Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at|http : //books . google . com/|

^H •

i^^^l

1

>*.. 1

1^'

lf»>\ •

1- ^

-J

mMAa- IUa.(U/V>iW'

*

/pHE TOWN AND CITY OF WATERBURY,
^ CONNECTICUT. FROM THE ABORIGINAL
PERIOD TO THE YEAR EIGHTEEN HUNDRED
AND NINETY-FIVE.

EDITED BY JOSEPH ANDERSON, D. D.

0

VOLUME I.
BY SARAH J. PRICHARD AND OTHERS.

NEW HAVEN :

THE PRICE & LEE COMPANY.

1896.

lOAN STACK

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1896,

By the price & LEE COMPANY,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

PREFACE.

THE publication of a new History of Waterbury was first
seriously considered by the firm of Price, Lee & Co. in the
summer of 1887. The undersigned was invited at that time
to take in hand the preparation of such a work, but felt compelled
to decline the task. He gave to the publishers, however, the
names of two writers whom he regarded as well fitted for the
work, and in September the following notice appeared in the public
prints: "Price, Lee & Co. of New Haven announce that their His-
tory of Waterbury is in course of preparation, — the first hundred
years in charge of Miss Sarah J. Prichard, and the last hundred
years in charge of Miss Anna L. Ward." More than a year after
this (on November 16, 1888) the firm issued a circular, in which,
after referring to the publication of Bronson's History in 1858 and
to the remarkable development of Waterbury since then, and
expressing the conviction that the time had come for a new history
of the town and city, they announced that arrangements had been
completed for the preparation of such a work, and solicited the
cooperation of those interested in the subject. In addition to Miss
Prichard and Miss Ward, "the Rev. Dr. Joseph Anderson, the
Hon. F. J. Kingsbury and Mr. H, F. Bassett " were mentioned as
having been engaged to contribute chapters upon special topics
or periods. From that time until now the work has been going
forward with but little interruption, and in addition to those already
mentioned several other writers have been enlisted, as indicated
in the table of contents.

Up to the date of the issue of the circular just referred to, but
little had been done toward putting on record the history of Water-
bury. Interesting references to the town had occasionally been
made by the early writers, as for example by President Timothy
Dwight in his "Travels in New England and New York"; Barber
in his " Historical Collections," in 1836, had devoted to it an enter-
taining chapter (prepared, by the way, by Judge Bennet Bronson);
Charles Burton had published in the National Magazine^ in 1857, his
articles on the " Valley of the Naugatuck," two of them relating
to Waterbury; Orcutt had issued in 1875 his "History of Wolcott,"
covering an important section of the old town; biographies of
Waterbury men had appeared in such works as the " Biographical

566

iv PREFACE,

Encyclopedia of Connecticut and Rhode Island," and the " Repre-
sentative Manufacturers of New England," and in the Leaven-
worth, the Benedict, the Terry and the Hoadley genealogies;
special subjects had been touched upon in such books or pamphlets
as those of Chauncey Jerome and Henry Terry on clock making,
and those by Messrs. Kingsbury and Anderson enumerated on
pages 959-962 of our second volume; the Waterbury Almanac, begun
in 1853, had garnered from year to year, so long as its issue con-
tinued, the facts not only of the passing time but of the earlier
days; the newspapers, for nearly half a century, had been making
their daily or weekly record, and — most important of all — Dr.
Bronson had published his History, embodying in it materials
derived by his father from documents that have entirely disap-
peared. But Dr. Bronson's work was completed within five years
after Waterbury became a city, and was practically limited in its
scope to the period that closes with the Revolutionary war. His
account of " manufacturing in Waterbury," for instance, fills less
than four pages. There was a clear field for the modern historian,
and much interesting material in reference to the earlier times
which had not yet been made use of. The claim of the circular,
that in view of the rapid growth of Waterbury, the " marvellous
development of the industries by which it has became known
throughout the world," and the additional facts concerning its earlier
period that had come to light, the time had arrived for a new his-
tory of the town and city, seemed fully justified.

The plan of the work, as indicated fiiom the start, contemplated
a book divided into two volumes, embracing about a century each.
After a time the accumulation of materials for the modern period
was so great that it became necessary that as much as possible
should be crowded into the first volume. The line separating the
two volumes was accordingly drawn through 1825, the year of the
organization of Waterbury as a borough, and this involved the
division of the history of the First church, of St. John's parish and
the cemeteries of the town into two parts, the earlier of which is
to be found in Volume I and the later in Volume III.

A recognition of the successive territorial partitions of the
original township involved our including in our scheme the history
of Watertown and Plymouth to 1780, of Wolcott to 1796, of Middle-
bury to 1807, of Prospect to 1826 and of Naugatuck to 1844. The
earlier history of these derivative towns is covered substantially by
the narrative in Volume I, the only important exception being the
history of Salem society (now Naugatuck) from the Revolution
to its incorporation as a town, which it seemed best to leave, with

PREFACE, V

the exception of the Salem church, to some future historian to
reproduce on a scale commensurate with its importance.

The narrative of the colonial and revolutionary periods is the
result of an independent study by Miss Prichard of the original
sources, including documents that have come to light since Dr.
Bronson's History was written. This study was pursued with but
little reference to Bronson, although the value of his labors was
known from the beginning. It ought to be understood, however,
that it was not the purpose of the author or the editor to super-
sede the earlier work ; on the contrary, certain subjects to which
Bronson devoted special attention are in this History passed over
lightly for that reason. It may be added that Dr. Bronson, to the
hour of his death, was deeply interested in the present enterprise.

The outline given at the opening of the second volume indicates
the largeness of the plan upon which the modern history of the
town and city was projected. It has been carried out with a ful-
ness of detail hardly anticipated even by the editor when he
prepared the schedule of topics for the guidance of his collabora-
tors. It is therefore safe to say that this History is more extended
in its scope and more exhaustive in details than any town history
thus far published. This is made evident in the treatment given to
the several departments of the city government, and to special topics
not heretofore included in local histories, as shown in the chapters
on street names, corporations, inventors and their patents, college
graduates, philanthropic institutions, amusements and fraternities.
While the fact has never been lost sight of that Waterbury is a great
manufacturing centre, while the manufactories and the men who
have controlled them have had justice done to them, at the same
time a serious effort has been made to represent the many other
phases of the life of a prosperous modem city. By following a
plan constructed with some reference to modem sociology, the
History has become almost cyclopaedic in its character, and instead
of being, as the prospectus proposed, a work " in two volumes, of
about 500 pages each," has grown into three volumes, with a total
of 2250 pages. The liberality of the publishers in furnishing to
subscribers so much more than was promised deserves to be recog-
nized here, and this may serve at the same time as an explanation
of the delay in the completion of the work.

In view of the attention given to details, the casual reader will
be surprised at certain omissions and discrepancies which he is
likely to discover. The probability of the occurrence of error is
increased in any work when it is accomplished by collaboration.
But in the present case the chief explanation of omissions and

vi PREFACE.

irregularities is to be found in the lack of cooperation on the part of
the public. For the earlier history of the town the sources are of
course documentary, and were therefore at the command of the
author. For the later history resort must be had to living men, as
individuals or as official representatives of organizations, and in
many instances repeated appeals had to be made in order to
secure a satisfactory statement of essential facts. If the amount of
correspondence and of personal effort on the part of the compiler
required to secure the data for some of our chapters could be
known, it would serve as a revelation in regard to the indifference
of the great majority to matters of history, and the difficulties that
beset the local historian. Should omissions, then, be discovered, it
may be that others than the compiler or the editor are to be blamed
for them. It may be presumed at all events that omissions are not
accidental, or the result of the want of a plan, but were allowed for
some good reason. In the field of manufactures and trade, for
example, it was found necessary to limit the record to corporations,
and not to touch upon unincorporated business firms unless inci-
dentally. There was of course no intention of slighting anybody or
neglecting any " interest."

In a work like this, one of the matters difficult to deal with is
the biographical element. Who among the living or the dead shall be
selected for biographical treatment? and who shall be omitted? In
answering these questions it was found impossible to draw a line
which any two persons could agree upon. It should be said, how-
ever, that the classification and grouping of biographies under
different departments naturally led to including persons who might
otherwise have been omitted, while others, of no less value in the
eyes of the community and in their influence upon it, were passed
by. In some cases, in which a formal biography is not given, the
significant facts of the life are mentioned incidentally, and can
readily be discovered by help of the index. If some biographies
seem needlessly long and others too brief, it must be remembered
that most of the sketches were prepared from materials furnished
by the persons themselves or by their relatives. A similar remark
may be made in regard to the genealogical data. The appendix of
" Family Records " in our first volume must be of the highest value
from the genealogist's point of view, but our History, nevertheless,
was not intended to be a genealogy, and makes no claim to be so
considered. When, however, the names of a second or third gener-
ation and the birth-dates of male children were furnished, especially
in families fully identified with Waterbury, we put them on record
almost as a matter of course.

PREFACE, vii

The authorship of our History affords a fine illustration of the
modern tendency to cooperative work in literature. The original
plan, which placed the first hundred years in charge of Miss
Prichard and the second hundred years in charge of Miss Ward, has
been substantially followed out, although in each volume a group
of writers is represented. Miss Prichard, in pursuance of her task,
after years of patient and loving research, contributed to the
History an elaborate and vivid narrative covering the colonial and
revolutionary periods, and prepared, in addition, chapters on the
old highways, on early place-names, on the history of the First
church and on the church in Salem society. The relation of her
work to Dr. Bronson*s has been already referred to, but it would
not be easy to set forth the entire newness of the picture she
has painted, and the amount of well-established detail she has
introduced into it. As we read her story, the Waterbury of the
eighteenth century comes back to us, vital with the old colonial
life and clothed at the same time in that rich and tender coloring
which the past so naturally takes on at the magic touch of a pen
like hers.

From the nature of the case Miss Ward's work was entirely
different. As already indicated, the sources she had to draw upon
were living men and existing organizations, and much labor was
required in securing the cooperation even of those who were them-
selves subjects of the history. The newspapers of half a century
had to be searched, an extended correspondence had to be carried
on and personal interviews held, for the securing of materials, and
after all this came a task of preliminary editorship, ere these
materials could be handed over to the writers who were to prepare
the several narratives. Such work can never secure the recognition
it deserves, because it is work beneath the surface; but such work as
this underlies our second and third volumes throughout, and without
it our history of modern Waterbury could not have come into being.
Miss Ward's relations to the people of the present time made her a
representative, to a certain extent, of the business aspects of the
publication, and in this field also she has exhibited decided ability.
The numerous illustrations with which the book is adorned have
been in her charge, and the elaborate index is the fruit of her skill
in a field in which she is known as an expert.

Among the collaborators there are two who ought to be specially
mentioned because of the large amount of work done by them.
One of these is Miss Katharine Prichard, who prepared with pains-
taking labor the invaluable appendix containing a transcript, with
important additions, of the records of the town in relation to births,

viii PREFACE.

marriages and deaths. The other is Mr. Kingsbury, who has not
only written a number of chapters, but has served continually as a
repository of genealogical and other facts, ever ready to be drawn
upon and always reliable. The others who have cooperated in the
production of the several narratives are designated in the table of
contents prefixed to each volume. A helper who has, perhaps, done
more for the work than is thus indicated is Benjamin F. Rowland,
who has assisted Miss Prichard in following out many lines of re-
search. Another is Professor David G. Porter. Another is Miss
Mary De Forest Hotchkiss, whose services have been chiefly, but by
no means exclusively, clerical. The editor takes the liberty of say-
ing that he regards the men and women who have contributed to
this History as constituting a corps of workers of exceptional ability
— some of them filling the position of specialists in the fields in
which they have labored.

With so large a variety of authors, it was inevitable that there
should be considerable diversity of style and treatment, and, as
already suggested, occasional repetitions and contradictions. The
diversity of style and treatment is probably an advantage. As for
contradictions and repetitions, they have been eliminated, so far as
a laborious editorial revision could accomplish this. The editor is
not responsible for Miss Prichard's narrative, but only for its place
in relation to the work as a whole. As for the other chapters, he
has taken it upon himself to shape them with reference to a certain
editorial standard, which included such minor matters as punctua-
tion and capitalization, and the omission of the titles "Mr." and
" Miss," and of the name of the state after places, when that state
is Connecticut. It included also, within certain limits, the literary
form of the chapters.

That some parts of the History are brought down only to 1894
and others to the end of 1895 is explained by the fact that the work
has been going through the press for two years. Many changes
have taken place in the community in the meantime, the most
important of which is probably the securing of a new charter for
the city and the reorganization under it of the municipal depart-
ments. (As the first volume was printed before the division into
three volumes was decided upon, some of the references therein to
Volume II should read ** Volume III.**)

Since this work was first projected, several books and pamphlets
have appeared, relating to the history of Waterbury. Among these
are: " Waterbury and Her Industries," published in 1888; " Water-
bury Illustrated," published by Adt & Brother in 1889; "The Book
of the Riverside Cemetery," 1889; "Waterbury, its Location, Wealth,

PREFACE. ix

Finances, etc., published by the Board of Trade," 1890; "The Mili-
tary History of Waterbury," 1891; "The Churches of Mattatuck,"
1892, and " The History of New Haven County" (Volume II, Chapter
XV) 1892. It is pleasant to note that all these, except the last, were
prepared by writers belonging to our corps of collaborators, and
were not designed to supersede this work or any part of it.

A fact which ought not to pass without mention here is that sev-
eral of those who have been engaged upon this work did not live to
see it completed. Of the writers whose names appear in our table of
contents four have finished their earthly course since the History
was begun: Nathan Dikeman, Israel Holmes, 2nd, who died Feb-
ruary 12, 1895, the Rev. J. H. Duggan, who died November 10, 1895,
and Thomas S. Collier of New London. The widely-known en-
graver, Alexander H. Ritchie, by whom most of the steel plate
portraits in this History were executed, died September 20, 1895, in
his seventy-fourth year. He was a native of Scotland, an artist
in oil colors, and for twenty-five years a member of the National
Academy of Design. He had frequently expressed a desire to com-
plete this series of portraits, upon which he had been at work for
seven years, and during his last illness had the satisfaction of
knowing that his hope had been realized. It is to be added that
Greorge S. Lester, who, as a representative of the publishers, was
for some time closely connected with the History, and well-known
in Waterbury, died on April 20, 1893.

The editor ventures to say a word in conclusion in reference to
his own work. It was understood at the outset that the three
gentlemen mentioned in the prospectus should constitute a kind of
editorial board, to whom the various doubtful questions likely to
arise, as well as the general shaping of the work, should be sub-
mitted. This position they have not abdicated and their advice
has continually been sought, but as the work advanced, its editorial
management devolved more and more upon the undersigned, and
became by degrees a close supervision, extending not only to the
general plan and outline but to innumerable details of form and
arrangement, to say nothing of the composition of entire chapters
of the narrative. The duty of supervision, which the editor
thought of in advance as but little else than a pastime, proved for
various reasons to be a prolonged and laborious task. The plan of
the History was so extensive, and the standard adopted so high,
that a much greater burden of labor came upon him than he antici-
pated when he accepted the position. His professional duties, of
course, could not be transferred, and this special work must there-
fore be performed at odd times and during summer vacations and

X PREFACE.

in midnight hours. If it is not what it ought to be, he hopes that
these facts may serve to explain deficiencies. Looking back over
the past four years, he is inclined to appropriate as his own the
quaint language of Anthony k Wood in the preface to his History
of Oxford: "A painful work it is, I'll assure you, and more than
difficult, — wherein what toyle hath been taken, as no man thinketh
so no man believeth, except he hath made the trial." A "painful
work," but a work that has had its pleasures; and not the least of
these has been the close association into which it has brought the
editor with the other workers in the same field. That it has
also opened up to him a richer and more detailed knowledge of this
noble old town, of which he has been a citizen for more than thirty
years — a town remarkable for its strong men and for its marvel-
lous development as an industrial centre — is something for which
he cannot cease to be grateful.

JOSEPH ANDERSON.

Waterbury, February 22, 1896.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME I.

CHAPTKR PACB

I. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS i

By Homer F. Basset t, M. A.

II. ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 14

By the Rev. Joseph Anderson, D, D, Also the three
following chapters,

III. INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES 26

IV. INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 39

V. STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK 56

VI. LONDON'S PLANTATION IN MASSACHUSETTS BAY, . 77

By Miss Sarah J, Prichard. This and the following
chapters to Chapter XXXIV were written by Miss
Prichard,

VII. MASSACHUSETTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTI-
CUT, 91

VIII. CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK, . 116

IX. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, 127

X. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION 144

XI. ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE, . .150

XII. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION 158

XIIL MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, 176

XIV. THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686, 185

XV. WATERBURY IN 1689 203

XVI. FROM 1685 to 1691, 215

XVII. THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERBURY 224

XVIII. MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 237

XIX. DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR, 248

XX. THE SCOTT FAMILY 257

XXI. THE COMMON FENCE 264

XXII. TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN, . . 277

XXIII. THE NEW INHABITANTS 292

XXIV. EARLY NORTHBURY 311

V

«

xii CONTENTS OF VOLUME 1.

CHAPTBR PACK

XXV. EARLY WESTBURY, 320

XXVI. EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 1741, . . - . 332

XXVII. THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'S MEADOWS, . , .342

XXVIII. LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS, . .353

XXIX. 1742- 1760 366

XXX. WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS 383

XXXI. WATERBURY'S LATER YEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 398

XXXII. WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION, . 409

XXXIII. WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 433

XXXIV. WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION ... 445

XXXV. AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. . . . . 488

By Arthur Reed Kimball.

XXXVL LIFE IN THE AGE OF HOMESPUN. 520

By Mrs. Emily Goodrich Smith {with additions).

XXXVII. OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS, 548

By Miss Sarah J, Prichard and Benjamin K How land.

XXXVIII. OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES, . . 572

By the Hon. Frederick J. Kingsbury^ LL. D.

XXXIX. THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY, . 592

By Miss Charlotte Benedict; the First Academy by the
late Israel Holmes^ 2nd,

XL. THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825; ALSO THE CHURCH IN

SALEM 601

By Miss S. J. Prichard {pp. 601-616; 640-646) and Dr.
fosepk Anderson. The biography of Dr. Samuel
Hopkins by Miss Benedict,

XLI. THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1830, 647

By F. J. Kingsbury, LL. D.

XLII. BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS, . . .666

By Miss Katharine Prichard {pp. 666-63o) and Dr. Joseph
Anderson.

XLIIL ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK, . . .685

By Miss S. J. Prichard and Benjamin F. Howland.

APPENDIX. FAMILY RECORDS pp. 1-166

By Miss Katharine Prichard.

PORTRAITS IN THIS VOLUME.

Anderson, Joseph,

ON STEEL.

Frontispiece.

MISCELLANEOUS.

Bronson, Alvin,
Bronson, Josiab,
Cook, Lemuel,
Hopkins, Samuel, D. D.,

PACB

518
515
315
634

ILLUSTRATIONS IN THIS VOLUME.

John Warner's staff, .......

Tree in the rock on the old Cheshire road, ....

A western war-club, scalp-locks attached, and old Waterbury buttons marked

" Scovills & Co. extra," ......

Pestle of Turkey hill Indians, ......

Indian pipes, ........

Implements found in Naugatuck, ......

Soapstone dish and chipped implements. Hospital bluff, Waterbury, .
Dish, axes and *• Chungke stone," Waterbury, ....

Specimens found near Bunker Hill, .....

Pestle and soapstone dish from Watertown, ....

Toy implements from a child's grave, .....

Articles of agreement and association adopted by the planters of Mattatuck;

first page, ........

Articles of agreement; second page, . .

Articles of agreement; reverse, ......

The old Town Plot, ........

House lots of Mattatuck, 168 1, ......

Dr. Henry Bronson's map, .......

The oldest gravestone, .......

The Indian deed of February 20, 1684, .....

The Three Sisters, alias the Three Brothers, ....

Waterbury township of 1686; view from Malmalick hill, ]

Proprietors' book of record, 1677-1722, .....

Hop Meadow hill; the sections remaining in iEqi,

Looking down upon Steel's meadow and plain, ....

Pine meadow, looking southward from Reynolds bridge.

Jericho rock and Buck's Meadow mountain, ....

The Rock house ........

PAGE

xiv
6

25
34
38
60

65
66

67
68

71

128
129
130
132
160
161

173
192

193
98, 199

216
241
242

243
244

259

XIV

ILLUSTRATIONS.

Steel's meadow along the river,

Map of survey, 1715,

Entrance of Beacon Hill brook into the Naugatuck river at the straits,

House built by the Rev. John Tiumbull,

The valley of '* the small river that comes through the straits

Lebanon," ....
Pac-simile of invitation to a ball, .
House built by William Adams,
Factory of J. M. L. & W. N. Scovill, 1835,
Third house of worship of the First church, 1796 to 1840
Fac-simile of receipt given by Andrew Eliot,
Fac simile of receipt given by Thomas Ruggles,
St. John's church, 1795,
Gravestone of Hannah Hopkins, .
The Porter house at Union City,
The house site of Ebenezer Richards,
The old mill at Grey stone, .
Some autographs of early settlers.

P^CB

•

•

266

•

283

straits.

284

«

328

northward of

•

543

y

538

•

562

•

574

•

614

•

624

•

625

•

657

•

668

•

715

•

717

•

718

•

168

Ap.

JOHN WARNKR's staff.
<DBACON JOHN WARNKK OF NORTHBURY, BORN 170O, DIED 1795.^

CHAPTER I.

THE ANCIENT TOWN — ITS BOUNDARIES — ITS TOPOGRAPHY — ITS STREAMS
— ITS GEOLOGY — THE GLACIAL AGE — ITS MINERALOGY, BOTANY
AND ZOOLOGY.

ANCIENT WATERBURY embraced a territory lying on both
sides of the Naugatuck river and extending from the point
where Beacon Hill brook joins that stream, or the southern-
most limit of the town of Naugatuck, to the northern line of the
towns of Plymouth and Thomaston, or even further north. The
length of this tract is not less than sixteen miles and the average
breadth about eight, and it contains nearly one hundred and thirty
square miles. Lying near the southern extremity of the Green
Mountain range, it has a surface consisting of several low, parallel
ridges, with narrow valleys between, which trend almost without
exception to the south. The unevenness of the surface produces
numerous watersheds of limited extent, from which small streams
find their way to the Naugatuck. Only one of these is called a
river, and this is hardly more than a good sized brook. So numer-
ous are these streams that they are supposed to have suggested
the name given to the territory when it was incorporated as a
town.

One of the largest tributaries of the Naugatuck is Lead Mine
brook, which takes its name from a hill in the town of Harwinton,
where a mine of black lead was supposed to exist. This stream
enters the Naugatuck a short distance south of the present northern
line of Plymouth, but there are good reasons for believing that the
original boundary was further north and that Lead Mine hill was
within the limits of ancient Waterbury. Northfield branch enters
the Naugatuck, from the west, at the village of Thomaston. A
mile south of this, at Reynolds Bridge, West branch, which rises
in the town of Morris, flows into the river, also from the west. It
is generally called "the Branch." The next tributary is Hancock
brook, which unites with the main stream at Waterville. It drains
a long, narrow valley, east of, and nearly parallel with, the Nau-
gatuck. Steele's brook, whose watershed embraces the eastern and
northern parts of Watertown, enters the Naugatuck from the west
about half way between Waterville and Waterbury. The largest

2 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT,

and most important branch of the main stream, within the limits of
the ancient territory, is Mad river. This stream has its source in
Cedar swamp, which lies partly in the town of Bristol and partly
in Wolcott, and was so named when it was covered with a heavy
growth of white cedars. A dam of very moderate height, across the
outlet, has converted it into a large reservoir, and its waters are
used by the factories along the stream. Mad river, on its way to the
Naugatuck, receives several tributaries. The largest of these are
Lily brook, Lindley brook and Chestnut Hill brook. They furnish
a large quantity of most excellent water, and are considered of
great importance to Waterbury as the probable source of a future
water supply. A small stream known as Smug's brook enters the
Naugatuck from the east, at Hopeville, and a larger one, called
Fulling-mill brook, at Union City. The next two tributaries are
from the west. The first, Hop brook, joins the river between
Union City and Naugatuck, and the other. Long Meadow brook, at
the lower end of Naugatuck village. Beacon Hill brook, the south-
ernmost tributary within the limits of our territory, is historically
interesting as the ancient boundary between Waterbury and Derby.
It unites with the Naugatuck just where the hills converge to form
the gorge below the village of Naugatuck. It is thought that
during the glacial period this gorge was closed by ice or other
obstructions, and that a lake occupied the valley for many miles
above.

The Naugatuck itself is formed by the union of two streams
which come together at Torrington. The eastern branch rises in
the town of Winchester and flows nearly south ; the western rises
in Norfolk and flows southeasterly. Besides the streams we have
mentioned there are numerous unnamed brooks which, after a
brief course, fall into the main river. All the streams are fed
largely by springs of pure water and were, in earlier times, the
trout fisher's paradise.

There are no lakes in this territory, although Quassapaug is at
one point only ** eighty rods " from the line that bounded ancient
Waterbury on the west. Neither are there any large swamps.
There are many small ones and not a few pools and temporary
lakelets that disappear in the dry season. These are formed in the
slight depressions in the underlying mica -slate and, as many of
them have no visible inlet or outlet and are slowly filling up with
vegetable and other matter falling into them, they make a sort of
rude gauge by which we may roughly estimate the length of time
that has elapsed since these basins were formed. Some of them
are filled with peat moss, and attempts have been made to use

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 3

the peaty deposits for fuel, but with unsatisfactory results. A few
have been drained and reclaimed and are now productive lands.*

One very important feature of this region remains to be noticed.
It is the alluvial deposits along the Naugatuck river and some of
its branches. At the time of its settlement by the whites these
were natural meadows. They were not peculiar to these streams,
but it was their existence here that led the settlers to choose this
territory. They are of limited area, and the fertility of the soil
caused the natives to destroy the forests which covered them, if
such ever existed.

The geological history of Waterbury is short but interesting.
All that the surface reveals, even to the eye of the geologist, is the
existence of the same mica-slate and semi-crystalline rock that
forms the foundation of the entire Green Mountain range, a super-
ficial deposit of drift and the insignificant alluvial deposit already
referred to. The two formations first named, though in contact
are widely separated in time, but how widely geologists do not tell
us, as the age or relative place of the Green Mountain mica-slate is
a question on which they fail to agree. All admit that it is one of
the oldest of the stratified rocks, but whether it antedates organic
life on the planet, or is among the earliest of the formations that
bear traces of life is not definitely settled. At some time in the
history of the strata, either before they had become hardened, or if
later when they had been made plastic through the agency of heat
they appear to have been subjected to a lateral pressure so intense
that they were curved, crinkled and twisted into the strange forms
they now present. Later, when they had reached their present
solid condition, they were, by the same internal force, raised up,
tilted, broken and, in parts, completely overturned as we see them
to-day. Striking illustrations of the tilting of vast ledges of these
rocks can be seen on the west side of the Naugatuck river at
Hinchliffe's bridge. The effects of lateral pressure on a large
scale can be seen in the gorge below the old clock factory at
Hoadley's station on the New York and New England Railroad.
Veins of granite occur in many places. They are supposed to have
been forced up through rifts in the slate rock from underlying
molten masses. Some of these veins are of such extent and the
granite is of so fine a quality that they are worked as quarries.
The be'st quarries thus far opened are near the Naugatuck, one at

* The names attached to many of the hills, valleys, streams, and swamps are commemorative of persons
or events, and such localities as Spindle hill, Buck's hill, Breakneck hill, Withington hill, Woodtick, Mill
plain and Wooster swamp are chiefly interesting in connection with the circumstances which gave them
name. They are located and described in the history which follows.

4 HI8T0BT OF WATERS UBT,

Rattlesnake hill, the other a mile above Reynolds bridge and
known as Plymouth quarry.

It is evidently a long time, even as geologists measure time,
since changes of position or serious disturbances of any sort have
taken place in the rocks that form the Green Mountain range.
How much they have been changed on the surface by the slow
action of the elements, how often, through repeated subsidences
and upheavals of the crust of the earth, they had been submerged
in ancient seas and raised again above their surface before the ice
age began, can never be known. Some conception of the length of
time that elapsed between the completion of the mica-slate forma-
tion and the beginning of the ice age can be gained from the fact
that at least fifty distinct formations were begun and finished
within that period. The possibility that some of these were
contemporaneous is admitted, but the relative position of most of
them is such that this could have been the case in only a few
instances. Standing, as one may in many places on our hills, with
one foot on the ancient slate rock and the other on the drift that
partially covers it, one becomes a sort of Colossus of time, and the
immensity of the period thus spanned quite overpowers the mind.

It is probable that much of the rounding and polishing of the
boulders, pebbles and gravel which constitute so large a portion of
the drift, was done by water before the glacial era began. The ice
in its course took up this material, but deposited much of it
unchanged. Long ago, as we reckon time, but quite recently, if
we reckon by geologic eras, seas washed the base of the Green
Mountain range and sandstone deposits of considerable extent were
formed. In these, remains of animal and vegetable life are found
which show that the higher forms of both lived on the land in
great numbers and for a long period. But, if they lived within the
limits of the territory we are describing, all traces of them have
disappeared.

The loose, unstratified deposit of clay, sand, gravel, cobble-
stones and boulders that covers nearly all the northern part of
North America is known as "drift." It is a heterogeneous mass
of material that has been transported by some means from places
often hundreds of miles away, and always from points northward
of its present location. The study of glaciers as they exist to-day
in various parts of the world shows that the drift, whatever the
history of the parts of which it is composed may be, has come into
its present position through glacial agencies. So well are these
agencies now understood that an explanation of most of the feat-
ures presented by the drift in this region is not difiicult.

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, 5

The ice age was formerly looked upon as a completed period in
the geological history of the earth, but it is no longer so considered.
It may be nearing its close, for ice fields cover far less territory
than they covered in the past, or it may be that the recession of
the glaciers to higher altitudes and polar latitudes is only tem-
porary, and that they will, sometime, reoccupy their former limits.
Evidence is accumulating which shows that the advance and
retreat of the ice fields occurred once or more than once before.
Vast regions in the polar zones are covered with ice, and glaciers
fill the higher valleys in many mountain ranges in the temperate
zones, and in the aggregate millions of square miles are to-day
undergoing a grinding and smoothing process precisely like that
which smoothed and polished our hills of mica-slate. The study of
existing glaciers shows them to be moving bodies and recent
observations on some of the Alaskan ice fields prove that their
velocity varies from a few inches to more than sixty feet in a day.
Without stopping to consider the cause of this motion, it is
suflScient for our purpose to say that the moving fields of ice trans-
ported innumerable boulders far from their original beds (leav-
ing them in many instances on the summits of high mountains),
formed kames, drumlins and kettle holes,* and on melting left the
general deposit of clay, sand, gravel and loose rocks that covers all
our hills and valleys. At almost any point where the removal of
the drift has laid the rocks bare, grooves and striae can be seen that
were made by the slow but resistless movement of the ice and the
sand and the fragments of rock imbedded in it. They are parallel
and can often be traced for a long distance. Their direction in
this region is a few degrees east of south. It is an interesting fact
that, although their course is rarely, if ever, deflected to the right
or left by any obstacle, they follow vertically every elevation and
depression except the most abrupt. This was explained when it
was found that glacial ice is not the rigid solid it seems to be,
but yields under its own weight to all the inequalities of surface
beneath it. It would be easy to show that this pressure must mani-
fest itself vertically and not laterally. On all our hills of slate
rock the easy acclivities are almost invariably on the northern
side, and the cliffs, where such exist, are as constantly found on

* A ** drum " or " drumlin " is defined as a long narrow ridge or mound of sand, gravel and boulders; a
name given by Irish geologists to elevations of this kind, believed to have been the result of glacial agencies.
A " kame " is a peculiar elongated ridge made up of detrital material. A ** kettle-moraine " is an accumula-
tion of detrital material with kettle-like depressions. These depressions are called kettle -holes. (A fine
example of this sort is the north Spectacle pond on the Meriden road near Silver street.) The chief differ-
ence between drumlins and kames is in the arrangement of the materials composing them and the time of
their formation, the kames being of more recent date. It is only in the kames that the kettle-holes are met with.

The explanation here given of these terms seems called for, as they have but recently appeared in
geological writings.

6 HISTOBT OF WATERBUUr.

the southern or southeastern side. This shows not only that the
denuding; force which smoothed the hills came from the north and
expended its energy against the rocky obstacles in its course, but
that, being a semi-fluid, it did not accommodate itself to sudden
and abrupt changes of level as readily as a fluid would have done.
Boulders are found everywhere. They belong to various geological
formations, but always to such as may be found at some point
further north. This may be near at hand or hundreds of miles
away. Some are rounded as if water worn in pre-glacial seas.
Others are angular as if they had been subjected to little more
than the ordinary action of the elements. Their situation often
indicates very clearly the means by which their removal was
effected. They are as often found stranded on the highest points
of our hills as in the vales below — left there when the sea of ice
melted away. One of the largest of these stray rocks, in this re-

gion, stands
southeast of
ton Hitch-
Waterbury
judge from
mineralogi-
a great way
from its ori-
ginal bed.
So nicely
balanced
are some of
these bould-
ers that
they can be
moved by
the hand,
are called rocking
stones. A remark-
able bftulder is st.cn
on the old Cht^shiru
road, near the tl";!-
denceof John Mix It
is above the ordinary
size, and out of a rift
on its highest point
a large and wide
spreading white oak
tree has grown.

a little distance to the

idence of Shel-
i k, on the road from
Southington, and, to
i angularity and its
.1 character, it is not

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, 7

During the last thirty years several hills within the city have
been leveled. Others, especially along the line of the railroads
below the city, are fast disappearing. Very few remain intact.
Their removal has afforded to those interested an excellent oppor-
tunity for studying their structure. They are composed of sand,
gravel and boulders, and are unquestionably of glacial origin. So
also are the similar deposits that skirt the hillsides along the
Naugatuck and its principal branches. The peculiar arrangement
of the material composing them is not easily accounted for. It is
not stratified, in the sense in which that term is usually understood,
nor is it without a kind of stratification. Sorted, expresses best the
arrangement of the sand, clay, gravel and boulders. The hills have
usually a linear arrangement in the line of the glacial movement,
and in this locality they are always found where some valley, large
or small, opens out into a plain. South of West Main street two
parallel ranges of hills exist; the range nearest the river consisting
of material brought down the Steele Brook valley, and the other
and much longer one, of material brought down the Naugatuck
valley. Each of the brooklets that flow from the north through
the city has its hill of drift, or terminal moraine, as they were
formerly called, at the point where the stream enters, or formerly
entered, the plain. The moraine of Little Brook valley was the
hill (now removed) that extended from where Dr. Alfred North's
residence stands to the fountain at the east end of the green.
Spencer hill and the hill on which the High School building
stands, mark the termination of Great Brook valley. The entrance
of Carrington Brook into Mad River valley is marked by an exten-
sive deposit of drift of the same general character as the others we
have named, and similar examples may be seen in many other places.

As already remarked, the transportation of earth and boulders
by glaciers is going on in many parts of the world to-day, but I
do not find that any observer has satisfactorily explained the pro-
cess by which the different materials in our hills were sorted and
deposited. A careful study of their structure, based on observa-
tions made while some of them were being removed, has led to the
belief that they were formed near the close of the ice period, not
by river currents but in temporary lakes. The closing of the
gorge (already referred to) below Naugatuck would have resulted
in the formation of a lake where Waterbury now stands, deeper
than the height of the highest drift hills in this region. Admitting
the existence of such a lake, we may suppose that the field of
glacial ice extended over its entire surface, and that glacial rivers
carried earthy materials across the ice. A deposit must, of course.

8 BISTORT OF WATERS URY.

have been formed at the termination of the ice field, the same as if
it were on the land, and, as by irregular stages the ice retreated, a
line of hills would have been left. The sorting would depend upon
the volume and strength of the currents of water flowing over the
surface of the ice, and these would vary with the seasons and from
various other causes. The structure of the hills is just what it
would be if a feeble current bearing clay or sand for a time^ till a
hillock of such materials was formed, had been succeeded by a
flood strong enough to bear along the heavier matter that had been
left behind. The advance or retreat of the ice field even for a few
feet, or any variations in the course of the currents, would change
the place of the deposits, and bring about just such an arrangement
as we actually find. This explanation accounts for the limited area
covered by the several deposits and their great, relative thickness;
also for the varying inclinations they present. As a rule they dip
to the north or in the direction from which the material must have
come, but it is not rare to find the inclination towards other points
of the compass, and occasionally a deposit caps the cone-like hill,
falling down to the base on every side. How far the features here
described are local I am unable to say, but there are, in several
geological works, cuts showing sections of drift hills in various
localities, and in some of them the structure is apparently the same
as in our hills.

One other feature of these hills is to be noted. Over the entire
surface of most, and perhaps all of them, there is a thin layer of
drift, rarely more than one or two feet in thickness, which differs
from the layers beneath it in that the sand, gravel and boulders
of which it is composed are intimately mixed and without any
stratification whatever. As river currents capable of moving this
material would have demolished the hills themselves, it is probable
that it was formed from detritus from floating ice after the glacier
had retreated to the northern shores of the lake.

On the road from Waterbury to Meriden, not far from Silver
street, there were a few years ago two deep holes, partly filled with
mud and water, known as the Spectacle ponds. One of them still
remains, but the other has been drained by the removal of the
bank of drift which separated it from Mad river, and the peat has
been carried away. They are very near together, there being only
a narrow roadway between them, and their small diameter, circular
outline and great comparative depth suggest the name of kettle
holes, which is now generally given to similar depressions every-
where. The kettle hole on the north side of the road does not
exceed three hundred feet in diameter at the top and its depth is

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 9

between thirty and forty feet if we include the water and mud
which fill the bottom. The steep bank is composed of drift, but a
ledge of rocks approaches very near to it on the northern side.
The kettle holes were, for a long time, a puzzle to geologists, but it
is now generally believed that they mark places where detached
masses of ice of moderate extent but of great thickness were sur-
rounded by and covered over with drift at the close of the ice
period. As the ice melted, the debris on the surface would fall
outward from the middle, and when all was gone a kettle hole
would remain. This explanation does not militate against the
theory that a lake covered this region at the time these were
formed, for beds of ice of immense thickness are often covered
with drift to the depth of many feet and of sufficient weight to
strand the whole mass. Few regions illustrate better than ours the
principal features of the ice age.

No rich deposits of the metals have ever been found within the
limits of ancient Waterbury. It is said that traces of gold and
silver exist in several places, and indications of copper are not
rare, but the eflEorts that have been made at mining for these
metals have not been successful. Early explorers of the region
reported the discovery of graphite, and samples of the mineral
seem to have been carried away, but the location of the mine, if
there was one, was lost and has never been re-discovered. There are
traces of graphite in our mica slate in many places, but nowhere in
such quantity as could be called a black lead mine.*

A list of the trees and plants growing in Waterbury at the time
of its first settlement would be interesting as showing how many
of the native plants have become extinct. No such list exists, and
there are very few references in ancient records to particular
species even of the useful forest trees. Sometimes a particular
species is mentioned as marking a boundary, but that is all. The
original forests have been cut down and, though there are more
acres of woodland than there were even thirty years ago, the trees
are everywhere of recent growth. Probably the chestnut (Castanea

* As remarked in the description of the geological features of this region, the country is dotted all over
with boulderSf and it is plain that these came from places north of where they now lie. Now it is well
known that graphite is abundant at Hinsdale, Mass., at Brandon, Vt., at Ticonderoga on the west shore
of Lake Champlain, and at many places north of the Naugatuck valley. Is it not quite probable that a
boulder containing graphite from some of these places was found on Lead Mine hill, and that the small
quantity thus secured was taken as an indication of a large deposit ? There is a boulder on a hillside half
a mile south of Bristol, Conn., that contains a small amount of pure graphite. This rock must have come
from a long distance to the north, as there are no other rocks of the same kind in that vicinity. A limestone
boulder containing a vein of sulphate of strontia, was found a few years ago in the drift overlying the clay
slate at Middleburg, Ohio, although the nearest locality where strontia is found in place is on Strontian
island in Lake Erie, nearly one hundred miles from where the boulder lies.

lo HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

vesca) was then as now the most abundant species. This, with the
white pine (Pinus strobus), the sugar maple (Acer saccharinum)
and four or five of the eight or nine species of oak found here,
formed the greater and more valuable part of the forests. Two
species that were sparingly found here thirty years ago have since
become extinct, — the black spruce (Abies nigra) and the paper or
canoe birch (Betula papyracea). The former once grew in the
swamp south of the Middlebury road, and the latter was found in
several deep ravines. One species, the common locust (Robinia
pseudacacia), has become naturalized in a few places.

Inasmuch as complete catalogues of the plants of this state, or
of special districts, are easily accessible to botanists, it is quite
unnecessary to attempt a full list here. What follows relates
mostly to plants that are believed to be extinct or are becoming so,
and to others that are interesting because of their habits, their
beauty or their rarity, although not, perhaps, rare in other places.

Hepatica (Hepatica triloba), is becoming rare, being much
sought after for its beautiful and very early flowers. Gold thread
(Coptis trifolia), a plant in some repute for its medicinal properties,
and abundant a few years ago in the vicinity of Waterbury, has
become rare through the clearing up of its habitat — boggy swamps
and wet thickets. The tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), the
whitewood of the western states, is occasionally met with, but the
finest specimens are dwarfs beside the majestic trees of this species
found in the west and south. Canadian moonseed (Menispermum
Canadense), never common here, seems to have entirely disap-

m

peared. The May apple or mandrake (Podophyllum peltatum)
grew not many years ago, within a limited area, a short distance
above Waterville. Sarracenia purpurea, best known as the pitcher
plant or the side-saddle flower, was once very abundant in the peat
swamp south of the Middlebury road, but disappeared when the
fire overran the bog a few years ago. It is doubtful whether it can
now be found within our limits, though very plentiful in localities
not distant.

The climbing fumitory (Adlumia cirrhosa), often cultivated for
festoons and bowers, was for several years common along the
rocky banks of Hancock brook, above Waterville. The pale
corydalis (Corydalis glauca) is sometimes met with on the bare
summits of the hills, where it finds root in the seams and rifts of
the rocks. We have ten or twelve species of the wild violet. The
round-leaved (Viola rotundifolia) is the rarest of these, being found
here only in cool, springy places. It is abundant further north,
and this is its extreme southern limit, unless it be met with in the

PHYSICAL CIIABACTEBI8TIC8. ii

Alleg^hany Mountains. The violet wood-sorrel (Oxalis violacea),
often cultivated, grew wild for a time on the hillside near the resi-
dence of Wallace H. Camp. Rhus typhina, the stag horn sumach,
is rare in this region, a few specimens being found in the rocky
vallej' of Hancock brook, below Hoadley's station. The bladder nut
(Staphylea trifolia) grows at the base of the hill in the meadow west
of the Waterbury Brass Company's mill, and in a few other places.

The striped maple (Acer Pennsylvanicum) and the mountain
maple (A. spicatum) are found in the ravine at the foot of Eagle
rock, near Reynolds Bridge. The fringed polygala (Polygala
paucifolia) sometimes called flowering wintergreen, is one of the
most beautiful of our early spring flowers. It is not a rare plant,
but is always a puzzle to young botanists. The prickly pear
(Opuntia vulgaris) is common on the summit of Beacon Hill, just
south of the line of ancient Waterbury, but does not, so far as I
know, occur within our limits. The bristly sarsaparilla or wild
elder (Aralia hispida) is found in the ravine between Waterville
and Hoadley's station. It is very abundant further north on the
Green Mountains. Four other species of this genus are found here.
Flowering dogwood (Comus florida) is met with in all parts of our
territory and is quite abundant on ihe hills west of Thomaston.
The dwarf cornel (Comus Canadensis) grows in a swamp half a
mile northwest of the Spindle Hill school-house in Wolcott. It is
very common on the hills further north. The cranberry tree
(Viburnum opulus) was found, a few years ago, on the hill west of
the Waterbury Brass Company's mill, and the hobble-bush (V.
lantanoides) grows in the ravine at Reynolds Bridge. The com-
mon May-weed (Maruta Cotula), introduced from Europe, was
formerly one of the most common weeds seen by the roadside. A
few years ago it almost disappeared from this region, and for
several seasons could scarcely be found. Lately it has reappeared,
but is still rare.

The ox-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare), that beautiful foreign
pest which some have named as the national floral emblem, is so
common that when it is in blossom in June, our hills are as white
as if covered with snow. The creeping snowberry (Chiogenes
hispidula) was quite abundant in Cedar Swamp before that was
made a reservoir; but it is doubtful whether it can be found within
our limits. The trailing arbutus (Epigea repens), once common,
has almost disappeared through the ravages of Mayflower hunters,
who take it root and branch, flowers or no flowers, wherever they
can find it. Jamestown weed (Datura stramonium), not rare thirty
years ago, is rarely if ever seen now. The fringed gentian

12 HISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

(Gentiana crinita) is rather common, but is certain to share the fate
of the arbutus, as its very pretty flowers are just scarce enough to
be sought after. The five-flowered gentian (G. quinqueflora) occurs
in Litchfield and in Bristol, and should be found in Plymouth and
Thomaston. A thrifty patch of buckbean (Menyanthes trifolia)
was found, a few years ago, by J. G. Jones (who has detected several
rare plants in this region), in a muddy pool, beside Chestnut Hill
brook, in Wolcott. It has since disappeared. Wild ginger (Asarum
Canadense) was once common along the banks of Hancock brook,
above Waterville.

A tree that, whether cultivated for shade or growing wild,
exceeds all others in luxuriance, is the American or white elm
(Ulmus Americana). It flourishes everywhere, on high lands and
on low, in wet and dry soils alike. Its winged seeds take root and
grow in every thicket, in cultivated fields, in gardens and even
between the paving stones of gutters and sidewalks. It is a
favorite shade tree throughout New England, and it thrives
nowhere better than in the Naugatuck valley. The slippery elm
(U. fulva) is rather rare, and seldom reaches a large size in this
region. The hop (Humulus lupulus), introduced from Europe,
grows spontaneously along the Naugatuck river. The family of
oaks is represented by the following species: Quercus alba, Q.
montana, Q. bicolor, Q. prinoides, Q. ilicifolia, Q. tinctoria, Q.
coccinea, Q. rubra, and Q. palustris. The pine family is represented
by the pitch pine (Pinus rigida) and the white pine (P. strobus).
The latter seems to have been abundant here in early times and
to have furnished much valuable timber. The hemlock and the
black spruce grew here. The former is now quite rare and the
latter exists only as a shade tree around old homesteads. The
tamarack or black larch (Larix Americana), once common, is now
nearly extinct. The white cedar (Cupressus thyoides) was once
abundant in Cedar swamp, and a few scattering trees of small size
still grow on the borders of the reservoir which occupies its place;
but it is not, so far as I know, found within our limits.

The Indian turnip (Arisaema triphyllum) is very common, but
the dragon root (A. dracontium) is rare. It was growing, a few
years ago, along the Naugatuck, just below the Watertown railroad
bridge and, in a gully now filled up, near the New England station
in Waterbury. The water arum (Calla palustris) grows in Wolcott,
in a swamp northwest from the Spindle Hill school-house, also in a
swamp near the Middlebury road. Three species of lady's slipper
(Cypripedium pubescens, C. parviflorum, C. acaule) occur in this
territory. C. acaule is quite common, the others are very rare. At

PHTSICAL CHARACTERISTICS.

13

least twenty-five species of ferns are found in this region. One
species, the walking-leaf fern (Camptosorus rhizophyllus), has dis-
appeared from the only locality where I have found it growing.
This was in Watertown, near Nonnewaug river, almost due west
from the Watertown fair grounds.

In nothing else does the subjugation of a wilderness by man
work such change as in its zoology. The larger wild animals are
killed or driven away, and domesticated species, either useful or
otherwise, take their places. The smaller animals change their
haunts and to some extent their habits. Waterfowl desert the
lakes and rivers, and other game birds become scarce and shy, and,
though a few species of small birds may increase in numbers, most
of them grow scarcer and some disappear, and the birds of prey
follow the kinds they subsist upon. Fish are taken to an extent
that exceeds their increase, and their homes are poisoned by
sewage or closed by obstructions, till they die out, or they are only
saved from extinction by a re-stocking of their haunts. Reptiles,
from their habits, are less aflEected than other orders, but these
also suffer through the reclamation of waste places and the war
of extermination that is ever waged against the noxious kinds.
Among the lower orders, especially among insects, these changes
mean the destruction of many of the original tribes and the intro-
duction of others.

We have no complete lists of the animals living here at the time
of the first settlement of the country, but we know that many
changes have taken place. Bears, deer and wolves, once common,
are no longer found. Wild geese and ducks and other waterfowl,
though formerly here in countless numbers, are rarely if ever seen
on the ponds and running streams, and grouse and quail would
long ago have become extinct had not the law given them protec-
tion. The streams, poisoned by factories, are destitute of fish, and
it is only in the small spring brooks among the hills that the trout
now finds refuge. Civilization and cultivation mean extermination
to the aborigines, whether wild animals or wild men. All give
way to civilized man, for not his " rights " but his ambition and
selfishness ** are paramount," and they have " no rights that he is
bound to respect." In enlightened man the cruel instincts of the
savage have not yet died out, and he gloats over his more perfect
devices for destroying helpless creatures that while living are
harmless, and when dead are of no value to him.

CHAPTER II.

Aboriginal Mattatuck — The Indian Race— The Algonkian Stock
IN New England — Indians of Connecticut River, of Long
Island Sound — Mattatuck claimed by both — Aboriginal
Life — The Tribe and the "Gens" — Tribal Ownership of
Land — Employments — Useful Arts — Implements of Stone —
Language — Character.

THE history of Waterbury begins with its settlement by white
men. But there are certain well known or ascertainable
facts concerning its condition previous to the earliest visits
of Europeans which some readers will expect to find included in
the narrative, and which for the sake of completeness ought to be
put on record. These facts relate not only to the topography, the
geology and the natural history of the region formerly called Mat-
tatuck, but to its aboriginal inhabitants.

These inhabitants belonged, of course, to the American Indian
race. It is possible that the Naugatuck valley was at some far oflE
time — say during the last glacial period — occupied by a prehistoric
people, represented, as some think, by the Eskimos of the present
day. But in the absence of any remains which can be positively
assigned to such a people, it is unneccessary to take this possibility
into account. The only inhabitants with whom we need concern
ourselves are the Indians of whom the first settlers purchased the
territory and their predecessors.*

At the time of the discovery of America, and at the settlement of
Connecticut a hundred and fifty years later, the entire North
American continent was overspread by a people constituting quite
certainly a single race. With the possible exception of the Eskimos,
they possessed physical and linguistic peculiarities which differ-
enced them from other races of men and set them apart as a people
by themselves. At the same time this widely extended race was
divided into distinct stocks or peoples, separated from one another
not only by geographical position but by the possession of totally
distinct languages. There are those who, like Roger Williams in
his " Key," speak of " the language of America " as if there were

* Chipped implements have been found in the gravel of the Delaware river, at Trenton, N. J., which from
their position must apparently be assigned to a glacial era. (See Abbott's "Primitive Industry," chapter
xxxiii.) But no great antiquity can be claimed for any remains thus far discovered in the Naugatuck valley.

ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

15

only one American Indian language, apparently ignorant of the
fact that the Indian languages are numbered by hundreds, if not
thousands. But, as in other parts of the world, these languages are
not all distinct from one another, nor is the relationship between
one and another in all cases the same. Some are as closely related
as Spanish and Portuguese are, others as remotely as English and
Welsh, and others are as completely separated from one another as
are Greek and Hebrew. As in Europe and Asia there is an Aryan
family of languages descended with all their diversities from a
common parent language, and a Semitic family descended from an-
other common parent, so is it with the languages of America. They
exist in larger or smaller groups, each group entirely distinct from
the others, and each consisting of several languages having a com-
mon parentage, and characterized by certain close affinities. There
is, for example, an Iroquois group, numbering seven or eight lan-
guages, a Dakota group, numbering eighteen, a Shoshonee group,
numbering thirty-two languages and dialects, and an Algonkin
group numbering seventeen. The seven or eight members of the
Iroquois group are evidently sister tongues, possessing to a large
extent a common vocabulary and other common characteristics;
the same is true of the seventeen members of the Algonkin group.
But between the Mohawk language of the Iroquois group, and the
Mobegan language of the Algonkin group, although the two ex-
isted for a long time side by side, there was no more relationship
than between English and Hungarian. There was a certain resem-
blance between them in structure, but between their respective
vocabularies, that is, between the stock of words used by a Mohawk
and the stock of words used by a Mohegan, no resemblance or rela-
tionship can be discovered.

It may not be strictly scientific to divide oflE and classify the
peoples speaking these various languages according to the group-
ing which the languages suggest, but it is very natural to do so,
and is not likely to be seriously misleading. While therefore we
speak of the American race as one, we speak of it as divided into
" races " or peoples. Of all these, the Algonkians — that is, the tribes
speaking the various languages of the Algonkin stock— were geo-
graphically the most widely distributed. They extended "from
Labrador to the Rocky Mountains, and from the Churchill River of
Hudson Bay to Pamlico Sound in North Carolina."* Some of these
— for example, the Crees, Chippeways and Delawares — were numer-
ous and were spread over wide regions. But in the territory now
known as New England the population was broken up into compar-

* J. C. Pilling's " Bibliography of the Algonquian Languages," p. iii.

1 6 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7,

atively small divisions, — the various tribes or bands speaking
closely related languages, or dialects of the same language. In
Southern New England the tribes best known to us were the Mas-
sachusetts, the Nipmucks, the Narragansetts and the Mohegans, to
whom the Pequots were closely related.*

Taking our position on the western bank of the Connecticut, say
at Hartford, we find ourselves in the midst of an Algonkian people
extending for some distance up and down the river, divided into
tribes or bands, and perhaps loosely organized into a kind of con
federacy. We can not accurately define the nature or extent of
their organization, but we learn from the records of the time that
at the first coming of the English a certain sachem named Sequas-
sen sold land to them extending as far west as the country of the
hostile Mohawks. The tribe of which Sequassen was a sachem
must have included the Indians of the Farmington river, some of
whom had their principal seat at Poquonnock, a dozen miles to the
north of Hartford, and others at the bend in the river, eight or ten
miles to the west, where Farmington was afterward settled. From
this bend in the Farmington river, or from the name of the place
at which the bend occurs, these Indians were called the Tunxis. f
In Barber's " Connecticut Historical Collections " they are spoken
of as "numerous and warlike," but Mr. J. W. DeForest in his
" History of the Indians of Connecticut '* estimates their number
at "eighty to one hundred warriors, or about four hundred indi-
viduals." The first Poquonnock chief known to the English was
Sehat, who was succeeded by Nesaheagun, whose name has been
perpetuated in that of the first Waterbury lodge of Odd Fellows. J
The Farmington Indians had a camping-ground at Simsbury also,
some miles west of Poquonnock, and claimed ownership of the
lands west of there, as far as the Housatonic river. All the ter-
ritory comprised within the original bounds of Mattatuck was
included in their claim.

* By some writers the lutme Mohegan is used to designate all the Indians between the Narragansetts and
the Hudson river. " The Muhhekantew or Stockbridge Indians, as well as the tribe at New London, are by
the Anglo-Americans called Mohegans. . . . This language is spoken by all the Indians throughout New
England. Every tribe, as that of Stockbridge, that of Farmington, that of New London, has a different dia-
lect; but the language is radically the same. Mr. Eliot's translation of the Bible is in a particular dialect of
this language." P. 5 of Dr. Jonathan Edwards's '* Observations on the Language of the Muhhekaneew
Indians. New Haven, 1788."

t ** The locality to which the name originally belonged was the * bow ' or * turning ' of the river, where * it
bends' {wui-funJksAau) from a southeasterly to a northerly course." Dr. J. H. Trumbull's ** Indian Names
of Places," p. 74.

The name " Tunxis " survives in the designation of a " tribe " or lodge of the " Order of Red Men/* in
Waterbury.

t The old-fashioned e of the early scribes having been mistaken, as it often is, for an Oy the name has been
transformed into " Nosahogan.'*

ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

n

Leaving the centre of the state and going southward to the
shore of Long Island sound, we enter the country of the Quiripi
Indians, who were known around New Haven harbor as the Quin-
nipiacs. Their territory extended from the Connecticut river to
the western bounds of the state. To the west of the New Haven
Indians was another Quiripi tribe or band claiming ownership on
both sides of the Housatonic. Their territory extended from West
river (which flows between New Haven and Orange), or at any rate
from Oyster river (which flows between Orange and Milford), all
the way to Fairfield. Those who lived to the east of the Housa-
tonic, whose chief seat was near the mouth of the Wepowaug (or
Milford) river, were known as Wepowaugs; those to the west and
north were called Paugasetts or Paugasucks.*

On the west of the Housatonic the Paugasucks claimed the terri-
tory now comprised in the towns of Stratford, Bridgeport, Trum-
bull, Huntington and Monroe, and on the east of that river lands
extending northward beyond Beacon Hill brook, including what
lies between the Housatonic and the Naugatuck, and embracing the
Mattatuck bounds. Although their well-known sachem Ansanta-
way t is said to have had his wigwam on Charles Island, the chief seat
of the Paugasucks was at the mouth of the Naugatuck. On the
tongue of land between the two rivers, about three-fourths of a
mile above their junction and close to the Housatonic bank, they
had a kind of fortress to which they were accustomed to resort in
times of danger.

It appears, then, that at the date of the settlement of Mattatuck,
the country lying to the east and northeast of it was occupied by
an Algonkian tribe, having for its natural eastern boundary the Con-
necticut river, and claiming jurisdiction far to the west, while the
country lying to the south was occupied by another Algonkian
tribe, having for its natural southern boundary Long Island sound,
and claiming jurisdiction far to the north. Mattatuck itself — as
any one may see by a glance at the map of Connecticut — lay at the
intersection or overlapping of the two claims, and was the common
meeting-ground of both tribes. If the tribes had been hostile
rather than friendly, the meeting-ground would have been a
battle-ground; but not only was there a good understanding

* Ifi the records of New Haven colony, the name appears as Paugasset ; in the records of the Connecticut
colony, Paugasuck. It designated the lands '* by Derby ferry and about Derby neck," and was superseded
by the English name Derby by vote of the General Court in May, 1675. It denotes, according to Dr. Trum-
bull ('* Indian names," p. ^6) *'a place at which a strait widens, where the narrows open out," and is descrip-
tive of the junction of the Housatonic and Naugatuck rivers. The name was applied, naturally enough, to
the Indians who had their chief seat there.

i Like Nesaheagun, his name is perpetuated in that of an Odd Fellows' organization in Waterbury— the
Ansantawae Encampment.
2

i8 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

between them, there are indications in the various deeds of land
signed by their representatives, that some of them were inter-
related.

At the time of their first contact with Europeans, the American
Indians in different regions were found in different stages of devel-
opment. Those of Central America, Mexico and New Mexico lived
in villages (pueblos) and depended almost entirely on horticulture
for subsistence. There were other tribes that did not cultivate the
ground, but depended entirely upon fish, game and bread-roots.
Between these two extremes there were tribes which combined both
these modes of life in different degrees. They depended partly on
horticulture for subsistence, but could not be considered village
Indians. To this class belonged the Indians of the Atlantic coast,
including those of Connecticut. They had their established camp-
ing-grounds, but they were a roving people. This was true of those
from whom the territory of Waterbury was purchased. The Farm-
ington river Indians had their camping-grounds at Poquonnock,
Farmington and Simsbury, and the Paugasucks at the mouth of the
Naugatuck. But we must not think of them as dw^elling perma-
nently at these places, but rather as frequenting the entire region
which they claimed as their own, establishing a temporary camp
now at one place and now at another, according to the season of the
year and the opportunities afforded for hunting and fishing, — an
annual visit to the salt water being a matter of course even with
those who lived at a considerable distance from it.* Dr. Bronson
says: f '* It is believed that at the time of its discovery no Indian
settlement existed within the limits of ancient Waterbury." Even
if this was the case, it does not follow that the region was not occu-

* " They remove house upon these occasions :From thick warm valleys, where they winter, they remove
a little nearer to their summer fields. When 'tis warm spring, then they remove to their fields where they
plant corn. In middle of summer, because of the abundance of fleas, which the dust of the house breeds,
they will fly and remove on a sudden from one part of their field to a fresh place. And sometimes, having
fields a mile or two or many miles asunder, when the work of one field is over, they remove house to another.
If death fall in amongst them, they presently remove to a fresh place ; if an enemy approach, they remove
into a thicket or swamp, unless they have some fort to remove unto. Sometimes they remove to a huniing-
house in the end of the year, and forsake it not until snow lie thick, and they will travel home, men, women
and children, through the snow, thirty, yea fifty or sixty miles. But their great remove is from their sum-
mer fields to warm and thick woody bottoms where they winter. They are quick ; in half a day yea, some-
times at few hours' warning to be gone, and the house up elsewhere, especially if they have stakes ready
pitched for their mats. I once in travel lodged at a house, at which in my return I hoped to have lodged
again there the next night ; but the house was gone in that interim, and I was glad to lodge under a tree."
(Roger Williams's " Key/' pp. 46, 47.)

" Towns they havfe none, being always removing from one place to another for conveniency of food, some-
times to those places where one sort of fish is most plentiful, other whiles where others are. I have seen half
a hundred of their wigwams together in a piece of ground, and they show prettily; within a day or two, or a
week, they have been all dispersed. They live for the most part by the seaside, especially in the spring and
summer quarters ; in winter they are gone up into the country to hunt deer and beaver." (John Jossclyn's
"*'Accouni of Two Voyages to New England, made during the years 1638, 16*^)3," p 99 of reprint.)

+ " History of Waterbury," p. 2.

ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 19

pied, in the way already indicated. As we shall see (in the follow-
ing chapter), there are remains which go to show either that it was
more widely occupied than we are wont to suppose, or else that the
period of its occupancy extended over hundreds, if not thousands,
of years.

What kind of people were these aboriginal inhabitants of Mat-
tatuck ? The ordinary reader doubtless believes that he has a toler-
ably correct conception of them — although his views may be derived
from newspaper estimates of the present-day Indians of the west-
ern plains. But concerning the essential facts of aboriginal life
and character most of us are thoroughly ignorant. This is not the
place for elaborate dissertation or minute description; but there
are important facts — some of them bearing directly upon the trans-
fer of the territory from barbarian to civilized hands — which ought
to be placed on record in such a history as this.

Among the Indians as first known to Europeans a tribal organ-
ization was universal. Whatever classification into groups or lin-
guistic families may be suggested by a study of their languages, we
must not fail to recognize their division into tribes, each tribe
claiming possession of a territory of its own, having a name of its
own, and distinguished by a special dialect, the result of its separa-
tion in area from others speaking the same mother language. It is
not generally known, but it is a well established fact, that within
the limits of every tribe was another organization —perhaps we
should say, an " institution " — which has received the name of clan
or gens. The gens is a very ancient form of social organization,
which can be traced in nearly all parts of the globe among savage
and barbarous peoples, and which existed in full development
among the American aborigines at the time of the discovery. A
gens consisted originally of a group of persons related by ties of
kindred, who "traced their descent from a common female ancestor
through females, the evidence of the fact being their possession of a
common gentilic name. It included this ancestor and her children,
the children of her daughters, and the children of her female
descendants, through females, in perpetuity; while the children of
her sons, and the children of her male descendants through males,
would belong to other gentes^ namely, those of their respective
mothers."* Every tribe, therefore contained at least two gentes,
while in some tribes the number had increased by subdivision to
more than twenty. Each gens was distinguished by its name and
totem (usually the name of some animal or bird) ; its members pos-
sessed certain rights in common and were bound together by cer-

* L. H. Morfran's "Ancient Society," pp. 67, 68.

20 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

tain mutual obligations, the most important of which was the obli-
gation not to marry in the gens. It was to the gens, and not to the
tribe, that the right belonged of electing sachems and chiefs. The
office of sachem (whose duties were confined to affairs of peace) was
hereditary in the gens, that is, it was filled by election as often as a
vacancy occurred; other chiefs were elected in recognition of per-
sonal bravery, wisdom or eloquence. In these elections all adult
persons, both men and women, had a right to take part, so that the
organization was on a purely democratic basis. The gens held the
right also of deposing those whom it had elected, so that the term
of office was practically " during good behavior." It ought to be
added that the office of sachem, in order to remain within the gens
(the line of descent being on the female side), must pass from
brother to brother or from uncle to nephew, never from father to
son. Property also was hereditary in the gens, and under a similar
law.

There is good evidence that these forms of organization — the
tribal and the gentilic — existed among the Indians of Connecticut
no less than among the other aborigines of America. We have
already pointed out certain lines of tribal division and centres of
tribal life. There is no doubt (in view of modern investigations)
that through these various tribes the existence of three ancient
gentes (the Wolf, the Turtle and the Turkey), which belonged to
the Indians of Connecticut in common with the Delawares dwelling
further to the south, could have been traced, and that these had in
the course of centuries been subdivided until they numbered
eleven, each having its special name. Among the modern descend-
ants of the Mohegans the division into eleven gentes still exists.*

A fact of more importance (not intrinsically, but in order to a
correct understanding of the relations of the aborigines to the
first settlers) pertains to the ownership of property. Among people
in the " lower status of barbarism," the amount of personal property
is always small. It consists of one's personal effects, together with
possessory rights in garden-beds, and, among some tribes, in joint-
tenement houses. Among the Indians, the ownership of these was
hereditary in the gens. But, except among the Aztecs, who had
advanced somewhat further than the northern tribes, the owner-
ship of lands inhered not in the gens but in the tribe. The condi-
tion of things existing among the Cherokees and other tribes of
the Indian Territory to-day, was universal among the aborigines —
namely, tribal ownership of land and no ownership in severalty.
The territory of a tribe "consisted of the area of their actual

♦"Ancient Society," pp. 173, 174, 100.

ABORIOINAL INHABITANTS. 21

settlements and so much of the surrounding region as the tribe
ranged over in hunting and fishing, and was able to defend against
the encroachments of other tribes." Outside of this area was a
margin of neutral ground, separating the tribe from other tribes,
and claimed by neither. When the neighboring tribe spoke a
different language, this neutral area was likely to be broad; when
they spoke dialects of the same language, it was narrower and less
clearly marked.* The fact that there were no definite boundary
lines may serve to explain the rival claims of different bands
which the settlers of Mattatuck had to recognize, involving repeated
purchases by them of the same territory.

The kind of life which the aboriginal occupants lived may be
partly inferred from what has been said in regard to their means of
subsistence. Their chief dependence was upon fishing and hunting,
which were the sole employments of the men; the cultivation of
the ground was left entirely to women. Whatever pertained to
in-door life — the wigwam with all its belongings — was under the
care of the women; the men, when not occupied in the chase, or
engaged in war, lived a life of leisure, diversified by the manufac-
ture of bows, arrows, axes and pipes.f

It must be remembered that these people belonged to what has
been termed the stone age, and had not emerged from the lower
level of barbarism. They knew nothing of iron, and almost noth-
ing of copper. But the number of things which they could do,
without metals of any kind, is greater than any one would imagine
who had not made a special investigation of the matter. They
possessed the art of striking fire; they made bows and arrows
— the bowstrings of sinew, the arrow-heads of stone or bone; they
manufactured various other stone weapons and implements (some

♦*' Ancient Society," p. X 12.

^ Roger Williams, in his **Key," says that the men ** commonly get and fix the long poles, and then the
women cover the house with mats, and line them with embroidered mats which the women make,— which
amongst them make as fair a show as hangings with us " (p. 32, first edition.) He says in the same chapter :
*^ Their women constantly beat all their corn with hand " in their pounding mortar ; ** they plant it, dress it,
gather it. barn it, and take as much pains as any people in the world. . . . It is almost incredible what
burthens the poor women carry of com, of fish, of beans, of mats, and a child beside." '* Generally all the
men throughout the country have a tobacco-bag, with a pipe in it, hanging at their back. Sometimes they
make such great pipes, both of wood and stone, that they are two foot long, with men or beasts carved, so
big or massy that a man may be hurt mortally by one of them ; but these commonly come from the Mau-
quauwogs [Mohawks], or the men eaters, three or four hundred miles from us" (pp. 37, 38, 44, 45.)

Wood, in his *'New England's Prospect,^' says that the women in their care of the cornfield,'* exceed our
English husbandmen, keeping it so clear with their clam-shell hoes, as if it were a garden rather than a
cornfield, not suffering a choking weed to advance his audacious head above their infant corn, or an under-
mining worm to spoil his spurns." He adds that '^ in winter-time they are their husbands' caterers, . . .
and their porters to lug home their venison, which their laziness exposes to the wolves till they impose it
upon their wives' shoulders." "They are often troubled, like snails, to carry their houses on their backs,
sometimes to fishing- places, other times to hunting-places, after that to a planting place, where it abides the
longest " (part 2, chapters 19, 20.)

22 HISTORY OF WATERBVRT.

of them chipped, others ground), such as axes, hammers, chisels,
knives, drills, fish-spears, net sinkers, mortars, pestles, pots, pipes,
ceremonial and ornamental objects, and implements for use in
athletic games. They made vessels of clay mixed with sand and
hardened by fire. They had learned how to cure and tan skins,
and of these made moccasins, leggins and other wearing apparel.
They made nets and twine and rope from filaments of bark, and
wove the same material into belts, sashes and burden straps. They
made baskets of osier, or cane, or splints; canoes of birch bark or
skins, or dug-out logs, and houses of poles covered with skins.
They had also invented musical instruments, such as the flute and
the drum. They cultivated maize, beans, squashes and tobacco, and
made unleavened bread of pounded maize boiled in earthern ves-
sels.* Of the various objects manufactured by the aborigines of
Connecticut only those made of stone have escaped the tooth of time,
with the exception of a few specimens of pottery, most of them
fragmentary. The stone implements, however — especially the
small implements made by chipping — are numerous, and are valu-
able as indicating the kind of life which the primitive man lived
and the various places occupied by him in the course of centuries.
Within the bounds of ancient Mattatuck, as everywhere else in
America, we can trace the red men by the stone " relics" they have
left behind them. We can see them moving from place to place,
establishing their camping-ground now on the river-bank, now by
the brook-side, now on some commanding bluff, and again at some
perennial spring. The arrow-maker's hut had its place in each
camp, and the chips which he made still testify, in many a quiet
spot, to his industry and skill. f That there were well-worn paths
across the tribal territory, made by these roving bands in the
course of centuries, is altogether probable, and it is also probable
that some of the roads of the present day follow the trails of our
aboriginal predecessors. To what extent during their long occu-
pancy they had carried the task of clearing the land of forests, it is
impossible to say. Perhaps they had done more in this direction —
especially at certain tribal centres — than they usually receive credit
for.

Our outline would be very imperfect, did we make no reference
to the language of these aborigines. As already indicated, the dia-
lects spoken on the Connecticut and on Long Island sound, were
dialects of an Algonkin language common to all the tribes between
the Kennebec river and the Hudson. This language has been pre-

* L. H. Morgan, '* North American Review," October, 1868; "Ancient Society/* pp. 69, 70.
t Compare Abbott's " Primitive Industry,'' pp. 455-459.

ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 23

served to the present day in John Eliot's Indian Bible and other
translations, in Roger Williams's " Key into the Language of
America," and in Abraham Pierson's "Some Helps for the Indians."
The work by Pierson, who was the father of the first rector of Yale
College, is " a catechism in the language of the Quiripi Indians,"
and represents "a dialect having a place between the dialects of
Massachusetts, Narragansett and eastern Connecticut, and those of
the middle states; showing nearer affinity than other New Eng-
land dialects to the true Delaware or Renapi of New Sweden." *

This is the dialect which was spoken by the Paugasucks of the
Naugatnck river, who claimed ownership of the lands to the north,
including the territory of Mattatuck, and must have differed some-
what from that spoken by the Farmington Indians. The nature of
the differences between the dialects is indicated by Roger Williams
in his " Key," under the word anum^ meaning " a dog." He says: ** The
variety of their dialects and proper speech within thirty or forty
miles each of other is very great," and illustrates this by the differ-
ent forms of this word. In the Cowesit dialect it is anum, in the
Nipmuck alum^ in the Narragansett ayim^ and in the Quinnipiac
arum. " So that," he adds, " although some pronounce not / nor r, yet
it is the most proper dialect of other places, contrary to many
reports." f Eliot in his " Indian Grammar Begun " refers to the
same variations: "We Massachusetts pronounce the «, the Nip-
muck Indians pronounce /, and the Northern Indians pronounce r;"
and we have a further instance in the different forms of the name
by which the Indians of southwestern Connecticut are designated.
" Quinnipiac {quinni-pe-auke) means * long- water land ' or country. .
. . In the Mohegan and Narragansett dialects the first syllable was
pronounced quin^ by the Connecticut river Indians quil, and by the
Indians west of the * long water' quirJ' J Similar dialectic peculiari-
ties can be traced in the names signed to the deeds given to the set-
tlers of Mattatuck by the Paugasuck Indians, who were undoubt-
edly Quiripis, when compared with the names of the Indians of
Farmington river. Of the dialect actually spoken in the Naugatuck
valley, a few words have been preserved by Mr. J. W. DeForest, in
the appendix to his "History of the Indians of Connecticut." In
this brief list the same dialectic differences can be traced. For ex-
ample, the word for " man," which in the Narragansett was nnin, was
in the Naugatuck dialect rinh; the word for " fire," which in the
Massachusetts was nootau and in the Narragansett note or yote, was in

♦Dr. J. H. Trumbull's reprint of Pierson (Hartford, 1873), p. ii.

+ " Key," p. X07.

X Dr. J. H. Trumbull's " Indian Names," p. 61.

24 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

the Naugatuck ruuhiah. The other Naugatuck words are, wenih^
woman, keesoop, day, toofku, night, nuppehy water, tookh^ tree, awaususo,
bear, and sepu, river, — for each of which a corresponding word,
closely resembling it, may be found in the related dialects. *

The language of which this was one of the dialects has been
carefully studied in modern times by DuPonceau, Pickering, Dr. J.
Hammond Trumbull, and others; its structure has been examined
and its grammatical characteristics have been placed on record. Its
peculiarities can not be here explained, but it may be worth while
to mention that in its structure it was " polysynthetic," like all the
Algonkin languages (perhaps we may say, all the aboriginal lan-
guages of North America) ; that its vocabulary, contrary to the pop-
ular impression, was abundant rather than scanty, and that it was
as completely subject to strict grammatical laws as the languages
of the civilized world. Any one who fancies that the aboriginal
occupants of Mattatuck were poorly furnished with means of inter-
communication by speech, or had to make use of a rude and form-
less dialect, would do well to examine the paradigms of the verb in
Eliot's grammar, or the vocabularies in Williams's " Key," or the
questions and answers in Pierson's catechism. A close study of
these remains of an extinct speech would inevitably result in height-
ening the respect of the student for the mental characteristics of
the people upon whose lips, in the course of ages, it developed into
a symmetrical, copious and expressive language.

Of the Tunxis and Paugasuck Indians, as they were at the time
of the settlement of Mattatuck — their numbers, their condition as a
people — we have little or no information, except that which may be
drawn from the deeds by which they conveyed their lands to the
settlers, the signatures attached to those deeds and the very slight
personal allusions connected therewith, or found in the colonial
records. We have no description of these people from the pen of
any early traveller, nor record of them in any journal of trader
or missionary. Any one threading his way through the elaborate
metaphysical definitions of the catechism prepared for the Quiripi
Indians in 1658 would be justified in inferring that the Quiripis,

* The following is the Quiripi version of the first three petitions of the Lord's prayer, as given in Pier-
son's catechism (p. 59 of the reprint), with Dr. TrumbuH's literal translation into English. The translation
is here made interlinear, to indicate the order of the words in the Indian rendering.
" Noushin auseqiiamuk terre,

" Our-Father the-place-of-light in,
Werrettepantammunatch kowesewunk.

Let-it-be-well-regarded thy-name.
Peamoutch' kukkussootummowunk.

Let-it-come-hither thy-great-rulership.
Knrantammowunk neratch sket' okke nenar auscquamuk terre."
Thy-thinking bc-it-so on-the-face-of earth even-as the-place-of-light in."

ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

"5

and therefore the Paugasucks, must have been a people of great
intellectual ability. But the more correct inference would be that
the devout Pierson had sadly misconceived the method to be
employed in evangelizing a barbarous and ignorant race. There is
nothing to indicate that the Indians of Mattatuck differed in any
important respect from the other aborigines of New England with
whom the early writers have made us acquainted. They had the
virtues and the defects of other barbarous peoples. If their virtues
were not developed, certain it is that new vices were superadded,
as the result of their contact with Europeans. But this is not to
be wondered at. When we consider the red man's nature and dis-
position, the stage of development he had reached and the severe
ordeal involved in his being brought suddenly in contact with an
aggressive civilization, his conduct in this trying period of his his-
tory seems upon the whole worthy of high commendation. How-
ever cruel and bloodthirsty he may have been by nature, it is cer-
tain that in his intercourse with peaceable white men he was peace-
able; if they showed themselves friendly, he was their faithful and
useful friend.*

•The gradiial wilhdnii»l ind dJH^purance uC ihi Paugaiucli and I'lmiii Indians before the advance of

17 uid Febniary ij, iSj* and publiihed Id the '■ Waterbury American ■' (weekly edition) of Febniary ^ and
Uanh ;. These leelura were aftcmard embodied in Ihe " Indian Hiilory" prefiied lo Orcutt'a " History

CHAPTER III.

ABORIGINAL REMAINS — INDIAN DEEDS — LAND SALE OF 1658 — TKE
THREE DEEDS GIVEN BY THE FARMINGTON TRIBE — DEED GIVEN BY
THE DERBY INDIANS — PERSONAL NAMES ATTACHED TO THE SEV-
ERAL DEEDS — RELATIONSHIPS INDICATED BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS
AND BETWEEN TRIBES.

OF the aboriginal occupants of Mattatuck the traces that remain
are of three kinds: First, the deeds which record the transfer
of their lands to the early settlers; secondly, the Indian place-
names which under forms more or less disguised have survived in the
town records or in tradition, and some of which are in common use at
the present day; and thirdly, the stone implements scattered over the
region, many of which have been found and have passed into the
hands of collectors. What follows is an attempt to describe these
several kinds of remains.

The author of "Good News from New England," writing of
Indian customs, says: " Every sachem knoweth how far the bounds
and limits of his own country extendeth; and that is his own proper

inheritance In this circuit whosoever hunteth, if they

kill any venison, bring him his fee." It was natural for Europeans
familiar with the institutions of feudalism and royalty, to suppose
that among the barbarous tribes found occupying the new world
government was monarchical, as among themselves. To them a
sachem was a petty king, the people of the tribe were his subjects,
and the tribal territory was, as in the passage just quoted, " his own
proper inheritance." But if this was true at all, it was only in the
narrowest sense. The territory belonged to the sachem simply as
the official representative of his people. An Indian tribe was a
democracy; the sachemship was an elective office, and the lands
belonged no more to the sachem than to the others. They belonged
to the tribe. The true state of the case — however the early settlers
may have misunderstood it — comes to view in the large number of
Indian names usually attached to an Indian deed. The list may not
in any case have included all the adult males of the tribe, but as a
rule the tribe was well represented, and the sachem's name seldom,
if ever, stood alone. The settlers had no real-estate transactions
with individual Indians, and on the other hand they did not allow

ividual white men — in Connecticut, at any rate — to buy of the

INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES, 27

•

Indians, either directly or indirectly, land or timber "or candle-
wood or trees of any sort or kind," without authority from the Gen-
eral Court.* The first purchase of land within the limits of Matta-
tuck with reference to a settlement was made by a committee of the
General Court in behalf of the settlers, and subsequent purchases
were made through a committee appointed by the settlers them-
selves, or rather, by a company known as the " proprietors of Mat-
tatuck."

The Indian deeds relating to the transfer of Waterbury terri-
tory from the aboriginal owners to white men are six in number.
The earliest of these antedates by seventeen years the first regular
purchase with reference to a plantation at Mattatuck. It appears
that two of the inhabitants of Farmington, Stanley and Andrews
by name, in their excursions westward had somewhere discovered
a deposit of graphite, or something which they mistook for that
valuable mineral. f Their discovery attracted some attention and
doubtless led to what appears to have been the first purchase of
land lying within the Naugatuck valley. In the curious deed that
relates to it, dated February 8, 1657 (O. S.), and recorded in the town
records of Facmington, the purchase is described as " a parcel or
tract of land called Matetacoke [Mattatuckok'e'], that is to say, the
hill from whence John Stanley and John Andrews brought the
black lead, and all the land within eight mile of that hill on every
side,'* — making a circular area, sixteen miles in diameter. The pur-
chasers were William Lewis and Samuel Steele of Farmington, and
the grantors were Kepaquam, Queromus and Mataneg. It appears
from a deed of 17 14, relating to the same tract of land, that a con-
siderable part of it was "comprised within the bounds of Water-
bury." But such were the terms of the grant, and such was the
action of the General Court in the final disposal of the territory,
that this earliest purchase need not be further considered here.J
When, on August 11, 17 14, this same tract was conveyed anew to
Stanley, Lewis and their associates and successors, the deed was
signed by Pethuzo and Toxcronuck, who claimed to be the succes-
sors of Kepaquam, Queromus and Mattaneag, and in October fol-
lowing it was signed by four other Indians, Taphow the younger
and his squaw, Awowas (or Wowowis) and Petasas, a female grand-

* See Colonial Records of Connecticut, Vol. I, p. 214 ; New Haven Colony Records, Vol. II, pp. 593, 594.
There are cases on record like this, under date of May 12, 1679 : '* This Court grants liberty to Lieutenant
Samuel Steele to purchase of Nesahegen one acre of land in Farmington meadow." (Conn. Col. Records,
Vol. Ill, p. 29.)

^ See Chapter I, p. 9, and note.

X The history of this tract, which was for some time a bone of contention in the colony, is given in some
detail in the lecture entitled ** Footprints of the Red Man in the Naugatuck Valley," referred to on p. 25.

28 BISTORT OF WATERBUR7.

child, probably of Awowas. Some of these names we shall refer
to subsequently.

Of the four deeds obtained by the proprietors of Mattatuck from
the aboriginal owners, the first is dated August 26, 1674. It con-
veyed a tract of land lying on both sides of the Mattatuck river,
measuring ten miles from north to south, and six miles in breadth.
The second deed was given ten years later— April 29, 1684 — and
nearly doubled the area of the town by the addition of a tract lying
on the north of the previous purchase. The third deed, given
December 2, of the same year, refers to the purchase made by the
committee of the General Court in 1674, and in consideration of
nine pounds received from the agents of the proprietors, conveys
certain lands additional. These three deeds were given by the
Tunxis or Farmington Indians; the fourth, dated February 20, 1685,
was given by the Paugasuck or Derby Indians, and conveyed
twenty parcels of land, designated in the deed by their Indian
names, probably most of them comprised in the first and third
purchases from the Farmington tribe. A sufficient explanation of
these purchases of the same territory from two different tribes
within the space of three months, is afforded by what has been said
with regard to the limits of tribal territory and the conflict of
claims concerning the " neutral area."

Of two of these deeds — that of December 2, 1684 and that of
February 20, 1685 — the original autographs were discovered in 1890,
bearing the names of the aboriginal proprietors (representatives of
their tribes), and over against their names their respective "marks,"
made with their own clumsy fingers. Copies of these deeds and
of the other two are preserved in the Waterbury Land Records,
and they bring before us the red man at his point of closest
approach to us. In the light of these interesting documents we see
him standing for a little while upon the threshold of our history,
and then turning away to vanish into darkness.*

It is not our object just now, to set forth the relations of these
deeds, or of the purchases which they represent, to the settlement
of Mattatuck; but rather to obtain from an examination of the
names attached to them, and from any slight hints they contain, as
definite a conception as possible of the Indians from whom the
lands were purchased, who may with some propriety be considered
the aboriginal occupants of Waterbury. In a deed given by the Farm-
ington tribe to the town of Farmington, May 22, 1673, we read, " These
are the names of the Indians that are now present, the day and year

♦The four deeds are recorded in Vol. 11. of the Land Records, pp. 224-231, but not in chronological
order.

INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES,

29

aforesaid." At the several sales of Mattatuck territory the red men
atid their squaws were doubtless present — assembled at some one
place — and if the modern photographer could only have been stand-
ing near with his camera we should now have representations of
the aboriginal grantors which would enable us to estimate them
more correctly. But we have only their names and some few indi-
cations of their relations to one another, and there are reasons why
the names of persons and of relationships should both be mislead-
ing. The place-names which have come to us from the red man
were so constructed that they can be analyzed and interpreted; with
their personal names the case is different. Even if we could trans-
late them into English, as we do the names of the modern Indians
of the west, they would probably be to us without significance; and
as regards relationships, their mode of designating them was so
different from ours that even the commonest terms were liable to
be misunderstood. In the system of consanguinity which prevailed
among our aboriginal predecessors (and which prevails to-day
throughout the American race)* a man called his sister's children
nephews and nieces (as with us), and they called him uncle; but his
brother's children he called sons and daughters, and they called
him father. A woman called her brother's children nephews and
nieces (as with us), but she called her sister's children sons and
daughters, and they called her mother. My father's sister's chil-
dren and my mother's brother's children are my cousins; but my
father's brother's children and my mother's sister's children are my
brothers and sisters. And these designations represent an elabo-
rate scheme, no part of which corresponds closely to our own. It is
obvious, therefore, that if in the several deeds not only the names
but the relationships of the grantors were invariably given (as they
are in some instances), this would not greatly aid us in reconstruct-
ing the aboriginal tribe or band; we should still have only a list of
names before us.

But notwithstanding the scantiness of our material, it may be
worth while to see what we can do with it.

Unfolding before us the first of these Indian deeds — that of
August 26, 1674 — we find that the persons designated as the "own-
ers and proprietors " of the " tract of land called by the name of
Mattatuck " are fourteen in number, and bear the following names:
Nesaheagin, John Compound, Queramouch, Spinning Squaw, Tap-
how, Chere, Aupkt, Caranchaquo, Patucko, Atumtucko, James,
Uncowate, Nenapush Squaw, Allwaush. The order in which the

* See L. H. Morgan^s '* Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family," Smithsonian
Contributions to Knowledge, Vol. XVII ; " Ancient Society,*' pp. 435-452.

30 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

names are here given is that which is followed in the body of the
deed; the order in which the grantors affixed their marks to trie
original document may have been different, and we find among the
signatures the statement that " Patucko promises for James," from
which it is natural to infer that James was not present with the
others. Among the witnesses is mentioned " Robin, the Indian."

In the second deed, — given nearly ten years later, that is, April 29,
1684, and relating to the northern purchase — three of these names
appear again, namely, Patucko, who signs " in the name and behalf
and by order of Atumtucko," and Taphow. To these may probably
be added AUwaush, although somewhat disguised under the form of
Wawowus. These are the four that come first in order, and follow-
ing these we have Judas, Mantow, Momantow's Squaw, and Mary or
Mercy, who is describeji as Sepus's Squaw,* — making eight in all.
Among the signatures we find the additional name of Quatowque-
chuck, Taphow's son, with the statement that " though Taphow's
son's name is not in the deed above, yet he doth agree to the sale
with the rest, this 30th of April, 1684." Among the witnesses to
this deed is named " Momantow, Indian," whose squaw is mentioned
among the grantors, and who must therefore be distinguished from
Mantow, also one of the grantors. These persons are described in
the body of the deed as " Indians now belonging to Farmington."

In the third deed, the original autograph of which is preserved
— that of December 2, 1684 — the names of John a Compowne, Man-
tow, Atumtucko and Spinning Squaw reappear, and in addition to
these we have Worun Compowne, and instead of Patucko, Patucko's
Squaw, who is designated Atumtucko's mother (which, however,
may mean his aunt), and, second in the list, a new name, Hachatow-
suck. The name Sebocket, which appears among the signatures
under the form of Abuckt or Abucket, is probably the same which
occurs in the first deed as Aupkt. The names given in the body of
this third deed are seven in number; among the additional signa
tures at the end are " James's daughter, by Cockoeson's sister," " also
Cockocson's sister's daughter, as also Abuck." We learn from
another memorandum that Cockoeson's sister was "Patucko's
squaw," and that Warun Compowne was " Nesaheg's son," perhaps
his nephew.

Counting the several distinct names that appear in the three
deeds given by Farmington Indians, we find that they number
twenty-five. Mr. J. W. De Forest has been quoted as assigning to
the Farmington tribe a population of " eighty to one hundred war-

♦ Sepus's name is preserved in Waterbury (but in incorrect form) in Sequcses Council, Degree of Poca-
hontas, of the *• Improved Order of Red Men."

INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 31

riors, or about four hundred persons." But Mr. De Forest frankly
confesses * that his estimate is " based upon nothing,'* and in all
probability it is too large. There must have been at this time a
good many Farmington Indians besides these; in the deed already
referred to, given to the town of Farmington in 1673, the following
names are found in addition to those already enumerated: Nona-
wau, Onkawont, Skerawagh, Wauno, Seacut, Wonkes, Aslanaugh,
Wasamock, Cochemhoote and Nocimamon. The number of signers
on that occasion, including two sons of James and several squaws,
was twenty-five. But the tendency of the latest investigators is
to the belief that our estimates of the Indian population have
hitherto been entirely too high, and sympathizing with this view
we venture the opinion that the twenty-five men and women who
signed the Mattatuck deeds constituted a fair representation of the
Farmington tribe. If we are to distinguish in any way between
the signers of the deeds and others who did not sign, we may sup-
pose that the signers (excepting, of course, the sachem and perhaps
members of his family) belonged to a band that had from time
to time occupied a camping ground within Mattatuck bounds and
thus secured a special claim to the territory.

Examining the names themselves, what do we find ? John Jos-
selyn, in his "Two Voyages to New England," f says that the Indi-
ans "covet much to be called after our English manner, Robin,
Harry, Philip, and the like." In each of these deeds we find this
preference illustrated. Among the names mentioned in the first
are included (besides the witness, Robin) a John and a James; in
the second we find a Judas and a Mary or Mercy, and in the third
John appears again. The first deed mentions also a Chere (written
afterward Chery), which may possibly stand for Cherry, and in
both the first and the third deed Spinning Squaw holds a prominent
place. We may readily believe that the English proper names were
attached to the Indians who bore them in a hap-hazard way; but
the designation "Spinning Squaw" invites inquiry. Is it to
aboriginal spinning (making thread from filaments of bark) that
reference is made? or had this woman learned to spin from her
white neighbors of Farmington, and become so devoted to that kind
of work that it gave her a name ? It is interesting to learn that this
woman's name became connected at an early day with a locality in
the northern part of the town. The purchase described in the deed
of April 29, 1684, is spoken of as having upon its southern boundary

♦ •' History of the Indians of Connecticut," p. 52.

+ " An Account of Two Voyages to New England, Made during the Years 1638, 1663. By John Jossclyn,
Gent.;" reprint of 1865. p. 100.

32

HISTORY OF WATERS UB 7.

"that which was formerly Spinning Squaw's land;" in other words,
her land was at the northern end of the purchase of 1674. But how
this case of individual ownership came to pass (if such it was) there
is nothing to indicate.

Of the Indian names in the deed of 1674, the first in order, and
doubtless the first in importance, is Nesaheagun. The name is
spelled in a variety of ways, and seems to be identical with Neesou-
weegun, a name found attached to an agreement with the towns-
men of New London in 1651.* But the bearer of the name (known
also as Daniel) could scarcely have been the same person. Nesahea-
gun seems to have been the successor, and, in accordance with
Indian law, the nephew of Sehat (Seocut ?) who was the first sachem
of the Farmington tribe with whom the English became acquainted.
Nesaheagun is spoken of as " sachem of Poquonnock in Windsor,"
and about the year 1666 sold a tract of land measuring twenty-eight
thousand acres to certain agents of that town. His name does not
reappear in the second and third deeds; but the first name in the
third deed is John a Compound, which, by the way, stands next to
Nesaheagun's in the first, and the fourth is Warun Compound, who
is described as " Nesaheg's son," which may mean his nephew. If
John a Compound was also a nephew of Nesaheagun, or his brother,
he may have been his successor in the sachemship. This name.
Compound, if not of English origin, has been forced into a strange
resemblance to English; but there is reason to suspect that it is an
Indian name in disguise, possibly a place-name. In the third deed
— that of December 2, 1684 — the full name is given as John a Com-
powne. The chief who figures most prominently in the early his-
tory of Virginia was named Powhattan, from the falls in the river
{pauat'hanne) near which he lived. Is it not possible that the
" Indian proprietor " who here comes before us may have been
named in a similar way from the "other-side falls," wherever these
may have been ? At all events, acompown-tuk (if there were such a
name) would mean " the falls on the other side," and might easily
have been transformed by " otosis " into " a-Compound." The
name Compounce, attached to a pond in the north-western part of
Southington, is usually regarded as a corruption of "Compound's;"
but in this latest form it resembles more closely the name as it
appears in the Farmington deed of 1673, where it is given as Com-
paus.

The third name in the deed of 1674, Queramouch, is interesting
as being identical with one of the three Indian names already men-
tioned in the curious deed of 1657, where it appears as Querrimus

• President Stiles, First Series Mass. His. Coll., Vol. X, p. xoi.

INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 33

or Queromus. His associates in the deed of 1657 were Kepaquamp
and Mataneag. This last name may afford another instance of the
naming of a chief from the place where he lived. There was a place
called Mattaneaug, or Matianock, near the mouth of Farmington
river in Windsor. In the Colonial Records of 1640 it is called Mat-
tanag. Arramamet, described in 1636 as " sachem of Matianocke,"
lived near the present line between Windsor and Hartford, and
twenty years later — in 1657 — the same sachem or his successor may
have been designated by the name of the place at which he resided.*

Of the names Uncowate and " Nenapush Squaw " we know
nothing further. But Patucko, whose name is the first in the deed
of April, 1684, and who is superseded in the deed of December
following by " Patucko's squaw," ought to interest us especially as
the source of one of the place-names that have survived to the pres-
ent day. One would hardly suspect a connection between Tucker's
Ring, in the northwest corner of the town of Wolcott, and this
Indian " proprietor," but such a connection exists. A suggestion of
it is found in the name Ptuckering Road, and in a deed of 1731, cited
in Dr. Bronson's " History of Waterbury," Potucko's Ring is
definitely mentioned. If the story is true that he " kindled a fire
in the form of a large ring around a hill, in hunting deer, and per-
ished within it," that may account for the place-name. At the same
time it is worthy of mention ihQX potucko (in the Narragansett dialect
puttukki^ in the Massachusetts, /<f/«>^^///) means round. Dr. Trumbull
calls attention to the fact that " a Patackhouse, sister of Nessahe-
gen of Pequannoc, signed a deed to Windsor in 1665."! If Potucko
lost his life (in the way indicated by tradition, or otherwise)
between April and December, 1684, the substitution of his squaw's
name for his in the later deed would readily be explained.

Attention has already been called to the fact that while Moman-
tow's squaw is named as one of the grantors in the deed of April,
1684, Momantow himself was among those who witnessed it. This
would indicate that the wife had certain rights in the second grant
of land in which the husband did not share. Whether this was the
case with other squaws who are named in the deed as grantors, it is
difficult to say; but this can hardly be the explanation of the substi-
tution of Potucko's squaw for Potucko himself in the deed of Decem-
ber, 1684, because the land therein described is substantially the

*S€e Trumbuirs '* Indian Geographical Names," p. 27.

t *' Indian Geographical Names," p. 57. In several of the Algonkin versions of the Lord^s prayer,
Petukkentag ox woxci^ cognate word is used for "bread,'* meaning *' something round/' In the Mohegan
dialect it is ^tqw>ffk: in the Virginia tuckahoe^ whence the modem " hoe-cake."

Potucko^s name is perpetuated in another way in Waterbary — in Potucko Assembly (No. sag) of the
** Royal Society of Good Fellows," an insurance fraternity.

34 HISTORY OF WATEBBUBT,

same as that which Potucko, with others, deeded ten years before.
It is nevertheless true that a study of these names and relationships
inevitably suggests that the grns^ as distinguished from the tribe,
had come to be somehow recognized in the ownership of land as
well as of personal property. The rule which (as we have seen) had
become well established among the Aztecs may have begun to
operate among the Indians of Connecticut.

The only other names in the three Farmington deeds that
require notice are Quatoquechuck, who has already been referred
to as Taphow's son, and Hachatowsuck. This last name, under
the form " Hatchetowset,*' occurs frequently in the Woodbury and
Litchfield records, but evidently as designating another person. He
is mentioned in the Litchfield Land Records as buying and selling
land as late as 1736, and in 1741 he petitioned the General Court to
help him to a division of the Indian lands at Pootatuck, at which
date his eldest child was aged sixteen. It is evident from these
facts that the Pootatuck Indian could not be identical with the signer
of the deed of 1684. One who was sufficiently prominent at that
date to stand second among the native " proprietors " of Mattatuck,
would hardly be speculating in land fifty-two years afterward.
Besides, there is no reason to doubt that the same name frequently
belonged to persons of different tribes. If we could analyze Indian
personal names, we should probably find it to be a matter of course

I'BSTLB OF TURKEY HILL INDIANS.* (sEK NEXT I'AGE).

that there should be a Hachetowsuck in the Tunxis tribe and an
Atchetouset among the Pootatucks. But it illustrates the curious
changes to which Indian names were subject on European lips, to

* This " pestle *' was found in 1883, in a cave (afterward destroyed by quanryinfi:) at Turkey Hill, near
Turkey Brook, Derby. It is 17 inches long and 2>^ by s^i inches in diameter at the middle. The mate-
rial is a compact mica slate. It is worn smooth on one side, but not at the ends.

INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 35

find that the Pootatuck Atchetouset, in his petition to the General
Court, appears under the guise of ** Hatchet Tousey." Many years
later a squaw of the Turkey Hill band, near Derby, bore the name
of Moll Hatchet. She was said to have been so called from the fact
that she habitually carried a hatchet with her; but the name seems
to have belonged to her family and was very probably a remnant of
some such genuine Indian name as Hatchetowsuck. In " Hatchet
Tousey " the transformation may be seen taking place.

When we turn to the deed given by the Paugasuck or Derby
Indians, we find an entirely new set of names before us, represent-
ing another and for the most part a distinct tribe. The names
mentioned in the body of the deed, and at the end of it, are as
follows : Awawus, Conquapatana, Curan, Cocapadous, Cocoeson,
Tataracum, Kekasahum, Wenuntacun, Wechumunke, Weruncaske,
Arumpiske and Notanumhke. Of the twelve persons thus desig-
nated the first eight appear to have been men, the other four were
women. Of the relations of the grantors to one another and to
other Indians, there are some slight indications. Although the
name of Awawus comes first in the list, it is Conquepatana who is
designated "sagamore," that is, sachem.* But Awawus, as the
position of his name indicates, must have been sufficiently promi-
nent among the grantors to hold a representative place; for in a
memorandum attached to the deed by Governor Robert Treat of Mil-
ford, he calls him "the Indian proprietor." "Awawas, the Indian
proprietor," he says, " appeared at my house and owned this deed
above mentioned to be his act, and that he has signed and sealed to
it." On the i8th of April, Conquepatana made a similar acknowl-
edgment of the deed before the governor, "and said he knew what
was in it, and said it was weregeny f The relation between the name

*The impression is prevalent — based upon the positive statements of some of the earlier writers — that the
terms " sachem" and *' sagamore" designated two distinct offices, the second inferior and subordinate to the
first. But there seems to be no good ground for such a representation. Dr. J. H. Trumbull, in his edition
of Roger Williams's ** Key," note 392, says that a comparison of the several forms of the word as found in
different Algonkin dialects "establishes the identity of sachem with sagamore."

In the Massachusetts vocabulary attached to Wood's *' New England's Prospect,'* published in 1635, sag-
amore and sachem are said to be the same, although Wood says elsewhere (in the monarchical phraseology so
generally adopted) that '*a king of large dominions hath his viceroys or inferior kings under him, to agitate
his state affairs and keep his subjects in good decorum. Other offices there be," he adds, " but how to distin-
guish them by name is something difficult " (p. 90, reprint of 1865). Daniel Gookin, on the other hand,
writing about 1674, seems to make a difference between the two terms. He says, speaking of the Pequots :
** Their chief sachem held dominion over divers petty sagamores." (First Series Mass. His. Coll., vol. I. p.

M7)-

f W'eregen means "a good thing.''* In the form Wauregan the w^ord has been appropriated as the name
of a manufacturing company and a village in eastern Connecticut. Dr. Trumbull ('* Indian Names,** p. 79)
says: ** It was doubtless suggested by a line in Dr. Elisha Tracy's epitaph on Sam Uncas in the Mohcgan

burying-ground in Norwich :

' For courage bold, for things wauregan

He was the glory of Moheagon.* '*

36 HISTORY OF WATEEBUBT,

of the sagamore and the fourth name in the list, Cocapadoush,
is not apparent at first glance, but comes to view when we give
them as they are given in another deed (April i, 1709), where they
are written " Cockapotanah," and " Cockapotoch." The sagamore
ig known in later records as Konkapot, and he who stands fourth in
the list was Konkapot-oos, perhaps Little Konkapot. It may be
worth while to mention in this connection that Konkapotanah lived
until 1731, and that on June 28, 1711, he and his son "Tom Indian**
deeded to the proprietors of Waterbury, for a consideration of
twenty-five shillings, "a small piece of land" north of Derby
bounds, west of the Naugatuck river, and south of Toantuck brook.*
In a deed given by Nonnewaug and other Pootatuck Indians, in
1700, to the people of Woodbury, Konkapotana's son is included
among the signers, and also another of the grantors we are just
now considering, Wenuntacun; from which it would appear that
close relationships existed between the Paugasucks and the Poota-
tucks similar to those between the Paugasucks and the Tunxis. Of
the other four men in our list, namely Curan and Cocoeson, two are
represented not only personally, but by the women whose names
follow. One of these, Arumpiske, is said to be Curan's squaw, and
another, Notanumke, Curan's sister. The other two women,
Wechumunke and Weruncaske, are designated as Cocoeson's sis-
ters.

By the mention of Cocoeson's sisters we are brought to a consid-
eration of the relation of this fourth deed to the other Waterbury
deeds, or rather, the relation of these Paugasuck Indians to the
Farmington tribe in the ownership of Mattatuck territory. It has
already been suggested that Wawowus of the second deed (April
29, 1684) was identical with Alwaush of the first. Is it not proba-
ble that Awawus, whose name comes first in this Paugasuck deed —
the " Indian proprietor " who appeared before Governor Treat — is
the same person ? It is possible, too, that the Curan of this fourth
deed is identical with Caran-chaquo, of the first, and the position
of his name, between Conkapotana and Conkapotoos, suggests a
relationship between him and them. But, however this may be, we

* It would b« interesting to know whether there was any relation of kinship between Konkapotana and
Captain Konkapot, who figures so prominently among the Stockbridge Indians of the upper Housatonic. A
deed of the territory comprising the ** upper and lower Housatonic townships,'* made in ^1724, was signed by
Konkapot and twenty others. He received his captain's commission from Governor Belcher, in 1734, was
baptized in 1735, and died previous to 1770— one of the first fruits of the mission to the Housatonic Indians,
of which the Rev. Samuel Hopkins, born in Waterbury, was the founder.

The name is perpetuated in Konkapot river in North Canaan, and in Konkapot's brook in the southeast-
em part of Stockbridge, Mass. This latter stream has become in the mouths of the people " Konk's brook,"
and latterly, with the help of " otosis " has been degraded into " Skunk's brook.'* Thus is the stately name
of the sachem of the Paugasucks reduced to an offensive monosyllable!

INDIAN DESDS AND SIGNATURES. 37

may feel certain that the sisters of Cocoeson mentioned here are
identical with the " Cocoeson's sisters " who signed the deed of
December 2, 1684. And this being the case, we are in a position to
make still further identifications. We learn from the deed of
December 2 that Cocoeson's sisters were James's daughters, and that
one of them was Patucko's squaw and Atumtucko's mother. This
establishes the fact, suggested by his name, that Atumtucko was
Patucko's son; it also explains why, in the deed of 1674, Patucko
"promised for James," and suggests to us that we are to look for
this James among the Paugasucks. In a deed of 1659, by which the
Paugasucks sold to Lieutenant Thomas Wheeler the land between the
Housatonic and Naugatuck rivers, we find the name of " Pagasett
James." It is almost impossible to avoid the conclusion that this
Paugasuck James was the James who was the father of Cocoeson
and his sisters, and that the sister who in the fourth deed is desig-
nated a squaw, that is, Wechumunke, was Patucko's squaw and
Atumtucko's mother. At the sale of December 2, it would appear
that "Atumtoco's mother, Jemes's dafter," was not present, but
was represented by the other sister^ Werumcaske. " Cockeweson's
sister's dafter " is also mentioned as among the signers.

It is impossible to say to what extent these twelve grantors
were representative of the Paugasuck tribe, or whether there were
any other connections by marriage between the Paugasucks and
the Tunxis than the two deeds reveal to us. Besides, in attempting
to interpret and estimate the very slight data afforded us, we must
remember what has been said in regard to Indian systems of con-
sanguinity, and the risk of our being misled by English terms, mis-
takenly applied to Indian relationships. If our supply of facts
were larger, we might find among the aboriginal proprietors of
Mattatuck unquestionable evidence of the existence of the gens, of
inheritance through the mother (as in so many of the Indian
tribes), and of the descent of the sachemship not from father to
son, but from uncle to nephew. Such facts as we have brought to
view seem to point in that direction.

The results of such an examination as this of old records must
seem trifling and unsatisfactory. But it will be worth while to
have labored over them if the aboriginal owners and occupants of
Waterbury are thus brought more distinctly before us. It gives us
a somewhat firmer hold upon these flitting forms of the wilderness
to know their names and some of the ties which bound them to one
another. We see them roaming the forests and threading their way
along the river banks, and when the white man comes with his money
and coats and axes and hoes we see them gathering from the " long

38 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

river "on the east and the Housatotiic on the south for a confer-
ence and a sale, and after the deeds have been drawn up and
signed, and marked with the red man's "marks," returning to their
camping-grounds little aware of the meaning of the bargain they
have made. When Governor Treat made his memorandum on the
Pangasuck deed that Conquepatana had appeared before him and
acknowledged it, he added that the sagamore "said he knew what
was in it and said it was jveregen " [good]. But how little he knew !
How little he appreciated the far-reaching significance of the trans-
action that had taken place a few weeks before on the banks of the
Naugatuck. But it was a peaceable and friendly sale, and so were
the others that had preceded it. The rival claimants were not hos-
tile but friendly tribes, and the friendship of both of them for the
white man remained unbroken to the end.

■hawk pipn o(

.nM,M=,d.j.. Ui.o

ckllcilcly tnera

vcdiina. iu length

perhips aliM I

ii. drillioK iht h

ok thmutrh the stem

bowl, Th«.m

•p«>>l>»o(.l>"

The p.p. wilh

(Me «id figure upon

CHAPTER IV.

ABORIGINAL PLACE-NAMES OF MATTATUCK — OBSOLETE NAMES IN THE
PAUGASUCK DEED OF 1685 — NAMES WHICH STILL SURVIVE — NAMES,
NOT INDIAN, CONTAINING REMINISCENCES OF INDIAN OCCUPANCY.

OF the several deeds referred to in the preceding chapter, the
fourth, given by the Paugasuck Indians on February 20, 1685,
is of peculiar interest for two reasons— because of the vari-
ous memoranda which accompany the signatures, and because of
the remarkable list of Indian place-names which it contains.

This deed conveys to the settlers of Mattatuck ** twenty parcels
of land, by their names distinguished;" but the "parcels" were
evidently small, and they are designated only by their Indian
names, and with one or two exceptions are not "distinguished"
otherwise. The names seem to have been recorded with unusual
accuracy (as were also the personal names in the deed), and, taken
as a whole, present an inviting but unproductive field for linguistic
and topographical investigation. The tract conveyed lay on both
sides of the Naugatuck river, so that the " twenty parcels of land "
are in two groups. The eastern section is described as follows :

"[i] Wecobemeas, the land upon the brook or small river that
comes through the straits northward of Lebanon, and runs into
Naugatuck river at south end of Mattatuck bounds, called by the
English Beacon Hill brook, and [2] Pacowachuck or Asawacomuck,
and [3] Watapecke, [4] Pacoquarocke, [5] Megunhuttake, [6] Mus-
quanke, [7] Mamusqunke, [8] Squapnasutte, and [9] Wachu ; which
nine parcels of land lie on the east side of Naugatuck river, south-
ward from Mattatuck town ; which comprises all the land betwixt
the forementioned river, or Beacon Hill brook, and the brook at the
hither end of Judd's Meadows, called by the name Sqontk ; and from
Naugatuck river to run eastward to Wallingford and New Haven
bounds ; with all the lowland on the two brooks forementioned."

And this is the account of the western section :

"And other parcels on the west side; the first parcel called by the
name Saracasks ; the rest as follow : [2] Petowtucke, [3] Weqarunsh,
[4] Capage, [5] Cocumpasucke, [6] Mequenhuttocke, [7] Panootan,
[8] Mattuckhott, [9] Cocacocks, [10] Quarasksucks, [11 J Towantucke ;
and half the Cedar swamp, with the land adjacent from it eastward;
which swamp lies northward of Quassapaug pond ; we say, to run

40 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

an east line from thence to Naugfatuck river ; all which parcels of
land forementioned lying southward from the said line, and ex-
tend or are comprised within the hutments following : From the
forementioned swamp a straight line to be run to the middle of
Towantucke pond (or the Cedar swamp a south line), which is
the west bounds toward Woodbury, and an east line from Towan-
tucke pond to be the butment south, and Naugatuck river the east
butment, till we come to Achetaquopag or Warunscopage, and then
to but upon the east side of the river upon the forementioned
lands."

The general outline of this tract of land — at any rate, of that
division of it lying on the east side of the river — is not difficult to
trace ; but to distinguish the ** twenty parcels," and to identify them
at the present day, is quite impossible, and would probably be
impossible even if we knew the meaning of their Indian names.
The southern boundary of the eastern section is distinctly stated
to be Beacon Hill brook, and the northern boundary "the brook
at the hither end [that is, the northern end] of Judd's Meadows,
called by the name Sqontk," which must be the stream known
to-day as Fulling Mill brook, which empties into the Naugatuck at
Union City. The limits of the western section are not clearly
stated, but it seems to have been bounded on the north by a line
running easterly from Cedar swamp (** which swamp lies northward
of Quassapaug pond") to the river, and on the south by a line
running from Towantuck pond to the river, and on the west by
Woodbury. The west bank of the Naugatuck was to be the
eastern boundary of the upper part of this western tract, but below
Achetaquopag (or Warunscopag) it was " to abut upon the east side
of the river, upon the forementioned lands." In other words, the
native proprietors, claiming ownership on both sides of the river
below Fulling Mill brook, claimed ownership also of the river itself.

By observing closely the indications thus given, we are enabled
to " locate " a few of these parcels of land with some certainty. We
know " Towantuck " because the name has survived to the present
day — the only one of these twenty names that has not become
obsolete. The pond with which it is here connected, is now better
known as Long Meadow pond (in Middlebury, near the Oxford line),
but the name has become attached to a station on the New England
railroad, and has also been selected as the designation of a " tribe"
of the *^ Improved Order of Red Men," organized in Waterbury in
1892. We know also the land designated by the name " Wecobe-
meas," because it is distinctly described as "the land upon the
small river that comes through the straits northward of Lebanon

INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 41

Improbably where Straitsville is now situated], called by the English
Beacon Hill brook."* And there is another name, although not in-
cluded among the twenty, which the language of the deed enables
us to fix somewhat definitely. In the phrase, "the brook at the
hither end of Judd's Meadows, called by the name Sqontk," the
name seems to belong to the stream rather than the meadows, and
in that case, as has already been said, represents the well-known
Fulling Mill brook of the present day. If it refers to the meadows,
its identity is equally well established. In this neighborhood,
apparently, we must fix other two names. According to the inter-
pretation already given, the eastern boundary of the tract on the
west side of the Naugatuck was the west bank of that river down to
a certain point, and below that the east bank of the river was the
boundary. The point at which the boundary-line crossed the river
is named " Achetaquopag or Warunscopage ;" and if the claim of
the Paugasucks on the east side of the river was bounded on the
north by Fulling Mill brook, as seems evident, then must the spot
designated by these two names have been near the mouth of that
brook. Whether the " Copage " which is mentioned among the
twenty parcels of land is identical with one or both of these, must
be considered further on. Of the other names in the list of twenty
there is none that can be positively identified, and only a few whose
meaning can be ascertained with any certainty. Foremost among
these is "Wachu," the ninth name in the first group. Wadchu
always means mountain or hill, and we should, as a matter of course,
connect it with Beacon Mountain, were it not for the indications in
the deed that Beacon Hill brook, which flows north of it, was the
southern limit of the eastern tract. There are other heights on the
east side of the river in that vicinity, but none to which the name
** Wachu " could be so fittingly applied. Although there is nothing
in the deeds to help us to further identifications, there are, never-
theless, two or three points worth noticing. There is, for instance,
a " Megunhuttake " (Mequenhuttocke) in both groups of names ; but
it does not follow that there were two distinct and widely separated
parcels of land thus designated ; the name was doubtless applied to
a tract bordering on the river and extending along both banks. A
connection between "Copage," which stands fourth in the second

*}. W. Barber, writing in 1836, or earlier, says: ''About fourteen miles from New Haven the main
road to Waterbury passes by Beacon Mountain, a rude ridge of almost naked rock, stretching southwest. At
this place is Collins's tavern, long known as an excellent public house, and the Straitsville post office. About
half a mile south of Mr. Collins's the road passes through a narrow defile formed by a gap in the mountain
[doubtless the ** straits" referred to in the deed], barely sufficient in width for a road and a small but
sprightly brook which winds through the narrow passage. On both sides the cliffs are lofty, particularly on
the west ; on the east, at a little distance from the road, they overhang in a threatening manner." (*' Con-
necticut Historical Collections," p. x86, fi^t edition).

42 HISTORY OF WATEBBURT.

group, and the two names " Achetacopag " and " Warunscopag " has*
already been suggested. The close connection between the sixth
and seventh names in the first group—" Musquanke " and " Mamus-
qunke " — is obvious ; and the same is true, so far as the structure of
the words is concerned, of " Pacowachuck " and " Pacoquarocke."
The piece of land known as " Pacowachuck " was known also by
another name entirely different, " Asawacomuck."

As regards the meanings of these names, it would be interesting
to know them, even if the places to which they belonged could not
be identified. Every Indian name had a meaning, and was "so
framed as to convey that meaning with precision ; " every place-
name "described the locality to which it was affixed."* But the
names in the list before us are in the Quiripi dialect, and do not
readily lend themselves to any such analysis as can now be made.
The most that can be done is to throw out a few suggestions and to
adduce an occasional parallel.

The first name in the list of twenty— "Wecobemeas" — bears a
close resemblance to "Wecuppeemee," the name of a small river in
Bethlehem and Woodbury, one of the three streams which unite to
form the Pomperaug. The stream seems to have derived its name
from an Indian chief (Wickapema, Weekpemes) who is on record as
a witness to certain Woodbury deeds. The name means "bass-
wood" or "linden." But whether Wecuppeemee, the chief, called
himself "the Linden," or was so denominated by the English
because he lived at a place where lindens grew, is, as Dr. Trumbull
remarks, doubtful. The name which in Woodbury is connected
with a stream is applied in the list before us to "the land upon
Beacon Hill brook." It probably designated a spot where bass-
wood trees grew, and which could easily be distinguished in this
way. In the second name, " Pacowachuck," one readily recognizes
wachu, "mountain" or "hill," as a component part, and \i paco is a
variation of pahque^ as it frequently is, the entire word must mean
"at the clear (or open) mountain," and the reference must be to
some hill divested of woods. A similar analysis would give us as
the meaning of Pacoquaroke " clear long place," referring perhaps to
some strip of meadow on the river-bank, or some smooth place in
the river itself. The alternative designation of "Pacowachuck,"
which is " Asawacomuck " (ashaway - commok) seems to mean "an
enclosed place between." In the name " Musquanke " a resemblance
may be traced to Massacunnock {Mas/iequanoke), the Indian name of
Falcon Island, south of Guilford, which means " place of fish-hawks,"

* Dr. Trumbull, " Composition of Indian Geographical Names," in V^ol. II. of " Collections of the Conn.
His. Society," pp. 3, 4.

INDIAN OEOORAPHWAL NAMES.

43

or the root of the name may be m'squammaug^ meaning "red fish,"
that is, salmon. But the name ** Mamusquunke " which is associated
with the other, suggests a derivation different from both of these.
In the third name on the west side of the river, " Wequarunsh," the
prefix wequa is a familiar one, meaning "at the end," and thence "a
point." It is possible that in the remainder of the word we have the
inseparable generic - ^w/j>& ("a standing rock"), in which case the
name would mean "at the end of the ledge," or would designate
some place or point with an "upright rock at the end."* In "Pan-
ootan," one can hardly help suspecting that the n of the first sylla-
ble ought to have been written «, in which case we should find in
the word a reminder of our old friend Powhattan and the " falls "
which gave him his name.f Pauat-han means "falls in a rapid
stream ;" but whether there are falls or even rapids in the Nauga-
tuck, within the limits indicated by the deed, of sufl&cient import-
ance to justify such an appellation, may be open to question. In
the name which follows this, " Mattuckhott," the first syllable may
represent matta^ "without," which appears again in "Mattatuck," or
the whole word may stand for nCtugk-ut^ meaning "at the tree."
The only other name of the twenty, of which anything definite can
be said is "Capage." It is substantially the same as Cupheag, the
old name of Stratford, (the same as Quebec also) and means " a place
shut in," "narrows" or "a cove." The writer of this chapter
suggested, in the Rev. Samuel Orcutt's "History of Derby," J that
the name designated "possibly the narrows in the river at Beacon
hill." If this "Capage" is identical with the copage in "Acheta-
quopag or Warunscopage " — the point at which the eastern bound-
ary line crossed the Naugatuck — then must we locate it at the north-
ern rather than the southern end of the eastern section of the
Paugasuck grant — that is, at Fulling Mill brook, rather than at
Beacon hill. But there is no good reason for insisting on their
identity. As for "Warunscopage," perhaps we have here a personal
name associated with a place-name in a quite unusual way. Among
the signers of the deeds given to Waterbury, Warun Compound holds
a leading place. May not this spot at which the boundary line
crossed the river have been known as Warun's Copage ? and in

*In the a]^eeraent made May 22, 1674, between New Haven, Milford, Branford and Wallingford wiih
reference to their bounds, in the memorandum attached to the New Haven and Milford section, we read of
^*a straij^ht line up into the country, which line shall run upon the rock or stone called 'the beacon,* which
lieth upon the upper end of the hill called Heacon hill, and from thence to the end of the bounds" (Conn.
Col. Records, Vol. Ill, p. 233).

t See p. 32.

X *• Indian Names of Places," pp. xciii— xcvii. of Orcutt's " Derby ;" see also Dr. Trumbull's " Indian
Geographical Names," pp. 8, 23.

44 HISTORY OF WATERS UR7.

Acheta-copag may we not recognize another of our signers,
Achetowsuck ? These, however, are mere possibilities.*

In our interpretation of the deed, we have brought these last
mentioned names into close association with " Sqontk," a name
attached, apparently, to "the brook at the hither end of Judd's
Meadows," which we^have identified as Fulling Mill brook. The
name, "Squaniuck," is attached to a tract of land on the east bank
of the Housatonic river, at the mouth of Four Mile brook, in Sey-
mour, and to a settlement of a dozen houses at that point. In a
Derby deed of 1678 it is described as "a certain tract called and
known as Wesquantook and Rockhouse hill," whence it appears
that ** Squantuck" is an abbreviated form of the original name, the
meaning of which. Dr. Trumbull says, "is not ascertained.** It is
doubtful whether the name "Sqontk," which we have connected
with Fulling Mill brook, is to •be considered etymologically the
same as the Squantuck in Seymour, or is rather to be identified
with Scantic, the name of a stream in another part of the state —
between East and South Windsor. The latter Dr. Trumbull derives
from peska-tuk, "where the river branches'* — a meaning which
would be sufficiently applicable to the place at which Fulling Mill
brook empties into the Naugatuck. In this connection it is worthy
of remark that in Pierson's Catechism, which represents the dialect
of the Paugasuck Indians, the word squanta is used as the rendering

for "gates.** t

We have given our attention thus far to the obsolete place-
names in the Paugasuck deed. But besides these, and besides
" Towantuck,*' to which reference has been made, there are other
geographical names mentioned here, which are by no means
obsolete, but are in daily use and have attained to no little import-
ance. These are " Naugatuck '* and " Quassapaug," and we may add
" Mattatuck.**

" Mattatuck " is mentioned in the deed, first as the name of the
"township** which the grantees represent, and secondly, as an alter-
native name of the river. The stream which was known in the
lower part of its course as the Naugatuck, was known further north
as the Mattatuck, and afterward also as the Waterbury river. By
the help of early records, the history of the name can readily be

* By mistake of the copyist, the name Waninscopage appears in the Waterbury Land Records as Marusco-
pag, the initial W having been taken for an M. In this incorrect form it was transferred to the list in
Orcutt's " History of Derby," p. xcv, and thence into Dr. Trumbull's " Indian Geographical Names/' pp.
3, 8, 23. In the original deed (the discovery of which is referred to elsewhere) the name is plainly ** Wanins-
copage.*' In the list in Orcutt's ** Derby," the name Quarasksucks— the nineteenth in our list of twenty —
was given as " Gawuskesucks," having been incorrectly deciphered.

t ** Some Helps for the Indians/' p. 65 of Dr. Trumbull's reprint.

JNDIAN QEOORAPHIGAL NAMES,

45

traced. Its first occurrence is in the deed of February 8, 1657-8,
already referred to, by which certain lands in the upper part of the
Naugatuck valley were granted to William Lewis and Samuel vSteele,
of Farmington. The deed reads, " A parcel or tract of land called
* Matetacoke,' that is to say, the hill from whence John Stanley
and John Andrews brought the black lead, and all the land within
eight mile of that hill on either side." " Matetacoke " evidently
stands for Matuhtugk-ohke^ meaning a "place without trees," and was
probably an accurate description of the hill referred to, or of some
spot in its neighborhood. If applied to a hill, it must have been a
bare and treeless hill, and might with equal propriety have been
described by the name " Pacowachuck," referred to above. The
next occurrence of the name is fifteen years subsequent to the deed
to Lewis and Steele. It is in a document embodying the report of a
committee of the General Court sent out in behalf of the people of
Farmington to inquire in regard to a place for a new settlement in
the Naugatuck valley. They say they " have been to view Matituc
oocke in reference to a plantation," and "do judge it capable of the
same." The Farmington people immediately petitioned the Court
for permission to make a settlement, and in their petition they
speak of " having found out a tract at a place called by the Indians
Matitacoocke^ which we apprehend may sufficiently accommodate to
make a small plantation." As the reference here is unquestionably
to the meadows of Waterbury, we must suppose that an Indian name
belonging to a place a number of miles further up the river was
used by a kind of accommodation, or that during the interval of
fifteen years the scope of the name had been gradually enlarging
until in popular use it covered the entire region, or else that the
same name was independently given to two distinct localities — to
the place where the black lead was found, because it was a bare and
treeless hill, and to the Waterbury meadows for a similar reason,
because they were destitute of trees. Since every Indian place-
name was a description of the locality to which it was affixed, such
a coincidence as this might easily happen.

In each instance of its occurrence thus far, the name appears in
its larger form, terminating in oke or oocke. It occurs in this form
in the petition to the General Court in October, 1673. But in the
record of the action of the Court on this petition, the name is given
in the shortened form, " Mattatock," and this form came immedi-
ately into use. The committee appointed to explore the region
speak in their report, made in April, 1674, of having "viewed the
lands upon the Mattatuck river," and in the record of the Court,
May 18, the expression used is "a plantation at Mattatuck." From

46 HISTORY OF WATEHBURY.

this time onward until 1686, the place and also the river were known
by this name. In the records for May 13, 1675, we read of "the new
town going up at Mattatuck," and a little further on, Mattatuck is
mentioned in connection with Derby and Woodbury (whose names
had recently been changed) and Pottatock and Wyantenuck (whose
names were afterward changed to Southbury and New Milford) as
towns whose boundaries required to be immediately ascertained
and established. In the record for May 15, 1686, we read : "This
Court grants that .Mattatuck shall be and belong to the County of
Hartford; and the name of the plantation shall be for the futuie
Waterbury. ''*

Although " Mattatuck " was not retained as the name of the
town, and has been superseded by " Naugatuck " as the name of the
river, nevertheless it has not become extinct. It was duplicated on
Long Island as early as 1658,! and survives there, in the form "Mat-
tituck," as the name of a pleasant little village, situated between
Long Island sound and Great Peconic bay. It has survived also in
the upper part of the Naugatuck valley almost to the present time ;
at all events, it was customary a few years ago to speak of East
Litchfield as Mattatuck. The name is attached to a street in the
city of Waterbury — that which runs northward from West Main
street along the eastern channel of the Naugatuck river ; also to a
local Historical society, organized in 1878, which has for its field the
territory embraced within the ancient town. The "Mattatuck
Manufacturing company," established in 1847, has become extinct;
but the name is connected with other organizations. There is a
Mattatuck Council of the "Royal Arcanum" (an insurance frater-
nity), and a Mattatuck Drum Corps. The name occurs, finally, in the
title of a book published in 1892 — "The Churches of Mattatuck" —
which contains the record of the celebration of the bi-centenary of
the First church in Waterbury (November 4 and 5, 1891), with
sketches of all the Congregational churches within the ancient
domain.

The name " Naugatuck," which appears in the Paugasuck deed as
the established designation of the Mattatuck river, was originally
used in a very restricted sense, but is now the most frequently

♦Conn. Col. Records, Vol, II, pp. 210, 224, 249, 253; Vol. Ill, p. 197.

According to Dr. Bronson (*' History of Waterbury," p. 67), the new name was selected as descriptive.
** The new town took its name of Waterbury on account of its numerous rivers, rivulets, ponds, swamps,

* boggy meadows' and wet lands." '* It is a pity," adds Dr. Bronson, *' that the beautiful old Indian name

* Mattatuck ' was not retained. But our Puritan ancestors regarded these native words as heathenish, and
were in haste to discard and forget them.*'

t New Haven Col. Records, Vol. II, pp. 233, 302, 462, 463: "A parcel of land called Mattatuck and
Akkabawke" [Aquebogue].

INDIAN QEOORAPHICAL NAMES, 47

mentioned and most widely known of all the aboriginal names in the
valley. The first instance of its occurrence is in the Records of the
Jurisdiction of New Haven for May 27, 1657. Among the conditions
proposed by the inhabitants of Paugasuck, upon which they were
willing to "submit themselves to the Jurisdiction," the first was in
these words : " That they have liberty to buy the Indians' land,
behind them, that is over Naugatuck river, and not toward New
Haven bounds, and also above them northward, up into the coun-
try/'* In a deed to Thomas Wheeler, the same year, the name
occurs again ; and again in a deed to Joseph Hawley and Henry
Tomlinson, of Stratford, August 16, 1668, and frequently afterward
in the Derby records and the colonial records of New Haven and
Connecticut. This was the name by which the river was known in
the lower part of the valley. Yet in a report made to the General
Court by a Derby and Mattatuck committee, in May, 1680, it is
designated once as " Mattatock river,*' and twice as the ** Nagotock
or Mattatock." When the plantation of Mattatuck became the town
of Waterbury, the name Waterbury was also applied to the river,
but did not retain its hold upon it.f Of course it is impossible to
say at what date the name " Naugatuck '* achieved a complete vic-
tory, but it appears to have had the field to itself for more than a
hundred years past. And being used to designate the river, it came
to be applied as a matter of course to the valley through which the
river flows.

This was the only use of the name until 1844, when it was
adopted as the name of a new town. At the May session of the
General Assembly in that year, that part of Waterbury embraced
within the society of Salem, with portions of Bethany and Oxford,
was " incorporated as a distinct town, by the name of Naugatuck." \
A year later (May, 1845), the legislature incorporated the ** Nauga-
tuck Railroad company," and from that time the old aboriginal
name became a household word to thousands who might not other-
wise have known it.

Besides the larger uses of the name thus far indicated, it is
applied to several organizations in the town of Naugatuck. These
are the Naugatuck Electric Light company, the Naugatuck Electric

* New Haven Col. Records, Vol. II, p. 223.

t For example, in the petition of the people of Westbury (afterward Watertown) for " winter privileges,"
in October, 1733, they speak of being separated from the meeting-house by '^ a great river which is called
Waterbury river, which for great part of the winter and spring is not passable." In the Litchfield records
this is the name generally used.

$ Resolutions and Private Acts, pp. 86-89. Dr. Bronson says, in his "History of Waterbury," p. 67 :
" Our friends down the river showed their good sense when they called their new town Naugatuck (another
beautiful name)— where the second settlement in the vallcv was made."

48 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

Time company, the Naugatuck Malleable Iron company, the Nauga-
tuck Water company, and the Naugatuck Musical Union. It may
be added that since 1870, the name "Naugatuck Valley" has been
applied to a newspaper — the " Sentinel," published at Ansonia. In
1879 the same designation was given to a newly organized Associ-
ation of Congregational ministers, and in 1883 to a new Conference
of Congregational churches.

As regards the meaning of this name, the traditional derivation
is given in Dr. Bronson's "History of Waterbury."* Naukotunk^ the
original form of the word, is there said to mean " one large tree,'*
and to have been the original name of Humphreysville (now Sey-
mour), which was so called from a large tree formerly standing
near Rock Rimmon at Seymour. The same derivation is given in a
letter from Stiles French of Northampton, Mass., formerly of Sey-
mour, who received it from the Rev. Smith Dayton, whose authority
was Eunice Mauwee, the daughter of " Chuce." Mr. French says :
" She told Mr. Dayton that the name Naugatuck meant * one big
tree,* and was pronounced by the Indians Naw-ka-tunk. This * one
big tree' stood about where the Copper works in Seymour now
are, and afforded the Indians a shade when they came to the
Rimmon falls to fish." This tradition is apparently direct and
authentic. It was probably the foundation for the statement of Mr.
J. W. DeForest (a native of Seymour) in the preface to his " History
of the Indians of Connecticut," that " Naugatuck was not anciently
the name of the river to which it is now attached, but of a place on
the banks of that river." In Mr. DeForest's brief list of words in
the Naugatuck dialect the word for "tree" is tookh ; in Pierson's
Catechism it is p'tuk. The usual form in the vocabularies is mihtuck
or mektug, but the initial m does not belong to the root. The last
syllable of Nauga-tuck may therefore very well stand for "tree/*
but the remainder of it is not so easily identified. Dr. Trumbull
accepts the traditional derivation, /Mr«^£7/-/««^>^, meaning "one tree;"
but in so doing he seems to disregard an important verbal distinc-
tion upon which he has elsewhere laid stress. f There is documentary

♦ p. 15, note. A writer in the " Watcrbury American" of May i, 1879, mentions two entirely distinct
interpretations which he has met with : '* Some say that ' Naugatuck ' means ' rushing water,' others, * beauti-
ful vale.* '* There is no foundation for either of these.

+ In his reprint of Roger Williams's " Key,'' Dr. Trumbull says: " The primary signification of nquit
seems to be * first in order,'— the beginning of a series or of progression not yet rDmpleted ; while
pavasuck denotes ' one by itself,' a unit, without reference to a series ; " and this seems to be sustained by
Pierson's Catechism, which translates, '" first " by negonne, but when it refers to the '* one true God " renders
"one" hy pasuk. (Trumbull's *' Indian names," p. 36; Williams's "Key into the Indian Language of
America," Trumbull's reprint, p. 50; " Some Helps to the Indians,'^ pp. 11, 13.) One would suppose that if
the distinction was ever a real one, it would be made in such a case as this, that i«, in designating a well known
and apparently isolated tree.

INDIAN QEOQRAPHIGAL NAMES.

49

evidence to sustain the statement that "Naugatuck" was at first
not the name of the river, but of a place on the river ; for in the
report of a committee appointed by the General Court (February,
1676) "to order the settlement of the lands at Derby," we meet with
the expression, "the river that cometh from Nawgatuck." The
phrase reveals the process by which the place-name, more than
twenty years before this, had come to be attached to the river.
But whether the derivation of the name received from the Squaw
Eunice, a hundred and fifty years later, was anything better than
an etymological venture on her part, is perhaps an open question.
Dr. Jonathan Edwards, in hi^ " Observations on the language of the
Muhhekaneew Indians," informs us that the Indian name of Stock-
bridge, Mass., was WnogquetookokCy and Dr. Trumbull says that this
means a " bend-of -the-river place." In view of the decided bend in
the river at Seymour, why may we not suppose that it is this that
is represented in the name "Naugatuck," rather than some tree
standing by itself — especially when Naukot-tungk would have meant
not "a single tree," but one of a series of trees? Waiving this
objection, we should have had in the one case Naukot-tungk-oke, and
in the other, Wnogko-tuck-oke, The oke is dropped in either case, and
there are numerous instances of the dropping of the slight sound
represented by the initial W, In a Derby deed dated April 22^
1678, "the fishing place at Naugatuck" is definitely mentioned;
and there can be no doubt that this ancient "Naugatuck "which
gave the river its name, was at or near the spot where Seymour
now stands. But it is quite as likely to have been designated the
" fishing-place at the bend in the river," as " the fishing-place at
the one tree." When "Chuce" went there, with his band, about
1720, it was the only piece of land in the town of Derby which the
Indians had not sold. Because of its value as a " fishing place "
they clung to it to the last.

Another geographical name found in the Paugasuck deed is
"Quassapaug" — applied to the beautiful lake which lies just west
of the western boundary of Mattatuck, part of it in Middlebury and
part in Woodbury. In a Woodbury deed of October 30, 1687, it is
spoken of as " the pond called and commonly known by the name
Quassapaug," and the eastern boundary of the town is said to be
" four score rod eastward of the easternmost of the pond." Although
it does not lie within Waterbury territory, it has long been a place
of resort for Waterbury people, and its name is mentioned more
frequently, perhaps, than any other of the aboriginal names belong-
ing to the region. It is drained by the Quassapaug river, or Eight
Mile brook, which empties into the Housatonic at Punkups. Mr.

4

so

BISTORT OF WATEBBURY,

William Cothren, in his "History of Woodbury," speaking- of
Captain John Miner, says : " To the lovely lake on the eastern
borders he applied the name Quassapaug, or * The Beautiful Clear
Water.' This pleasant sheet of water, so cosily nestling among
the verdant hills, furnished one of the first fishing places to the
new settlers, cut off as they were from the seaboard by the bound-
less forests lying between them and the sea." On a subsequent
page, Mr. Cothren suggests another interpretation of the name —
"Rocky pond"* — on the supposition that the first two syllables
represent qussuky meaning "rock" or "stone." But this word for
" rock," Dr. Trumbull says, is seldom, perhaps never, found in local
names, the " inseparable generic " - omfsk being used instead. Be-
sides, there would seem to be no special appropriateness in such
a designation. In regard to the meaning of paug there can be no
doubt. It denotes "water place" {pe-auke)y is used for "water at
rest," or "standing" as distinguished from "flowing" water, and
is a frequent component of names of small lakes and ponds
throughout New England.f But the proper interpretation of the
first part of the word is somewhat uncertain. The Rev. Azel
Backus, in 1812, in his " Account of Bethlem," interpreted the name
as signifying " Little pond," apparently deriving it from okosse-paug;
but in Dr. Trumbull s judgment "he certainly was wrong;" for
" Quassapaug is not a small, but the largest pond in that region."
The author of this chapter, in his list of place-names in the Rev.
Samuel Orcutt's " History of Derby," suggested that the name
might possibly represent quunnosu-paug^ that is, " Pickerel pond," and
found incidental support for this opinion in Mr. Cothren's refer-
ence to the good fishing which the lake furnished to the early
settlers. Dr. Trumbull, in his " Indian Names of Places in Connec-
ticut," rejects this interpretation (but on insufficient grounds) and
proposes another. J He says it " may have been denominated k'che-
paug^ that is, * greatest pond' — a name easily corrupted to Quassa-
paug.'* Such a change does not seem an "easy" one, but there is
documentary evidence in support of this interpretation. In a report
concerning boundaries, made by the agents of Woodbury and Matta-

* Colhren's Woodbury, pp. 844, 877.

tDr. TrumbuU's "Composition of Indian Geographical Names," p. 15.

t He says : '^ Dr. Anderson, in Orcutt's ** Derby,'* proposes qunnosu-paugy ' pickerel pond,* to which the
only objection is that after names of fish, maugy 'fishing place,' was used, instead of Paug^ *pond,' or
tuck^ * river.' " But if Noosup-paugy '* Beaver pond,** is allowable (see p. 40), why not QuunnosH-^augf
Besides, in his paper on the " Composition of Indian Geographical Names," Dr. Trumbull suggests the very
analysis which is here proposed. He says (p. 43) : ** Quinshepaug or Quonshapaug^ in Mendon, Mass.,
seems to denote a * pickerel pond ' {quMnasu-paug).^* The opinion expressed in his ** Indian Names in Con-
necticut " may be the result of later investigation ; but may it not be possible that maug was used of fishing-
places in rivers^ rather than in ponds ?

INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 51

tuck, June 29, 1680, we find the expression, " the great pond, com-
monly called or known by the name of Quassapaug." It would seem
as if here the Indian name and the English translation of it had
been brought together.*

Mr. Cothren, in the "History of Woodbury," speaks of "the care
with which our fathers gathered up and applied the beautiful
Indian names which abound in our territory." He says elsewhere
that " no town of equal dimensions within the writer's knowledge
has retained so many of them,*' and refers to the fact that in the
neighboring town of Watertown not a single Indian place-name
reraains.f Ancient Mattatuck, taken as a whole, has not been quite
as unfortunate as that part of it now known as Watertown ; but the
real Indian place-names which have come down to us, in addition to
those included in the Paugasuck deed, are very few, — not more than
a half dozen, all told.

The first to be mentioned (following the alphabetical order), and
perhaps the most interesting, is "Abrigador." This is the name of a
high hill half a mile southeast of Centre square, Waterbury, — now a
thickly settled district of the city. The residents of the district
sometimes speak of it as " the Abligator," and the transition from
this to " Alligator " is occasionally made. In the list of place-names
in Mr. Orcutt's " History of Derby," the opinion was expressed that
this name was not of Indian origin, but was a Spanish word {abri-
gadd) meaning "a place of shelter." That it was not an Indian name
was formerly the opinion of Dr. Trumbull also ; but in his " Indian
Names of Places in Connecticut " he derives it from ahigad or abiguat^
meaning " covert " or " hiding place," and quotes from the list of
names in the "History of Derby "the statement that ** there is a
cleft rock on the southwest side of the hill which used to be called
the Indians' house." That it should be an Indian name in disguise
is not remarkable ; but it is certainly a remarkable coincidence that
in the form in which it occurs in Waterbury it should correspond
so closely to a Spanish word having the same meaning.J

♦ Bronson*s Waterbury, p. 74.

tCothren*s "Woodbury," pp. 844, 58-60. He attributes the preservation of the aboriginal names in
Woodbury in part to Captain John Miner, " the leading man among the colonists," who had been educated
as missionary to the Indians, understood their language, and was the surveyor for the town (p. 844).

tOrcutt's "Derby," p. xcvi ; Trumbull's " Indian Names," pp. i, 2. Dr. Trumbull points out that we
have the same Indian word in " Abagadasset " ("at the place of shelter "), a name found at Merry-meeting
bay, Maine, and probably in the name " Pictou " also. Another instance which he gives illustrates in a
striking way the changes through which Indian place-names sometimes pass. The bay of Castine, Me., was
called by the Abnakis Matsi-abigivadoos^eky which means " at the bad small shelter place " or " cove." This
long descriptive name was shortened to " Chebeguadose," and finally corrupted to " Bigaduce," and then its
origin was traced by process of the imagination to a supposed ("rench officer. Major Biguyduce, said to have
come to Maine with Baron Castine. See also " Composition of Indian Geographical Names," pp. 38, 39.

52

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

The name " Compounce," attached to a pond in the northwest
part of Southington, has already been referred to. This pond also,
like Quassapaug, is a place of summer resort for Waterbury people.
That it derived its name from one of the "native proprietors," John
Compound, or a-Compaus, is unquestionable ; but the origin and
significance of the personal designation is, as we have seen, a
matter of uncertainty.*

Between two and three'miles southwest of the centre of Water-
bury is a high ridge or knoll, close to the road which runs parallel
to the Town Plot road, some distance to the west of it, known locally
by the name of "Malmalick" or ** Malmanack." In 1882, the Rev.
Eli B. Clark (since deceased) wrote of it as follows : " My father,
Eli Clark, owned and for more than fifty years lived upon a farm
in the southwesterly portion of the town, nearly three miles from
the centre, embracing within its limits what was then known as
Malmanack hill — the highest ground for miles around, and com-
manding a fine prospect in all directions." This hill is supposed to
have been the site of an Indian camp, and Mr. Clark in his letter
speaks of the numerous arrow heads and other chipped implements
which used to be found there in considerable numbers. The name
is probably of Indian origin, but so disguised that its derivation
cannot be traced with any certainty. It may possibly mean " barren
place."

In the Waterbury records for November, 1729, mention is made
of the lay-out of a highway towards Westbury (now Watertown),
which is said to have begun " at the road on the hill against
Manhan meadow." "The Manhan" is a name which is still in
common use in Waterbury, designating a locality about half a
mile west of Centre square, and generally applied to the canal
or mill-race which supplies water to the mills of the Waterbury
Brass company. The manufactory itself is also popularly known
as "the Manhan." In the record referred to, "Manhan meadow"
means " island meadow," and is a precise designation of the piece
of land lying between the line of the Naugatuck railroad and the
main channel of the Naugatuck river. Dr. Bronson in his " His-
tory " says : " There are indications (or used to be) that Manhan
meadow was once an island, and that a part of the river, at a not
very distant period, ran down upon the east side next the hill, in
the course of the canal of the Water Power company, continuing
through the old * Long cove * and along the line of the Naugatuck
railroad till it met Great brook. This was low ground, and through-
out its extent there was (in the writer's memory) a chain of minia-

• See pb 32.

INDIAN GEOORAPHICAL NAMES, 53

ture lakes or ponds."* The same name occurs in Easthampton,
Mass., applied now to a river, and is readily recognized in such
names as Manhannock, and Manhasset (or Munhansick), but not so
readily in Montauk, Manhattan and the Grand Menan. In recent
years, it has been aiBfixed to a Waterbury street — that which runs
northward from West Main street, between Fairview and Mattatuck
streets. It is to be regretted that it was not given to the street
which runs nearest to the " canal," and thus nearest to the " island "
from which it derives its name.

Another genuine Indian appellative has survived in the name of
one of the school-districts of Waterbury, "Oronoke." In the final
syllable, we recognize the familiar terminal, meaning " place," but
what particular place within the region extending from West-side
hill to Middlebury furnished the name which now designates the
entire district, it would probably be impossible to discover. The
name occurs in other parts of the state under the varied forms,
Woronock, Waronoco, and perhaps Orenaug (in Woodbury).

The only Indian place-name that remains to be mentioned is one
that belongs to the present town of Wolcott and has been already
referred to.f On March 31, 1731, John Alcock, of New Haven,
bought a piece of land in the northeast quarter of Waterbury which
is described (in the record of that date) as "near Ash swamp or
Potucko's ring." In an entry in the Land Records for December 3,
i795> ^ certain boundary line is described as "crossing Ptuckering
road, so called," at two different points. This road is now called
"Tucker's Ring road," and the Indian origin of the name would
hardly have been suspected, were it not for the connecting links
which the local records furnish. As we have already seen, Potucko
was one of the first signers of the first Waterbury deeds ; but whence
comes the name " Potucko's ring ? " and what is its significance ?
The traditional explanation is given in Dr. Bronson's "History:"
" So called from Potucko, an Indian, who having fired a ring of
brushwood to surround and catch deer and other game, was himself
entrapped and consumed." J There is nothing essentially improb-
able in the story, and some slight support for it may be derived
from the fact (already referred to) that while Potucko's name
appears among the signatures attached to the deed of April 29,
1684, it is not among those in the deed of December following, but
is substituted by that of Potucko's squaw. The fact of the close

* Branson's *' History of Waterbury," note to p. 96.

+ See p. 33.

$*' History of Waterbury," note on p, 462. Sec also the Rev. Samuel Orcutt's " History of Wolcott,"
note on p. xP?.

54

HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

connection of the name with the word petukki^ which means
"round," becomes specially interesting in the light of the tradition
concerning Potucko's death in a ring. Did the Indian derive his
name from a practice of hunting deer in the way the tradition
indicates — as if he were known as "the man of the ring"? Or was
the story, like some other traditional tales, invented to account for
the name ?

To this brief list of names in the Indian language should be
added some others which, although not of Indian origin, contain
reminiscences of the Indian period and of Indian occupancy.

Following again the alphabetical order, we begin with " Jack's
cave." The old Indian trail between Farmington and the Nauga-
tuck valley, which afterward became a travelled road, passed through
the northwest corner of what is now Wolcott. According to tradi-
tion the road ran close to the place where the dwelling of Mr. Levi
Atkins now stands, but the Indian trail passed a little further to
the north, "near a large, shelving rock called Jack's cave." In Mr.
Orcutt's "History of Wolcott" it is added that "the Indians en-
camped under this rock at night, in passing between Farmington
and Woodbury," and that near it stood a large chestnut tree from
which Mr. Timothy Bradley cut two hundred bullets, shot into it
by Indians while shooting at a mark. * This does not prove
conclusively that the Jack of Jack's cave was an Indian ; but, all
things considered, it is a name which ought probably to be included
in this list.

"Spinning Squaw's land," a locality mentioned in the early
deeds, and apparently well known in the early days of Waterbury,
is sufficiently described in the preceding chapter.f

" The Wigwam " is the name given to a strip of land, a mile long,
lying on "West branch," which empties into the Naugatuck near
Reynolds bridge. It is said to have been occupied by an Indian in
recent years. A small stream which empties into West branch is
known as "Wigwam brook."

There is another locality in which the memory of a wigwam sur-
vives. In 1684 the proprietors of Mattatuck granted to Daniel
Porter " four acres in the Wigwam swamp, as near the lower end as
may be, so as to have the breadth of the swamp." In a deed bearing
date a hundred and ten years later (December 3, 1795) we read :
"Land in the sequester at the west end of * Wigwam swamp,' so
called, on the brook which runs out of said swamp into Hancox
brook " ; and in a later deed : " Land in the northern part of the

•Orcutt's " Wolcott," p. 197 and note.

t Sec pp. 31, 3a.

INDIAN OEOQRAPHICAL NAMES,

55

sequester in the First society of Waterbury, at the western end of
'Wigwam swamp/ so called, and lying upon the brook which runs
out of said sw^amp into Hancox brook/'* It has been suggested
that Spinning Squaw's land was here, and that it was Spinning
Squaw's wigwam which gave its name to the swamp.

" The Old Canoe place " is the name applied to a spot in the Nau-
gatuck river below Hopeville, behind the house which stands nearly
opposite the residence of the late Isaac M. Thomas. There are
rapids above and below, but here the water is smooth and compara-
tively deep. It is supposed to have been a place where canoes were
kept, or where the river was crossed by canoes.

It may be added in this connection that Mattatuck seems to have
had its Indian burying ground. It was situated on what is now
Johnson street, north of Sperry street.

Reference may be made, in conclusion, to another spot which has
aboriginal associations connected with it of quite recent date. A
few rods south of the city line (in Simonsville), on the east side of
the highway, which here runs close to the river, there is a bit of
elevated meadow, formerly surrounded by a wood, some trees of
which still remain. Within the memory of persons now in mature
life it was the site of a wigwam and the home of a solitary squaw.
There was a kind of dam across the Naugatuck at this point, and it
was a good fishing place, f

* Land Records, Vol. XXV, pp. 30a, 407 ; Vol. XXVI, p. 427.

t Reference has been made to the fact that in the town of Watertown, which belonged to ancient Mat-
tatuck, there is an entire absence of Iildian local names. An Indian name has recently been introduced which
is likely to secure a permanent foothold in the town. The proprietors of ** Wattles Pond," desiring to give it
a more euphonious name, in connection with a plan to make it a place of resort for summer visitors, applied
to the writer of this chaiAer for aid in selecting one. Instead of resorting (as is usually the case) to borrow-
ing, a name was made to order, according to the laws which govern the construction of Indian place>names.
The pond being a *^ fine fishing-place " was called IVinnitftaug^^ and is likely to be known by that name in
the time to come. Some future explorer, failing to light upon this statement respecting its origin, may
regard it as a genuine survival of the aboriginal period.

( The author cannot refrain from adding here that while the proofs of this chapter were passing through
his hands, tidings were received of the sudden death of Samuel McLean of Watertown, who is referred to
in this note, and also of the Rev. Samuel Orcutt, whose '* History of Derby" and ** History of Wolcott*'
are quoted above, and who was the author of other voluminous town histories. Both of these gentlemen
were killed by railroad trains at Bridgeport, within a few days of one another — January 10 and 14, 1893. )

CHAPTER V.

THE "stone age" IN CONNECTICUT — STONE IMPLEMENTS, CHIPPED AND
GROUND—USES TO WHICH THEY WERE APPLIED, IN PEACE AND
IN WAR — PLACES WITHIN MATTATUCK TERRITORY WHERE
REMAINS OF THE STONE AGE HAVE BEEN FOUND — ACCOUNTS OF
VARIOUS " finds" between BEACON HILL BROOK AND LITCHFIELD
— IMPLEMENTS DESCRIBED.

IN Europe the long prehistoric period has been roughly divided
by archaeologists into three ages — the Stone age, the Bronze
age and the Iron age. This division, based upon the charac-
teristics of the prehistoric remains that have been collected, is not
entirely applicable to the western hemisphere, yet we may speak of
the aboriginal population of America at the time of the Discovery
as belonging to the Stone age, and some tribes or families as having
passed upward into what may be designated the Copper age. The
Indians of New England were still in the Stone age at the coming
of the first settlers. They seem to have used to a very limited
extent implements and weapons of hammered copper, obtained
through traffic with other tribes, and there is evidence that they
had learned to make pottery. But their dependence for useful
implements, for weapons of war and for cooking utensils was
almost entirely upon stone and wood.

We should hardly expect articles of wood to resist decay until
modem times (although in a few instances wooden objects have
survived), but implements of stone in large numbers lie scattered
on the surface of the ground to the present day, or imbedded in
the soil, and are still found, by those who have eyes to see, in
ploughed fields, on the banks of rivers, along roadsides and in places
where no one would expect to discover them. These stone imple-
ments may be divided into two general classes — those made by
chipping, such as the well-known arrow heads, and those made by
pecking and grinding, such as celts, axes and pestles. Of these two
classes, the former is by far the more numerous, although the num-
ber of ^es and other ground implements which have been picked
up in New England and over all the Atlantic slope during the past
two hundred years must be immense.

If we knew precisely to what uses the various implements were
applied, we should be able to reproduce quite fully the life of the

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK, 57

aboriginal tribes. But concerning many of the remains there is still
much uncertainty, after all the study which archaeologists have
bestowed upon them. We know what the universal needs of the
Indian were, — to provide for himself and his household sustenance
and clothing and shelter. We know that the men hunted, that the
women tilled the ground, that certain games and other amusements
were indulged in, that religious rites were practiced, and that tribes
made war upon one another. The remains that have been gathered
consist of utensils or weapons which had to do with this simple but
varied round of life; but what particular uses they served it is not
always easy to say. To the various kinds of stone implements
names have been confidently attached by collectors, but in all prob-
ability those names are in many cases erroneous and misleading, —
although as a matter of convenience they have to be used. In meet-
ing the simple wants referred to, trees had to be felled (by burning
or otherwise), posts had to be trimmed and driven, canoes had to be
dug out, fire-wood to be prepared, deer and smaller game to be shot
or trapped, fish to be caught in summer and in winter, flesh and fish
to be boiled or roasted, bones to be cracked for the marrow in
them, corn and beans to be planted and the ground tilled, skins to
be scraped and cleaned, enemies to be slain, by arrow or club, and
their scalps removed, and the dead to be disposed of by burial or
otherwise. The stone implements that are found were used, either
mounted in wood or otherwise, for these various purposes — some
for one kind of work and some for another; but there was of course
no such strict application of the tool to its specific purpose as we
find to-day among skilled workmen. The celt, for instance, or the
grooved axe, or the large chipped implement, may have been
applied, like the modern jack-knife or hatchet, to a hundred differ-
ent uses.

To a people whose chief means of subsistence were hunting and
fishing, a region of rapid water-courses and of forests must have
been specially attractive, while at the same time " interval lands "
and clearings at the mouths of streams must have had great value
in their eyes. We can readily believe, therefore, although there
may have been no tribal seat or central camping-ground within the
limits of ancient Mattatuck, that the territory was quite constantly
occupied by wandering bands or family groups, who settled down
here or there for a season, and then departed to some more prom-
ising fishing-place, or some bluff commanding a better view of the
river. At any camping-ground likely to be occupied for a few
weeks in succession, wigwams would be erected, cooking would be
gone through with, fire-wood would be provided, soapstone dishes

58 HI8T0RY OF WATBBBURT,

would be used, fish and game would be got ready for the pot, arrows
and fish-spears would be made, to take the place of those that had
been lost or broken, and arrow-heads and spear-heads chipped, to
supply the constant demand. There are doubtless many spots up
and down the Naugatuck valley, at the mouths of streams and on
such bluffs as that on which the Waterbury hospital now stands,
where these various processes were carried on, year after year, for
centuries. Some of these spots have already furnished large har-
vests to the collector of " relics *' or to the farmer-boy, while others
have yet to be discovered. In some parts of our country — notably
in New Jersey and in Ohio— the collecting of stone implements has
been engaged in by so many, or systematized to such an extent,
that definite opinions may safely be expressed in regard to their
abundance and their relations to different localities. But nothing
of this kind has been accomplished in the Naugatuck valley; it
would be impossible to indicate on a map of the region, except in
the most imperfect way, where camping-grounds were situated, or
where the arrow-maker's hut may have stood, or where a battle
with some hostile tribe may have been fought. The abundance of
small chipped implements at a given place might be explained by
one collector as the result of a battle, and by another as indicating
the site of an arrow-maker's workshop, according to the scientific
training of the collector, his accuracy as an observer and his caution
in drawing inferences. Kilboume, in his " Sketches and Chroni-
cles of Litchfield," comments in this way upon the chipped
implements found on the shores of Bantam lake :

That such battles [between the Litchfield Indians and the '* intruding
Mohawks "] have been fought on the now quiet rural shores of our beautiful lake
and for a mile or two northward, is clearly indicated by the stone arrow-heads
which are scattered in such profusion in the soil. It is true they are found in other
parts of the township, but nowhere in such abundance as in the locality described.
The writer remembers, as one of the pastimes of his childhood, following in the
furrows behind the ploughman, on the West plain, for the express purpose of picking
up these interesting memorials of a by-gone race — then of course regarded simply
as playthings. These arrowheads are of various shapes and sizes, and are made
of different kinds of flint — black, white, red and yellow — showing them to have
been manufactured by different and probably distant tribes. *

To the untrained collector it may seem almost a matter of course
thus to explain the abundance of arrow-heads at a given place by
supposing a battle to have been fought there; but it may be
entirely unscientific to do so. There are other hypotheses which
must be brought into careful comparison with this ere a safe

* pp. 64, 65, of " Sketches and Chronicles of the Town of Litchfield. ])y Payne Kenyon Kilbourne,
M. A.,'* Hartford, 1859.

8T0NE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK.

S9

decision can be reached. So, too, it may seem a natural inference
from the variety of materials represented in a collection of arrow-
heads that they were "manufactured by different and probably
distant tribes,** but no such inference can be sustained ; indeed
there are various facts which go to show that the material of
which these implements were made was sometimes transported in
considerable quantities from place to place, and manufactured
afterward.

Not only has no systematic exploration of Waterbury territory
with reference to archaeological traces been made ; it is quite impos-
sible to give any full account of the remains which have been
gathered up in the present and in previous generations. The very
miscellaneous data which follow are simply those that have come to
the writer's knowledge within a few years past, representing no
effort at an exhaustive search for "relics" in the field, nor any
serious attempt to ascertain what may be treasured in private
collections, or lying around in the garrets and cupboards of farm-
houses. These memoranda, however, will serve to show how wide-
spread and general was the aboriginal occupancy of the region, and
how closely conformed was the life of our Mattatuck predecessors
to the typical Indian life.

Beginning at the southern boundary of Mattatuck, that is, at
Beacon Hill brook, a mile and a half below Naugatuck centre, we
find traces near the mouth of the brook of what some have called
an Indian village. The brook is famous as a trout stream ; indeed
for rods above and below its mouth the Naugatuck river used to be
"black with fish," and it was with reference to the fishing that the
" village " was established there. This camping-ground was situ-
ated on the northern bank of the stream, about forty rods above its
mouth. Certain details in regard to it were furnished to the writer
by the late Josiah Culver of Naugatuck (born in 1799), whose
father, Amos Culver, settled near the mouth of Beacon Hill brook
previous to 1780. At that time, corn-hills — remains of aboriginal
planting — were plainly visible, and there were Indians living in
the neighborhood. Numerous traces of an arrow maker's work-
shop existed there, and some years ago, in digging a cellar, a large
quantity of stone " chips " was unearthed. Josiah Culver found a
stone pipe on this site, and a soapstone dish that would hold two or
three quarts. In his later life he found a rude " pestle " and a few
white quartz arrow-heads near his dwelling, on the west side of the
Naugatuck river.

About a mile back from the river rises Twelve Mile hill, known
also as Straight mountain. Here, on a plateau overlooking the

6o HISTORY OF WATBRBUBT.

Naugatuck valley, is the residence of H. N. Williams. On the level
surface, ten rods back from the declivity and near a peat swamp,

^_. Mr. Williams found one

of the axes figured in
the accompanying cut.
It is six and a half
inches long and three
' and a half wide, nar-
rowing to the cutting
edge. It is flat on one
side, but the groove runs
entirely around it. It has

I been carefully ground in

the groove and near the
edge, but not elsewhere.
Mr. Williams found near the same spot a mallet-like stone, having
a very artificial look ; but it is probably a natural object.

The other axe here figured was found in the village of Nauga-
tuck, and was preserved for many years in the family of the late
Willard Spencer, of Waterbury. Its length is six inches. It is very
slightly grooved, except on the edges, and bears few traces of work.
It was evidently a natural wedge of fine sandstone, selected because
of its axe-like shape, and mounted in its handle with as little labor
as possible.

The large chipped implement figured in the same cut was also
found in Naugatuck village, near the river. It is of dark brown
flint (more properly, chert), and is seven inches long, and seven-
eighths of an inch thick at the middle, tapering on both sides to a
nicely chipped edge.

In the writer's collection are three other implements found in
Naugatuck, near the river. One of them (presented by the late Cal-
vin H. Carter) may be regarded as a pestle, although it approxi-
mates to the form of a blunt chisel. It is eleven inches long.
Three of its sides are flat; the fourth side rounded. Lying with
its rounded side up, its heighth is two and a quarter inches, its
thickness one and three-quarters. One of the ends is rounded, the
other wedge-shaped, but blunt. The material is a fine sandstone,
very similar to the axe last described. The second specimen is a
chipped " hoe " of white quartzite, five inches long. The " blade " is
three and a half inches wide, the " stem " two and a quarter. It is
very rough and evidently unfinished. What it would have become
in the finishing process it is difficult to say. Still more interesting
than this is the third implement, which may be described as a small

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 6i

"adze" or a "gfouge " designed for mounting in a handle. On one
side it is flat, except that it is gouge-shaped at the cutting edge.
The other side is convex, and midway there are two projections,
with a hollow between them, evidently made to receive a withe
handle. The tool is five inches long and an inch and three-quarters
in width. It is of very hard stone, but is symmetrically shaped and
carefully ground.

At Bradleyville, northwest of Naugatuck, stone implements
have been picked up by John Bradley, Isaac Scott, Enoch Newton
and others, but no details can be given. *

Through the kindness of Dr. Isaac N. Russell the writer's col-
lection contains a stone axe found at Piatt's Bridge on the Nauga-
tuck, three miles south of the centre of Waterbury. The stone is
very compact and heavy and almost black. The length is seven
and a half inches, the breadth five inches; the thickness above the
groove two inches and a half. The groove is shallow, and although
the axe is of a well-defined type it has been made such without the
expenditure of much labor. The part below the groove is wedge-
shaped and tapering, and the cutting edge is very nearly a semi-
circle. Along with the axe came a few arrowheads, and additional
arrowheads of white quartz were received from the Misses Cowell,
residents of the Piatt's Mills district.

At Malmanack (or Malmalick), a hill referred to in the previous
chapter, numerous chipped implements have been found. The Rev.
Eli B. Clark, in a letter already quoted, says :

In my youth, while cultivating the fields on the sides and top of that hill, we
often found Indian relics, chiefly arrow-heads of greater or less perfection. I
should judge that they were from three to five inches in length, some very slim
and sharp, others larger and more blunt, intended probably for larger game. We
often found them broken, but some were apparently as perfect as when used by
the red man in slaughtering his game.

It was very pleasing to us boys to find these relics of a former race, and we
carefully treasured them up, for the time being, as curiosities. I have a vague
recollection that something we called the Indian hatchet was occasionally found,
but of this I could not affirm positively.

The locality of the arrow-heads was confined chiefly to the hill; I scarcely recol-
lect finding any on other parts of our farm, which extended quite a distance in all
directions. I do not think that the question why the arrow-heads were confined to
that partictilar spot was much agitated in those days. Whether the Indians came
there for the outlook, or for game, or for some other reason, was not satisfactorily
settled, if indeed it has been since, or ever will be. The hill was evidently a
favorite camping ground, where much time must have been spent; otherwise it is
not easy to account for the loss of so many weapons of the chase.

As far to the east of the Naugatuck as Malmanack is to the west,
rises the height known as East mountain, near the bounds of

62 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

Prospect. This is represented in the writer's collection by a hand-
some black spear-head. At Prospect centre, on ground high
enough to command a view of Long Island sound, the writer
secured an interesting stone "mortar," probably of aboriginal
manufacture, which now rests under a tree near his cottage at
Woodmont. The material is a compact, yellowish brown sandstone.
It is without definite form, but approximates to an oval. It is
twenty-three inches in length, eighteen in breadth, and six in
thickness. The excavation is three inches at its greatest depth and
slopes gradually to the top. The longer diameter of the excavation
lies across the stone and measures seventeen inches. Its width is
fourteen inches, so that there is a flat margin on one side* of it,
measuring several inches across. This may have been a mortar in
which to grind com. If so, the "pestle" must have been used
horizontally, that is, rolled. But the excavation does not afford
much evidence of use. *

Returning to the Naugatuck river, a little above the point at
which Mad river empties into it, we find a spot productive of arrow-
heads where the office of the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing
company now stands. Here was the home of the late Joseph P.
Somers, from whose daughters, Mrs. Stephen E. Harrison and Mrs.
Douglas F. Maltby, the writer has received collections of arrow and
spear-heads — the arrow-heads, as usual, being mostly of white
quartz. They were picked up, years ago, in the garden connected
with the old homestead.

In the autumn of 1892, some laborers who were digging a cellar
near the corner of East Main and Silver streets in Waterbury came
upon a number of arrow-heads. A short distance to the east of this,
on the Meriden road, are two curious depressions, formerly filled
with water, known as the Spectacle ponds.f Some years ago, in one
of these ponds or " kettle holes" — that on the south side of the road
— a curious and interesting discovery was made, not only represent-
ing aboriginal life, but bearing upon the question of the antiquity
of man in this region. The workmen of Mr. D. G. Porter, while
digging muck and peat from the bottom of the pond, came upon a
number of pieces of wood bearing unquestionable evidence of hav-
ing been cut with a blunt instrument. Some of the sticks were pine.

* The writer recalls with no little amusement the prolonged effort put forth to secure this " relic " from
its putative owner. It lay at the time in a barn yard, filled with ice, having been set apart as a watering
trough for fowls. But the farmer's son, as soon as he was asked to sell, conceived a strong attachment for it.
" My grandfather," he said, ** found it and brought it home a hundred years ago, and people have come
miles to see it." When finally persuaded to name his price, he said, with much deliberation, ** I shall have
to ask you twenty-five cents for it." "Well, I am willing to give you twenty-five cents for it," the col-
lector quietly replied ; and he then and there began to appreciate for the first time the high estimate
which the hill-top farmer puts upon a quarter of a dollar.

t These are described and their origin explained in chap. I, pp. 8, 9.

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 63

some white birch, and measured two inches in diameter. Others
showed unmistakable traces of fire, as did also the stones that were
found with them. The remarkable thing about these remains (now
in the writer's possession) is that they were found at a depth of fif-
teen feet below the surface. To establish approximately their date,
we must not only go back to a time when the Spectacle ponds were
dry ground, but must reckon the rate at which black earth is
formed by the annual deposit of leaves, and the rate also of the
formation of peat through the growth and decay of peat -moss. It
has been estimated that in a country overgrown with forests of
beach, oak and chestnut, where there is annually a vast deposit of
dead leaves, the increase in the depth of the soil is " one one-hun-
dred and twenty-eighth of an inch per annum," or one inch in a
hundred and twenty-eight years.* At this rate, to deposit a stratum
of soil fifteen feet in thickness would require more than twenty-
three thousand years. Such estimates are of a hap-hazard character
at best; but even if such a rate as this could be established for a
wooded region and a level surface, it would serve but poorly as a
measure of the time required for the deposition of earth and muck
and peat in a glacial "kettle hole." We must make large allowance
for the accumulation of fallen leaves in such an excavation; and for
the washing in of sand and refuse by heavy rains. But after all
such deductions are made, the depth at which the remains at Spec-
tacle pond were found is remarkable. A variety of hypotheses
might be suggested to account for their position; but those who
believe that man existed in North America during the last glacial
period or soon afterward, will find here new evidence in support of
their opinion.

Coming westward again to the centre of the city, and going a
short distance up Prospect street, we are at the residence of Mr.
Luther C. White — the house next north of Trinity church. In dig-
ging the cellar of this house, some years ago, a "relic" was found
more interesting than any other that has thus far been discovered
in ancient Mattatuck. It is the pipe with a face and figure upon it
pictured on page 38. This pipe is of fine, dark green steatite, so
dark that it is almost black. The stem is four and a half inches
long, half an inch wide, and five-eighths of an inch thick. The
bowl is two inches and three-quarters in depth; the diameter across
the top is seven-eighths of an inch, and the diameter of the bore
three-eighths. On the upper side of the stem is a recumbent female
figure, the right arm alongside of the body, the left arm across
the chest. Each hand has three fingers which are spread apart

*Dr. C. C. Abbott on the ^'Antiquity of the Indians of North America," in Thf American Naturalist
for February, 1876 (Vol. X, p. 67).

64 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

like the claws of a bird. The figure is three inches and a half in
length, and a little broader than the stem upon which it rests. On
the tipper part of the bowl, facing the smoker, is a carefully carved
man's face, an inch and three-eighths in length. The ears are per-
forated, and the eyes are either closed or directed downward to the
recumbent figure on the stem. There is a slight projection or ring
around the top of the bowl, and another similar ridge around the
stem, half an inch from the end. The pipe is carefully carved and
beautifully polished throughout, and taken as a whole is far superior
to the average handiwork of the New England Indians. Artistically
and in its workmanship it bears some resemblance to the pipes of
the Ohio valley Mound Builders, — although if it were a mound pipe,
it might not be easy to explain how it reached the Naugatuck val-
ley during the aboriginal period. But if we may judge from what
some of the early writers have said concerning the skill of the New
England Indians, such work as that displayed in this Waterbury
pipe was not altogether beyond their reach. John Josselyn, in his
" Two Voyages to New England," enumerating articles of Indian
manufacture, mentions " tobacco pipes of stone, with images upon
them;"* and Wood, in his "New England's Prospect," speaking of
the things which the Massachusetts Indians obtain from the Narra-

gansetts, says :

From hence they have their great stone pipes which will hold a quarter of an
ounce of tobacco, which they make with steel drills and other instruments. Such
is their ingenuity and dexterity that they can imitate the English mold so accu-
rately that, were it not for matter and color, it were hard to distinguish them. They
make them of g^een and sometimes of black stone. They be much desired of our
English tobacconists for their rarity, strength, handsomeness and coolness. f

So closely does this description correspond at some points with
the Waterbury pipe that we might easily suppose the author had it
before him while he wrote. Very probably its Mattatuck owner
obtained it by traffic rather than by manufacture, but with such
facts before us as these furnished by Wood we need not suppose that
it came from the Ohio valley or from any tribe more remote than
the Narragansetts. And what Wood says in regard to the use of
steel drills suggests that this and other articles of aboriginal manu-
facture may belong to the period subsequent to the first coming of
Europeans. At any rate, it is difficult to believe that such work
could have been done without metal tools — without the "steel drills "
of the English, or the copper instruments of the Mound Builders.

The streets next west of Prospect street, namely. Central and
Holmes avenues, run northward across land formerly owned by the
late Samuel J. Holmes. On that part of the land now crossed by

♦p. Ill, reprint of 1865. + Part 2, chap. 3 ; p. 69, reprint of 1865.

urONE IMPLEMEHTB OF MATTATUCK.

6S

Central avenue there were formerly several places which afforded
evidence of early (perhaps aboriginal) excavations. The several
depressed areas varied in extent from six to twelve feet square, and
in two of them charcoal was found, with other traces of fire and also
ilat stones. Near the centre of the land, where Holmes avenue now
is, was formerly a low bluff, with springs at its base. Mr, Israel
Holmes reports that arrow-heads, mostly of white quartz, used to
be found here in considerable numbers.

Mr, Israel Holmes's present residence, "Westwood," stands on a
beautiful plateau on the west side of the river, overlooking the
extensive meadows of the Kaugatuck. Here also many arrow-
heads and larger chipped implements have been found, and on the
north side of the house traces of an arrow-maker's work-shop are
constantly occurring, Mr. Holmes's collection of "relics" picked
up about the house and in the garden contains twenty or thirty
white quartz arrow-heads, several of flint and of red sandstone, two
"pestles," two interesting fragments of soapstonc dishes and two
implements evidently designed to be mounted as hoes and probably
used in cultivating corn.

On the bluff next north of Mr. Holmes, where the house of Mr.
Loren R. Carter now stands, arrow-heads are still picked up. On
Hospital bluff, a little distance to the south, some interesting pieces
have been found, among which are those here represented.

The soapstone dish was given to the writer some years ago by
the late C. B. Merriman. Its general outline is triangular, but the
corners are rounded off so much that it is almost circular. Its
length, not reckoning
the projecting handles,
is eight inches, its great-
est breadth seven inches
and its height four. The
excavation is so shallow
— less than two inches —
and it is upon the whole
so rude, that it may be
supposed to have been
left in an unfinished
state, and perhaps never
used. The chipped im-
plements figured in the m.aisi.wb dish am. cilmiu iMr.kMP^Ts, hosjit.l blip..
cut were received from watbbulrv.

the late A. B, Wilson, the famous invenlor of the Wheeler &
Wilson sewing machine, who built the house which has since
become the Waterbury hospital. They were found by him at the

66 HI8T0BT OF WATSRBURT.

time the cellar of his house was dug. They are each three inches
long, of a greenish gray chert. One of them has been worked quite
symmetrically; the other, which is but little more than a semi-circu-
lar flake, smoothjon one side and chipped on the other, may have
been used as a " scraper " for cleaning skins, or may be regarded as
an unfinished spear-head.

On the high ground south of Hospital bluff and just north of
Sunnyside avenue, on the land which has been set apart as a
"town" cemetery, the large axe figured in the following cut was
dug up a few years ago by Mr. S. M. Judd. He found it in digging
a grave, at a depth of four feet below the surface. This specimen is
interesting as illustrating the ease with which the primitive man
could on occasion provide himself with necessary tools. The " axe "
is but little more than a large wedge-shaped flake of compact sand-
stone. It is eight inches long, is square across the top, showing the
natural cleavage, is an inch and a quarter thick on one side and
tapers to half an inch on the other. It is nicked, not grooved, and
is rudely chipped on the thin side. It is not so much an unfinished
implement as one that was fitted for a withe handle by a few
minutes' labor, and afterward cast aside.

The lively stream which tumbles down between the Hospital
grounds and the land north of the town cemetery is known as Sled
Hall brook. On the old Town Plot road near this brook arrow-heads
have recently been found, and — what is of more interest — several
fragments of aboriginal pottery bearing traces of decoration, the de-
sign being that which is sometimes described as the basket pattern.
Some distance to the northwest of this last named locality, and
alongside of the Middlebury road, lies a large swamp, bounded on
the northeast by a ledge
of rocks crowned with
_ large trees. On the edge

I .^flAM^^^^^ '^^ '-^^ swamp, close to

r ~^^^^^^^H^^^K .^^&^_^__ the rucks, the soap-stone

I _^^^^^^^^Bftm ^^^Bfl^b figured the

IJ^^^^^^^^^P*^ ^^^^^^^p by

I^^^^^^^^B^ ^^^^^^^ the late Isaac Boughton,

! ^^^^^^^ . -^.^fc and deposited by him in

the writer's collection.
Its length, not including
the projecting handles,
is eight inches and a
D1..M, ai:e5ano "cmrNr-KB st™i,'' ii„ierburv. half, Its Width six and a

half. Its general shape is a rectangle, with rounded corners and
bulging sides. The bottom is not^flat, so that it is higher at one

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUGK.

67

end than at the other. The excavation measures six and a half
inches by five atid a quarter, and is two and a half inches deep.
The material is a coarse soap-stone of very light color. Although
a good deal of work has been laid out upon it, taken as a whole it
is unshapen and clumsy.

Near the swamp just referred to, a well-known road branches
from the main highway and passes through what is called the Park.
Beyond the Park, on high ground overlooking the road from
Naugatuck to Watertown, lives Mr. Thomas Lockwood, who has
picked up on his little farm some very pretty arrow and spear
heads, A mile or two north of there, on this same Naugatuck and
Watertown road, a little to the northwest of " Bunker Hill," is the
residence of Mr. Charles Cooper. With the exception of the large
spear-head, the specimens figured in the following cut were picked
up within a short distance of Mr. Cooper's house. The spear-head
was obtained from Mr. Stephen Atwood, at the sawmill on Wattles
brook. It is over five inches loag, of a dark gray chert, and very

neatly chipped. Of the sixty pieces in the Cooper collection ten
are of dark chert, one (at the centre of the cut) of yellowish brown
flint, and another (the large one directly below it) of light gray
flint, flecked with white. The rest are of white quartz, one of them
very transparent. Great pains were evidently taken with this, but
it was probably broken in the making. Most of the arrow-heads
are perfect, but thick and clumsy.

The soapstonc dish figured on the next page is said to have
been dug up in building the Watertown branch of the Naugatuck
railroad. It is of the same general character as that received from

68

HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

Mr. Boughton, but larger and less smoothly finished. It is ten
inches long and about eight inches wide. The projecting handles
are large and strong. Although the dish is six inches high, the
depth of the excavation is less than two inches; so that it is very
heavy. The entire surface bears the marks of the pecking tool.

The pestle here figured was found in the village of VV^atcrtown,
and was presented to the writer by Dr. Isaac N. Russell. It is seven-
teen inches long and almost cylindrical in form, its diameter being
two inches at one end
and an inch and a half
at the other. The sides
are smooth and exhibit
signs of use; the ends
are rounded, but not
smooth. The material
is a compact and hard
argillite, of a reddish
brown color.

For some years past
an agricultural fair has
been held annually at
Watertown, at which
from time to time stone implements have been exhibited. At the
fair held in June, 1880, an interesting collection was exhibited by
Mr. Frederick Judd, consisting chiefly of implements found in the
northern part of the town, in the district known as Garnseytown.
On Mr. Judd's farm, which is separated from the valley of the
Naugatuck by a high ridge, there is a " bog-meadow pond," drained
by the Shepaug river. Most of the pieces in Mr. Judd's collection
were found near that. It includes a number of arrow-heads and
spear-heads, among which a white leaf-shaped spear-head is
specially worthy of mention, a small celt, a gouge, three " pestles "
of medium length (one of them flat), and one pestle specially
noteworthy because of its size and shape. It is very symmetrical
and is twenty-three inches in length.*

If we return to ihe centre of Waterbury and go out from there
in a different direction from that in which we have thus far pro-

8T0NE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK, 69

ceeded — to the northeast rather than the northwest — we come at
once upon an interesting site, near the corner of Cooke and Grove
streets. Here, where the venerable brothers Edward and Nathan
Cooke lived side by side for many years, the channel of Little brook
is still visible, although walled in on both banks. In the garden
which slopes upward from the brook toward the northwest, Mr.
Walter H. Cooke has from time to time picked up perfect or imper-
fect arrow-heads and numerous chips. Of the arrow-heads in his
collection, twenty-five were found on the "home lot."

A third of a mile further on, we reach the foot of Burnt hill,
where Dr. Amos S. Blake, some years ago, picked up the grooved
axe represented in the cut on page 66. Through Dr. Blake's kind-
ness, it now belongs to the writer's collection. It was found on the
roadside in a populous part of the city, where it had lain imob-
served by passers by for perhaps two hundred years. It is six
inches long and four wide, and is divided into two nearly equal
parts by a well wrought and deep groove. Below the groove it is
more than two inches thick, and tapers rapidly to a cutting edge.
The upper end is flat and unworked; there is in fact no trace of
work upon the axe except in the groove and on the edge. It is of
trap rock, very heavy for its size, and rather clumsy.

In the same cut (on page 66) is figured a bi-concave discoidal
stone ver}'- similar in its general character to the so-called
" chungke stones " found in the southern states. It is round and
quite symmetrical, is three and a half inches in diameter and an
inch artd three-quarters in thickness near the circumference. The
depth of the concavity is three-eighths of an inch, and is about the
same on both sides. The rim is slightly convex and the edges are
rounded off. In one or two spots it shows traces of polishing.
Elsewhere, except in the concavities, it bears the marks of the
pecking tool. The material is yellow sienite. This stone was pre-
sented to the writer by Mr. Charles R. Tyler, of Buck's hill, who is
a grandson of David Warner and a descendant of John Warner, one
of the first settlers of the town. It was in the Warner family for
many years, and is believed by Mr. Tyler to have been found in
Waterbury. Such stones, though of frequent occurrence in the
south, are rare in the northern states. Dr. C. C. Abbott, in his
" Primitive Industry," which refers chiefly to the " Northern Atlan-
tic seaboard," has a chapter on discoidal stones, but it is very short,
the northern specimens which had come under his observation hav-
ing evidently been very few. The game of " chungke," of which
the southern and southwestern Indians were passionately fond, is
described by James Adair as he saw it, a hundred and fifty years

70

HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

ago, and more fully by C. C. Jones, in his work on southern antiqui-
ties.* The writer is not aware of any references to it in authors
who have described the New England Indians, but the game may
have existed among them without being so prominent as among the
southern tribes. If the stone here figured is a Connecticut speci-
men, and not a modern importation, its existence may be accepted
as evidence that " chungke " was played in ancient Mattatuck, —
although it is of course possible that this was an implement
designed for some entirely different purpose.

That part of ancient Mattatuck which lies to the east and north-
east of Buck's hill, now embraced in the town of Wolcott, is prob-
ably as well stocked with prehistoric specimens as the rest of the
territory, but the writer is not informed in regard to discoveries in
that quarter. Wolcott is represented in his collection by a few
specimens secured through the late Samuel Orcutt. One of these
is a grooved axe of sienite, of rather neat form, six inches long and
three and a half wide. A deep and polished groove divides it near
the middle. Below the groove it is carefully worked, but there is
little trace of work above. There is a well-defined notch in the
top, of more recent workmanship than the rest.

In the village of Waterville, two miles above Waterbury centre, a
number of interesting specimens have been found. At the
southern end of the village, on a small stream named Mack's brook,
Mr. Heber Welton has found a number of arrow-heads. Mr. G. W.
Tucker reports " the oldest inhabitant " as stating that there used
to be an Indian camp on the banks of Mack's brook, that the
Indians were drawn there by the abundance of fish, and that at
certain seasons the stream was full of salmon. Mr. Welton has
found in this vicinity several pestles, one of them in the bed of
the river.

The writer's collection contains an interesting and shapely imple-
ment taken from Factory pond in Waterville. It is six inches long,
and an inch and three-quarters wide in its widest part. It may
perhaps be classed with stone chisels, but is flat on one side and
handsomely rounded on the other. At the upper end it tapers to a
blunt point, and the cutting edge measures about an inch. It has
lain so long in the water that it is difficult to say of what kind of
stone it is made.

Across the river from Waterville is the home of Mr. Joseph Wel-
ton, sheltered on the northwest by a ridge which runs in a south-
westerly direction as far as the Waterbury almshouse. Mr. Welton

♦Jones's " Antiquities of the Southern Indians,*^ pp. 341-358 ; Adair's " American Indians/* pp. 401, 402;
Abbott's '* Primitive Industry.'* pp. 341-343.

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. -ji

has picked up around his house a number of arrow-heads and other
chipped implements, some of which he has contributed to the
writer's collection. Among these is a semi-lunar knife of slate,
similar to that already described, but smaller and somewhat imper-
fect, and evidently very old. Some years ago, while working the
road near the almshouse, Mr. Welton came upon the grave of an
Indian child. The skeleton was in a sitting posture. The skull,
taken from the earth in a somewhat fragmentary condition, was
sent to a friend in a neighboring town. But Mr. Welton reserved
for himself, and afterward gave to the writer, certain objects which
make the "find" one of peculiar interest. These are toy imple-
ments, four in number, some idea of which may be obtained from
the accompanying cut. One is a diminutive celt, two inches and a
quarter long and three quarters of an
inch wide at the cutting edge. Another,
two inches and five eighths in length,
might be considered a miniature pestle,
were it not that at one end it is wedge-
shaped. Of the other two pieces, one
is axe-shaped, the other nearly square.
The latter measures an inch and a half
on each side, and neither of them is
more than an eighth of an inch in thick-
ness. That these two were designed
for toy pendants {"gorgets," as they are
sometimes called) is evident from the
fact that a perforation had been begun
in each. The objects possess a unique

interest; associated as they were with '™''""'i-HMENisti(o«A child's cr*vk.
the remains of a child, they help us to bring^vividly before us what
may be called the home life of our aboriginal predecessors. There
is nothing to forbid our thinking of these buried trifles as the
handiwork of some fond father or elder brother, unfinished at the
moment of the child's death and deposited in his grave by a
mother's hand.

A short distance above Waterville, at Hinchliffe's bridge, there
is a ledge called the Deer-steak rocks. In this ledge, near the river,
there is a rock-shelter, open to the south, the " roof " of which pro-
jects ten or twelve feet. In the spring of 1881, Mr, John Stevens,
digging here, picked up within a space ten feet square about sixty
arrow and spear heads, perfect or broken. Most of them are of
white quartz, some of them carefully finished. Three or four are
of a bluish flint-like stone, and one of these is two and a quarter

\l

72

HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

inches in length. A fragfraent of pottery was also found, bearing-
traces of a simple decoration; also three fragments of a perforated
article, apparently the remains of a large pipe of European manu-
facture.

Some distance further north, on the Thomas ton road, just above
Jericho bridge, there is a bluff, now under cultivation, where quanti-
ties of quartz chips are ploughed up. They can be traced sometimes
the whole length of a furrow, and may pretty certainly be regarded
as indicating the place of an arrow-maker's open-air work-shop.*

A little further up the river, at Reynolds bridge, on the west
side, is the residence of Mr. H. F. Reynolds. It stands on a plateau
overlooking the river and the road. On the slope near his house,
and on the strip of meadow between the road and the river, Mr.
Reynolds has picked up arrow-heads and numerous chips. In his
small collection is one of the finest specimens the Naugatuck val-
ley has thus far produced. It is a beautiful leaf-shaped spear-head,
five inches long and three inches wide. Its outline is symmetrical,
the edge is carefully chipped, and the color is milk-white.

In the writer's collection Thomaston is represented by a single
specimen. It is an axe, very similar in outline to the sole of a shoe.
The length is six and a quarter inches, the width, just below the
groove, two inches and a half, whence it narrows gradually to the
cutting edge. The groove, which is shallow, is within an inch and
a half of the top.

About a mile and a half above Thomaston, on the eastern bank
of the river, there used to be a factory and a few houses, bearing
the name of Heathenville. The writer was informed by the late
Horace Johnson that in his boyhood he used to find arrow-heads
and quantities of stone chips at this place. The ground close to
the water's edge was full of chips, mostly black.

Some years ago, in the Litchfield correspondence of the Water-
bury American, appeared the following paragraph:

In a late issue, you speak of a discovery of soapstone dishes, in Rhode Island.
There are plenty of them nearer home. I have in my possession a bushel or so of

* About a mile above Jericho bridge, on the east side of the road, which here runs very near the river, is
a so-called Indian mortar. It is an excavation in the rock, close to the road. The rock, which is a stratum
of mica-slate, dipping to the northwest, is broken away across the mouth, so that the east side of the hole,
next the bank, is much higher than the side next the road. The excavation is nearly circular, and is twenty-
one inches in diameter. The depth of the main '* shaft,*' measured on the side next the bank, is two feet;
measured from the level of the road, it is eight inches. But within and below this there is another hollow,
fourteen inches by six, and five inches deep. The stratification of the rock is easily discerned throughout
the cavity. That it was ever used by the Indians as a mortar (for grmd ng corn), there is no reason to sup-
pose. An Indian trail may have run close by it, but the conditions favorable for the establishment of a vil-
lage or camping-ground are altogether wanting here. Under almost any circumstances the excavation would
have been inconvenient to use as a '* mortar.** It is undoubtedly of natural rather than artificial origin, and
is what geologists term a pot-hole. It would not have been worth while to describe it so fully, excrpr that
tradition has so long regarded it as of Indian origin.

STONK IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUGK.

73

fragments of such dishes, and know of two localities where the soapstone was
quarried and manufactured. The dishes are very commonly in use among the
farmers here, for washing hands, etc.

Having learned that the correspondent from whom this statement
came was D. C. Kilbourne, Esq., of East Litchfield, the writer,
accompanied by Mr. H. F. Bassett, called on him, and under his
guidance visited one of the prehistoric manufactories of soapstone
dishes which he had discovered. This manufactory, or open-air
work-shop, is situated near "Watch hill," on Spruce brook, a beauti-
ful stream which empties into the Naugatuck a mile and a quarter
below the East Litchfield railroad station. Mr. Kilbourne had gath-
ered his large assortment of broken dishes from a strip of meadow-
land lying along the left bank of the brook. A new examination of the
same ground brought to light many more fragments, of all sizes and
shapes, most of them evidently representing dishes that had never
been finished but were broken in the making. They were covered
outside and inside with tool-marks, and all of them were very
rough. In some cases the projecting handles showed a nearer
approach to completion than any other part of the dish. Of the
specimens collected, that which comes nearest to being a perfect
dish is noteworthy for its diminutive size. It is only four inches
and a half in length, and three inches high. It is conformed to the
regular type, the projecting handles not being lacking; but it is so
small that one can not help asking to what use, in cooking or eating,
the red map could have put it.

The broken dishes were interesting — sufficiently so to justify
carrying away a large quantity of them; but a more important dis-
covery was yet to be made. The writer, going back and forth over
the ploughed ground, picked up a piece of quartzite which bore
marks of chipping. He soon found another and another, and very
readily discovered their character : they were the tools used in
shaping and hollowing out the soapstone dishes. Before his explor-
ation was ended he had collected sixty of these stone tools, twenty-
five or thirty of which were closely conformed to a well-defined
type. They measure from three and a half inches to five inches in
length, and in size and shape resemble a man's clenched fist, — sup-
posing the thumb instead of being turned inward to be extended
and to rest against the forefinger. The end of the tool represented
by the top of the thumb is in each case chipped to a point, and the
larger end is chipped and rounded in a more careless way. In addi-
tion to the unbroken tools, numerous fragments were found, and a
half bushel of quartzite chips, besides two or three good arrow-
heads. In the brook quartzite pebbles like those from which the

74 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

tools were formed could easily be gathered. A few other tools were
found of a different character. One of them is of mica-slate, one
end of it remaining in its original condition, the other end reduced
by chipping to such a size that it can readily be grasped by the
hand. It is, in short, a rude beetle, about a foot long. Two other
pieces, pointed like the quartzite tools, are of entirely different
material and form. One of them is eight inches in length; of the
other only the pointed end remains.

The region in which this prehistoric manufactory was situated
abounds in seams and quarries of soapstone. There is a quarry near
the top of Chestnut hill in the southwestern part of Torrington,
which has been worked of late years, says Orcutt,* "with fairly
remunerative success." About a mile east of this, the stone crops
out again. There is another quarry in Litchfield, and ledges of
soapstone on Bunker hill, Waterbury. In the edge of the wood,
near the site of the Spruce brook "workshop," there are excava-
tions from which some of the material used by the Indians was
evidently obtained. f

No thorough exploration was made by the writer and his com-
panions with reference to the sources whence the Indians obtained
the material for their dishes. It may be that soapstone quarries as
interesting as those discovered within recent years near Provi-
dence, R. I., and in Amelia county, Va., may be awaiting some
enterprising explorer in the vicinity of Spruce brook, or else-
where in the Naugatuck valley. .

To these memoranda concerning " relics " found in ancient Mat-
tatuck may be added brief accounts of two others, belonging outside
of Waterbury territory, but close to its borders, which for obvious
reasons are likely to be of interest to readers of Waterbury history.

In the autumn of 1834, a piece of "aboriginal sculpture" was
unearthed in the town of Litchfield, which is thus noticed by the
Enquirer of October 2d, of that year:

A discovery of a singular carved stone image or bust, representing the head,
neck and breast of a human figure, was made a few days since, on the Bantam
river, about forty or fifty rods above the mill-dam, half a mile east of this village.

♦" History of Torrington," p. 176.

f At several houses in the vicinity large slabs of soapstone, more or less carefully worked, and soapstone
** mortars,** were found. As Mr. Kilbourne indicated in the Atntrrican. some of these were doing service as
wash-bowls. The writer brought home with him one of these mortars, measuring seventeen inches by
twelve. The hollow, which is nearly circular, is eight inches in diameter and three inches deep. In the
door-yard of a farm-house he found a large slab in which three basins had been hollowed out. The stone is
more than three feet long, two feet and nine inches wide at one end and two feet at the other, and ten
inches thick. One of the bowls is sixteen inches in diameter, another nine, and another six. It is not at all
probable that such stones as these were **got out'* and shaped by the aborigines; they are doubtless the
product of white men's industry at a period when dishes of any kind were scarce.

STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK.

75

Some boys happened to discover near the banks the head of the figure projecting
above the ground, which so excited their curiosity that they immediately dug it
out and conveyed it to the mill, where it is for the present deposited The image,
which is apparently that of a female, is carved from a rough block of the common
granite, some part of which is considerably decayed and crumbly, yet must have
required more patient and persevering labor than generally belongs to the char-
acter of the natives ; and though in point of skill and taste it falls something short
of Grecian perfection, it is certainly *' pretty well for an Indian." For what pur
pose it was intended — whether as an idol for worship, or the attempt of some fond
admirer to preserve and immortalize the lovely features of his dusky fair one, or
whether it was merely a contrivance of some long-sighted wag of old to set us
Yankees a guessing, or even whether it is one hundred or five hundred years old-
all is unrevealed; though no doubt some tale is hanging thereby, if we could only
find it out. All our American antiquities have this interesting peculiarity, that we
know nothing of their history. We have not even the twilight of fabulous story to
relieve our curiosity. The past is hidden in deeper obscurity than the future.

This account is reproduced in P. K. Kilbourne's " Sketches." Mr. Kil-
bourne adds: " This curious relic is now preserved in the cabinet of
Yale College."* J. W. Barber, in his " Historical Collections of Con-
necticut," says: " It is a rude sculpture of brown stone, nearly the
size of life, representing a female, with head and shoulders, extend-
ing down to the waist. It is now deposited at Yale College, New
Haven." f

In January, 1879, inquiry was made of Mr. C. H. Farnam, then
curator of the archaeological department of the Peabody Museum,
New Haven, in reference to this aboriginal relic, and the following
reply was received:

I have endeavored this morning to find some trace of the statue you speak of.
About 1820, the College turned over to an institution called the ''New Haven
Museum " all their collection of relics. Upon the failure of this enterprise, the
collections were sold, the best specimens going to Boston; but to what museum I
can not learn. I suppose the specimen you refer to was among the articles so
disposed of, but have no record of it. I have also seen Mr. John W. Barber, but
he does not recollect where he heard of the statue. It may be in the Boston
Museum, and it might be worth while writing to the owners — though in a show
collection of that kind there is probably no one who knows about the particular
specimens. I am sorry on my own account, as well as yours, that I cannot give
you definite information.

The other relic is of wood, and is said to have been the war-club
of Pomperaug, a sachem of the Pootatucks. It is a weapon of
uncertain age, evidently old, but in a state of good preservation.
Its entire length, head and handle included, is two feet and nine
inches. The handle is two feet and two inches long; is two inches
thick near the head, tapering to one inch, and is without bark. The
head is about six inches in diameter. The club is simply a branch

* p. K. Kilbourne'8 " Sketches and Chronicles of the Town of Litchfield," Hartford, 1859; p 65.
+ P. 456, first edition.

76 BISTORT OF WATERS URT.

of a tree, apparently buttonwood — from the lower end of which, at
a point where another branch shot out, two large excrescences had
developed. The two excrescences have grown together on one side,
constituting a large knot, upon which the bark still remains. The
branch seems to have been cut from its tree by a hatchet, but the
small end of the handle shows obvious traces of a saw.

This interesting relic was presented to the writer by Mrs. Emily
Goodrich Smith, daughter of the well known S. G. Goodrich (" Peter
Parley") and widow of Nathaniel Smith of Woodbury. Mrs.
Smith, in a letter accompanying her gift, dated September 17, 1891,
assigns its ownership to Pomperaug, "an early distinguished chief
of the Pootatucks," and says that "an aged squaw, visiting the
burial places of her tribe, gave this club of her ancestor and chief
to Nathaniel Smith, Esq., over fifty years ago." *

With the facts before us which Mrs. Smith mentions, it can not
be doubted that the club is a genuine Indian relic. But it must be
acknowledged that the tradition which ascribes its ownership to a
Pootatuck chief named Pomperaug is open to question. Dr. J.
H. Trumbull, in his " Indian Names of Places," speaks of Pomeraug
as follows:

Local tradition derives the name from a Potatuck sagamore whose fort was on or
near'* Castle Rock" in Woodbury; but no evidence to support this derivation has
been found in the town or colony records, and the form of the name makes it cer
tain that it originally belonged to a place, not to a person. A heap of stones in the
village of Woodbury is supposed to mark the grave of Pomperaug, on which, says
Mr. Cothren, "each member of the tribe, as he passed that way, dropped a small
stone, in token of his respect for the fame of the deceased.** Such memorial stone-
heaps were common in New England. From the one in Woodbury both the locality
and the mythic sachem probably received their name, which may be interpreted
'* place of offering " or ** contributing."

That " Pomperaug's " war-club in other days must have passed
through severe experiences, is evidenced by the fact that in order
to reduce a serious fracture in the handle of it an application of
thirty-five or forty feet of fine copper wire once had to be made.
But in the time to come its fortunes will be different; it is now
likely to rest undisturbed in the quiet and seclusion of a collector's
cabinet, and afterward to serve as a nucleus of that collection of abo-
riginal remains which is sometime to adorn the walls of the Bronson
Library. When that collection is at length brought together, prop-
erly classified, displayed and annotated, the people of Waterbury will
have perpetually before them a picture of the life of their aboriginal
predecessors of deep significance and of permanent value.

♦ The donor adds : '* Committed to the Rev. Joseph Anderson, D. D., with the request that when he ha*
done with it said club shall go to the Bronson Library, of Waterbury, Conn."

CHAPTER VI.

early attempts to establish settlements in new england — the

london company — the plymouth company — the pilgrims

London's plantation in massachlsetts bay — the ships of

1629 transfer of the government from england to new

england — waterbury names in massachusetts and plymouth
in 1636 wahginnacut visits englishmen, to induce migra-
tion to the connecticut river — dutch at hartford — john
oldham, the first trader — plymouth's trading house at
WINDSOR — Newtown's petition for removal — Massachusetts*

EFFORTS TO RETAIN THE SETTLERS WITHIN HER JURISDICTION —
THE ** FORTY -TON BARK " — THE COURT's GOOD-BY BLESSING —
ARRIVAL ON THE CONNECTICUT RIVER — HARDSHIPS CONTENDED
WITH DURING THE FIRST WINTER.

IT IS difficult for the inhabitants of the Connecticut of to-day
to become thoroughly conscious of the fact that no man, no
record, no library in existence, can give the name of a person
who lived in any portion of our State three hundred years ago.
The attempt at making this truth our own produces a train of
thought not altogether pleasing, and brings home in a way that
is new the oft -repeated words: Our fathers were pilgrims and
strangers.

New England had been seen of John and Sebastian Cabot in
1497, and, in 1498, they had sailed along the coast, and their passing
glance had secured for England, under the reign of King Henry
VII, that possession by sight which England held for nearly three
centuries.

In 1602, Bartholomew Gosnold with thirty-two men, had landed
on Cape Cod, lingered a month with the intention to settle, and
then returned to England.

In 1605, George Weymouth found Gosnold's Cape Cod, followed
the coast northward, entered the Kennebec River, ascended it many
miles, stole five Indians, and returned to England.

In 1607, George Popham, under the direction of his kinsman. Sir
John Popham, with one hundred and twenty colonists, entered the
same river, landed at its mouth, and built a village Let us hope
that the five Indians who had been stolen, were returned by this
early and convenient opportunity. Success did not attend this enter-

78 ffiarOBY OF WATERBUBT.

prise. George Popham, the leader, died, and the adventurer. Sir John
Popham, died, and the weary and disappointed colonists returned
to England.

In 1606, not an Englishman was known to be in North America.
In that year special interest was awakened in England in the un-
occupied lands of the New World. Certain " Lords and Gentlemen "
formed two companies, for the settlement of parts of America.
Men of London and its vicinity called their combination, " The Lon-
don Company." Men of Plymouth called their association, "The
Plymouth Company." Both companies intended to cause colonies to
be established in " Virginia," which name in 1606 served to indicate
all that region lying between South Carolina on the south and the
most northern part of the State of New York on the north. To
the London Company was allotted South Virginia ; to the Plymouth
Company, North Virginia. It was provided that neither company
should plant within one hundred miles of any settlement already
begun by the other. This provision serves to account for the lap-
ping of the territory of one company upon that of the other, for
South Virginia's northern limit was the south-western point of pres-
ent Connecticut, while North Virginia's southern limit ran down
into present Virginia. From these two companies of London and
Plymouth and their successors, have emanated the many patents
and grants that confront the investigator with a net- work of rights,
difficult to follow through all the complications arising from uncer-
tain bounds.

Sir John Popham's adventure of 1607, already referred to, seems
to be the first fruit of the attempt of the English Company of Ply-
mouth to settle North Virginia or New England.

For seven years we are without a record of any attempt at
colonization.

In 1614 Captain John Smith explored the shore from Cape Cod to
Penobscot River, and gave to the country the name of New Eng-
land. The following year, he is said to have set sail for the New
World, prepared to plant a colony — to have been made a prisoner by
a French fleet, and his colony not to have been planted. In the
same year Adrian Block, the Dutch navigator, sailed through Long
Island Sound, and it is said that he discovered the Connecticut
river, and ascended it as far as present Hartford.

If we look for the motives that prompted colonization down to
this date we shall find them in the words, profit, proprietorship, and
freedom in a new land to do, and, to be.

But here we come to the landing of the Pilgrims, and the
strange story of their grant of land along the Delaware River

LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT.

79

from the London Company, but with no charter from the King, and
their landing, no man may tell why, on bleak Plymouth shore with-
out grant or charter, and their everlasting growth from that day to
this — their motive, first and last, being "freedom to worship God,**
with all the profits and proprietorships possible added thereto.

Mention should here be made of merchant Thomas Weston's
seventy-five men, gathered in 1622 from the streets of London, and
planted at Wessaguscus, now Weymouth, where they disagreed with
the Indians, and, being unwholesome members of society, were
aided, most willingly, by the men of Plymouth in their return to
England ; of Thomas Morton and his followers, who came in the
same year, and whose yet-to-be-told history we may not follow, from
the time when Miles Standish paid him a visit and sent him across
the sea, down to 1630, when he was again returned to England by the
Massachusetts Bay Company, his goods confiscated to pay his debts
and expenses and for " a canoe he unjustly took from the natives,
and his house burned down to the ground in the sight of the
Indians, for their satisfaction for many wrongs he had done them
from time to time." The above is from the Records of Massachu-
setts, while a modern historian tells us that the accusation against
him " seems to have been based upon the fact that he used the Book
of Common Prayer," but the Records give us no hint that he prayed
at all. ■

Soon after the Pilgrims were established, fishing vessels began
to visit the coast. They were sent out by English merchants, and
were, apparently, the heralds of the great Puritan colonization
scheme. A fishing village began to grow on Cape Ann, but it did
not thrive. Troubles came upon it, which were softened by the
ministrations of Mr. Roger Conant. Thus early we come upon a
trail that leads directly to our Waterbury, for, in 1771, Dr. Roger
Conant, the grandson in the fifth generation of this Mr. Roger
Conant, settler at Salem before 1628, came to Waterbury, where he
married in 1774 Elizabeth, daughter of "Thomas Bronson, Esq.," and
died during the war of the Revolution, on Long Island. Mr. Roger
Conant, by appointment of the owners in England, became the
leader of the settlement. The English capitalists soon grew weary
of their unprofitable adventure and withdrew from it, leaving the
little colony of fishermen and planters ashore, and adrift from
help. Roger Conant stood by and drew them away from Cape Ann
to Indian Nahumkeeke, often called Naumkeag, and now Salem.
When the Puritans came to New England, these men from Cape
Ann were already in possession, and are the old planters so often
referred to, and to whom special rights adhered because of their

8o HISTORY OF WATERS UBT,

possessive priority — the beaver trade and the raising of tobacco
being of the number.

There was another venture made that deserves mention, that of
Captain Wollaston, who, about the year 1625, brought over a com-
pany of " indented " white servants ; but not finding a market for
their labor he, it is said, after a tarry at Mount Wollaston, other-
wise Morton's Merry Mount, and now Braintree, " carried them to
Virginia and sold them [their labor] there."

Thus it is found that the only band of immigrants that had held
to the soil, despite every disadvantage, had been the Pilgrims of
Plymouth, and they had lived largely on things invisible to Lords
of Trade in England or elsewhere. This little band of one hundred
and one in 1620, and forty-five in 162 1, had, in 1628, become three
hundred, when the Puritan exodus began. "Mr. John Endicott
and some with him were sent to begin a plantation, in 1628,
at Massachusetts Bay." These were followed, in 1629, by three
hundred men, eighty women, and twenty-six children, with one
hundred and forty head of cattle and forty sheep, which set sail, in
three ships, for London's Plantation in the Massachusetts Bay. It
is difficult to resist the temptation to give items concerning the
fitting out of these ships. No Arctic expedition of to-day could be
more carefully and thoughtfully equipped than were the George
Bonaventure, the Talbot, and the Lion's Whelp, by the English
Company of men (and one woman whose name is unknown), who
ventured their money in the enterprise. There had been great
content the year before when Mr. Endicott had given himself to the
company, and when Rev. Mr. Higginson adventured himself in
1629, great was the joy among the capitalists. It gave good heart to
the work. Mr. Higginson came in the Talbot, Rev. Mr Skelton in
the George Bonaventure, bringing with him his library of fifty
volumes. Rev. Mr. Bright, who had been trained up under Rev.
John Davenport, came in the Lion's Whelp. It is interesting to
note that Mr. Davenport and Mr. Theophilus Eaton were both
adventurers in the Puritan settlement of the Bay, and that its first
three ministers were approved by Mr. Davenport.

Besides the three ministers, the ships bore almost everything,
including the " English Bible in folio of the last print," the Book
of Common Prayer, the Charter itself, in the care of Mr. Samuel
Sharp, and the oath that was to be administered on the ship's
arrival to Mr. Endicott, the elected Governor. In their cargoes
were mill stones, and stones of peaches, plums, filberts and cherries ;
"kemells" of pear, apple, quince and " pomegranats ;" seeds of
liquorice, woad, hemp, flax and madder ; roots of potatoes and hops ;

LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT, 8i

Utensils of pewter, brass, copper, and leather ; hogsheads of wheat,
rye, barley, oats, beans, pease, and "bieffe;" thousands of bread;
hundreds of cheese, and codfish ; gallons of olive oil, and Spanish
wyne; tuns of water, and beer ; thousands of billets of wood, beside
the loads of chalk, the thousands of brick, and " chauldrens of sea
coales," that were cast in the "ballast of the shipps."

To these, and other items, must be added the apparel of three
hundred men, and the long list of the munitions of death with
which each ship was freighted. There were ensigns — "partisans,
for captain and lieutenant," halberts, for sergeants — muskets with
fire locks, four foot in the barrel, without rests — long fowling
pieces, six and a half feet long — full muskets, four feet in the barrel,
with " match-cocks " and rests — bandaleeres, each with a bullet bag —
horn flasks, to hold a pound apiece — "cosletts," pikes and half
pikes — ^barrels of powder and small shot— eight pieces of land
ordnance, for the fort — whole culverings — demiculverings— -sackers
and iron drakes — great shot, and drums — with a sword, and a belt
for every^ one of the three hundred men.

After this manner was carried on the great Puritan exodus be-
tween 1630 and 1640. Time and space have been given to the
three ships named, because Waterbury is, in a certain way, linked
to them in its history. Their passengers came under the conduct
of a close corporation, fully entitled to govern and make its own
laws, subject only to the Crown of England. The Governor and
Council of Massachusetts Bay, in New England^ came, governed most
minutely by the General Court of the Governor and Company of the
Massachusetts Bay, in London — and many of the laws, the severity
of which has hung like a pall over the memory of Puritan and
Pilgrim, will be found to have been imposed upon them by the
power that lay behind the local government. A list of the passen-
gers in the three ships, if it exists, will give to us, among others,
the names of the men who came as planters, and paid their five
pounds each for passage — the names of those who came under
engagements to the company for special services — as vine dressers,
makers of salt, hunters, shipwrights, iron-workers, and other arti-
sans necessary to the achievement of a successful plantation. The
Pilgrim, the Mayflower and the Fower Sisters soon crossed the
ocean, each undoubtedly bringing its one hundred and twenty-five
passengers — the number permitted. These were soon followed by
scores of ships, eight having arrived within a single week.

To Governor Matthew Craddock, by far the largest adventurer
in this colony-building, although he seems never to have visited
America, belongs the honor of having suggested the removal of the
6

82 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

government itself from England to New England. The transfer
was made in 1630 in the ship Arbella, which arrived on June 12. It
brought, as a passenger, John Winthrop, who had been elected in
England as governor of the Company to succeed Governor Crad-
dock, and who superseded Governor Endicott, who had governed
the Massachusetts Bay Colony in this country but six months.
There are no lists, known to the writer, of the passengers who
came in the six ships here mentioned, by which the great emigra-
tion was inaugurated.

While it is apparent that the number of men who were made
freemen in the colony was not more than one in five of the inhabi-
tants subject to military duty, yet we find among the freemen in
the first list, that containing the names of those who were admitted to
the honor on the eighteenth of May, 163 1, three family names, held
by three of the first proprietors of Waterbury. They are Richard-
son, Gaylord, and Jones. Richards, Welton, Porter, Andrews, and
Gridley had been added to the list by 1634 ; Warner, Hopkins,
Stahley, Newell, Scott, and Lanckton, before March of 1635, while
Judd — and his name was Thomas — and Carrington appear before
June of 1636 ; thus connecting more than one-half of the first settlers
of Waterbury with the Puritans of the Bay. If we turn to the
Plymouth Colony, we shall find there also the names of Hopkins,
Barnes, Andrews, Jones, Richards, and Stanley, while, in both
colonies, we may find many other names that have made, and are
making, worthy records in the history of our town, whose bearers
were already residents in New England before the migration to
Connecticut began.

Going back to the statement that no man can give to us the
name of an inhabitant of Connecticut three hundred years ago, we
may add to it, that the most distant recorded echo of human
footsteps on its soil comes down to us through only two hundred
and sixty years. The footsteps are those of Wahginnacut, an Indian.
The story of white men in the Massachusetts had come to him, and
he perhaps thought, in his human, Indian heart, that white men
would be good to have in Connecticut. Wahginnacut had a good
and human reason for his thought. As nearly as the story can now
be told, the Indians of Connecticut River had passed through a
quarrel with the Pequot or Thames River Indians, the outcome of
which had been that the Pequot tribe had seized the lands of
Wahg^nnacut's tribe along the river ; and the hope that illumined
his dusky mind was, that the presence of white men would restore
to the native Indians the lost valley of their fathers. Inspired
with this hope, Wahginnacut traveled in 1631 from the Connecticut

LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT. 83

River to Massachusetts, and paid a visit to Governor Winthrop at
the Bay, and to Governor Winslow at Plymouth, to induce migra-
tion to his noble river. He offered, in his princely way, to furnish
eighty beaver skins a year — and this was at a time when beaver
was as good as gold, and we have Governor Craddock's word for
it, that it should fetch in the English market pound for pound.
It was a large salary that Wahginnacut offered to Englishmen for
dwelling in his land, for he added to the beaver the promise to
furnish corn for the white men; and yet, we have been to/d that the
Indians were not husbandmen before their demoralization began
— and this in face of the fact that captain, or passengers, or crew
of the Mayflower, robbed the storehouses of corn, that the Indians
of Cape Cod had laid up for the season of 162 1.

For a time, the proffers of the Indian seem to have been made in
vain, for neither company availed itself of his information, or
accepted his offerings ; but two years later, in the^autumn of 1633, the
seed that he had sown gave signs of growth. Plymouth Colony
made a venture, and, so far as we know, it was made on the strength
of Wahginnacut's representations. The frame of a trading-house
had been made ready and placed on board a small vessel. Lieuten-
ant William Holmes commanded the expedition, and an Indian,
Nattawamut, a sachem, was its pilot.

Already the Pequot Indians had made sale of lands on the Con-
necticut River to the Dutch, lands that had been wrested from Nat-
tawamut's tribe. The Dutch had taken possession of a point at
Hartford, and when the Plymouth vessel sailed into and up the
river, on its western bank a mound had been raised and two guns
were pointing riverward. Lieutenant Holmes did not obey the
signal from the fort or guns, but sailed on, unharmed, to the site of
present Windsor. There, land was bought from the Connecticut
River Indians, through Nattawamut. The trading-house was set up
and garrisoned and the vessel went back to Plymouth, bearing
what, for cargo, we know not, but we are told that the pil«t, soon
after his faithful service, died of small pox.

It will be remembered that this trading-house was built in the
autumn of 1633, under the auspices of Plymouth Colony. Massa-
chusetts Bay had been invited to join in the venture, but declined,
giving at the same time its consent to the work, in so far as it might
have jurisdiction over the territory to be occupied.

Through the regions usually characterized by writers as " pathless
wilderness," it is well known there existed Indian thoroughfares,
trails, and paths. The native Indian was, by nature and by practice,
a traveler. He wandered, from very love of wandering — he roamed,

84 HISTORY OF WATERBUBY.

as a hunter — he visited his kindred tribes — he journeyed to sur-
round council fires — he attended dances far and near — he failed not
to be present at the annual games, held on natural plains like our
own Manhan meadows, and he well knew how to mark a new path-
way for the white man from plantation to plantation. Add to this
the well known habit of the inland tribes of going down to the sea to
spend their summer days in fishing and digging clams, drying the
clams in the sun and stringing them for winter store of food,
and we shall not find it difficult to account for certain paths that
existed, without apparent reason, at a very early date. The path, or
trail, or road, as it is called, mentioned in 1674, from Milford to
Farmington, is a case in point. This trail was probably made by
the Indians of Tunxis Sepus, before Farmington came into being.
The Indians of Farmington, without doubt, knew all about the fine
fishing and clamming ground around Milford, long before English-
men came. Milford was a favorite dwelling place ; Ansantawae
had his "big wigwam" on Charles Island, we are told by Lambert,
and the tribe gathered there. The very fact that in 1640 it was
necessary for the first settlers of Milford to surround themselves
with a palisado a mile square, is eloquent of the number of their
Indian neighbors, while at Quinnipiac there was no need of a pali-
sado, not above forty-seven warriors dwelling there.

It was some such path, doubtless, through which, in the summer
of 1633, the great Indian trader, John Oldham, "and three with
him," came to Connecticut. The glimpses that we get, through the
rifts in events, of Oldham, reveal a splendid, hopeful creature,
through whose vision prosperity danced with a grace that in 1629
kept three ships waiting in England for two months, while he set
forth to the gentlemen who were the adventurers the gains of three
for one that could be made, if certain trading powers were conferred
upon him. Oldham deserves a monument ! He and the three
unknown men with him were Connecticut's first traders. They
had rAurned to the Bay by the fourth of September in that year,
and it was in the same autumn that the vessel from Plymouth
brought the trading-house into the river.

Oldham reported that the sachem " used them kindly and gave
them some beaver." He estimated the land distance to be about
one hundred and sixty miles, and said that he lodged in Indian towns
all the way. He also "brought some black lead, whereof the Indians
told him there was a whole rock."

One can well imagine how this enthusiast, on his return, set the
glories of Connecticut valley forth to the men who gathered to
learn the story he had to tell. Three men (the name of but one is

LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT. 85

given, as " Hall") were moved by it to set out in the cold of Novem-
ber, to trade for themselves. Governor Winthrop records that they
lost themselves, endured much misery, could not trade because the
Indians were dying of small-pox, and returned on the twentieth of
January. To the imagination of John Oldham, brisk and fertile,
and stirring with life and a very solid faith in itself, we may safely
attribute the settlement of the valley, at so early a date. The
trading venture of the men of Plymouth, and the overland journey
of Oldham, seem to have been brought about by Wahginnacut's
visit to the eastward. The other items that we have been able to
glean concerning Connecticut in the year 1633, are the following :
Oct. 2, " The bark Blessing, which had been sent to the southward,
returned. She had been at an island over against Connecticut,
called Long Island, because it is near fifty leagues long. There,
they had store of the best wampumpeak, both white and blue.
They have many canoes, so great as one will carry eighty men.
They were also in the river of Connecticut, which is barred at the
entrance, so as they could not find above one fathom of water."

On the twenty-first of January following, in the same year, news
was received at Massachusetts that Captain Stone, putting in at the
mouth of Connecticut, " on his way to Virginia, where the Pequin ♦
inhabit, was there cut off by them, with all his company, being
eight." Within four months after the return of Hall, we find
Newtown, now Cambridge, petitioning the court for liberty to
remove the town to a more commodious site. On May 13, 1634, the
inhabitants were granted leave to seek out some convenient place
for themselves, with the promise that it should be confirmed to
them for a habitation, provided that it did not take in any place to
prejudice a plantation already settled.

In this permit, no limit of jurisdiction was included, and, as early
as July, "six men of Newtown went in the Blessing, to discover
Connecticut River, intending to remove their town thither." We
are left without any knowledge of the work accomplished by these
six unknown men. It is probable that they had for a fellow passen-
ger Governor Winslow of Plymouth, for he visited the Plymouth
trading-house in his " bark," that summer. It is also possible and
even probable that the tradition regarding the presence of English-
men at Wethersfield in the winter of 1634, is based upon this visit
and its results for a foundation ; if so, the men were not Watertown
men who were there, but Newtown men, as is proven by the fact
that it was not until May of 1635, that Watertown petitioned for
leave to remove. It is well known that present Hartford was

♦ The Peqoots.

S6 HISTORY OF WATERS URY,

formerly Newtown; Windsor was Dorchester, and Wethersfield was
Watertown, respectively named from the towns of the same names in
the Bay, whence most of their first settlers came.

In September 1634, the court convened, and its most important
business was the serious discussion regarding the removal of
Newtown to Connecticut. "The matter was debated divers days
and many reasons alledged pro and con." Newtown men com-
plained of the want of accommodation for their cattle, " so as they
were not able to maintain their ministers." They had no room to
receive more of their friends to help them. The towns were too near
each other. Connecticut was fruitful and commodious, and Dutch
or English would possess it soon. To these reasons was added, " the
strong bent of their spirits," urging them to go.

Massachusetts said that these men ought not to depart, because
they were bound by oath to seek the welfare of the commonwealth,
which was in danger, being weak, and the departure of Mr. Hooker
would not only draw away many already in the Bay but would
divert others from it. Beside, they who might go would be exposed to
evident peril from the Dutch and Indians, " and also from our own
State at home, who would not endure they should sit down, without
a patent, in any place which our king lays claim unto." The
outcome was, that both Boston and Watertown offered Newtown
enlarged accommodations. The congregation of Newtown accepted,
for the time, the offer of the towns, and the fear of their going
forth was removed.

The General Court had learned wisdom by the action of New-
town, and, when in May of 1635 Watertown and Rocksbury, and in
June, Dorchester sent up, asking permission to remove, the court
granted all the requests, but limited the territory to some place
within the jurisdiction of the Court.

A careful reading of the records of Massachusetts Bay, from 1630
to 1636, and of Connecticut colony from 1636 to any subsequent
date, will reveal to the reader the wisdom of the migration to
Connecticut.

The men who came to Wethersfield, Hartford, and Windsor,
were not the men who could have " sat down in peace " under the
jurisdiction of the Bay. It is well known that one man of their
number, Thomas Hooker, could dispense " the shines of his favour "
upon colony or continent — for, to the light of one sermon of his we
owe the Constitution of our State and of our United States.

We take but a step within the Records of Massachusetts in the
year 1635, before we find the wisdom of the serpent well delineated
in the Court's organized opposition to Connecticut's first attempts at

LONDON* 8 PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY, 87

settlement. It squirms in the very laws enacted in that year, and
repealed when there was no longer use for them. Certain of the
men who wished to leave had taken the Freeman's Oath. In the
beginning of 1635, it was ordered that every man, sixteen years or
older, who had been six months in the jurisdiction, servants
included, should take the oath of a Resident, with punishment at
the discretion of the court, upon refusal — thus placing bonds upon
themselves to remain within the jurisdiction of the Bay. If any
resident should presume to leave without due permission, special
laws were made for his speedy return by every means that could be
pressed into service, on land or sea. The way was still farther
hedged by an enactment that forbade any man to carry out of the
jurisdiction a bushel of corn without the consent of the governor, or
an assistant, under penalty of eight shillings, when com was selling
for five shillings. Another law was made, forbidding resident or
stranger to buy any commodity whatever from any ship, under
penalty of confiscation, without like permission. Meanwhile, the
elders and brethren of every church were entreated *' to devise one
uniform order of discipline in the churches agreeable to the Scrip-
tures, and to consider how far the magistrates were bound to inter-
pose for the preservation of uniformity." This was, perhaps, the
first open appeal from Court to Church. The battle was between
the adherents of a " Covenant of Works," and a " Covenant of Grace,"
and we learn incidentally that Mr. Hooker was believed, by one
man at least, not to preach a " Covenant of Works."

It is well known that the corner stone of Church and State in
the Bay was laid in mortar mixed only by church members, but a
new enactment went forth at this time. It is not clear that it was
aimed at the churches and congregations that removed to Connecti-
cut, but there is nothing to evidence that such was not the case.
It forbade a man the rights of citizenship, even though a church
member, unless the particular church of which he was a member
had been gathered with the consent of the neighboring churches and elders.

The times were stirring with events. The first military organ-
ization of the colony of twelve towns took place.

But the crowning disturber of the period was Mrs. William
Hutchinson, who came to Massachusetts about 1634, with her hus-
band and son Edward. With her individuality, her able gifts, and
her undoubted charm of manner, she wrought what was believed
by the Puritans of the Puritans to be great mischief, by her daring
flights of liberty of belief and thought. It is hard to understand
why the court allotted her to be kept prisoner by one of her alleged
captives, John Cotton, but the Puritans were a mysterious people.

88 BISTORT OF WATERS URT.

and we need an interpreter. It finally became necessary in the eyes
of the Court to deprive a considerable number of the staid inhabitants,
notably fifty-nine men of Boston, of all fire-arms or other means of
offense and defense. The very permits to the towns for removal,
that have been cited, were accompanied by an edict, under which
a committee was appointed to imprison persons suspected to be
enemies to the Commonwealth and to bring in, '* alive or dead, such
as should refuse to come under command or restraint." Did this mean
such as should attempt to escape from jurisdiction into Connecticut ?

This edict had been issued but a few days, when an arrival from
England wrought a magical change in the hard heart of the Massa-
chusetts Court. The arrival was only a little forty-ton bark, with
twenty men in it, who were called servants. The bark and the men
had been sent over by Sir Richard Saltonstall. The magic of the
affair was, that they were " to go plant at Connecticut." The Court
serpent at once became a courting-dove — and brooded her departing
children with " three pieces to f ortifie themselves withall." Two small
pieces of artillery were also lent to them for the same purpose, and
six barrels of powder granted ; two out of Watertown ; two out of
Dorchester, and two out of Rocksbury. To these were added two
hundred shot, all of which Captain Underbill and Mr. Beecher
(also a captain) were to deliver — and the Connecticut towns were
granted liberty to choose their own constable.

There was evident haste to take possession of the new territory
before Sir Richard Saltonstall's men should begin their settlement,
and the colonists, anxious to depart for Connecticut, went forth
with the good -by blessing of the Court. It will be noticed that
there was no requisition of powder from Newtown. This may have
been because six men of that place (now Cambridge) were already
upon the Connecticut River, for we know that they were there as
early as July of 1634. Governor Winthrop tells us that the men of
Dorchester were set down near the Plymouth trading -house (at
Windsor), in August, 1635, at which date they had been there long
enough to cause the Dutch to send home into Holland for com-
mission to deal with the English at Connecticut.

That the inhabitants were at Wethersfield early, maybe inferred
from the fact that permission was given to Watertown to migrate
early in May, and dismission granted by the church of the same
place to members to form anew in a church covenant in Connecticut
on the 29th of the same month. We find also that if the inhabi-
tants were not removed from Watertown in Massachusetts to
Watertown on the River, by the last of October, 1636, their inter-
est in the lands to be divided was to be forfeited.

LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT. 89

By the 6th of October, we learn from the journal of Governor
Winthrop, that the three towns were gonf to Connecticut. On the
day that Winthrop recorded that fact he tells us that there arrived
two gresit ships, the Defence and the Abigail. John Winthrop, Jr.,
who had been in England for a number of months, and Sir Henry
Vane were passengers on the ships. The fame of Connecticut had
been carried across the sea. Men of station and fortune in England
had secured a patent and charter and resolved to establish a new
colony along the banks of the beautiful river. John Winthrop seems
to have gone abroad on this very mission, for he returned with
authority " from Lord Say, Lord Brook, and divers other great per-
sons in England, to begin a plantation, and to be its governor." Men
and ammunition and two thousand pounds in money he had, to
begin a fortification at the mouth of the river. Massachusetts Bay
took the part of her colony children when Sir Henry Vane treated
with the magistrates concerning the three towns, gone thither. Sir
Henry Vane thought that the towns should give place to the new
commission, and Massachusetts seems to have demanded full satis-
faction, in case they were required to do so.

It was November before the new "Governor Winthrop, Jr.,'* by
the appointment of the " Lords of Connecticut," sent a bark and
about twenty men to take possession, and to begin building. This
little expedition was only just off for its work, when there came
in "a small Norsey bark, with one Gardiner, an expert engineer or
work-base, and provisions of all sorts, to begin a fort at Saybrook.*'

Nature frowned mightily upon little Connecticut in her first
efforts at life. Her Indian children had been so reduced iix num-
bers by small-pox in 1634, that the winter of 1635 found scanty store
of corn or other provisions awaiting the emergency that came upon
the white settlers when their own provision ships failed to arrive.

The overland route was probably taken in the summer or autumn
of 1635. The goods and provisions of the little company went by
sea in two shallops, or barks. An east wind arose in the night.
The boats were cast away upon " Browns Island near the Gurnetts
Nose," and every man was drowned. Meanwhile, the people were
waiting, not knowing why the lost barks failed them. Winter came
before its time. Snow fell, when it was only time for leaves to fall.
Early in November it was knee-deep. Before the ninth of the
month six men had wandered for ten days in the cold and the snow
in their efforts to reach Plymouth, having been cast away in " Man-
amett " Bay, on their return from Connecticut. The fifteenth of
November the river was closed by ice, thus cutting off, most com-
pletely, all hope of their provisions reaching them by sea. The day

90 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT,

after the river was frozen, twelve men set out for Massachusetts,
to secure help.

Of this journey, we have the following record : "November 26,
1635, there came twelve men from Connecticut. They had been ten
days upon their journey and had lost one of their company drowned
in the ice by the way, and had been all starved, but that by God's
providence they lighted upon an Indian wigwam."

In their extremity, and having, it would seem, full faith that
their lost barks would come to the river's mouth, about seventy
men and women determined to brave the perils of a journey to
meet them. Perhaps they also had some hope of relief from the
provisions that were sent by the thirty -ton bark for the twenty
men, at the fort, in the beginning of November.

They did not meet the expected help, but they found the ship
Rebecca of sixty tons. It is not quite clear whether the company
went on board the Rebecca twenty miles up the river or at the
river's mouth. Winthrop tells us that two days before, the ship
had been frozen in twenty miles above the sound, and that it ran
upon a bar in getting to sea and was forced to unload before it
could get off. He also adds that the Rebecca was set free from the
ice by a small rain. Historians tell us that these starving people
cut it out. They arrived in Massachusetts December 10, having
been but five days at sea, " which was a great mercy of God, for
otherwise they had all perished with famine, as some did."

A little later, Winthrop tells us that those of Dorchester who had
removed their cattle to Connecticut before winter, lost the greater
part of them, " but some, which arrived at the eastern bank too late
to be taken over, lived all the winter without any hay ; that the
people were put to great straits for want of provisions. They ate
acorns and malt and grains."

The hardships and suffering of that 1635 winter, have never been
told — can never be known. The heroism of it has slipped noise-
lessly down into unbroken silence. The names even of the men and
the women who stayed to eat acorns and malt, or who wandered
in snow and cold, without food, to the river's mouth ; or of those
who braved the journey overland, or who perished by the way, are
utterly unknown. But this we do know — that of the men and
women who had part in the events outlined in this migration, were
the fathers and mothers or the grandfathers and grandmothers of
men and women who, two hundred and fourteen years ago, made
their homes in the leafy basin that holds within its hill-notched
rim the Waterbury of to-day.

CHAPTER VII.

MASSACHUSETTS BAY COLONY GOVERNS CONNECl'ICUT — JOHN OLDHAM

AND THE PEQUOT WAR CONNECTICUT COLONY A MILITARY

ORGANIZATION — GOVERNMENT BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE — THE
FIRST GOVERNOR — BEGINNINGS OF TOWNS — FARMINGTON PLANTA-
TION GROWTH OF LAWS — TROUBLES FROM AND WITH INDIANS

FREEMEN ADMITTED — LAND BOUGHT AT DERBY — CONNECTICUT
OBTAINS A CHARTER FROM KING CHARLES II — NEW HAVEN COL-
ONY UNITES WITH CONNECTICUT — FORMATION OF COUNTIES —
COUNTY COURTS.

THE first civil officer in Connecticut was William Westwood.
He was appointed by Massachusetts Bay constable of the
plantations on Connecticut River in September, 1635, and
seems to have been the sole representative of Law and Order
during the first six months of the existence of the Colony. " John
Winthrop, Jr., Governor" — as the son was called by the father.
Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts Bay — had apparently
no desire to exercise authority over the colonists at Connecti-
cut, although he had been commissioned to do so by the " Lords
of Connecticut " in England. Winthrop was on the ground in
the beginning of the year 1636, and remained for several
months either up the river with the new towns, or at the fort
at the mouth of the river. The General Court of the Bay,
therefore, arose to the emergency of the hour in March, 1636, and
created a provisional government, placing it in the hands of
eight persons selected out of the number of their " loving friends,
neighbors, freemen, and members, gone, and to go, unto the
river." William Westwood was one of the eight. He had been
appointed to the office of constable in 1635, and this appointment
gives his name to us as a resident of Connecticut during the winter
of that year. It was on the last day of May that Mr. Hooker and
the rest of his congregation set off for Connecticut. We all know
that this company went by land, and that Mrs. Hooker was carried
in a horse-litter; that the company drove one hundred and sixty
cattle, and fed of their milk by the way. It may not be as generally
known that this company, when leaving Massachusetts, turned their
backs upon fifteen great ships riding at anchor in the bay, so brisk
was the business of emigration as then carried on, and that the
echoes had scarcely died away from the volley of great shot fired by

92 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

the fleet on the election of Sir Henry Vane as governor. The first
court was held at Hartford— then Newtown — in 1636. " Newtowne "
in Massachusetts became Cambridge in 1638; Newtown in Connec-
ticut became "Hartford Towne" in 1636. Five of the eight mem-
bers of the government were present. Henry Stiles was the first
legal culprit in the colony. He traded a " peece " for com with the
Indians. He was ordered to regain it in a fair and legal way. The
first act of legislation was an order forbidding to trade fire-arms,
powder or shot with the natives. To this law the people had been
obedient in Massachusetts. That the first months of civilized living
in the river-valley were not months of the apprehension of evil
from the Indian is evident; for it was not until after the seventh of
June, 1636, that a watch was established, and even then it was to
begin and end only when ordered by authority.

Peace and prosperity reigned until July, when John Oldham
came upon the scene in a most tragic manner. He had been out a
long time on one of his trading expeditions; had visited the Pequot
region and passed on to Block Island. John Oldham's personal
properties and his real estate were widely scattered; his interests
were many. He seems to have acted as agent for Governor Crad-
dock in England, and for others. "One John Gallop, with one
more and two little boys," passing through Long Island Sound, saw
and recognized his pinnace about two miles from Block Island, in
the hands of fourteen Indians. Gallop at once made war upon boat
and Indian crew. After the onslaught was over, certain of the sav-
ages having leaped into the sea, three Indians were left alive. Two
of them were prisoned in the hold of Oldham's boat. One, having
surrendered to Gallop, was bound and placed in his boat. Another
surrenderer had been bound and dropped overboard. Oldham's
body, still warm, was found under a seine. After committing it to
the sea, Gallop sailed away with the pinnace in tow, but, in the
night, the wind rising, it was cast adrift, with the Indians in its
hold. Later, Gallop's prisoner implicated the Narragansetts in the
murder of Oldham.

Up to this time, it is believed that but one attack had been made
by Indians upon white men within the limits of Connecticut. A
Captain Stone, then of Virginia, but from indications the same Cap-
tain Stone who had been forbidden under penalty of death to re-
enter Massachusetts jurisdiction, and who was accounted a worth-
less person, had, three years earlier, been slain, with his com-
pany of eight persons. In 1634, certain of the Pequots desiring
a treaty with Massachusetts Bay, declared that the sachem who
had been guilty of this crime had been killed by the Dutch, and

MAaSAGHUaBTTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT,

95

that all but two of the Indians engaged in the murder had died of
small -pox, and that Stone himself had provoked the deed by seizing
two Indians, whom he bound and conveyed to his boat, compelling
them to pilot it up the river. It was now the summer of 1636, and
" The Bay " had made no effort to punish the crime or seek redress
for the murder of this captain of Virginia, or for his crew.

The news of the killing of John Oldham aroused the people of
Massachusetts to a spirit of indignation, the vindictiveness of which
causes us, for the time, to regret our English blood. They made
haste to gather their warriors. In less than five weeks, ninety men
under four commanders, and generaled by Endicott himself, set forth
for war. Their commission bade them "put to death the men of
Block Island, make of the women and children prisoners; and thence
to go to the Pequots on the river Thames and demand the murderers
of Captain Stone. If they refused, to demand as hostages Indian
children. If denied, to take the hostages by force." As we have
seen, two years had passed by; negotiations had more than once
been carried on between "The Bay" and the Pequots, but no
attempt had been made to secure the two Indian murderers who
were left alive, showing that Stone's death was not a bereavement
to the colony; but Oldham, with whom they had often differed, had
a strong hold on their regard, and they desired to avenge his death.

Block Island, as we see it to-day, does not seem an easy place for
the men of two Indian towns to hide in, but hide they did in the
brush-wood of oak that was so dense that men could only walk in
file, so effectively, that ninety Englishmen could not find them in a
two-days' search. When making a landing, about forty Indians had
" entertained " them with their arrows, but these had immediately
disappeared in the undergrowth. The Englishmen departed after
having utterly destroyed two plantations, three miles apart, of sixty
wigwams, " some of which were very large and fair," and two hun-
dred acres of com and seven canoes. How many Indians they killed
by firing into the thickets they knew not, but Winthrop tells us that
not a hair fell from the head of any one of the ninety men, " nor
any sick or feeble person among them," — the light scratch of an
arrow upon the neck of one man and the foot of another not being
apparently worth the mention. Going thence to the Connecticut
shore the ninety men were joined by twenty more. These were
doubtless Captain Underhill's twenty men who had been lent to the
Saybrook fort by " The Bay," and we learn, incidentally, that they
remained there three months. Augmented by this force the boats,
four in number, set sail for the Thames river. There they pro-
ceeded to do all the harm in their power to the Pequots. They

94 HiaTOBT OF WATERS UBY.

burned wigwams on the left bank of the river and on the right,
destroyed com, killed, it is said, fourteen Indians, wounded forty,
and departed entirely unharmed. Alas ! The blood-thirsty savage !
But he learned, if slowly, the lesson of avengement from the her-
alds of the Gospel of Peace. Six months later " a general fast was
kept in all the churches in * The Bay ' because, among other causes,
of the dangers of those at Connecticut and of ourselves also by
the Indians." Oh, the deep satire of that fast ! (that is, as seen
from our point of view). No wonder is it that "those of Connecti-
cut showed themselves unsatisfied with this expedition against the
Indians, finding themselves in danger," and compelled to join in
the war of extermination which soon followed.

No wonder is it that the Pequots found their way up the river in
May, of 1637, as far as Wethersfield and avenged their losses by kill-
ing and making captives. They killed six men, three women, and
carried captive two young girls. This was the news by which Mr.
Haynes, the first elected governor of the colony, was met at Say-
brook about the fifth of May, 1637, when on his way with his family
to join his fortunes with the men up the river. He wrote to Gover-
nor Winthrop from Saybrook, announcing this first trouble with
the Indians. History has it, but the authority is unknown to the
writer, that the people of Wethersfield in buying their land from a
friendly Indian, had promised that he might remain within the
town limits, but expelled him, and that this violation of the treaty,
as it were, with the Indian, caused him to bring the Pequots upon
the settlement. We hope, for the good name of our fathers, that
this is not true; but subsequent events create a strong probability
that the statement was founded on fact. One of the pleasantest
things that we have to record is that the two English maids were
returned unharmed to their homes before May ended by the order
of the Dutch Governor, who sent a sloop demanding them. When
refused, he threatened to break his treaty with the Indians, and
seized hostages with which he ransomed the captives.

The work of the Pequots at Wethersfield was accomplished
before the first of May, for .on that day the ninth session of court
was held at Hartford. Six of the original members of it were pres-
ent, and nine men called " comitties " appear in connection with its
officers. Offensive war was declared against the " Pequoitt." Ninety
men were levied out of the three plantations. Stricken Wethers-
field furnished but eighteen of the number. The preparatory steps
of this first war in our state are so simple that we may be forgiven
for giving them. It must be kept in mind that every Englishman
known to be within the limits of our state was confined to the three

MA88A GHU8ETT8 BA Y'8 PLANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT, 95

gatherings of humanity up the river, and the men, possibly forty,
who were in and about the fort at the river's mouth.

With the ninety men went twenty "Armour" and 180 bushels of
com. Of this com, each plantation was to bake into biscuit one-
half of its proportion if by any means it could do so; the other half
was to be in ground meal. " For the captain and the sick men,"
there was to be a hogshead of good '* beare," three or four gallons
of strong water and two gallons of " sacke." The suet, butter, oat-
meal, pease, salt and five hundred of fish, Hartford furnished.
Windsor provided the pork, rice and cheese; while unfortunate
Wethersfield had to give but a single bushel of " Indian Beanes."
Every soldier carried one pound of powder, four of shot, and
twenty " bulletts." From the river's mouth was to be taken a barrel
of powder and a light gun, if it could be carried.

Thus equipped, the soldiers of Connecticut Colony set forth to
perform deeds forced upon them by the cruel onslaught of Endicott
upon the Indians. Thus equipped, they sailed past the fort orna-
mented by the heads of seven slain Pequots. No man worthy of
the name can read of this onslaught without horror of spirit, or
think of it without whole-souled pity and poignant regret. Alas,
for the poor Pequot ! Treacherous he may have been, but no war-
rior was he ! He could die in hundreds and he did, while but a
single Englishman gave up his life in the slaughter. War it could
not be called. The attitude of the two races was permanently
changed by it Faith in the white man departed for ever from the
Indian. Englishmen looked with guilty suspicion upon the Red
man to the end. Confidence expired in blood and flame. Peace
was gone from the land. Henceforth, life became a series of efforts
to protect itself. It does not in any degree relieve the repulsiveness
of the situation to take in the broad view of the natural selection
of the races. In their turn, the Indians were avenged. A century
of care and perplexity, accompanied by wakeful nights and anxious
days, often emphasized by present terror and cruel death, was borne
by the guilty and by the innocent. To-day, interest is beginning to
develop itself in regard to this Indian, whom, every year, we have
been driving into thickets of wrongs, until he has degenerated into
what he is. And what is he }

In the Soldiers' Field, at Hartford, we find as land owners three
Waterbury names: John Warner, John Bronson and Thomas Barnes,
the father of Benjamin of Mattatuck, who, we have reason to think,
were soldiers in this Pequot war. On the second of June, 1637,
thirty men were sent out of the three plantations into the Pequot
country, to maintain the right that " God, by conquest," had given

96 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

them. Crops had suffered from want of attention, during the weeks
of war, and the following February, Indian corn was not to be had,,
except from the Indians, who were treated very unfairly even in
this thing. John Oldham's estate was the first settled in Con-
necticut, and the court had much pains and trouble regarding it.

Connecticut, by virtue of her conquest, began at once to collect
tribute from the Indians, and in three years' time, the magis-
trates at Hartford were sending all the way to Uncoway, our Fair-
field, to collect it. It is well known that the pursuit of the Pequots
to their final refuge gave to Englishmen their knowledge of the
sea-coast lying to the westward towards the Dutch, and opened
the way for the settlements at New Haven and Milford, which had
their beginnings in the next year, and that the result of the war
made of Connecticut colony a military organization, almost to a
unit. Every man above sixteen years old was to bear arms, except
he was excused by the court, or unless he was a church officer or
an officer of the General or other Courts. There was a magazine of
powder and shot in every plantation, fifty corslets were provided
" and kept in the meeting-house," ♦ at Hartford, and every military
man was continually to have in his house ** half a pound of good
powder, two pounds of bullets and a pound of match." Captain John
Mason was the public military officer of the plantations. He was to
train the men in each town ten days in the year; but not in June or
July — Mason to give a week's warning. Watch by night and ward
by day began. And thus was the century of care and tribulation
inaugurated by our fathers in the towns on the river.

Connecticut's treatment of the Indians after the subjugation and
well-nigh extermination of the Pequot tribe, is a study at once
curious and most interesting. She held out her mailed hand for
tribute; extended a legal protectorate over a right or two that the
Red man might possibly be thought to own by virtue of his crea-
tion; admitted in many ways, with apparent unconsciousness, the
wrongs she committed against him (as that in the Wethersfield
trouble " the first breach was on the part of the English) ; " held him
off, and lured him on, and knew no more what to do with him then
than we do now. She tried quite earnestly to convert him; at the
same time holding him responsible for crimes that he never commit-
ted, and possibly knew nothing about. The Indians rebelled against
imputed sin and other wrongs to such a degree that a whole century
passed away before a chief of the Indian natives sought admission
to a Christian church. When he came, his name was Ben Uncas, a

* This gives the date of the first meeting-house at Hartford, as 1637.

MASSACHUSETTS BAT'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT 97

sachem of the Mohegans. Being willing to encourage so good " a
beginning, the Assembly desired the Governor to procure for him a
coate made in the English fashion, and a hat, and for his wife a
gown.*' The desire was granted.

In the end of the year 1637, in March, Agawam (Springfield)
sent deputies to the court.

On the 14th of January, 1638, Mr. Hooker's sermon bore fruit in
the constitution of Connecticut colony. A governor was about to be
made, and his oath of office, as well as that of future magistrates
and constables, was made ready. The governor promised in his
oath "to execute justice according to the rule of God's word; " the
magistrate, "according to the righteous rule of God's word," and
the constable, " to execute all lawful commands or warrants from
any magistrate or court."

"John Haynes, Esq.," was chosen governor May 11, 1639. The
deputy governors, the magistrates, the secretary and the treasurer
were all chosen at the same meeting of the freemen, and the wheels
of government immediately began to revolve, according to the will
of the people. We can readily imagine that the occasion was one of
great rejoicing on its first occurrence, and the election sermon and
election cake commemorated it annually far into the present cen-
tury. Thus early, a correspondence began with the neighbors at
Quinnipiac. No person was punished for any crime or misdemeanor
during three years from 1636 to 1639, and few complaints were
made. That mild-mannered gentleman, Mr. Pinch eon, was " ques-
tioned about imprisoning an Indian at Agawam, whipping an
Indian and freeing of him," and a few fines were laid, but Justice
held her hands off. In August, a treaty of combination with " The
Bay " was thought of, but it was deferred after consultation with
Mr. Fenwick, who had arrived at the fort, on account of the matter
of bounds.

It is impossible to write a page of the history of this period and
leave out the Indian question. It suddenly comes to the front at
this time in one of the incomprehensible ways practiced by our
fathers. Soheage, sometimes called Sequin, was a sachem of Weth-
ersfield. Divers injuries had been done to him by the English. He^
in turn, committed wrongs against them, but between them all for-
mer wrongs had been remitted the year before. He had been com-
pelled to move down to Middletown. It does not appear that any
new offense had been committed, but the Indians were accused of
growing insolent, and the court was " put in mind that it had long
neglected the execution of justice upon the former murtherers of
the English." Surely, Oldham had been avenged, and the Wethers-

7

98 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

field victims, if they fell by the hands of the Pequots, had been
most vengefully avenged; but now, in mid- August of 1639, two
years after the Pequot war, one hundred men were levied to be sent
down to Middletown, to demand the guilty persons of Soheage, who
was accused of harboring them. They desisted from their demands
only by the persuasion of the New Haven people, who appealed for
their own safety, and perhaps more potently because of the harm
that might come to Connecticut colony and New Haven alike, by
"the noise of a new war, that might hinder the coming of ships the
next year." Of all things, the colonists dreaded anything inimical
to immigration.

The war-spirit contented itself for the time, by sending forty
men in two shallops, with two canoes, to gather the corn that the
Indian husbandmen had planted on land that had been conquered
by the English to the eastward. It was said that the planting had
been done contrary to agreement. This corn-robbing expedition
was undoubtedly carried out, for, on the third of October, "the
soldiers for the last exploit " were ordered paid for nine days, at two
shillings per day. Meanwhile, the first Thanksgiving on record in
Connecticut had been held on the i8th of September, 1639.

Before October, 1639, Stratford, under the name of Pequanocke,*
had the beginnings of a plantation, the formula for which we do
not find, and Roger Ludlow, the former commandant of Castle
Island, in Boston harbor, had taken upon himself to set Uncoway,
or Fairfield, going into the ways of a well-ordered plantation. Gov-
ernor Haynes and Mr. Wells made a visit at this time to Stratford,
to see how matters were going there; to make freemen and admin-
ister the oath of fidelity to the planters, and to assign Sergeant
Nicholls, the ancestor of the Nichols family of Waterbury, to train
the men and exercise them in military discipline; and then to visit
Fairfield, in order to condemn or confirm the proceedings of Roger
Ludlow there. This year, 1639, was an important year. Towns
were insured certain rights in their own lands, and powers were
bestowed for choosing officers and making orders for well-ordering
the same. In fact, the town meeting was fully ordained, with its
town book and town clerk, and the Probate Court was established at
Hartford. There was one act of this October court, the result of
which, if it did result in action, historians would delight to find.
Six men of the three towns were appointed to gather up the
passages of God's providence that had been remarkable since the
first undertaking of the plantations, in each town, and then, jointly,
to gather them up and deliver them unto the court, and if they

* It was also called Cupheage.

MASSACHUSETTS BAT'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT.

99

were judged then fit, they were to be recorded. Will this record be
found ?

Thus early, the spirit of unrest had come upon the plantations.
Men of Wethersfield had flitted and were about to flit to Milford
and to Fairfield, and now, just as the year was ending, in January,
1639, a committee was appointed, at the request of the planters of
all these towns, to view the lands by Unxus Sepus (at Farmington)
with all haste, that a new plantation might there be made. So
urgent did this seem, even in the wintry weather, that the court
was adjourned while the country should be viewed. The weather
proved too severe, and Wethersfield, which seemed the most impor-
tunate in the matter, agreed to wait until the next meeting of the
General Court. Undoubtedly, the departure of persons from the
last mentioned town to Milford and Fairfield was greatly deplored,
and every means was used to keep her inhabitants near by. It has
not been an easy matter to obtain light on the beginnings of indi-
vidual towns; the lands of the original three plantations were
ample, and could be extended by a word from the court. The
children of the planters were not grown, in three years, to man's
estate. A new generation had not come upon the stage to find all
the places of public trust filled, and to desire to make new offices in
a new place; therefore, this longing to emerge from town bounds
could not have been born of the want of land. These early men
were only just out of the toils of English life and law, and to every
one of them who was endowed by nature with a spark of individu-
ality, we can safely attribute an overwhelming desire to wield the
power within him, without let or hindrance. Such was the stability
of English life then, as now, that men had no expectation of rising
above the station into which they were born; therefore, in the new
condition of things, what was more natural than that every man
should seek to be born into a new town, whose good places were not
already seized upon } The conditions for the planting of Farming-
ton were to be made in July of 1640, but the particular court of that
date omits to give us the details, and because of this omission, we
are obliged to grope in ignorance, gathering here and there the con-
ditions attending the formation of plantations.

In April of 1640, "Mr. Hopkins, Esqr.," was made governor, fif-
teen men were made freemen, the bounds between Stratford and
Fairfield were ordered, and the late governor, Mr. Haynes, had to
make the journey to determine them. The first prison in the colony
was prepared for, at Hartford. It was to be of stone, or wood,
twenty-four feet long and sixteen or eighteen feet broad, with a cellar.
Our Thomas Hancox presided over the Hartford prison after he left

loo HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Waterbury in 1691. Intended marriage engagements were to be
published in some public place and at some public meeting at least
eight days before the parties became engaged, and the same interval
was required between the engagement and the celebration of the
marriage covenant. Hartford bad one hundred and fourteen land
owners, and the court was, as usual, very busy making laws to pre-
vent the Indians from becoming bold and insolent. Any Indian
who had the curiosity to touch any weapon of any sort in house or
field, was to pay half a fathom of wampum and to pay " life for life,
lymbe for lymbe, wound for wound " in case of accident to life or
limb thereby. Moreover, the culprit was to pay for the healing of
such wounds; if he stole he was to pay double and receive such pun-
ishment as the " magestrats " chose to inflict. He might not enter the
house of an Englishman; and he might not enter the plantations,
except on conditions. The first will appeared on record — that of
Henry Pack [?], wherein he bestowed upon the church the clock that
his brother Thornton had bought. The first prisoner was kept by
John Porter, constable of Windsor, with lock and chain, and held to
hard labor and coarse diet; the Oath of Fidelity for the western
plantations at Stratford and Fairfield was made ready; the Hartford
portion of the first highway in the colony — that from Hartford to
Windsor — was mended sufficiently " for man to ride and go on foot
and make drift of cattle comfortably," and to the governor was
given liberty of free-trade up the river for seven years.

In this year, 1640, the colonists took a long look ahead. They
recognized the vital necessity of securing to themselves some com-
modity to defray the charges consequent upon supplying their
needs from abroad. The raising of English grain seemed to the
government to promise well for that end, and it at once gave per-
mission to all persons within its plantations to seek out suitable
ground where it might soonest be raised, and granted to each
" teeme " furnished a hundred acres of ploughing ground and
twenty of meadow. The main condition to be regarded was, that
twenty acres, that is, the meadow, was to be improved the first year,
and the one hundred within three years. Careful and minute
orders concerning the same were to be carried out by a committee,
of whom the " Worshipfull " Edward Hopkins was one. Men were
to send in their names and be served by the town, after the commit-
tee had made choice for themselves. A competent lot was to be
allowed for each owner of a team, for a workman to manage the
business and carry on the work. Stock removed to such place was
to be levied to the town from whence it came. The committee
might even admit inhabitants plantation-wise. In fact, from these

MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. loi

and other orders, we may look to this enterprise in grain-raising as
the nucleus of more than one town. It seems probable that Eng-
lish Grass meadow in Waterbury, now in Plymouth, was one of the
meadows early sought out for raising grain by some Farmingtonian.

If cotton has ever been king, far-seeing Governor Hopkins was
the first to recognize it, for, in 1640, he undertook '' the furnishing
and setting forth a vessel to those parts where the said comodity was
to be had, that a trade of Cotton Wooll be set upon and attempted."
This vessel went and came with its cargo of ** cotton wool," and this
name for cotton was in general use in Connecticut after 1830. Thus
early was an order for the preservation of the forests sent forth,
that the material for the supply of pipe-staves remain undimin-
ished. The export of pipe-staves was an important and extensive
industry and regulated with great care. The staves were to be four
inches broad, four feet and four inches long, half an inch in thick-
ness besides the sap, and if under four inches in breadth they were
to go for half staves. A supply of linen cloth was desirable —
experience had thus early taught them that much land lay about
that might be improved in hemp and flax. To this end, every family
was ordered to procure and plant, that year, one spoonful of Eng-
lish hemp-seed in fruitful soil. This was for seed-supply for the
year following, wherein every family, although no cattle were kept,
was ordered to sow ten perches; if any cattle, twenty perches; if
draft cattle, one rood of hemp, or flax.

Country rates, "yet behind unpayed," were to be accepted in
merchantable Indian corn at three shillings the bushel; other
indebtedness of labor, or contract, or commodity, at three shillings
four pence the bushel.

That the fear of the Indians was not appalling, appears from
the fact that six men were sent into the Mohegan country to plant
com near Uncas, and were to remain until the harvest should be
over. It will thus be seen how far away the colonists were reach-
ing to occupy the meadows, even in 1640, and so the suggestion
already made, that Waterbury, as an occupied locality, is a number
of years older than it has been accounted will not be deemed unwor-
thy of consideration.

Among the laws of 1640, is the following : " It is Ordered that
what p'son or p^'sons w'**in this jurisdiction shall, after September,
1 641, drinke any other Tobacco but such as is or shall be planted
within these libertyes, shall forfeit for every pound so spent five
shillings, except they have license from the Courte."

The first land bestowed upon any individual by the government,
was Fisher's Island. It was bestowed under its present name, and

102 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

at his own request, upon John Winthrop, subject to the "public good
of the Country and trade of fishing or salt and such like."

The grasp of the government upon the individual in those mat-
ters in which he might be supposed to be a law unto himself, must
have been extremely irksome. His very apparel was subjected to
restraint in material, in cost, and in form; his labor was under the
law of hours and his rewards were fixed. No man might give or
receive more than the sum determined by the General Court, except
he abide the censure of that court — but this law was unpopular and
soon repealed. The selling prices for most commodities were given,
— and the Indian was to receive less for his corn than the white man
might take. Rumors of war floated in. Mr. Ludlow, down at Fair-
field, had been told by a friendly sachem that the Indians of Mid-
dlctown, Narragansett and elsewhere, had a combined plot for des-
troying the Engflish. A Long Island Indian revealed the plot to
Mr. Eaton, at New Haven, and a Connecticut River Indian told of
it. How unfriendly all the Indians were ! Mr. Saltonstall, whose
lands lay above Windsor, promised to lend the Country two pieces
of ordnance — " Sakers or Minions." These pieces of ordnance
undoubtedly came in the forty- ton bark, in 1635, when twenty pas-
sengers were " to go plant at Connecticut." The Bay was immed-
iately " writt " unto to further the prosecution, or persecution, of the
Indians. All fire arms were to be made perfect. A magistrate
alone might receive a sachem, if he had but two men with him.
For the first time — this was in August of 1642— a guard of forty
men was to attend the meeting every Sabbath and lecture-day
"complete in their arms," and the members of the court took an
oath to keep secret its doings. The Indians were gathering for
some purpose, supposed to be warlike, about Tunxis, or present
Farmington. The most stringent enactments were issued: The
Englishman might not deliver to any Indian, articles that he had
contracted for; much less do any work for him in iron or steel, or
even buy his venison; sixty "halfe Pickes " were ordered, to be of
ten feet length, at least, in the wood, and the watching and warding
were set in force with new zeal. A month passed by in quiet, and
then ninety coats were ordered to be made defensive against Indian
arrows, by being basted with cotton wool. Governor Hopkins's ship
had come in; hence, the supply of " cotton wool." Six weeks went
by. No harm came from Tunxis or other Indians, and, on the first
of December 1642, the Capital Laws of the Colony, twelve in num-
ber, were promulgated.

At this date, that " master-piece of woman's wit," Mrs. Hutchin-
son, appears to have been dwelling on the river, for Dr. Bray

MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 1 03

Rossiter tries to collect a bill of ;^24o from her, but accepts ;^23, by-
order of Court. So attractive had the Indians become in three
months* time to certain of the inhabitants that they took up their
abode with them, and the Court found it expedient to enact a
penalty for such abiding with the Indians; making it at least three
years' imprisonment in the " house of correction," besides fine and
corporal punishment; and no man might make any "arrowheads"
for Indians under penalty of a ten pound fine, and tribute was
demanded from Long Island Indians also.

In 1643 a weekly market was established, to be held every Wed-
nesday at Hartford. This was for all manner of commodities,
merchandise, and cattle. Highway surveyors were appointed, with
liberty to call out every team and person fit for labor one day in the
year to work, especially on the ways which were between town
and town. The Grand Jury of twelve persons was ordered, and the
foundations of the family state were considered. It was declared
that " the prosperity and well-being of commonwealths did much
depend upon the well government and ordering of particular
families " and, as this " could not be expected where the rules of God
were neglected in laying the foundation of a family state," it was
ordered that no person remaining under the government of parents,
masters or guardians " should make or give entertainment to any
motion or suit in way of marriage without the knowledge and
consent of those to whom they stood in such relation," neither
should any third person intermeddle in the matter.

The commissioners of the United Colonies, in session at Boston,
in October, 1643, decided that Miantinomo be delivered up to be
murdered by his captor, Uncas. The harrowing story rises up again
and again, and we can only cry, "Oh, why was this thing permitted ?"
Neither timidity nor fear can wholly account for it. Fearing that
the Narragansetts would seek to avenge the death of their sachem, it
was ordered that eight men be sent to Mohegan to defend Uncas, and
that each town prepare itself for defensive war. It was forbidden
"to sell for day," or trust any Indian with goods or commodities, and
the meeting-house guard was increased to one man from every
family in which there was a soldier, who was to carry a " muskett,
pystoll, or some peece," with powder and shot, to each meeting.
The forfeit was twelve pence for every neglect — and forty pounds
were paid to Mr. Fenwick for repairs on the fort at Saybrook. In
December, 1643, there was kept a Day of Humiliation. This day
seems to have been popular. In January, because of the state of
their native Country, it was decided that there should be monthly a
day of humiliation, " according to the course of their neighbors at
New Haven.** Wednesday was the day.

I04 BISTORT OF WATERS URT,

The inhabitants were ordered to bring in their measures and
yards and weights once in the year, to be tried and compared with
the standard. Only sealed measures might be used — and only
measures of seasoned wood might be sealed — and if any measure
was found too little, the "scale was to be cutte out." Persons were
forbidden to sell"Wyne and Strong Water " without license from
the " p^'ticuler Court," or any two magistrates. It had become custom-
ary to sell the forbidden articles from vessels on the river, and from
houses. In June, 1644, for the benefit of many strangers and pas-
sengers (thus incidentally giving us a picture of the growth of inter-
course), one sufficignt inhabitant in each town was to keep an " Ordi-
nary, for provisioning and lodging in comfortable manner; that
strangers and passengers might know where to resort." The inhab-
itants were to choose the men for this service, and two magistrates
were to decide upon the fitness of the men for the work. It was at
this time — eight years after the settlement — that the law was
enacted requiring parents to certify to the Town Clerk, within three
days after the birth of a child, the date of its birth, and every man
within three days after his marriage, the date of that marriage.
For every default, the penalty was five shillings. The Register was
to receive sixpence for recording the day of the marriage and two
pence for the day of the birth.

The order concerning trading with the Indians was repealed,
and Uncas, "who hath bine a friend to the English," might enter
the house of a magistrate or a trader, with twenty men, and his
brother with ten; other sachems, if they came not with above four
men.

In this year, James Hallet, an unfortunate soul of Windsor, for
his theft, was to restore tenfold " for that should be proved against
him, and to be branden in the hand, the next Trayening day, at
Windsor." Up to this date, about six cases of corporal punishment
are to be met with. The stocks at Windsor, and the pillory at Hart-
ford, had been made to do duty. There had been one case of brand-
ing in the cheek the letter R, and perhaps two cases of whipping
" at the cart's tail," at Hartford.

In October, 1644, we find six towns within Connecticut colony.
They are Hartford, Windsor, Wethersfield, Stratford, Uncoa or
Fairfield, and Southampton on Long Island. The latter town had
sought admission. We learn the number by the appointment of
two men in every town within the jurisdiction to demand of every
family what it would give for the maintenance of scholars at Cam-
bridge, formerly Newtown. This free-will offering, largely in corn,
was, for many years, gathered annually into the place prepared for

MASSACHUSETTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN GONNECTIGUT,

105

it, and at the convenient time, it, or its value, was sent up to " that
Schoole of the Prophets wch now is" — Harvard College.

Before the end of the year 1644, Connecticut had overfilled the
markets of Plymouth and Massachusetts Colonies with grain, and
a company of exporting merchants seems to have been formed,
chief of whom were our enterprising Governor Hopkins and Mr.
William Whiting. To them, and to them only, was corn to be sold
to go out of the river, for two years, and the prices for wheat,
rye, and pease were regulated for them. Cattle and " Swyne '*
above half a year old, were to be ear-marked or branded and regis-
tered in the town book.

From the beginning, the possession of the fortification and lands
at the river's mouth had been desired, and in the agreement for
their purchase, which was entered into in this year, Mr. Fenwick
was to receive two pence per bushel for all grain that should be
exported out of the river for ten years, and six pence per hundred
for all " biskett " so exported. For every hog that was killed in any
of the towns on the rive^, twelve pence per annum. For every sow
or mare that was in the towns, the same sum; and twenty shillings
for every hogshead of beaver traded out of the Jurisdiction, " and
paste away down the River." The payments were to be in beaver,
wampum, wheat, barley or pease, at the most common and indiffer-
ent rates. Stringent measures were taken to prevent collusive deal-
ings, and the concealing of stock, with penalties annexed. This was
a very heavy tax upon the five towns. Hartford had added to her
weekly market two fairs in the year, one in May, the other in Sep-
tember.

In 1645 we find the colony taking the most vigorous measures
"for the cnlardgement of the libertyes of the Patent for the Juris-
diction," for, in the sale made by Mr. Fenwick, he did not include
the jurisdiction, although he promised to secure it, if he could. That
he failed, and that he was under some pecuniary obligation to the
country because of this failure, may be fairly inferred from a clause in
his will, in which he leaves ;^5oo to the country, contingent upon
Governor Hopkins's approval. The story of the patent and charter,
if it could be clearly told, would be of very great interest.

For five years little Farmington had been a plantation under the
name of Tunxis, but on the first of December, 1645, she was given
her English name, her bounds were established, and town rights
conferred. Saybrook, or- "Seabrooke," was added to the towns,
making the number eight in 1645. But we may not linger in this
interesting search, but must pass quickly over the field covering
the period down to the beginning of our own plantation, merely

io6 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

mentioning that in 1646 our first " Body of Laws " was to be
"drawn forth" by Mr. Ludlow (Fairfield therefore was probably
the place where the work was done), that the destruction of a wolf
was rewarded with ten shillings, that no man might let any land to
the Indians, because " they mixed themselves in their labors with
the English," and that the delivery of Miantinomo to Uncas caused
the sending forth of forty men in this year, for " warrs," and for the
support of Uncas; after which the knapsacks, pouches and powder
were gathered up and delivered to Mr. Talcott.

Whatever the formula may have been for the planting of planta-
tions, we have not found it. Middletown is the ninth in number^
although nearly six years of plantation life passed, as in our own
case, before it became a town. It must be mentioned that the
business of whale fishing dates back to the year 1647, and that the
probable pioneer in that business was Mr. Whiting. The company
were to have seven unmolested years to make their fortunes in, but
Mr. Whiting died within the first year.

It was in March, at the very close of the year 1647, that Sims-
bury was to be purchased by the country, to be disposed of to
inhabitants of Windsor, and the purchase was to be repaid by those
that should enjoy it.

The first trace of witchcraft that the writer has noticed, appears
in December of 1648, when the "Jury found a Bill of Inditemenf
against " Mary Jonson, on her own confession."

New London, in its formative stages, dates back to the sending
of men to perpetuate the conquest of the Pequots, directly after the
war. In 1648 Mr. John Winthrop was appointed magistrate there.
The next year its bounds were laid and a court erected, and the
Indians were not to set any traps within the bounds; but hunting
and fishing, except upon the Sabbath day, were allowed to them in
all the towns at that date. Faire Harbour was the first name chosen
by the court for the town, but because it was an excellent harbor
and a fit place for future trade, and also the only place that the
English had possessed in Connecticut by conquest (and the court
added that it was by a very just war upon that great and warlike
people, the Pequots), and in memory of London, the new town,
" settled upon the fair River of Monhegin in the Pequot country,"
was called New London.

The earliest mention of Stamford, in Connecticut colony, is in
1649. John Whittmore, late of Stamford, had been killed by the
Indians. The court judged it " lawful and according to God in way
of revenge of his blood," to make war upon the natives in and about
the premises. They consulted with New Haven and ordered forty-
five Connecticut men to prepare for the war.

MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PL ANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT. loj

In November, 1649, East Hampton, on Long Island, was
"accepted and entertained *' under the government, it being "their
importunate desire."' Samuel Smith and others of Wethersfield had
a ship at that port ready for her first voyage, and desired to freight
it with pipe-staves. The 19th of December, 1649, was Thanksgiving
day.

In 1650 foreigners were not to retail any goods within the juris-
diction, nor were their goods to be retailed by any one. June nth
was Thanksgiving day, and in November of the same year, on a
Wednesday, there was another Thanksgiving day. In June of 1650
certain men of Hartford asked leave for a plantation at Norwalk.
If the way for such an undertaking "was clear and good," and the
number and quality of the men engaged in it were such as might
rationally carry on the work to the advantage of the "publique
welfare and peace," and the people were willing to look after their
own defense' and safety, and the divisions of lands were made
according to just rules approved by a committee appointed by the
court, and the people would pay their just proportion of public
charges, this plantation was allowed, and in 165 1 it reached town
estate.

At this date, 165 1, and for several years before, families and
small companies of families had been and were living remote from
the several towns, and to these solitary dwellers and scattered ham-
lets we are able to trace a considerable number of the towns, both
early and late, and others, that we cannot follow, doubtless owe
their origin directly to some advance dweller in the wilds, who
went with or without permission.

In October of 165 1, the people were building the great bridge at
Hartford, and a day of fasting and humiliation was kept, because
of " some diseases or infection," that was among their " neighbors
and friends of the Massachusetts."

The beginning of 1653 found the Government greatly interested
in the preservation of the people in and about Saybrook, because
of the Indians, and apprehensions regarding the Dutch — England
and Holland being at war. They were ordered to gather the scat-
tered families into the town. The " Corporation in England " sent
arms and ammunition for the United Colonies, of which Connecti-
cut received to the value of sixty pounds. The Indians near all
plantations were compelled to testify their fidelity to the English
by delivering up their guns and other arms to the Governor or the
Magistrate. They were not to walk in the night, except with a
message to the English, and then they were to deliver themselves
up to the watch, and were to be shot by the watch, if they did not.

jo8 HI8T0RT OF WAT^RBURT.

On the first of March, 1653, Governor Haynes died. In 1654, by-
order of Parliament, the colony was expected to "demeane itself
against the Dutch, as an enemy to the Commonwealth of England."
Accordingly, it sequestered in England's name " the Dutch house,
the Hope, with all the lands, buildings, and fences thereunto
belonging." " Barbados Liquors, commonly called Rum, Kill Devill
or the like," had reached the colonies at this time, and the use of
them had made sad havoc among the Indians, so that the most pro-
hibitory laws possible were enacted. The rapid deterioration of the
natives seems to date from the importation of these liquors. Wars
and rumors of wars filled the horizon. " Oliver, Lord Protector of
England," wrote a letter to the General Court in relation to a pro-
posed expedition that stirred the colonists deeply. Uncas himself
began to make complaints of unfair treatment from the English,
in the taking of his lands. The United Colonies resolved
upon war with Ninigret, and forty-five men were called forth to the
Niantic country. They were to meet in Hartford and there begin
their march. The want of an able interpreter had prevented the
conveyance of the knowledge of God to the natives, and duly con-
sidering " the glory of God and the everlasting welfare of those
poore, lost, naked sonnes of Adam," the Court " wrott " unto Thomas
Mynor of Pequot to send his son John to Hartford, that he might
be educated to assist the elders to interpret the things of God to
them.* And here we meet the very familiar name of Daniel Porter.
He was to be allowed and paid out of the public treasury, as a
salary for one year, six pounds, and in addition six shillings a jour-
ney to each town upon the river, " to exercise his arte of chiur-
gerie."

The first mention that is made of the Housatonic River is in
1656, when it is called the Paugasitt River. The jurisdiction rights
of Connecticut over the region embraced by this river are not evi-
dent to us, and were not to the colony itself, for at the date last
given, Stratford requested that their bounds to the northward
might be established, and the answer was, that the bounds should
be "twelve miles northward by the Paugasitt River," if the juris-
diction had the right of its disposal.

In 1656, we make the acquaintance, slight though it be, of our
friend William Judd, the eldest of the five Judd brothers who cast
their lot in with Waterbury at its beginning. He was in this year
made a freeman. We learn, also, that wolf-pits were constructed to

♦ This lad, John Minor, sent to Hartford from New London, was one of the pioneer settlers of Wood-
bury. It was he who Mras upon the committee for establishing the bounds between Mattatuck and Wood
bury in 1680.

MASSACHUSETTS BA T'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 109

catch wolves, because of the bounty derived from their capture, and
that the penalty for stealing a wolf from the pit, to either Indians
or English, was ten shillings, or six stripes of whipping, and that
no town might entertain a Quaker, Ranter, Adamite, or other noto-
rious heretic, above fourteen days, unless the town so choosing to
entertain, pay five pounds per week for its safe harboring of them.
We rejoice to assure the reader that this law did not arise within
the heart, or brain, or at the hands of our Connecticut Colony, but
was adopted by the United Colonies at the suggestion of the gov-
ernor and magistrates of Massachusetts Colony. From the same
source came the law of this year, forbidding the sale of a horse to an
Indian, or any boats or "barkes," or any tackling belonging there-
unto. It is agreeable to find that Mamanto, probably our good
Indian of " Mantoe's House Rocks," twenty-four years later, in 1680,
was by special grant of the Court permitted to have a horse, and
he was perhaps (with a good degree of probability) employed with
his horse as special messenger between Farmington and Mattatuck
in that year of our house-building, for the rocks were named for
him here, and the natural and artificial marks of his horse were
recorded in Farmington.*

In 1656, in the three river towns there were 447 land owners,
whose estates were valued at ;£47,7io. Dr. Daniel Porter's "sal-
lery" was continued, and a Dutchman, whose name was "Mr."
Lawrence Cornelius, was admitted by New London and the General
Court an inhabitant of that town, he to have free trade there. Free-
men were admitted to the colony by the General Court; inhabitants
were admitted to a town by a major vote of the town. The deputies
of a town were to give certificates to men desiring to be made free-
men, that the candidates were of peaceable and honest conversation,
but the court reserved the right to accept or reject them at its
pleasure. The qualifications required were, that the candidates
should be householders who were one-and-twenty years of age, who
had borne office, or who possessed thirty pounds estate. In the end
of this year Stephen Hopkins, our first miller, he who built the mill
which was here in 1680, was made a freeman. In 1656, also, the
troubles in the church at Hartford culminated. Massachusetts min-
isters and elders voluntarily proposed to visit that town and counsel
the opposing parties. A " synnod " was held.

In May, 1657, sixty-five freemen were added to the list, and the
Gunn name appears in the colony in the person of Jasper Gunn,
who was freed from training, watching and warding "during his
practise of physsicke." He had been in Connecticut earlier, cer-

* See references to Mantow and Momantow on pag^e 30.

no HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

tainly in 1648, and in 1649 he was attending the mill at Hartford,
while Thomas Gunn was a jurym?an still earlier. The Gunn family-
filled an important place in the life of Waterbury in subsequent
years.

Indians at Farmington were troublesome in 1657. A "most hor-
rible murder" was committed by them at that place.* Tekomas,
Agedowsickf and Wonanntownagun, alias Great James, were to
be kept in prison as pledges until the murderers should be brought
forth to trial and judgment. The estate of one Indian was
sequestered, and the inhabitants of Farmington were to seek out,
and bring before the governor, Indians who might be suspected of
the crime, while the Indians themselves in and about Farmington
were directed to nominate a sachem. It was a serious office to hold,
that of an Indian sachem, for the English held the "heathen
prince" strictly accountable for all the crimes committed by his
tribe; but in this case at Farmington there seems to have been no
sachem to bring to account. A fire was also occasioned at the same
or nearly the same time, by which certain houses were burned; it
is believed that the houses were owned by William Lewis or
Francis Browne, or perhaps both. For this fire the Indians of
Tunksis Sepus or Farmington, mutually pledged themselves to
make an annual payment to the court for seven years of the full
sum of eighty fathom of wampum. " Mamanto," (our " Mantow," it
is thought), was one of the four Indians who signed this agreement.
A committee was appointed to distribute the payments to Lieutenant
Lewis and Francis Browne, to make up their loss by fire. This year
1657 comes to us of Waterbury with a thrill of interest, for this is
the year in which we have direct and recorded evidence that white
men, whose names we know, traversed some portion at least, of our
valley; men who a little later were active in preparations for its
settlement, and one of whom, John Stanly, lived an honorable and
active life in our community until after 1700; the other, John
Andrews, died while preparations for settlement were in progress.

The patience of the law-givers must have been greatly tried
when Indians who had a grievance met in court, each sachem
to plead his own case. The court wearied with their speeches,
when on one occasion Uncas and a sachem named Foxon "justi-
fied in many words." Great wisdom was required to bestow just
verdicts, when present troubles were complicated with old feuds

*In the diary of John Hull, under date of April 23d, in this year, he tells us that this murder was that
of an English woman and her maid, and that a little child was sorely wounded, '*all within their house,"
and that the house was fired, *' which also fired some other houses or bams ; " that the Indians, being appre-
hended, delivered up the murderer, who was most horribly executed.

+ Another form of Hatchetowsuck ; see pp. 34, 35.

MASSACHUSETTS BA T'S PLANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT 1 1 1

running back more than a generation, and one is not surprised
when, after an all-day session of Indian special pleading, the verdict
was— that the Indians should be left to fight it out among them-
selves on the other side of the river, but no Englishman's house, per-
son or property was to be injured. In the beginning of 1658, thirty-
seven men were formed into a cavalry company, under the name of
"Troopers." They made choice of their own officers, and the court
confirmed them. The officers commissioned were a captain,
lieutenant, " cornet, three corporals" — one of whom was Nicholas
Olmsted, one of the five men who ordered Waterbury's first steps
in town ways — and a quartermaster. This company of troopers
was formed from the men of the three original towns. It was
in March, 1657, in the very last days of the year, that the order
was issued forbidding any persons to " embody themselves into
church estate without consent of the General Court and approba-
tion of the neighbor churches." There was a provision in this
law, out of which grew in later years, within the townships, the
winter privileges, and the church societies, which in turn re-
solved themselves into towns again. The provision was that the
order should not " take place upon such as were hindred by any
just impediments [such as our Naugatuck river] on the Sabbath
day from the publicke assemblies by weather or water, and the
like."

In 1658 the court was more tried with the "differences" that had
broken out in the churches at Hartford, and in other towns, than
with the Indians themselves, and sternly ordered an " utter cessa-
tion of all further p'secution " by the church at Hartford towards
the withdrawers from them until the court decided the differences
between them. The court could not, or would not, arbitrate these
matters. It was greatly buffeted with ecclesiastical " strikes," and
sent the matter, as t|jey did Miantonomo, up to "The Bay," or
rather, sent for the " Bay " elders to come across country to Hart-
ford.

No less than seventy men were made free before the Court of
Election in May, and the great number caused tumult and trouble,
so that thereafter freemen were admitted at the October court ; and
here we meet for the first time with the "squire," so familiar to our
ears a score of years ago, and now well nigh obsolete. The new
recorder, Mr. Daniel Clark, makes use of it as a prefix to the name
of Mr. Winthrop.

The Farmington Indians were entertaining strange Indians at
this time — contrary to their agreement with the English, " when they
sat down " there — and carrying on hostilities, thereby endangering

112 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

life by bullets shot into the town, and Thomas Judd, the father of
the five young men of that name who came to Waterbury as pro-
prietors, was on the committee to inform the Indians that they
were required " to provide another place for their habitation and
desert the place wherein they were then garrisoned." In this year,
1658, "the season was intemperate, the harvest thin, and there was a
sore visitation, by sickness in several plantations," and Governor
Edward Hopkins died. The act against the Quakers did not long
survive on Connecticut soil. It was modified in such manner that
if one was "found fomenting his wicked Tenets and was legally
convicted to be disturbing the public peace," that Quaker was
to be " dealt with " by " fine, or banishment, or corporal pun-
ishment."

One of the most weighty matters coming before the law-givers
again and again and continually, related to the selling of spirit-
ous liquors. Laws were enacted regulating; laws prohibiting; laws
repealing laws; but the question did not seem answerable to law.
At last they tried the experiment of permitting Indians to have
cider, provided it should be " drank " before the eyes of the seller
thereof, in order to prevent excess, but this liberty was soon with-
drawn, and no man might even give any Indian cider. The first
intimation of negro slavery is met with in the law of 1660, that
neither Indian nor "negar" servants should be required to train,
watch, or ward in the colony. The laws of this year were
especially clear and practical. No person might be admitted an
inhabitant of a town unless he was known to be of an honest con-
versation and was accepted by the major part of the town. A sec-
ond small troop of horse, of eighteen men, was permitted to be gath-
ered out of Fairfield, Stratford and Norwalk. No inhabitant could
sell his house and lands without offering them first for sale to the
town in which they were situated. The above was one of the laws
which was cited as being contrary to English law, when, at a
later period, the charter was in peril. No man or woman could live
more than two years in Connecticut, if he or she had wife or hus-
band "in foreign parts." Every town in the colony was ordered to
send forth its Indians a quarter of a mile away from the town. The
law forbidding to sell fire-arms to Indians was still unrepealed;
nevertheless, the Indians possessed guns, for, at this time, laws
were made Regulating their fire-arms, as, that Englishmen might
seize any guns brought in by them, to be redeemed by the Indians
on payment of six shillings each; and a little later, in i66i, they
had free liberty to carry them through towns, if not above ten men
were in company.

MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT 113

It was at this time that the order went forth causing sales,
grants, bargains, and mortgages of lands to be in writing and placed
upon record, duly witnessed by one witness and the recorder.

The Indian name of the Housatonic river was merged into the
Stratford river in 1660, for Dr. Bray Rossiter — who had been at
Hartford in attendance upon "John Talcott in his sickness'* — had
applied to the court to sanction his purchase of lands at *' Paugusset,
on Stratford River." His request was granted; he was given per-
mission to buy another hundred acres, and Connecticut colony
accepted the lands thus acquired under its government. Hunting-
ton, Long Island, also was received to its ** power and protection."

In 1 66 1, the Colony was very active and deeply absorbed in car-
rying out the desire of its corporate heart — to obtain from King
Charles II. the long desired charter. Everything was made ready
for that event. The financial part of the business enterprise was
secured. It was five hundred pounds. An address to the King was
made ready by Governor Winthrop, and a petition prepared by a
committee, and, with the money, the address, and the petition, and
a long and minutely worded letter of instructions in the premises,
the Governor set forth on a voyage to England, at once momentous
in its hopes and results to the Colony.

In his address Governor Winthrop assures King Charles that the
" Fathers of the Colony had very pious and public ends in view, when
they transported themselves, with their wives and children, unto
this western world " — even the " propagation of the blessed Gosple
of the Lord Jesus amongst the Heathen," as well as "the farther
extent and honor of the British Monarchy." He then reminds him
of the full and free consent that his father, Charles I., gave, together
with his gracious " L" Pattents," to them of Massachusetts Bay, and
later explains how Connecticut came to be settled, and that the lands
were purchased of " Indian sachems," kindly explaining to the King
the fact that Indian sachems were " Heathen Princes," and then
adds that when the sad and unhappy times of troubles and wars
began in England, his subjects on the Connecticut River could only
"bewaile w'** sighes and mournful teares." Then, writing for the
people, he declares that they "have ever since hid themselves
behind the mountains, in that desolate desert [the Connecticut Val-
ley !] as a people forsaken, choosing rather to sit solitary and wait
only upon the Divine Providence for protection [that is, without
a charter] than to apply themselves to the changes of powers
[the Commonwealth and Oliver Cromwell], assuring his majesty
that his subjects had kept their hearts, as well as their stations, free
from all illegal engagements, and entire to the interests of their
8

114 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

King." Presently, he implores favor and gracious protection, and
asks his acceptance of the colony, reminding the king that it is
" his own Colony, a little branch of his mighty Empire," and explains
many things that his poor pilgrims have done for the glory of Eng-
land. The address makes most humble apology for the colonists, in
that they had "publickly and solemnly proclaimed and declared for
his majesty in Connecticut, before a form and express order for such
testimony of allegiance had arrived by the ships from England,"
and closes with the hope that his majesty will be pleased to excuse
the poverty that has nothing to present the King of England from
the wilderness, but hearts and loyal affections. It ends with the most
profound professions of loyalty and submission and devout suppli-
cations to " His Eternal Majesty, the King of Heaven and Earth," to
pour down temporal and spiritual blessings upon the "Royal
Throne " of Charles II. This address, written by Governor Win-
throp, was placed in the hands of a committee which was empow-
ered to " compile or methodize the Instrument." Hence, the very
remarkable production. However, it accomplished its purpose, and
the charter was received at Hartford, with honest acclamation of
joy, and " publiquely read in audience of ye Freemen, and declared
to belong to them and their successors " on the 9th of October, 1662.
It had been duly signed and sealed on April 23rd; had been pub-
licly exhibited in Boston in September, and was delivered in Hart-
ford for safe keeping, into the hands of Mr. Willys, Captain John
Talcott, of Waterbury interest, and Lieutenant John Allyn, persons
chosen for that office by the freemen. A " Charter Keeper's Oath "
was administered to the three men, and the wheels of government
were once more adjusted by the General Assembly of assistants and
deputies who "established all officers in the Colony, both civil and
military, in their respective places and power."

A new era, bright with satisfied longings, and brilliant with hope
had dawned. It is at this date that we bid farewell to the General
Court and advance under the order of the General Assembly, which
frequently steps back into the old ways, and calls itself always the
Court, and frequently the General Court, but its marching orders
are with few exceptions under General Assembly.

It is quite impossible fully to appreciate the situation of the
colonists either before or after the charter was obtained. Hitherto
every step had been taken with secret distrust and often with per-
ceptible hesitation, but always in the hope that Mr. Fenwick would
be able to transfer to them whatever jurisdiction he either held or
might be supposed to hold by virtue of patent, at the time when he
sold to them the fort. But now all was changed ! Everything was

MASSACHUSETTS BA T'S PLANTA TION IN CONNECTICUT 1 1 5

tinged with hope, and the chartered colony was afloat on the sea of
success. It grew in a day, in a manner that must have filled the
river people with becoming pride; the doubting towns came hurry-
ing up to Hartford for shelter under charter; for the Englishman
respects law and reverences the law-giver. It was on the first day
after the charter was proclaimed that the Hartford Train Band was
given precedence over all other military organizations, a precedence
that it has never wholly lost. Southold, Stamford, Greenwich, and
even Guilford, through a portion of its inhabitants, came under
jurisdiction. The court declared its claim, under patent, to all of
Long Island, received West Chester as a " member of its corpora-
tion," and conferred plantation rights upon " Homonoscetts," or
Killingworth, as it could maintain thirty families. The General
Assembly was busy with new enactments fitting the new environ-
ment, casting off laws that the colony had outgrown, and removing
restraints no longer desirable.

When, in 1664, New Haven colony submitted to the inevitable,
and came, in her own proud way, to the point of yielding up her
colonial rights, the heart of Connecticut throbbed with fullness of
satisfaction, and the married life of the colonies has been, from that
time to this, not free from troubles, but, on the whole, an estate for
the better for both parties. New Haven gave up her colonial name
and her individuality, but never relinquished her influence and her
formative power. Two years later, in 1666, the counties of Hartford,
New Haven, New London and Fairfield were formed. Waterbury,
naturally, took her place, when she came into being, within Hart-
ford county, for, while its eastern and western bounds were not
given, its north bound was that of Windsor and Farmington; its
south, the "South end of ye bounds of Thirty Miles Island," now
Haddam. County courts were also appointed for each county, to be
held twice in the year.

CHAPTER VIII.

WAS THE DISCOVERY OF MATTATUCK DUE TO THE SEARCH FOR METALS?
MINING RIGHTS OF 1657 IN THE VALLEY OF THE MATTATUCK
RIVER — POSSIBLE MINING INDUSTRIES INTERRUPTED BY INDIAN
TROUBLES AT FARMINGTON — WATERBURY'S MINE OF 1 735 REST-
LESSNESS OF SETTLERS AT FARMINGTON AND ELSEWHERE LANDS

AT BRISTOL GRANTED IN 1663 THE FIRST STEP TOWARD WATER-
BURY IN 1670 DEACON STEPHEN HEART'S FARM IN MATTATUCK.

BEFORE IT BECAME A PLANTATION THREE MEN OF FARMINGTON

VIEW MATTATUCK TWENTY-SIX MEN PETITION THE GENERAL

COURT FOR A PLANTATION COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO VIEW

THE LANDS — ITS RETURN TO THE COURT THE GENERAL COURT

APPOINTS A COMMITTEE TO REGULATE AND ORDER A PLANTA-
TION AT MATTATUCK.

IT will probably never be possible for any investigator to deter-
mine what Englishman first beheld the lands on which we
dwell in Waterbury, or to declare the purpose that led him
into the valley through which ran the Mattatuck river. Historians
have hitherto accorded to the territory no charms beyond those
known to the hunter ; and it has been thought that even the
Indians held the region in avoidance, except for its animal life,
down to the time when it was solicited of the General Assembly
for a plantation by certain men of Farmington ; but there are indi-
cations that Indians dwelt here, and it is known that land was laid
out here before the establishment of the plantation.

That the Waterbury of to-day owes its eminence among manu-
facturing towns to the working of metals, no man may deny. That
the discovery of Mattatuck may be attributed to the search for its
supposed metallic treasures, is quite within the bounds of proba-
bility. Indeed, we have facts recorded which in the line of
evidence indicate that energetic search for metals was made here
at least seventeen years before the region was selected for a planta-
tion. The Winthrop name of two centuries and more ago stood for
so much in the way of endeavor and enterprise, that no one can be
very much surprised to hear it connected with even the discovery
of Waterbury. On the 13th of May, 165 1, John Winthrop, Jr., was
living at Pequot (New London). From that place he sent a letter
to the General Court on a subject that was of special interest to
himself. In this letter Mr. Winthrop wrote :

UONNECTlGUra PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK. nj

There hath been earnest motions to me from some well-willers to the com-
mon good, to make some search and trial for metals in this country, and there is
hope that there might be a stock gathered for that purpose, if there were encour-
agements from the several jurisdictions. I have therefore made bold to propound
the enclosed grant to yourself and the court ; professing this, that I neither know
nor have heard of any mines or metals within this jurisdiction, for I have not yet
made any search, but only propound it for encouragement to any that will be
adventurers and join in the undertaking of such a design.

Mr.Winthrop then cites "The Bay" as an example, giving Lynn
and " Nuberry " as two places where he knows that lead has been
found ; " but," he adds.

That at Lynn, being challenged by the Towne, and so neare the Iron worke
that takes up all the wood, that it cannott bee wrought there; and the Towne hath
beene at charge for the finding of the veine, but it cannot bee found, and so they
are discouraged ; for it was oncly loose peeces that were found. I doe not much
desire to have anything put in about gold and silver, yet, if it be put in, it may
incourage some.

The action of the court on the receipt of the letter quoted from,
follows :

Whereas, in this rocky country, amongst these mountains and stony hills, there
are probabilities of mines of metals and minerals, the discovery whereof may be
for the great benefit of the country, in raising a staple commodity, and whereas,
John Wenthrop, Esq. , doth intend to be at charge and adventure for the search
and discovery of such mines and minerals — for the encouragement whereof, and of
any that shall adventure with the said John Wenthrop, Esq., in the said business.
It is therefore ordered by this court, that if the said John Wenthrop, Esq., shall
discover, set upon and maintain, or cause to be found, discovered, set upon and
maintained such mines of lead, copper or tin, or any minerals, as antimony vitriall,
black lead, alum, stone-salt, salt springs or any other the like, within this jurisdic-
tion, and shall set up any work for the digging, washing, melting, or any other
operation about the said mines or minerals as the nature thereof requireth, that
then, the said John Wenthrop, Esq., his heirs, associates, partners, or assignes.
shall enjoy forever the said mines, with the lands, wood, timber and waters within
two or three miles of the said mine, for the necessary carrjring on of the works and
maintaining of workmen and provision of coals for the same; provided it be not
within the bounds of any Town already, or any particular persons propriety, nor in
or bordering upon any place that shall or may by the court be judged fit to make a
plantation of.

Within six years from the date of John Winthrop's letter, John
Standley and John Andrews, two nien of Farmington, who later
cast their lot with the men of Waterbury, had penetrated the wil-
derness to the west of their township, and from a hill had carried
with them to Farmington a mineral substance which was believed
to be black lead. The record, as we have it, is very incomplete.
We are not told that John Standley and John Andrews were pros-
pecting for metals under the incitement of Winthrop's and the

ii8 HISTORY OF WATEBBURT,

court's encouragement, but we may suggest the probability of it.
We are not even told that they discovered the hill containing it, but
simply that they brought the "lead** from a certain hill. Whether
they were the discoverers of it or not, the fact that the hill with its
" black lead " was discovered, evidently aroused the Farmingtonians
of 1657 to action. Two of their number, William Lewis and Samuel
Steele in that year obtained from three Indians of Farming^on
(whose names upon the Farmington record of the transaction —
which appears to be the original deed — are written Keoaga[m?]
Queromus and Mataneg, or as ordinarily rendered in copies of the
same, Kepaquamp, Querrimus and Mataneage), "a tract of land
called Matetacoke, that is to say, the hill from whence John Stand-
ley and John Andrews brought the black lead." By this deed the
Indians did not convey their title to the lands. They simply con-
ferred mining rights in a great circle of land whose diameter was
sixteen miles, with the hill as its central point. By this grant, or
lease, they had permission "to dig and carry away" to any extent
desired ; they could also " build on the land for the use of the
laborers, but not otherwise improve it."

Whatever plans may have been made to develop this mine, they
were doubtless held in abeyance, for it was at this time, in 1657,
that the "horrible murder," already referred to, took place in Farm-
ington, that so greatly alarmed the inhabitants.* From this time
onward, the Farmington Indians were restless, and being required
by the inhabitants to leave their homes and move on, we can
understand why the "black lead" was left in its native hill. Where
this hill was, and is, remains to this day a secret. That it was
within the bounds of Mattatuck plantation might be inferred from
the name. It has been considered by historians safe to place it in
Harwinton. The mention of the fact that Waterbury's bounds
with Farmington, and with Hartford even, were nearly half a cen-
tury in getting established, suggests the possibility that in the
beginning the hill was where its name indicates, and near the north
line of the Waterbury township of 1686. The Rev. E. B. Hillard in

* In 1840, Rev. NoRh Porter, in his historical address, delivered on the two-hundredth anniversary of the
settlement of Farmington, tells us that it was the house of John Hart that was destroyed by fire, and that in
the same year Mr. Scott was cruelly murdered. Mr. Julius Gay gives the date of the burning of John Hart's
house as December 15, 1666. The Mr. Scott referred to was perhaps Joseph, the son of Edmund Scott of
Waterbury, but his death occurred nearly, if not quite fifty years later. August 18, 1657, the Indians belong-
ing to Tunksis Sepus, being treated with about the damage done by fire, occasioned by Mesupeno, they
obliged themselves to pay unto the General Court in October, for the term of seven years, the full sum of
eighty fathom of wampum. * * * Four Indians signed this agreement in the name and with the consent of the
rest. Col. Rec. of Conn., Vol. I, p. 303. The Indians did not make prompt payment, and in May, 1660, the
Court appointed a committee ** to take in the consideration of the loss of Lt. Lewis and Francis Browne, and
according as they judge requisite to make distribution to both parties of that which the Indians have
engaged to pay yearly to make up their loss by fire until the whole sum Jl>e paid in by the Indians."

aONNEVTIOUrS PLANTATION AT MATTATUGK, 119

his "Sketches of the History of Plymouth/* 1882, has ventured to
place it a little north of the Harwinton line, on the east side of the
highway running past the house of Arthur Cleveland, and as lying
about half a mile back of the above house. He tells us that "marks
of rock-blasting are still apparent, which could have been only for
mining purposes."

We find, in Waterbury Town Records, of 1735, "a place called
the mine." It was situated "near the upper end of the bounds."
We further learn that " it was on the west side of the Naugatuck
River," and that "it was against English Grass Meadow;" and still
further, we are told by record that " English Grass Meadow is at
the Mouth of East Branch, or Lead Mine Brook." It is the most
northern meadow lot, save one — the Plum Trees — within the
ancient bounds. Both meadow lots were named before 1688. The
law forbidding persons to acquire title to lands from the natives,
was not made until 1663, six years after the date of the conveyance
of the mining rights to Lewis and Steele; hence, its validity as
recognized in later transactions.

Since writing the above, a visit to English Grass Meadow has
been made. It was impossible to mistake the beautiful curved
meadow, lying at the mouth of the East Branch. Mr. Irwin Fenn,
who lives in its vicinity, remembers it by its English Grass name.
It was so called sixty years ago by its then owner, Mr. John Allen.
It is now owned by Mr. George Gilbert, and is in this August of 1892,
beautiful with com, and plentiful with its crops of potatoes and
grain. Mr. Fenn thinks that the " Plum Trees," were on the East
Branch itself, and about three-fourths of a mile above English
Grass Meadow. He remembers when, about fifteen years ago, the
last of the plum trees that gave name to the meadow were cut
down. They were, at that time, reduced to a few rods in extent.
The present owner is Mr. Samuel Baldwin. The region has, from
time to time, been sought after for its supposed mineral treasures.
Mining rights have been secured as recently as within about twenty
years in lands very near the mine of 1735.

Lewis and Steele evidently received their title to this great
<}ircle of land as representing a company of men ; for under date
•of June 29, 1665, at a meeting held at Farmington, "there was
chosen Sarg' Stanly and Sarg* Hart to go to Left. Lewis and
Eng" Steel to demand ye Deed of Sale of Mattatuck Land, and
have it assigned to them In ye behalf e of ye Company, and have
it Recorded.

" A treu Copie Transcribed out of ff armington old Town Book
pr John Hooker, Regst^"

I20 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

In 17 12, a committee was appointed by Farmington, with full
power to lease out to Col. William Partridge and Mr. Jonathan
Belcher for sixty-eight years, "all their mines except iron and pre-
cious stones and the fifth part of all oar of silver and gold that
might be found within the common and sequestered land, not yet
granted to any particular person or persons." These gentlemen of
Massachusetts were undoubtedly men of large enterprise. They
secured to themselves for terms of years varying from eight to
sixty-eight, the working of all mines, iron excepted, within Farm-
ington, Wallingford and Simsbury. In Wallingford and Simsbury,
mineral wealth was known to exist at the period named. In 17 14,
the General Assembly confirmed the acts of the towns' committees
in relation thereto, and granted the persons employed in the mines
exemption from military duties. It is not unreasonable to suggest
that early Waterbury shared in the same enterprise and that the
place called "The Mine," was an outcome of that period, if indeed
it did not date back to the lease of 1657.

When one looks upon the Farmington meadows of to-day, and
goes back, in thought, to the time when, in 1672 or 1673, but eighty-
four men, with their families, inhabited the. great township, the
Indians occupying only their reservation of two hundred acres,
together with " the little slip, staked out, to avoid contention," the
question forces itself upon the mind anew : Why were these men
not content ? The question of land, surely, could not have been a
serious one; nor were its divisions so arbitrary as to account for the
spirit of unrest that prevailed in Farmington, as elsewhere. Men
were not equal. The government of towns was in the hands of a
few men. Few were the changes in the more honorary offices, and
heavy was the repression felt by the individual, consequent upon
the letter of the law, whose weight weighed him down more heavily
than he could bear. Hence the efforts of the individual to seek
out some tract of land, even if distant from the settlement, where
he could, at least to his little herd of cattle, speak his mind, with-
out suffering the consequences. However many other good and
sufficient reasons there may have been for the continual wandering-
in townships by man, and out of townships by bands of men, we
think we must look beneath surface indications for the foundations
whence this spirit of restlessness was upheaved.

As early as 1663, we find that three or four men had strayed
away into that portion of Farmington then called Poland — and now
Bristol — and by permission of the town, had there selected lands to
be laid out to them when granted by the town. Richard Bronson,.
Thomas Barnes and Moses Ventrus seem to have been the pioneers

CONNECTICUrS PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK 121

in securing grants. These grants were followed in 1664 by one of
twenty acres to our John Lankton.

In 1670 a movement began, that may be looked upon as the first
and vital step toward Waterbury, and yet it occurred within the lim-
its of Farmington itself. Land in Great Swamp was conferred
upon men of Farmington upon conditions. This Great Swamp lay
along the branches of the Mattebeset river and was allotted in par-
cels, varying from twenty to fourteen acres, " through the conde-
scendency of particular persons in the town to part with something
which is their right, to persons of lesser estate, on these conditions."
The conditions were, that the lands were forever to be a part of
Farmington; "never to be a distinct people from the town without
their liberty and consent." The land was to return to the town " if
the people living there should endeavor to rend themselves off from
the town to be a distinct people of themselves, or, with any other."
Neither could any man thus endowed with his acres in the Great
Swamp make sale of this land until he had lived his four years in
Farmington, and further, no one was allowed to go there to live
except he owned the land. Twenty-eight of the men who just four
years later signed the " Articles Agreed upon for the Settling a Plan-
tation at Mattatuck," were twenty-eight of the men who had by
waiting secured for themselves these lands at Great Swamp. In
1687, the town of Farmington agreed to give Richard Seymour, a
blacksmith, twenty shillings, as a "gratewety " for his moving to the
Swamp, and 1686 is the date given by historians for the settlement
at " Farmington Village in and about Great Swamp."

We have already given evidence that the region within ten miles
of Waterbury — at Bristol — was sufficiently well known in 1663 to
be selected and granted, in part, to three men of Farmington. We
also know of one colonial grant of a farm that was laid out
within Waterbury's borders before we have any evidence of a
design on the part of the men of Farmington to petition for a plan-
tation here.

In 1673 the court bestowed upon Deacon Stephen Heart a one
hundred and fifty acre farm. In the records of 1705 we learn for
the first time that "this grant was laid out to him within the town-
ship of Waterbury, which afterward being granted for a plantation^ he
or his heirs relinquished, and it was to be removed to a place upon
Mattatuck river to the northward of the town there." We may not
stop to follow this grant. Like the Indians it was compelled to
move on in advance of townships, being now at the meeting of the
bounds of Windsor, Simsbury and Farmington, and again sent over
the Connecticut river into Killingly, where possibly it remained.

122 BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

We return thanks to this wandering farm for the light it reflects
from 1705 on 1673. Having thus shown conclusively that land was
held within the bounds of Mattatuck in May, 1673, we must give to
Deacon Stephen Heart the honor of being, so far as known to the
writer, the first English landed proprietor in Waterbury; but it
does not follow that he had no predecessor. We have already
alluded to the earliest grant, that of Fisher's Island in 1641, to John
Winthrop. This was soon followed by grants to the soldiers of the
Pequot Massacre, and from that early date the grants grew rap-
idly in number, and in size to one at least of one thousand acres. A
very suggestive grant is that to Thomas Judd and Anthony Haw-
kins, of four hundred acres in i66i. The evidence has not been
met, but the suggestion is here offered to a coming investigator
that the whole or a portion of this land was laid out in present
Naugatuck, and that this farm gave rise to the name by which that
territory was known for so many years while it was a part of Water-
bury — not Judd's Meadow, but Judd's Meadows. If this should
prove to be tenable, then Deacon Stephen Heart must give place to
Deacon Thomas Judd, his fellow townsman. This Deacon Judd of
Farmington was the father of William, John, Benjamin, Lieuten-
ant Thomas, Philip and Samuel Judd, every one of whom had some
part in the settlement of Waterbury. Therefore Deacon Thomas
Judd's six sons may have been familiar with our hills and valleys,
even in their boyhood. This view has been taken as one of the pos-
sibilities of the situation, and may be upheld by several plausible
facts, one of which is that the Judds must have had a reason for
not desiring a plantation at Mattatuck; for not a Judd name is to be
found in the list of the petitioners for it, while, when the planta-
tion arises on their landed horizon, the entire family rush in as
planters ! Was this because they had been improving the two hun-
dred-acre farm — granted to be laid out in not more than four pieces
— at Judd's Meadows for thirteen years, and fain would keep it from
the iron hand of a plantation ? And is this an explanation of records
which reveal to us certain facts that we are unable to account
for — such expressions in the first book of Proprietors' Records as
"Butler's House," " Butler's House Brook," "Where Butler's House
was" when we have no knowledge of any Butler among the early
inhabitants of Waterbury — a man whose house was a thing of the
past in 1689 ! Was he the farmer of Judd's Meadows, or was he a
Stratford Butler and a Quaker, one of the five Quakers in the
colony at that date, and obliged to move on ? or who was this But-
ler ? Before October 6th, 1673, Thomas Newell Sen', John Warner,
Sen', and Richard vSeamor, all of Farmington, "partly for their own
satisfaction, and for the satisfaction of some others," came to view

CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK

123

*** Matitacoocke " in reference to a plantation and made report that
they " judged it capable of the same."

October 9th, 1673, twenty-six men, all of Farmington, and not a
Judd of the number, sent up a petition by John " Lankton " to the
court then in session at Hartford. The following is a copy of that
petition as it appears in the State Records of Towns and Lands,
vol. I, page 162. The original papers relating to the period, of
which this is one, have been carefully preserved by pasting them to
the leaves of volumes. On holding the leaf on which this petition
is found to the light, it was seen that upon the back of it had been
written, " Farming petition for to make Mattacock a plantation, 9
Octob' 1673. John Lancton payes for this petition." John Lane-
ton therefore paid ten shillings for the privilege of having the peti-
tion read in court, for such had been for eleven years the require-
ment.

THE PETITION FOR A PLANTATION.

To the honerd general! court now siting In Hartford Octobr 9, 73

Honerd gentlemen and fathers we being sensible of our great neede of a com-
fortable subsistance doe herby make our address to your selfes In order to the
same Not Questioning your ceare and faithfulness In y* premisses: allso hoping of
your freeness and readyness to accomtdate your poore supplicants with y* which we
Judge to be: In your hands: acording to an orderly proseeding we therefore
whose names are hereafter Inserted to humbly petition your honours to take cong-
nicance: of our state who want Land to Labour upon: for our subsistance & Now
having found out a trackt at a place called by ye Indians matitacoock: which we
aprihend may susfetiently acomidate to make a small plantation: we are therefore
bould hereby to petition j'our honors to grant vs y« liberty of planting y« same with
as many others as may be: capable comfortably to entertaine and as for the pur-
chasing of y* natives with your alowance we shall take care of: & so not to trouble
with farther Inlargement we rest only desiring your due consideration & a return
By our Louing ffriend John Lankton and subscribe our selfes your nedy petitioners

Thomas Newell Daniell wamer

!ohn Lankton Abraham Andrews

ohn andrews Thomas hancox

ohn wamer seinio' John Carrington

)aniell porter Daniell An(kews,

Edmun Scoot Joseph heacox

John Standly Junior thomas standly

abraham brounsen Obadiah richards*

Richard seamer Timothy standley

John Wamer Junio' william higgeson

Isack brounsen ^^'^ porter

Samuell heacox Thomas Barnes

John Wellton John woodruff.

Attention is requested to the apparent distinction made in this
petition between the tract of land desired for a plantation and the
place within it — the language it will be noted is, " having found out
a trackt at di place called by ye Indians Matitacoock."

* In a different hand writing.

124 BISTORT OF WATERBUBT,

THB ANSWER OF THB COURT TO THE PETITION FOR A PLANTATION.

Oct. 9. 1673
In answer to the petition of severall inhabitants of the towne of Farmington that
Mattatock that those lands might be granted for a plantation, this Court have seen
cause to order that those lands may be viewed sometime between this and the Court
in May next, and that reporte be made to the Court in May next, whether it be
judged fitt to make a plantation. The Committee appoynted are L°* Tho: Bull,
L°* Rob^ Webster and Daniel Pratt.

The same distinction is preserved in the response of the Court
in the words: " that Mattatock that those lands might be granted." Dr.
J. Hammond Trumbull in editing the published Records of the Col-
ony notices this apparent vagary of language, and adds in a note, the
words, " So in the Record." Nothing is more unsafe to historical
accuracy than the easy assumption that the early writers were care -
less or used language unadvisedly, when the fact may be and usu-
ally is, that we fail to comprehend the intricacies of the situation^
or are ignorant, or unmindful, of important factors in the case.

Unfortunately for us, the early records of AVaterbury have been,
twice at least, harvested, with an abundant portion of excellent his-
torical grain left in the field, but no gleaners passing that way to
garner it. Events that were familiar to the men of that time, and
for which there seemed to them to be no future use, were omitted
in the new volumes of record, the old books being discarded and
lost. It will be remembered that it was upon the ninth of October,
1673, that the committee was appointed to view the lands in ques-
tion, and that it was to make report concerning them at the May
session of Court, 1674. It did so, and here is the report, as rendered:

THE COMMITTEES RETURN ABOUT MATTATOCK.

April 6. 7. 8. 9. 1674.

Wee, whos names are underwritten (according to the desire and appointment of
y« honoured Court) have viewed y* lands upon Mattatuck river in order to a planta-
tion, we doe apprehend that there is about six hundred acres of meadow and plow-
ing land lying on both sides of y« river besides upland convenient for a towne plot,
with a suitable out let into y* woods on y* west of y« river, and good feeding land
for cattell.

The meadow & plowing land above written a considerable part of it lyeth in two

peices near y« town plot, y* rest in smaller parcels, y« farthest of which we judge

not above fower miles from y" towne plot: and our apprehensions are that it may

accommodate thirty familyes

Thomas Bull
Nicho: Olmstead
Robert Webster.

[For some reason, not apparent, Nicholas Olmstead acted in the place of
Daniell Pratt.]

It will be seen that Thomas Bull, Nicholas Olmstead and Robert
Webster, occupied four days in the investigation. They must there-

GONNECTIGJJTS PLANTATION AT MATTATUGK,

125

fore have passed the nights of April 6th, 7th and 8th, 1674, in the
wilderness, if it was all wilderness at that time, or possibly, like the
earlier travelers between Connecticut and " The Bay," they lighted
upon Indian wigwams by the way, and were hospitably entertained.
Is it urged that there were no wigwams at Mattatuck ? We have the
best of evidence that there was here one of the ^^ Long Wigwams''
that were built for the use of the Indians when they assembled in
large numbers for festive and other purposes. "The path that
comes from the Long Wigwam," occurs more than once in our
records. We suppose this wigwam to have been in the vicinity of
Wigwam Swamp, " whose west end is at the north end of Burnt Hill,"
and from which a brook flows into Hancox Brook. This committee,
in its report, proves itself to have done efficient work. In four days
the men journeyed from Farmington to present Waterbury; crossed
Mattatock River; selected the town site upon our present Town
Plot; estimated the meadow and ploughing land, available for imme-
diate use, at six hundred acres; examined the territory, we have
reason to think, both up and down the river, as they give an opinion
of the distance of the more remote meadows from the "town plot "
of their selection as not above four miles ; reported good feeding
ground for cattle, and, finally, concluded their report with the oft-
repeated and much-misunderstood " apprehension " concerning the
ability of the region to support thirty families.

Having lost from the records, in the case of Farmington, the
formula for the formation of plantations, and their care by
committees during the period of their infancy, before they arrived
at the stature of towns, with every one then committed to the
care of its duly appointed King Constable, we are compelled
to gather, here and there, what facts we may, regarding the
conditions under which a plantation might be granted by the
Court. We add here, what has perhaps been already intimated,
that one of the requirements was, that as many as thirty fami-
lies must be secured to form a plantation, for the reason that
that number of house-holders was deemed sufficient to support a
minister; therefore this return to the General Court of the ability
of the region to support thirty families did not limit it, even in the
opinion of the committee, to that number of inhabitants, but merely
gave evidence that that requirement of the Court could be met in
the case of Mattatuck. It was also added that there was a suitable
outlet into the woods on the west of the river. The significance of
the last sentence does not seem clear. It may have had reference to
Mattatuck's access to Woodbury. Woodbury was then but an infant
of eleven months, just that time having passed since four men and
their associates had been granted permission " to errect a plantation

126 HISTORY OF WATEEBUBY.

at Pomperoage." Woodbury is somewhat apt to hold her head
proudly with age above Waterbury, but her plantation grant is
less than a year older than ours, although her English name and
town estate bear earlier date.

It was on Tuesday, the 19th of May, 1673, that the report con-
cerning Mattatuck lands was received by the Court, considered,
accepted, and acted upon by the appointment of " Major John Tall-
cott, L°* Rob^ Webster, L°' Nicho : Olmstead, Ens : Sam" Steele and
Ens : John Wadsworth to be a committee to regulate and order the
setleing of a plantation at Mattatock in the most suitable way that
may be ; " and thus Mattatuck was duly committed to the martial
nurses of its infancy — a major, two lieutenants, and two ensigns —
and it still does credit to its early training. Of this committee,
Major John Talcott was the most conspicuous member. From the
time when he was " chosen ensign by the Trained Band of Hartford "
in 1650, to the date of his death in 1688, John Talcott, Jr., led a busy,
eventful and important life. The marvel is, that a man so weighted
with colonial trusts of magnitude, should have been chosen to lay
the foundations of a plantation of minor importance. He never-
theless attended to the commission valiantly and well. We have
abundant proof of this, in the still existing documents relating to
Mattatuck in his excellent legible handwriting. In the November
following this appointment he was nominated and appointed " Com-
mander-in-Chief " of all the military forces to be raised in the
colony, and sent against New York. He already held the position
of assistant to the Governor; was treasurer of the colony; commis-
sioner of the United Colonies, and on the very next day after the
Mattatuck appointment, he was on a committee to hear the " Indian
Complaints " and draw them to an issue; two days after that, he was
to go over to Long Island, empowered, with two others, " to order
and settle the affairs of those people, establish military officers " and
perform other trusts of magnitude; also, he was " to consider of and
dispose of some tracts of land for the country " on still another com-^
mittee; and to ** consult of some way to promote the public good " on
another; beside being requested to look after the fencing of the
meadows between Farmington and Simsbury. Independent of all
these matters, he was, it would seem, expected to obtain from the
owners a deed of the territory of Mattatuck. His genius for coax-
ing Indians was believed in. Just what tactics were used in the
case of Waterbury we are not able to delineate, for records are
silent, but we can, perhaps, obtain a dim outline from his own
description of the manner in which he influenced the Indians of
Simsbury to part with the lands that formed that township.

CHAPTER IX.

WATERBURY's first entrance upon plantation life — THE " NEW-
TOWN GOEING UP AT MATTATUCK " IN 1675 — THE EFFECT UPON IT

OF "king" Philip's war — the supposed flitting of the inhab-
itants TO farmington — Connecticut's indian governor —

progress of the war — SALE OF THE SURRENDERING INDIANS —
MAJOR TALCOTT'S INDIAN BOY — THE " IRISH CHARITY " OF 1680.

THE Committee appointed by the General Assembly for the
ordering of the settlement at Mattatuck, acted with com-
mendable promptness. The company of and from Farm-
ington knew that the land was virtually their own, and we are
quite ready to believe that men did not wait for their allotments
in severalty, in the spring time of 1674. Everything was just
edging toward newness of life, a life made enjoyable by the tem-
porary amiability of their Indian neighbors. That year's crops
may have been already planted in the heaven-made meadows on the
day when the committee announced that it had formulated the
laws and the covenants under which Mattatuck might take its
place as the twenty-sixth town within that portion of Connecticut
colony that is now included in the bounds of the State.* This
formula of obligations and agreements covers eight conditions.

The first one permits every accepted inhabitant to have eight acres for a house
lot. The second, bases the amount of land to be distributed in the meadows, upon
the amount of each man's estate, and limits the value of that estate for this distri-
bution, to one hundred pounds. The third, provides for the payment of public
charges, for five years, by a tax upon the meadows. The fourth, requires every
person who shall take up allotments within four years from the date of the
"Articles" to build " a good, substantial dwelling house, at least eighteen feet
long, sixteen wide, and nine feet between Joynts " with a good chimney.

The fifth, requires the fourth article to be complied with in every particular,
under penalty of loss of the allotments — buildings excepted — and the return of the
allotments to the committee for future bestowment upon a more complying inhab-
itant. The sixth, requires the possessor of an allotment— he having built his house —
to take up his personal residence in it as an inhabitant within the four specified years.
If a man failed to perform his duty in building and occupying, he was to forego not
only his allotments, but his lands also. It is supposed that this failure operated to
shut him out from any further rights in the township, notwithstanding any pur-
chase money he had paid. The seventh requirement is, that a man, having built
his house, must live in it four years before coming to the full ownership of it, or

*At the time when Mattatuck became a plantation the eastern portion of Long Island was nnder the
Jurisdiction of Connectlcnt Colony.

13°

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

This paper was prepared by Major Talcott and delivered to the
men of Mattatuck, and is a copy of the original manuscript with
its autograph signatures, which was undoubtedly returned to the
General Court. The illustrations show that it was written upon

■'*-i-

v_.^:^^3M.i^^'^^S^^

j. . — •* .-41: 1, ^./-,6, ^* — r,«

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 131

three sheets of paper, which were afterward made one by sewing
the parts together. At the fourth article the stitches are taken
with a red worsted cord which has kept its color well for nearly
two hundred and twenty years. At the sixth and seventh articles
it is again sewed by brown linen thread. The document entire is
a little less than a yard in length. It has been bound in glass and
framed, and will be handed down to the care of coming genera-
tions. The third page of the illustration shows the reverse. The
writing upon it, except the signatures, is that of John Wadsworth.

The document was found in 1890, together with other orders
relating to the settlement. This discovery included two of the
Indian deeds of the township; the original lay-out of the three
acre lots, and a very valuable paper relating to the houses of 1681.
They were in the house of Mr. Charles D. Kingsbury, on North
Main street, in Waterbury. Soon after the decease of that gentle-
man, his son. Honorable Frederick J. Kingsbury, sent this docu-
ment to the writer, and the finding of it led to the examination of
thousands of papers that were in the same house. The older
papers had been handed down from one town clerk to another,
until, in 1793, the inheritance fell upon John Kingsbury. He was
then a young man of thirty-one years. During a life-time of
official service, from town clerk to presiding judge of New Haven
County Court, Judge Kingsbury had accumulated many valuable
documents, all of which were placed in the hands of the writer, to
the very great advantage of this work. When Dr. Henry Bronson
prepared his history of the town he was without the valuable
assistance thus acquired. A comparison of the original paper
here represented with the version of it as rendered by the recorder
of the period and faithfully reproduced by Dr. Bronson will result
to the advantage of Major Talcott's paper. The recorder for
Waterbury omitted the name of one signer, that of Benjamin
Judd, thus making it appear that the signers of 1674 were thirty
in number, instead of thirty-one.

This paper is not only important in itself, but is noteworthy as
the only one to which the autograph of every member of the com-
mittee is attached, and also as the only one that has been found
relating to Mattatuck during the first three years of its existence
as a plantation. We are thus left without direct evidence of what
was achieved in the year 1674, and that part of 1675 before the
inhabitants were ordered away. We know from subsequent events
and recorded references, that the beautiful ridge of high land that
we still call Town Plot, was the chosen town site. It was selected
by the committee to view the lands, and approved by the commit-

132 HISTORY OF WATBRBURY.

tee to order the plantation. From the "Articles of Agreement,"
we naturally infer that eight-acre house lots were allotted to the
subscribers, but even this ample provision may have been modi-
fied in order to bring the habitations into more immediate neigh-
borhood. These house lots we are told, were laid out on either
side of a highway. That there was a highway extending north
and south through the old Town Plot we know, and we know that
its width as originally laid out was 264 feet. This we learn by a
subsequent order for its reduction to two rods. This was after the
town site had been chosen on the cast side of the river, in 1677.
It was after that time often called the "town spot," to distinguish
it from the town plot.

We are left with little knowledge of the achievements of our
fathers during the period between June 6th, 1674, and the tenth
month of the year 1677. Tradition points her finger to the hill on
which the Waterbury Hospital stands, as the site of certain cellars
which the men of Farmington digged in its eastward declivity for
protection during their first winter here. It has long been believed
that men spent that winter at or near the point where Sled Hall
Brook flows into the river. The finding of Indian arrow-heads at
this place suggests that wigwams
|^^^**"7*" ' /"F^^ may have been there also. Sled

^riit'' ' ■■ '■' I ^^" Brook might tell us that it

':;.a;-.- 1 ran a saw-mill that first winter,
-"■ ' ;■ but its voice has departed with its
; falling waters, and we listen in
J vain at the closed door of the
past,

1 ' Leaving tradition, we do not

■ . ■ ' know how many of the thirty-

one men presented themselves to
] accept house lots ; neither do
, we know how many habitations
r ** i! graced Town Plot in 1674 and 1675.

t-~ i Whatever was done at that time

L' . : i:| : has been utterly lost to us; but

Cr'"'!." ' '' I the finding of the orders of the

f __. i committee for 1677 affords us a

S^\ " ' l^ bit of material on which to specu-

""^^ late in house lots. On the back of

'"" "'"'' '^""'' '"'"''''' the order to reduce the dimen-

sions of the highway on "Old Town Plotf is traced what appears
to be the lay-out of the original town or village, and we may accept

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, 133

it with more or less uncertainty. It certainly is not the new town
spot on the east side of the river. Fifty-two years later, when
these old eight-acre house lots came in question and they were to
be looked up and laid out anew, we find " that it was by vote agreed
that if the committee for the old Town Plot lots can not find all
the old Town Plot lots for all the original proprietors, those that
aire wanting may have liberty to take them up in the undivided
lands." If we rely upon the house lots, as plotted on the back of
the order, we shall at once see that the whole number of sub-
scribers does not appear to be represented. There is a highway,
on one side of which nine lots of varying size are outlined, with
eight on its opposite side. At either end of this highway are
transverse ways, on one of which we find five lots, on the other
three, making twenty -five in all; thus intimating that twenty-
five of the original proprietors made some progress in building
on the original town site, before the inhabitants were ordered
away in 1675.

One word or more may be allowed just here regarding the gen-
eral condition of the colony at the time Mattatuck had its first
beginning; for it seems to have had two distinct entrances upon
plantation life, the first in 1674, the second in 1677.

The year 1674 was a period exceptionally free from disturbance
in colonial life in New England. The treaty of peace had been
signed between England and the States General of the
United Netherlands, by which New York had been restored to the
English. Major Andros did not arrive in New York— to begin dis-
turbances and claim jurisdiction, for the Duke of York, over all the
region to the Connecticut River— until November in that year, and
he waited until the May following to demand surrender of the ter-
ritory. The growth of towns in the colony was extremely grati-
fying. So quiet and peaceful, comparatively speaking, was the
country that there seems to have been no occasion for the meeting
of the authorities between May and October, and, when the last
Wednesday in that month was appointed " to be kept as a day of
publique Thanksgiving throughout the colony to prayse God for
the continuance of His mercy and goodness to the English nation,"
thanks were, to be given " for freedom from the dangers of war
which did surround them, for the enjoyment of God's holy word
and ordinances with peace, for health, which had been continued
in the plantation, and for the comfortable harvest the Lord had
been pleased to grant them." All the business before this court
related to matters of peace. Time was found even for establish-
ing a table of rates for post-riders and their expenses throughout

134 HISTORY OF WAIERBURT.

the colony, with Hartford as the hub of the wheel. Under such
circumstances can we suppose that the best blood in Farmington
would remain idle in Waterbury? that no sounds of the builder
were heard on Town Plot during the summer and autumn of one
year and the summer of another year ?

That the town was in building^ in May of 1675, appears from the
action of the Court on the petition of Joseph Hawkins and John
Hull, of " Pagawsett," that "Pawgasuck" (Derby), might be made
a Plantation. In view of the facts as given by them to the General
Court — ** that about twelve families were settled there already, and
more, to the number of eleven, were preparing for settlement
forthwith; that the people had engaged a minister to settle
amongst them speedily, and had expended about one hundred
pounds in preparing a house for him " — the court was induced to
look with favor upon the petition, reserving to itself the power to
settle the bounds of the place " so as may be most accommodating
and least inconvenient to the said Pawgasuck and the new town
goeing up at Mattatocky

Early in the summer of 1675, began the first war between Indi-
ans and Englishmen, with " King Philip " of Rhode Island, who
was said to be the son of Miantonomah, and the grandson of
Massasoit, as the generally accredited aggressor. It was marked
at every step by horrors and cruelties that can never be forgotten
so long as the meaning of the word war is retained in the conscious-
ness of an Englishman. Massachusetts is to this day monumented
with memories of it. No pen needs to trace anew the story, from
the day in June, when Philip, roused to anger by the execution of
three of his friends by the English, because of their murder of an
Indian Missionary, marched out from his fortress on Mount Hope,
near Bristol, R. I., and fell upon the little company at " Swansey,"
in Plymouth Colony, down to the date of his death, in August, of
the following year. On the first day of July the news reached
Hartford of the attack upon Swansea. Measures were at once
taken to send thirty dragoons and ten troopers to aid in the
defence of Stonington and New London. The men were raised
out of the three original towns, and Nicholas Olmstead was com-
missioned as their lieutenant. They set forth at a day's notice.
Word was hurried down the way to New Haven, and ordered to be
sent on to all the towns lying on the sea coast, that " the Indians
were up in arms in Plimouth and in the Narrogancett Country;
that they had assaulted the English; slain about thirty; burnt
some houses, and that they were engaging the Indians round about
by sending locks of some English that they had slain, from one

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION,

135

place to another." To add to the intricate situation, Governor
Andros arrived with two sloops at Saybrook. He was come
ostensibly to make a visit, and to give aid, but everything in the
way of usurpation was momentarily expected from him and his
forces. The utmost of delicate and firm diplomacy was required.
The council and the commander, Captain Thomas Bull, proved equal
to the occasion, and after some expressive words and impressive
ceremonies between the parties of both parts, Governor Andros
made a formal departure without having forcibly carried out his
supposed right, which was to take possession of the territory lying
west of the Connecticut River, for the Duke of York.

That the Pequot Indians, west of the Mystic River, remained
friendly to the English in this war, may have been largely owing
to a fact that seems to have been lost sight of. Only two months
before the contest began, the government of that tribe had been
duly organized by Connecticut; a code of laws drawn up, under
which they were required to live, and the government placed in
the hands of an Indian governor with an associate and two Indian
assistants. For the support of this government, largely instituted
by our Major Talcott, whose laws are extremely interesting and
suggestive, "each Indian man above sixteen years of age, was to
contribute annually five shillings in current Indian pay." This
revenue to the governing Indians, doubtless played an important
part in keeping the peace. Governor Cassicinamon was wily
enough to beg that the Indians, whom he was to govern, should
not be informed of his own interest in the income, thus acquired.

"About I in the morning of August fifth, 1675, the Council,"
consisting of Governor Winthrop, Major Talcott, Captain Allen
and three other gentlemen, was called together. A messenger
had arrived in Hartford with thrilling tidings. Less than forty
miles away, at Quabaug, now Brookfield, one of the most stirring
events of the war had taken place. The Indians, in pursuit of
fleeing victims had entered the town — ^but we all know the story!
We learned it in childhood. We almost know that house by sight
— the large one on the hill — into which all the village folk are
fled. We enter with them, and for two long days watch and wait,
while all around us houses burn, until this one in which we crouch
is the only one left in the town. We hear, are forced to hear, the
piercing in of the musket balls that pelt the house, for the Indians
have muskets now! We are made to feel the flash of fiery brands
hurled upon roof and clapboard, to catch the fumes of sulphur, as
rags dipped in brimstone stifle the air they aje tossed through.
We dart back from the fire-tipped arrows that are shot against it.

136 HI8T0RT OF WATERS URT.

We are even compelled to watch with well nigh fatal fascination
that cart^ while Indians lade it with flax and tow until it can hold
no more; while they throw on the flaming torch and thrust for-
ward the fiery load that strikes the house with a burning thud; to
know, at last, that the house is kindling! Shall we stay to burn, or
open that door and rush forth to meet three hundred foes, every
one of whom has heard the story of the burning of his Indian
fathers in swamp and fort by Englishmen ? While we hesitate, the
** heavens are opened," the floods descend, the fire is quenched,
help cometh, and we are saved!

It was after Hadley, Deerfield and Northfield had been
attacked ; after the seventy young men from Essex county, con-
veying grain from Deerfield to Hadley, had been surrounded and
slain while gathering grapes at Muddy Brook, by an overwhelm-
ing force of nearly eight hundred Indians; after thirty houses had
been burned at Springfield, that advice " to be observed '* came
from the General Court. The inciting cause for this advice was a
letter received from Governor Andros of New York. It was writ-
ten October loth, and informed the Council that an Indian, profess-
ing friendship for Englishmen, had given warning that the Con-
necticut Indians planned to attack Hartford during the " light
moon " of October. Governor Andros received this news in the
morning and hurried it off by post. He added to it the report
that other towns between Hartford and Greenwich were in the
same danger, and that between five and six thousand Indians were
** engaged together" to make the attacks. The urgency of this let-
ter is well expressed by its inscription. After the usual address
to Deputy Governor Leete, Governor Andros added, *' to be forth-
with posted up to the Court, post, haste, post — night and daye."
This letter confirmed fears that were already in force because of
the war-like demonstrations in Connecticut's own towns. The
Indians of Milford made complaints of hard treatment, and even
the Paugasuck Indians of Derby " were prepared with their arms
in a hostile manner." This had so alarmed the inhabitants that
the Council was appealed to for advice. The Court had already
advised the inhabitants "to remove their women and children;
their best goods and their corn — what they could of it — to some
bigger town that had a better capacity to defend itself," and had
given the same counsel to all small places and farms throughout
the Colony.

Upon the receipt of this letter advice crystallized into law.
Under the impression of imminent danger, the Council set forth in
crisp language the well nigh defenceless condition of all the plan-

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 137

tations, and ordered each one to make places of defence and
appoint room in them for the women and children, and others not
able to help themselves, to repair into in case of assault. It
ordered all weak places and out-livers on farms speedily to remove,
with the best of their estates, to places of the most hopeful
security. This order was issued October 14, 1675. Treaties were
at once formed with the Indians of Hartford, Farmington,
Wethersfield, and Middletown. The Indians were to set their
wigwams where ordered, that they might be kept under the watch
and ward of the respective towns. This was done to prevent their
departure to join hostile tribes or to do injury to Englishmen, and
also to prevent any cause of offence that might be offered to them
by white men. At Hartford, a list of every Indian man, woman
and child was taken. When the night watch went on duty, each
Indian answered to the roll-call. When the ward began in the day
the list was handed over to the warders, and each made answer
again to the name on the roll. No Indian could be abroad after
night fall, neither could he be absent, except by ticket of leave,
unless accompanied by an inhabitant.

We naturally infer that it was at this time, and consequent
upon the order recited, that the inhabitants of Mattatuck took the
Council's warning. We know that the men of Woodbury returned
to Stratford, their old home, and that it was with great difficulty
that many of them were persuaded to return to the wilderness
when the war was ended. A considerable number of the then
planters of Mattatuck still held home lots and houses in Farming-
ton. No written evidence of the fact has been found by the
writer, but it seems almost necessarily true that the " new town
going up at Mattatuck " ceased in its building; that its dwellers
left their houses on our Town Plot, crossed the river near Sled
Hall Brook, followed the raised roadway, still apparent, leading
from that point across the meadows to Willow street, and thence
took their way by " the Watterbury path " to Farmington. This
discouragement must have fallen heavily upon the little band of
workers, that doubtless was compelled to leave certain of its num-
ber to gather in the Indian and English corn and convey it to the
nearest place of safety. Wallingford was at the time the nearest
place of safety, as there were garrison houses there.

Other orders soon followed. Simsbury was given but one week
to remove in — Hartford, New Haven and other towns that could
do so were enjoined to fortify. They were " to compleat and lyne
their stockadoes and flanckers with a ditch and breast worke — that
persons might have recourse to them to annoy and withstand ene-

138 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

mies, and all men's courage more animated and emboldened to do
their dutys." Milford gave the Council some concern. The peo-
ple there differed in the matter of their fortifications. They had
trouble also with their Indian neighbors, these not keeping within
the bounds prescribed, " and the people of Milford wishing to deal
with them as enemies." The Council, without a day's delay, posted
off a letter to Mr. Alexander Bryan of that town, desiring him to
cause "all the people to carry so tenderly towards the Indians that
they may not receive any just provocation to stir them up against
us," adding : " We have enemies enough, and let us not by any
harsh dealing stir up more yet ! Let us walk wisely and warily,
that God may be with us."

The necessity for a standing army caused an order to be issued
in May of 1676 for three hundred and fifty men to be raised as the
standing army of the colonies. How many men of the Mattatuck
of 1674 and 1675, beside Timothy Standly and John Bronson, were
volunteers in the companies that went forth to battle with the
enemy, and were to have all the plunder that they could seize;
"both of persons, corn or estate," the only condition being that
"authority should have the first tender of their dispose of captives,
allowing them the market price," or how many of their number
were pressed into the more regular service has not been learned.*
Farmington was largely represented in this war, more than fifty
men being demanded of her; and once, at least, she was warned,
by post, to stand upon guard for her own defence.

We learn, with interest, the effect that this war had upon one
of the thirty-one men of Mattatuck in determining his future resi-
dence. John Judd and John Hawkins were the sons respectively
of the Deacon Thomas Judd and the Anthony Hawkins who had
grants of four hundred acres in 1661. John Judd had married Ruth
Hawkins, a sister of John Hawkins, and the latter, when about to
go forth with the army, made a will, from which I quote :

THIS FOR MY BROTHER, JOHN JUDD.

January the nth, 1676.

These may inform you and those whom it may concern that if the providence of
God shall so order it that I fall on the field and loose my life, or miscarry any other
way before I come home, that the small estate that God hath given me shall be
disposed as is here mentioned.

To his nephew, the four-year old child of John Judd and his
sister Ruth, he gave his house and home-lot, together with other

^ At a meeting of the Council in Hartford, December 5th, 1676, there was granted to John Bronson of
Farmington, the sum of five pounds ** as reparation for his wounds and damage received thereby, and qoar-
teridg and halfe pay to the first of this present month.'* To Timothy Standly, there was granted a soldier's
lot. There were three John Bronsons in Farmington.

MATT4TUCK A8 A PLANTATION. 139

lands, when he should be twenty-one years of age. (In this will
the child is called the "cousin " of the testator). During the inter-
vening seventeen years, the benefits arising from house and lands
were to be held by John Judd. That John Hawkins fell in battle,
or soon died, is apparent from the date of the inventory of his
estate, which is September fifth, of the same year. Thus, we
account in part — the removal of Deacon Thomas Judd to Hadley
in 1679 being an additional motive — for the fact that John Judd
never came to build on and occupy the house lot of two acres
extending along the west side of Bank street, from the "Green,"
nearly to the Waterbury Bank, which was duly assigned to him.

As we hasten on, this not being in any wise an outline of the
war, we turn most willingly away from all the horrors of the win-
try march of near two thousand Englishmen with their faithful
Indian allies, and its outcome, in the greatest of all the swamp
fort-fights, that of Narragansett, and come to the close of the
conflict, making mere mention of the fact that throughout King
Philip's war, the most careful, earnest and painstaking efforts
were made, first and last, by the General Court, and the Council to
"conciliate, pacificate, and well treat" the Indians within their
borders. The safety of the colonists at home, depended on keep-
ing their Indian neighbors "contented in their minds," and in gen-
eral, success attended their efforts. When subject to the rigors of
long marches, taken in cold and hunger, their Indian allies were,
seemingly, if not in fact, treated with greater consideration than
were the colonists themselves; so fearful were they of losing their
dusky friends. The Court entreated her children in all the towns
to come to some agreement with their neighbor Indians, by which
they might be able to distinguish them from the enemy, and "not
to put them upon any unrighteous and intolerable terms, to be
observed, least trouble break out to the country thereby." Connec-
ticut colony lost few of its inhabitants within her own bounds. A
man named Kirby was killed, between Middletown and Wethers-
field, by five Indians. Near Windsor, G. Elmore was slain. Henry
Denslow, William Hill, and perhaps others, fell victims to Indian
warfare. When Cohause, an Indian, who was taken prisoner by
Indians, between Milford and New Haven, was examined before
the Council, at Hartford, he admitted his knowledge of and parti-
cipation in most of the above murders. As "a child of death, the
council sentenced him to suffer the pains and terrors of death."
His executioner was an Indian.

Although it has been intimated that this war ended with the
death of King Philip, it kept its active life long past that event.

I40 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Hatfield and Deerfield receiving " visits from fugitive Indians in
September of 1677. They burned, it is said, seven houses, took
captive twenty-four inhabitants, and killed, at Hatfield, several
persons. This news aroused once more the people of Connecticut.
Post-riders were sent forth; towns were warned to put themselves
in defensive order; Hartford County was ordered to bake one
thousand pounds of bread; the other counties five hundred each,
and hold it in readiness for instant use, and fifty men from the
triplet-towns on the river were rushed forth to Hatfield, with
horses, long arms and ammunition. During this war, horses were
comparatively few in number, and the prices at which they were
held were very high. On the long marches the proportion of horses
to men was about one to three.

This seems to have been the last requisition of troops that was
made. Gradually the conflict softened, the Indians either fied to
the northward, or surrendered. The surrendering Indians, if not
proved murderers, were to " have their lives " and were " not to be
sold out of the country for slaves,'* but all persons sixteen years of
age or older were to be sold for servitude. If under sixteen, the
time of such servitude was to extend until the subject of it
reached the age of twenty-six years. If over sixteen, the time
was ten years. There was a division of Indians made to each
county, and the " committee men " were to divide the county pro-
portion, to the several towns in that county. When so divided,
the Indians were offered for sale in each town unto " such as they
thought most meet to educate and well nurture them, at such
price as was thought equal." Each assistant and each " committee
man was to have one for himself freely." The prisoners of war
were otherwise disposed of. Some of the number belonged to the
captors; others were bestowed upon "friend Indians;" and, perhaps
the more dangerous sort, were sent out of the country and sold into
slavery. Could a greater hardship befall an American Indian —
with all the free-born blood of the forest ranger running from
heart to brain — than to be made a slave in an English town, even
when his master was just and kind ? Our Major Talcott had one of
these Indian boys, whom, according to his account book, now
in the State Library at Hartford, he bought of Mr. Wolcott. The
Major kept a little account in his " waste book " of the running
away of this Indian boy, that well illustrates the tendency of the
Indian to roam at will, and we give it.

January 1680, Dick was gone away three days.

July 30, 168 1, Dick ran away at the time of Indian Dance, three days in Harness
expended to find him.

August 20, ran away two days.

MATTATUCK A8 A PLANTATION, 141

August 25, Dick ran away and was found next day by his father, being but one
day, found at Mr. Lord's bam.

August 27, Dick ran away and was gone six days.

September 13, Dick ran away with his father, as they say, went up to the West
Mountain, and came not until September 19th, six days in all. Cost me one way
and another to send out after them five shillings.

November 4th, Dick ran way four days.

November 15th and 16, Dick ran away all three days, and was off and on in the
neck of land where was a Town of Indians, and his father brought him, after much
time spent. That time. I was at charges in looking after him. four shillings.

October 24th, 1684, Dick went way to Simsbury to Seposs his wigwam. The
English saw him and advised Sepos to bring him home, but I sent two men to
search after him and they brought him home and Sepos came with them. He was
gone that time six days and spoyled his cloathes very much that time. The charges
in looking after him was nine shillings that I was out of purse.

May 19, 1685. Dick went away again. I sent to Podunk then, as I always did^
and to Farmington, Weathersfield and Simsbury as my manner was always to send
around, that if I got out of one town, he would be taken in the other towns, but
Coakham seieed him on the East side of the Great River and brought him home.
I expended in my search for him that time, three shillings and six pence and he
was gone bout iive days.

But the crowning aggravation came in 1687, when, " Dick ran
away in hay time ! I sent a man to Farmington on purpose with
letters to Mr. Wadsworth to enquire of the Indians, and to Sims-
bury, to Weathersfield, and over the Great River, and at last Mr.
Hooker's Indian boys brought him home, who was gone that time
five days and the charges this time was six shillings." This run-
ning account of Dick's running away was kept with a legal pur-
pose. It could be brought up against him at the end of his ten
years of service and would prevent his release from servitude. A
glance at Dick's " wast " book for the other side of his account,
though earnestly desired, is denied to us. It should be told here
that Major Talcott had the power to sell Dick, as a captive, to be
transported out of the country for his running away, and also
that each Indian who returned Dick received two yards of cloth.

We have made no attempt to give even an outline of King
Philip's war. Connecticut disclaimed all responsibility for it, but
she suffered from it in untold ways. We have been able to catch
a glimpse of the cost of it to Waterbury. It seems to have cost us
the loss of a number of original planters; to have thrown a cloud
of discouragement over the enterprise that was many years in lift-
ing; to have added greatly to the burdens of those who had
the moral and physical courage to continue the work— begun
so auspiciously and interrupted at the vital point; and finally, to
have thrown our town so out of line with progress at its very
beginning, and dwarfed it so completely that it was thrown back

142 EISTORY OF WATERS URT.

for several generations to rely solely upon self -effort under most
discouraging conditions. Waterbury's position to-day among towns
is that of a " self-made " town. Let us think thoughtfully of these
things in her history; let us give credit where credit is due; for
the natural advantages of the township were less than those of
any one of the towns settled at an early date.

Mattatuck bore her early trials and troubles without an apparent
moan. Not a word has been found in relation to the sufferings of
her people during King Philip's war. Not a cry for aid has been
heard. Not a petition for redress has been seen. It is only by
looking up facts that tell of the troubles of surrounding towns that
we can throw the light from their beacon fires of distress into our
plantation. Is it probable that Mattatuck escaped the experiences
that befell Woodbury and Derby ?

There is at Hartford a petition, which has never been published,
that was sent up in relation to the grievances of Woodbury and
Derby. It was not seen until after the chapter relating to that war
was in print. It was addressed to the General Court, October 12,
1676, in behalf of those towns, by their respective ministers. Rever-
end Zachariah Walker and Reverend John Bower. The writer of
the petition was Mr. Bower. A portion of it only is here given :

" That whereas the providence of God hath so ordered that by
meanes of late troubles brought upon the country; we the inhab-
itants of Woodbury and Derby have been necessitated to remove
from our dwellings, and a more favorable aspect of Providence
at the present inviting us to a return, and the necessity of many
of our families in part enforcing it; yet forasmuch as we can not
be assured but the like danger may again arise; we make bold
before such our return to request this honored Court to resolve us
in our important inquiry, viz. : in case the war with the Indians
should be again renewed; what we may expect and trust to from
the authority of this realm in order to our protection and safety ?
We humbly request that this our inquiry may neither be judged
offensive nor concluded irrational till the following grounds of it
be considered.

" First, we cannot be insensible of our former experience viz., that
in a time when danger threatened the loudest and our two planta-
tions above s*d were in greatest hazard, we were not only without
any other help but our own for the guarding of our said places, but
our own [men] also, which were indeed too few, were taken from us
time after time, being pressed from the sea side towns, when occa-
sionally they came thither about necessary business, whereby we
had more, proportionable to our numbers, from our two plantations.

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION.

143

imployed in the publick service than (we suppose) any other town
of the colony : And as by that means we were forced to a removall
so yt we had not the least benefit of any guard for the safety of our
own persons or goods. Neither can we be insensible how unable many
persons will be, after a second remove to those plantations, without
mine to their families to return again to these their plantations;
partly by meanes of the chargeableness of such removes, and partly
by meanes of what disappointments we have already met with."

The letter or petition then defines the mutual obligations of sub
jects and rulers, and sets forth the benefits that would accrue to
New Haven and Fairfield counties by securing the plantations of
Woodbury and Derby, and adds, "because the Indians would not
set upon lower plantations until they had attempted those above,
and if they fail there, they will be the more shy of pounding them-
selves by coming lower.'*

It may not be generally known that during the period just
referred to — in 1676— Ireland, touched by the story of the suffer-
ings of her English brethren in New England, sent a gift of one
thousand pounds for their relief. It is called in the records the
"Irish Charity." Massachusetts caused a list to be made of the
suffering families within her own borders and sent for correspond-
ing lists from Plymouth and Connecticut. A list from Connecti-
cut was forwarded, but when it became known that Massachusetts
alone — with twelve towns yet to hear from — had within her bor-
ders six hundred and sixty families that were in absolute distress,
Connecticut, like the brave little Colony that she has ever been,
remitted all her right, title and interest in the " Irish Charity " to
Plymouth, and Massachusetts colonies. Connecticut's list, if in
existence, could give to us the names of families that were driven
out of their habitations; the owners of houses that were burned,
and also the names of those persons and families that were sus-
tained by charity; for they were all included in it.

CHAPTER X.

MATTATUCK's second entrance upon plantation life — A NEW TOWN
SITE CHOSEN — TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE PLANTERS — MAJOR
TALCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF HIS PURCHASE OF A TOWNSHIP FROM THE
INDIANS — A GLANCE AT CONNECTICUT COLONY IN THE YEAR
1679.

THE Committee appointed to establish the plantation, without
doubt, made due return to the Court of its acts concerning
our town, but no record of such accounting- has been found;
whereas, in the case of Derby an km pie and minute return was ren-
dered, even to the care that had been taken in providing a place for
yards, where goods and cattle brought to the ferry from Woodbury
and Mattatuck might be stored. This was accomplished in 1676.

Mattatuck's second entrance upon plantation life is heralded to
us by the announcement of a meeting, held by the proprietors in
May, 1677. They assembled to discuss the question that had arisen
concerning the town site. " Difficulty " was recognized in setting the
town where it was then laid out. No hint is given concerning the
nature of this "difficulty." Dr. Bronson has suggested that it may
have arisen from the desire to be on the same side of the river with
their Farmington friends, in case of an attack from the Indians;
from the difficulty of access from the east, both for themselves and
their harvests, and from the fact that to Farmington they must
resort "for the regular ministrations and ordinances of the Gospel."
All these things must have received due consideration when the
original site was chosen, and the conditions seem not to have
changed, except that the danger from Indian raids had increased;
but even then, Woodbury was nearer to them on the west and Derby
on the south than Farmington was on the north. It would seem that
some weightier cause than all these causes combined had arisen to
throw discouragement over the Town Plot enterprise, and very natu-
rally the men who had been foremost in building and in making
improvements on the hill would be the strong objectors to the change.
Evidently the proprietors were not of one mind, for they left the mat-
ter in the hands of a committee, and chose men of discretion and
years to decide for them. These men were " Deacon Judd, John Langh-
ton, Ser., John Andrus, Senr, Goodman Root, and John Judd and Dan-
iell Porter." They were to view and consider whether it would " not
be more for the benefit of the proprietors in general to set the town

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION,

145

on the east side of the river." They were, in so doing, to content
themselves with "less home lots.*' Those formerly laid outwore
to be secured to them. The committee was instructed in the follow
ing words, which it may be noticed differ slightly from the render-
ing heretofore given : " provided also they think and concede it so
to be, to advise with the Grand Committee, and in conjunction with
them, they giving liberty, so to do." Under this agreement, the
proprietors promised to act according to the decision of the com-
mittee, "notwithstanding what is already done."

If we could cast the shadow of a coming event in the right
direction we might throw legal light on the change of site, for
at the session of the General Court next following, it was ordered
that "for the future, all plantations or townships that shall or
may settle in plantation-wise shall settle themselves in such near-
ness together that they may be a help, defence and succour each
to other against any surprize, onset or attempt of any comon
enemie ; and the General Court from time to time shall appoynt
some committee to regulate such plantation settlement accord-
ingly." This enactment was made because of the "woefull experi-
ence of the late war," and because the " Providence of God seemed
to testify against a scattered way of living, as contrary to religion."
Each family upon an eight-acre lot would necessarily be more
remote from neighbors than the same family upon a two-acre
lot. The removal to a plot one fourth the size of the first lay-
out of the town made the settlement very compact, and far more
capable of self-defence. It may also be suggested that, as more
than once in our history. Mad River has played an important
part, it also became a factor in this change. The corn mill was
of the foremost importance, and the urgent need that it should
be near by the house lots was recognized. The excellent natural
advantages which Mad River, at that time called Roaring River,
possessed as a mill-site could not have been overlooked, for we
very soon find it with its name changed to Mill River, and a mill
upon it. Our authority for its first name is the paper on which is
the original lay-out of the three-acre lots. Three of the lots were
laid out on Roaring River, two on the south side of it, and one on
its east side.

The question of immediate water supply determined the site of
all or nearly all early homesteads. We find that through the acres,
about seventy-five in number, that comprised the second town plot,
four streams coursed their way. Great Brook and Little Brook
passed through the house lots that lined the east side of Bank and
North Main streets. The West Main street habitations were sup-

lO

146 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

plied by the considerable rivulet that came down from the north-
ern highlands east of present Central avenue, and by another
stream that came from the westward. Both streams crossed West
Main street near the site of St. John's Church, uniting on its south-
ern side. From that point the brook flowed westward through sev-
eral house lots on its way, by meadow and cove, to the Great River.*
The chosen spot was sufficiently well watered to supply to the
town even its name " Watterbury."

The next ray of light concerning the settlement falls upon it
four months later through an Indian deed. The Assembly's Com-
mittee transfers the title — Major Talcott alone signing the deed —
to a tract of land ten miles in length from north to south, and six
in breadth, to " Thomas Judd, John Stanley, Samuel Hikcox and
Abraham Bronson, inhabitants of Mattatuck." As it names the
above men and refers to the remainder of the company in the
words, ** and to the rest of the inhabitants belonging to the said Mat-
tatuck," a fair inference is that in September, 1677, the four men
named were already housed in the new plantation. Concerning
this deed, we learn that the proprietors of Mattatuck paid the com-
mittee thirty-eight pounds, "in hand received, or security suffi-
ciently given for payment thereof.*' The Indian side of this sale
does not appear in manuscript, but we get light on the possible
means used in the purchase of Mattatuck lands from the following
items, found in the account book of Major Talcott, which relate to
his purchase of the township of Simsbury. It is probable that
similar tact and wiles, and Trucking cloath Coats, meat, bread,
beer and cider, Indian corn, and a shilling in money, played
their part in the acquiring of our township — Major Talcott being
the purchaser of both townships. The account is in his hand
writing.

1682.

May 15 : Simsberry Town is D' Pr my payment of their indian parchas of their
Bounds of their Town.

To pay'd Totoo: and Nesahegon each of them a Trucking £. s. d,
cloath Coat to Joshep whiting to John moses . 00 06 00

To Seokets wife a Coat, Aups a Farmington indian a Coat,
Nenepaush Squa one: Coate, Nesaheages Squa one Coate,
Cherry one Coate, and mamantoes squa one Coat for these
six Coats I charge 04 16 00

♦The name of our larger river was, while Watcrbury remained a plantation, Mattatuck River. After
that date, the inhabitants called it the Great River, when necessary to designate it. This soon became in
the lay out of lands and in deeds simply "the river/' Occasionally, in a document relating to matters
extending beyond the limits of the township, it became Waterbury River. The name Naugatuck for our
section of the river is quite modern. It was not universally adopted until after 1800. I

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION. 147

>

May 1 8th To payd Nesahegan for his right in tantuuquafooge Six bush-
ells of indiati Corne

To him payd for his right in weatooge Nine bushells of indian
Corn att this time indian corn fetch ready money 2: shillings

for which I expect money — i 17 06

May 1 8th To payd Masecup 2: Bushells by the Indians order, to Cogri-
uoset 2: bushells — pr the same order, to wayump pr ye

same order one Bushell

May i8th To Seoketts squa 2 bushells, to nenepaush squa 2: bushells, To
Aups 2: Bushells To pashoners squa 2: Bushells To totoos
bushells seaven. To one bushell the Indians wear payd more —
all as good as money soe I sould and others that sould, this

being 21: Bushells 02 12 06

Pd chery more in money one shilling ....

pd to momantooes sqa four bushells of indian Corne . . 00 1 1 03

pd to M' Joseph whiting of the Country for a Coat Serg' John

Griflfin had for an indian that he payd for the purchass* . 00 18 00
pd p. charges of Twenty Indians first day at proudingf terms
of a bargaine set the pot with good meat and bread beer
and sider provided that day for Capt: Allyn and Capt: New-

bery yo' comittee 01 05 00

Spent sundry times besides for 2 years together sometimes 10:
sometime 20 sometimes 15 sometimes 6 or 7 indian with Cider
victuall's and beer, at lest 16 days compleat myself and the
first time cost me six dayes most of which I rod to pook hill
[Podunk?] to the indians to drive on the bargaine they
demanding one 100 pounds was afraid any of o' English
should put me by the businis by adviseing them to insist
upon that great sume for which I reckon . . . 06 10 00

18 16 03
1684 May, To so much payd Mr. Joseph Whiting for a Coat yo' Towns

man had see folo 82 i 00 00

19 16 03
Simsbury Towne is pr: contra: Credited. The Towne of Simsbury have granted

to me three hundred Acres of Land on the West side of the Town upon the River
that runs there where the Indians ust to ketch samon at a place called cherrys land
and any where within theire Bounds by that sayd River to be taken up in one Two
or Three places as I see cause, as by Town grant doth fully appear, a coppy
whereof I have in keeping and this to be in full sattisf action of all my cost and
charge of the purchase of their bounds of Ten mile squar, and therefore must be
accounted in my books at eighteen poundes sixteen shillings and three pence

18 16 03
More on the other side 01 00 00

19 16 03
The following is from the " History of Simsbury:" J " The Indians

not having been paid [for their lands] made a grevious complaint

♦John Griffin had obtained from an Indian a deed of a portion of the Simsbury land, before this pur-
chase. iSo in the manuscript. tNoah \, Phelps, author of History of Simsbury.

148 HISTORY OF WATERS UBT.

•

to the Major, and being incessantly urging for their dues," the town,
" to still their acclamations and to bring to issue the said case, and
to ease the Major of those vexatious outcries made by the Indians
for their money," ordered the sale of one hundred and fifty acres
of land to extinguish the debt.

We will glance for a moment beyond the hills of this plantation
gathering at Mattatuck, in the year 1679, and look out upon the
English Colony that encompasses it. We find Connecticut lying
between "Narraganset River" on the east, and "Mamaronock
Rivulet " on the west. Within her borders are twenty-six towns —
Mattatuck apparently not included in the number; for although
Mattatuck seems to have been the twenty-sixth plantation, her
town number was twenty-seven — another plantation having gained
precedence in the race for town honors. In every settlement in the
Colony except two, that are "newly begun," there is a "settled min-
ister," and the two "are seeking out for ministers to settle amongst
them." The highest salary paid is one hundred pounds; the lowest
is estimated at not less than fifty. We find, with a little surprise,
that already in the twenty-six towns the people are divided into
" strict Congregational men, more large Congregational men, and
moderate Presbyterians," while within the Colony there are " four
or five Seven-day men, and four or five Quakers." Ministers are
preaching to the people twice every Sabbath day and sometimes on
Lecture days. Masters of families are catechizing their children
and servants with regularity, being so required to do by law. The
poor are relieved by the towns where they live, every town provid-
ing for its own poor and impotent persons. There are seldom any
that need relief, because labor is dear. Two shillings and some-
times two shillings and sixpence for a day laborer is paid and
provisions are cheap. Wheat is four shillings a bushel; beef two
and a half pence a pound, and butter six pence; other provision in
proportion. "Beggars and vagabond persons are not suffered.
When discovered, they are bound out to service."

In the twenty-six towns are living 2,552 trained soldiers, for
every man, with a few exceptions, between the ages of sixteen and
sixty, is in his country's service. There is one " Troope " of about
sixty horses. The Governor of the colony is the General of all the
forces. There is a major in each one of the four counties, who
commands the militia of that county. The horsemen are armed
with pistols and carbines; the foot-soldiers with muskets and pike.
There is one small fort at the mouth of Connecticut River. The
Indians left alive in the colony, are estimated at five hundred
fighting men.

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 149

Thus early, it is with authority declared that most of the land
that "is fit for planting is taken up," that what remains "must be
subdued and gained out of the fire as it were, by hard blows and
for small recompence." The principal trade of the colony is man-
aged in the four towns of Hartford, on the Connecticut River.
New London on the Pequot River and New Haven and Fairfield by
the sea-side. The buildings are described as " generally of wood,
some of stone and brick; many of them of good strength and come-
liness for a wilderness, many forty foot long and twenty broad and
some larger, three and four stories high."

The commodities of the country, the larger part of which are
transported to Boston and bartered for clothing, are wheat, pease,
rye, barley, Indian corn, pork, beef, wool, hemp, flax, cider, perry
(pear cider) tar, deal boards, pipe staves, and horses. There is also
a trade carried on with Barbadoes, Jamaica and other islands, for
money, rum, cotton wool, and sugar; with an occasional vessel
laden with staves, pease, pork and " flower " to Madeira and Fayal.
There are in the colony about twenty merchants ; some trade to
Boston only, others to Boston and the Indies; others to Boston and
New York; others include Newfoundland in their ventures. The
vessels that are owned in the colony are four ships; one owned in
Middletown, one in Hartford, and two in New London. One of the
New London ships and the Hartford ship are of ninety tons
burden each. To these may be added three pinks, twelve sloops,
six ketches and two barks ; the total tonnage being about seven
hundred. Absolute free trade is in full operation, except that a
duty is collected on wine and liquors, which is improved toward the
maintenance of free schools. Dwelling houses in the colony are
not taxed, because they are so chargeable to maintain. The total
valuation of the estates, dwelling houses not included, in the year
1679 is ;;^i53,6i4. This picture is not drawn with a free hand. It
betrays at every step an evident desire not to paint th^ facts in glow-
ing colours lest England exact more tribute for her King than the
colonists are willing to yield; for these items have been gleaned
from the replies made by authority of the General Assembly to
certain questions concerning " His Majesties Corporation of Con-
necticut." The questions were sent to New England by the
"Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations," in England.

CHAPTER XL

THE FIRST MEETING OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE, IN JANU-
ARY, 1677 — THE SECOND MEETING IN 1678 — THE THIRD MEETING

IN NOVEMBER, 1679 THE FOURTH MEETING IN 1680 — THE FIFTH

MEETING IN 1680.

HOW many meetings were held by the Assembly's Committee
for Mattatuck in the interests of that plantation, cannot be
told with accuracy. We have, well-preserved, in the hand-
writing of Major Talcott, the orders of six meetings. They extend
over a period of five years, from 1677 to 1682. By following their
order we shall learn something of the growth of Mattatuck.

New Year Day in England was March twenty-fifth until the date
was changed to the first of January, by act of Parliament, in the
year 1752. England's colonies obeyed the law implicitly, so long as
required to do so. Attention is called to this point, for the reason
that the writer has followed the usage of the period throughout its
extent, thereby avoiding any confusion of dates, or unnecessary
reference to "Old Style and "New Style."

THE ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE — THE FIRST MEETING.

In January, 1677, a meeting was held, probably in Farmington,
by the committee for Mattatuck, at which six points were " agreed
and concluded." The first one accepts John Root, senior, he sub
scribing to the "Articles for settling of Mattatuck in behalf of one
of his sons." The autograph of John Root, as a subscriber to the
"Articles," has not been found. The name is found placed upon a
fence division at a later day. It was before this date that Abraham
Bronson* withdrew from Mattatuck and went to Lyme; that Rich-
ard " Seemor," Thomas Gridley, and John Porter dropped out of the
race — John "vScovel," Benjamin Barnes, Joseph Gaylord and David
Carpenter coming in at this meeting to take their places. It was at
this meeting that the highways were to be " mended sufficiently " —
Benjamin Judd being appointed to call the proprietors out each in

♦As early as October of 1877, Abraham Bronson had taken up his residence in Lyme. Bronson and Joseph
Peck were candidates for the office of Lieutenant. '* The remonstrants " against Bronson's confirmation
declared themselves *' possessed with many fears what will become of our sweet and pretious peace which
the Most HiRh, praysed be his name, hath favoured us with." This election appears to have been made with
all due formality. That it might be carried on in a solemn way, there was at least '* a fortnight's warning
given before the choice," and a sermon preached by Rev. Mr. Noyes. Abraham Bronson was elected Lieu-
tenant, Joseph Peck, Ensign— Lieutenant Bronson was also a deputy from T>yme, to the General Assembly,
for a number of years.

ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE,

151

his turn, to do his just part, and Benjamin — Mattatuck's resident
surveyor — was warned by the committee "to attend the Country
Law '* in this service. With great consideration the committee
granted to the proprietors one year more in which to take up resi-
dence, each in his own house, in Mattatuck. The time that was
formerly granted was soon to expire— on May 30, 1678. This exten-
sion of time was to May 30, 1679. The final order related to public
charges. They were to be borne " one year longer or more " than
had been ordered in the third article, dated May 30, 1677. Major
Talcott perhaps intended to write May 30, 1674 — the date of the
original articles — the third one of which does relate to public
charges — or it may have been that there was an annual meeting
on May 30, 1677, and that the orders were given on that day which
would give us knowledge of the layout of the first highways, house
lots, meadow allotments, garden -spots of an acre and less in
Munhan Neck, and other events of interest that we can not learn
the time and manner of. It is evident that there was a meeting
prior to the one whose orders we are following.

It was in January, 1677 also, that the committee took occasion to
announce that during the time it continued in power, it should
appoint men " to lay out all necessary highways for the use of the
inhabitants that were needful " and afterward the " Town was to
state and lay them out, together with what common passages
should be judged necessary." Then it was that the broad highway
on the old Town Plot was reduced to two rods, and that the common
field fence on the " East side of the river, for securing the meadows,
was ordered to be made sufficiently by the last of May." Does the
question arise ; How do we know that the above order is not the
beginning of orders concerning the common-fence and field ? The
answer is furnished in the list of names, whose owners were
appointed to make the portion of the fence that was first allotted
to them. It was appointed unto them to make it, at a time when
Abraham Bronson, Richard Seamor, Thomas Gridley and John
Porter were members of the plantation, and, as we have seen, they
had left it before this meeting was held. Furthermore, on its roll,
there is not the name of a man who joined the organization at this
time ; showing conclusively that the common field and its fence
had been the subject of an earlier order. During the year 1678 the
settlement lapses into silence. Not a note of life can we extract
from it, or find in relation to it, until ^larch in that year.

THE SECOND MEETING.

Three men of the committee met "according to joint agree-
ment" at Farmington, March 11, 1678, and determined that those

152

HISTORY OF WATERBUBT,

lots not yet laid out to the proprietors should be laid out by
" Lieutenant Standly [of Farmington] with the* helpfulness of
William Judd, and John Standly Jr." It speaks well for this
committee of father and son that John Standly Junior's allot-
ments were such that Talcott and Company afterward advised the
town to make amends to him because of the "meanness" of them.
In this second spring of the new beginning on the east side of the
river, in 1678, there was " a mile of fence or thereabouts," ordered
to be made within fifty days, and the three acre lots, which had
been granted to the proprietors by a former grant, were to be laid
out. William Judd, having had a grant that his three -acre lot
should be "layd out upon the west end of his House Lott," the
grant was confirmed. The three acres still lie to the southwest-
ward of the house lot on which the late "Johnson house" stood, on
North Willow street.

THE THIRD MEETING.

By the twenty-sixth of November, 1679, as winter was close at
hand, the few courageous souls who had complied with the condi-
tions, and adventured themselves and their families in the enter-
prise, had appealed to the committee. These men doubtless felt that
they were entitled to the presence and protection of every man who
had signed the agreement to help build the town. Many of the pro-
prietors still lingered in their old homes. Each man had some
reason, sufficient unto himself, for his course of action, but his
neighbor, in the lonely plantation on Great and Little Brooks, failed
to see why the obligation should not be met. The committee con-
vened at Farmington and held a meeting that continued two days.
During this time it considered the case of the delinquent sub-
scribers, and declaring that their delay led to the discouragement
of the men already at Mattatuck, and weakened their hands, " deter-
mined and resolved " to bring about a better state of things. To
that end, the announcement was made that every man who was not
personally present with his family at Mattatuck by the last of May,
1680, there to abide, must forfeit his title and interest in all the allot-
ments that had been granted to him there. This meant his house
lot; his old Town Plot house lot; his three-acre lot, and such other
grants as the committee had made every man equal in, without regard
to the number of pounds annexed to his name. To add to the force of
the argument for speedy removal, it was sejmingly declared that
mere personal presence, although it might hold allotments, was not
sufficient to hold title as a proprietor in the undivided lands of the township
itself. To secure his hold upon them and place it upon a foundation
never to be moved, he was required to build a mansion house in all

ORDERS OF THE A8SEMBLT8 COMMITTEE. 153

respects up to the specifications given on the last of May, 1674, and
to have it finished the thirtieth day of May, 1681, and to be abiding
in it on that date. The committee had been very considerate. In
the first place, the time limited was from May, 1674, to May, 1678.
Because of the intervening war, this time was extended to May,
1679. When that time expired, an additional term, it is thought,
must have been granted, but we find no extension covering the
interval to November, 1679. Then, apparently, consideration, ex-
tension and grace being alike failures, the penalty was annexed.
We shall soon be able to see the result of this new law with its
forfeitures.

On the other side of the paper on which the above order is writ-
ten, we find that Major Talcott has traced the announcement of the
second death, so far as we have learned, that took place in the little
band of thirty-one men, that of Daniel Warner. The language of
the original record in the words that, "he, with his family, were
upon the remove to Mattatuck, and on that juncture of time, the
Divine providence of God removed the sayd Daniel out of the Land
of the Living," suggests the possibility that his death was caused
by accident, during the removal. " Out of compassion to his relict
and children Left behinde him," the allotments were confirmed to
them, without conditions. Mrs. Warner was advised, as were her
relatives, to build a dwelling-house with all possible speed, and to
inhabit there, or to cause some person to dwell there in her stead.
Even in building, she was not compelled to abide by the time set
for other settlers. The first death of a signer is believed to have
been that of John Warner, Sen', the father of Daniel. The priority
of his death appears — in our records —only from the fact that he
was not in Mattatuck when the first and second divisions of fence
were ordered, while Daniel Warner is the active maker of his pro-
portion, in both divisions.

On the next day, the committee was again occupied with our
interests. We learn at this session that Lieutenant Samuel Steel laid
out our first highways. East Main street was one of the number
laid out by him. It is described as "that Highway at the east end
of the Town plot at Mattatuck, running eastward out of Sayd Town
plot, being Three rods wide." It was determined that it should be
and remain for public and common use. It is further described as
lying between Joseph " Gaylers " lot, and a house lot of two acres
"reserved for such inhabitant as shall hereafter be entertained."
Joseph Gaylord's lot is now the site of Irving block. The reserved
lot is the corner of East Main and South Main streets, reserved to
be the birth-place of the renowned Samuel Hopkins.

154 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

It was on this memorable 27th of November, 1679, that certain
lands were designated and set apart for a specified use forever.
Why those lands are not to-day serving the uses for which they
were set apart, is an unanswerable question. Here are the words
of the authorized committee: **It is agreed and determined that
the House Lott of Two Acres, lying at the east end of the Town
abutting Northerly on Thomas Warner's Hous Lott, and a piece
of Meadow and Swamp conteyning about fifteen Acres, by estima-
tion lying upon Steele's Brook, [the bounds being given] and
a piece of Land conteyning by estimation Three Acres, lying
in the pasture Land, commonly so called, shall be and remayne
for the use, occupation and improvement of the ministry of the
sayd Town forever, without any alteration or dissposal, use or
improvement whatsoever." The two-acre house lot was the third
lot of the six two-acre lots that occupied the east side of Bank
street, between East Main and Grand streets. The well-known
First Church property at the foot of Grand and Willow streets
is the portion that is left of the three acres, lying in the pasture
land. It is the only remaining fragment, the little crumb that
is left of the generous loaf designed for the support of the
ministry forever. The First Church was amply endowed by the
Colony's committee, but permitted her inheritance to depart from
her. Somewhere about eight hundred years hence, at the expira-
tion of a lease, the fifteen acres on Steele's Brook may return
to her.

After providing for the ministry, the committee's next act was
to encourage an inhabitant, by allowing " an additional House Lott
to what was formerly allowed," to be laid out. And here we get an
insight into the allotments that were before granted to each man,
by the grants that were to accompany the new house lot. They
were " eight acres on the old Town plot and a three acre lot." To
the former grants were now to be added eight acres in the new
division to be laid out, ten acres upon a plain on the west side of
Steels meadow, and about twelve acres in " Buck " meadow
"being an Island." When a town was in need of an inhabitant,
because of his skill in any of the lines of its development, special
grants were bestowed. This inhabitant thus provided for, was
probably then in waiting. He was a man who was undoubtedly
welcomed with all the greeting little Mattatuck had to offer, for he
was a carpenter ! His name was Stephen Upson. He subscribed
to the articles in December 1679, and probably made his mark on
more than one of the houses that were waiting for the builder, for
we have his testimony that "Samuel Judd's house was shingled

0RDER8 OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE. 155

about Michaelmuss *' and that "he went into it in November 1681,"^
and that "it was not fit before."

The last bit of advice to the inhabitants on this day in Novem-
ber 1679, was, to build a sufficient corn mill for the use of the
town. Thirty acres of land were proffered to the persons who
should build such a mill " and keep the same in good reparation for
that work and service of grinding Corne." The thirty-acres of land
were to be laid out, to ** be and remain to their heirs and assigns
forever, he or they maynteyning the sayd grist mill, as afore sayd,
forever." The last words of this meeting are the following: "We
allow the standing of Thomas Warner's cellar without molestation,
according to agreem*^ of Lieut. Sam" Steel." This was also a con-
cession probably because of bereavment, and it gives us the assur-
ance that there was, at least, a cellar in Mattatuck, in Nov. 1679.
John Warner had recently died. He had undoubtedly built the
cellar of his house on his house lot on the east side of Exchange
place. It must have occupied the land near where vSouth Main
street begins, also the part of Exchange place that was taken for
that street when South Main street was laid out about 1806. It
probably included the site of Apothecaries' Hall, it being the second
lot from the northward of the six two-acre lots already referred to,
as filling the space between East Main and Grand streets. The
cellar may have been placed there before Lieutenant Steel laid out
the highway, as it seems for some reason to have been an intru-
sion upon it. However it may have been, the committee did not
compel Thomas Warner, the son of John Warner deceased, to
remove it, and it is agreeable to learn that the curved line of the
east side of Bank street probably had its origin in a kindly intent
toward the son of the man who was the first to die, of the men of
Mattatuck.

THE FOURTH MEETING.

Major Talcott and Mr. John Wadsworth met at Hartford, May
22, 1680, and appointed William Judd, Thomas Judd, and John
Standly, or such others as the inhabitants of Mattatuck should
appoint, to meet with men of Woodbury, to determine a bound line
between the towns. Representing the town^ John Welton and Samuel
Hickcox acquiesced in the appointments made at Hartford, and
declared that they did not see cause to appoint any other persons to
determine the bound. This town act is the earliest, perhaps, on
record, and indicates that the inhabitants had already chosen offi-
cers, and before having been granted power to do so. The date is
May 31, 1680. It appears upon the same paper with the commit-
tee's act making the appointments, and is signed by John " Well-

1^6 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

ton " and Samuel Hickcox "in the behalfe of the teste." Therefore
John Welton and Samuel Hickcox were the first townsmen, or select-
men. The same day, Major Talcott and Mr. Wadsworth sent a com-
munication addressed: "To Our Friends at Mattatuck/' in which
more than a mile of new fence was ordered to be made. The need
of this fence must have been very great, for the proprietors were
directed to make it within nineteen days.

THE FIFTH MEETING.

This meeting was held at Farmington, on the fifth of February,
1680. Three members were present. Town officers had been chosen
by the inhabitants as before stated, and without apparent authority.
The committee gave power to the officers " to execute their respect-
ive offices" and gave the inhabitants liberty, "being orderly called
and convented " by their major vote, to choose their " Townsmen,
constables, surveyors, fence-viewers and haywards, or any other
civil officers, from time to time, without any farther order from the
committee."

Stephen Hopkins had, at this date, built a mill in Mattatuck. He
was granted to have the " thirty acres appointed and intailed in a
former order to such as should erect a mill there." To the thirty
acres, the committee now added " so much more land as should be
necessary to advance the grant to be in value of one hundred pound
alottment."

Deacon John Lankton, William Judd and David Carpenter, had
been complained of for not meeting their obligations as subscribers.
They had doubtless failed to arrive at Mattatuck with their families
on or before May 30th, 1680, and their allotments, granted at Matta-
tuck, were declared to be forfeited. Should any persons appear and
desire allotments, they, by subscribing, building a house, and set-
tling in the place with their families within a year from the time
of subscribing, were to be invested with the allotments. If the
new subscribers failed to fulfill, the lands were to return to the
committee. " Leavyes " for defraying the public charges, except
for watching and warding, were to be raised upon the meadows for
one year from date. Uplands were permitted to be added to the
meadow lands of Isaac Bronson and Benjamin Judd, sufficient to
raise the meadow land to the value of an hundred pound allotment.
Thus early we hear the cry raised for more land to improve. The
applicants are Daniel Porter and Thomas Richardson. The town
was granted liberty to add the desired land and the committee
appointed men to lay it out, and also to lay out to Stephen Hopkins,
his lands. Necessary fences for securing lands under improvement

ORDERS OF TUB ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE.

157

were again ordered to be made by the last of April, 1681. Stephen
Upson complained that he was much straightened in his possession
of lands. Whatever addition the town should see cause to lay out
to him, was granted. A house lot of two acres was granted to
Stephen Hopkins. It was ordered to be laid out " as conveniently
as might be to suit the mill;" also a three acre lot, "according as
the other inhabitants have granted." The final act was the grant
to Benjamin Judd of "some land at the north end of his house lot,
to build on." This was the first legalized encroachment upon the
fine broad way laid out through the town plot. Our beautiful
" Green " is the portion that testifies to its original width. To this
grant of " some land," the condition was annexed, that the highway
should always be and remain four and one-half rods wide.

CHAPTER XII.

THE INHABITANTS OF MATTATUCK ITS PLANTERS YOUNG MEN FARM-

INGTON WELL REPRESENTED — THE PLANTATION OF 1681 — THE
GREEN PLAIN — HOUSE LOTS SURROUNDING IT — THE HOUSES — THE
OWNERS AND THEIR FAMILIES.

AN attempt, however imperfect its result may be, to gather by-
name and family the little band of town-builders that grad-
ually constructed the compact village of Mattatuck, will not
be without interest. It may be said, with approximate truth, that
the plantation of 1677 was the work of young men. That these men
were " poor " men has, in one way and another, been so impressed
upon our minds, that w^e find it almost natural to think of
them and to speak of them as pioneers, driven by stress of
lands and worldly goods to leave Farmington and live in log
houses in the wilderness, in order to eke out a livelihood;
but the facts, as they have one after another been relieved
from obscurity, compose a brighter picture. The young men were,
with few exceptions, married men with families. Some of the
number, perhaps every one who came from Farmington, owned his
own house in that place. Dr. Henry Bronson had not seen, when he
pictured the log houses of the planters, the evidence granted to us,
that the houses were both clapboarded and shingled. Neither did
he know that his own ancestor — the John Bronson who is thought
to have been of the company that migrated with the Rev. Mr.
Hooker from Massachusetts Bay in 1636; who owned a house lot
and other lands in Hartford in 1639; who was a soldier in the
Pequot war, and who was one of the earliest settlers in Farmington
— that he, also, reached out his aging hands to bless in the most
practical manner the beginnings of our town. We find that he had
here, when he died in 1680, the early form of the saw-mill — in a " pitt
saw, Tiller and box." He also had other implements of the builder,
given in the inventory of his estate as "at Mattatuck." They were
" 4 plaine stocks with Iron and file. 3 Augurs and a zest [rest], a plow^
stock Irons and chisell." Beside these, he had here, cattle, and
"one small feather bed."

Farmington did not send out men whom she could spare, because
they were "unwholesome members of her community," to found
Mattatuck. She parted with some of her very best men; men who
had assisted to lay her own foundation walls; men who were and

MA TA TUCK AS A PLANTATION.

159

who continued to be owners of many fruitful acres in her beautiful
valley; young men, whom she needed to serve her own places and
purposes. There were not many families of note in Farmington
that were not represented here by some one of their number. The
Farmington church, that stood for all that was highest and best in
the civil and social life of the time, yielded to us abundantly of her
treasures. More than thirty of the men and women who came here,
and who were dwelling in their own houses before the last of May,
1681, came hither out of the full communion of that church. The
greater number of them had spent their entire lives under its influ-
ence, guided by the religious teachings of Reverend Roger Newton
and Reverend Samuel Hooker — while at least six of them could
remember a boy-life in Hartford, and the teachings of Reverend
Thomas Hooker. Beside these, the church parted, a little later,
with Robert Porter, one of her seven pillars, and doubtless would
have yielded to us another one, had John Bronson, Senior, lived to
accompany his three sons in their removal. Whatever may be said
of the planters of Mattatuck, it must, through all time, be admitted
that they were a people — God-fearing, God-worshiping, God-loved,
and we hope, God-loving. That they were well-born and well-bred,
we know, for we have followed, even though it has been in a very
imperfect and fragmentary manner, the path leading through time,
and marked with the events in which they and they fathers had
been led from 1628 to 1677.

Of the elder men who ventured themselves to brave the discom-
forts and dangers incident to migration; who attended the prepar-
atory stages of the plantation, guiding its initial steps with their
experience; not one, so far as we have learned, perfected his resi-
dence as an inhabitant in 1681. John Warner, Senior, another
soldier of the Pequot war, had passed on in the endless migration to
the Unknown, before that time came; John Bronson, as we have seen,
had already followed him, while John Andrews, Senior, was about
to write his will, in which he describes himself as "grown aged,"
and "attended with many weaknesses," and even John Langdon— a
deacon, at a later day, in the Farmington church — who had been
energetically interested in the plantation, carrying up to the Court
the petition for its formation, and paying the ten shillings neces-
sary for the sending of it on its courtly way, failed to secure his
position as inhabitant and proprietor — thus leaving young men at
the front in every line of endeavor.

i6o

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

a

k

b

^

"5

*

*

)

i

*

^

;*

(

?^

{

w

>

1

s

Highway

nou/

milow

Street.

\

■ 1

1

1

IS

•

A»i*rt ^»rter fit Jlcrt

r ^trat

%

TIU0tms Hmioamt

I

5

^

^

5"

•
a Atrej

3

^

d

Q

1

5

Dmmti nTmrmtr

fnSn^ Itiirmfr • -a ^rm

a ^*r*t

5^

a Aerwkf

1

a ^rr<rj

•

John e^rrtn^mi*

ayltrtf

1

Sarffmnf.Mfm Stmntlltf

r Jfrrfj

a jlcftt

/or asm J)tor*ei ^mrff

StimMai Si€Kaa
a j*t/ft

Z3mbm TM^mmi JitM/ar JUm JihM
a jtirrj

a Arm

now Bank Street.

nouf North Main Street anzt Linden SirpcA

\

i

\

I

n

i

V 1

5i r

i

•s

' 1 ^

5-

w

■1

♦

V

\

^ 1

HOUSE LOTS OF MATTATUCK, 1681. LThe top of the page is west ]

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. i6i

The central fact of the early New England village, was its green
plain. Around it and along its very borders the town plot was laid
out. Its surrounding house lots were narrow and deep. The green
plain of Mattatuck, the eastern portion of which is now called,
sometimes the Green, and sometimes Centre Square, was at the time
of the settlement but little more than the marshy result of a former
swamp. It has required time and much labor to evolve it into its

present form of beauty. The most careful research, reveals to us
the town spot, as it was laid out under the care of the Assembly's
Committee. On the north side of the green plain were twelve
house lots — on its south side, twelve— on Willow street, four— on the
north street, four— on Bank street, four. Thirty-one of the number
were allotted to the thirty-one men who were the signers of 1674.
One was given to Stephen Upson. One was bestowed upon the

i62 mSTORT OF WATERBURY.

miller. Three remained as great-lot house lots for the benefit of
the public.

We introduce here (see page i6o) an outline map of these
lots, with explanations. The small lot of three-quarters of an acre,
on which now stands the stately ruin of the Judge Kingsbury house,
was given to young Thomas Judd, the son of William, when he
became of age to receive it. Two house lots have been added to the
plot although they were not laid out until about 1685. This has
been done in order to show their true position in the plan. They
were bestowed, one upon Samuel Scott (a son of Edmund), the other
upon Richard Porter. The Atkins building, at the corner of Grand
and Bank streets, is on the lot of Richard Porter. The map of
" Mattatuck Village " that was prepared for Dr. Bronson's History
of Waterbury is also reproduced. It represents not only the
earliest house lots, but also a period later in the history of the town.
He placed three house lots below Grand street because one of the
number, Richard Porter's, required a highway for its south bound,
and he did not find that part of Grand street that lies eastward
from Bank street. We find that Grand street east of Bank street,
being an original highway, was conveyed in 1697 to Richard Porter
in exchange for the Union Square front of his Bank street lot.
Thus early did the townsmen begin the work of diverting the lands
which had been granted to the ministry in perpetuity, from the
original intent of the grantors ; for this temporary closing of a por-
tion of Grand street was the entering wedge that opened the way
for the relinquishment of the ministry lot on Bank street, for other
land, and this took place while the founders of the town were
living. The street was re-opened April 9, 17 12.

We have so long delayed to introduce the inhabitants of Matta-
tuckby name, that we are come to November in the year 1681. It
is now six months since the time expired that was granted by the
committee for finishing the houses. The past year has been one
of great trials to the elder towns, and we may be quite certain that
this new plantation has had its full share of tribulations. Rever-
end Simon Bradstreet tells us in his journal, that during June,
July, and August of this year a great drouth prevailed, destroying
corn and grass to the value of many thousand pounds. The drouth
was followed by " a malignant fever of which many died in many
places in the colony during September and October." The "rod of
the anger of the most High had been shaken " so severely over the
people that, for the first time in its history, the General Assembly
closed its October session without the appointment of a day for
general thanksgiving. " And yet," the Reverend journalist adds :
** there was enough left for a meat and a drink offering."

MATTATUCK A8 A PLANTATION. 163

The specifications for house-building formulated in 1674 by the
committee, were exceedingly simple. It was not forbidden to build
a palace, but it was required that every man should have a good,
substantial dwelling house, at least eighteen feet long, sixteen feet
wide, and nine feet between " joynts, with a good chimney in the
fore sayd place." The "fore sayd 4)lace" has not before been
mentioned, but it probably referred to the chimney-space. It
seems highly probable that the earliest effort at a habitation
was one erected in common, with sufficient of comfort for the
workers during the week, and that the men, inured to riding,
thought little of returning to their families at Farmington as often
as occasion required. But the time has now arrived when each
man should be found living in his own finished house, with his
family abiding with him.

We will begin our acquaintance with the founders of the town
at the southeast corner of the " Green." The lot is marked on the
plan ** Deacon Thomas Jtidd for John Judd," with the name of
'* Abraham Andrews, cooper," beneath it. We find this lot without
a house upon it. We have already learned why John Judd gave up
his claim to Mattatuck lands. Abraham Andrews, his successor,
although he has attained his thirty -third year, is still waiting for
his coming bride. She will be Sarah, the daughter of Robert Por-
ter^ and will arrive from Farmington at some time during the com-
ing year.

On the lot lying to the westward, Daniel Porter, the well-known
surgeon of the River Towns, or his son Daniel, has built a house,
but it has no chimney. The younger Daniel himself, although he
is now twenty-nine years old, seems to have neither fireside nor
wife. Eighteen years later, in 1699^ we shall find him living in this
house with his wife, Deborah Holconjb, and one child.

Adjoining the Porter lot, and where now is standing our Town
and City Hall, we find the house of Timothy Standly. In 1634, John
Stanley died while on the passage from England to New England,
leaving three little children. One of the children died. The two,
John and his sister Ruth, were left to the care of their uncles
Thomas and Timothy (their father's brothers), between whom the
estate of John Stanley was divided by the Court for the benefit of
the children. The little boy, John, became Captain John
"Standly," of Farmington, and was the father of the Mattatuck
Standlys. We find Timothy Standly's house "large enough and
ovned." In it are living Timothy himself, who is twenty-nine
years old, and his wife, Mary Strong, of Windsor. They have been
married five years, and are without children.

i64 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

On the fourth lot, where now is the Silas Bronson Library build-
ing, Leavenworth street, and a part of the Kendrick homestead
land, John Carrington is living, with his wife and their four chil-
dren. John is about thirty-nine years old. The children are :

John, age 14 years, Hannah, age 6 years,

Mary, age 9 years, ^ Clark, age 3 years.

There is an interest and a pathos about this name John Carrington.
It is connected with an event so pathetic that it sends shudders of
pity through all the years from 1650 to 1892; and yet there are
events occurring every day in the current of our boasted civilization
that will, without doubt, send the self-same storm of pity surging
through the hearts of men and women two hundred and fifty years
hence — events that we accept without a protest. John Carrington
and his wife, Joane, of Wethersfield, in 1650, were tried before the
court at Hartford for the crime of witchcraft. Our John Carrington
was then a lad of about eight years. We are not able to say that he
was the child of the above John and Joane Carrington, but there
seems to be no reason to doubt that such was the fact. " At a Par-
ticular Court in Hartford on the 20th of February 1650, John Car-
rington and Joane Carrington of Wethersfield, were on trial for
their lives." We find the following :

JOHN carrington's inditement.

" John Carrington thou art indited by the name of John Carring-
ton of Wethersfield, carpenter, that not having the feare of God
before thine eyes thou hast Interteined ffamiliarity with Sathan
the great Enemye of God and mankind and by his helpe hast done
workes above the course of nature k^r w'^h both according to the
Lawe of God and the Established Law of this Commonwealth thou
deservest to dye.

The Jury findes this Inditem' against John Carrington the 6th of
March i6fy.*'

Then follows the name of his wife Joane, and the same indite-
ment in the same words, with the same finding by the same jury.
On this jury we find men with whose names we are already
familiar. Thomas Judd, William Lewis, Stephen Heart and Mr.
Tailcoat, the father of our Major Talcott, are of the number. That
the finding of this jury was followed by the execution of John and
Joane Carrington, may be inferred from the following entry. I
have not the date of it : " There was presented to this Courte an
inventory of John Carrington's estate which was ordered to be filed,
but not recorded." The inventory on file has never been found.
We return, from this painful departure, to Mattatuck, and find the

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION. 165

house of John Carrington too small to meet the requirements of the
committee, although large enough to hold many bitter recollections
for its owner.

On the next lot — belonging to Edmund Scott— we find a house
perfect according to the specifications of the committee. Not a com-
plaint has been made against the work of this man. The original
house lot of the late Hon. Green Kendrick, together with Leav-
enworth street, occupies all of Edmund Scott's lot, and one-half of
John Carrington's lot. In this perfect habitation we find a family-
notable for the number of its members who fell victims to the rage
of the Indian. The family consists of Edmund, his wife, who was
Elizabeth Fuller and the widow of Thomas Upson, seven sons and
one daughter,* No other one of the proprietors is so well equipped
with sons as is Edmund Scott. It is not surprising that many acres
on mountain and in meadow are early recorded to the Scott name,
when we find that the boys of the following list are aids to their
father in subduing the wilderness. The following ages are esti-
mated from the records of the Probate Court:

Joseph, about 20 years, George, about 12 years,

Edmund, about 18 years, David, about 10 years,

Samuel, about 16 years, Robert, about 8 years,

Jonathan, about 15 years, Elizabeth, about 5 years.

On Thomas Richason's two-acre lot we find no house in 1681, for
he is living with his wife, Mary, and their seven children, in a cel-
lar. The language of the complaint is that he " hires a cellar to
live in." The children are :

Mary, age 14 years. Israel,

Sarah, age 12 years, Rebecca, born in IVaUrbury, April

John, age 9 years, 27th, 1679.

Thomas, age 7 years, Ruth, age 6 months.

We have here the record of the birth of the first English child of
Mattatuck. It is difficult to understand why Thomas Richason is
living in a cellar in 1681, when we learn, by the record of the birth
of his daughter Rebecca, that he has been living in Mattatuck at
least two and one-half years. The construction of the early houses
was such that many of them were easily burned; but, had disaster by
fire fallen upon this proprietor — the man who held the least interest
in the township, his right being but fifty pounds — the committee
would surely have forborne to take away his allotments.

♦The oldest known grave in ancient Waterbury is, with little if any doubt, the grave of Joseph, the
eldest son of this family. It lies in a lonely spot in the very heart of the wilderness— about half a mile west
from Reynolds Bridge— and marks the spot where he was killed by Indians. This was before February of
1708.

1 66 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

The lot to the westward on which will be found " The house for
the minister," is one of the three house lots belonging to the
same number of great-lots, that were set apart by the committee
for special service to the community. One of the number will be
seen at the west end of "the" highway, or West Main street, the
other on "a" highway, or Bank street. The one on Bank street had
been devoted to the "ministry" already, but in this same year, the
dwelling houses having been fairly well completed, one for each
family, the question arose, " Which of the great-lots shall be for the
minister's use?" This question was asked in a letter written a few
months later in the same year, on February 20, 1681, by Timothy
Standly, and Abraham Andrews, ** select men," to the committee.
Surely this was commendable promptness on the part of the
founders of the town in preparing the way for the coming min-
ister of the gospel. The answer of the committee was deferred
until April, when it was given in the following words : " We
leave it to your judgment, to be determined by the major part
'of the inhabitants, and if you cannot agree, we shall determine."
We infer that the lot was chosen by the inhabitants, in the absence
of any evidence contrary to that inference. The house that was
built on that lot, it is thought, occupied a site that included the
land on which the extreme southern portion of the house of Mrs.
John C. Booth is standing.

Next west of the minister's house, is a lot that was originally
allotted to William Higginson, who was twenty-six years of age at
the time he signed the Articles in 1674. His wife was Sarah, the
daughter of John Warner, Senior, thus associating with the first days
of the Plantation, as original planters, John Warner, his sons John,
Daniel, and Thomas, and his daughter Sarah — the date of whose
marriage with William Higginson I have not learned — as well
as the third generation of Warners, in the children of John, Junior,
Thomas, and Daniel. This lot was subsequently bestowed upon
Edmund Scott, Junior. Our only authority for the ages of the
children of Edmund Scott is the Probate Court record, according
to which, Edmund, Junior, is at this time, about eighteen years of
age, and yet he had been granted the house lot of William Higgin-
son in 1679, and his house is now complained of, because it has no
chimney. The gift at this time, to Edmund Scott, Junior, from his
father, of a house on the same lot, in order to avoid the forfeiture
of his son's allotments, suggests that we perhaps ought to find two
houses on the lot.

The next lot is Benjamin Judd's. He has been living nominally
in Mattatuck, several years, but delayed to finish his house until

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 167

two months ago. His wife is Mary, the daughter of Captain
William Lewis of Farmington — Benjamin is not yet forty years
of age. His wife is thirty-six. Their children are:

Benjamin, age 10 years, Sarah, age 4 years,

Mary, age 6 years, Hannah, age 2 months.

The next house lot is John Welton's. His age and parentage are
unknown. On this lot he has built a house to the acceptance of his
townsmen, for no complaint has been made by them to the com-
mittee. In it, John is living with his wife, Mary, and their six
children.

Abigail, age 14 years, John, age 8 years,

Mary, age 12 years, Stephen, age 3 years,

Elizabeth, age 10 years, Richard, age 19 months.

Especial interest is attached to the above infant, Richard Wel-
ton, because family tradition claims his birth as that of the first
English male child in Mattatuck. An account " of the Welton
family in Waterbury," by Richard Welton, who writes that he (the
writer) "is the great-grandson of John Welton, who came from
England," gives the date of Richard's birth as ** September 27*
1679 ; " but it is the only date given in the manuscript. Our town
record states that this child was " bom in Waterbury, sometime in
March, 1680." Assuming that the public record is the true one,
Richard Welton seems to have two competitors for the honor. One
of them is little John Warner, who by record was " born in Water-
bury, March 6th, 1680 ; " the other is Abraham Andrews, the next
door neighbor of young Richard.

Abraham Andrews, Senior, was early on the ground, and seems to
have fulfilled all his obligations with great faithfulness. His house
lot is next west of John Welton's. Here he lives with his wife
Rebecca Carrington, daughter it is believed of John Carrington of
Wethersfield, and sister of John Carrington of Mattatuck, with their
four children,

Rebecca, age 9 years, Hannah, 2ge 3 years,

Mary, age 7 years, Abraham, born October 14th, 1680.

The record of Abraham Andrews* children does not say that this
Abraham was born in Waterbury, but, as one of the requirements
was that the proprietors should be personally living with their
families at Mattatuck by May, 1680, and other men have been com-
plained of because they were not here at that time, and Abraham
has escaped all censure, we infer that he was living here in his
own house when this child was born. Based upon the above as a
conclusion, the birth of this young Abraham Andrews antedates
that of Richard Welton and John Warner by five months.

1 68 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

Next west, we find a " great-lot/' — house lot, whose first occu-
pant will be Reverend John Southmayd, about 1 704,

Having reached Willow street, w.e find on its western border a
lot with John Langton's name on it. Of this lot we know little.
There was probably no house upon it.

Benjamin Jones is the owner and occupier of the adjoining lot.
His wife is Hannah Spencer, to whom he has been married twenty
years. They have at least one child, Benjamin, age unknown.
Benjamin Jones has been absent from the plantation too much to
please his neighbors, and complaints have been made ; but, as he
was on the ground in time, and built his house in time, the commit-
tee will ignore complaints. This is also the lot on which John
Andrews, the father of Abraham, the cooper, intended to build and
live.

We will pass by the small lot of only three-quarters of an acre,
on which young Thomas Judd will live when he becomes of age to
receive lands. Crossing West Main street, we come to the home-
stead of the late Judge Bronson. It is the scene of Abraham Bron-
son's early attempts to settle in Mattatuck. This was before Lyme
and his wife Hannah, the daughter of Matthew Griswold of that
plantation, lured him away. He was married three months after
the articles were signed, and was living in Mattatuck in 1677. Now
we find John Scovill in possession, the allotments having been
conferred upon him by the committee. John Scovill's house is
without a chimney. In 1688 " the town of Farmington voted to have
a town house to keep school in." It was to be eighteen "foot'*
square "besides the chimney space." Mr. Julius Gay, of Farming-
ton, in his " Schools and Schoolmasters in Farmington in the Olden
Time," refers to the above clause relating to the chimney as " sig-
nificant," and tells us that "chimneys were at first built on the out-
side of the houses; that they were not built of bricks, for there
were no bricks in the country except those brought by the Dutch-
men from Holland; that they were not built of stone, because there
was no lime for mortar but the little that could be obtained from
the burning of oyster shells. Accordingly, chimneys were built of
wood, laid up log-house fashion, and lined with clay. Of course the
clay was continually coming off and the houses taking fire." How-
ever the chimneys of Farmington may have been built, the men of
Waterbury built stone chimneys, laid in clay, oXsivery early date, and
there is reason to think that the houses of the first settlers were
constructed with stone chimneys. There was a house, built, it is
thought, by the first Stephen Upson— it was certainly given by him
to his son Stephen — that had a stone chimney. It stood on the

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION. 169

southwest corner of Grand and Bank streets, and was taken down
in 1839, after the death of David Prichard, who had lived in it more
than a century. The late Johnson house, that was built before 1723,
by a son of John Scovil, the planter, had a stone chimney, laid in
clay; while the heirs of another "signer" divided among them-
selves the house of their father, even to the stones of the chimney.
Two of the houses referred to certainly had chimneys in the centre.
The fact that there are in 1681 four houses without chimneys, cer-
tainly indicates that the chimney was supplementary to the house.
John Scovill has been married about sixteen years. His wife is
Sarah, the daughter of Thomas Barnes, of Farmington. Their chil-
dren are John, who is about fifteen years of age, William, Benjamin,
and perhaps others.

Lying to the northward of the John Scovill lot is the habitation
of William Judd. William, three of his brothers and John Stanley,
communicated to the church at Farmington their desire to remove
to Mattatuck. The following is the reply that was made concern-
ing William's request : " Particularly to our brother William Judd,
that it having pleased God to deal so bountifully with him, that not
many of the brethren with us have so large accommodations as him-
self, yet see not his call to remove on account of straightness for
outward subsistence and therefore counsel him, if it may be with
satisfaction to his spirit, to continue his abode with us, hoping God
will bless him in so doing." In May 1680, William's family was not
living in Mattatuck. Because of this omission his allotments were
taken from him. But last March he accepted them again and
promised to live in Mattatuck. Therefore, we expect to find him in
November of 1681, very comfortably housed. He is about forty-
five years old ; has been married twenty-three years to Mary, the
daughter of John Steele. Their eldest child, Mary, has been for two
years the wife of Abel Jones, of Northampton. The children at
Mattatuck are six:

Thomas, age 18 years, Samuel, age 8 years,

John, age 14 years, Daniel, age 6 years,

Rachel, age 11 years, Elizabeth, age 3 years.

Returning to West Main street, on the corner where Mr. Charles
Mitchell is now living, we find John Warner, Junior. He has built
his house without delay or deficiency, unconscious of the fact that
he is living on the ground where sixty years later will be erected
the first Church of England edifice in the Naugatuck Valley. Here
we find him with his wife and their five children:

John, age 1 1 years, Ebenezer, age 4 years,

Ephraim, about 11 years, Lydia, age 6 months.

Robert, age unknown.

lyo

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Next eastward is the lot given to John Porter and resigned by
him in 1677, we know not why. David Carpenter was the next owner,
but he is under sentence of forfeiture. It stands now in the hands
of the committee awaiting the coming of Robert Porter in 1684.

Going eastward we find on the next lot, containing one and
three-quarter acres, the unfinished house of Thomas Hancox. It
is "covered almost all and clabborded and noe chimney." Three
of his neighbors testify that he has " deserted the place, being gone
all or the greatest [part] of the year past." Thomas Hancox has
the largest estate, save one — that of William Lewis — in Farmington.
This evidence does not speak well for Thomas, and perhaps not for
Rachel Leonard of Springfield, who, apparently, keeps him waiting
for three years before she consents to live in Mattatuck as Mrs.
Hancox. Meanwhile, the settlers will complain relentlessly;
Thomas will return to duty; sign anew the promise to keep his
pledges ; finish his house, and perhaps furnish his neighbors w^th
food, for Thomas Hancox is a butcher. He will stay long enough
to perfect his title as a proprietor — to have two islands, a brook,
beautiful meadows, and one little child, bear his name — ^and then he
will flit to Farmington, to Hartford, to Farmington again — and
years afterward a grandson will sell his rights in the township.

On the lot bearing the name of Samuel Gridley, with Thomas
Newell beneath it, we find Thomas, aged thirty-one years, with his
wife, Elizabeth Wrotham, and their infant son Thomas. " He came
not according to Articles ; neither built according to Articles. Ye
house not finished in time." The time, it will be remembered, was
the thirtieth of last May.

John Bronson has the first two-acre house lot that we have met
with since leaving Willow street. He has the honor of having per-
formed the conditions of his contract to the acceptance of his towns-
men and the committee. No complaint has been made. His age is
thirty- seven. His wife is Sarah, the daughter of Moses Ventrus.
Her age is thirty-two. Their children are:

John, age 11 years, Dorothy, age six years,

Sarah, age 9 years, Ebenezer, age 4 years.

Thomas Judd, Jr., has a larger house lot than has been allotted
to any of his neighbors to the westward, for it is two and one-
quarter acres. This Thomas Judd, "Junior" in Farmington, is to
become our Lieutenant Judd. He will be our first deputy to the
General Court. Dr. Bronson speaks of him as, " the leading man of
the infant town." He has followed in John Bronson's footsteps.
He arrived in time. His family was in Mattatuck by the last of
May, 1680, and the last of May, 1681, he was living in his own finished

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION,

171

house, his family abiding with him. He is now forty-three years
of age. About twenty-one years ago Thomas Judd married Sarah,
the daughter of John Steel of Farmington. Their children are :

Thomas, about 18 years, John, about 12 years.

Sarah, about 16 years,

The next lot was bestowed upon Daniel Warner. It will be
remembered that he died two years ago, when the family was mov-
ing from Farmington to Mattatuck. We may expect to find that
Mrs. Warner has built her house according to the advice of the
committee, and that she is living in it with her children :

Daniel, age 14 years, Samuel, age 6 years,

John, age 10 years, Thomas, age 4 years.

Abigail, age 8 years.

The lot of Obadiah Richards lies to the eastward of the Warner
lot. It contains three acres. He has built a house, but " it is not
according to the dimensions of articles." Whether the length
was too long, or the breadth was too narrow, we are not informed ;
neither are we told that the house was too small. Dr. Bronson tells
us that Obadiah Richards joined the settlement early ; that
he had an old Town Plot lot, and that he made his propor-
tion of fence in all the divisions, but that he had a tardy, slip-shod
way of doing things, and that when the crisis came it was found
that he had not rendered a full compliance with the conditions of
the articles, and his allotments were condemned — that he mended
his ways, however, and his rights were restored. By means of the
paper on which Major Talcott recorded the complaints, we learn
the exact nature of each proprietor's sin against the law of the
committee, and are able to do justice to the memory of Obadiah Rich-
ards. So far from being " slip-shod," he certainly has been exceed-
ingly enterprising and industrious to have accomplished so much
as has been done in the way of house and home building, especially
when we stop to consider that he has but one boy to help, and five
little girls to hinder him in his struggle with the wilderness. He
was granted the only three-acre house lot fronting the green plain.
It extended on the north to present Grove street. Before the
estate to which this house belongs is settled, the lot and the house
will be divided among the sons and the daughters, even to the
stones of the chimney. About fifteen years ago, when about twenty-
eight years old, Obadiah Richards married Hannah, the daughter of
John and Mary Andrews, of Farmington. Their children are :

John, age 14 years, Elizabeth, age 6 years,

Mary, age 12 years, Sarah, age 4 years,

Hannah, age 10 years, Obadiah, age 2 years.
Esther, age 8 years,

172

BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

On March 21st, 1679, in the old meeting-house at Farmington,
Obadiah Richards and his wife presented their seven children for
baptism. It was probably just before their removal to Mattatuck.
We find the same seven children here in 1681.

The next lot will be found marked Thomas Judd, for son Sam",
and beneath, Philip Judd. Samuel Judd was not of age in 1674,
therefore his father became responsible for him. In the house on
this lot we have the pleasure to present to all whom she may inter-
est, the first English bride of Mattatuck. She is only eighteen, and
the wedding journey has been from Massachusetts to Mattatuck.
The arrival and the moving into the new house has taken place this
very month. The bride is Mariah, the daughter of Thomas and
Mary Strong, of Northampton. In his "Thomas Judd and his
Descendants," Mr. Sylvester Judd tells us that this marriage cere-
mony took place ** about 1681." We are able to add to that testimony
that " Samuel Judd built and went into his house in Mattatuck in
Novemb', '81: and not fit before — that it was shingled about Mich-
aelmus." The above testimony was given by Stephen Upson, Isaac
Bronson, and Daniel Porter. The first child of Samuel Judd was
bom in the October following. Philip Judd did not become the occu-
pant until 1687.

Joseph Hickok * is the owner and occupier of the next lot, hav-
ing met and fulfilled all the required conditions. We find Joseph
Hikcox and his wife in their finished house with their children:

Joseph, age 9 years, Mary, age 5 years,

Benjamin, age 7 years, Elizabeth, age 2 years.

Samuel Hickox, one of the influential men of Mattatuck, lives to

the eastward of his brother Joseph, In every way, he seems to have

done his duty, and although he is not one of the eleven planters

whose interests are represented by ;^ioo, we expect to find on his

lot a larger and a fairer house than his neighbors have indulged in.

His wife is Hannah . Their children are:

Samuel, age 13 years, Thomas, age 7 years,

Hannah, age 11 years, Joseph, age 4 years,

William, age 9 years, Mary, age i year.

We are now come to the house lot occupied in part in 1892,
by The Citizens' Bank and by Mr. Henry Scovill. Richard Sea-
mer was the first recipient of it. He built his proportion of the

* This name, now usually rendered Hickox, has been given in many forms, seemingly ranging at pleasure
from Hitchcock to Hicks. When Samuel Hickox, brother of Joseph, signed his name to the inventory of
the estate of John Bronson in Mattatuck, in 1680, the recorder at Hartford made it Samuel Hitchcock. The
baptismal records at Farmington give it as Hitchcock, and as Hickcock. Waterbury Records usually render
it Hikcox. While upon the tombstone of a member of the same family was placed the name Hicks. There
lies before me an agreement, made in 1707, between William and Benjamin Hickox, sons of Samuel the
planter, to which iheir autographs are appended. The one is William Hickcox, the other, Benjamin Hecock.

.VATTATUCE AS A PLANTATION:

>73

first division of the common fence, and then left the plantation.
Benjamin Barnes was his successor. There is a house upon the lot
at this date. Benjamin Barnes is twenty-eight years of age. The
name of his wife we know only as Sarah— and the date of the mar-
riage has not been found. Benjamin, their first child of which we
have record, was born in 1684. Mention is here made of this Ben-
jamin Barnes to preserve the fact that his grave-stone is the oldest
one known to be within the
ancient township of Waterbury.
It is here given, and is identified
from its date, ly'g, and the ini-
tials B. B. Benjamin Barnes
died in 1709, aged twenty-five
years. The stone was discover-
ed in 1890, in the Grand street
cemetery. It had sunken until
the rough edge only of what
appeared to be a common field
stone was raised perhaps a half-
inch out of the soil. It bears a
date at least seventeen years
earlier than any other tomb-
stone in the township.*

Leaving the green plain, we
turn to the left, enter the North
highway, and visit the most
northern habitation of the plan-
tation. No latch-string is out, for
John Newell, his neighbors say,
does not stay at home. His house
is finished and waiting. John Newell's life-story we may not tell
He brings no bride to cheer the North-street house during all the
lonely thirteen years that he holds it. His age is thirty-nine years.
The name upon the lot is "Thomas Newell son."

We turn to his neighbor on the south, the reliable Isaac Bron-
son. He is a man who seems in all ways to have been faithful to
his promises, building on his four-acre lot in time, and "according
to articles," and therefore not afraid to enter complaints against
others. Isaac is thirty-five years of age. His wife is Mary, the
daughter of John Root of Farmington. Their children are:

Isaac, age 11 years, Samuel, age 5 years,

John, age 8 years, Mary, age i year.

!l Hopkim

h Hopkin.

174 HiarORT OF WATERBURT.

John Standly, Junior, or, as usually written on Waterbur}^
Records, John Standly, is the occupier of the next lot, containing
three and one-half acres. In 1681, this young man of thirty-four
years is quite unconscious of the important position he is destined
to fill during the coming fourteen years of the town's life. Our
regret is that he did not see the importance of copying, for preser-
vation, more of the events connected with the early days of planta-
tion and town. He was appointed to perform that duty by his
townsmen after he left Waterbury. It is now twelve years since
Hester Newell (the sister of John, who has the house two doors
above) and John Stanley were married in Farmington. It is evi-
dent that these parents have known the broadening touch of sorrow,
for bereavement has been their lot. Before coming to Mattatuck,
they lost two children, Esther and John. Their children in 1681 are:

Esther, age 7 years, Nathaniel, age 2 years.

Samuel, age 4 3'ears,

On the next and last lot before reaching East Main street, we

find the land originally allotted to Thomas Gridley; but it does

not appear that he even attempted to make a rod of the common

fence, or to fulfill any of the duties incumbent upon a "signer."

John Stanley, naturally wishing his own sister, Sarah Gaylord, to

live next door, assumed the responsibility of Thomas Gridley's

allotments in behalf of Joseph Gaylord, her husband. Joseph

Gaylord is thirty-two years of age, his wife is twenty -nine. Their

children are :

Sarah, age 10 years, John, age 4 years,

Joseph, age 8 years, William, age i year,

and perhaps Benjamin and Elizabeth. The record of Joseph Gay-
lord's children is not quite satisfactory, either as to their number,
order, or ages. Neither is his house quite satisfactory, but, " it is
large enough and ovned."

Crossing " the highway runningeastwardout of the Town Plat, "
on the south-east comer of the green plain (now East and South
Main streets) we are at the house lot " reserved for such inhabitant
as should thereafter be entertained." The " entertained " resident
guest proved, as we know, to be the miller, Stephen Hopkins. The
mill at Hartford from its beginning seems to have been held in the
Hopkins family; Governor Edward Hopkins himself owning the
mill or an interest in it. It is not easy to recognize through the
centuries the exact condition of this lot in Mattatuck in 1687. It is
less than two years since this two acre lot was bestowed upon
Stephen Hopkins, who had built the corn-mill in 1680, but what
may be found upon it in November 1681, we are not able to record.

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION. 175

Occupying^ the next lot to the southward, on which is the name
^* John Warner, Sr." with " Thomas Warner " beneath it, we find the
son, Thomas Warner. This is the land it will be remembered upon
which a cellar had been made in 1679, the cellar which the Assem-
bly's Committee permitted to stand. Thomas Warner has failed to
build his house in time. It is not finished, but that fact does not
necessarily prevent our finding that his family is living in it, and
as our records tell us that a son was born to Thomas Warner in
Mattatuck, March 6, 1680, and the family continued here, we may
expect to find him here with his wife Elizabeth, and their children,

Elizabeth, age unknown, John, age 20 months.

Benjamin, age unknown,

Southward of Thomas Warner's homestead lies the house lot
belonging to the " Ministry." On a lot south of the above lies the
new house lot that was laid out for Stephen Upson, the accepted
proprietor. Stephen has without doubt built his house, but his
home lot lies in a lonely spot, he having no next-door neighbor,
and it may be that he is permitted to live on the south side of the
green plain, where he has a merry company of half-brothers, for his
mother is now the wife of Edmund Scott. Stephen is destined to
wait another year for his home, and his wife, Mary Lee, who will
come from Farmington. Nearly all that Mattatuck gains, Farm-
ington must lose.

Thus we find that in 1681, Mattatuck is a village of twenty-
eight dwelling-houses. Fifteen of the number are finished houses,
thereby placing their owners on the Roll of Honor ; thirteen are
incomplete, or otherwise unsatisfactory. Two of the planters have
failed to build; and two house lots are to us as undiscovered terri-
tory. We find twenty-two families (including one widow) in which
there are ninety-three children; and one household is without
children. There is one new home; and there are six planters who
are not married men. To these must be added, in our thought of
the inhabitants, the unknown number of persons who, in the
natural course of town building, made themselves necessary to the
young plantation, but whose presence never became a matter of
permanent record. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Matta-
tuck received some of the Indian captives — the residue of the war —
and that they lived here during their term of servitude ; for the
records of the colony are replete with indications that the early
inhabitants utilized the labor of the " Indian " in many ways.
Counting only the legalized inhabitants whom we can name we
find one hundred and forty-five souls in Mattatuck in 1681.

CHAPTER XIII.

A LETTER FROM FARMINGTON — DIRECTIONS REGARDING THE GREAT LOTS
— WAYS FOR PASSAGES THROUGH THE MEADOWS — THE COMMITTEE
MEETING OF 1682 — ITS CONDEMNATIONS AND FORFEITURES.

'"T^HREE months after the date of the preceding chapter, Timothy
J^ Standly and Abraham Andrus, as selectmen, wrote to the
Committee for Mattatuck, asking advice. The date of the
letter was February 20, 1681. It was near the time of the annual
meeting when the letter was written. The committee waited six
weeks before answering the questions. The inquiries may be
inferred from the replies given. The inhabitants were permitted
to choose from among the three great lots, the lot that should be
for the minister's use, and were told that in case they could not
agree among themselves, the committee would decide the matter.
Another question had been asked in regard to the great lots, in
reply to which, the committee wrote : " Our answer is, men at
present to take up these lots do not appear to us. We are not
forward to break them, hoping in time some of worth and useful-
ness will appear, and for the present leave it in the hands and
power of Sergt. Thomas Judd, Sergt. John Standly and
Samuel Hikcox [to] let out the three great lots, and to break up
two or three acres in each lot, and to defray all common charges."
This reply indicates that the inhabitants had asked if the great lots
could be divided so as to admit men who desired to become pro-
prietors of small holdings in the township. It also reveals to us that
the committee held ambitious hopes for Mattatuck ; hopes which
they quietly veil behind the words " Some of worth and usefulness,"
when they might have written, "some of wealth and station; men
fitted to rule a plantation."

The answer to the second question is especially interesting, as
it touches the subject of highways. "In reference unto ways to be
laid out for passage through your meadow lands, our answer is, that
we desire and appoint [the same committee] to lay out ways
through sd meadows of twenty foot wide or more if they judge
needful, for cart, horse, or oxen in yoke ; every man to hold the
property of the land taken out of his and their allotments forever,
only to be improved for the use afores'd of a passage, the pasturage
to belong to him or them through whose lot the way shall be laid

MATTATUGK AS A PLANTATION. 177

out/' "Serg.t" Thomas Judd, Isaac Bronson and Benjamin
Judd had applied to the committee for guidance in reference to
herding of cattle. The answer was : " We do order and appoint for
the future that the inhabitants at a town-meeting, the major part
of the inhabitants so met shall have full power to resolve and
determine the way and method for herding, and to state what shall
be charged for keeping of cows, and what shall be levied on dry-
cattle." This letter, announcing the result of the meeting, is signed
by three members of the committee, John Talcott, John Wadsworth
and Nicholas Olmstead. It was " Taken out of the original " by
John Wadsworth. This is the first known meeting of the com-
mittee that we have not in the *' original." Without doubt. Major
Talcott's many duties prevented him from sending this one to Mat-
tatuck.

February 6, 1682, the committee met again. The meeting was
held at Farmington. It was fraught with momentous consequences
to certain proprietor inhabitants of Mattatuck. Fifteen months
had passed since the time expired that had been appointed by the
committee for the dwelling houses in Mattatuck to stand perfected.
In the interval, sm annual meeting had been held. Its permits, and
one order, we have just enumerated as contained in the letter sent
to the selectmen. No hint has been given of condemnation or for-
feiture. The inhabitants have been allowed to go on, living in and
finishing their houses in apparent security, when suddenly the
sword of justice descends upon them, and — wonder of wonders — it is
wielded to the drop, through the agency of certain of the planters
themselves. In view of the fact that the few men who came first
and built first had made complaints to the committee because their
old Farmington neighbors tarried in their homes, one would not
naturally expect to find the same men again raising their voices in
complaint, when their neighbors and their brothers had arrived,
and were making their very hearts glad by their presence, simply
because the same neighbors and brothers had been a little late in
finishing their houses; but this is precisely what they did do. We
meet here, among our own planters, one of the surprises that assail
us at so many points in the life of the Puritan, affording another
proof that there was something in the men of that day that we
have never quite understood — that we have never begun to under-
stand— and the knowledge of this facts hould cause us to withhold our
judgment in numberless instances. This not-understood somethings
led our planters straight on in the path of law, which to them was
the King's Highway of Duty, and valiantly they trod it, even when
the journey took away the thing they had most earnestly sought for.
12

178 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

Thus we find at the very opening of this meeting at Farmington,
in February, 1682, the following statement from the committee:
** We having heard the complaints ; and Alligations of Serg'.
Thomas Judd, and Serg*. John Standly and other Friends sent
from Mattatuck, as persons impowered to implead sundry of the
proprietors there, for that they have not erected their dwelling
Housen, and finished the same, according to provision and enjunc-
tion by Articles concluded by the Committee for Mattatuck,
November 26, 1679." We have no reason to think that it gave
either John Standly or Thomas Judd any pleasure or profit to have
their brothers dispossessed of their allotments, or to lose one-half
of the householders, and yet they laid and pursued the plan for
precisely that result. It was from these " complaints and alliga-
tions " that we were able to draw the picture of Mattatuck in i68i.
At the risk of being wearisome we will give them in their due form
and order. As the committee listened to the story. Major Talcott
made notes upon a piece of paper seven and one-half by eight
inches. That piece of paper, yellow with age, crumpled and worn,
was among the discovered documents so often alluded to ; and by
its light we have been able to throw color and form into a region
that seemed destitute of both.

The first act of the committee at this meeting was to adjudge
and condemn all the granted allotments, formerly laid out to Ben-
jamin Judd, Samuel Judd and Thomas Hancox, to be condemned as
forfeited.

Benjamin Judd was arraigned on two charges. The first charge
was because he was not living with his family in Mattatuck on May
30, 1680. The second was that his house was not finished on May
30, 1 68 1. Testimony was offered that it was done in September of
that year. Another aggravating circumstance was that Benjamin
had " drawn oft from ye place." The temptations to linger long in
Farmington must have been very great to most of the early settlers
here. There, they had homes. There, family ties still held them.
Their church relations continued there. Schools and comforts,
unknown in Mattatuck, existed there. These things must have
appealed strongly for sweet delays and long visits to men like Ben-
jamin Judd, and to his wife, who was the daughter of Captain Will-
iam Lewis, and to others.

Samuel Judd had "not built according to time prefixed. He
built and went into his House in November, :8i, and not fit
before." Stephen Upson, the carpenter, testified that " it was
shingled about Michaelmuss." Daniel Porter and Isaac Bronson
testified.

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 179

Thomas Hancox was the next culprit. Of him it was said: He
"hath a House covered all most all and clabborded and noe chim-
ney, within the time stated." He had deserted the place, "being
gone all or the greatest of the year past."

It was agreed that the persons to whom the committee should
thereafter grant the above allotments should " reside and dwell in
Mattatuck the full term and time of four years in a steady way and
manner with their families after subscription to the act and order."
If the owners of the buildings on the condemned lands should
refuse to sell them at a reasonable rate, or if the parties should fail
to agree in the matter of purchase and sale, the new grantees were
at liberty to build upon the land such mansion houses as the com-
mittee required at the beginning. The same penalties for forfeiture
were re-enacted for the new incumbents. The committee evidently
made this condemnation and forfeiture of the allotted lands with
genuine regret, for, almost in the same breath, certainly in the
same sentence with the above conditions, we find the words: "And,
in case those friends whose lands are at this meeting by us con-
demned, do desire to be re-possessed of their present lands condemned
as forfeited, [they] shall subscribe to this present act and order, in
case we see reason to re-possess him of them." Under the above
act, David Carpenter's formerly condemned lands were also to be
admitted.

The "friends sent from Mattatuck," also complained of "Timothy
Standly, Joseph Gaylord, John Carrington, Abraham Andrews,
Cooper, Thomas Nuel, Daniel Porter, Thomas Warner, Thomas
Richison, Obediah Richards and JohnScovel," for their not building
in time. Edmund or Edward Scott, Jr., was complained of at the
same time; but his father came to the rescue, and he escaped.
Benjamin Jones and John Newell were also the subject of com-
plaint. To begin with the list, we find that Timothy Standly and
Joseph Gaylord had each of them a house that was " Big enough,
and ovned." [Ovened ?]

John Carrington was complained of, because his 4iouse was not
large enough.

Abraham Audrus, the cooper, had not built a house on John Judd's
house lot, which had been conferred upon him by the committee.

Thomas Newell had failed to gain a residence in May, 1680, and
his house was not finished in May, 1681, neither was it done when
the complaints were made.

Daniel Porter had built a house, but it had no chimney.

Thomas Warner, whose father, John Warner, the old "Pequot
warrior," had his cellar in readiness when he died, had failed to

i8o HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

comply with the building regulations. The house was still unfin-
ished.

Thomas Richason, poor fellow, was living in a cellar, and even
the cellar was not his own, for the record tells us that he "hired it to
live in."

Edmund Scott, Junr., had a house, but it was without a chimney.
Obadiah Richards had not built his house according to the dimen-
sions required by the committee.

This paper of Major Talcott's bears evidence of the Major's
weariness of white men's complaints, for the latter part of it runs
along in this sleepy fashion:

" Benjamin Joanes complayned of for neglect of cohabitation.

John Nuel complayned of for ye same —

John Scove no chinny —

B: Scott conyslait — "

The last word is not easy to decipher. It does not seem to be
complaint, and it does not seem clear that Major Talcott intended
to write "comes late."

The committee exempted Benjamin Jones and John Newell from
the ban of condemnation and forfeiture. To the other men, they
gave an opportunity. They were to submit, to reform and live upon
the place one year longer than their neighbors, who had fulfilled
conditions. This they were required to do, in order to become abso-
lute owners of the soil. They all, with the exception of Benjamin
and Samuel Judd, availed themselves of the way of return.

Benjamin Judd withdrew his services as public surveyor and
returned to Farmington. Samuel Judd left his house, into which
he had moved with his bride in November, 1681, and followed his
father, Deacon Thomas Judd, to Northampton, where, in due time,
he fell heir to the estate of his father's second wife. It is not
known what became of their houses; but it seems probable that
Samuel's house remained for the occupancy of his brother Philip,
who came in 1687, and received from the committee his brother's
allotments, and that Benjamin's house was occupied in 1683, by
Thomas Judd, Jr., his nephew. Thomas Hancox, after fifteen
months' delay, when the meadows were growing green again,
thought them promising enough to pay him for subscribing anew
and staying the additional yeiir.

Before this meeting ended, the committee agreed that all public
charges, including those for making and mending highways, should
be laid on the meadow allotments for two years, or until 1684.
They also granted that each proprietor inhabitant should have
eight acres laid out in such places as the inhabitants should agree

MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, i8i

upon, and they confirmed a grant of land, bestowed by the planters
themselves, upon Samuel Hikcox. I think, but cannot prove, that
this grant was bestowed upon Samuel Hikcox at this early date in
recognition of his expenditures for a saw-mill. Philip Judd also,
who died in 1689, after living here but two years, owned a " right of
eleven pounds in the saw-mill and horse tackling." Six months
before, on August 3, 1682, the inhabitants had held a meeting in
the interest of Stephen Hopkins. Deacon Langton's allotments
had returned to the committee, and at this meeting the inhabi-
tants granted them to Stephen Hopkins, with the understanding
or condition that one-half of the proprietorship should be entailed
to the mill, in the same manner that the thirty acres had been. A
copy of the record of this town meeting was prepared and sent over
to the Assembly's Committee, that the act of the inhabitants might
be ratified by the power that still governed the plantation. Among
the early documents, we unfold this very copy that went from
Mattatuck to Farmington in 1682, and was returned, with the acts
of the committee, at an unknown date. There is upon it the words,
*' transcribed on page 23 b." This indicates that Mattatuck Records
at that date filled twenty -three pages. Samuel " Hickcox ** signed
his name, and John Warner made his mark on the copy; they being
the townsmen in that year. At some time between the date of the
town meeting — or more strictly speaking the proprietors* meeting,
for as yet there was no town — and this meeting of the committee
in February 1682, vStephen Hopkins must have resigned the care of
the -mill to his son John, for when the committee at the meeting
whose acts we are considering, ratify the act of the inhabitants con-
cerning Deacon Langton's allotments, the name of " John Hopkins,
the present miller," is substituted for that of his father Stephen.
The last words of this meeting are given in the form of advice.
^* Serg'. John Stanly " had petitioned the committee to allow him to
have four or five acres of meadow land up the river, even though he
must go four or five miles away from the village to find it. The
committee advise the inhabitants to comply with Sergeant Standly's
request, "in consideration of the meanness of his allotments."
This land grant was called Standly's Jericho and the name still lives
in Jericho bridge, on the Naugatuck railroad.

The acts of this meeting were not signed until the next day; the
committee having taken time to duly consider all the evidence
offered. There is nothing to throw light upon the case of
** Edward " Scott, Junior. He had a house upon the lot that had
been allotted to William Higginson, but it will be remembered that
it had no chimney. On this day his father " Edward " Scott, Senior,

i82 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT,

appeared before the committee, and made a verbal deed of gift to
his son of " that house set for a dwelling house on the home lot
granted to his son by Mattatuck committee," and all his rights in
the other grants received that belonged to the home lot on which
the house then stood,together with all the charges and expenses there-
on. This gift included what " he had disburst for the lands in refer-
ence to the purchase thereof." This first deed of land in Mattatuck
bearing date February 7, 1682, is recorded by Major Talcott upon
the same paper that contains the records of this most important
meeting. "John Talcott and John Wadsworth Assistants/* sign
the deed as ^witnesses.

We are not able to account for the house on this lot without a
chimney, and at the same time, another house on the same lot that
met all the requirements of the committee, unless we assume that
William Higginson had built a house on it, and that Edward, Sen-
ior, had bought it, without the land. Similar transactions were
frequent at this period.

This is believed to be the last meeting held at Farming^on by
the Committee for Mattatuck, for upon the same paper and beneath
the deed of Edmund Scott, John Wadsworth wrote the following
formula for signatures :

" We whose names are here under- written do subscribe to a
faithful submission and observation of the act of the committee on
the other side of this lefe February 6, 1682." Nearly four months
passed away before a penitent approached to promise "submission"
and "observation," and then we find appended the following list of
four names with their dates of signature.

Subscribed this 4 June 83 Thomas Hancox.

Jan. 10 83 Thomas Judd.
May 26= 84= Robert: Porter.
June 13. 87 Philip Judd.

In a little comer of space left on the paper in the deed of
Edmund Scott to his son, and above the formula for signatures,
John Wadsworth tucked in the explanation of Philip Judd's signa-
ture in the following words: " We the committee grant Philip Judd
the quiet possession of the land and allotments at Mattatuck that was
formerly his Broth Samuel Judds lands this 13th of June 1687 pr us.

John Talcott ) CommitUe."
ToHN Wadsworth 3

John Wadsworth

Thomas Hancox was the only penitent. Thomas Judd was
"accepted as an inhabitant at Mattatuck " on the day he signed the
agreement. The following is the document:

MATTATUCK A6 A PLANTATION. 183

" Hartford, Jan^y: the loth: 1683.

Thomas Judd Jun' is accepted as an inhabitant at Mattatuck his father Thomas
Judd having signified his desires of the same he the sayd Thomas Judd Jun': sub-
scribing to the Act and order of the Committee February the sixt 1682. in reference
to Benjamin Juds allotment, and privilidg of reseizen of the same upon condissions
in the sayd Act and order granted. It being determined by us the Committee, in
case any grant or grants be made by the inhabitants of Mattatuck to Thomas Judd
Jun': in reference to possession of any parcels or Tracts of Land is hereby made
voyd and of none effect, notwithstanding any thing to the contrary. And whereas
there is an Addission formerly granted by the Committee to Benjamin Judd's home
Lott, it is now ordered that the sayd Addission shall not run further into the High-
way [West Main street, about present State street] than it was layd by Serg* Jn«
Stanley Thomas Judd, and the Townsmen appointed for that service.

John Talcott

Pr us John Wadsworth ^

"Ly r\ r Committee.

NicHO. Olmstead 1

»>

Sam u ELL Snell Senr J

This is the latest document that has been found containing the
autographs of the surviving members of the committee. It sug-
gests that Thomas Judd, Junior, had before that date received from
the inhabitants, either with or without the sanction of the commit-
tee, certain lands that he could no longer hold when invested with
the allotments of his uncle, Benjamin Judd.

Lieutenant Nicholas Olmstead died soon after he signed the
acceptance of Thomas Judd, Junior, as a proprietor of Mattatuck.
Lieutenant Samuel Steele, died in 1685, thus leaving but two mem-
bers of the committee of five. Lieutenant Steele had more personal
interest in our plantation than any other one of the number, for
two of his sisters lived here, they having married the brothers
William and Thomas Judd. Three children of Deacon Thomas
Judd of Farmington, married three children of John Steele, of
Farmington. As long as Mattatuck continued its plantation life,
all the acts of the inhabitants that included the granting of
lands, or the acceptance of proprietors, required the sanction of
the committee; but after 1682, we find that gradually the inhabit-
ants became more independent in their acts, because the comn^ittee
more and more lessened its grasp upon affairs. In October, 1685,
the Court "appointed Major Talcott and Mr. Wadsworth to con-
tinue in full power as a committee for Mattatuck, as formerly, not-
withstanding the decease of some other of the committee."

Dec. 26, 1685, Major Talcott gave directions for raising rates for
defraying public charges. There is in the writer's possession, a let-
ter written by Mr. John Wadsworth to the selectmen of Waterbury,
that is of interest in this connection. It is the last communication
from a member of the committee. When folded in the creases made
by the writer, the letter is about two and one-half by two inches.

1 84 HISTORY OF WATBRBURT.

It still bears upon the red sealing-wax the impression of the writer's
seal, which is so broken that only the sections of an anchor can be
identified. We give the letter. It speaks for itself as clearly as we
could interpret its meaning. We do not follow the spelling or punc-
tuation:

'* To the Selectmen of Waterbury:

Gentlemen: — When we had the last meeting at Farmington concerning your
affairs, it was pleaded and owned by some of yourselves that there was a division
of land laid out, wherein it was agreed by yourselves and the committee that laid it
out that there should be an addition, namely, 5-4 for one acre; that is to say, [in]
part of that division; but through forgetfulness or oversight it was omitted, and so
the persons concerned fall short of what they should have had. This is therefore
to request and desire you to accommodate those persons concerned with that which
may be just on the fore mentioned account, and, so as they may be suited as well
as you can; for without doubt they will be losers by not having it together with
fore said division — which is all at present from him who is

Your assured friend and Servant, John Wadsworth.

Postscript — Your " atendent " of the above said, shall be allowed by us the Com-
mittee.

Farmington, Sept. 9, 1687."

The custom of " throwing in " land in the measurements of it
was extensively practiced in our township. Hills were sometimes
thrown in, and waste land not estimated. There is one instance of
a land division wherein three roods of the best land was laid out for
one acre and seven roods of the "worst" land for one acre. This
arrangement was entered into in order to equalize values, as Mr.
Wadsworth explains. At last on the fifteenth of May, in the year
1686, twelve years after the plantation was formed, the General
Assembly was pleased to accept the plantation into Hartford County
and to bestow upon it the name of " Watterbury."

We have closely followed the government of the committee to
the present date. Meanwhile, the inhabitants have carried on their
own enterprises in the most enterprising manner. They have built
their houses, constructed miles of common fence, built a corn-mill,
and we feel constrained to write, a saw-mill, although we can offer
no evidence as to its site, unless the saw-mill near the corn-mill was
the earliest one built. Already the lot for the minister's use is
chosen and perhaps built upon. It may have been the presence of
the minister in the plantation that caused the General Assembly to
confer upon it acceptance into the Corporation of Connecticut. It
is at points like the present one that we miss the sight of the
twenty- three pages of Mattatuck Records, ungrateful for the
moment, for all that is left to us. During the nine years that have
passed since the close of King Philip's war, not one note of alarm,
so far as we know, has been sounded in Mattatuck, that was caused
by the word or act of a single "dusky child of Adam."

CHAPTER XIV.

FARMINGTON's bounds — DEEDS FROM TUNXIS INDIANS — MATTATUCK
LANDS CONVEYED TO THE PROPRIETORS BY INDIANS — BOUND LINE
WITH DERBY — BOUND LINE WITH WOODBURY — A SUGGESTION — THE
THREE SISTERS — DEATH OF KING CHARLES II. — JAMES II. PRO-
CLAIMED KING, AT HARTFORD — THE CHARTER IN PERIL.

AS in all her beginnings Waterbury must go back to Farming-
ton as the source of her life, so must we study the boundaries
of that township and examine her Indian titles in order to
establish clearly and definitely our own territory. The acts of the
General Assembly and the acts of the Indian are so firmly inter-
woven and adjusted to fit the web of civilization, that, if taken sep-
arately, we lose the meaning of the design. Therefore, diflficult as
it may be to follow outlines, we make the attempt, resisting the
temptation to give the interesting details that crowd close to one's
pen and claim to be put upon record.

When, in 1645, the bounds of Farmington were established, there
seemed no necessity for a western boundary on its wilderness side,
and no bound was appointed. Its eastern limit was five miles west
from the Connecticut river. The Round hill, in the great meadow
toward Masseco (Simsbury), was the point of measurement for its
north and south bounds. Its south bound was five miles south
from this hill, with the following very significant liberty : " They
shall have liberty to improve ten miles further than the said five^ and to hinder
others from the like^ until the Court see fit otherwise to dispose of it** Here
stands revealed the fact that Farmington had jurisdiction over all
of the territory comprised within ancient Waterbury for twenty-
two years, before any restriction whatever was placed upon her
improvements by the court.

We will try and learn how the "Governor and Company of the
Colony of Connecticut " acquired the title under which the terri-
tory could be granted to subjects. The honest men of Farmington
answer this question for us. It was " taken for granted that the
magistrates bought the whole country to the Mohawk's country of
the chief sachem, Sequassen." After the three bounds of 1645 had
been established, it became necessary to look up the title that had
been obtained from the Indians, at the first settlement. About 1650
there was a "discovery made, in writing, of such agreements as were
[made] by the magistrates with the Indians of Tunckses concerning
the lands, and such things in reference thereunto as tend to settle

1 86 HISTORY OF WATBRBURT,

peace, in a way of truth and righteousness, between the English
and them." It is by this "discovery, in writing,'* that the above fact
appears in relation to the supposed title. We repeat it. It was
'* taken for granted that the magistrates bought the whole country to
the Mohawk's country of Sequassen, the chief sachem ! " The record
goes on to narrate that "notwithstanding their interest by that
means, yet that the magistrates did in a friendly manner come to
terms with the Tunckses Indians that some English might come
and live amongst them, which terms were these : That the Indians
should yield up all the ground that they had under improvement at
that time when the bargain was first made, and reserve ground in
place together compassed about with a creek and trees, and now
also to be staked out only in that piece. The English were to have
the grass for their cows, which now they are willing to let go, also
one little slip to be staked out, to avoid contention." There was
also an agreement made, by which the English were to break up
lands in the grounds that were, in time to come, to be used by the
Indians. This bargain, or deed, seems to have been made with a
full understanding on the part of the Indians; for John Stanton,
the interpreter, was present, and is one of the witnessing signers;
and the very language of it impresses one with the spirit of fair-
ness evinced by the men of Farmington. The Indians are told in
the plainest words, in this document, that "all the lands the Eng-
lish have are of little worth until the wisdom, labor, and estate of
the English are improved upon them, and that the magistrates,
when they have land for a place, give it away to the English to
labor upon, and take nothing for it." The advantages that the
Indians were then enjoying through the presence and protection of
white men are then very prettily pictured in words, after which
the following promise is made by the chiefs of the tribe :

"In this we, the chief Indians, in the name of all the rest,
acknowledge; and we engage ourselves to make no quarrels about
this matter." The Indians who signed this agreement were Pethus
and Ahamo, said to be the son of Pethus. The marks or heraldic
devices appended to this deed are notable; the first, because the
signature is made with two separate marks, perhaps in imitation of
English names; the second, or Ahamo's mark, is replete with a sig-
nificance that merits consideration. It is an elaborate device,
nearly two inches in height and more than an inch in width, show-
ing care and intention on the part of the signer to express his
meaning. The original deed forms a part of the volume of record.
This deed, or agreement, was the second one, or rather it was a
combination of the two agreements that had been made, one in 1640
and the other in 1650.

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686. 187

In 1667, " the Court granted unto Farmington to run their bounds
from the Round hill to the southward ten miles, provided it did not
prejudice any former grant to any town or particular person." It
will be seen that by this grant, five miles of the ten that had for-
merly been secured to Farmington for improvement, now came
within her own proper bounds, leaving the five miles that she had
had liberty to improve, entirely outside of her jurisdiction. In 1671,
twenty-six years after she became a plantation, Farmington 's west
bound was established. It was to run ten miles west from Hartford
bounds, or fifteen miles west from Connecticut river. Farmington
in 167 1 was anxious to have her western bound established. Was
it not with direct reference to the possible plantation at Mattatuck?
It is unreasonable to suppose that the men of Farmington remained
in profound ignorance of the region in which, for nearly a genera-
tion they had had liberty to improve the lands, or that the impetus
toward a settlement was unfelt up to the time when legal steps
were taken to that end. With this thought in view, we can under-
stand how certain places were already named, when the legalized
settlement of Mattatuck began, and understand why we are unable
to account for the naming of Steele's brook and plain and meadow;
of Bucks hill and Wooster swamp; of Mount Taylor, of John
" Macy's " land and Golden's meadow. They are one and all sug-
gestive of the days when Farmington had liberty to improve, and
the General Court used all the inducements in its power to per-
suade its subjects to raise commodities, for export. Could a better
field have been found for Edward Wooster, the great hop-raiser of
the region, than Wooster swamp ?

Farmington seems to have been keenly alive to her landed inter-
ests at about the time the settlement at Mattatuck was in the
thoughts of her sons, for in 1672 she secured along her entire west-
ern border an additional mile of territory, and even Wallingford,
apparently in dread of too near a neighbor on her western side,
petitioned for and secured two miles of additional territory on her
western border. The grant to Farmington pushed Mattatuck a mile
to the westward.

But the Indians of Farmington had never conveyed the lands
extending ten miles to the southward of the Round hill, and ten
miles to the westward from Hartford's west bound, and now the
court had added the eleventh mile ! A new agreement was entered
into on May 22, 1673, in order to cover the above territory. This
argeement recognized the deed, or treaty of 1650, between Pethusand
Ahamo, and the English,but explained that in course of time, dissatis-
faction had "been growing amongst the Indians in reference to the
premises, on which account the town of Farmington gave them a

1 88 HI8T0RT OF WATEBBUBT.

meeting by a committee." How could it have been otherwise, when
the court was, without authority, giving away their lands, and
Farmington was receiving them, without making payment for them?
However, at this meeting both parties came to a friendly and final
conclusion, based upon the court's present lay out of lands. For all
the miles of territory they gave up, the Indians received two hun-
dred acres of upland within the bounds of the plantation, and three
pounds in other pay. Upon this deed, also the original document,
there is traced an outline of the Round hill, which is nearly a cir-
cle, on the interior of which is written, "ye round hill — Wepansock
ye Indian name." From the circumference of the hill, lines are
drawn to the cardinal points, with the distance from the hill given
on each line. Twenty-six Indians were present at the signing of
this deed, and made their marks upon it. The territory covers
fifteen miles from north to south, and eleven from east to west.

It was not until May i8th, 1674, just nineteen days before the
signing of the Articles of Agreement for the Settling of Mattatuck,
that Farmington's southern and western bounds were measured and
laid out and returned to the court. The south bound reached a
tree on the west side of a swamp under the Hanging hill, near the
south end of the hill. The tree was marked with initials, and the
date. May 7, 1672. It is with interest that we note the western
bound of Farmington, for it indicates the existence of a recog-
nized, and, without doubt, habited place, farm or farms, before the
plantation was organized. James Steele, the surveyor, makes the
return to the court, as follows: "Farther, I being appoynted to
measure the bredth of Farmington bownds from Hartford bownds
westward, have accordingly measured out eleven miles tau^ards Mat-
tatuck to a white oak tree marked with divers letters and figures, as
S: S: [Samuel Steele] I: S. [James Steele] F: B., I: W. I: R., May 7:
'73. with divers other trees marked in the sayd line."

That Mattatuck was not at that date, simply a territorial region
to which the name was applied, and that there was something beyond
this western bound of Farmington, which, when reached was
the Mattatuck^ towards which James Steele measured is certainly dis-
closed by the words chosen to describe the western bound of Far-
mington.

August 26, 1674, fourteen Indians (six of whom signed the deed
covering the court's extension of Farmington lands the year before),
conveyed to the committee "one parcel of land at Mattatuck,
situate on each side of Mattatuck River; being ten miles in length
north and south and six miles in breadth." The eastern bound of
this tract of land was upon Farmington. In 1677, the committee
conveyed this sixty square miles to the thirty-one proprietors of

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686, 189

Mattatuck, they having paid the purchase price thereof. It must
be kept in mind, that, as yet, the Colony of Connecticut had con-
firmed no right in the soil to the planters. It simply held jurisdic-
tion over the territory, and only quitclaimed its interest in lands,
when the inhabitants had secured title to them from the aboriginal
owners. Thus, we get a glimpse of the value to the settlers of the
" uncouth " marks of the native potentates, and no longer marvel at
the efforts made by the planters to secure an enlarged township by
bargaining with the tribes for land to the north, south, east and
west, of the sixty square miles of 1674. It must be kept in mind
that the colony had in 1640, simply "taken for granted" that it pur-
chased of Sequassen all the lands to the Mohawk country — but it
soon fell back from that untenable assumption, and required would-
be proprietors to buy their own lands. Meanwhile, it was decided
to look ahead, and determine what might be suitable lines of divi-
sion between town and town. Accordingly on May 18, 1675, ^ com-
mittee was appointed to view the lands and the distances between
Derby, Woodbury, Mattatuck, Pototock (Southbury) and Wyante-
nuck, and to consider what might be suitable bounds for each town.
Three years passed by, accompanied by King Philip's war, without
a return to the court from this committee. During this interval,
Mattatuck had awaited development; the inhabitants of Woodbury
had entered into retreat at Stratford and perhaps, like our own peo-
ple, they returned to their old love with renewed affection, for the
town of Woodbury found it necessary to appeal to the court to
make an order that might enforce the people who had taken up lots
to return and inhabit there. The court made the order, which was
very compelling and armed with penalties. Because of these things,
the bounds had been neglected.

In 1678, the boundary committee appointed in 1675, was called
upon to report, but failed to do duty, and in October, 1679, was
again called upon to report in May 1680; and it was ordered that
" no farm be laid out within eight miles of either of those places,
until return had been made." In May, 1680, the four men, Wm.
Judd, Edward Worcester [Wooster], Lieut. Joseph Judson, and Mr.
John Banks, proving still delinquent, a new committee was
appointed "to view and measure the distances between Derby,
Woodbury and Mattatuck and consider what might be suitable
bounds for each plantation."

It is evident that Derby and Mattatuck had become weary with
waiting for the court's committee to act, for on the last day of
April, 1680, the respective towns had appointed a committee to act
in determining a line between the settlements, and had given their
agents full power "to make a final issue of the matter before it

ipo

HI8T0BT OF WATEBBURT,

should comg to the Court." And so it happened that three days
after the appointment of the court's new committee, Derby and
Mattatuck appeared, on May i8, 1680, before that tribunal with the
following as their agreement concerning Mattatuck's south and
Derby's north bound line. Twelve-Mile hill has long been a recog-
nized landmark. It was given its name, and the twelve-mile stake
was placed upon it, to indicate that Derby's north bound was twelve
miles from Milford's north bound. The name and the stake carry
the date back to the year 167 1, when Derby was not even a planta-
tion, but the home of a few settlers who were ambitious to be
recognized and owned by the colony. To-day, Twelve-Mile hill is
called Andrews hill. It lies to the west of Naugatuck, and has an
interesting and eventful history of its own.

The following is the agreement between Derby and Mattatuck
that was sanctioned by the court on May 18, 1680 :

" The sowth bounds of Mattatock doe begin at a stake at Derby's
Twelve Mile end, and from that stake to extend a west line where
Derby and Mattatuck shall meet Woodbury bounds, and from that
stake aforesaid at the end of Derby Twelve Miles, to goe w*** a
straight line to a stone marked w"* M on the north side, and D on
the south side, lyeing on the west side of Nagatuck or Mattatuck
river, and from that stone* to the mouth of Beacon Hill brook
where it falls into the Nagatuck or Mattatuck river, and that
brook to be the dividing line eastward between Mattatuck and
Derby." Thus the first boundary line of the township was estab-
lished before town rights were bestowed, and without the interven-
tion of the court, and to the evident satisfaction of both parties.

The precedent seemed a good one for Mattatuck and Woodbury
to follow. Accordingly, on June 29, 1680, William and Thomas
Judd and John Standly, Junior, for Mattatuck — John Minor, Joseph
Judson and Israel Curtice for Woodbury, had a meeting and unani-
mously agreed upon the following boundary :

"That there be a line run, due east from the westernmost part
of the bounds agreed and concluded between Mattatuck and Derby,
to Mattatuck river, and so that line to be run from the sayd river
two miles and twelve score rodd due west, and then a line runn
from the eastermost part of the great pond comonly known by the
name Quassapauge, from such a part of the pond as by us allready
is agreed on, fowerscore rods due east, and then a straight line
from that fourescore rod to the aforesaid west corner between
Derby and Mattatuck, and from the aforesaid corner fouerscore rod
due east from the pond." The bounds were to run from the given

\

*It is thou£^ht that the marked stone referred to was lost or destroyed about 1849, in the construction of
the Naugatuck railroad.

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686. jpi

points due north to the northward extent of each plantation's
bound. May i8, 1681, the General Court "confirmed and rattified
the boundaries agreed upon between Mattatuck and Woodbury and
granted that Mattatuck plantation should run eight miles north
from the town plott;" and also that Mattatuck's bounds on the east
should be upon Farmington's bounds. The north bound of Wood-
bury was not established until two years later; it was to run eight
miles north from the north bounds of Derby.

Lieutenant John Standly and John Norton were "to lay out
Mattatuck bounds." That very day, May 19, 1681, our John Standly
had been confirmed lieutenant of the "traine band of Farmington,"
of which organization his father, John Standly, had been for sev-
eral years the captain. Accordingly the court gave to him his new
title when, a few hours later, they placed him upon the committee
to lay out our bounds. What a temptation it must have been to stay
in Farmington, with the added glory of being a lieutenant there !
If anything could have won him from allegiance to the new planta-
tion, surely this temptation offered by his townsmen, would have
accomplished its purpose; but he laid his military title down and
became plain John Standly of Mattatuck. On several committees
that were made in reference to local matters, he was afterward
called Lieutenant Standly. Although the committee had been
appointed in 1681, and had duly attended the commission, the court
did not accept and ratify the return. Possibly it awaited the time
when the proprietors should have acquired title to the entire terri-
tory within its allotted area. In the year 1684, three deeds were
obtained from its Indian owners. April 29, 1684, nine Indians, for
nine pounds, conveyed a section of land, as an addition to the tract
conveyed in 1674. It was on its north side, and extended eight miles
north from Mount Taylor. On an east and west line its extent was
eight miles. At a point on this eight-mile northern line of the
township, Standly and Norton marked a certain tree with their
initials. This tree, in time, became lost, and the loss of it led to
complications which proved a loss of territory to Waterbury; but
we must wait forty years for the coming of that event.

December 2, 1684, ten Indians, for nine pounds, conveyed "one
parcel of land at Mattatuck situate on [the] east side of Nagatuck
or Mattatuck river, to extend three miles westward from the afore-
sayd river — three miles toward Woodbury, butting upon the rock
called Mount Tayler; an east line to be run from thence to Farm-
ington bounds, [and] a west line from the fore-mentioned rock, this
to be the butment north — butting east on Farmington bounds, and
from the great rock called the ordinary at the west of Farmington
bounds upon a south line to Beacon Hill brook or Milford or New

192 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

Haven bounds, butting south upon Beacon Hill brook and Pauga-
suck bounds — west upon Pototuck and Pomeraug. This parcel of
land being [and] laying within the township of Mattatuck bounded
as afore prescribed."

February 20, 1684, twelve Indians, for six pounds, conveyed
twenty parcels of land; nine on the east and eleven on the west
side of the Naugatuck river. On the east side, the nine parcels
with attractive Indian names lay between the mouth of Beacon Hill
brook and Fulling Mill brook {at Union City), while the eleven par-
cels on the west side seem to have extended from the first men-
tioned brook to Cedar swamp, on the north side of Quassapaug
pond. This deed is replete with points of interest. It presents to our
notice the very unusual fact that twelve Indians conveyed nine par-
cels of land, each parcel bearing its own descriptive name (its sig-
nificance unknown to us), and the nine parcels circumscribed in
area by two tributaries of the Naugatuck river, which are, possibly,
not more than two miles asunder, and this in a region popularly
supposed to have contained no "town of Indians." We here pre-

^^

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1636. 193

sent this unique deed. The reproduction is a little less than one-
third of the size of the original,

A timid suggestion may perhaps be allowed to enter here, in
view of the above deed and other facts that have come to the notice
of the writer. It will be remembered that the small-pox raged so
extensively about 1634 that the Indian tribes as far to the westward
of the Connecticut river "as could be heard of," were almost depop-
ulated by that disease. In view of that fact, we can readily under-
stand how once populous "towns of Indians" came to be broken up
and deserted. The suggestion is, that the twelve signers of the
deed of February, 1684, were the representatives of a tribe whose
tribal name was the "Nagantucks," and that it had a "town" at
some point between the two brooks; a town which had been given
up at a date prior to the conveyance of the lands to the men of Mat-
tatuck. In that region there was very early (certainly before Mat-
tatuck was settled), a place called "The Deer's Delight." Can one
imagine a more fitting deer park than the region lying between the
entrance of Beacon Hill brook into the river and present Seymour,
or a finer place for an Indian village than the vicinity of that brook
at the straits of the river? In 1672, Nagantucks was recognized as a
place or locality. It was associated (in the bounds of New Haven
or Milford, perhaps both), directly with " the rock called the
Beacon, lying upon the upper end of the hill called Beacon Hill, and
with the three chestnut trees growing from one root, being on the
next hill, called the Reare Hill." We here present the said three
chestnut trees of 1672. They
were still growing from one root
in 1891, The town charter of
New Haven described the north-
west comer of that township as
marked by the same three chest-
nut trees growing from one root,
in which patent they are called
the Three Sisters. These trees
became the boundary corner of
the towns of Waterbury, Wal-
lingford and New Haven, and
also one corner of a bound be-
tween Watcrbury and Milford.
They were .sometimes called the
Three Brothers. This clump of
trees seems never to have been
cut, but to have been left to
13

f94 niSTORT OF WATEBBURT.

Stand until nature laid it to rest and appointed its heirs. At
the present time, three large, ancient looking chestnut trees remain
at the place and constitute the corner bounds of Naugatuck, Beth-
any and Prospect.

It may be noticed that Mattatuck's north bound was to run
** eight miles north from the /^zf/i //^/," which gave to that planta-
tion about five miles of wilderness north of the north bound of
Woodbury, whose north line was to run eight miles north from t/ie
north line of Derby,

Just four days after the men of Mattatuck, in little Connecticut
Colony, obtained from the Indians the last of the deeds of 1684, there
was sent forth from the "Councill Chamber in Whitehall " to the
" Principal Officers and Inhabitants of Connecticut," the announce-
ment of the death of King Charles II., which event occurred on
that very day; and on the same day the proclamation of his only
brother and heir as King James II., was likewise announced to Con-
necticut. Directions were sent out, and the form for the same was
enclosed, that similar proclamations might be made in the chief
towns. All men in office here were to continue in office until the
pleasure of the new king should be made known. James II. was
duly proclaimed at Hartford, April 19, 1685, about two of the clock,
with great solemnity and affection, and then Robert Treat, of Mil-
ford, Governor, — he who but two months before was receiving the
Indians to witness the marks they signed on Mattatuck's deed — by
order of the Council, did address the new King in due form, giving
assurance that "his proclamation as King of Great Britain, Ireland
and France had been duly made with acclamations of joy and affec-
tion, properly accompanied with petitions to the King of Kings for
the long life and happy reign of his Majesty." Then, having done
his duty by the king, he, the same day, prepared an address, in
which he besought his most "Excellent Majestic to grant the
benign shines of his favour to the poor Colony of Connecticut in
the continuance of the liberties and properties granted by their
late sovereign, Charles the Second, of blessed memory, that they
might be encouraged in their small beginnings and live under his
royal shadow a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and hon-
esty." The address closed with due protestation of loyalty, duty
and obedience.

But we must turn away from the response of King James II. —
from all the arts and wiles of his would-be "Counsellors," and the
efforts that were made to dissolve the colonial system — and simply
announce that, before Mattatuck became a town, Connecticut colony
had every reason to apprehend the loss of its charter. For twenty-

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1G8G. 195

t

three years it had rejoiced in its possession and experienced all the
blessings of its kingly protection. The men who received it were
yet alive. They had in memory the ninth of October, 1662, the day
on which it was **publiquely read in audience of ye freemen, at
Hartford, and declared to belong to them." They had heard the
oath administered to " Mr. Willys, to Captain John Talcott, and to
Lieut. John Allyn;" the solemn oath to take into their custody the
priceless three sheep-skins, and safely to keep them. To the same
men they had seen Governor John Winthrop deliver the "Duplicate
of that charter," in 1663. They had paid their full share of corn for
that costly luxury; paid it in two-thirds wheat and one-third pease
— dry and merchantable. Their persons and carts, their boats and
canoes had been hired or pressed into service "to carry and trans-
port" the corn from the towns to the vessels that bore the grain to
New London. They had felt all the glad elation that came, when
from Long Island and from the farthest western bounds, even to
the very borders of the Hudson's river, the towns one after another
came up, by deputy or petition, to be taken under the protection of
that charter. Then the freemen had kept a Thanksgiving,
appointed because of the success of their "Honored Governor in
obtaining the Charter of his Majestic,, their Sovereign," and for the
free trade that had been ordered in all places in the colony. Now,
a day of public humiliation was appointed, to lament "the sin of
their great unreformedness under the uplifting of God's hand
against them." In the election sermon it was declared that He had
"smitten them in all the labers of their hands, by blastings,
mildews, catterpillars, worms, tares, floods and droughts."

In 1686, just as the inhabitants of Mattatuck were waiting for
the crown of all their labors — acceptance into the corporation, as a
town entitled to send its deputies to the assembly — the priceless
charter was in peril.

The freemen of Connecticut were aroused ! Many miles of terri-
tory, rich in mystery and replete with possibilities, lay to the north-
ward and westward of the settled townships. The charter gave
authority to " The Governor and Company of the Colony of Con-
necticut" to bestow these lands upon the colonists; but there was
no time for the organization and settlement of new towns. The
General Assembly resolved to enlarge the River Towns. To Hart-
ford and Windsor was given all the region lying between Wood-
bury and Mattatuck', and the Massachusetts line on the north; and
between Farmington and Simsbury, and the Housatonic river on the
west. It gave to other townships other lands. It bestowed hun-
dreds of acres upon individual men, for reasons that were not stated
of record.

196

mSlORY OF WATERS us r.

To properly equip the little Ship of State to outride the
approaching onset, it anchored each town within its jurisdiction
fast to the precious charter, by a " pattent " chain. The pattern,
after which each chain was to be wrought, was prepared. It was in
readiness in court on May 14, 1685; the day on which the towns
were ordered to take out, each one, its own little charter. Matta-
tuck had never sent a deputy to the Assembly at Hartford in 1685,
and therefore, in alt probability, did not petition for a charter at
the date given in the instrument as May 14, 1685, but merely fol-
lowed, when she did petition, the formula that was provided at that
time. If the above date be accepted as the true one, then Water-
bury and Lyme were the earliest petitioners for charters, and the
patent must have been sought by Mattatuck. Mattatuck's last
appearance in public, by name, was May 19, 1686, and the date of
the granting of Waterbury's charter was the following February.

A glance at a copy of Waterbury's patent of 1686, under the
light of the following facts, will convince the observer that it was
not a valid charter. The patents, or charters, were "to be signed
by the governor, and by the secretary, in the name and by order of
the General Court of Connecticut." The month after they were
thus signed, it was ordered that they be sent back to Hartford, that
they might receive the legal title of " Authority." They were then
to be signed by " The Governor and Company of the Colony of Con-
necticut." Waterbury's charter of 1686, as copied for Bronson's His-
tory, bears the following signature only:

" Pr order of the General court of Connecticut.

John Allyn, Secret'y."

THE TOWNSHIP OF 168G. 197

We give the charter of that date, accompanied by a view of the

lands included within it. The circular map of the township was

sketched from the summit of Malmalick, one of the finest of the

lofty, round hills, for which the region is noted. It lies south-west

of Town Plot. From its summit the entire range of the township

can be seen.

waterbury's patent of 1686.

Whereas the Generall Court of Connecticut have formerly Granted unto the
inhabitants of Waterbury all those lands within these abutments viz. upon New
Haven in part & Milford in part & Derby in part on the south & upon Wood-
bury in part & upon the comons in part on the west & upon comon land on the
North: & east in part upon Farmington Bounds & in part upon the comons &
from the South to the north line extends Thirteen Miles in length & from Farm-
ington bounds to Woodbury about nine Miles breadth at the North & somewhat
less at the South end, the sayd lands having been by purchase or otherwise law-
fully obtayned of the native proprietors. And whereas the proprietor Inhabitants
of Waterbury in the colony of Connecticut in Newengland have made application
to the Governor & company of the sayd colony of Connecticut assembled in Court
the fourteenth of May one Thousand Six Hundred & Eighty-five that they may have
a patent for the confirmation of the afoarsayd lands as it is Butted & Bounded
afoarsayd unto the present proprietors of the sayd Township of Waterbury which
they have for some years past enjoyed without Interruption. Now for more full
confirmation of the premises & afoarsayd Tract of land as it is butted and Bounded
afoarsayd unto the present proprietors of the Township of Waterbury Know yee
that the sayd Gov & company assembled in Generall Court according to the
commission granted to them by our late Soveraign Lord King Charles the
Second of the blessed Memory in his letters patent bearing date the Three
iB Twentyeth day of April in the fourteenth year of his Sayd Ma'*«» Reigne
have given and Granted & by these presents doe give grant rattify & confirm
unto Thomas Judd, John Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brun-
son, John Wilton & the rest of the proprieters Inhabitants of the Towne of Water-
bury & their heirs & assigns forever & to each of them in such proportion as
they have already agreed upon for the division of the Same all that afoarsayd
Tract of land as it is butted & Bounded together with all the woods uplands
arable lande meadows pastures ponds waters Rivers fishings foulings mines
Mineralls Quarries & precious Stones upon and within the sayd Tract of
lands with all other profits and commodities thereunto belonging or in any
wise appertaining & we doe also Grant unto the aforenamed Thomas Judd,
John Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John Wilton
& the rest of the p'^sent proprietors Inhabitants of Waterbury their heirs and
assigns forever, that the foresayd Tracts of land shall be forever hereafter deemed
reputed & be an Intire Township of it Selfe to have & to hold the sayd Tract
of lands & premises with all & Singular their appurtenances together with the
priviledges. Immunities «& franchises herein given and granted to the sayd
Thomas Judd, John Stanly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John
Wilton &. others the present proprietor Inhabitants of Waterbury their heirs
assigns & to the only proper use and behoof e of the sayd Thomas Judd, John
Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John Wilton & the other
proprietors Inhabitants of Waterbury their heirs & assigns forever according to
the Tennore of his Ma»'" Manar of East Greenwich in the County Kent in the

IITSTORY OF WATERBURY.

THE TOWNSHIP OF KSO.

200 HISTOBT OF WATERBURT.

Kingdom of England in fee A common soccage <& not in capitee nor Knight
service they yielding & paying therefore to our Soverigne Lord the King his heirs
4& successors onely the fifth part of all the oare of Gold & Silver which from
time to time & at all times hereafter shall be there gotten had or obtained in Lue of
all rents services dutys & demands whatsoever according to the charter in wit-
ness we have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Colony this eighth of febuary in the
Third year of the reign of s** Soveraigne lord James the Second by the grace of
God of England, Scotland, france & Ireland King defender of the faythe of o""
Lord 1686:

Pr order of the General Court of Connecticut,

John Allyn, Secret'y.

That the proprietors of Waterbury discovered that they held no
legal title to their township, appears in the very words of their
petition for a new one. In 1720, they ask that a "deed of release
and quitclaim of and in the lands within the town may be granted,
and be signed and sealed by the Honorable the Governor and the Sec-
retary"

The omission on the part of the governor to sign Waterbury *s
Charter, was but a sign of the times. The colony was in a state
of excitement and alarm. Sir Edmond Andros was daily expected
to arrive, and to usurp the government. Waterbury had no repre-
sentative at Hartford to look after her interests and it is highly
probable that the town's patent, unsigned by the governor, and
unsealed, was still at Hartford on June 15, 1687, when "Sundry of
the court, desiring that the Patent or Charter [of the colony] might
be brought into Court, the secretary sent for it, and informed the
Governo'" and Court that he had the Charter, and showed it to the
Court: and the Governo'" bid him put it into the box againe and lay
it on the table, and leave the key in the box, which he did forth-
with." This is all that relates to the story of the Colony's Char-
ter that is on record.

Dr. Benjamin Trumbull, Gershom Bulkley, and tradition, give to
us the Charter Oak, and the rest of the interesting story from the
time when the box containing the charter was left upon the table
with the key in the lock. It must have been a dark day in June,
when lights were required in the court room; or an evening ses-
sion must have been held — it is difficult to contend with traditions,
even that of the Charter Oak — so dear to Connecticut. The charter
itself still proclaims by its presence in the State Capitol, that it was
never given up.

On the 13th of the October following. Sir Edmund Andros, in
the name of King James II. took the government of the colony into
his own hands. Under the advice of unwise counselors, the king
had planned to revoke the charters of Massachusetts Bay, Plymouth,

THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686. 201

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and Connecticut Colony,
and to consolidate them under one government. The Province of
Maryland, and the Proprieties of East and West Jersey and of Dela-
ware were to be united with the Province of New York. Edward
Randolph had been for some time in possession of five writs of Quo
Warranto, with summons from the sheriffs of London, summoning
the Colony of Connecticut, with other colonies, to appear before the
English Court, and show by what authority the Governor and com-
pany held power. Certain articles of misdemeanor had been drawn
lip against "Authority " in Connecticut, as early as July 15, 1685. It
will be seen that the General Assembly was not too early in getting
ready for the expected disaster. Accusations were brought against
the colony for promulgating and enforcing nine acts and laws, a
number of which were declared to be contrary to the law of Eng-
land. We cite one only. It was distinctly charged that the inhabi-
tants were denied the " exercise of the religion of the church of
England." A diligent search of the acts of the General Court, and
of the code of laws fails to find any proof of such denial. This
accusation was based upon the following law:

"It is ordered, that where the ministry of the Word is established throughout
this colony every person shall duly resort and attend thereunto respectively upon the
Lord's Day, and upon such Fast Days and days of Thanksgiving as are to be gen-
erally kept by the appointment of authority. And if any person within this Juris-
diction, without necessar}' cause, withdraw himself from hearing the public minis-
try of the word, he shall forfeit for his absence from every such meeting, five shil-
lings."

That the accusation was without foundation appears by an act
made by the Connecticut legislators in 1669, and, so far as we have
found, never revoked; showing, most conclusively, that the cere-
monial rites of the Church of England were not denied to the in-
habitants by any law made or existing after May 13, 1669.

• • This Court having seriously considered the great divisions that arise amongst
us about matters of Church Government; for the honor of God, welfare of the
Churches and presevation of the public peace so greatly hazarded, do declare that
whereas the Congregational Churches in these parts for the generale of their pro-
fession and practice have hitherto been approved, we can do no less than still
approve and countenance the same to be without disturbance until better light in
an orderly way doth appear; but yet forasmuch as sundry persons of worth for
prudence and piety amongst us are otherwise persuaded (whose welfare and peace-
able sattisfaction we desire to accommodate) this Court doth declare that all such
persons being also approved according to law as orthodox and sound in the funda-
mentalls of Christian religion, may have allowance of their perswasion and profes-
sion in Church wayes, or assemblies, without disturbance."

Sir Edmund Andros took possession of the Government in Octo-
ber of 1687. James II. abdicated his crown fourteen months later.

202 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Dec. II, 1688. On February thirteenth, in the same year, King Will-
iam III. and Queen Mary assumed his discarded inheritance. Will-
iam and Mary had been on the throne less than three months, when
Sir Edmund Andros having departed, the General Court of Connec-
ticut was again convened. The date was May 9, 1689, and that was
the thrilling session, at which Waterbury, for the first time in her
history sent a deputy to represent her interests. " Ensign Thomas
Judd for Waterbury," is the magical sentence found in the records
of that court which tells us that Waterbury, after having served
fifteen years as a minor, took her place in 1689 (under the reign of
William and Mary) as a unit in the political life of the colony.

Major Talcott did not live to see the plantation, for which he
had done such excellent service throughout the period of its youth,
celebrate its majority. He died after a most active, eventful,
honored and useful life, in July of 1688. A singular independence
in thought and act characterized this Puritan. Secretary Allen in
writing to Governor Andros three months after that gentleman took
his place as " Governor in Chief e of his Ma^*** Territories in New
England," wrote of Major Talcott, that he was ** one who loves to
act his matters by himself." Of Sir Edmund Andros, one may be
permitted in parting with him to write, that he performed unpleas-
ant obligations to his sovereign, with the least possible friction to
the colonists.

We find many ** snap shots " taken of him both by professional
and amateur historians, that utterly fail to give likeness to his life
and character. His treatment of the Indians and his care for their
welfare, is extremely winning. He constantly urged that the peo-
ple should everywhere " faile not to have regard to ye Indians as
their own pebple." If he tasted the sweets of power in America, he
also drank the cup of sorrow, for but three months after he began
to rule, his wife. Lady Andros, died at Boston. As a picture of
burial rites in 1687, we give an extract from the Diary of Judge
Sewell, relating to her funeral : " Between 7 and 8 lychns [links]
illuminating the cloudy air, the corpse was carried into the hearse
drawn by six horses, the soldiers making a guard from the govern-
ors house down the prison lane to the South meeting house; there
taken out and carried in at the western door and set in the alley
before the pulpit with six mourning women by it. House made
light with candles and torches."

CHAPTER XV.

THE RELATION OF EACH MAN'S PROPRIETY TO THE PURCHASE OF THE
TOWNSHIP — LAND GRANTS THE LOTTERY — MEADOW ALLOTMENTS

— MINISTRY LANDS— THE THREE- ACRE LOTS — THE MINISTER'S LOT

— MR. FRAYSOR REVEREND JEREMIAH PECK INVITED TO BECOME

THE SETTLED PASTOR IN WATERBURY — THE MINISTER'S HOUSE

THE SCHOOL-MASTER — THE "GREAT SICKNESS" OF 1689 — THE
DEATH OF ROBERT PORTER AND PHILIP JUDD — THE BURYING
YARD — WATERBURY's FIRST LIEUTENANT, COMMISSIONERS, AND TAX
LIST.

FROM 1677 to 1689, Waterbury made excellent progress in all
the lines of her development. Neither death nor disaster, so
far as we may know, attended her growth to that date. It is
true that she had lost, by removal, two of her proprietors, Joseph
Hickox and Thomas Hancox; but Robert and Richard Porter had
been added to the number. During this period of twelve years
much had been accomplished; the inhabitants had proceeded with
their various industries without, so far as we can learn, taking
thought of fear concerning their Indian neighbors. They had made
definite and apparently satisfactory agreements with their prede-
cessors in the ownership of the soil, covering an extent of territory
about eighteen miles from north to south, and of an average
breadth of from eight to nine miles. Over this stretch of country
they had wandered at ease, examining every bit of meadow land on
the Great river and its tributaries. The familiarity of the inhab-
itants at a very early ^period, with their meadows, swamps, boggy
lands, uplands, mountains, hills, *4o" lands and high lands; their
islands, rivers, brooks, ponds, "grinlets," and "runs of water,"
when we consider the extent of the township, and the labors. that
filled their hands, is surprising. During the life of the plantation,
a man's acres in the meadows determined the amount of his taxable
estate. His interest in the purchase of the township w^as deter-
mined by the number of pounds annexed to his name as a signer of
the plantation agreement — the highest interest being indicated by
;;^ioo, the lowest by ;;^5o. The relation between the one hundred
or the fifty pound interest, and the "purchase paid," has not been
learned. That there was a purchase of the township made by the
planters in some form, and quite distinct from the purchase from

204 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

the aboriginal inhabitants, is evident; but nothing definite or explan-
atory concerning it has been left on our records. The scheme that
seems to have been carefully wrought out for the adventurers and
voyagers, before the Massachusetts Bay Company set sail from
England, affords certain hints in relation to the sub-divisions of
interests and lands that ensued in that colony, and also in Con-
necticut. It seems probable that the proprietors became holden to
the colony, through the committee appointed by it, for all the costs
and charges incident to the settlement of the plantation, including
their Indian purchases and the work of the committee, together
with all other incidental expenses. In the Massachusetts Bay,
every adventurer who placed ;^5o in the common stock was to have
two hundred acres of land. So in our own case, each planter
secured lands according to his venture in the common stock. The
division or allotment of lands in the former case was, in the begin-
ning, left to the governor; in Mattatuck, to the committee. It is
true that the men of Farmington told the Indians that the "Colony
gave away their lands for the English to work upon without taking
anything for it," but that was years before Waterbury was settled.
If the above suggestion is in accordance with the actual purchase,
then the amount of a man's propriety, if it was nominally ;^ioo,
governed the amount of money he paid toward that purchase. In
return for this payment, the man with the ;^ioo propriety received
from the committee twice as much meadow land as his neighbor who
held but half his tenure in the township. There is no one thing
that more finely sets forth and fully illustrates the implicit faith
of our fathers in the all-controlling power of the God in whom
they trusted, than the manner of their drawing of lots for their
lands. To them, this was a "solemn and awful ordinance;" it was
God who stood within it, directing the issues that fell to His chil-
dren. If a man drew the first chance, which gave him power to
choose his land where he pleased, it was the Lord of heaven and
earth who dwelt in that chance and appointed that he should
receive it. The man who was reserved to the last and left no choice,
believed that he was appointed for that lot, and accepted his por-
tion. We believe that the men of Mattatuck, in like manner and
with equal solemnity, approached "the solemn and awful ordinance
of a lot," and accepted their allotments and divisions of upland and
boggy meadow in the same spirit of devout submission. We stand
two centuries away from this belief and condemn the lottery, quite
ignorant of the fact that our fathers held it as an holy ordinance,
and that it is this very elimination of God from it which brought it
into disrepute.

WA TERB Un Y IN 168U, 205

Before 1689, the following apportionment of lands had been
made: The eight-acre house lots on Town Plott in 1674; the two-
acre house lots on the east side of the river in 1677 or 1678; and to
these had been added, probably at the same time, and apparently
to each proprietor, one acre in Manhan neck.* This must have
been to afford a garden spot, where the land was already in readi-
ness tor the planter, on which food supplies, needful for immediate
use, might be raised. There was also an eight-acre lot given to
each proprietor. In addition to the above, there was a division of
meadow land before 1679, and, probably before that time, one of
boggy meadow. Of the layout of the above two divisions no record
has been found. In the eleventh volume of the Land Records we
find a copy of the order for the dividing of certain meadow lands in
1679. In 1891, the order itself was found, which we give below.
The literal form of the original document is not copied, as the inex
perienced reader would need a translator to comprehend it, but the
language is carefully followed. It is called :

TflE DIVISION TO THE STRAITS.

The order which is agreed of in the dividing of and drawing of lots for those
lands which **Lyeth" down the river from those lands already laid out to the
**rivurit'* [Beacon Hill brook] which runneth into the river on the east side of the
river at the straits [of the Naugatuck river, below Naugatuck] ; and also a meadow
which is up the river from the town plot called by the name of Buck meadow [on
the w^est side of the river above Mount Taylor] ; and, in the dividing of the above
said lands, we agree that three roods of the best of this land shall be accounted as
one acre, and the worst of the land which we divide shall be accounted seven roods
but for one acre, and so rise or fall in this divi.*iion according to the goodness or
badness of this land, and this to be considered and equalized by those which are or
shall lay out this aforesaid land into their several allotments ; and also w^e agree
that there shall be five acres allowed to a hundred pound allotment, and if these
lands appointed to this division shall fall short to allow according to this propor-
tion to every allotment, then those which fall short to take up their proportion in
any undivided meadow, except a piece of land called the pasture, or a parcell of
land which lyeth at the brook which runneth into Steele's meadow ; and in this
division it shall be in the power of the above said persons if they see reason so to
do to throw in lands into the several allotments and count it not in the measure
according to their discretion and we begin in this division at the south side of the
river and the lots to run south aud north which we count up and down the river
and the first lot in order to be accounted that next the river and so run down the
meadow to the " stray ts" aud take the lots in order as they fall at the north end
and at the straits run over the river at the east side of the river in like manner, and
go upward and end at the divided land at the fore said side, and then go up into
Buck's meadow and begin in that allotment at the southward or lower end and go
upward and end at the upper side or end of that meadow.

* Manhan neck surrounds Neck hill, which is the meadow hill that overlooks the present ball grounds.

2o6 HISrORT OF WATERS URY.

The lots as they fell by succession ;

Great Lot. Benjamin Jones,

Abraham Andrus, Samuel Hikcox,

John Carrington, John Warner,

Benjamin Barnes, Samuel Judd,

John Wilton, Daniel Warner,

William Judd, Timothy Standly,

John Judd, Benjamin Judd,

William Higginson. Thomas Warner,

David Carpenter, Daniel Porter,

Joseph Gaylord, Isaack Bronson,

John Scovill, Joseph Hikox,

Edmund Scott, Thomas Newell,

Thomas Richason, Thomas Judd,

John Langdon, John Standly.

John Newell, •• y lote Botte."

[The lot bought].
Obadiah Richards,
Thomas Hancox,
John Bronson,
Great Lot,

The two pieces of land that were excepted from use in this
division, were the Little pasture, and the fifteen acres on Steel's
brook, which had been set apart for the use of the ministry, by the
Assembly's Committee in November, 1679. That act remained in
force until the present session of the General Assembly of Connec-
ticut (1893), at which session the First Church of Waterbury, after
enjoying its inheritance for two hundred and sixteen years, sought
and obtained legal power to alienate it. The moral right is still in
question.

The Waterbury Driving Co. is the present owner, or occupier
of the fifteen acres on Steel's brook. This division of meadow
lands has been so carefully followed, that we are able to place defi-
nitely the land of each and every owner. The mouth of Hop
brook was the place of departure. TJie land between the brook
and the river was a "great lot." Afterward, it belonged to the pro-
priety that was given to Rev. John Southmayd, who, when he
recorded it to himself (as seven acres and one-half), stated that it
included the island between the river and the brook. This is the
island that lies in the Naugatuck river against the mouth of Hop
brook. Abraham Andrews seems to have had his lot cast next the
minister on this as well as on other occasions. His house lot, his
Straits division, his Beaver meadow, his Hancox meadow, his Tur-
key hill field, and even his seat in the meeting-house, were next the
minister. In course of time the lot of Andrews, by purchase,

WA TERB UR T IN 1689. 207

became twelve acres, and about 1790 was still known as Andrews
is/and/ The railroad station at Union City is on a portion of it.
John Carrington, Benjamin Barnes and John Welton also had their
lots on Hop brook, substantially between it and the river. William
Judd*s lot began below where the Great hill meets the river, against
Mr. J. H. Whittemore's house, and extended below the present river
bridge. In 1687 this was called eight and a half acres. The point
was so heavily washed by floods, and so much of it was hopelessly
barren, that when duly measured it was accounted twenty acres,
showing how great was the discretion of the measurers in "throw-
ing in" land. This became the "Deacon's meadow," which name it
retained for many years. The three men whose names are next on
the list had their lots on the west side of the river — David Carpenter's
lying on both sides of " Towantick " brook [Long-Meadow]. The
hill against the canoe place was passed over, and then five lots,
(John Langton's being the southernmost), occupied the meadow
spaces as far down as " Straight's " mountain. We find fourteen
meadows on the west side of the river. On the east side, the lots
were divided by the rough, rugged hills that came to the river, so
that only nine lots (beginning with John Newell's at Beacon Hill
brook, and ending with Daniel Porter's lot, which for some not
understood reason, ended before reaching the "hither end of Judd's
meadows," leaving ten acres between it and Squantuck or Fulling
Mill brook). Ten lots in this division were laid out up the river,
beginning at Buck's meadow; Isaac Bronson's being the first, and
the others following in the order given in the list. " Y. lote Botte"
or The Lot Bought, became Reverend Jeremiah Peck's. Obadiah
Richard's lot was on both sides of the river. Buck's meadow not
containing sufficient land to complete the list, Thomas Hancox's lot
was given to him, perhaps a mile above, at a place spoken of as the
"Slip," and also as "The Butcher's Island," Hancox Island, Ensign
Judd's Island and Welton's Island. John Bronson went into Wal-
nut Tree meadow, above Buck's meadow, for his allotment. The
final lot was a great lot. It became Jeremiah Peck's and the school
lot. This lay east of the river at Walnut Tree meadow. Walnut
Tree and Buck's meadow we find used interchangeably, that is for
the land on the east side of the river.

The following preamble in relation to a meadow division of 1679,
is new material that was found in 1890:

A MEADOW DIVISION OF 1679.

May, '79. The plantars of Mattatuck being at the town plot added by vote
Thomas Judd to William Judd, John Standly, and Sam. Stell, to equalize the land
to lay out in the division of land from Manhan meadow upward and make addition

208

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

to those lots in that division according to the quality of the land and remoteness of
it as the foresaid parties shall judge to be just and right.

The first meadow,

2d "

3d " west side the river.
East side river, the first meadow from the south

12 acres. Island 5 acres,
Second meadow, east side, ....

It

II

20

acres.

33

t (

27

1

• 1

17

i 1

23

it

120

<i

The following is the result of the work of the committee :

The division of the remainder of the land in Manhan meadow and Steel's mead-
ow, and Ben. Judd's meadow, and Hancox meadow and at the small brook, as foUow-
eth : We first began at Manhan meadow, and second, in Hancox meadow, and
third, at a bit of land at the west side of the river against Hancox meadow, and
fourth, at the south end of the brook against Hancox meadow, fifth at the lower
end of the land which lies at the brook which comes down into Steele's mead-
ow, and go upward and end at the north end of Ben. Judd's meadow, at Will-
iam Higginson's lot, and according to this order to draw lots, two acres to a
hundred pound, and if these lands herein expressed fall short of this divison, then
to be made up by any undivided lands except this *' Bit of Lande called a Pastors."
We began in Hancox meadow at the southward end at that bit at the west side of
the river against Hancox meadow at the south end

The lots as they fell in this division in or by drawing.

1 John Bronson,

2 Joseph Gaylord,

3 Tho. Warner,

4 Edmund Scott,

5 Obadiah Richards,

6 Daniel Warner,

7 John Newell,

8 Thomas Hancox,

9 John Warner,

10 Great Lot, .

11 John Carrington. .

12 Ben. Jones,

13 Samuel Hicox [£ 95]

14 Will. Higginson,

15 John Welton,

16 Tho. Newell, .

17 Benj. Judd,

18 John Langdon,

19 Isaac Bronson,

20 John Judd,

21 Thomas Richason,

22 Abraham Andrews,

23 Great Lot,

24 Great Lot, .

25 John Scovill,

26 David Carpenter,

[(ES.

HALF- ACRES.

RODS.

I

half

16

I

half

32

2

00

00

2

00

00

I

half

16

I

00

32

2

00

00

2

00

00

I

03 roods

3

3

00

00

I

00

32

2

00

00

I

[?]

32

I

I rood,

24

I

half

16

I

3 rood.

8

I

3

8

2

• 00

00

I

3 rood,

3

2

00

00

I

00

00

I

half

16

3

00

00

3

00

00

I

half

16

I

half

16

WATERBURT IN 1689, 209

ACRES. HALF-ACRES. RODS.

27 John Standly, 2 00 00

28 Daniel Porter i 3 roods 3

29 William Judd, 2 00 00

30 Timothy Standly, ..... i 3 roods 24

31 Joseph Hikcox, i 00 32

32 Ben. Barnes, 2 00 00

33 Samuel Judd i half 16

34 Tho. Judd, 2 00 00

THE THREE-ACRE LOTS.

In March, 1678, an order was given for the laying out of the addi-
tion to the house lots. The lots of this division are known as the
three-acre lots. Our records contain nothing in relation to it, but
the quaint old paper containing the lay out was among the treas-
ures recovered in 1890. It is here given; and is, it is thought, in the
writing of William Judd.

The order which the addition of the house lots in Mattatuck as it is to be taken
up. Those that desire to take up their addition in the rear of their house lots we
shall do all that we can to accommodate each man in that particular to be suited
first and 2-3 so go on in that order.

1 Benjamin Barnes.

2 Samuel Hickox.

3 Joseph Hickox.

4 John Welton. [Next east of the Burying Yard.]

5 Abraham Andrus. [Between the Mill-land and the Mad River, and South of

Union Square.]

6 Benjamin Judd. [Between the ancient Judd's Meadow road that ran east of

the Pine hill (now removed) and the Mill-land ]

7 John Bronson. [Seldom, if ever, had his lands recorded.]

8 William Higginson. For '* Will" Higginson **piched" north side of '*Sam"

Judd.
9, Thomas Newell. [Between Farmington Road and the Mad River, largely on

the West Side of Dublin Street.]
10. Thomas Hancox.

11 Samuel Judd.

12 John Newell. To receive two acres at the rear of his lot. [It will be remem-

bered that John Newell's house lot when recorded, contained five acres.]
13. Great Lot next Tho. Richason. Pitched for the Great Lot, south side Ror-

ing river . . . butting at John Carrington's east. [Mr. Peck was allowed

to relinquish this lot, and take three acres between Farmington road and the

river, east of Dublin Street.]
14 Thomas Richason.

15. ** Ad ward " Scott, to receive his lot at the east side of the Roaring River.

16. John Carrington. [Next east of Mr. Peck on the south side of Roaring, or Mad

River.]
17 Benjamin Jones. Ben Jons south side Roaring River next to that I piched of

for great lot.

18

14

2IO HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

19 David Carpenter. Piched for David Carpenter [illegible] " Tho " Hancox, if he

like it.

20 ''Themothy" Standly. "Piched" for Timothy Standly at the south of

Thomas Richason*s, if he like it.

21. Daniel Porter.

22. John Judd. For John Judd, north side of John Warner's lot, Roring River

if he like it.

23. Thomas Judd. [Lieut. Thomas Judd's three-acre lot was in the rear of his

house lot, but separated from it by Grove Street. ]

24. John Standly. To receive "Achur" more. [This acre was added to his house

lot.]

25. John Scovill.

26. John Lanckton. Pitched for [?] south of Timothy Standly.

27. Obadiah Richards.

2S. Great Lot next Abraham Andrus.

29. Thomas Warner.

30. Isaac Bronson. To receive 2 acres, end of his lot. [This lay out explains w^hy

Isaac Bronson held a four acre house lot.]
31 John Warner.

[32] Daniel Warner next John Warner.
[33] Joseph Gaylord.
[34] Great lot estend. [This was the ministry lot at the east end, on Bank street.]

The above paper is authority for the statement that the first
English name of Mad river was Roaring river. During all this
period we find nothing^ to indicate that the people of Waterbury
possessed that most essential and central figure of colonial townships,
a ** minister," but we may not for one moment indulge the thought
that the preaching of the Word and the teaching of the inhabitants
were neglected. The General Court was at the helm, and we are
persuaded that it did not allow Waterbury colonists to drift into
barbarism. It is true that we cannot point to a single line of evi-
dence concerning this matter, beyond the question that was asked
about 1682, by the planters : "Which of the great lots shall be for
the minister's use?'' until the year 1688, when a certain meadow
division that had been planned in 1684 was consummated. In this
division, Mr, Frayser is found in the possession of land belonging
to one of the three grand divisions of ^^150 each. The title Mr.
was reserved exclusively for " Ministers of the Gospel " and digni-
taries in civil affairs, in the early days of the colony. This,
together with the presence of the same name in 1687 (where it
appears as Mr. John Fraysor) in a list of gentlemen who were clergy-
men of the Established, or Congregational church, sugo^ests that
Mr. Frayser was, at the time, acting minister for the inhabitants of
Waterbury.

A somewhat careful study of the dealings of the General Court
with the towns under its jurisdiction, seems to justify the writer in

WA TERB UR Y IN 1089, 2 1 1

a statement to the following effect — that, in 1686, when Mattatnck
was accepted as a town, she had chosen a minister, and that he was
already living in the house that had been built for him on the house
lot next to Thomas Richason's (the site now occupied by the resi-
dence of Mrs. John C. Booth), and that the Court's blessing was
obtained in consequence of this action on the town's part. This
statement receives substantial aid in the very language used in the
proprietor's meeting at which it was agreed to invite Mr. Peck to
become the " settled " pastor. For thirty-three years the paper,
which lies before me, containing the acts of the proprietors in rela-
tion to Mr. Peck, remained unrecorded. Reverend John South-
mayd testifies on the document that he recorded it in the " first
book, p. 9, March 20, 1722." The following is a copy. The clerk's
formula has been retained.

Att a meeting of the propriators of Watterbury : march the 18: 1689 they did unani-
musly desire M"^ Jerimy pecke Sen'^ of grinage [Greenwich] to setle with them in
the worke of the minestry:

At the same meeting for the Incoragment of M'" peck Above faid: the propria-
tors gave htm the houfs built for the minester, with the horn lote, att his first
Entaranc there with his family:

Att the same meeting the above said propriators of waterbury granted: M' Jerimy
pecke of grinage the other alotmants or general Devisons belongin to the mineslers
lot so caled provided he cohabit with them four yers and if the providens of god so
dispos that he Dye befor the four yers be out itt shall fall to his heirs:

Att the same meetinge the propriaters granted to Calabe and Jerimy pecke the
to hous lots layd out to the great lots on buting westerly on abraham andrus his
hous lot [south-east corner of West Main and Willow streets] the other on ben
jons his home lote and one of the grat lots of meddows with the sevarall Divisions
of upland: upon condisons they bild each of them a tenan table hous that is to say
a house upon each hom lote and dwell with them four yers:

Two days later, the proprietors held another meeting at which
they agreed to be at the charge of the transportation of Mr. Peck
and his family, and cattle, and goods, to Waterbury. Samuel
Hickox, Isaac Bronson and Obadiah Richards were chosen "to take
as prudent a care as they can for to transport Mr. Peck and family
and estate according to the vote above written for the benefit of
the Town."

It will be noticed that the proprietors, in giving to Mr. Peck a
house, describe it as the "house built for the minister at his first
entrance there with his family." Mr. Peck's family was still in
Greenwich, and the language is evidently applied to an act already
consummated, and refers to a former minister. There is a letter,
written at Greenwich by Reverend Jeremiah Peck in response to
an invitation he had received from the church at Barnstable to

212 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

become its pastor, which is still extant. It belongs to the Governor
Hinckley papers, and is in the Prince collection, which is in the
present possession of the Boston Public Library. It throws light
on the acts of the Waterbury proprietors, in relation to Mr. Peck
and his son Jeremiah. Mr. Peck, in his letter to Governor Hinckley,
asked what provision the men of Barnstable would be willing to
make for his declining years, (Mr. Peck was no longer a young man)
or for his family in the event of his death. He also inquired what
opportunity Barnstable would afford for his son, as a school-master.
The first question seems to offer an answer to the natural inquiry :
Why was a great propriety, with all its belongings, bestowed upon
Mr. Peck, when the use of that land was in the thoughts of the com-
mittee and of the people ? It was doubtless freely given in order
to secure the services of a man of Mr. Peck's worth and ability.

Waterbury evidently needed a school-master to teach spelling,
reading, and writing, and seemed quite as ready to evince gener-
osity in that line, as in the former ; for to secure the presence of Jere-
miah, Jr., and Caleb, two sons of Mr. Peck, they were offered the
second grand division of the three held by the township. Caleb
declined his allotments, and the one-half of the propriety was dedi-
cated to "the school." Jeremiah Peck, Junior, was probably
Waterbury's early, if not earliest school-master. Reverend Jere-
miah Peck himself, was master of the Colony school at New Haven,
twenty -nine years before he came to Waterbury.

The year 1689 was a memorable one in our history. The need
for the services and consolations expected from the minister was
then imperative. "A distemper of sore throat and fever" passed
through the colony. Secretary Allen in writing to Governor Brad-
street, under date of August 9, wrote: "It is a very sickly time in
most of our plantations, in some, near two-thirds of our people are
confined to their beds or houses, and it is feared some suffer from
want of tendance, and many are dead amongst us, and the great
drought begins to be very afflictive." No session of the General
Court could be held in August, because the Assistants were ill. Mr.
Wadsworth, one of the members and the last survivor of the Com-
mittee for Mattatuck, died in September. In Windsor, twenty-nine
persons died within thirty-six days. In New London more than
twenty deaths are recorded. We have no means of knowing the
number of persons who fell victims to the disease in Waterbury.
Through the Probate Court, we learn of the death in that summer
or autumn of three of Waterbury's proprietors ; the eldest man in the
community — Robert Porter, and Philip Judd — the last proprietor
whose autograph has been found appended to the Plantation Agree-

WATERBURT IN 1G89, 213

ment. He came to Waterbury in 1677, with his wife Hannah, who
was a daughter of Thomas Loomis of Windsor, and their three chil-
dren, Philip, Thomas and Hannah. Two children, William and
Benjamin, were born in Waterbury. According to Dr. Bronson,
"he was the first of the original proprietors who died in Water-
bury." The inventory of the estate of Robert Porter was presented
to the Court, September 18, 1689, while that of Philip Judd was not
received until November 2. Robert Porter's son Benjamin, also died
in 1689. Joseph Hickox was the first of the planters of 1681 to die.
He removed to Woodbury about 1686, where he joined the church in
May of that year, and his son Samuel was baptized there in Sep-
tember of the same year. Benjamin Jones' estate appears in the
Probate Court at New Haven, in 1690. It is not known whether the
dead of 1689 were interred in Waterbury, or were carried to Farm-
ington. John Warner made his will when about to leave Farming-
ton for Mattatuck, and requested, in the event of his death, to be
laid with his kindred in the place of burial at Farmington. The
earliest mention of the " Burying yard " in Waterbury, that has
been noticed, is in the entry of the following land grant — made by
John Hopkins in 1695: "The town grants to Edmund Scott a par-
cel of land laying within the common fence, butting east on the
burying yard, north on the fence, west on the highway." This
highway, forming the western bound, was the highway to the old
Town Plot. It ran across the meadows from present Willow street
to the river.

In September the business before the Court was urgent and of
the utmost importance; but so universal was the prevailing illness
that fourteen deputies to that session were absent. Ensign Thomas
Judd was of the number. England and France being at war,
the misery of it extended to their colonies. The Frenchmen of
Canada, and the Englishmen of New England, alike, sought the aid
of their Indian allies. It was a war session of the Court. It was
determined to raise two hundred volunteers together with the
Indians who were willing to go forth against the enemy. " To
guard Albany and invade the French toward Canada," two "foot
companyes " were ordered to go forth to that city. One company
was placed under the command of our Derby neighbor, Ebenezer
Johnson, who " had liberty to beat up the drum for volunteers to serve
under him in every plantation in New Haven and Fairfield coun-
ties." It was at this time that the office of Lieutenant-Colonel
was first recognized ; the sergeant major of each company as
well as all other officers, were placed under command of that
magnate.

214 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

Waterbury's list was to be made out in this year — apparently for
the first time. "Tho. Judd, John Stanly and Isaack Brunson," being
the appointed listers. John Stanly was also " confirmed L*** and
Thomas Judd ensigne of the trayne band of Waterbury." Water-
bury's first commissioners were appointed, in the persons of Cap-
tain Wm. Lewis and Captain John Stanly, who also served Farm-
ington in the same capacity. This was the year when freemen were
to be admitted into the corporation, " being twenty -one years of age,
of peaceable, orderly, and good conversation, and possessed of forty
shillings in country pay, per annum." Being duly endorsed by the
selectmen of his plantation, each man so admitted was to be duly
" enrowled " by the Secretary of the Colony. Waterbury had in this
year ten young men who had arrived at the required age. They
doubtless, were peaceable, orderly, and of good conversation, and,
possibly, to make their eligibility complete, lands were granted to
them. Two of the number had already been made proprietors, and
one, Joseph Scott, seems not to have attempted to settle in Water-
bury.

CHAPTER XVI.

BOOKS OF RECORD — THE PROPRIETORS* BOOK THE ^PLACE WHERE THE

MILL-STONES WERE BROUGHT OVER — THE NEW ROAD TO FARM-

INGTON — THE FIRST SAW-MILL THE TEN MILES OF SEQUESTERED

LAND — THE MINISTER'S DIVISION OF FENCE — INDIAN OCCUPANCY

FORT SWAMP — THE LONG WIGWAM — THE SEVEN ACRE HOG FIELD

— NOTES OF WAR — WATERBURY ENTERTAINS SOLDIERS — SCOUTING
MILITARY WATCHES.

THE papers in the hands of the Assembly's Committee; the
proprietors' record of their acts, commonly called " The
Proprietors' Book ;" a Book of Grants, of which nothing
remains but the index; a town book for conveyances of land, in
which certain planters recorded lands which they owned at the
time of record — the owners often satisfying themselves by simply
announcing their ownership, together with the mention of the
names of the persons from whom they had received the lands; and
fourth, the Book of Town Meetings and Highways, are the sources
from whence we derive our knowledge of the progress of the town
during a large part of its first half-century. Into the book of town-
meetings and highways, many grants from the Proprietors' Book
were copied; but the old book itself would seem to have fallen into
careless keeping, for much of it has disappeared. Dr. Bronson
described it in 1857, as "an old, dingy manuscript of foolscap size,
which he dug out of a mass of forgotten rubbish, found in a private
family, and with many of the leaves at the end rent and broken,
and exceedingly brittle when handled." In 1890, through the cour-
tesy of Dr. Bronson, it was received from the New Haven County
Historical Society, where it had been deposited for safe keeping in
1862. It contains twenty-six folio leaves, and its appearance, as
here presented, testifies the accuracy of Dr. Bronson's description
of thirty-five years ago. One leaf has been lost since 1857. This
book is evidently the result of an effort made to preserve as much
of the original as could be found at the time the leaves were sewed
together in their present form. At a later date, additional records
were prefixed, they having been made by Reverend John Southmayd,
as proprietors' clerk. It contains the acts of sixty-three meetings.
The earliest date is 1677 — the latest, 1722. But two entries that
were made before 1689, remain.

mSTORT OF WATEBBURT.

The following miscellaneous items found among those copied
from this book before its disintegration began, afford a glimpse of
the growth of the town r

^M

Under date of 1680 (according to the transcription), there was
given to Abraham Andrus, Senior, "a piece of land butting on the
Mill river, and on the common fence against s'* Andrus 3 acre lot,

FROM 1685 TO 1691. 217

provided it do not prejudice highways, and he build a house, or set
up a tan yard." In 1681, Abraham Andrews, Senior, had a house on
West Main street. He later built a house near the mill, but of the
tan yard we find no mention. Soon after 1686, a decided effort was
made to induce young men to build in the eastern part of the town,
but this inducement to Andrews in rdSo suggests a probable error
made by the copyist in the date. In 1685, Joseph Gaylord received
two acres of boggy meadow, upon y^ account of a corner of his
house lot, [supposed to be the Irving Block corner], y* he hath con-
sented to be layd out to y* highway." In 1686, the boggy meadow
was increased by " four acres on y* north s''. his two acres lying at
y® heather end y® pople grinlet, to join to y^ and run northward till
he hath his compliment." This was on Long Hill. In 1687, he
received four acres more, described as "at Judd's meadows, in y® lo
land np among y® hills in a kind of a popple swamp."" These lands
were on ** Toantick " or Long Meadow brook, near where Samuel
Warner settled, and in the vicinity of Butler's house of pre-historic
interest, and where, at a later date, William De Forest lived.

In 1686, Stephen Upson received a grant of the ground his barn
stood on, " to run a straight line to his gate post, and 4 acres for a
pasture on the north side John Hopkins' three-acre lot the west
side the Long hill." In 1687, he had "4 or 5 acres the north side
the above, to spring to the hill at both ends." In 1686, "The town
granted Srg. Judd five acres, to begin at the mouth of the brook
that comes into Mi// river where the mi// stones were brought over'' The
next year he was granted an "addition to his five-acre lot at the
Mad river from the mouth of the brook to the foot of the hill north-
ward, and to take in the low land, to run an east line to a rock from
the foot of the hill." These grants have been followed until we are
able to identify the mouth of the brook where the mill-stones were
brought over, as Beaver Pond brook. It is now often called Hog
Pound brook, the name of a branch having been substituted for the
main brook. It enters Mad river at the east end of the East pond
of the Brass Mill company. The grants mentioned, together with
a subsequent grant, lie on the west side of Mad river south of the
house of Mr. James Porter, and extend from the mouth of the brook
mentioned to the present Cheshire road. The rock, which was the
landmark mentioned, is in the meadow on the west side of the
river, between it and the low green hill in the meadow. The Plank
road may perhaps be said to pass through the first of the three
grants; the pumping station of the City Water works to be on the
second — westerly from which, the bound rock lies; while the third
extends to the present Cheshire road, (at that point, a portion of

2i8 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

the Farmington road of 1686). Thomas, a son of Lieutenant Judd,
sold the land to Daniel Porter about 17 17. Porter sold it to Isaac
Spencer; Spencer to Joseph Hopkins, and Mr. James Porter is the pres-
ent owner of a part, if not all of the land included within the origi-
nal grants. From whence the mill-stones were brought, we do not
know. There was a mill-stone maker at that date, named Barnes,
in the western part of the Colony, but there is no proof that he
made our mill-stones, or that he was related to our Benjamin
Barnes. The elder Governor Winthrop in a letter to his son
John, then in England, wrote: "Bring mill-stones — some two and
some three feet over," and it seems probable that Waterbury*s first
mill-stones were imported, and that they were borne from New
Haven along the ancient road from Milford to Farmington, until
the Wallingford path to Waterbury was met. They were brought
over Beaver Pond brook six years before the road from Waterbury
to New Haven was ordered to be made.

In 1686, we find mention of a new road to Farmington. We get
this in a grant to Philip Judd, made the year before he died, when
he received " eight or ten acres on the east side of the branch of the
Mad river on the right hand of the new road as we go to Farming-
ton." This grant was long known as Philip's meadow, and is on
the east side of Linsley, Linley or Lindly brook, which was prob-
ably named from a family of "Lindsleys." While still of Bran-
ford, they owned land in Farmingbury Society in Waterbury, in
1780 and later.

We obtain our first knowledge of the road from Cook street to
Pine Hole, from a grant in 1686 to Abraham Andrews, of "five acres
for a pasture upon the Little brook where the way shall begin at
the north end of the plain above the Flaggy swamp and so to run
across the swamp to the foot of the hill at the east side — and if he
goes away, it shall return to the town again."

The earliest intimation of a saw-mill comes in like manner.
Samuel Hikcox, Jr., had arrived at an age to receive land, and was
granted " three acres at the Pine swamp by the path that leads to
the saw-mill on the brink of the hill taking in all the swamp." This
swamp lies this side of Grange Hall on Saw-Mill plain, and the Meri-
den road crosses it. The above grant establishes the fact that
there was 207 years ago a saw-mill on or at the site now occupied
by the "Leather Works" of Mr. William Rutter. The complete
history of that mill site from the time of its occupancy in 1686, or
earlier, down to the present time is doubtless within the range of
possibilities. There was a gun factory there, I think, during the
War of the Revolution; certainly in 1800.

FROM 1685 TO 1001. 219

It was quite reasonable and natural that the northeastern sec-
tion of the township— that lying nearest to Farmington, should
first be selected for occupancy; but after a time the proprietors
recognizing that the lands in that direction were rapidly disappear-
ing into the hands of individuals, resolved to prevent the lay-out of
more grants, near the town, on that side. Accordingly, late in 1686,
it was decided that "all the boggy meadows east from the town
fence two miles north and southward from the town, should be
sequestered for common lands." The same day, it was determined
that not only the boggy meadows, but '* a// the land on the east side the
fence around to the Mill river and to the East Mountain and north-
ward to David's brook, should be and remain as common land."
The original proprietors understood the terms of this sequestration,
but the generation of twenty years later, seemed to require a new
statement concerning it, and in 1707, the proprietors sequestered
" for the use of the town two miles from the corner of East Main
and Cherry streets eastward, or, in the language of the act, *two
miles from the going down of the hill beyond Thomas Hikcox house
east, and then from it two miles north and two miles south, and then
to run at each end west to the common fence.' " Within this area,
which must have included about ten square miles of the township,
as it ran from David's brook on the north to the Long Meadow falls
on the south, were the common pastures. Waterbury was unique in
its possession of a Horse pasture, a local name not yet entirely
unfamiliar to the ear. " Ways for drifts of cattle " into the common
pasture were frequently provided for, notably that one across the
Mad river at Baldwin street. In this sequestered land, any inhab-
itant might take fire wood, timber, or stone, but he might not lay
out any grant of land within it.

The " Proprietor's Book," as we now have it, contains none of
the grants cited. They belong to the portions of it that have dis-
appeared. The single entry of 1677 which it contains, records the
removal of the town site from Town Plot. In 1686, we are given
the apportionment of the minister's fence in five divisions of the
common fence. This, it will be remembered, is the date of the
town's admission into the Colony, and is three years before the
arrival of Mr. Peck. This intimation, taken in connection with the
other evidence which has been adduced, seems to determine the
presence of a minister in Waterbury from 1686 to 1688, if not at a
still earlier date.

It is from this book that we learn that Waterbury possessed a
" Long Wigwam." Long wigwams were built for special uses, and
were designed for the accommodation of assemblies of Red Men.

2 20 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

They are described under that name by the earliest travelers in
New England, who have left their observations upon record. Much
time has been spent in a careful investigation of the region lying
between the eastern bound of the sequestered lands, and the western
bound of the ancient township of Farmington. By this investiga-
tion, together with a most careful and exhaustive search of our town
records, a line of Indian highway, and as we believe, of Indian occu-
pancy, has been found dotted with Indian place names, and extend-
ing certainly from Farmington's west-bound to a point north of
Waterbury's village plot of 1689. It lies along the region that may
be designated as bounding the land on its northern side that was
sold by the Tunxis Indians in 1674, to the men of Mattatuck. We
find within our borders that crowning evidence of Indian occupancy
— a fort swamp. It lay north and west of the road to Farmington.
The Meriden road passes through this swamp east of the house
of George Hitchcock. A broad point of land extending into it, and
now occupied by a house, formed an excellent site for an Indian
fortress; while a brook called Fort Swamp brook flows out of the
northwest part of the swamp, runs west, northwest and north into
Lilly brook. Before reaching the brook it divides itself into several
streams which uniting again form two streams, one flowing on either
side of a small hill whence they enter Lilly Brook.

A discontinued section of an old Farmington road ran southeast
of Fort swamp. In 1788, a road was laid out, that is described as
beginning at Farmington road a little east of Edmund Austin's,
and as passing "Fort Swamp and brook, Tame Buck [a hill], and
extending to the highway by Elnathan Thrashers and Ebenezer
Frisbies." The latest mention of the swamp under its ancient name
that has been met, is in 181 2. It has been called in recent years Ford
swamp and sometimes Frost swamp, the names having become
associated with it through the ownership of lands in it, or, in its
immediate vicinity.

In the line of Indian occupancy referred to, we find the follow-
ing place names : " Patucko's Ring," a name that covered consider-
able territory; Man toe's House Rocks, and Wigwam Swamp, whose
** west end lies at the north end of Burnt Hill." We also have ** Kill "
Plain, sometimes appearing as "Cill," and again as "Kiln" Plain;
and the line being extended, we come upon Fort Hill (which may
be of English origin). It is a sandy spur of the Mount Taylor
range, and sometimes, from its peculiar outline, is called the Tray
Orchard, while to the northward lies " Mount Tobv." This is fre-
quently written Mount Tobe, while Mr. Southmayd alone probably
gave to us its correct name, in Mountobe, an Indian name, and

FROM 1685 TO 1691. 221

easily corrupted by the early recorders (who evidently disliked
" monotonous spelling ") into Mount Toby. We also find a place
called Potostocks, and sometimes Porterstocks, whose signification
is not known, and Nonnewaug Hill,* and Nonnewaug Plain, and
Race Plain, while in the west part of the township, now Middle-
bury, we find the Wongum Road.

Taking the East Farms school-house as a centre, we find our-
selves in a region that at a period beyond which our records extend,
tradition notes, as a hog pound. It is not far from the ancient
bound line of Farmington, and may have been in use by the people
of that town. Corroborating tradition, in 1689, when lands were
granted thereabout, Hog Pound brook antedated the grants. South
of the school-house, it is said, "lay the hog pound itself, and that
the swine were permitted to roam the country at will, but were
accustomed to obey the call that occasionally summoned them to
the pound, where they were rewarded by a treat of corn." How-
ever that may have been, in 1689, 133 acres in that vicinity were
divided into nineteen hog fields of seven acres each. These are
arranged in five groups, and were distributed to nineteen planters.
The first three fields are described as " upon the hill eastward
of the path from the longe wigwam upon the hill;*' seven were
"on the hill on the west side of Hog Pound brook," (this brook
flows into Beaver Pond brook, west of the school-house);" three
more were "on the west side of the Beaver Pond brook;" three
were " on the hill on the east side of Hog Pound brook, and
on the north side of the road that leads to Farmington," while
the seven acr^s of the Rev. Jeremiah Peck's hog field are now
covered by the waters of the upper " East Mountain " reservoir,
he having received, together with two of his parishioners, allot-
ments "at the southeast end of Turkey hill, to run both sides of
the brook."

Certain well-known names, attached to lands, served to denote
locality as unerringly as the lighthouse fulfills its mission. Bron-
son's meadow was one of the number. It lay along the Mad river
in the broad valley north, or northerly of the red house where
Justus Warner lived, and which, together with the ruin of the
house of his father, Ebenezer Warner, with its central chimney and
corner fire-place in every room, is still standing. The path to
Bronson's meadow lay over Long hill in 1686. A grant on that hill
was described as "on the north side the path that leads to Bron-
son's meadow."

♦ Nonnewaug Hill is between Steele's Brook and the West Branch, its southern end between Steele's
Brook and Obadiah's Brook.

222 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

The year 1689 was notable for the many and special gifts be-
stowed upon the young men of the town. There was wide scope
for this generosity, for the spirit of departure was abroad. The
reasons for this were ample. Two years later, in writing of the
condition of Waterbury, Mr. Peck wrote that the people had been
brought low by losses of the fruits of the earth, losses in their
living stock, and especially by "much sickness during the space of
the last four years." To add to the picture thus drawn, war was
again, and through no act of the Colony, thrust upon the people.
No more defenseless town existed than this one. To the north-
ward, from whence the French and Indians might descend upon it,
there was no habited place. Waterbury had but thirty-seven men
to defend about two hundred women and children. It is not sur-
prising that our records are at this time abundantly sprinkled by
such gifts to the young men as the following, in order to induce
them to stay : "To John Scovill, Junior, a piece of land butting on
John Warner's three acre lot on the east, on a highway on the west
and south, on Thomas Judd, Jr., on the north, provided he build a
house according to original articles and coinhabit four years after."
This was at the northeast corner of Pine and Willow streets. "To
Jonathan Scott, a piece of land," with bounds. This was on Union
square, between it and Bank street. Ephraim Wainer received
a " piece of land " on Willow street, between Pine and Grove
streets.

Waterbury must have been a busy hamlet in 1690. We are in-
debted to the new minister, Mr. Peck, for what we know of its part,
humble though it was, in the war between France and England.
He tells us that horsemen were often sent out in search of an ap-
proaching enemy, and hints at timely discoveries that proved safe-
guards to neighbors in other towns. It would seem that Waterbury
was at that date in the line of march between Hartford and Albany,
for he informs us that the town had " far more trouble than other
towns in the Colony by the soldiers passing to and fro, and their
often entertainments with us."

The Colony asked to borrow of the people in every town pro-
visions, grain, or any other estate, upon the public faith of the
Colony, to be repaid again in ten months. Every male person
whatsoever, if sixteen years of age, except negroes and Indians,
was compelled to serve upon the " millitary watches." Any inhab-
itant, being absent, whether at sea or elsewhere, was compelled to
furnish a substitute through the members of his family left at
home, and even widows, worth fifty pounds, were required to pro-
vide a man to watch in their steads.

FROM 1685 TO 1091. 223

This military watch was kept by walking or standing in the
places where danger was apprehended from the enemy, and, from
the charge given, it would seem that firing the woods was one
mode of warfare adopted. If fire was discovered, the cry ordered
was "Fire ! Fire ! *' If the enemy was at hand, the watchman cried
** Arme ! Arme ! " Who can say that our Burnt Hill does not date
from that war? Waterbury was one of the towns exempted from
listing men to join the "fiyeing army of dragoones," and a special
grant of twelve pence a bushel was allowed it for what of the
country rate should be transported to Hartford or New Haven.
Nothing has been learned regarding the earliest fortified house or
houses here; but, as every town in 1690 was ordered to "complete
f/ie fortifications that had been ordered^'* although the order itself has
not been found, it undoubtedly included the frontier town of
Waterbury; and as no one house could have accommodated the
population at that date, more than one must have been prepared.
We find no mention of fortified houses until 1703.

r

CHAPTER XVII.

THE REVEREND JEREMIAH PECK — HIS PETITION TO THE COURT FOR
PERMISSION TO GATHER A CHURCH IN WATERBURY — THE CHURCH
ORGANIZED — ITS DEACONS — MR. PECK PETITIONS FOR ASSISTANCE
IN BUILDING A HOUSE FOR THE WORSHIP OF GOD — THE DISASTER

OF 169I — DELAYS — MR. PECK UNABLE TO PREACH HE CONVEYS

HIS PROPERTY TO HIS CHILDREN — "THE PRESENT MINISTER" —
THE TOWN BUILDS A HOUSE FOR ANOTHER MINISTER — ENTHUSIASM

OVER JOHN READ DEATH OF MR. PECK BURYING-YARD AT THE

FOOT OF HIS GARDEN — PROPRIETORS AT THE CLOSE OF THE
CENTURY.

'"'P^HE exact date of the arrival in Waterbury of the Reverend
I Jeremiah Peck is not evident, but that it occurred prior to
May 20, 1689, appears from a town act of that date : "The
Town granted Mr. Peck and Edward Scott, Jr., an addition to the
north end of their house lots — Scott to spring northwards three
rods on the northwest corner, and Mr. Peck to spring a rod and a
half from the northeast corner of his lot, and so a straight line
from the above said corners to bound them on the highway, pro-
vided they make and maintain a good and safe ditch to drain the
land." This referred to the locality surrounding the site of St.
John's Church. Edmund Scott, Jr., lived next west of Mr. Peck.
Both house lots were between Church and State streets, and this
land received the waters of the two streams that crossed West Main
street near the corner of Church street.

A clergyman of the "Congregational or Established Church of
Connecticut Colony " at the period in question, could perform the
functions of his ministerial office, only when ordained over a special
church and people. Therefore Mr. Peck, when he left Greenwich —
where he must have been an ordained minister, for we find him
filling the various offices connected with the position — could not
perform the same duties in Waterbury until the organization of a
church, and his ordination as its pastor. It was for this reason
that the planters continued to take their children to the old church
at Farmington for baptism, even after the arrival of a minister
already venerable in the service. Sixty-three children (and per-
haps a greater number) were born in Waterbury between 1681 and
1 69 1. Forty-five were baptized in Farmington before the date of
the organization of the church in 1691, and fourteen of the number

THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERBVRY, 225

after Mr. Peck came. The last child baptized there for the reason
given, was Ebenezer Richardson, son of Thomas, the planter, on
June 28, 1691.

The invitation on the part of the Grand Proprietors to Mr. Peck
to "settle with them in the work of the ministry,'* was unanimous.
The name of every one of their number then living and known to
have been within the town, with the single exception of John War-
ner's (whose name may have been — like that of Benjamin Judd
from the list of original proprietors — an omission of the recorder),
is appended to the agreement by which his salary of sixty pounds
became assured. The following is the agreement :

In Considaration of settling the reuarant : M' Jerimy pecke in the worcke of
the menestry : amongst vs : in watterbury : we whos names : are vnder writen :
doe ingage : to pay to the aforsaid : m"" Jerimy Pecke acording to our yerly grand
leuy ecth : of us : our proportions of sixty : pounds by y" yere : to be payed fifty ;
Pounds in Prouition pay : and ten pounds in wood and thus to doe : yerly

Robert Porter : John brownson John newill

Thomus Judd sen Samuel hickox Abraham andrews Sen

John Standly Obadiah richards Daniell Warner :

John wilton sen pilip Judd beniamin barns

Edman Scoote sen Abram Andrews Thomus richardson

Isaac brownson Thomus Judd Ju Timothy Standly

Joseph gayler Thomus wamer : John hopkins '.

Daniel Porter : Edman SCoot Ju steuen vpson

Thomus newell

Of the twenty-five men who signed the above engagement,
which is without date, all are, or represent. Grand Proprietors.
Robert Porter, whose name stands first on the list, would undoubt-
edly have been deacon of the church had he lived to see its organ-
ization. We miss six names from the number. John Carrington,
Joseph Hikcox and Benjamin Jones were dead at the time of the
signing of the agreement; William Judd and Thomas Hancox were
removed to Farmington, and John Scovill, it is thought, was in
Haddam. Several younger men, to whom lands had been granted
were unrepresented.

In the then condition of the town, by reason of the disasters
that were befalling it, Mr. Peck's presence must have been of the
utmost importance and comfort to his people, for the minister filled
a place in the life of the community at that date, that is not gen-
erally understood. He was the reigning sovereign over his people,
holding at the same time every office within his own government
— being at once father, guide, counselor and deputy in all matters
relating to the public weal, as well as revealer of the will of God to
his children. His person and his presence were regarded with awe

15

2 26 HISTORY OF WATERBURY,

and reverence, and the numberless sacrifices that were made for
the privilege of possessing a "Minister of the Gospel" testify to
the deep appreciation of the luxury. However grim and severe the
outline of the planter's own house, his minister's house must pos-
sess a chamber chimney, and glass for the windows; and a well,
even though his own wife and children dipped from the waters of
the running stream. * Accordingly, we have found a house already
built, and ready for Mr. Peck when he arrived, (his family consisting
of his wife, their daughter Anna, and sons Jeremiah and Joshua).
One naturally thinks of Mr. Peck with a feeling of commiseration
that he should remove to Waterbury, at nearly seventy years of age,
to begin a new life in the wilderness; but he came into the vicinity of
his kindred, and nearer to his old home in Connecticut. His aged
father was living in New Haven. He also had a daughter, Ruth
Atwater, and five grandchildren living there. Still nearer, at Wal-
lingford, were his brother John and his sister, Elizabeth Andrews,
and nineteen nephews and nieces.

It is said that Mr. Peck was born in London, England, or its
vicinity, in 1623; that he came to America in the ship Hector in
1637, with his father, Deacon William Peck, who was one of the
founders of New Haven. From the time of his arrival until he
reached his thirtieth year, the only mention that has been found of
him appears in the account books of the steward of Harvard Col-
lege, where are found credits of Jeremiah Peck from 1653 to 1656.
November 12, 1656, he married Johannah, a daughter of Robert
Kitchell, of Guilford. He spent four years in Guilford, "preaching
or teaching." In 1660 he was called to take charge of the Colony
School at New Haven. When, two years later, New Haven colony
came under the jurisdiction of Connecticut, Mr. Peck joined the
band of devoted men who desired to found a new town and colony,
in whose government no man might have part or lot, until he had
acknowledged the government of his God by visible membership
in church union. He thus became one of the first settlers of New-
ark, New Jersey. In 1669 or 1670, he was settled as the first min-
ister of Elizabethtown. In 1670 and again in 1675 he was invited
to the church at Woodbridge, N. J., but the repeated invitations of
the people at Greenwich at last won him back to Connecticut. Not-
withstanding a "cair* to Newtown, L. I., he removed in 1678 to
Greenwich. It was while there, that he was desired to settle in the
work of the ministry at Barnstable, Mass., and, as we know, at
Waterbury.

We are no longer surprised at the escort provided by the town
for the safe conduct of Mr. Peck and his family on their journey

THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERBURT. 227

from Greenwich to Waterbury, when we remember the warlike
condition of the country. It seems strangely out of place to write
that a war between France and England delayed for two years the
most important act that ever took place in the Naugatuck valley —
the organization of the First Church of Waterbury. Minor causes
may have contributed to that end, but we are forced to believe that
the event took place at the earliest moment practicable. War's
alarms were not soon allayed; in fact, the "flankers " about the Meet-
ing-House at New Haven were not removed until 1693. It would
be interesting to know how long the people of Waterbury resorted
to their fortified houses at night, and to hear again the stories of
adventure told by the scouting parties on their return to the town,
but the records of the events of that period perished long ago, as
they were thought not essential to the life of future generations.

In the autumn of 1690, the dragoons in the several counties were
disbanded, to return to their foot companies, and certain steps were
taken that gave evidence that the dangers of the war, although not
over-passed, were greatly mitigated. In the spring of 1691, Mr. Peck
prepared a petition to the General Court, in which consent was
requested by " some of the Inhabitants of Waterbury *' to proceed
to the gathering of a Congregational church. Mr. Peck's desire to
be strictly accurate in his statements is apparent in the expression
"we, at least some of the inhabitants," which occurs in the petition,
thereby implying that the desire was not entirely unanimous. Per-
haps there were certain cautious persons who felt that the colony
was not yet in a state of peace that would warrant so important a
step, and perhaps the demands upon the town, by reason of the war,
had been such as to make the cost of the undertaking a question of
moment. There was much entertaining to be provided for, as the
approbation of the neighboring churches was as essential to the for-
mation of a church, as was the consent of the Court. The follow-
ing is the petition which was presented to the General Assembly,
May 14th, by Ensign Judd:

To the honored General Court our humble salutations presented; wishing all
happiness may attend ye: we at least some of the Inhabitants of Waterbury being
by the goodness of God, inclined and desirous to promoue [promote] the concerns
of the Kingdom of Christ in this place by coming into church order: do find: which
we well approue of: that it hath been ordered by the honoured General Court: that
no persons within this Colony shall in any wise imbody: themselues into church
estate without the consent of the General Court and approbation of the neighbour
churches, we humbly request the consent of the honoured General Court now
assembling: that we may as God shall giue us Cause and assistance proceed to the
gathering of a Congregational Church in this place, and for the approbation of
neighbour Churches we desire it and intend to seek it. So being unwilling too long

228 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

to prevent your Honors from other emergent occasions: we in breuity subscribe our-

selues in all duty your humble Seruants in the name and behalf of the rest of our

Brethren.

Jeremiah Peck.

From Waterbury. 91. May. 12. Isaac Brounsoon.

The request met with instant favor in the subjoined response:

Mr. Peck and Isaac Brunson, in the behalf of the people of Waterbury, petition
ing this Court that they might have the liberty and favour of this Court to enter
into church fellowship, and to gather a church in that place: This Court do freely
grant them their request, and shall freely encourage them in their beginnings, and
desire the Lord to give them good success therein, they proceeding according to
rule therein.

Therefore, in May, 1691, the inhabitants were legally entitled to
church organization. Having secured the franchise, the people
seemed in no haste to avail themselves of the blessing. They
waited three months before taking action.*

If Mr. Peck kept a record of the church and its subsequent his-
tory under his pastorate, it has disappeared from the knowledge of
man. What we know in relation to it has come to us through the
following agencies:

In 1729, the Reverend Thomas Prince, of Boston, received a letter
(evidently in response to inquiries made by him) from the Reverend
John Southmayd, of Waterbury, containing certain information
regarding the town and church in that place. In 1772, extracts
from Mr. Southmayd's letter were made (I do not know by whom),
and the extracts were among the manuscripts of Benjamin Trum-
bull, D. D., of North Haven, at the time of his death in 1820. Dr.
Trumbull had planned in i8ii, to write "The History of the Ameri-
can Churches of every denomination of Christians within the United
States of America," and had gathered much material in view of his
proposed work. His historical papers and collections were be-
queathed to Yale College. " All other books, manuscripts, pamph-
lets, etc., were equally divided among the four children."! Justus
Bishop, a son-in-law of Dr. Trumbull, was one of the executors of
his will, and certain of the Trumbull manuscripts — extracts from
Mr. Southmayd's letter being of the number — were brought to Water-
bury by the late David T. Bishop, who was perhaps of the family
of Justus Bishop, the executor. The paper in question is now in the

♦Dr. Bronson makes the following statement: "At what precise time the church of Waterbury was
organized I have been unable to ascertain. Dr. Trumbull says, August 26, 1669, and Mr. Farmer, in his
Genealogical Register, gives this as the date of his ordination. Probably Mr. Farmer copies from Trumbull.
I once supposed that * 1669 ' was a misprint for 1689, and that the last was the true time of Mr. Peck's
settlement." He then adds: "In all probability the installation or ordination, took place soon after, pos-
sibly August 26th, as in Trumbull." Dr. Trumbull gives Mr. Peck's name as Joseph, instead of Jeremiah.

+ North Haven Annals. By Sheldon B. Thorpe, 1892.

THE FIRST CnURGH OF WATERBURT. 229

possession of Mr. James Terry, of New Haven.* It is not now
known whether Mr. Southmayd gave the following facts from the
then existing records, or from information given by participators
in the interesting event, for Abraham Andrews and his wife, Ben-
jamin Barnes, Mrs. Daniel Porter and Stephen Upson were still
living, and Mr. Southmayd himself had been familiar with the field
almost thirty years, having preached in Waterbury within five
months after the decease of Mr. Peck. The following is a transcript
of the extracts of 1772 made from Mr. Southmayd*s letter of Novem-
ber 18, 1729, as given by Mr. James Terry, and is the sole source of
our information (as it apparently was of Dr. Trumbuirs) regarding
the age of our church. The portion of the transcript relating to
the settlement, with which we are already familiar, has been omitted.

WATERBURY.

EXTRACTS MADE FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE REV'D MR. PRINCE, AT BOSTON,

ANNO 1772.

The number of original shares [in the plantation] about 33. The first settlers
about 28.

The first Church in Waterbury was formed August 26, 1691 — the number of
male communicants 7, and in 1729, 46.

Mr. Jeremiah Peck was ordained Pastor of the Church the same day in which it
was formed, viz. Aug. 26, 1691. He was after some years by a Fit of the Appoplex,
disenabled for the work of the ministry, and some years after, June 7, 1699, left this
world in y* 77th year of his age.

lijay 30th, 1705, The Rev*^ John Southmaid was ordained Pastor in his Room.
The number of males then was 12. This town was not at this day divided into
precincts or societys. In February, 1691, There was a remarkable Flood in this
town. The meadows were all under water and the ground so soft and the stream
so rapid that it tore away a great part of the meadows, and almost ruined them.

The frost came out very quick and the rain fell apace, which made the ground
uncommonly soft.

The town did not recover from the damage it received by this deluge for many
years. Some of the inhabitants were grately discouraged, and many drew off, and
the town was almost ruined.

There was a dreadful sickness in this Town, wh. began in October about the 15th
1 712, and did not cease until Sept' 13, 171 3. More than 20 persons died in this town
within this time. 7 died in the month of March, and the sickness was so great that
there were hardly enough well to tend the sick.

This from M"^ John Southmayd, NoV^ i8th, 1729. In a letter to the Rev** Thos.
Prince.

It is to be regretted that the extractor of 1772 did not give to us

the letter in full, but the history of Waterbury meets with denials

like this at every step in its progress. Inference and speculation

*The catalog^ue of the Prince manuscripts does not, I think, contain this letter, but it may have been
among the papers that were destroyed, or carried away from the library of Mr. Prince at the time the British
troops were in possession of the Old South Meeting-House, in whose tower the library was kept.

230 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

might be indulged in, almost without limit, in regard to the founda-
tion of this church, without any increase of knowledge regarding
it. It is, or seems to be, quite safe to make a few statements. The
first is, that the usages and ceremonies of the Congregational
church, as established in Connecticut colony, were carefully
adhered to; the second, that the neighboring churches of Hartford,
Farmington, Woodbury, Wallingford, Derby and New Haven were,
or may have been, represented by their appointed elders and mes-
sengers; that the organization and ordination ceremonies occupied
two days; that the "laying on of hands" by duly ordained men,
and the "right hand of fellowship" were ceremonially conducted;
and lastly, that the "seven male communicants" extracted in 1772
from Mr. Southmayd's letter of 1729, were, in reality, referred to in
the letter itself as the seven pillars of the Waterbury church, for
that number of members was evidently considered essential to
uphold the stately organization known as a church. We are not able
to mention the "visible saints " who were considered "fit matter,"
or the special form of their confederation which established them
into a •* visible church;" neither do we know the particular cov-
enant by which they became embodied into a "true, distinct and
entire church of Christ;" but we may be and are confident that Mr.
Peck was the central figure of the seven; that to him belonged the
"power of guidance or leading;" while to the brethren, in full com-
munion, was committed "the power of judgment, consent, or privi-
lege," and that communion of the churches, and counsel from them
in cases of difficulty, was to be sought and submitted to, " according to
God.'' The foundation was firmly laid, and the superstructure rests
to-day upon substantially the same basis — the fundamental question
still calling through the centuries : What is, according to God?

It ought perhaps to be mentioned in connection with the
Waterbury church, that the example that the mother church at
Farmington had set in 1652, doubtless was a formative influence in
1 69 1. That church was organized by the "joining in the cov-
enant " of seven men, of whom Reverend Roger Newton was one.
At a later date members were added. There was a distinction in
the degree of membership, however, delineated by the terms
applied to different holders of the honor. Certain members were
"joined to the church;" others were "joined to the congregation;"
while a few were recorded as "joined in the covenant." Abundant
instances might be cited in proof that the " seven-pillar " form of
covenant was followed often, if not universally. Salem and
Scituate churches are mentioned as evidence in Massachusetts,
while the first church organized in Connecticut, that at Wethers-
field, was formed in the same manner.

THE FIRST CIIURCn OF WATERBUR7,

231

Fifty-three years later, in 1747, Deacon Thomas Judd died, and
the memorial stone placed above his grave tells us that he was "the
first Justice, Deacon and Captain " in Waterbury, and that his age
was 79 years. The hand that prepared the inscription was led into
error, for the man whom it delighted to honor was five years older
than the stone-age assigned him; and it was his uncle, Lieut.
Thomas Judd, who was the first justice of the peace. His claim as
the first captain is unquestioned, while the statement that he was
the first deacon is subject to question. It may be true that the
church was without deacons for nearly five years, but it is not cer-
tain that it was so. The sweet reasonableness of a thing does not
resolve itself into history; if it could, we might with every pro-
priety suggest that the Waterbury church, even as other churches
had done, appointed two deacons; that they may have been Corporal
Isaac Bronson and Lieutenant John Stanley; that the records
retained the military titles that had already become familiar, and
that in 1695, when Lieutenant Stanley returned to Farmington,
Thomas Judd was elected to fill the vacancy, as in 169^ we find
Deacon Thomas Judd taking the place in the records formerly occu-
pied by Thomas Judd, the smith. If we depend upon our town
records for the evidence of deaconship, we shall find but one deacon
in the church for thirty-three years. The alacrity with which even
Deacon Judd permitted his military title to conceal his ecclesias-
tical standing, evidences the ease with which, in the absence of
church records, the first deacons have passed into oblivion.

As soon as possible after the church was organized, preparations
were made for building a house for the worship of God. In the
State Library we find in Ecclesiastical Papers, Vol. I. p 89, the fol-
lowing autographic petition for aid in the work, in which Mr. Peck
gives to us glimpses of the life his people were then and had been
living.
The Petition to the General Court for Assistance in Building an House

FOR the Worship of God.

[May it] please the honourable Generall Assembly to take into [their] serious
consideration the Condition & Request of your humble & [loving] servants the
Inhabitants of Waterbury, as to our Condition. The [Providen]ce of God & that
in severall wayes, hath brought us low by losses [of the frjuits of the earth, losses
in our living stock, but especially by much [sickness] amc»ng us for the space of
the last four years: We live remotely in a corner of the wilderness [wh]ich in our
affairs costs us much charge pains & hardships. As to our Petition & that which
we desire; it is your encouraging & assisting of us as we hope in a good work; yet
too heavy for us; viz the building of an house convenient for us to assemble in for
the worship of God; Such an house we doe more & more find very great need of.
Wee return our honoured gentlemen hearty thanks for the late encouragement
they gave us unto Church work: w^ee are embolden fro. our past experience of j^our
former candidness & favour toward us: yet once more to present this our humble

232 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

Petition for your help in this great & needfull afiEaier. Much we could mention by-
way of persuasion: but we are prevented of time & we hope that a few words to
the wise will be sufficient. It may be considered that we have been often at
charges in sending forth horsemen for the timely discovery of an approaching
enemie. which hath been or might have been some safeguard to our neighbours in
other Townes. For this our Scouting we have had no public recompense. We
also have had farr more trouble than some other Townes in this Colonic by the
souldiers passing to & fro & their often entertainments with us, which hath occa-
sioned much expense of our time etc. We also are informed that we shall not be
the first that have had publique assistance in the like work in this Colonic. We
hope right worthy Sirs that you that are the Patrons of this Christian Common-
wealth; will be pleased to give us further encouragement to build God's house &
the encouragement which we doe particularly petition for is that our Publique
rates may be given to us for the space of the four next ensuing years. We find in
holy writ that some whose spirit God hath Stirred up have been famous in promot-
ing such a work; as David & Solomon. We hope & trust we shall have a placid
return fro. our Worthies upo. whom our eyes are: So we remain your humble &
needy Petitioners and Servants.

From Waterbury. Anno Domini. 91 October. 7.

In the name & on the behalf of the rest of our inhabitants.

John Hopkins, ) j^„,^,„_
Thomas Judd, )

The petition was answered the next day.

October, i6gi.

Upon the petition of Waterbury this Court grants them their present country
rate toward the erecting of a house for the pub: worship of God in that towne,
prouided they improue it for that use and no other.

This people — our fathers — " living remotely in a corner of the
wilderness, brought low by many losses and by much sickness dur-
ing the space of four years," (to which had been added two years
of war's alarms), had just risen up to prepare a house for the wor-
ship of God, and were taking hold on life anew, when a sudden and
awful blow fell upon the little town. By a mighty freshet, their
precious meadows, on which they chiefly depended for the support
of life, were torn up by the roots and carried away. From the
Plum Trees, a meadow above Lead Mine brook on the north, to the
straits below Judd's meadows on the south, the spring of 1691 gave
stones for bread, — and yet the brave planters held on. Not a man
left the settlement! Their meadows gone, they clung to the hills,
and began to lay out mountain lots. We, who have so often seen
the wrath of the Naugatuck, when in a spring freshet its furrowed
waters dashed over the meadows, islanding Hop meadow hill, and
covering all the region between the river and Meadow street, (thus
completely cutting off access to present Brooklyn and West Side
hill), can understand something of the blow that then befell Water-
bury. The smaller meadows on the Mad river and the branches of
both rivers doubtless suffered too, thus forcing every man to spend

THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERS URY,

233

his days in a struggle with forest trees and stones for the posses-
sion of the soil hidden under them in the hills. Under these con-
ditions, the work of building the house for the worship of God was
retarded. When the floods came, Waterbury had forty-three tax-
payers, and not estimating dwelling houses, a list of jCiS^g. In
1694, with the same number of taxpayers, her list had fallen to

In May of 1693, Mr. Peck received from the colony " two hun-
dred acres of land, for a farme." Whether this was a grant for
special services, or a gratuity, does not appear.

We learn nothing more of the house for the worship of God
until 1694, when :

The Town agree to use or improve the money that now is, or hereafter shall
be due for wild horses * that are sold in the town. We say to improve it for help-
ing to build the meeting-house, and to stand by the officers that sell them, and
hereafter to allow those that bring in such horses one-half.

How much aid the good cause received in this manner is not
known. In 1694 the Court again granted Waterbury its country
rate toward the finishing of the meeting-house, provided that the
town should discharge to the country its indebtedness of the town.
From this time, we find nothing regarding the church building
until 1699. There is no proof that it was finished, or that Mr. Peck
ever preached in it, and there is no proof to the contrary. It is not
known at what date Mr. Peck became incapacitated for preaching,
thus throwing a double burden upon the people, but in 1695 there
was another minister to be considered, who is referred to, not by
name, but as //le present minister^ when the parsonage land was de-
voted to his use. In 1696, and until the ordination of Mr. South-
mayd, the children of Waterbury people were taken to other towns
for baptism, Milford and Woodbury being of the number.

In 1696 Mr. Peck executed a deed of gift of all his property in
Waterbury. He mentions six children, Samuel, Ruth At water (to
whom he gave, among other books, *'Ye Articles of y^ Church of
England"), Caleb, Anna Standly, Jeremiah, and Joshua. In this
deed, the lands that his son Jeremiah owned which had been given
him by the town, were to be accounted as Reverend Jeremiah's
lands, and to be equally divided between Jeremiah and Joshua.
The house and home lot and the three-acre lot were exempt from
this division, and bestowed upon Jeremiah. To Jeremiah also was

* It must not be understood that wild horses went roaAing through the country. If a man neglected
to brand his horses properly, he could not easily reclaim them, and ia many instances branded horses were
not reclaimed. Waterbury, it will be remembered, had a horse pasture, but the adjoining towns seem to
have beea without that useful adjunct, and the animals were apt to stray abroad, and were taken up, prop-
erly advertised, and then sold.

234 HISTORY OF WATERBURY,

given the farm the General Court had granted. With his custom-
ary regard for contingencies, he made the following conditions :
" Y^ Jeremiah and Joshua pay all my lawful debts, provide well and
comfortably for me and my wife ♦ ♦ * as long as we both live,
and if they fail or neglect their duty, I reserve y* power to sell the
land for my relief." On behalf of his wife, in the event of his death,
and the failure of his sons to provide well for her, and in case she
should leave them during the time of her widowhood — bearing his
name — he gave her power to command the use of one-third part of
all the lands he had given to Jeremiah and Joshua. To his wife he
gave, to be hers, after his decease, two cows and six sheep, with all
"the movables within doors excepting a silver tankard," which
went to Jeremiah. This will, of over three thousand words, proves
that Reverend Jeremiah Peck to the end of his life continued an
exceedingly careful and provident man.

Mr. Peck lived nearly three years after the execution of this deed,
but as an assistant had been required before it was made, and we know
that the Rev. John Jones officiated at a later date, it is not probable
that he was again able to perform public duties. He was placed in
a trying position, for while he yet lived, his church and people
were eagerly, and with great enthusiasm, preparing to receive his
successor. A young man, fresh from Harvard College, had won the
heart of Waterbury and aroused it to a pitch of enthusiasm that
makes itself felt through the dim pages of the old records. His
name was Reverend John Read, and he was destined to become a
brilliant and successful man, but Mr. Read was not destined for
Waterbury. In vain they offered him their hearts and lands, and
promises to build him an house with three chimneys, 38 feet long
and 19 feet wide, with a stoned cellar and other elegancies of con-
struction. To this, they added an annual salary of jQ^o and jQ2o in
labor for two years, and after two years of service as an ordained
minister, he was to receive one of the three grand propriety rights
in the township.

The town made great effort to secure John Carrington's house lot
(Leavenworth street now runs through it), to put the new house
upon, but his heirs declining to sell it, it was decreed to take off
the obligation that lay upon the lot "at the West end " and "set the
minister on it." The obligation was, that it had been sequestered,
as school land. This lot at the " West end " is now Mr. Robert
Brown's corner at Willow street.

It was while his people were making ready for another minister,
that " on the 7th of June, 1699, the Reverend Jeremiah Peck * left
this world, in the 77th year of his age.' " His pastorate in Waterbury
was a short and a serious one. It began and continued amid the

THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERS URY, 235

Storms of war. The "great sickness " and the "remarkable flood,"
together with the "losses in live stock," and in "the fruits of the
earth," (for Mr. Peck was a farmer as well as a minister), when
combined with age and growing infirmities, must have made the
active years of his life here full of care and anxiety. It is but a
meagre record that we have given of this man. The finding is
most unsatisfactory, but we are compelled to leave it thus. In cer-
tain towns settled at an early date, it was the custom to bury the
dead in the garden of the minister. Mr. Prudden's garden, at Mil-
ford, is cited as an instance — and the first place of burial in our
town was likewise at the foot of the minister's garden, for Mr. Peck's
house lot extended through to Grand street, and the part of the
late Grand street cemetery in use during the first century, was but
a continuation of that house lot. It was probably within this time-
consecrated ground on "Burying- Yard Hill," that Reverend Jere-
miah Peck, after his long and useful life, was laid to rest, but no
inscribed stone raised in memory of him remained when, in 1892
the city of Waterbury dishonored itself by desecrating the graves
of one hundred and seventy-six years; by blotting from the face of
our fair township the last vestige of its founders ! Neither church-
spire nor mill-chimney can ever be raised high enough to over-
shadow this crime, committed against the generations gone, and the
generations to come. Two weeks after Mr. Peck died the town en-
gaged to pay money, or that which was equivalent at the place where
Deacon Thomas Judd should buy "nayls," for the clapboarding and
shingling the minister's house. Committee was added to committee
in order to hasten the work — meanwhile, as an extra temptation, the
coming minister was proffered ten acres of upland "where it could
be found." A month later, Mr. Read was desired " to go on and accept
the call to the work of the ministry on the terms propounded to him
on the town's behalf," and an extra committee, composed of a lieu-
tenant, deacon, ensign and sergeant, was desired to go on and secure
Mr. Read if he was "obtainable;" but he was, evidently, not obtaina-
ble, for sometime between July 18 and August 21, 1699, Mr. Read dis-
appointed his devotees, and they turned away, much disheartened, to
look for another minister, appointing Deacon Judd to make the
search " by himself and the best counsel he could take to get one
to help in the work of the ministry, and to bring a man amongst
them upon probation, in order to settlement, if he could." The next
month. Deacon Judd not having been successful, John Hopkins was
appointed to give him aid in getting a minister. Ministers were
not to be had for the asking, in the seventeenth century. October
12th came, and a rate of a half penny on the pound was laid, to be
paid in current silver money, or that which was equivalent, bearing

236 niSTORT OF WATERBURT.

its own charge to the market, for to buy nails and glass for the minister's
house. During all this time, while the records are eloquent with
effort regarding a minister, not a word appears in regard to the
meeting-house, and are we to believe that the minister's house had
glass in the windows, and the house of God none ? *

One of the latest acts of the century was the laying of " a rate of
8d on the pound for carrying on the work of the minister's house,
to be given in labor or provision pay," and twenty days later, after
the long silence, the following : " What charge Ensign (Timothy)
Standly and Sarg. Bronson, committee for building the pulpit and
seats in the meeting-house, are at, more than the money given in
the country rate, and horse money according to the town act, shall
be paid by the town." We may conclude then, that in 1700 the
meeting-house had a pulpit and seats, or was about to be supplied
with them.

At the close of the century, seven of the original proprietors had
died in Waterbury, Robert Porter and Philip Judd in 1689, Edmund
Scott and John Carrington in 1690, Abraham Andrews, cooper, in
1693, Samuel Hikcox in 1694, and John Bronson in 1696. Two — Ben-
jamin Jones and Joseph Hikcox — had died elsewhere. Five — Will-
iam Judd, Thomas Hancox, Thomas and John Newell and Lieut.
John Stanley — had returned to Farmington, and John Scovill had
removed to Haddam — fifteen in all. If we add to this list those who
died or left the town before 1681, we shall find that in 1700 less than
one-half of the Grand Proprietors of the township remained.
Before 1700 thirty young men, sons of the planters, had been added
to the list of land owners. The whole number of tax-payers in
October, 1699, was forty-seven. We close the century with the list
of the planters* sons who had become land owners and had settled
in the town; they being called Bachelor Proprietors in distinction
from the Grand Proprietors, or sharers in the thirty-four divisions
of the little republic of Waterbury. Nine sons of planters either
died or failed to gain residence here between 1681 and 1700.

THE BACHELOR PROPRIETORS BEFORE 1700.

Isaac and John Bronson, Clark Carrington, Joseph and John
Gaylord, Samuel, William, Thomas and Joseph Hikcox, Thomas
and John Judd, Deacon Thomas Judd, John Richards, John, Thomas
and Israel Richardson, Edmund, Samuel, Jonathan, George, David
and Robert Scott, John Scovill, Samuel Standly, John, Ephraim and
Benjamin Warner, John, Stephen and Richard Welton.

* Twenty years after this church edifice was built, changes were made in it, and its doors and windows
were repaired. At that time, the vote taken relating to the purchase of glass has led to the erroneous belief
that the windows were without glass until 1715.

CHAPTER XVIII.

YOUNG MR. SOUTHMAYD — HIS ACCEPTANCE BY THE TOWN — ENSIGN TIM-
OTHY Stanley's house to be fortified — "yards" — a new

INHABITANT — THE MEADOWS ALONG THE GREAT RIVER — WATER-
BURY ISLANDS — WATERBURY HILLS.

JOHN READ, while at Harvard College, had a classmate named
John Southmayd. We are not able to assert that young Mr.
Southmayd listened to the story told by his friend Read, of
the generosity and needs of a poor and feeble little town in the
wilderness, and was moved by compassion and other considerations
to preach for its people — or that Mr. Read softened his refusal by
sounding the praises of his friend, but both statements are made
tenable by ensuing events. Dr. Bronson gives the following
anecdote relating to the young men, which was told by Professor
Hedge, of Harvard. Southmayd, while a student, prepared a chair
which was so constructed that when a person sat down in it, it sud-
denly gave way. When the Freshmen class was entered, its mem-
bers one by one were invited to Southmayd's room and offered the
treacherous chair. In the same class with Southmayd there was
one by the name of Read, who was mischievous, and one Collins,
who was dissolute. A wag, to hit off the three, composed some
lines .which ran thus:

" Bless'd is the man who hath not lent

To wicked Read his ear,
Nor spent his life as Collins hath,

Nor sat in Southmayd's chair."

We have seen how Waterbury lent its ear to this young and
"wicked" Read — a man who became the most distinguished lawyer
of his time in New England, and we are soon to see young South-
mayd become one of the most wise, sagacious, and beneficent sail-
ing-masters that ever directed the three-decked ship of church, plan-
tation, and town, safely over the shoals that beset its course.

Before November 2, 1699, Mr. Southmayd had preached here.
The two-acre house lot and other lands for the new minister were
already cleared and fenced, and Samuel Hikcox and his brother
William were appointed to go about and gather a work-rate of ;^2o,
out of which they were to dig and stone a well.

In June of 1700, it was announced in town meeting, that "having
had some taste of Mr. ^ovX\imeats ministry the people were satisfied,

238 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

and were willing to accept him as their minister to dispense the
word of God amongst them, and desired that the church in due sea-
son should settle him in Gospel order amongst them." But Mr.
Southmayd delayed to accept the duties of an ordained minister.
We shall find the reason perhaps, in the following entry, under date
of April 9, 1700. "The town agreed considering our present cir-
cumstances, to fortify Ensign Standly's house for the safety of the
town, and if it should prove troublesome times and the town see
they have need and are able afterward, to fortify two more." At
the same meeting "it was agreed to go about it forthwith." All
men and boys and teams that were able to work, were to begin the
next day, and the man who did not help with his own hands was to
pay 2S 6d. or with his team 3s. a day, until the work was done.

Until 1700, Waterbury was a compact village. The planters all
had their houses at the town spot. "Yards" are referred to as
existing in localities quite remote from the centre. Abraham
Andrews, Senior, had land "at Judd's meadows, on the east side of
the brook that runs into Benjamin Barnes' yard." Isaac Bronson
had an acre for a yard very early at Buck's meadow. There was an
"old" yard at Hancox meadow brook in 1715. Mention is made of
the spring and the place where they used to stack their hay west of
the Long Boggy meadow in south-western Watertown. These are
sufficient to indicate the custom of making yards for cattle, and
stacking hay where it was made.

To the present date, an attempt has been made to prison the
chief events as they transpired, reflecting what light might sift
• through a score of decades upon them while the town was held as
a single family — but from this point we must diverge with the
diverging inhabitants, pausing only here and there to chronicle a
passing event, as we follow our friends to Breackneck, Judd's
Meadows, Buck's hill, and whithersoever they go to build, and
abide, and subdue the wilderness. While we wait for the finishing
of the meeting-house, and for young Mr. Southmayd to say " yes "
to the town's wooing, and for the town to build that fort about
Ensign Timothy Stanley's house, over whose site stands our City
hall, it seems a fitting time to visit the meadows along the Naug-
atuck, and give the names by which they were known by their
owners, and by which certain of them are known to this day. On
the way do^'n the river we stop to mention an important event —
the arrival of a new inhabitant, with a new name to add to the
twenty-two, hitherto known in the town. He came, or he appears,
in 1700 on the list of town-officers, as a fence viewer. His name is
Joseph Lewis.

MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 239

THE MEADOWS ALONG THE NAUGATUCK RIVER.

Judd's Meadows included all the meadows reaching from the
Straits at Beacon Hill brook, to Fulling Mill brook at Union City.
In the sub-division of these meadows, the division northward from
the Straits on the east side of the river, extending from the brook
to the hills northward and eastward, seems not to have been hon-
ored with any name, except that the upper portion is known as Ben
Jones's lot, and is often referred to as a starting point. One of the
Newells had an allotment at the south end, bordering on the river
and Beacon Hill brook at its mouth. This, later, was Jeremiah and
Joshua Peck's, and they sold it to the new inhabitant, Joseph Lewis.
Later, the Hopkinses bought it and the Jones allotment and all the
surrounding region. On the west side the river, the first allotment
was John Lankton's, bordered on the south by the great rocks, on
the north by a little brook. This allotment became John Hopkins's.
The Hopkins family retained these meadows until they became, by
inter-marriage and deed of gift. Culver property, which they con-
tinue to be. North of the little brook, Thomas Richardson's allot-
ment began. It ran up into a neck between the hill and the river,
and included an island. Richardson gave it to his son Thomas, and
he sold it to Samuel Hikcox 2d, in the distribution of whose estate
it was "set" to his daughter Sarah, who married John Piatt, of
Norwalk. The Platts bestowed it upon a relative, Joseph Betts,
about 1750. The land lay neglected until it "went to pieces" in
Colony, Church and State taxes. The Culvers gathered in the
pieces and added them to their farm.

The next division west, became known as Scott's meadow from
an allotment in it to Edmund Scott. Scott's meadow gave the name
to that region, which it retains to this day. The Naugatuck Rail-
road runs through this, as well as through Richardson's allotment.
On Joseph Gaylord's meadow, the mill of L. & W. Ward stands.
East of the river, Sargeant Hikcox had the southern-most allotment,
of five acres, including an island. The old Waterbury and Derby
highway crossed this island, long known as Hikcox island, now
Ward's island. In the meadow which ran on the east side of the
river up to the old Burying Yard hill, John and Daniel Warner,
Benjamin and Philip Judd, and Timothy Standly had part and lot.
About against it on the west, began another section of meadow in
which was Scott's plain. This meadow section extended from the
hill south of Butler's brook, known as Toantic — as Scott's, and as
Long Meadow brook — to near the present Naugatuck bridge, where
it was to meet the "Deacon's Meadow" which is on the same side
of the river. It was allotted to William Judd, father of Deacon

240 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

Thomas, whose properly it became by virtue of the bestowment of
the Plantation's committee. It is recorded in 1688 as eight acres,
and extended from just below Maple street to the place where the
hill meets the river, so that the Rubber mills on Maple street and
the old passenger station of the Naugatuck railroad were built on
the Deacon's meadow. The section on the east side of the river from
burying yard hill to Fulling Mill brook was know as Warner's
meadow. The owners in this area were Dr. Daniel Porter (who had
a meadow and also a ten-acre grant from the town here), and Benja-
min Judd.

On the west side, at Union City, at the mouth of Hop brook, the
land became known as Andrew's meadow, Abraham, Senior, having
an allotment there. He bought of Mr. Southmayd a great lot allot-
ment, and of John Welton,his division. It was here that he had his
cattle yard. He also bought ten acres of Timothy Stanley. And-
rew's island was a part of the great lot. This point brings us to the
northern terminus of the Judd's meadows region. It is thought
that Lieutenant Judd had a two-acre lot assigned him as early as 1677,
and which he chose at Judd's meadows. In this allotment at this
very early date, each man seems to have selected a warm, secluded
spot with a stream running through it — perhaps with reference to
its suitability for cattle yards. In 1679, when the region was pre-
pared for allotments, this two-acre meadow of William Judd's was
ignored or forgotten, and Abraham Andrew's portion encroached
upon it. The difficulty was amicably adjusted, however, by Judd's
getting Andrew's lot at Hancox's meadow. This would seem to
account for the name of Judd's meadows in 1677 or '78.

The Slip, or the Long land, is the region now known as Platts'
mills. The meadows at the point above Pine island were described
as " at Dragon's point." Above Dragon's point, lies Long meadow,
which name in modern days has crossed the river and is applied
likewise to the line of narrow meadow lands along the river at Hope-
ville. The Long meadow region extended northward to the sand
hills lately used by the Meriden railroad for the extension to meet
the New England road. At and about the mouth of the Mad river
lay Mad meadow. On the west side of the Great river, in present
Brooklyn, was the Little meadow. In this Little meadow of the
Past (owned in the present century by Ansel Porter, son of Colonel
Phineas, and in our day by the late Charles Porter), lies all that part
of the city bordering the river between Washington avenue and
Riverside cemetery.

On the east side, lay the Beaver meadows, or meadow. Its east-
ern limit was Pine hill, removed about 1880. Great brook ran

.VEADOWS. ISLANDS AND HILLS. 241

through it, also the passage to the fording place, now Bank street.
Its northwestern bound was the line of coves that separated it from
the Manhan meadows, while near the river it ended at the base of
the eastern terminus of Hop Meadow hill. This hill extended to
Bank street. The accompanying illustration presents the sections
of the hill remaining in 1891. The meadow has been filled to the
depth of six or seven feet.

Hop meadow is southward and westward of the hill, between it
and the river. The Manhan meadows began with the western
border of the coves, and they extend to the point where the Nauga-
tuck river, after receiving Steel's brook, bends to the eastward.
This bend in the river forms the dividing line between Manhan
meadows and Steel's meadow and plain.

On the east side of the river above the mouth of Hancox brook
lie the fine meadows bearing the name of Thomas Hancox. They
extend northward to Mount Taylor. Above Mount Taylor on the
west side of the river, lies Buck's meadow. Frost's bridge crosses
the river against it. On our way to Buck's meadow we have passed
a long, narrow, crooked strip of land that in 1679 was set aside for
a new inhabitant. It was estimated " as twelve acres, if it was there

242 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

to be found." Stephen Upson was the new inhabitant, and he " took
it up." For many years it was known as Upson's island. The
rocky hills near by were called Upson's Island rocks. Next, on
the same side of the river lies Walnut-Tree meadow. Against it,
where Daniel Carver now lives, a brook comes to the river, known
in 1699 as George's brook. Following the river to Jericho rock,
which is a hill on its east side, we pass on the same side, Standly's

Jericho (which it will be remembered was given to him because of
the "meanness of his allotments.") It is the first meadow above
the Jericho bridge. West, on the river, a little above Standly's
Jericho, lies Pine meadow proper.

Next we come to the Reynolds Bridge station of the Naugatuck
railroad, which lies in Judd's Jericho. The view of Lower Pine

MEADOWS. ISLANDS AND HILLS.

243

meadow is taken in the Reynolds Bridge region, looking south-
ward. The hill to the left is Jericho rock. Stand ly's Jericho
lies between the rock and Lower Pine meadow. Higher still,
against the station, west of the river and of the West branch, lies
what came to be known as Upper Pine meadow. Above the bridge
is the Acre plain and Judd's slip. As you go up to the falls — the
only fall in the river about Waterbury worthy of the name — on
the east side is Popple meadow, which still holds its old name.
" The plain against the Popple meadow " lies across the river.

Above, on the west side, at the base of the Pine mountain,
extending up toward the mouth of Pootatuck brook, is an extensive
level meadow which appears to have had no distinctive name at the
first and probably became consolidated with Twitch Grass meadow,
which originally was a small meadow at the mouth of Twitch Grass
brook, which formed one side of the ancient burying-yard at
Thomaston,

The meadow lands above, on either side of the river, appear to
have been nameless, until the station and bridge at Thomaston are
reached. On the west side, the meadow extending up to the dam, is
Andrew's meadow of 1688. The land by the station is spoken of as
the plain against Andrew's meadow. Above the dam, on the west
of the river, is a piece of land known as Welton's meadow. A plain

344

BISTORT OF WATERBUR7.

against that, where the railroad runs, is referred to as the plain
against Welton's meadow. Above, on the east side at the mouth of
the East branch, or Lead Mine brook, lies English Grass meadow.
Above and against it, were " the mines." Still northward lies the
meadow spoken of as the Plum Trees.

Just above the Two-and-a-half-mile bridge, about half way
between Campville and Thomaston, on the east side of the river,
about a fourth of a mile from the bridge, is a house which is near
the old town line of Hartford and Waterbury, before Harwinton
was. In passing up the river road on the west side this house can
be seen in the distance.

n JoMph Scoii

We have thus followed the meadows bordering on the Naugatuck
from "The Straits" to "The Plum Trees" — a distance of about
eighteen miles.

WATERBURV ISLANDS.

There were twelve islands in the ancient township. They all
lay along the Great river. The most southern one was Richard-
son's, at Judd's meadows. Hikcox island is now Ward's island.
Andrew's island, now waste land, lies against the mouth of Hop
brook. Pine island is in the bend of the river, where it is well
wooded, just above the mill dam of the Piatt's mill. At an early
date, the river rapids at this point were known as the Pine Island
falls, and the elevated land west of the river was Pine Island plain,

MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 245

early owned by the Porters. In the same vicinity Isaac Bron-
son and John Carrington had their eight-acre lots, and on the old
road west of the river Samuel Barnes settled in 1730; on the east
side was Pine Island spring (later the Widow's spring, from its
ownership by the widow of Sergeant Samuel Hikcox). South-
mayd's island was originally his Beaver meadow allotment of three
acres, probably islanded by the old long cove and the small run of
water that came down Willow street and ran through the line of
coves to the river. In 1810 Southmayd's island had grown to eight-
een acres ; bounding east on heirs of Stephen Bronson, south on
Hop Meadow hill, westward on the Cove and a pent highway,
north on the burying ground and highway. The small island near
Sled Hall brook seems to have been nameless. The island lying
at the north end of the Manhan meadows, at the point where the
water is diverted from the river to enter the Manhan canal, was
known as Gaylord's island. Lake Hubbard, which is an enlarge-
ment of the river at this place encloses the island. This, at a later
date, became known as Upson's island. The turn in the river at
this point has been attributed to the work of the beavers, causing
the river to cross the valley to its opposite side. The old river
channel is still to be seen. Gaylord's upper island is between
Joseph Welton's house and Waterville. It was described, in 1687,
as "2^ acres' lying in a cind of a half mone at the lower end of
Hancox Meadows."

Bronson's island has been omitted from its proper place. It lies
between the river and the Watertown road just above the present
West Main street bridge. In time of a freshet this is still an island.
It was a permanent island as late as 1752.

Opposite the Waterville station of the Naugatuck road is a pro-
jection of land that formerly was an island ; it has borne the name
of its owners — Bronsons, and it is believed to have been early
Scovill's island. Just above, is " The Little Island " of the Bron-
sons. Above Mount Taylor on the east shore of the river is the
long, slender strip of an island, dedicated in 1679 to the settler who
should come and make a good inhabitant. This is Upson's island.
He was to have twelve acres of meadow here, if it contained so
much. Thomas Hancox owned two islands. The first one lay next
his eight-acre lot at the mouth of Steel's brook. The second is
enclosed by the two junctions of the West Branch river with the
Naugatuck at Reynolds Bridge; and is now estimated at about
fourteen acres. These islands acquired their names from the occu-
pation of their owner, Thomas Hancox being a butcher. This is
made evident by a deed of John Standly, wherein it is called " The

246 HISTORT OF WATERBURT.

Butcher's Island." After Hancox went to Hartford and became
keeper of |the prison there, the upper island belonging to him was
long a landmark as Ensign Judd's island. At a later date it bore
the Welton name. Mr. Henry Reynolds is, I think, the present
owner.

THE HILLS OF WATERBURY.

While we have not room to tell of the meadows that lie along the
branches of the Great river, we may invite the possible reader to
accompany us to that fair and beautiful hill-top lying beyond Town
Plot — called Malmalick before it was seen of white men,* and from
whence the planters beheld their township of nameless hills, in the
summer of 1674. Here, we may clothe a few of the same hills on
which these steadfast, earnest men fought the strife of life, with
the names their lips and deeds framed the picture in.

Looking northward, we trace the valley where the Naugatuck
river penetrates the great circle and unites with Hancock brook.
To the eastward, clearly cut against the blue, we see the " Blew Hill "
of early days; now the Hanging hill of Meriden. To the south-
ward, the dark pines and the crowding heights reveal the place
where the Great river enters the narrow and solemn pathway that
leads it out of the township. To the westward, the white church
of Middlebury is seen. Truly it is a hill-country that we look
upon, simple, and solid, and sober in its every line ! As seen from
this point, few are the marks that man has placed upon the
circle.

Beginning at the Strait between Beacon hill and the " Straights "
mountain, and moving westward, we pass Naugatuck, Great hill, or
Gunn hill — where Isaiah Gunn lived — Twelve-Mile or Andrew's hill.
Gunn Town, Millville, Toantick hill, in Derby. Woodruff's hill,
Lewis's, Clark's, Joe's, and ** King " Beebe's hills. Osborne Town.
Sandy, Bedlam, Meshaddock and Camp's hills. Bradleyville. The
hill west of Hop swamp. Middlebury, The Great hill east of Quass-
apaug (so named in the earliest boundary of the town), Bissell's hill.
The White Deer Rocks, Break Neck, Three-and-a-half-mile, Oronoke,
and Two-and-a-half-mile hills, Garnsey Town lands, Jeremiah's
mountain, Edmund's new mountain, Gaylord's hill, Warner's moun-
tain, World's End rocks, Scott's mountain — now called Nova Scotia
(and probably dating from the departure of certain inhabitants
after the war of the Revolution to that place), Welton *s moun-
tain, Arnold's hill, Buck's meadow mountain, Hikcox mountain,
Bryant's hill, Richard's hill, Edmund's Old mountain. Mount Tobe,
or Mountobe.

*See pages 198 and 199.

MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 247

Where the Naugatuck river enters, we find Mount Taylor, and
Taylor's Meditation, Wool rocks, Drum hill, Manhan Meadow hill,
World's End, or Lewis' hill. Buck's, Burnt, Grassy, Clinton and
Spindle hills — while near by are West Side hill and Town Plot —
Patucko's Ring hill, Mantoe's House rocks, Chestnut, Long and
Round hills. Tame Buck hill, Benson's hill (now Wolcott), Meriden
hill, East mountain, Abrigador, Prospect, and the Great hill. South-
eastward lie unknown hills, with the West Rock range in the dis-
tance, while nearer lie Hopkins' Pond, and Mulberry hills, with
Bethany, the Reare hill; and the Beacon Cap on Beacon hill to close
the door of the township on its Derby side, and complete the great
circle of hills.

CHAPTER XIX.

TOWN OFFICERS IN 17OO SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL LANDS — CANDLE WOOD

POUNDS — THE MEETING HOUSE — MR. SOUTHMAYD's HOUSE LOT —

THE DEATH OF LIEUTENANT JUDD AND OF OBADIAH RICHARDS

FIRST HOUSE IN WATERTOWN — AT BUCK's HILL — IN MIDDLEBURV —
AT JUDD's meadows — MR. SOUTHMAYD's ORDINATION — FORTIFICA-
TIONS AND EVENTS DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR PRIOR TO I709.

THE year 1700 was ushered in with the following men in power:
Timothy Standly was the constable; John Scovill, Dea. Judd
and Benjamin Barnes were townsmen; Edmund Scott and John
Warner viewed the fences, and Robert Scott the chimneys; Stephen
Upson and Richard Porter were the hay wards; Dr. Porter surveyed
when there was occasion; Joseph Gaylord, Jr., collected the minis-
ter's rates; Thomas Judd, Jr., was town treasurer and town clerk;
and Benjamin Barnes made the graves. These men were elected
for the year on the i8th of December, 1699, at the same meeting in
which we meet for the second time a reference to a school in Water-
bury, and at which the recorder was directed "to record those grants
of lands that were in the old town book that stood fair to be taken
out, even thougli the date was torn off." The old town book here
referred to was doubtless the one of which we have a portion. Its
successor seems to have been the present first volume of town meet-
ings, and as that begins with page 98, and at this date, it indicates
that the book called the Proprietors' book numbered 97 pages.

The first allusion to a school in Waterbury is met in 1698, when
the town granted thirty shillings in addition to the last year's rent
of the school lands for the encouragement of a school for four
months, and a committee was chosen to " procure one to keep school
to teach in writing as well as reading." It is surprising that no
school is mentioned for a period of sixteen years, for pupils abounded
from the beginning of the town. Some radical change in the schools
must have taken place about the time of Mr. Peck's death. It is
probable that his son, Jeremiah, taught the school from 1689 to 1698.
After the latter date, the school is mentioned every year in the
town meetings.

"The rent of the school lands," referred to lots in Hancox, Mun-
han, and Buck's meadows, and one in the Neck. These were leased
in 1 701 and the four succeeding years, as follows: The Hancox
meadow lot in 1701 to John Welton for ;;^i. 15.00; in 1702 to Dea.

DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR. 249

Judd for j^i.oQ.oo; in 1703 to John Richason for making ten rods of
new fence and 4 shillings; in 1704 to Thomas Richason for ^1.19.00.
The Munhan lot was leased at sums varying from 5 to 8 shillings —
the Neck lot for about the same sums, while the Buck's meadow lot
brought prices varying from ;^t.o4.oo to ;^i.i3.oo. The total income
derived from the four lots in five years was ^15.08.00. In no instance
do we find the same man in possession of the same lot two years in
succession. Fourteen men leased the lots during the period named.

In 1701 "For men's trial to make candle wood" the town gave
** liberty to each inhabitant to try one tree apiece and that man who
should pull a pine tree and set the two first letters of his name on
it, fairly to be seen, it should give him the title to it as his own
estate." If a man " felled boards, logs, timber, or wood and let it
lie at the stub for a twelve month " it was " to be free for any that
would fetch it."

This was the period when pounds were established, and horses
or cattle tied in the corn fields except when kept by a keeper on his
own land or with leave from the land owners, were to be impounded
by the hay wards. The first pound was " set up " where the Water-
bury Bank building now stands. It was then a portion of the South
highway, and the pound was placed in it because the South Meadow
gate opening into the Common field was in the Common fence at the
south side of Grand street. The second pound was in Willow street
at West Main for a similar reason — the West Meadow gate into the
field was there.

In 1702-, ten years after its foundations were laid, the first meet-
ing-house was finished. This we learn from the orders given to
the townsmen to make up their accounts concerning the work, and
the appointment of a committee in July 1702 "to place the people
where they should sit in the meeting-house." In order to under-
stand this long delay we must keep in mind the condition of the
people during the ten years. The same conditions existing to-day
would defer the completion of the church edifice now newly begun
in our town for a much longer period. Destroy our manufactories
or render them absolutely useless for two or three years; add a war
in a neighboring State that threatened our town with destruction;
fill the woods on all the hills with signs and shadows of lurking
Indians; send forth our military companies to keep the peace in
New York State; then add typhoid fever until it entered nearly
every house in the city and attacked the larger part of its inmates
— and church-building would languish in our midst — and yet,
from a like condition, the early men and women of Waterbury
came forth to take the places assigned to them in the finished

250

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

meeting-house of 1702. It stood about in the centre of the present
Green, with its main entrance on the south side. The reason for
placing it so far to the westward is found in the knowledge that
the second meeting-house, begun in 1727, was placed east of the
first one, and the third, built in 1795, ^^st of the second one. Its
floor space must have been sufficient to seat about 300 persons.
It had doors on its east, west, and south sides; a pulpit and seats,
but no pews. There is no reason for thinking that its windows
were without glass. The first " seating " of the first meeting-house
is not known; the only item that is left to us regarding it is — that
Mr. Southmayd's seat was at the west end of the pulpit. This
church edifice, unchanged, sufficed the people for six years only.

It is interesting to learn just what was expected of the pastor of
this, and other churches in 1702, and what was meant by "an able
and orthodox minister of the gospell," for we may thus obtain a
glimpse of Mr. Southmayd's acquirements at the age of twenty-six
years. Fortunately for us, the General Assembly defined "an able
and orthodox minister" that very year, enabling us to assert that
John Southmayd was a person well skilled in arts and languages;
well studied and well principled in divinity; that he approved him-
self, by his exercises in preaching the gospel, capable of dividing
the word of truth aright, and of convincing "gainsayers"; and that
his conversation was such that he was a person called and qualified
to be pastor of a church according to gospel rule— for such were
the qualifications demanded of him by The Assembly, and by pas-
tors and teachers of neighboring churches. To this young man
the legal voters of Waterbury, numbering fifty-two persons, and
whose combined estates were estimated at ;;^205o, promised to give
^50 in provision pay and jQio in wood annually, with ";^4o in labor
for fencing and clearing his house lot and other lands." Not yet
content with its own liberality, the town added jQ<^ to his salary,
and the promise to bestow upon him the house that had been begun
for Mr. Read, with lands and the propriety in lands — in fact, a great
lot with all its belongings, "when he should become an ordained
officer in the church"; the only condition being that the propriety
should revert to the town in case "he should go away before two
years were out after his ordination."

From the beginning, the people had not been satisfied with the
house lot for their minister, and now they were anxious to secure
the lot lying to the eastward. John Scovill was the person selected
to achieve the desired result, and his endeavors attest his ability
as a diplomat. The original Southmayd lot, together with the
Abraham Andrews and the John Welton lots occupied the land

DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR, 251

lying between present State and Willow streets. The town owned
land in Steel's meadow that had been sequestered for the ministry.
Thomas Judd owned the Andrews lot, represented by the home-
stead of the late George Prichard. John and William Bronson
owned an interest in the homestead of their father, John Bronson^
lying across the highway. The town conveyed the ministry land
in Steel's meadow to John Bronson; John Bronson promised to buy
of the heirs their interest in his father's homestead* and give it to
William. On this promise, William conveyed the house and lot to
Thomas Judd, Jr. Thomas Judd, Jr., conveyed the Andrews home-
stead to the town, and the town added it to Mr. Southmayd's two
acres.

There is no mention of any other minister at Waterbury during
the time between Mr. Southmayd's first arrival and the time of his
ordination five years later. It is not easy to account for this long
delay. During its first year Mr. Southmayd married Susanna, the
daughter of William Ward, deputy to the General Assembly from
Middletown. The next year, in 1702, his father, William South-
mayd, mariner, died, and Waterbury lost two more of her Grand
proprietors — Lieutenant Thomas Judd,f the first resident Commis-
sioner and Justice of the Peace, and the first lieutenant in the
township; and his next door neighbor, Obadiah Richards, who was
the first man, so far as has been found, to build a house and barn
away from the town spot. The death of these men must have been
a serious blow to the town, for the one held important positions of
trust and responsibility, and the other was an earnest, a brave, and a
practical planter. In the midst of war and danger from savage
foes, Obadiah Richards built the first house in present Watertown
before Dec. 23, 1700, for on that day he was granted one acre, "where
his house stands at his mountain^'' and on the same day his son Oba-
diah was received as an inhabitant.

It is highly probable and entirely reasonable to suppose that
Obadiah Richards, Jr., who was the first known inhabitant of
Watertown, was living there in 1701.

Richards' mountain, or Obadiah's hill, is the eminence southwest
of the centre. The Middlebury and Woodbury roads pass over it. In
1 701, Richards gave to his sons John and Obadiah, each one-half of
his lands on the mountain (above sixteen acres), and to Obadiah,
his share of the house and barn. John, apparently, having assisted

• That he kept his promise is evidenced by the fact that eight years later the homestead was set to Will-
iam Bronson as his whole portion in his father's estate.

+ A little paper lying unheeded for 188 years tells us that Dr. Hull came from Wallingford to attend Lieu-
tenant Judd in his illness, and that before 1705 his son Thomas paid Dr. Hull at his house five shillings in
cash on his " father's account."

252

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

in the building of this house and barn, was the owner of the other
half. The house is mentioned in 1704, and again in 1709, but in 17 15
some disaster had befallen both house and barn, for we find in a
land grant the words " where the house and barn stood." Houses
and bams did not wear out in fifteen years. It is not to be thought
that Obadiah Richards continued to live in this isolated habitation
when the peril was so great that only the edict of the General
Court, commanding towns to stand and fortify, prevented wholesale
flight to points of greater safety, and it is highly probable that the
house and barn were burned in the Indian raid of 17 10, which vis-
ited Waterbury with a calamity that was long felt.

Bucks Hill is probably the scene of the second attempt to build
homes at a distance from the village. The brothers John and
Ephraim Warner (probably twins) were, it is believed, dwelling
there at the close of 1701 in houses separated by the highway;
John's house was on the west side and is now fairly well repre-
sented by William Tyler's residence; Ephraim's, on the east side, a
little southerly from the Tyler house. The depression supposed to
indicate the cellar of the latter house was obliterated in 1891. The
two houses supposed to have been built in 1701 are not specifically
mentioned until 1703.

Before April of 1702 Isaac Bronson had built the first known
residence in present Middlebury.

Before December of that year Samuel Hikcox had "set his
house " in Naugatuck.

The initial steps had thus been taken for the establishment of
three towns in 1702, and the events narrated had taken place before
the first meeting-house was finished, or Mr. Southmayd was ordained.

October 7, 1703, Isaac Bronson, Thomas Judd, and Edmund Scott
were chosen ** to provide what was needful for the entertaining the
elders and messengers for the ordaining Mr. Southmayd." If the
feast was made ready and the guests arrived, the ordination did not
take place that year, nor even the next year. Peaceful avocations
were rudely interrupted. The fort about Timothy Standly's house
was rebuilt; Timothy was elected lieutenant of the Waterbury train
band, and Deacon Judd was made its ensign; the town stock of
ammunition was received from Hartford and kept in the Standly
fort; a garrison of ten men was stationed here by order of the
General Assembly; the town agreed to fortify Mr. Southmayd 's
house, "every man's proportion to be staked out according to his
Grand levy;" every sixth man in the train band was provided with
a knapsack, hatchets and a strong belt, and no man (of sixteen
years or older) was permitted to leave Waterbury unless he con-

DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR. 253

tributed ;^io for the defence of the place, and every man of sixteen
years was a member of the train band.

In 1704, Mr. Southmayd declined to accept the jQ^ addition to his
salary, which was to be in the same ** speci " — that was, in provision
pay. Not to be outdone in generosity the town decreed to give
him ;^io in labor — thus making his salary at his ordination jQto,
beside a free gift of his house and sl jQi<,o interest in what was orig-
inally about one twenty-second part of a township of more than one
hundred and twenty-five square miles — a fair salary and settlement
for the most distinguished clergyman of the present time! May 30th,
1705, Mr. Southmayd was ordained over a church of twelve male
members. It was a solemn, a serious, and an awful height to which
a man was raised, when he became " a visible member of the Church
of Christ" at any time from 1630 to 1740, in New England. The
marvel is, that so many as twelve men were found in Waterbury to
assume the enduring ordeal to life and character. The relation of
pastor and people became annealed in the fires of danger through
which together they passed. There is not from first to last the
slightest indication in the public records that the town and Mr.
Southmayd were ever at variance. He was the standard-bearer of
public opinion on all vital points; a certain mellow ripeness of per-
fect manhood seems to emanate from his departed life; whatever
he did in the church or in the town — for the two were but one — still
bears the blush of perfect fruit. One, now and then, can get a
glimpse of a side of his character that recalls the fact that his father
let a negro boy escape out of his barque at Middletown — and sug-
gests the possibility that the same spirit descended to the son; in
fact, the breath of spiritual and material emancipation was vital in
him. That house on the corner, in 1700 with "one end of it fit to
live in," was rich in historical interest before, during, and after the
days when it was fortified.

It was declared that it " would greatly prejudice the interests of
Queen Anne and encourage the enemy if any of the outposts in
Hartford county should be quitted or exposed by lessening the
strength thereof.*' Waterbury was accounted one of the eight
frontier towns, and it was forbidden that it should be broken up.
That it might be enabled to stand, a garrison of ten men was
ordered to be stationed here, and a scout of two men was to be on
duty every day.

Before 1706 there was a call for 400 soldiers from Hartford
county alone, to go forth to war with the English forces. Already
Queen Anne's war had been waged for four years, and the burden
and horrors of it fell upon New England. Waterbury had received

254

HISTORY OF WATERS an r.

one poor afflicted refugee in the person of Sergt. John Hawks, who
sought the home of his daughter, Mrs. Jonathan Scott, after having
survived the massacre at Deerfield,in which Frenchmen and Indians
killed his wife, his only son and his wife with their three children,
and carried captive and killed his daughter Elizabeth. Sergt. Hawks'
cattle were taken out of the Waterbury list in 1706, and Dr. Bron-
son tells us that he spent his latter days here.

In 1706, the fort about Standly's house was repaired by Doctor
Porter and Thomas Judd. A period of the wildest alarm and most
agonizing suspense followed. It was incited by a messenger from
Colonel Schuyler at Albany with the information that the " French
and enemy Indians were preparing to make a descent upon the
frontier towns." This was in January, 1706-7. Waterbury was one
of the four most exposed towns. At the same time Captain Minor
sent a messenger from Woodbury to the Council conveying his
suspicions that the Indians thereabout had been invited to join the
enemy. An examination of the Indians, who were summoned be-
fore the Council, confirmed Captain Minor's suspicions into belief.
It was resolved to remove the Indians of Woodbury and New Mil-
ford to Stratford and Fairfield; but later, as there was "much sick-
ness among them," two of their chief personages were taken to
Fairfield and held as hostages. Waterbury was warned to provide
with all possible speed a sufficient number of well fortified houses
for the safety of the inhabitants. The Council " resolved " that this
exposed town must have three houses fortified, and promised 10 use
its influence with the General Assembly that the charges for the
same should be borne by the country. Fifteen pounds was later
allowed Waterbury out of the country rates for that year, in consid-
eration of the extraordinary floods that had occurred.

The immediate response to this warning appears in our records
under date of January 31, 1706-7, when "the town agreed to build
the fort that is at Lieut. Standly's, strong." An act was also passed
" to build a new fort at the east end of the town at the place where
they could agree." They did not seem to agree about the place for
the new fort, for the following June, probably as the result of a
local alarm, " the town by vote considering our troubles and fear of
an enemy do agree to lay aside cutting bushes which was warned
for this day (June 23d) till after Michaelmus, and this day forth-
with to go about finishing and repairing the forts and to finish
them by Wednesday next at night." If there was a third fort at
this time, we have no intimation of its location. This was soon
after the expedition of one thousand men, in twenty-three trans-
ports, had set sail from Nantucket for Port Royal. During the

DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR, 255

time of that expedition the frontier towns were kept in alarm. In
October of 1708 an expedition was fitting out against Canada, and
the Council of War was directed to erect and sustain with men and
provisions as many garrisons at Waterbury as it deemed necessary
(but not more than two) at the colony's charge. It was at this time
that ";^5o was allowed for bringing up and maintaining Dogs in
the northern frontier towns in the colony to hunt after the Indian
enemy." A black dog, at about this time, is a factor in a deed in
exchange for land in Waterbury which may have figured in the
Indian hunts. It is interesting to note that in the midst of all this
dread excitement and danger the Reverend Ministers in the gov-
ernment met at Saybrook to utter their confession of faith on the
platform of Church Discipline there erected.

Our own records afford no intimation that a garrison was ever
stationed here, but in November 1708 we find the following act:
" The town agree to have three forts in the town, one built at the
west end of the town on the country account — one at Lieut. Stand-
ly's on the country account — one at John Hopkins's house on the
town account."* In December, it was announced that the fort at
the west end of the town should be built about Mr. Southmayd's
house.

In view of the above records, it is not possible to give a definite
and clear statement of the fortifications of Waterbury, for Mr.
Southmayd's house had been fortified four years at the last men-
tioned date, and the Stanley fort ante-dated that. Three months
later "the town agree that the Fort to be built at the West end of
the town shall be built about Mr. Southmayd's house."

In 1708 fifty names appear on the Waterbury list of tax-payers.
In 1709 we find but forty-three — a loss of seven names in one year.

In May of 1709, in the list of troops to be raised for the expedi-
tion to Canada, it is found that Waterbury's quota was four. In
October, Queen Anne ordered the expedition to be "laid aside."
Col. William Whiting commanded the Connecticut men. " Sorrow-
ful circumstances " attended the expedition, and a post was sent to
Col. Whiting directing him to take the best care that he could of
the sick soldiers remaining at Albany; to provide for their return
by water; and then to march home with such of his men as were fit
for the journey. His men were to be disbanded at the towns from

* The large red house of John Hopkins, standing on the south side of East Main street, between Great
and Little brooks, with a well in the middle of its ** enormous " kitchen, is remembered by persons still
living, and is thought to be the house fortified in 170S.

Some of the palisades of the Stanley fort were used in the construction of a fence about the house of
Lemuel Harrison, which occupied the site of the Stanley-Clark homestead, and are still remembered by Miss
Mary Ann Clark, a great-granddaughter of Thomas Clark.

256 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

which they had gone forth. Certain of the soldiers were' not
returned to the places of their enlistment, and the dates of their
discharge remained for some time unknown. Of this number was
Nathaniel Richardson of Waterbury, a young man of about twenty-
four years.

He was ** detached for the expedition to Canada, and he was dis-
missed from service, being sick, at New Haven." Four years later,
his heirs were awarded for his services to the country one pound
and sixteen shillings.

That Nathaniel Richardson returned to Waterbury is made evi-
dent by the following entry in the Proprietor's book, under date of
March 13, 17 10. By a major vote he was given four-score acres on
a branch of Hop Brook east from Break Neck hill. For this, he
was to live in the town in a settled way ten years and build a house
in five years. To this gift, remonstrance was made by certain of
the proprietors.

The names of the three other soldiers who served on the expe-
dition are unknown.

CHAPTER XX.

THE WILL OF THOMAS SCOTT OF HARTFORD — THE GIFT-DEED OF
EDMUND OF WATERBURY — JOSEPH SCOTT " KILLED " BY INDIANS
AT THE WEST BRANCH ROCKS — HIS GRAVE — HIS SON JOHN ADMIT-
TED AN INHABITANT OF WATERBURY — JONATHAN SCOTT CAP-
TURED BY THE INDIAN ENEMY AND TAKEN TO CANADA — JOHN
SCOTT IN CAPTIVITY AMONG THE INDIANS AT CANADA — HANNAH
SCOTT, THE MOST AFFLICTED WOMAN IN NEW ENGLAND — THE
FRONTIER ROAD THROUGH WATERBURY,

THE only Waterbury family known to have received personal
injuries at the hands of Indians during all the long and bit-
ter years of warfare is that of Edmund Scott.

The Scott family seems to have been somewhat noted for mis-
adventure from the days when Thomas Scott, the ancestor of the
family, was chosen in the midwinter of 1639 to go and examine the
country — or, in the words of the record, "to view those parts by
Unxus Sepus," because Hartford desired more ample accommoda-
tions, and Wethersfield also desired a plantation at Farmington.
This Thomas Scott was, I think, the grandfather of Edmund of
Waterbury. He died in 1643, while making his will in the presence
of two friends who had been 'summoned in haste to receive his last
words. "John Ewe, by misadventure, was the cause of his death"
and paid a fine of five pounds, in consequence of his act what-
ever it was, to the Court, and the same amount to Thomas Scott's
widow.

In present Watertown there are two Waterbury graves that
should be suitably inscribed and kept in perpetual remembrance
because of the suflEerings endured by their tenants at the hands of
Indians; and also because they were the first permanent residents
of Wooster-Westbury-Watertown. The graves are those of Jona-
than and Hannah (Hawks) Scott. He was a survivor of Indian
torture; and she was, probably, the most afflicted woman in all New
England, for in 1704, her mother and her brother with his wife and
their three children were slain at Deerfield, while her only sister
was made a captive and perished on the way to Canada. In 1707 or
1708, within a few miles of her home in Waterbury, her husband's
brother was tortured to death. In 17 10, her husband was seized in
the Waterbury meadows, the thumb of his right hand was cut ojff,
and thus mutilated, he was taken on the long and weary march to

17

258 HI8T0RT OF WATEBBUBT.

Canada, being bound at night to the earth by poles laid across his
body, on the ends of which his savage captors slept. He was sub-
ject to all the pains and penalties of two full years of captivity
before his wife saw him again. Her son John, a lad of eleven years,
was taken from her sight forever — it is said, on the same day, by
the same cruel foe; and, if the tradition be true, her eldest son
Jonathan, then thirteen years of age, was taken also; leaving Mrs.
Scott — with her daughter Martha, a child of nine years, and three
little boys, Gershom, seven; Eleazer, five; and Daniel, three — to
brave life in Waterbury in 17 10. Poor Hannah Scott ! Her sorrows
should keep her in remembrance.

Let us examine the evidence that has been collected regarding
Waterbury's one Indian tragedy. Edmund Scott of Waterbury
gave to his children nearly all of his property, by a deed of gift,
executed June 11, 1690. This deed has been called his a//7/ — hence
the error that has arisen in regard to the date of his death. In the
distribution of his lands, he gave to Joseph, whom he calls his eld-
est son, his twenty acres in the Great Swamp of Farmington, with
its upland, and a four acre lot; to Edmund, beside what was for-
merly given to him, a lot in the Neck, and a fourth part of his
undivided land in Waterbury; to Samuel and Jonathan, his "whole
right and title in Farmington, of houseing, home lots, orchards,
meadows, and upland." After gifts to his daughters — there was no
incentive to a man to leave lands to his married daughters, for they
could not hold them — he left to Geot-ge, David and Robert, his
whole property in Waterbury, including all his "movable estate,
both quick and dead." This deed tells us why Samuel Scott left
Waterbury, giving up his newly built house on Bank street, and his
other lands, to his brother Jonathan.

Three years later, Farmington gave to Joseph Scott, the eldest
son, "a swamp of 14 or 16 acres, as a soldier's lot, and the same
year the town measurer laid out for him two parcels of land " in
the place called Poland (Bristol). One piece of nineteen and a half
acres is described as "abutting southerly 6n the west branch of the
Poland river, and running westerly up the river to a marked white
oak tree near the northwest branch of the Poland river, and from
the tree a straight line eastwardly to a tree marked on three sides
and standing a little east of WattEberry path." The lands thus Uid
out to Joseph Scott had formerly been granted to John Langdon.
Joseph Scott probably went to Bristol to live in the wilderness at
this time, for we find the town of Farmington giving to him "a lib-
erty to dwell alone, provided that he faithfully improve his time
and behave himself peaceably and honestly towards his [Indian ?]

THE SCOTT FAMILY.

»S9

neighbors and their creatures." He was constantly to attend the
public worship of God, and, when required, to give mi account to the
townsmen of the manner in which he spent his time. In 1695 we
find mention made o£ " his cellar at Judd's meadow " in Farmington.

Tradition* gives the following in relation to Joseph Scott.
"Early in the history of the town [Bristol] a Mr, Scott who had
begun to clear a piece of land on Fall Mountain, intending to
remove hither from Farmington, was seized by a party of Indians
and horribly tortured. His screams were heard a long way; but
the Indians were so many that no one dared to go to the rescue, and
a considerable number of the settlers, fearing an attack, from the
infuriated Indians, hid themselves all day in the bushes near the
river."

The Mr. Scott of the tradition is, without doubt, Joseph Scott.
He was "killed" twenty years before there were any known set-
tlers in Bristol to hear him scream, or to hide by the river bank,
and he lost his life in Waterbury, according to the following evi-
dence. In 1758, Richard Seymour (Seamor) laid out about two
acres of land at Reynolds Bridge, described as " at the West
Branch rocks," and also as "near where Joseph Scott was killed."
Stephen Seymour had land adjoining laid out at a still earlier
date with the same description.

In Joash Seymour's re-survey of a very large tract of land at the
same place, it is described as " beginning at the foot of a ledge or large
rock, which lies to the right
of the path leading to the f
ancient Rock House, and IS t
running from thence to the [
West Branch, and down the \
Branch to the Naugatnck
down the river to Deep S
River brook to a branch [
of the brook and up the I
branch to a highway, and I
through the wilderness to I
Scotl's grave, and thence
through the wilderness to I
the point of beginning.'

There are three rotks
in this immediate vicinity,

any one of which might be taken for the Rock hotise of the early
days. In a meadow boundary, made before 1700, the Rock house

■ McmoTul HLtloT

26o HISTORY OF WATERBUR7,

was a bound, and the line was run from it, forty-seven rods to the
river. The one selected for the illustration is capable of giving
shelter to forty or fifty persons, and has been known in the Rey-
nolds family for a century as the Rock house. Another and still
larger ledge of the same description lies higher on the hill-side to
the southwest.

Joseph Scott was "killed" before Feb. 7, 1708-9, at which date
administration on his estate was granted to his brother Samuel, and
his grave is to this day a recognized bound of three farms; those
of Henry Reynolds, Charles Bidwell and George Osborne. He
seems to Jiave had an only child, John, who, like poor John Hawks,
fled to his kindred in Waterbury, after the death of his father, for
"Dec. 28, 1709, John Scott, son of Joseph Scott, deceased, was ad-
mitted an inhabitant in said town " (Waterbury). According to
this admission, he must have joined the expedition against Canada
from Waterbury, for he was in Col. Whiting's regiment, and was of
Waterbury at the date, although, having recently left Farmington,
he was accredited to that place when five pounds was paid to him,
in 17 10, for his services to the country.

Dec. 28, 1709, Jonathan Scott was appointed one of four fence
viewers. At some time between that date and July 26, 1710, he was
"captured by the Indian enemy, and taken to Canada." In October,
1710, and again in 171 1, the country rates on his estate were remit-
ted to his wife. In October, 17 12, he was "but lately returned from
his captivity." He requested relief from the Court, and received
" a release from his country rate, and ten pounds out of the treas-
ury, for the loss of one of his thumbs by the enemy." While we
can give no evidence that he was again captured, subsequent peti-
tions point decidedly to that view of the case, for, after an interval
of nine years, in 172 1, we find him again before the court, setting
forth that " while he was a captive and prisoner at Canada, he was
under distressing circumstances, and necessitated to take up money
upon credit for his subsistence and relief, and had taken up ten
pounds and prudently spent the same." The constable of Danbury
was directed to pay ten pounds of the Colony's money into his
hands. It seems probable that his son John was made prisoner
about this time, for four years later, or fifteen years after the first
capture, we find " the prayer of Jonathan Scott, setting forth that
his son John is now in captivity among the Indians at Canada, and,
that he is so reduced, that he cannot get him home." His prayer
was answered by a gift of five pounds, and the promise, that if he
recovered his son, the matter would be further considered, and the
Assembly would do therein as it thought fit. That was Jonathan's

THE SCOTT FAMILY. 261

last prayer to the court, although he lived twenty years after that
date. We find no proof that he recovered his son John, or that John
ever returned from captivity. Notwithstanding the traditional
statement as given by Dr. Bronson, it seems quite probable that the
stories of Joseph, of Jonathan, and of John, became intermingled
by the lapse of years, and that John's capture occurred during the
period between 1722 and 1725, for at that time the very air was
ringing with the alarms that shot along the frontier road — this road
ran from Hartford through Farmington to Waterbury, and from
Waterbury to Woodbury and New Milford. What more natural,
when Major Talcott came " riding this frontier," impressing men
and arms — on the news that three hundred " French Indians were
come over the lake towards Connecticut " — than that a Scott should
join the fray ?

Life was far from being dull and weary for want of in-
citement, to our fathers. There was scarcely time to get the
seeds in the ground, so incessant was the demand for scouts to be
established. Military watches and constable watches were con-
stantly in operation. The friendly Indians were all called in from
their hunting grounds; not one being allowed to enter the territory
lying north of the road that ran from Hartford through Waterbury
to New Milford, and between the rivers Connecticut and Housa-
tonic. Even an Englishman might not fire a gun within that ter-
ritory to kill any animal. If a gun was heard to the northward of
that road, the sound struck terror into every man, woman and child.

Certain of the Litchfield settlers deserted that then new and
defenceless plantation, until "the men of the coast" from Branford
and Guilford; from Fairfield and Stratford and Milford, were sent
to their aid. Even the few trusted Indians — the six who accom-
panied a scout of three Englishmen — were obliged to wear some-
thing white upon their heads to secure their lives from the wrath
of white men. And these were the times in which the men of
Waterbury made their town ! — the same men, whose graves the men
of 1 89 1 had not the courage to face, and so despoiled them and hid
them from sight forever.

The following is the traditional story of Jonathan Scott's capture
as related by Dr. Bronson. "About the same time (17 10) some In-
dians came down from Canada and ascended a hill, or mountain, on
the west side of the river, opposite Mount Tayler [the lower end of
Buck's Meadow mountain], to reconnoitre. They saw Jonathan
Scott seated under a large oak tree in Hancock's meadow, eating
his dinner, with his two sons, aged fourteen and eleven, at a little
distance. The Indians approached stealthily, keeping in a line

262 HiaTORT OF WATERBURT.

with the tree and Mr. Scott. In this way they reached him unper-
ceived and made him prisoner. The boys took to their heels; but
the father, in order to save his own life, which he was given to un-
derstand would be taken if he refused, recalled his sons Thus the
three were captured. The Indians then retraced their steps rapidly
with their prizes, having taken the precaution to cut off Scott's
right thumb, in order to cripple him if he should make resistance."
Dr. Bronson had met another tradition, for he adds, elsewhere, in
relation to Jonathan Scott : " The tradition is that he was buried
on Scott's mountain, and his supposed grave is still pointed out."
It is evident that Joseph Scott's grave has been mistaken for that
of his brother, for although Joseph was killed far from the early
Scott's mountain, there is an eminence in the vicinity, to the west-
ward of the grave, to which the name has been erroneously given.
Bronson adds, " that part of the tradition, however, which relates
to the circumstances and time of his death, as that he died by vio-
lence on his way to the north, at the hands of the Indians, after
having had his tongue cut out, is without foundation in fact." This
tradition is probably entirely true of Joseph Scott, of whom Dr. Bron-
son failed to find trace. The entire facts may be and probably are,
that Joseph was taken on Fall mountain, in Poland, and killed amid
the West Branch rocks at Reynolds Bridge, in order to stay his
screams, while on the retreat; that Jonathan Scott was captured in
17 lo, and again at a later date, perhaps at the same time with his
son John; but I have been able to find no evidence that John pre-
ferred the life of the French Indians to a return to Waterbury — or
that Jonathan Scott, Junior, was ever in captivity. Granting for
one moment that the traditional story of the capture is entirely
true, one finds it difficult to resist the temptation to draw a picture
of Waterbury on that summer's night, as its residents fled to their
fortified houses to pass the hours of darkness — but we must confine
ourselves to historical facts, and relate only that the Court in Au-
gust, 1710, in response to an appeal from Mr. Southmayd and others,
appointed a Special Committee of War for Waterbury, with full
power to raise and send men thither from the county of New
Haven for its relief by scouting or lying in garrison there, as
occasion should require. From the date of Waterbury's cry for
aid, we may place the capture of Jonathan Scott as probably July
25, 1710.

The following April, Waterbury was again suffering from appre-
hension.

At a town meeting in Waterbury, April 9th, 171 1, the town made choice of Mr.
John Southmayd, Lieut. Timothy Staudly, Thomas Judd, John Hopkins. Serg.

THE SCOTT FAMILY. 263

Isaac Bronson, Serg. Stephen Upson, George Scott as a committee to write to the
Committee of Safety at New Haven and to represent our case to said committee
concerning our present fears of the common enemy to take their advice and counsel
in said affair.

It was comparatively easy to call a tow^ meeting at that date,
the majority of the inhabitants living within sound of the beat of
the drum — and " a writing on the meeting-house door with the hour
and day asserted in said writing, 4 days exclusive before the day "
was "the legal warning for a town meeting for Judd's Meadows,
Break Neck, and Buck's Hill farmers" in 1709. A meeting must
have been called in haste after the capture of Scott, for on the next
day (July 26th), the town made choice of a committee, at whose head
was Mr. Southmayd, and the poor recorder was so frightened that he
wrote the name "Soth mad," "to draw up in writing the circum-
stances of the town " in that time of war, and present it through
their deputies to the General Court, which was to assemble at New
Haven within nine days. This document is not known to be extant.
At the same town-meeting, the town " gave Jonathan Scott his town
rate for 1709, for getting out of town William * Stanard's ' wife, and
in consideration of his present circumstances, he being in captivity."

In response to the appeal made by the town, the Court appointed
a Special Committee of War. for Waterbury, whose duty it was to
respond to the call of Waterbury men in case of danger on the
approach of an enemy, by sending "men for their relief" by scout-
ing or lying in garrison " as occasion should require."

The following April, Waterbury applied to the above committee
of war for "advice and counsel in said affair." We get no hint of
the occasion of the above appeal except that it was because of
"present fear of the cpmmon enemy."

CHAPTER XXI.

THE FENCE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE GREAT RIVER — FIRST DIVISION

NORTHWARD FIRST DIVISION SOUTHWARD SECOND DIVISON

NORTHWARD — SECOND DIVISION SOUTHWARD — THREE ROD DIVISION
THE FENCE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE GREAT RIVER.

THE early settlers of New England came to America thoroughly
imbued with the spirit of law and order. Every possible
condition of community-living was anticipated and prepared
for in England before a ship sailed for Massachusetts Bay, and but
four years had elapsed after the landing at Plymouth, before cattle
were brought to the new country — accordingly, when the pilgrims
sallied forth for the Connecticut wilderness we find them driving
cattle before them.

We have also found that " the settlers of Mattatuck were not a
mere band of adventurers bound together by a common purpose and
a common sympathy, nor yet a confederacy of independent individ-
uals, at liberty at any time to withdraw from the general govern-
ment voluntarily submitted to, but that they were pre-eminently a
unit in regard to social, political, and religious matters. It was not
each man's privilege to select for himself a portion of land on
which to found a home and raise sustenance for his family, but the
major vote of those men who were qualified to act determined
where each one should pitch his tent, as it were, and where he
should be privileged to expend his efforts to produce corn and
wine, or the other good things of this life. When each man's van-
tage ground had been duly carved out for him, he could not build
upon it such a domicile as he liked, and reside upon it when it
suited him to do so, but in all things he was subject to the rule of
others, whether he would or would not. In like manner, he must
not choose for himself what form of religious worship he would sus-
tain, or whether he would support any form, but must submit to the
governing voice of others in this, as in minor matters."*

In view of the above orderly and dignified arrangement, it is
interesting to witness the extreme caution and care with which the
colonists approached a condition incident to the new life, and for
which they had no precedent in English living. When the neces-
sity lay before them "in their beginnings" to improve their land in

♦ B. F. Howland.

THE COMMON FENCE. 265

a common way that should best advance the public good, it was
ordered that each town "should choose seven able and discreet
men, who were to take the common lands belonging to each of the
towns into sad and serious consideration, and after a thorough
digesting of their own thoughts, they were to set down under their
hands in what way the lands might in their judgment be best
improved for the common good." If five men in any one town
agreed on the way of improvement suggested, that agreement
decided the law for that town. The same committee was also to set
down what fences should be made. When a fence was made, and
viewed and approved by five out of the seven men, it was deemed a
sufficient protection to the fields, and if any cattle thereafter sur-
mounted that fence and damaged crops, the owner of the cattle was
compelled to make good the loss, "without any gaynesaying or
releife by Repleivy or otherwise."

As time went on, the inhabitants had liberty to choose each year
three new men as fence viewers, and the former committee was
reduced to five members — penalties and forfeitures being under its
control.

In 1662 the orders concerning the viewing of common fences
had fallen into neglect. To remedy this neglect, the Court then
ordered that every town — the number of towns had increased to
twelve (this was before the union with New Haven Colony) —
should choose two men, each year, who should be sworn to a due
performance of the work of fence viewing; refusal or neglect being
punishable with a twenty-shilling fine. It was at about this time
that the order was given concerning the setting down of fences in
meadow, and upland, and home lots, that gave liberty for either
party of twelve inches from the dividing line, for breaking ground
to set the posts, or " for the laying on the hedge," while the stakes
and posts were to be placed in the dividing line. In the uplands, a
liberty of four feet from the dividing line was granted for a ditch.

To the committee for Mattatuck was consigned the duty of
establishing the common-field, and the common-fence. To protect
the treasures of grass and grain from wandering or unruly cattle, a
portion of this fence was built at a very early date. This must have
been made to enclose the acre-gardens clustered about the Neck
hill, and as every man must have had an equal length of fence,
there seems to have been no record of it — at least, none has been
found. The first recorded division of fence was ordered in 1677
It began at the Mad river, near, if not at the point where the Bald-
win street bridge crosses it; from thence it ran westwardly and
northwardly, bounding the town plot of 1677 on two sides (Union,

266

HiarOBT OF WATBBBVRT.

Grand and Willow streets imperfectly representing its course). It
followed the general course of Willow street as far north as that
street now extends. It there bent to the westward, crossed David's
brook {named for David Carpenter), went along the western base

of Drum bill, and from

thence to the river,
reaching it above the
Michael Bronson house
place, a portion of the
cellar of which can still
be seen between the
New England railroad
track and the "Water-
bury River Turnpike
Road " (which extended
from Salem Bridge to
the Massachusetts line).
This division of fence
reached " towards the
upper end of Steel's
meadow." This meadow
lies along the west bank
of the river from the mouth of Steel's brook up to Prindle's
island, passing the mouth of Hancox brook and terminating
where Edmund's-mountain joins the river. Joseph Welton's house
indicates the locality.

In January, 1677, this fence was ordered "to be made sufficiently
by the last of May, 1678." The entire division was in length one
mile, two hundred and twenty rods, eight feet, and two inches. It
was made by twenty-three men. Thomas Richardson began the
fence at the Mad river, making only one hundred and eighty-six
feet — his interest in the meadow lands being less than that of any
other man. Timothy Standly then took up the work, carrying it on
for three hundred and fifty-three feet, and was followed by Joseph
Hickox with two hundred and twenty- three —John Newell with
three hundred and sixty-seven — Daniel Porter with three hundred
and thirty, leaving a Great lot interest of five hundred and fifty-
four feet, across Great brook and up the steep Grand street hill to
Bank street, to be made by the planters in a general way. An air
line drawn from the northwest corner of the Grand Street cem-
etery to the Mad River bridge is about three thousand feet, and will
very nearly, if not accurately represent the south line of the town
plot and the course of the common fence of 1678.

THE COMMON FENCE, 267

The two thousand feet of fence reaching to Bank street, having
been accounted for, the adjoining thousand, extending to the west-
ern limit of the burying-yard, was made by John Warner, Edmund
Scott, and Samuel Judd. Eight men of the proposed planters hav-
ing not arrived, and having no substitutes at the time when this
division of fence was necessary, compelled the twenty-three men
who were here to combine and make the upper section in the same
manner as they fenced for the great lots. This portion, when the
next division northward was made, was called "a piece of town
fence."

The second division of fence, was the first division southward
from the town. It began on the north bank of the Mad river, where
it met the south end of the first division. After crossing the river
it followed the high lands for a considerable distance, and then
turning westward reached the Naugatuck river just below Mad
meadow, following the hill that meets the river at that point. This
division was three hundred and ten rods, eight feet and two inches
in length, or nearly one mile, and was made by thirty men. The
third division of fence, was the second division northward. It
began towards the upper end of Steel's meadow and continued that
line of fence two hundred and fifty-eight rods, eight feet, and three
inches, or more than three-fourths of a mile. This section was
made by twenty-seven men.

Feb. 8, 1680, an addition to the fence that ran southward was
ordered. It began at Mad meadow and ended in the neighborhood
of the Great hill which begins at Hopeville near the red house
built by Joseph Nichols (about 1800), and extends to Fulling Mill
brook at Union City. This division numbered two hundred and
twelve rods, thirteen feet and seven inches, or more than five-
eighths of a mile. It was made by one woman and thirty-three
men, including " the miller."

Thus we find that within four years an average of twenty-eight
planters, in addition to all their other industries, constructed four
miles, forty-two rods, one foot and seven inches of common fence,
every foot of which had to be cleared of its primeval forest, or
other growth, before a rod of it could be built. This surely was a
public work of no mean sort, for every detail of the fence was sub-
ject to law, whether built of stone or wood; whether "hedged or
ditched."

A discovery of special interest is made at this point. It is that
in this fourth division, the position of the fence makers in the line
of improvement was not established by the drawing of "lots," but
was determined by the position of the house lots in the village plot.

268

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Could this have been learned at an earlier date, it would have saved
much hard work in determining the exact town plot of 1681. How-
ever, we are delightfully assured by this discovery that the house
lots were correctly given, and that the planters whom we placed
here in 1681 were here — for this fence was built in that year. We
transcribe the list. The reader can begin at the lot of John Bron-
son on the north side of West Main street and compare the names
with the map of the town plot on page 160, omitting the lots of
Samuel Scott and Richard Porter. We learn by this list that the lot
at the corner of East and South Main streets that was " reserved,"
was a great lot in 1681. This discovery is a genuine surprise, for
no hint of it has anywhere been given, except that in one convey-
ance at an early date John Hopkins' house lot was bounded "west
on common," but that has been held to be an error of the recorder,
while this finding verifies it. We transcribe the list.

1

■

M

c

1-^

•
93

0

•

1

C

first John Bronson,

. 4

15

6

Edmund Scoot Sen^

6

03

0

second Thomas Judd,

. 6

03

0

Thomas Richardson,

3

01

6

widow Warner, .

■ 3

II

7

grate lote, ....

9

04

6

Obadiah Richards,

4

15

6

Edman Scoot, . .

4

05

4

Samuel Judd, . . .

4

15

6

benjamin Judd, . .

5

09

2

Joseph Hickox, .

. 3

II

6

John Wilton, . . .

4

15

6

Samuel Hickox, .

5

04

0

Abraham Andeus, .

4

15

6

benjamin Bams . .

6

03

great lote, ....

9

04

6

John newill, . . .

6

03

0

John Langton, . .

6

13

Isaac Bronson, . .

5

09

2

benjamin Joans, . .

6

3

John Standly, , .

6

03

0

John Scovill, . . .

4

15

6

Joseph Gaylor,

4

15

6

William Judd, . .

6

3

grate lote, . . .

• 9

04

6

John Warner, . . .

5

9

2

Thomas Warner,

. 6

03

David Carpenter,

4

15

6

Steven Upson,

■ 3

I

6

Tho Hankox, . . .

6

3

Abraham andeus,

. 6

03

0

ThoNewiU, . , .

5

9

2

Danill Porter,* .

. 10

09

2

The fowT acrs for

Timothy Standly,

■ 5

14

3

the miler which is

John Camngton,

■ 3

II

7

the last, ....

7

The first section of fence was made during the spring of 1677,
before the crops were planted, or a house was built. Twenty only
of the proprietors came — and with them went to work David Car-
penter, who made John Porter's fence; Thomas Warner, who made
his father's section, and Joseph Gaylord, who fenced for Thomas
Gridley. The second section was made early in 1678 — twenty-one
of the former builders being present, John Root making John

♦ "Danill Porter had five rode layd to his 3 acore lote which was granted him by the towne."

THE COMMON FENCE, 269

Langdon's part, and Joseph Andrews appearing in place of his
father. The third division was built early in 1679 — eighteen only of
the builders of the first section appearing. The fourth division was
made, in haste, in May and June of 1680. Twenty of the men who
made the first section were present. But sixteen men held fast from
first to last in the four divisions. The great lots were as yet
ungiven and undivided, and appear in each division under that
name.

Before 1686, there was a three rod, or fifth division made. This
consisted of the removal of forty rods of fence at the northern end
of the line, to the east side of Hancox brook — from thence it was
continued northward one hundred and one rods, fifteen feet and six
inches. It would seem that no record of the three-rod division was
made until 1700, or, about the time when it was found necessary to
fence on the west side of the river.

In 1691, the town caused to be placed on record the following
formula for fence making :

What shall be counted sufficient fence for our meadows, ist. Rail fence to be
four feet high, not exceeding 6 inches between the rails two feet from the ground
upward. 2d. Hedge fence, 4 feet and a half high, 5 stakes to each rod and well
wrought. 3d. Stone fence, 3 feet and nine inches in height. 4th. Log, or pole
fence, 4 feet in height and well wrought. 5th. Ditch, two feet wide, and rails or
hedge 4 feet in height from the bottom of the ditch to the top of the fence, and well
wrought. And if there be any advantage by reason of the land or place where the
fence is, it is to be left to the judgment of the fence viewers what shall be suffi-
cient.

At the great town meeting in December 1698, Thomas Hikcox
and Joseph Gaylord were appointed fence viewers. In order to pre-
serve the fences from burning, by reason of forest fires, it early
became the custom to clear a space on both sides of the fence by
burning the bushes or whatever stood in the way. In March 1692,
'•the town agreed to burn about the common fence." The drums
being beat in the morning of the appointed day, and that day not
proving suitable, the townsmen were to appoint a day— "causing
the drum to be beat at night, and to fire about the fence the next
day."

In 1700, when men began to live on the west side of the river,
the common field was in danger from the incursions of their cattle
— and pounds being established — men had liberty to "pound their
neighbor's creatures in all the field north and south to the extent of
the 20 acre division of meadow to a lot." Annual appointments
were made of the date, when, in the fall of the year, the meadows
should be cleared of crops and made ready for the cattle to be
turned in. In 1699, on the 12th of September, it was voted that

270 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

"the meadows should be cleared to turn in cattle on the 29th of this
month, at night." The next year, it was the first of October; in
1 70 1, the fourth of October, and then the time began to turn back-
ward into September again. The extremes were September 26th
and October 4th.

In the spring of each year, the time was announced for every
man to have his section of the common fence put in perfect order,
and ready for inspection. In 1704, the fence about the fields was to
be done up by the fifth of March, and the fence viewers sent out
the sixth, and the haywards the eighth. This year, for the first
time, it was ordered that two days should be taken to burn about
the fence— the first day, northward; the second day, southward, and
" the town ordered that if the neighbors at the east end of the town
don't keep their cattle out of the meadow, then the townsmen by
themselves or some other on the town charge, to endeavor the
securing the fields for the present the cheapest and best way they
can." The two items, taken in connection, indicate that a portion
of the fence had been burned by trying to do too much in one day,
or possibly a freshet had had its own sweet will along the valley.

The first pound was ** set up on the South highway, somewhere
near the south gate," in 1702. In 1704, one was "set up in the lane
at the west end of the town — Deacon Judd to be pound-keeper."
The same year, the proprietors "gave Judd's Meadow men leave to
set up a pound for themselves on their own charge for impounding
their own cattle and such as are left out in the field when men are
at work with them there."

In 1705, the town "by reason of one of its fence viewers being
removed, ordered the other three, under oath, to view the whole
range of fence on the east side, and in case one of them be sick or out
of town, the others to do the work." An intimation of a fence on
the west side of the river at the above date is here given. The
office of fence viewer was held by nearly every proprietor — perhaps
by every one — that of pound-keeper, by the residents living near
the pounds. John Scovill was pound-keeper in 1706 — and seems to
have filled his duties so well, that in less than two months the town
promoted him to its highest civil office — that of constable.

As time went on, the need of a fence on the west side of the
river became imperative. The town had tried, by all the legisla-
tion in its power, to put off the great work. In order to accomplish
this, it had required men who wished to live on the west side to
enter into an agreement to keep their creatures out of the common-
field with as much care as though it were fenced around, and
allowed no man to cross the river unless he promised "to submit to

THE COMMON FENCE.

271

the order of the proprietors in regard to fencing and the meadows."
In 1704, at the great town meeting in December, the question was
before the meeting : " Whether the town should fence southward
from the end fence to Beacon brook on the east side the river and
that to be counted sufficient for securing the fields." Eighteen
voters were present. Five of the number — ^John Hopkins, Left.
Timothy Stanley, Jeremiah Peck, Dr. Porter, and Edmund Scott
voted to extend the fence to Beacon brook. Thirteen proprietors
voted against the extension. The land had been duly measured
between the Long Meadow falls and Beacon Hill brook, and also
from Buck's Meadow mountain to Long Meadow falls on the west
side. Before the meeting ended, it was decided to build the fence
on the west side, and to extend it on the east side " to the falls in
the river at the lower end of the Long meadow." All the land that
was fit for plowing or mowing was to be encircled by this fence,
and it was to be made good and substantial against all orderly
horses and cattle, and "sufficient against two year olds." Men
were given permission to enclose lands within the fence "for wheat
or other corn," and the proprietors agreed that "he who should
leave open the common gates or bars in the field, should pay all the
damage that was done thereby, and that horses should not be staked
nor cattle baited (unless men were at work by them), from the first
of April until commoning time."

It was ultimately decided to proportion the rods of fence each
owner of lands was to make, according to the number of his acres,
whatever the land might be — good, bad, or indifferent. Dr. Porter
"protested," and he had occasion to protest — for he had made more
fence on the east side than any other man. The new public work
did not progress satisfactorily. Certain men built the fence that
had been allotted to them, and other men held aloof. Two years
passed by, when a proprietors' meeting was held to discuss the
building of this fence— and a spirited meeting it must have been,
for the former vote was annulled, and a new allotment declared, in
which "only the land that was fit for plowing or moing" was to be
accounted in each man's propriety. Much land had been spoiled by
the flood, and the owners of such land " were to be considered and
abated." In the new allotment, each man's burden was to be meas-
ured by the benefit received. The records recognize " the difficulty
in reference to the fence on the west side the river," and tell us that
the proprietors, "for to obtain a peaceable proceeding," agreed to
the new allotment and declared that if, by reason of it, any man
who had already fenced should be removed from that portion of the
field, the man to whom his former lot fell should be responsible for

272 BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

the fence already made. In the new lot, the fence was to extend no
further than it was already laid — and to be " there or thereabout."
The fence was to be kept up all the year, and men could turn their
cattle into the field for the month of October only. The number of
cattle any man was permitted to turn in, was to be according to his
interest in the field; neither could any man bait or stake cattle
there, except upon his own land. The owners of the east-side fence
at the south end were allowed by the proprietors ten pence a rod, in
"good pay" to their satisfaction, for removing the fence to this
Falls. Every man was ordered to give the appointed committee an
account of his land in the field, that it might be properly measured,
and the fence apportioned. For that year, it was to be made against
cattle, but not against hogs. At the same meeting — May 1707 — "the
proprietors gave to Mr. John Southmayd four score acres of land on
the south side of the rock called Mount Taylor on the top of the
hill where we get rails as part of his propriety on the commons and
to take off the entailment of fencing in the common line for said
land — the town keeping liberty to fetch timber and stones — they
shutting up bars as there shall be need."

All the legislation the men of Waterbury were capable of — and
they were tireless in their efforts — fell powerless for a number of
years, before the magnitude of the undertaking. When combined
with the sense of injustice which prevailed in regard to it, the work
seemed hopeless. The project was attempted of "giving" away
lands to a number of persons — the recipients to make fence, in pay-
ment. Committee after committee was appointed to measure and
" modelize " and proportion the lands within the fields, but the fence
was not completed. Finally, each man who had made his fence was
permitted to remain in position in the line, but " mistakes were to
be regulated." In March of 1709, the condition of the fences may
be estimated by the following vote. " It was agreed on by vote to
bum about the fences on the west side on the 21 March and 22 day
on the east side if it be a good day to be warned by the beat of the
drum over night and the fence on the east side — the gaps stopped
and gates shut forthwith — and the west side quickly after it is
burned about." A three rail fence, four foot high, was established
as sufficient in 1709, on the west side — but peace could not be estab-
lished, and each man's private holdings in the field had to be meas-
ured, " each piece by itself," the proprietors agreeing to remove
Thomas Richason's fence from the west side to the east side of
his land at the lower end of Hancox meadow so as to take in the
land at Hickox Holes (present Water ville). When the lands were
duly measured — the east-side fence came up for re-measurement,

TUE COMMON FENCE. 273

and the grand result of the surveyors was written down in the Pro-
prietor's Book, pictured on page 216. On its open page, as seen in
the illustration, appears "y® lot for jr® fenc on y® West sd y® River
as it f[ell] deem' 24th=i7o6=to begin at y® falls at y® long-
m[eadow]."

There were fifty drawings for this lot — Mr. Southmayd had the
first chance, and drew number twelve — while poor widow Jones
drew number one, and consequently had to build the fence at its
most difficult point — for her lot fell at the Falls, where the promon-
tory, called Dragon's Point, comes nearly to the river. A slightly
detached, rocky, and pine-covered little hill fills up the intervening
space at the southeast comer, except that a narrow ravine lies
between the promontory and the diminutive hill. At the eastern
base of this hill the Naugatuck railroad runs, and through the
ravine, just wide enough for the purpose, the old highway west of
the river to Judd's Meadows, passed. At or in this ravine or
natural passway, were located the Long Meadow bars, where in
going from Waterbury to Judd's Meadow, one passed through the
common-fence into the open land.

This drawing is followed by the grand result of all the measure-
ments of land and fence, and we learn that in 1709 there had been
erected on the east side seventeen hundred and fifty-four rods — and
on the west side fifteen hundred and thirty-six rods of fence. The
measurements do not include the portion that was discontinued
below the Long Meadow falls— and the northern terminus remains
ungiven — ^the page on which it was recorded having been mutilated.
A little more than ten miles of fence had been constructed in 1709.
Every rod of it was put into serviceable repair each year— while
the continual danger attending it, by reason of forest fires, and
unruly cattle, and floods (at the points where it crossed the val-
leys), must have caused the planters much care and labor — but it
was a practical and ever-present lesson to them in self-government.
Men were not taught to live unto themselves, but to act for the
common weal. Even protesting Dr. Porter yielded, and manfully
made over three furlongs of fence for his twenty-six acres. Deacon
Judd had the longest line of fence — it being only thirty-six feet
short of a mile. He held forty-seven acres within the field, and it
is satisfactory to find that Widow Jones made but forty-one feet of
fence, she owning, in 17 10, but half-an-acre in the Waterbury
meadows — whereas her husband, at the time of his decease in 1689,
held a notable list of acres. Much of the delay and annoyance
attending this work arose from the mistaken generosity of the
planters in ** throwing into the measure" waste lands, and "vacant
18

274 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

lands," and unproductive uplands, which the owners declined to
fence for — and the mistake was atoned for by giving away many
additional acres— the sole condition being that the recipients should
fence for the land. As quite a number of the grants were made
after the fence reached the narrows at Mount Taylor and Buck's
Meadow mountain — notably one requiring its owner to make fifty
rods of fence at the north end — it is quite fair to suppose that it
continued above that point, and there are intimations that it
reached as far up the river as Reynolds Bridge, as mention is made
of Standly's Jericho gate. Near the village, there were South, East,
and West gates. The West gate was near Deacon Judd's and John
Scovill's home lots, and they were the pound-keepers, the pound
being in the highway. The South gate was on Bank street, at
Grand — and the pound near by has been mentioned as being in the
highway, where the Waterbury Bank building now stands. James
Prichard was the key keeper in 1734, he living close by. This gate
was removed three times to a point, each time farther south,
between 1820 and 1840, and disappeared from view when Bank
street was opened, soon after 1840. The first removal was to give
free entrance to David Prichard's barn, which stood where the L.
C. White building stands — the second for the accommodation of
Timothy Ball — who built the first house that ever stood on Bank
street between Brooklyn and the corner of Grand street. The
Griggs building occupies its site. The East gate was sometimes
called the Mill Plain bars; it stood on the south side of Union, near
Elm street. There was a North gate at the upper end of Manhan
meadow, but at a later day this was not in the common fence.

The West side fence crossed Sled Hall brook near where at the
present time stands a line of primeval trees, and crossed the Mid-
dlebury road near its junction with the Town Plot road. It
crossed Hikcox brook, went through Westwood and Loren Car-
ter's land, and through the lot owned by Willard Woodruff, crossed
the road and ran the west side of Woodruff's house, kept along
the base of the hill west of the present Bunker Hill road, and
skirted the hills west of the Driving park ; crossed the valley of
Steel's brook, the southwest corner of Edmund's mountain, the
valley of Turkey brook, and then ran "skewingwise and partly
lengthwise" over and across Edmund's mountain to its northeast
extremity. When the common fence was made, highways were not
laid out, and, as the necessity for them grew imminent, we find them
laid out through the field itself — a little later, following the fence
lines outside the field — and then, as the inhabitants scattered and the
uplands and mountain lots were laid out, crossing the field at more

THE COMMON FENCE, 275

and more frequent intervals, until common fence bars and gates
dotted the line and the highways were frequently fenced in. We
give a single instance: 'Liberty to James Balding' "was given to
fence in the highway from the common fence bars at the lower end
of long meadow to Carrington's brook, Baldwin to maintain two
horse gates, one gate at the common fence bars, the other at the
[place] where he fences across the highway and one pair of bars.**
In 1 7 10, the year that Jonathan Scott was captured — there was no
record made of the closing or opening of the field. Perhaps it was
not considered safe for cattle or men to wander in the enclosure.
It will be remembered that about ten square miles of land eastward
of the town was sequestered for commons, in which each and every
man might freely take wood and stone. The annual burnings
about the fence had probably consumed much valuable timber and
firewood, for, in 17 14, "the town voted that the East woods should
not be fired for seven years, that is to say, the east side of the fence
from a great brook called Smugse* brook, that runs into the river
about two miles south from the town to the top of the East moun-
tain to a little brook, and all the woods the west side the Mill river.
The penalty for firing was twenty shillings.

In 1 7 16 four fence viewers, Richard Porter, David Scott, Thomas
Bronson and William Judd were appointed, but the following week
"we find that Benjamin Barnes was accepted a fence viewer upon
the proposition that Mr. Southmayd made, that is, to have 8 shil-
lings for performing the work of a fence viewer for this year."
This agreement is the first intimation that any one of the original
proprietors received money for performing duties that concerned
all alike.

In 1721, "for securing the fence the east side of the river from
the North meadow gate to Wigwam Swamp brook (David's brook)
was to be by firing the east side the Little brook till they
came to the head of it, and then to the lower end of the Wigwam
swamp, and then down the brook to the fence." From the Mad
river to the lower end of the fence, they were to fire the east side
of the path to Judd's meadows. The Reverend John Southmayd's
advent into the Waterbury records as town clerk is evidenced by
his taking up the work at the appointment of fence viewers for the
year 1721. In 1722, eight men were required to do the work —
two were to view the fence " from the common gate by Deacon Judd's
to the north end " — two from the Woodbury road to the north end
— two from the same point southward, and two " from the common

•Smugse brook supplies the water power for Hopeville. It may have been named from aa Indian. The
name of Smugse does not appear as an English name in Waterbury.

276 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

gate by Deacon Judd's to the south end." At this time, the gates
and bars on the Country road to Woodbury, and at the South gate,
were to be maintained by the town. Our records are replete with
laws and regulations relating to swine. In 1723, they were per-
mitted to run at large during the year. Liberty did not agree with
the planters, or the swine, for the next year it was decreed that a
" Yoak 8 inches long above the hog's neck and 6 inches on each side a
grown hog, and proportionately on lesser swine, well put on, should
be deemed sufficiently yoaked." Occasionally we meet permission
like the following: "Swine may Run on the Commons without rings
or Yokes and be free from being pounded."

The next town meeting was to be held in January, 1724, "at 8
o'clock in the morning at Stephen Hopkins' house," but there is
no record of the meeting.

In 1729, "it was voted to have a flock of sheep in the Town of
Waterbury," and Stephen Hopkins, Joseph Smith, and Thomas
Barnes were appointed a sheep committee. There was a colonial
law relating to sheep, in which it was declared that no sheep should
be kept on the commons but in flocks, to prevent the sheep either
doing or receiving damage, except in plantations where there were
not a hundred sheep that might be kept together. If men neglected
to put their sheep to the herd, they were to be pounded, the pounder
to be paid two pence per head.

In 1739 and 1740 we find no record of fence viewers, neither is
there any from December, 1743, to December, 1753. From that'time
onward, the appointments were made with little regularity, six men
being able to perform the service at all times, and four oftentimes
being deemed sufficient, while in 1770, Ezra Bronson and Ashbel
Porter were the only fence viewers. The common fence remained
as a bound line until after 1800, and many portions of it could be
identified without doubt in 1893.

CHAPTER XXII.

waterbury manufactures for export in 1707 — her men among
the founders of durham — proprietors vote to take their
lands — current events — the meeting house enlarged —
school house built — first death in naugatuck — burying
yard sequestered on pine hill — remonstrance from joseph
gaylord of durham — land divisions — zachariah baldwin
arrives — book of records established — thomas clark
admitted — the south bound of the township surveyed —
the great sickness of 1712-13 — a new era — lieut. john
Stanley's remonstrance — more land troubles and lay-outs
— meeting house seated — MR. southmayd's salary.

WATERBURY began to manufacture staves for export at a
very early date — the white and red oaks that abounded on
every side making excellent staves and headings for casks,
barrels and hogsheads. The extent of the manufacture of these
staves — which were largely exported to the " Wine islands of the
West Indies'* — was such, that as early as 17 14, restrictions were
placed upon the trade on account of the rapid destruction of Con-
necticut's forests. We are able to give but a single item in proof
that Waterbury engaged in this manufacture — and that is afforded
by the chance preservation of an agreement between John Bronson
and Joseph Hikcox. In 1707, John Bronson made two thousand
staves in Waterbury, which were sent to Joseph Hikcox, at Durham,
who paid for them by an acre of land "^5/ Sled Hall."

This trade was doubtless carried on vigorously for many years,
and possibly the numerous saw-mills that sprang into being along
our streams were utilized in preparing timber for the hands of the
workmen who made the staves, for three saw-mills seem to have
been required before 1700; the first one on Saw Mill Plain before
1686, the second in 1699 at the north end of the Long hill — or at
least permission was given for one at that point, with " the liberty
of the stream and conveniency of ponding and the improvement of
what land was needed to set the mill on and to lay logs and the
like as is needed for use." The third grant was at the corn-mill in
1699, to Serg. Bronson, Deacon Judd, John Hopkins, Samuel Hikcox,
and John Richason — the conditions being that they should not
prejudice the corn-mill, and that they should maintain two rods of
the dam from the corn-mill eastward. The order forbidding to fire

278 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

•

the East woods^fpr'seven years may have originated in the desire
to preserve and grow timber for pipe staves; for all the early saw-
mills were in the East woods, on Mill river, or Great brook.

There was an exodus in 1706 that stirred the town. One Grand
proprietor and four Bachelor proprietors left Watcrbury together.
Of the number were Joseph Hikcox, who bought the staves; his
brother, Stephen Hikcox; Joseph Gaylord, the Grand proprietor,
and his sons John and Joseph. This was, it would seem, the first
attempt of Young Waterbury to found another town; for the five
men mentioned were original proprietors or "patentees" of Dur-
ham, in December, of 1708. Joseph Gaylord was the first selectman,
and Joseph Hikcox the first surveyor of that town. Thus Water-
bury had, after thirty years, to sip of the same bitter cup that Farm-
ington drank when bereft of thirty of her sons by Mattatuck.

Hitherto, nearly every person who had left Waterbury had
returned to the old home-town of Farmington, but this going forth
was deliberate and intentional, and it was deeply felt, especially so,
as it lessened the protective force at a time when every man was
needed in his own place. If the inhabitants -were disheartened
there is no sign of it in their acts, for they went on laying out new
highways; measuring their town bounds; strengthening their for-
tifications; altering and improving their meeting-house by putting
up^a beam for a gallery at the west end of it; consenting to Mr.
Southmayd's request that he might alter and enlarge his seat at the
west end of the pulpit; repairing the doors and windows of the
meeting-house, and building a gallery at one end of it; constructing
a school -house, sixteen feet long and fourteen feet wide; hiring a
school-master and dame (if need be) to teach in it, and paying them
with the remainder of a rate of two pence half-penny on the pound;
and living the while in perpetual fear. It was during these days
of fear that the second place of burial within the township was
established. It is the southern portion of that now known as Pine
Hill cemetery; the same ground so valiantly and reverently saved
from encroachment and destruction by the efforts of Mr. William
Ward. In the home of Daniel Warner in present Naugatuck, died,
on April loth, 1709, his wife, Mary, the daughter of Abraham An-
drews, Senior. We do not know that she was the first English per-
son to die at Judd's Meadows, but her death evidently made the
need apparent of a place of burial nearer than that of our late cem-
etery on Grand street. The record tells us that the selectmen of
Waterbury on the next day, April nth, with the presence and con-
sent of Samuel Hikcox, laid out and sequestered half an acre of
land of said Hikcox on the southward end of a hill at Judd's Meadow

TO THE CLOSE OF THE PBOPBIETOBS* REION.

279

called the "pin[e]" hill for a burying place for that part of said
town or any other who should see cause to make use of it for said
use: The record adds, that the land was laid out with the consent
of the neighborhood, and that on the same day the wife of Daniel
Warner was buried there. It is difficult to resist the impulse to pic-
ture in words that first burial in Naugatuck, to gather by name the
funeral band that went out of the house on Fulling Mill brook bear-
ing its silent burden over the rough highway down to the lonely
height that overlooked the river valley, there to lay it down for its
long rest, while three motherless children look down into that grave
the unutterable thoughts that children think, but never speak, in
the presence of death.

Brief, terse and incisive are the words in which the proprietors
of Waterbury express their mingled feelings regarding the bolt of
the Durham men.

They disdain to even mention them byname, but vote in January
of 1707, "to take the forfeiture of all the lands given on condition
to those men gone out of town that can not hold them by record in not
fulfilling the conditions." Stephen Hikcox had been accepted a pro-
prietor inhabitant in May of the year in which he left; while Joseph
and John Gaylord, and Joseph Hikcox had been proprietor inhab-
itants seven years. Joseph Gaylord answers back from Durham in
1 7 13, in the following style:

To the moderators of Waterbury. I do for my propriety — and my father being
proprietor in said township— demand my right in said township by devision accord-
ing to propriety, and do by this, according to Right, deny and bar any grants of
lands in said township to any, so far as the law justify me, in any other way but
according to propriety, and as for what has been given away since we came away
and have not been warned to said proprietor's meeting, demand our right according
to our propriety, and I desire this may be recorded. Joseph Gayl

Joseph Gaylord having been a Grand proprietor for thirty years
could not legally suffer loss by removal, but with the young men it
was different. Stephen Hikcox forfeited everything that stood in
his name, and the others, all their grants whose conditions were
not fulfilled. Generosity was perilous to our fathers. They
tempted with gifts, to their own hurt. We have found evidence of
that in the matter of the common-fence. Near the close of the cen-
tury, at the advent into legal manhood of certain of their sons, they
announced that to every one who would settle in the town, there
should be given " thirty acres of upland, swamp, and boggy meadow,
as an allotment, with a propriety in the commons according to the
allotment, beside a house lot and four acres for a pasture." The con-
ditions were, the building of a tenantable house, at least sixteen feet

28o maTOBT OF WATEBBUBT.

square, within four years, and the inclusion in the thirty-acre grant
of all the lands formerly given to the young men. This act was
declared to be in force for all such as lived among them as they
became of age and desired the privilege and were accepted by the
proprietors. This allotment was to be deemed a forty pound owner-
ship in all divisions of land, and a right in the commons, but carried
with it no right to join the Grand proprietors in the giving away of
lands. For two years the new proprietor was not to be taxed; but
after that time his allotment was to be deemed as a two pound estate
in bearing town charges for four years, and, after that time, to be
appraised as other lands were. During the four years, the new pro-
prietor might not sell any of the land of his allotment that he had
not improved or subdued — but the record saith : " If any dye here
his heirs to poses his lands."

The above decision seems to have opened the door of the town-
ship to admit any outsider who should choose to come and live in it,
provided that the new comer gain the good will of the Grand pro-
prietors. Joseph Lewis was the only one to enter and meet
approval before 1700, and we have no record of his arrival or admis-
sion into proprietorship; he simply appears on the scene invested
with the rights of a forty-pound proprietor, and is called to duty at
a town meeting in December, 1700, as fence viewer. He was the
seventeenth proprietor received under the new rule. It was
extremely natural that opposition should speedily arise under the
new order of things. Grants of ten acres each to the Grand propri-
etors, and four acrc?s to the young men, flew thick and fast over the
uplands and hills. The young men could take their thirty acres in
three places, and the man who got first a written description of the
land he had selected to the measurer, gained title by the act. The
grants made at this time afford us many place-names and are full of
interest. Thomas Warner selected his ten acres " at his three acres
at his boggy meadow over thre mile brook;*' Stephen Upson, "at his
hog field at the north side of Philip's meadow;" Joseph Gaylord Sen.
and Edmund Scott, ** at Judd's Meadow above where Butler's house
was;" Abraham Andrus Sen., "on the hill against George's horse
brook" (this was Beaver Pond hill); Benjamin Barnes, "at Brake
neck hil;" Stephen Upson, "where the grinlet runs into the great
boggy meadow, we say that grinlet that comes from the east corner
of the Long hill." Five or six of the young men chose their lands
" on the hill on the west side of the river against Buck's meadow,"
where young Obadiah Richards had already broken up land.

In 1702, it was declared that the only men who were qualified to
act in giving away lands were the proprietors for the first purchas-

TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 281

ing of the place, together with Stephen Upson, Richard Porter, and
Jonathan Scott. In 1705, the question came up in Proprietors' meet-
ing, whether they would divide the commons of the township
according to purchase. By a full vote the question was decided in
the negative, and the announcement was made that the proprietors
would give away their lands to particular men as they should see
cause, or judge that men had need of them.

In 1707, came the sequestration of ten square miles, for commons,
and this was followed at the same meeting by a division of upland
and meadow which gave every ;^ioo proprietor fifty acres, and
every other Grand proprietor forty-five, while the new ;^4o men
received thirty acres each — and lots were to be drawn for the divis-
ion. By this distribution, more than twelve hundred acres passed
at once out of the keeping of the original proprietors, and a disturb-
ing force entered the little republic. Had proprietory rights been
restricted to heirs, and every one of the Grand proprietors been the
father of an equal number of sons to receive this largess, all might
have been well. In the case of Joseph Gaylord, whose sons had left
Waterbury at this date, it was aggravating — hence, the remon-
strance of his son Joseph, which has been given. The case of Cap-
tain John Standly (who had returned to Farmington), was little
better, he having but one son, Samuel, in Waterbury, and we shall
hear from Captain Standly in due time. The most trying case of
all, was that of his brother Timothy, who was childless, but who
soon found a way out of his difficulty. This division was not
allotted or drawn for until two years later. John Hopkins and
Samuel " Stanly" were chosen March 6, 1709, "to fit [prepare] a lot,
and on Monday next 17 10 to meet at twelve o'clock, there to draw
the lot." That first Monday in 1710, must have been a day of deep
interest and much excitement in Waterbury. A week later it was,
that to the young soldier, Nathaniel Richardson (who had returned
"sick" from the war), the town voted four-score acres on the main
branch of Hop brook, east from Break Neck hill — but the vote met
with vigorous opposition from Jeremiah Peck, Lieut. Timothy
Standly, and Edmund Scott — nevertheless the town went on giving
away its lands even at the same meeting. March 5, 17 11, the second
man from the outside world was admitted into the corporation, in
the person of Zachariah Baldwin, of Milford, whose name appears
as "Zacery balding J""." That inhabitant did not find Waterbury
altogether attractive. For some reason, unknown to us, he sold in
17 13, his "land, building and other timbej, and all the labor that he
had done to it," together with his right in the township, to George
Scott Sen., who established his son Obadiah at the place, and the town

282 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

accepted him on Baldwin's propriety. It was at Judd's Meadows, on
the New Haven road, near Thomas Richard's house. I think, but
do not know, that Zachariah Baldwin was a member of the Church
of England.

In 171 1, a "book of Records" was established, in which it was
directed that the meadow divisions should be recorded, and Mr.
John Southmayd and Deacon Judd were chosen " to view some writ-
ing of the Grand committee and such as of value to be recorded the
remainder to be obliterated." It is well for this history, that in this
instance Mr. Southmayd and Deacon Judd did not do the oblitera-
tion-duty assigned to them. In December, 17 11, Thomas Clark, a
nephew of Mrs. Timothy Standly, was the third person admitted to
the township from the outside world. The only record that we have
oi proprietor' s meetings in 171 3, relates to Joseph Gaylord's remon-
strance, and of 1714, we have nothing until January, when the south-
ern bounds of the township were ordered to be measured, Mr. South-
mayd being at the head of the committee to make the measurements.
The Wallingford bounds were also to be looked after and settled,
and if an agreement could not be had with that town, the matter
** about the bounds was to be carried to court till it had a final issue."

When we consider where the southern bound of our ancient town-
ship lies, we are not surprised that the men of Waterbury, although
led by Mr. Southmayd, could not satisfactorily define the line, and
that the town called Mr. Kimberly, the County surveyor, to under-
take the task. " In company with Mr. John Hopkins, Dr. Porter,
and other men of the town of Waterbury on the 6th day of May,
17 15," Mr. Kimberly informs us that he set forth to measure the
southern breadth of the township. The following is the document,
which obliging Mr. Southmayd failed to "obliterate :"

These may certifie all whome it doth or may Concern That I Thomas Kimberly
Surveyor of land in the County of Hartford on the 6th day of May Anno Dom. 1715.
At the Desire & in Company with Mr. John Hopkins Dan^ Porter, and othermen of
the Town of Waterbury in Order to Survey and find the breadth from East to West
of the Southern bounds of the Said Township of Waterbury. And I begann at
two Chestnut trees markt, standing on the Westerly side of a Run of Water, at
some distance Northerly of a boggy Meadow, which trees stand at the South
West Corner of the bounds of said Township, and at South Easterly comer of the
bounds of Woodberry, from Thence I ran East by the needle of the Instrument. 3.
miles and 36. rods, to the River Called Naugatuck, viz — the Westerly bank thereof,
and from thence We ran (South by the needle) one Mile & 20. rods (Crossing the
Said River) to a brook running W. falling into the Sd River in the Southern bounds
of the Said Township of Waterbury next Derby — from thence I proceeded on my
former Course. E. one mile, then made another offsett of. 80. rods — Then again Con-
tinued our Course. E. i miles, and. 120. rods falling. 10. rods N. of 3 Chestnut trees
Standing at the N. E. Corner of the bounds of Milford. and, N. W. corner of the

TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPBIETOBS' BEIQN,

283

bounds of New Haven * * * Commonly called the. 3. brothers, alias, three

Sisters (as these Gent'° informed me.) Then Course continued — I ran. E. one Mile,

and fell. 80 rods. N. of a White Oak tree Markt anciently, and a large [heap] of

stones about, and diverse Letters & figures on "d tree standing on the Southerly

side of Wet land. From that tree. E. ran. 13 Changes* wanting. 16. rods to a heap

of Stones (on the top of a bare Mountain) by us now Erected for the E bounds of

the Said Township of Waterbury— A Map of this survey is hereunto Annext,

Here Note that a Line drawn. E. from the first mentioned Chestnut trees till it

Intersect a line drawn. N. from the mentioned White Oak tree in length, is, 6

miles. &. 156. rods and that in this. 6 mile. &. 156 rods no allowance was made for

the roughnesse and unevennesse of the Land, whereas according to my best skill

there ought to be allowed, at least. 118. rods.

THO. KIMBERLY— Surveyor—

The above figures gives us seven miles and twenty rods as the
length of the south bound of Waterbury in 17 15. The following is
a transcription of the map of the survey, f The chestnut trees at

}piMhoy

..%-

]Mlu/^'

3 JhUa <J d(/UvU

ZmUii,/Zor^t.

ue^^

^^^£4^^^^-

S-

the southwest line had become "two stumps" in 1753. They were
"near Samuel Wheeler's house " which was in Derby, and southwest
of the " two stumps." The present aspect of the " Three Brothers "
is given on page 193.

So thoroughly did the men of Waterbury, Derby, and Woodbury
establish their relative bounds in 1680, that they seem not to have
been in serious question at any subsequent time. There was a con-

* In measuring lands the forward chain bearer puts down one of ten pins which he carries, placing one at
the end of every chain. The rear chain bearer gathers the pins, and when the ten have been used, a furlong
has been measured, and a change of pins is made — therefore a change meant a furlong.

+ The last line run should be " 1 ^ mile & 24 rods."

284 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

test with Wallingford in the settlement of which Waterbury seems
to have yielded a little more than one mile and one-half of her ter-
ritory, at the southeast corner. In 1765, Waterbury and Milford
settled their line by this survey — "starting from the Three Sisters
and running due west one mile and one hundred and twenty rods
to a white oak staddle." From the oak "southward it was forty-
eight rods to Derby's northeast corner the southwest side of Beacon
Hill river."

The above survey was made in order to a settlement of the
bound line with Wallingford. The Assembly afterward appointed
a committee "to go upon the spot and measure the controverted
lines," for which service the proprietors of Waterbury were ordered
to pay Wallingford four pounds, three shillings and six pence.
They were also to resign their claim to the land lying to the
eastward of the " Three Sisters." Waterbury borrowed the above
money of Joseph Lewis and paid it in eighty acres of land

rO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 285

In 1715, the limit of the attainments of Waterbury under its
Grand proprietors was reached. We have been dimly recording, in
faintest outline, the achievements of a few men and their sons in
their endeavor to build an ideal English town, on foreign soil, in
which the Law of God should be the supreme rule of man, and His
public worship the visible sign of that rule. Waterbury was
severely disciplined and sorely afflicted during the thirty-eight
years in which it remained under the government of its founders.
In 1715 it had but just emerged from the scenes of illness and death,
that befell it from October 17 12, to September 17 13, in which time
more than twenty persons died. Mr. Southmayd gives us no hint of
the origin of this " great sickness," but it perhaps was the same
"camp distemper" that caused the troops to turn back so fre-
quently. It began in Waterbury, in so far as we may tell, by the
illness and death of John Richardson in October of 17 12, in the
third house (east from Willow) on the north side of West Main
street — to be followed in seventeen days by the death of his soldier
brother, Nathaniel, in the house next eastward; and that death in
eleven days more, by that of Thomas Richardson, the Grand propri-
etor, in the same house; while but a week later, from the same
home was borne forth the weary-hearted wife and mother, Mary
Richardson — she, who, when living in a cellar, became the mother
of the first-born child of Mattatuck. In less than a month, on the
i8th of December, Israel Richardson, another son of the same fam-
ily, was taken — to be followed in a brief while by his wife and their
daughter. In the next house eastward, died Mary, the widow of
the Grand proprietor, John Bronson — while in the following March
a most unusual event took place in the Burying yard on Grand
street — it was the burial of two young girls who died on the same
day^ and who bore the same name — Hannah Judd — the one was the
sixteen-year old daughter of John Judd; the other the fourteen-
year old daughter of Deacon Judd. Of the Hikcox family, five
members died. Samuel, the first settler of Naugatuck, and his son
Samuel; and three young sons of William Hikcox, who occupied his
father's homestead — now crossed by Prospect street. In the next
house, on the corner of North Main street, before the year closed
there died the wife, and son Ebenezer, aged twenty, of Benjamin
Barnes. Every death that occurred in the village, of which we
have record, took place in the row of houses on the north side of
West Main street, between Willow and North Main streets, supple-
mented by the two houses, close by, of Samuel Standly and Stephen
Welton on the east side of the Green, and that of Deacon Judd at
the west end. To these must be added the death of Daniel Warner,

286 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

at Judd's Meadows. We have no means of estimating the number
of those who were ill, but Dr. Porter's ability must have been tested
to the utmost, and the need of another practitioner was felt, for we
find the proprietors urging Dr. Ephraim Warner to "live among
them " and coaxing him with the use of all the school lands for
three years, and ten acres in the sequester, and other alluring mor-
sels of meadow, or "swamp that would make meadow." Dr. War-
ner was coaxed and came, and proved professional enough, on
occasion, to assist Dr. Porter in his "protesting" cases.

A new era was dawning. The proprietors prepared to meet it
by trying to place their lands on a basis that would please every-
body concerned. This they sought to do by making amends for
wrongs formerly done; by ratifying the acts of the town, it having
illegally granted lands; and by agreeing that every Grand pro-
prietor should have two bachelor allotments of forty pounds each,
to each lot— a few of the " old " proprietors being owners of more
than one Grand propriety. In the extra allotments here granted,
all lands that had formerly been given to individuals out of the
undivided lands were to be counted, and if the sons of planters had
been given lands, such gifts were also to be included in making up
the old planters' bachelor lots. This was intended to give equality
among those men who had sons who were bachelor proprietors, and
those who had not. Having thus restored the old planters to their
former standing, it was next agreed to make "a division of one hun-
dred acres apiece to each original proprietor and bachelor's accom-
modation to each of them alike and the remainder of the undivided
land to be divided to the original proprietors according to meadow
allotments." To prevent any possible misunderstanding, Thomas
Clark's bachelor-right was to be accounted on his uncle Timothy
Standly's bachelor rights. After the above votes had been passed, it
was formally announced that "the 40 pound propriety formerly
granted was to be void and of none effect."

The above votes were, without doubt, the effect of Lieut. John
Stanley's remonstrance, for it was at this meeting that that gentle-
man protested vigorously and in forcible language, against the act of
1697 — promulgated "in order to bring in inhabitants" — as contrary
to equity and justice; declaring that the first purchasers of the land
acquired a right in the lands according to the proportion of the pay-
ments they made by order of the committee for the settling of the
place, and in virtue of the articles of agreement which they had
fuliilled, and that they were entitled to the subdivisions as accorded
by the town patent to the then proprietor inhabitants and their
heirs. He informed them that he had nowhere seen that the

TO THE CLOSE OF TEE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 287

ancient proprietors impowered the major part by vote to give the
land at their pleasure, and announced that the received principle
seemed to be, that the major part of the proprietors in common,
might, by vote when opposed by the minor, give away from the
minor when and as they pleased. He tersely told them that that
which was consequent upon it, was, that the major part might com-
bine and give it all to and amongst themselves, so that the minor
part should have neither land nor commoning. Mr. John Stanley
had been away from Waterbury for twenty years at this time, but
his landed interests and his family ties in Waterbury had kept him
in intercourse with its people. He was, from time to time, called
upon to perform some service for the town. At this very meeting, he
was "desired by the proprietors to record the Indians' deed of
the town."

In November of the same year, it was voted that the original
proprietors should take up the acres of their bachelor lots in the
sequestered land. By the next vote they had liberty to take them
by their own land, and if not taken there, they were to be laid out
with the hundred-acre division. By the next vote an entirely new
layout was determined upon. It was that the allotment of one
hundred acres apiece, to each man alike, and the bachelor rights
belonging to the Grand proprietors, and the bachelor accommoda-
tions, should begin on the southwest corner of the bounds next to
Woodbury bounds, and the length of the tier of lots should be a
mile in length east and west, and to run north on the Woodbury
line until they had half the number of acres, and then on the east
of said tier, a highway twenty rods wide, and then another tier of
lots south to Derby bounds; which lots were to be a mile in length
as the first tier was. The east and west highways were to be four
rods wide.

There was evidently a desire at this time, or an influence at
work in the direction of repairing wrongs. Five-sixths of the three
Great lots, set apart by the* committee for special uses, had been
diverted from such uses, in order to give munificently to the Rever-
end Jeremiah Peck, and his son Jeremiah, and to the Reverend
John Southmayd — only one half-lot remaining for the schools. At
the same proprietors' meeting we find "a hundred and fifty pound
propriety in the undivided land set apart to be kept for the ministry
that is for the town to dispose on for the use of the ministry." Thus,
we have the appearance of the fourth Great lot. The next thing
in order was to enter in the " book of records " the names of the
Grand proprietors. Accordingly, Dea. John Standly and Abraham
Andrews, who were here from the beginning, and John Hopkins

288 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

with John Judd — whose boy-memory might serve him somewhat —
were appointed "for finding out who were the proper original
proprietors," and to record their names in the book of records.

Before the year 17 15 closed the town was divided into four quar-
ters and four measurers appointed for the four quarters. The
northwest quarter was west of the river and north of the Woodbury
road; the southwest, south of the Woodbury road. The northeast
quarter was east of the river and north of the Farmington road ;
the southeast, east of the river and south of the Farmington road.
To each division of the township, a measurer was appointed.

A glance at the land records at this time will convince us that
certain of the young proprietors made haste to part with their
lands. On Dec. 14, 17 16, Obadiah Scott sold to Daniel Shelton of
Stratford, eight acres in the Sequester. Three days later, Thomas
Richards sold the same number of acres to Mr. Shelton, and the
next month Jonathan Scott sold to him, "for a young mare, four and
one-half acres in the Sequester, not yet laid out;" while Thomas
Richards, " for a horse," sold land to the same party. These, and
other immediate sales made by the young proprietors of their new
possessions were disappointing.

Under the progress of expected events, and the natural growth
of the second generation, the little meeting-house was too small.
Waterbury must have had at this time a population of over three
hundred souls. A gallery was built, extending around three sides
of the audience room. The "fore seats" in the gallery were
finished; the interior of the roof was ceiled; four windows were
"put up," and apparently everything was made ready in 17 18 for
the arduous work of "seating the meeting-house." The repairs had
been going on for four years under the guiding hand of Jeremiah
Peck, the educated carpenter and school-master of 1689. One pay-
ment was made to him in 17 18 of £1$. We may not readily obtain
a mental picture of the interior from the records. Captain Judd,
Lieutenant Hopkins, and Dr. Porter were the committee for seating
the people when the repairs were completed. Age and estate were
the only factors to be considered in dealing out the stations of
honor in Waterbury; one year in age was counted as the equivalent
of four pounds in estate at the first recorded seating of the meeting-
house. It was voted that " the fore short seat in the gallery should
be deemed equal with the pillar or second seat below; that is to say
the second long seat from the upper end." This vote was annulled,
and it was voted "that the short seat in the gallery should be
equal, or next to, the short seat below." Ensign Hikcox, Joseph
Lewis, Stephen Upson, Jr., and William Judd were to sit in this fore

TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN, 289

short seat in the gallery and " were to take their turns yearly out of
the four first seats." The only other item granted to us is the follow-
ing: "Those that were formerly seated in the pew — the seat which
Mr. Southmayd had enlarged in 1709 — should sit there without
any disturbance notwithstanding our other votes to seat the meet-
ing-house." The meeting-house having been duly enlarged, it was
in order to enlarge Mr. Southmayd's salary. In 17 10, it was ;^5o in
provision pay, of which not more than one-third was to be in Indian
com. Any man by paying money could save one-third of his rate.
Mr. Southmayd released the town from paying him jQio in labor,
and it was agreed to pay the same amount in wood, at eight shil-
lings per cord. There had been no material change in his salary
for nine years, when, in 1719 : "It was agreed by vote with Marster
John Southmayd to give him sixty pound in money and the per-
ticuUers as followeth that is to say wheet at five shillings per
bushill ry at three and six pence pr bushill ingun at too and six
pence pr bushill porcke at three pence pr pound flax nine pence pr
pound and also we agree to give him ten pound in wood half a
crown a lod for ock and three shillings a lod for wamut wood."
This rate was to be paid before the first of the ensuing March.

It cannot be too strongly impressed upon our minds that to this
period in the history of the town, we find only its landed owners
forming any visible portion of its dwellers. In every instance we
have not been able to identify the person owning land, or giving
name to locality.

The student of the early history of New England towns will soon
discover that in their building no room was prepared for non-pro-
ducers of the necessary things of life. Every dweller within the
town edifice was expected to do his part in every department to
which the votes of the householders called him, and we find — taking
at random the period of ten years from 1708 to 17 18 — ^no less than fifty-
four men holding ofiice, and six proprietors representing it at the
General Court. In 1708 the town officers were a constable, three
townsmen, a town clerk, a surveyor, four fence-viewers, two hay-
wards, three listees, three rate-makers, a collector of ministers' rates,
a collector of town rates — a school committee, consisting of two mem-
bers, and a man " for to dig the graves." The last office was held by
five different men in the ten years. Poor Richard Porter must have
made many a weary journey up Grand street in the year 1712 and
1 713 (his house was at the corner of Bank street), to prepare the
graves for the dead of that time. The new offices created in the
interval, seem to have been those of town treasurer, chimney-viewer,
ordinary or tavern-keeper, grand juror, inspector, and leather-sealer,

19

290 mSTORT OF WATERBUBT,

During this period the town was served by a captain, two lieuten-
ants, an ensign, four sergeants and two doctors. Benjamin Barnes,
Jr., was the only proprietor who declined office. On one occasion
when he was appointed fence-viewer, his father, in town meeting,
promised that if his son did not do the work he would do it for him.
If there was any one thing that the colony and the towns dis-
liked, it was making provision for the poor; it must be remembered
that their aim was in many respects an ideal one ; that they tried to bar
out penury and all forms of unwholesomeness. In the beginning, the
Court of Magistrates held power over poor persons, and disposed
them in such towns as it deemed best able to care for them. Pov-
erty was considered a crime, consequent upon the sin of idleness.
Men were forced to bring up their children to some useful employ-
ment. A householder even, could not, under the town's watchful
eye, indulge in wasting his time. The natural seats of stone on the
Waterbury Green, it is safe to say held no loungers, and even the
holidays were improved by the earnest workers to remove them in —
nevertheless the poor were here, even in 1709, when — Deacon Judd
being the town clerk — made the following record of his own act.
** Oct. 8, 1709, William Stanard and his wife came to Waterbury, and
Dacon Judd out of pity gave them leave to be in his house a few
days and to work in his shop. Said Stanard staid till the thirtieth
day of said month and then by the said Judd, as a townsman, was
warned to depart the town and his house." A second townsman,
Stephen Upson, also warned him to depart; but he "not going
away " was warned again in November by Upson " to quit the town
and be gone." The sixth of December " he was warned by the said
Upson to depart or he would carry him away or take care it should
be done." It is evident that the kind-hearted Deacon Judd " out of
pity" declined to again warn, "as townsman," William Stanard
and his wife to depart; but the law's rigors were enacted, and curi-
ously enough we know by whom the deed was done, for when Jona-
than Scott had been gotten out of town by the Indians, we learn
that it was Jonathan himself who did the deed — for the town gave
him his town rate for 1709 for getting out of town William Stanard 's
wife." There are no sweeter words in all our records than the three
words, " out of pity," with which Deacon Judd tries to justify his
transgression of law, in taking the homeless and the wandering into
his house and shop — the little "smith" shop that was "set six feet
into the highway," at the southwest comer of West Main and Willow
streets. Did William Stanard die here, one cannot help asking,
that only his wife was gotten out of town. The above is the first of
a long and numerous list of "warnings out of town," that soon

TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 291

became only a form of compliance with law. This act relieved the
town of liability to support persons (being so warned) if, for any
cause, they become dependent upon the public. In this list are
names of men who later became prominent and prosperous citizens;
therefore if any resident of Waterbury should find that his ances-
tor's name is mentioned in the list, it need not cause a moment's
confusion.

It was not until 17 15 that the colonial law was passed compelling
a man to support his children and grandchildren, and children to
support their parents and grandparents. The first provision for the
unfortunate in Waterbury was made January 6, 17 18. "A rate of
five pounds as money was granted as town stock for the necessity
of the poor or distracted persons to be disposed of at the discretion
of the present townsmen according to law."

There was a colonial custom of granting a license to certain per-
sons who had endured unusual hardships through misfortune, acci-
dent, or affliction, to solicit alms in certain named towns for speci-
fied periods, but it is not known that any of Waterbury's inhabitants
ever sought the privilege.

Under date of April 28, 1719, we find the following entry:
" Thomas peate was admitted an inhabitant in the town by vote."
This is a mysterious entry, and contains in itself, all that we are
permitted to know concerning a man who got within the charmed
circle, apparently without condition or obligation.

CHAPTER XXIII.

REMARKABLE INCREASE IN POPULATION — THE TOWN DECIDES TO BUILD A
NEW MEETING HOUSE — MR. SOUTHMAYD's LITTLE MEETING HOUSE
BOOK — SEATING THE MEETING HOUSE — LAYOUT OF THE VILLAGE —
THE TAX-LIST OF THE YEAR 173O— THE NEW INHABITANTS OF I73I.

THE period from 172 1 to and including the year 1731 was the
most important decade in the early history of the town; it
witnessed changes greater in proportion to existing condi-
tions than any subsequent ten years has seen. The year 1720 found
but seven of the signers of the plantation agreement of 1674 living
in Waterbury — these were John Welton, Timothy Standly, Daniel
Porter, Abraham Andrews, Benjamin Barnes, Stephen Upson and
Richard Porter — the names of John Hopkins, Captain Thomas Judd,
Edmund Scott, Jr., and John Richards complete the list of those who
represented original proprietors. The same year found Waterbury
with a village center of perhaps forty-five families, while twelve
or possibly fifteen more may have been living in the neighboring
regions of Bucks Hill, Break Neck, and Judds Meadow. There is
no list extant of the voting population of 1720 — it must however
have been less than sixty-five persons, — while ten years later we
find one hundred and fifty-one men living here; an increase in ten
years of over one hundred and twenty-five per cent. Before this
migration to Waterbury began, the proprietors had, after many
attempts to deal satisfactorily with each other and with their sons
the bachelor or first degree proprietors, reached a final adjustment
of their landed rights. There are no proprietor's records from
March 4, 17 17, to October 9, 172 1. Therefore we are unable to give
an account of the steps that led to the following adjustment — which
took place at a meeting held at eight o'clock in the morning at the
house of Serg' Scovill, on February 28, 1721. Before this meeting
was held, the report of the committee appointed to search the
records and find out what men were entitled to land divisions was
received, accompanied by a list of their names. At this meeting it
was agreed that every original proprietor should have two £40 or
bachelor lots if he owned £100 interest in the township — thus giving
him £180 interest. A like proportion accrued to every lesser owner-
ship. The £40 interest was considered at that date, equal to sixty-
eight acres of land. Thereafter all divisions were to be made to the
original proprietors according to their propriety, with the additions

THE NEW INHABITANTS. 293

named. All conditions of building and living in the town a speci-
fied time were removed from the bachelor lots of the old proprie-
tors. The younger men who were bachelor proprietors were to
receive lands according to their £40 interest, and divisions of lands
were to be restricted to the two parties. Each man might take up
his division " by his own land and in one place more and in a hand
some form." The recorder, Mr. John Southmayd, was to issue notes
to the proprietors for the lands. These notes, upon presentation,
authorized the measurer to lay out lands, and the number of acres
laid out was to be endorsed upon the note. Mr. Southmayd was to
make a record of every note that went out from his office. Three
of these little notes are in the writer's possession; they are about
four inches long by three broad. One of them has the following:
" To the Measurers in Waterbury these may Certify that tlfere may
be Laid out in the Common and undivided Sequestered Land in said
Town. To David Prichard one acre and Twenty Rods on Jonathan
Scotts Sen' Right on the Division granted Dec"", ijthy 1793.

Certified per me

Ezra Bronson, Clerk,''

On the other side is the following; " forty four Rods laid out to
D. Pritchard June 3*** 1818. three quarters of an acre and twenty-six
rods laid out to David Prichard* Oct' 23"* 1837." The lay outs are
signed by Dan^ Porter, measurer. One note calling for 201 rods
is still unsatisfied, but forty rods having been laid out upon it.

Deacon John Stanley was called upon to assist in making the
lists of Grand and Bachelor proprietors. The combined lists com-
prise the names of ninety-six men. All these, having fulfilled con-
ditions, were owners of the lands purchased in 1674. Seventy-three
young men, sons of twenty-four Grand proprietors had settled, for
a time if not permanently, in Waterbury. Every one of the seven-
teen family names on this list is represented in the Waterbury
Directory of 1892.

The meeting house was the pulse of the living people — hence
the first intimation that we get of the ingress of population is in
1721, when the town voted "to apply to the General Court to get a
tax on all the land laid out within the town bounds, the money to
be disposed of to the building of a meeting house.'* It will be
remembered that non-residents owned lands laid out and to be laid
out — and Waterbury proprietors exacted tribute from all, for the
meeting house. The little old church building had but just been
made ready, by repairs and additions, for the then inhabitants.

* This is perhaps the oaly instance in which a man of over a hundred years bad land laid out.

294 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

when in 1722 the town empowered a committee to take up a part of
the stairs into the gallery and make seats there; to stop up the east
and west doors and make what seats the place would allow; to
raise the pulpit, and mend the outside of the building.

Other preparations were made — "a rate of twelve" was laid
"for raising up the school house (built in 1709) and other charges
in the town, as far as it would go;" twenty-four acres in the
sequester were laid out and ordered to be recorded for the use of
the ministry; six men were chosen for a committee to lay out high-
ways and make return to the recorder — three were to go together
and two agreeing empowered the recorder to make a record of the
highway so returned, while a general order to the committee in
regard to the width of the highways was, that they were not to
exceed twenty rods, but they should be as wide as could be had
where they did not take off any man's land, and " where men had
fenced in the highway it was to be accounted to the highway," and
the road through Waterbury bounds to Farmington* was to go
where it then went, and be ten rods wide where it would allow;
and no surveyor was to make boundaries within that stating of the
road; the ministry land near the center (now occupied by many
buildings) was to be leased (time not stated) to Samuel Porter and
Thomas Upson, and the school lands in the various meadows were
leased for six years; the school committee was bidden to demand
the country money yearly, also the money that the school land was
let for, — and pay the school and give an account of its receivings
and " dispensements " at "the great town meeting," which at this
time met every year on the second Monday in December, at 10
o'clock in the morning; f bills against the town were first to be
brought in, and then a rate to be laid sufficient to pay the charge.

It must be remembered that during these years Waterbury was
ever acting on the defensive; she was harassed by fears and con-
fronted by actual warfare; her citizens carried on their avocations
under terrible restraint; they went forth to their fields by com-
mand of authority in companies, every man bearing arms. If this
were a romance instead of veritable history, our Drum hill com-
manding the meadows up the valley would receive its name from
the fact that the sentinel was posted there with his drum to warn
the planters at work in the meadows of approaching danger, and
romance would probably coincide with fact.

♦ This was the road that ran from Hartford to New Milford through Farmington, Waterbury, and
Woodbury, in distinction from other roads from Waterbury to Farmington.

tin 1723, the "receivings" and the disbursements of the committee were je6.9.o, "with twenty-five
shillings in the hands of Dr. Warner."

THE NEW INHABITANTS, 295

The only inhabitant who appeared in 172 1 was Gershom Fulford,
a blacksmith, who moved over from Woodbury and entered into a
covenant to live in the town and practice his trade seven years, and
perform articles as the Bachelor proprietors had done. As a con-
sideration, he was given eight acres of land by subscription and by
vote. It does not appear that Captain Thomas Judd, the deacon
and the blacksmith, left Waterbury at this time, but circumstantial
evidence points three fingers of fact in that direction. He sold his
house; his position as captain of the Waterbury train band was
filled by Dr. Ephraim Warner in May of 1722, and his name disap-
pears for a time from the list of oflSce holders. I do not know
whether James Brown of New Haven, or Samuel " Chidester," who
had married a half-sister of Joseph Lewis, was the next arrival;
both came in 1722 and settled at Judds Meadow. James Brown was
licensed to keep an ordinary in that year. One can rejoice with the
inhabitants of 1723 in the prospect of even one new inhabitant, and
imagine that a tremor of satisfaction is found in the hand of Mr.
Southmayd where he records that Dec. 10, 1723, Nathaniel Arnold
[of Hartford] signed an agreement to live in Waterbury four years,
for which the town gave him ten acres on David's brook, north of
the town, near the common fence. Nathaniel Arnold's coming was
an event of importance. The town did not oblige him to build a
house, because there was one awaiting him. He bought* the next
year the original house lots of John Bronson, Lieut. Judd, and Daniel
Warner, comprising six acres. The next day William Ludinton
subscribed to an agreement to live here four years and build a
house, and the same day the town agreed to give John Williams, a
clothier, ten acres if he would come and sign the conditions and
build a fulling mill and follow the clothiers' trade. John Williams'
name is not subscribed to the agreement on the town book, and it
is not known that he came.

Judd's Meadow had already welcomed a substantial inhabitant
in the person of James Brown of New Haven, with his wife,
Elizabeth Kirby, and their eight children. As early as 17 17, he,
with Hezekiah Rew of Milford, bought of John Hikcox a house and
land on the hill on the east side of the river, south of the site of
Naugatuck's first meeting house. There he had been keeping an
ordinary, and cherishing the Church of England in his heart,
(although he paid tithes for the meeting house), while his neigh-
bors at the Town spot were undecided whether to repair the old
school house, or to build a new one; whether, with the help of Derby
to build a cart road to that place, or " a country road to be settled
by the Court." There was, however, no indecision in regard to

296 HISTORT OF WATERS URT.

building the new meeting house. Waterbury had from her begin-
ning a way of deciding matters for herself. Again and again we
have witnessed the manner in which she, quite courteously, avoided
the aid of foreign committees, even when offered by the court. Her
establishment of bounds with Derby and Woodbury is in evidence.
Waterbury witnessed the discord in the towns around about her in
relation to the location of their meeting houses, and four years
before a step was taken in regard to the building of a new one, we
find her people saying: " When we shall build another meeting
house we will build it upon the Green upon which the present meet-
ing house stands." In December of 1726, they laconically declare:
"We will build a meeting house forty feet wide and fifty feet long."
From the public records, and the autograph accounts kept by Mr.
Southmayd (now in the writer's possession), the following story of
the building of the second meeting house is gleaned: After decid-
ing upon the place for it in 1722, and its size in 1726, plans were laid
for meeting its cost. It will be remembered that in the adjustment
of proprieties, about 17 15, six new ones were created of £40 each.
Two of these had been sold; the four remaining, were placed in the
hands of a committee for sale, the proceeds to be expended on the
meeting house. For money to be used in its beginning, a rate was
laid of three pence on the pound, to be paid in May, 1727. The
building committee was composed of five of the town's best citizens,
Lieut. John Hopkins, Sergt. John Scovill, Isaac Bronson Sen'', Dea.
Thomas Hikcox, and Thomas Clark.

In the midwinter of 1726-7, the timber and other building
materials were brought by the people to the Green, and "overdid"
the rate of three pence on the pound, whereupon a second rate was
laid of three pence on the pound, which was also intended to cover
the town charges for the year.

The first cloud that shadowed the enterprise was the death of a
member of the committee, Sergt. John Scovill, who died Feb. 26,
1726-7, and in his place were appointed "Steven" Hopkins and
Lieut. Wm. Hikcox. Two stakes were set down at the east end of
the old meeting house, to " regulate the seting of the new one." The
northwest corner was to be at the one stake and the southeast cor-
ner at the other; the " sills were laid two feet from the ground on the
highest ground (the Green not having been graded) and the stone
work or underpinning was done accordingly." It was evidently far
easier to lay rates than it was to collect them, for in December of
1727 the first rate was still ungathered; and the second one was not
yet in when the town announced its expectation that if the collector
did not gather the money without delay "that the townsmen strain

THE NEW INHABITANTS. 297

on the collector," and then, it, at the same meeting, proceeded to
lay the third tax of three pence on the pound, which was to be
paid in money, and was to be gathered in July of 1727. The town
meeting here referred to was evidently not altogether peaceful,
for Mr. Southmayd records that "Capt. Hikcox and Stephen
Hopkins were put out from being meeting house committee," and
"Lieut. Hopkins was discharged from being a committee for the
meeting house." Their successors were Capt. Thomas Judd, Isaac
Bronson, and Deacon Thomas Hikcox.

In March of 1728, Nathaniel Arnold and Stephen Hopkins,
assisted by James "Balding" [Baldwin], — a young carpenter from
Newark, New Jersey, who had recently married one of Dr. Daniel
Porter's daughters — "culled the shingles that had been brought by
particular persons to be laid on the meeting house," and in the
same year the fourth tax was laid, making the entire tax eleven
pence on the pound. By Mr. Southmayd 's account book we learn
that two hundred and one pounds were paid to twenty-one men for
boards and work; one hundred pounds to the carpenter and for
glass and nails. Of the first sum mentioned Mr. Merriam, the car-
penter, was paid more than one -fourth, James Blakslee about
forty pounds, Joseph Lathrop thirty-two, and Israel or Isaac Moss
twenty-five. The entire cost of the building, exclusive of the gal-
leries which were not finished, seems to have been four hundred
and eighty-seven pounds, twelve shillings and sixpence.

It was paid for by the sale of the four proprieties of £40 each,
which were sold for two hundred and sixty-two pounds — of this
amount, Mr. Southmayd tells us that Thompson's bond was fifty-
four pounds, Judson's, the same amount, and Welles's seven pounds,
ten shillings (on the land records, we find that Jan. 11, 1726-7, the
three men named — all of Stratford — had measured and laid out for
them, sixty-two acres of land " on the Northward End of the hill
commonly called and known by the name of Shum's orchard Hill
in the North East corner of Waterbury Bounds"); by a gift from
Lieut. Timothy Standly of one of his Bachelor proprieties, which
sold for sixty pounds; by "Z/>»/. Balding's gift," of three pounds,
and by rates amounting to one hundred and sixty-two pounds, ten
shillings and eleven pence.

Whatever other debts Waterbury assumed early and late, there
was apparently no indebtedness left on its meeting house of 1729.
Mr. Southmayd's name does not appear on the town or proprietor's
records as indicating his activity in the enterprise, but the little
meeting-house book in which he kept all the accounts is eloquent
in his praise. He recorded the following item: "To get Rum," but

298 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

his pen crossed the charge — which was but four shillings and six
pence — a fact, notably to the credit of this town in that day and
generation.

Just one year before the meeting house was finished, Deacon
Thomas Hikcox, the second member of the original committee, died
and Thomas Clarke was appointed to the ofi&ce of deacon.

On the last day of June in 1729 all things were in readiness for
that most delicate and troublesome of all ceremonial observances
of early New England life — " seating the meeting house." As far
as my knowledge enables me to state, each town established its
own rules and grades of dignity. But two factors were recognized
here— age and estate. In 17 19, one year was accounted as four
pounds of estate — in 1729, as two pounds — in 1826 as ten dollars. I
am not certain whether it was because age had decreased in value
or the pound had increased. Every man's estate was increased by
eighteen pounds, on which he paid, for his poll tax. He also paid on
the same amount for members of his family or household who were
subject to the tax. It was now decreed that only one head should
be counted in a man's list in the seating of the meeting house.

On the last day of June in 1729, Mr. Southmayd made the fol-
lowing record: "At a town meeting they by vote gave me John
Southmayd the liberty of chusing a seat in the new Meeting House
and I made choise of the pew next the pulpit at the East end of the
pulpit for my Family to sit in," and he adds to the record the
words: "It was voated that we would Endeavor to seat the Meet-
ing House." We pause an instant here, to state that during the
erection of this building death had called away not only John
Scovill and Dea. Timothy Hikcox of the committee, but two of the
original planters who lived almost under its walls, Lieut. Timothy
Stanley, and his next-door . neighbor. Dr. Daniel Porter, leaving
Abraham Andrews as the sole survivor of the signers of 1674.

The next morning ushered in a day of supreme interest to every
inhabitant. After deciding that all the men of sixteen years and
over should be seated, the town made choice for a committee to do
the work, Dea. Thomas Clark, Samuel Hikcox, and Stephen Kelcy
(a young man from Wethersfield.) This committee was chosen
wisely. The first member was, according to our estimate, one of
the rich men in the town; the second represented fairly the pros-
perous, well-to-do element, although himself a young man, while
the third owned at that time but an ox, a horse, and five acres
of upland.

Over against the pew of the minister's choice, with the pulpit
between, was the pew next in dignity to that one. To the ever-

THE NEW INHABITANTS.

299

lasting credit of that committee, or the town, there was voted into
that pew " Goodman " Andrews * and his wife — Lieutenant Hop-
kins and his wife, Goodman Barnes — Sergt. Upson, and the widow
Porter. We seek in vain for increased knowledge of that day's
proceedings, for Mr. Southmayd adds the words " And Doc Warner
into the second pew," then closes the record for three months.

If the inhabitants were seated according to estate and age, we
might readily make a list of the order of the seating. Joseph
Lewis had in 1729 the largest estate, closely followed by Isaac
Bronson, Timothy Hopkins, Lieut. John and Thomas Bronson, John
Richards, Stephen Hopkins, Richard Welton, Captain William and
Thomas Hikcox, Nathaniel Arnold, and others.

In a community like that of Waterbury, there was a manifest in-
congruity in the seating qualifications, and doubtless there was an
uproar and much confusion, which wise Mr. Southmayd concealed
from our view as he closed the door of the records upon future in-
quiries. We need go no further in illustration than the case of
Deacon Thomas Judd. He had, even as others — for it was a custom,
and with few exceptions almost universally observed — given his
property to his children, leaving in his own name but a small frac-
tion of a large estate, and by the above ruling, Dr. Warner, a
younger man, was placed above him in the second pew.

The same rules applied to the same practice in the same church
down to the latest seating, in 1836, with few variations. In 1829
persons were seated according to list and age, ten dollars being
allowed in the list to one year of age. But one complete record of
a seating has been met. It is for the year 1792, and was among the
papers of David Prichard, who died in 1838. From it, we learn that
the meeting house of 1729 was divided into thirteen dignities, each
dignity consisting of two pews. In the first one, at the head of the
aisle or "alley," eight persons were seated, six men, and two women;
in the corresponding dignity on the west side, six persons. These
were followed by two great pews, and these, in turn, by the fourth
dignity, consisting of " northeast and northwest pews in the square
body." The fifth dignity was the second pew in the "alley " and its
west side counterpart — the sixth, two corner pews — the seventh,
the pew before the east and west doors — the eighth, north of the
east and west doors — the ninth, the third pew joining the alley, and
the corresponding pew on the west side — the tenth, the pews east
and west of the front door — the eleventh, the middle pew on the

* This is the only instance, I think, in which Mr. Southmayd used the word " Goodman," and it
•ijfnifies simply their venerable age, and was used in the absence of any other title. Both men having
been chosen to represent the town at the General Court, they could not, in that day, have been men of
inferiority.

300

HISTORY OF WATEBBUR7,

front side the house, and the west side — the twelfth, the southeast
pew in the square body, and the southwest one — the thirteenth,
south of the east door, and the "west side." This arrangement of
pews in 1792 may have been very unlike the original interior of 1729.

Tithing-men were first appointed in 1726. In the new building,
three were required to keep all things in order.

In December of 1729 it was voted to go on and finish the galleries
within six months, and verily there was need of haste, for we find
new inhabitants at more than the cardinal points of the compass,
and all points led to this central edifice, on Sabbath days, Lecture
days, fasts and thanksgivings, and on Town Meeting days. Among
the new inhabitants we find Nathaniel Arnold, of Hartford, accom-
panied by his mother and his five children — the youngest a lad of
eleven; Jacob Benson, who must have had a family, for he paid a
tax for three persons, and may have been the first settler on Wol-
cott hill, as that was early known as Benson's hill; Henry Cook,
from Branford, with his wife and five children; Samuel Brown,
"from Boston, Hartford County," with his wife and five children;
Joseph Nichols from Derby, with his wife and six children; John
Sutliff, a wanderer from Deerfield, Durham, Branford and Haddam,
with his wife, eight daughters and two sons; Abraham Utter, with
his wife and six children; William Luddington, with four children,
and perhaps a wife — if he came according to agreement in 1723;
Caleb Clark, with his wife and four daughters; Abraham Hodges,
from New Haven, with his wife and two children; Jonathan Guern-
sey, from Milford, with his wife and two children; Joseph Harris,
who probably had a family, for he owned a home lot; Joseph Judd
from West Hartford, with his wife and son Isaac; Robert Johnson,
a shoemaker and tanner, with his wife and one child; Thomas
Blakeslee from New Haven, with his wife and four children ;
Daniel How and his son; Jonathan Forbes, who paid taxes for "his
faculty," whatever it may have been; James Johnson and his wife
Eunice, who lived for a time on Bank street near the corner of East
Main street, he having bought Thomas Warner's house in 1730;
Joseph Smith with his wife and two children, he buying in 1726,
while he was yet of Derby, the house and land now the site of St.
Margaret's school; John Johnson, with his son Silence and his daugh-
ter Jane; John " Allcok " with one child, from New Haven; Ephraim
Bissell from Tolland with at least one child; Ebenezer Blakeslee,
and his bride from North Haven (whose father provided abund-
antly for him); Elnathan Taylor from the same place, with two
children — while Daniel Porter, son of Richard, and a few other wan-
derers returned to the fold. To these were added the young men
who came to the town and found here a charm in young woman-

THE NEW INHABITANTS.

301

hood unknown to them elsewhere, for they all married daughters of
proprietors of Waterbury; James Blakeslee, "joiner" of West
Haven, who was taxed on £6 for "his chest;" Isaac Castle and
Joseph Hurlburt from Woodbury; James Baldwin from Newark,
New Jersey; Nathan and Jonathan Prindle from Newtown; the
three brothers — Stephen, Isaac, and Ebenezer Hopkins, with their
mother, from Hartford, Stephen paying in 1732 a tax on £8 for "his
cordwinding trade," and Isaac on £7 for his " turning trade " —
Ebenezer not marrying here; Jonathan Kelsey and Stephen Kelsey,
a carpenter, who had built a house west of Break Neck in 1727 —
they coming here from Wethersfield; Daniel and James Williams
(brothers) from Wallingford — Daniel building a house on Pattaroon
hill in 1731, and paying a tax for his faculty, on £10; Samuel
Thomas from Woodbury, who bought land " southwestward of the
lower end of Woster Swamp westward of the path that goes to
Woster Swamp," in 1727; James Hull from New Haven; Nathaniel
Merrill from Hartford; John Guernsey, who married Deacon Jere-
miah Peck's daughter Anne, and was the first known resident of The
Village, now called Guernsey Town; Caleb Thompson, the site and
cellar place of whose house down the western slope of Town-Plot
hill was marked in 1891 by lilacs and a peach tree; all these, beside
Daniel Rose who laid out many acres on Twitch Grass brook at
Thomaston; Daniel Blakeslee, Ebenezer Kelsey, Jesse Blakeslee, and
Joseph "Gillet" were here before the close of 1731.

The foregoing list of new inhabitants does not, in all proba-
bility, include every person who came, and it may not be strictly
accurate in every instance in relation to family. Among the
causes of this movement to Waterbury may be found, first of all,
the opening of the township to outsiders by its proprietors, and
the lay out of The Village. It will be remembered that when it was
decided to make a hundred acre division to each proprietor, to
every man alike, the long lots were to be laid out next Woodbury,
beginning at the southwest corner of the bounds. Owing to the
loss of the proprietors' records between 1717 and 1722 we are not
able to give facts, but it seems entirely probable that the vote was
revoked, and that that division was ultimately laid out in present
Watertown — at that part of it now known as Guernsey Town, and
whose present name was given, because of its first settler, John
Guernsey. The natural features of this section were such as to
render it capable of being laid out with uniformity, in pleasing
contrast to the ordinary manner of selecting a " piece of land "
here and there to suit the emergency of the hour.

As laid out. The Village was an encroachment upon Woodbury's
east line at its northern point, for the towns adjusted the matter

302

BISTORT OF WATERS URT.

and changed the line — accordingly, the main Village lines were
made to run with it, and the change upset the highways, but the
proprietors fixed them up as well as they could and went on.

The Village, as laid out, consisted of a two-rod highway next
Woodbury, and then a half mile wide of land laid out in lots, and
then a highway running north and south eight rods wide, and then
another tier of lots half a mile wide — an eight-rod highway — a third
tier of lots, and then on the east side another highway of eight rods.
The first lot began at the south end of the west tier, following it to
its north end, and then beginning across the highway, followed the
second tier down, and finished at the north end of the east tier.
An attempt was made to sell 150 acres to cover the charge of the
lay out, should any "Chapmen" appear. The land was offered "at
a vandue," and no other chapman appearing. Dr. Daniel Porter
became the buyer; but for some reason he declined to perfect the
purchase, and the proprietors received the land again. In 1722, it
was agreed that Cap. Judd, Cap. Warner and Lieut. Hopkins should
have the management of the lay out of The Village; they were "to
call to the lot;" to "see what lot was drawn" and to give an order
for it to be entered by the clerk by number as the lot fell, and each
man's propriety was added to his name. The list is entitled, "A
list of the Lott as It was Drawn for A Division of the Sequestered
Land Att the North west quarter of the bounds. Nov. 28 1722 " and
may be found on page 62, vol. i. "Town Meetings, Highways, and
Grants." It is a complete list of the proprietors of Waterbury in
1722; for John Stanley Junior's name is at last added to the pro-
prietors, making one hundred and one owners. The grade of owner-
ship varies from £270 to £40. There are three £270 lots (Mr. Peck's,
Mr. Southmayd's — and the "School Lott"); fifteen, of £180; one,
(belonging to Daniel Porter) of £171; two of £162; the £150 pro-
priety created in 1715; eight of £144; one of £126; three of £108;
four of £90; and sixty-three of £40, or an ownership amounting to
£8,637. The number of heirs, among whom the various proprieties
were divided, is unknown. To meet the charge of the laying out
of The Village, whose lots were drawn for in 1722, it was in 1723
decided to sell public lands, or to grant them to the creditors at
five shillings an acre if the charges did not exceed the one hun-
dred and fifty acres at that valuation.

One school house, fourteen feet wide and sixteen feet long, built
about 1709, seems to have been the only school house in Waterbury
until after 1731. In 1730, men living at Judds Meadow, at Woster
Swamp, and at Bucks Hill, desiring to receive their proportion of
moneys derived from school lands, a division was made for their
benefit. We thus learn that on Dec. 14, 1730, " Samuel Barnes,

THE NEW INHABITANTS.

303

John Andrews, John Barnes, James Brown, Ebenezer Hikcox, James
Johnson, Isaac Bronson, Sergt. Joseph Lewis, Joseph Lewis, Jr.,
Samuel Warner, Sen., Samuel Warner, Jr., Edmund Scott, Jr., and
Samuel Scott," were living at Judds Meadow. At " Woster " Swamp
— which at that date included not only Watertown, but the " Up
River" country of present Plymouth — were Henry Cook, Isaac
Castle, Jonathan Kelcy, Joseph Hurlburt, Joseph Nichols, Jonathan
Scott, Sen., Jonathan Scott, Jun., David Scott, Gershom Scott, John
Sutliff, Samuel Tommus, Dr. John Warner, Ebenezer Warner,
George Welton, James Williams, Abraham Utter, and Ebenezer
Richason. At " Bucks Hill," Sergt. Richard Welton, John Warner,
Obadiah Warner, Benjamin Warner, Richard Welton, Jr., Joseph
Judd and William Scott," or thirty-seven families, among whom are
found twelve names that were unknown in the old plantation of
Mattatuck, This division of school money was the first step and
430und indicative of the disintegration of the ancient township.

The number of families living outside of the ** town spot " and
not in the localities named, we have not enumerated. The Isaac
Bronson named in the Judds Meadow region was not the Break
Neck resident of that name, but an Isaac Bronson living there in
1730 on the west side of the river, who may have been the son of
Isaac of Break Neck.

The earliest itemized tax list known to be extant is of the year
1730. That, together with some fifty lists of the period from 1730
to the close of the century, is in the writer's possession, having
been found in 1891 in the Kingsbury house so often referred to.
The list of 1730 is the joint product of the third John Scovill,
James Porter, and Samuel Hickcox, the " listers " for that year. It
is largely written by James Porter, but Mr. Southmayd's hand
appears in it, as it does for many years in most of the public docu-
ments of the town.

A copy of the above list is here given.

John andriss one pe .

18 00

2 oxson 3 cows 2 one y .

19 00

3 hors thee swine .

12 00

horn lot and land .

04 16

53 16

Thomas andar one p'

18 00

2 hors 2 oxson 2 cows

20 00

one yr one swine .

2 00

horn lot and land .

05 00

TAX LIST FOR THE YEAR I730.

nathael amold 3 p - .

2 oxs one hors 7 cows

3 2 yr one yr 3 swine
horn lot and land .

Nathaniel amold Jun'
one person one hors
2 swine .

54

00

32

00

10

00

II

10

107

10

21

00

02

00

45 00

23 00

304

HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

James baldwine one p
one ox 4 cows one hors .
one 2 yr 2 swine
medow land .

i8 oo
19 00
04 00
00 06

41 06

John bams one prcon
5 horses 2 oxsen 3 cows

18 00
32 00

4 2 ye 3 one ye 3 swine
horn lot and land .

14 00
07 16

71 16

Samuel Bams one pr

18 00

one ox 3 cows 2 2 jrrs

17 00

one yr one hors 3 swine
horn lot and land .

07 00
05 10

47 10

Thomas Bams one person
2 oxson 3 horses 7 cows .

iS 00
38 00

I 2 yr 3 I yr 2 swin
hom lot and land .

07 00
II 08

74 08

Jacob Benson 3 .
one cow one 2 yr .
4 oxen and land

. 54 00
05 00
01 12

60 12

Ephrem bisel one pr .

18 00

James blackle one pr

18 00

one hors 2 cows 4 2 yr

17 00

2 one yr 4 swine

his chest . . . .

06 00
06 00

47 00

Ebenezer Bronson one person . 18 00
6 oxen 2 cows 2 two yr old . 34 00
4 horses two i year old two

sw^ine 16 00

hom lot and . . . 05 12

12 acor of pasture
Isaac Brunson 2 per .
4 oxen 16 6 cows 18 3 horse
9 2 y« 3 3 yr 8 swine
one yeir old .
hom lot and land .

73

12

. 36

00

. 43

00

35

00

01

00

. 17 04

lef John brunson 3 pr
2 oxson 6 cows 6 2 yr
6 one yr old 5 horses
6 swine .
hom lot and land

John Bronson one pr
2 oxson 4 cows one ye
4 swine .
land meadow .

moses bronson one pr
2 oxsen 2 cows 2 swin
2 horses .
meadow land .

Thomas bronson 2 per
2 oxsen 5 cows 4 2 yr
5 one yr 3 hors 4 swine
hom lot and land .

James Brown two person .
two oxen two cows 2 hors
three swine
one year old .
land ....

Isaac Casel one person
3 cows one hor 2 one yr .

De Thoms Clark one pr .
4 oxen 5 hrs 4 cows 5 3 yr
one 2 yr 3 one yr 6 swine
hom lot and land .

Henry Kook 2 persons
6 oxen 4 cows 3 hors
one 2 yr one yr
meedow land .

gershom fulford on p
one cow 3 swine
his f acculty

54

00

3S

00

21

00

06

00

18

04

137 04

iS

00

21

00

04

00

03

12

46

12

iS

00

16

00

06

00

03

16

43

16

36

00

31

00

18

00

17

10

102

10

36

00

20

00

03

00

01

00

03

12

63

12

18

00

14

00

32

00

18

00

58

00

II

00

13 04

100

04

36

00

45

00

03

00

01

10

85

10

18

00

06

00

18

00

132 04

42 00

THE NEW INHABITANTS,

Jonathan gamcey one p
3 hors 2 oxen 2 cows
2 3 yr 2 one yr 4 swine
horn lot and land .

Joseph Haries one pr
one hors horn lot .

Ebenezer Hickcox one p
one hors one ox
land

gidon Hickcox one pr
2 oxsen one cow 2 hors
one swine
hom lot and land .

Samuel Hickcox one person
3 hors 2 cows 2 oxsen
one 2 yr 5 one yr 2 swine
hom lot and land .

Thomas Hickox one p
4 hors 2 oxsen 9 cows
6 2 yr 3 one yr 3 swine
hom lot and land .

Cap William Hickcox one pr .
5 horses 2 oxsen 6 cows 2 3 yr
4 2 yr 2 one yr 2 swine .
hom lot and land .
for tavern keeping .

99 10

Ebenezer Hopkins one pr . . 18 00
2 oxsen 3 cows one hors i swine 21 00

John Hopkins one pr

2 hors 5 cows 2 2 yr

3 one yr old 4 swine
mill ....
hom lot and land .

18

00

23

00

12

00

04 04

57 04

18

00

04

00

22

00

18

00

07

00

01

00

26

00

18

00

17

00

01

00

5

00

41

00

18

00

23

00

09

00

10

00

60

00

18

00

47

00

18

00

16

00

99

00

18

00

47

00

12

00

12

10

10

00

39

00

18

00

25

00

07

00

12

00

10

00

Stephen hopkins 2 persons
5 hrs 5 oxsen 5 cows 5 2 jrr
2 one year 2 swine .
and land

305

36 00
60 00

04 00

05 06

105 06

Stephen Hopkins, Jr. one person 18 00

two oxen i hors one cow . 14 00

one I year old one swine 03 00

land 00 16

Timothy Hopkins 2 prs .
4 oxsen 5 cows 4 2 yrs .
4 one yr 8 horses 9 swine
land ....

Joseph Holebut one pr
2 oxsen 2 cows one 2 vr .
one swine 2 horses 2 yr old
meadow land .

James Jonson one pr
one hors hom lot

John Jonson 2 persons
3 horses 2 oxen one cow i yr
3 acres of land

Beniaman Judd one person
one ox two cows
two I yr old one swine .
hom lot and land .

John Judd one person
two hors 3 oxen
3 cows one yr old .
hom lot and land .

Joseph Judd one person .
one hors one cow one swine
hom lot and land .

20

72 00

35 16

36 00
39 00

37 00
06 10

118 10

18 00
16 00
oc; 00
00 12

43 12

18 00
06 00

24 00

36 00
21 00

18

57 18

iS 00
10 00
03 00
03 19

34 19

18 00
18 00
10 00
05 18

51 18

iS 00
07 CX)
05 14

30 14

3o6

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Samuel Judd one person
2 hors one ox one cow
horn lot and land .

Cap Thomas Judd one pr
2 cows 2 hors 2 2 yr

one yr

horn lot and land

Thomas Judd one person
two horses

William Judd 2 per. .
two oxsen 5 cows 2 2 >t
3 one yr 5 horses 4 swine
horn lot and land .

Jonathan Chelcy (Kelsey) one pr.
one ox one hors two cows
land

Joseph Lewis sn' 2 prs
5 oxen 8 cows 6 horse
4 2 yr 2 one yr 8 swine
hom lot and land .

Joseph lewis Jun' one p
one hors 2 cows 3 2 >t
2 swine and land .

Joseph Nickkols two persons
4 oxen 3 cows two hors .
one two year old 2 swine

iS

00

13

00

2

15

33

15

18

00

16

00

01

00

04

00

39

00

18

00

06

00

24

00

36

00

27

00

22

00

10

16

95

16

18

00

13

00

16

31 16

Stephen Celey (Kelsey) one per. 18 00
one ox one hors . . . 07 00
upland 5 acres . . . 02 00

27

00

36

00

62

00

18

00

16

10

132

10

18

00

15

00

05

10

3S

10

36

00

31

00

04

00

Jeremeah Peck
one person 4 cows .
two oxen ten two yr
4 hors one yr on swine
hom lot and land .

30 00
28 00
14 00
12 00

84 00

Daniel Porter one person .

18 00

one hors three cows

12 00

one two year old

02 00

land

02 00

34 00

Wid [Deborah] Porter one hors

03 00

one ox 2 cows one ye

II 00

3 swine

03 00

hom lot and land .

06 00

23 00

Ebnzer Porter one person

18 00

one hors

03

21 00

James Porter one person .

18 00

two hors two oxen .

14 00

Land

04 00

36 00

Thomas porter one person

18 00

3 oxen 12 2 cows 6

18 00

I two year and 2 yearlings .

04 00

3 swine 3 3 Acres Hom lot 3

06 00

Land meadow and upland

3 16

49 16

Jonathan prindel one p

18 00

2 oxen one hors 2 2 yr .

15 00

7 acres upland

02 16

35 16

Nathan Prindel one person

18 00

one hors one cowe 1 ye .

07 00

25 00

John Richards 3 prs .

54 «>

6 oxen 5 cows 4 hors

51 00

2 one yr 5 swine

07 00

15 acres meadow land .

05 00

71 00

117 00

THE NEW INUABITANTS,

307

Thomas Richards one pr
3 hors 3 oxson 5 cows
2 one yr 5 swine
horn lot and land .

Ebenezer Richson two persons
4 horses two oxen .
3 cows two 2 year old
one I yr old two swine .
home lot and ...

Daniel rose one per
one hors one cow

david Scoott one pr. .
3 hors one ox one cow
one 2 yr 3 swine
hom lot and land .

Edmon Scott Snr 2 pr
3 hors 4 oxsen 3 cows 2 2 yr
3 one yr 4 swine
liom lot and land .

Edmon Scott Jnr one pr
2 hors one ox one 2 yr

land

18

00

36

00

07

00

06

02

57

02

36

00

20

00

13

00

03

00

05

12

77

12

iS

00

06

00

24

00

18

00

16

00

05

00

07

00

46

00

36

00

38

00

07

00

10

14

91

14

18

00

12

00

02

18

32

iS

18

00

17

00

4

00

Edmon Scoott min' one p
2 oxsen 2 cows one hors
hom lot and land .

39 00
geshom scott one person iS two

oxen 8 26 00

two cows 6 one Horse 3 . 09 00
one swine 20 sh 3 Acres Hom

Lott 04 00

4 Acres plowland . . 01 12

4 Acres meadow 2 Acres pasture 01 08

42 00

Jonathan Sot Sen"" 2 persons
three oxen 3 Cows .
2 three years old one 2 year
one I year one swine 4 hors
land ....

. 36

00

21

00

. 08

00

. 14

00

10

14

90 14

Jonathan Scoot Jun' one person 18 00
two oxen one Cow 3 hors . 20 00
land . . 05 10

43 10

obadiah scott one person one ox 22 00

three cows three horses . . 18 00

one year old . . . 01 00

three acres Hom Lott 4 acres

upland . . . . 04 12

Samuel Scott Sn' i per.
2 oxen 3 hors 3 cows
one 2 yr one yr
hom lot and land .

Samuel Scot Jun one p.
2 oxsen 2 cows 2 horses
one swine
hom lot and land

Widow Sarah Scott (David) 2 p.
one ox 3 cows one hors .
one 2 yr one yr 2 swine .
hom lot and land .

William Scoott one per
one ox one hors one cow
one swine hom lot & land

John Scovel 2 persons
2 hors 2 oxsen 3 cows
2 2 yr 3 one yr 2 swine
hom lot and land .

45

12

18

00

26

00

03

00

08

02

55

02

18

00

20

00

01

00

07

00

46

00

36

00

16

00

05

00

II

00

68

00

18

00

10

00

03

00

31

00

36

00

23

rx)

09

00

06

18

74 18

3o8

HISTORY OF WATBRBUBT.

William Scovel one person
2 horss 3 oxson 4 cows .
2 2 yr one yr 3 swine
horn lot and land .

Joseph Smith one person .
4 horses 4 swine hom lot and
land

John Sutliff 2 pr

3 hors 2 cows 3 2 yr one yr
meedow land .

Samuel Thomes one person
two oxen one cow one hors

32 00

Caleb Thomes (Thompson) one per-
son 18 00

18

00

30

00

08

00

07

00

63

00

18

A

00

a

18 06

36 06

36

00

22

00

01

16

59

16

18

00

14

00

John Ubson one per .
one hors one ox 4 as cows
one yr old 3 swine .
hom lot and land

18 00

19 00
04 00
03 12

44 12
Stephen Upson Sen one hors one

ox 2 cows . . . . 13 00
one I year hom lot and land . 5 02

Stphen Upson Jun one per
3 hors 4 oxson 5 cows 2 on yr
hom lot and land .

67 00

Thomes Upson one person . 18 00
two horses two oxen one swine 15 00
three cows one 2 ye i one year

old 12 00

hom lot and land . . 06 00

18

02

18

00

42

00

07

00

51 00

Abraham auter (Utter) one person 18 00

2 cows 2 one yr . . . 10 00

3 horses 3 one yr . . . 12 00
5 swine hom lot and land 08 00

48 00

abraham wamer one p
one hors one 3 ye one 2 ye
one half a hors

Beniamen Womer one person
two oxen two cows 3 hors
five Swine
hom lot and land

18

00

8

00

01

10

27

10

18

00

23

00

05

00

05

00

51 00

Ebenezeer Wamer Sen one per-
son 18 00

one hors one cow three swin . 09 00

27 00

Ebnezeer Warner jr Son of Daniel
one person . . . iS 00

three horse and half . 10 10

one cow & two yr old . . 05 00

33 10

do ephrem wamer one pr .

iS 00

one cow 2 hors 5 2 yr

19 00

one swine

01 00

hom lot and land .

3 06

41 06

Doc John Womer one person . 18 00
two hors one ox 2 yr old 2 swine 14 00
hom lot and land . . . 04 12

John Wamer Jun two person
two oxen two cows 4 swine
two hors two 2 ye .
hom lot and land .

36

12

36

00

18

00

10

00

02

16

66 16

Obadiah Warner one person . 18 00
two oxen 2 cows one hors 3

swine 20 00

hom lot and land . . . 03 00

Samuel Worner Sr. Land
one hors 2 cows i two yr

41

00

01

00

II

00

12 00

THE NEW INHABITANTS,

309

Samuel wamer Jun one p
2 hors one ox 2 cows
one 2 yr 4 swine
hom lot .

gorg welton 2 per

2 oxson 2 cows 3 hors 2 2 yr

21 yr

5 swine meadow land

John Welton one person .
two oxen two cows
one year old one Horse .
Hom Lott Meadow Land

18

00

16

00

06

00

01

10

41

10

36

00

29

00

05

18

70

18

18

00

14

00

04

00

04

00

Richard Welton Sen 3 person . 54 00

two oxen 7 hors 3 cows . . 38 00

4 two yr old 2 one year 5 swine 1 5 00

hom lot and Land . . . 19 00

richard welton jun one per
2 hors 2 oxson 3 cows .
one yr 2 swine
hom lot and land .

Daniel Williams one person
one hors ....

40 00
The sum total of this list is ;f 5024 15s.

[In May of 1731, was added to this list
the sum of ;f 214.]

James Williams
2 hors one cow l|ind

126 00

18 00
23 00
03 00
03 16

47 16

18 00
03 00

21 00
09 16

John Scovill,
James Porter,
Samuel Hickcox,

\

Listers.

It contains the names of one hundred taxpayers who paid taxes
for one hundred and twenty-five persons, while one hundred men
held dominion over two hundred and twenty-seven horses, two
hundred and forty-two cows, two hundred and fifty-nine young
cattle, one hundred and sixty -six oxen, and one hundred and
ninety-three swine — a very respectable exhibit for Waterbury in
1 73 1 — that town ranking as number forty-one of the forty-four
towns of the colony in the amount of its tax-list — but three, Derby,
New Milford, and Ashford, sending up to the General Assembly
tax lists of less amounts.

Dwelling houses were not taxed, and it is not easy to estimate
the number of them at this period. The custom existed of building
houses on land not owned by the builder. We meet with instances
of that practice continually during the early part of the eight-
eenth century, and there is at least one mill and mill trench that
was built before the land was made secure by deed. The pro-
prietors forbade no man to build his house on the sequestered
lands — accordingly, there has been found, even in the present cen-
tury what may perhaps be called a survival of the ancient order of
things ; in any event it is noticeable that to the northward, on
Burnt Hill, and in the East Woods a notable number of humble
habitations have been constructed, whose owners have held no

3IO HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT,

title to the lands on which they lived, but whose presence has been
tolerated by the land's owner, out of kindliness of heart.

In 1 73 1, twenty-three new names appear on the tax-list, but this
is not conclusive evidence that the men indicated were not '* of
Waterbury " at an earlier date. Upon it are the names of Daniel,
Ebenezer, and " Jese " Blakeslec or " Blakslee," John AUcock, Caleb
Clark, Jonathan Forbes, who was taxed for a faculty; John Guern-
sey, Abraham ** Hoges," Isaac Hopkins, Daniel How, James Hull,
Robert Johnson, Ebenezer Kelsey, Nathaniel Merrill, Elnathan
Taylor, Samuel Towner, and others of Waterbury; while Samuel
Brown becomes in this year. Deacon Samuel Brown. These were,
with few if any exceptions, young men and most of them married
in Waterbury.

At the great town meeting in December of 1731 "it was voted to
build a school house of twenty foot square on the Meeting House
Green;" and to "give the Rev** Mr. John Southmayd for his Sallery
one Hundred pound" in money or provision pay at the market
price — giving any man permission to make such agreement for his
rate as would please Mr. Southmayd and himself. On Dec. 20, 1731,
Mr. Southmayd " acquitted and discharged " the town from all rates
for his labor among the people from the year 1699, to the year 1723.
His pastoral relation to the people began in the former year, and
his duties as town clerk a little earlier than the latter year, and no
satisfactory explanation of the occasion for the above acquittance
has been found. The "twenty-feet-square " school house may seem
small, painfully small, for the children of Waterbury in 1731, but
it must be remembered that it was not encumbered with desks or
other modern appliances, and that it was occupied by the children
living at the town center alone, while the meeting house, whose
area was five times that of the school house was for the accommo-
dation of the entire township.

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE NORTHWEST INHABITANTS PETITION FOR "WINTER PRIVILEGES" —
WOOSTER — UP RIVER — HENRY COOK, THE FIRST INHABITANT OF
PLYMOUTH — HIS GRANDSON, THE LAST SURVIVOR OF THE WAR
OF THE REVOLUTION — THE ATTITUDE OF THE TOWN TOWARD
THE PEOPLE AT WOOSTER SWAMP — TOWARD THE PEOPLE AT
TWITCH GRASS MEADOW.

IN May of 1732 the Second company or train band of Waterbury
was formed, with Mr. Timothy Hopkins confirmed as its cap-
tain, Mr. Thomas Bronson as its lieutenant, and Mr. vStephen
Upson as its ensign. In May of 1728 Waterbury had, at her own
intercession (because of the distance), been transferred from the
County of Hartford to that of New Haven, and for twelve years
the estates of persons deceased had been settled at the Probate
Court in Woodbury. In 1732 twenty new names had been added to
the list of inhabitants; Mr. Southmayd's salary had been raised to
;^ioo money; the tax had been laid for finishing the galleries of the
new meeting house; a new school house had been ordered and the
timber for it gathered, and all things were moving along with
seeming prosperity, when, in the autumn of the year, a darkness
deep and portentous fell.

For the first time in all its history it is recorded that the town
meeting was opened by prayer, and verily prayer was become more
than ever a vital need, for thirty-two inhabitants to the northward
of the Town Spot had sent a petition* to the General Assembly
in which they told a thrilling story of the perils that attended
the journey from their homes to the meeting house in wintry
weather — not from savage foe, not from beast of the forest — but
by reason of that "great river" which they called "Waterbury
river." They declared that the way was " exceeding bad " and
that the river was not passable during a great part of the winter
and spring, and, in a subsequent petition, it was declared that the
highway from present Plymouth and Thomaston to the meeting
house crossed the river nine times, and the petitioners besought
the Court that they might have liberty to hire a minister to preach
the gospel to them during the months of December, January, Feb-
ruary and March, and that their dues to Mr. Southmayd might

♦This petition may be found in Dr. Bronson's History of Waterbury, p 254.

312 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

cease during those months. Eleven men, living within the de-
scribed bounds, did not sign the petition. The answer was accord-
ing to their wishes — for thirty -two men petitioned, and thirty
families had long been deemed a sufficient number to support a
minister. The liberty was granted for four years — from 1732 to
1736. The petition to the Court states that the town had refused
the request for the above privilege, but our town records give
no evidence that the request was ever made to the town. The
only recognition of it was a special town meeting appointing the
deputies for the town " to answer a memorial brought to the court
by our northwest inhabitants."

It is impossible for us to realize what this blow was to the Town
Spot. The men of 1732 knew perfectly well what lay before them —
the little children of the distant villages could not be sent to the
town school at the centre every day, and they had freely consented
to a division of the school moneys — but, the minister's rates! Mr.
Southmayd's dues ! How were they to be met 1 How we wish we
could hear the words of the prayer at that town meeting in Decem-
^^^) 1732 ! Already there loomed up in vision ecclesiastical socie-
ties to the north, south, east and west. All that was needed to gain
the victory over the old town by her children up the river or down,
was thirty families in any one direction who could support a min-
ister. It became almost a matter of self-preservation, to prevent
the repetition of a like catastrophe elsewhere.

The town meeting was a serious affair, and often a severe test of
the manliness of its attendants. Certain laws for the guidance of town
officers in the suppression of crime and all manner of evil doing
were ordered to be read in every town at the annual meeting in De-
cember. Men were not permitted to speak, except to ask permission
of the moderator to address the meeting, and no business not ex-
pressly stated in the warning could be brought before it for action.
It will be remembered that Deacon Judd's dial post was to be the sign
post in 1709, and in the same year a notice on the meetinghouse
door was to be sufficient warning for men living at a distance —
but later all notices were to be torn down from the meeting house
door on the Lord's day, unless such notices related to marriage.
The deep feeling of the people was expressed in the fact that but
one man who had signed that petition was elected to office for the
year 1733.

The earliest name applied to the region now occupied by Ply
mouth and Thomaston was Up River, so named in 1688, because that
here lay the up river division of meadow lands. Twitch Grass
meadow was, for some reason, selected at a later day as a name for
the same region, to distinguish the little hamlet there from their

EARLY NOBTHBURT, 313

distant neighbors at " Woster" or ** Woster Swamp." Taken collect-
ively present Oakville, Watertown and Plymouth were in 1730 some-
times called Woster, and sometimes "Our Northwest Inhabitants.*'

Thirty acres of the elevated ground or plain on which the vil-
lage of Thomaston stands was the up river division of five men,
each one of whom bore the name of John — John Stanley, John
Warner, John Newell, John Scovill, and John Carrington. Samuel
Stanley, a son of the above John, also had twelve acres laid out on
the above plain. Twitch Grass meadow is the extensive meadow
west of the river just below the village. The natural expanse
of meadow just above Thomaston bridge is Abraham Andrew's
meadow of 1688; a portion of it was Philip Judd's, but it was long
known as Andrew's meadow. Just above Andrew's meadow, and
near the central street to the bridge is a rocky ridge on which
there is- a " picnic grove." This ridge divides Andrew's meadow
from Welton's up-river division. It was in Welton's meadow that
the supposed first house in Plymouth was built.

Henry Cook is accredited as the first settler of Plymouth, Conn,
He was the grandson of Henry Cook and Judith Birdsale who
were married at Salem, Mass., in June of 1639, ^^^ ^^ was the son of
their eighth child, Henry, who was born in 1652. He was born at
W^allingford in 1683, and is said to have lived at Branford, from
whence he removed to Litchfield before 1727. We risk little in
suggesting that he may have been one of the seven men of Bran-
ford who were sent up from the Coast, under the command of a
sergeant, for the protection of Litchfield in 1725, and that the new
town proved so attractive to him that he removed thither. Pos-
sibly Daniel Rose, from the same place, was also one of the seven,
for we find Henry Cook of Litchfield and Daniel Rose of Branford,
buying land as partners in Waterbury less than two years after the
twenty-one men from Branford, Guilford and Wallingford marched
(probably through Waterbury), on their way to the new town in
the wilderness. That march doubtless inured to the benefit of
both towns in more ways than were then dreamed of.

In Welton's meadow on Feb. 2, 1727-8 Henry Cook of Litchfield
and Daniel Rose of Branford bought of Gershom and Abigail
Fulford, Thomas and Mary Porter — heirs of Stephen Welton — two
thirds of a lot of land "supposed to be ten acres more or fewer
lying towards the upper end of the bounds that was our grand-
fathers, John Welton's deceased." Feb. i, 1727-8, or the day before,
Cook and Rose had bought of Thomas and Mary Porter twenty
acres to be taken up in the undivided lands, and the next day they
had it laid out on the west side of Welton's meadow. Jan. 14, 1728,
nineteen and a half acres were laid out to the same parties "at

3M

HI8T0RT OF WA1ERBUB7,

a place called Welton's meadow," and the same day still another
"triangle" piece of thirteen acres, both pieces having been bought
of Jonathan Scott, Jun. April lo, 1730, Henry Cook had laid out, "a
little southwest of Twich Grass brook," on John Stanley, Junior's,
bachelor lot (which poor John had so much difficulty in securing) a
diamond shaped piece of land that contained one hundred acres, —
this he sold the same year to Jeremiah Hull. Before Jan. 10, 1731,
Cook had built a house in Welton's meadow, for he sold at that
date to Elnathan Beach of New Cheshire fortv acres from the
south end of his farm on the west side the river, joining to the
river, and in 1733 he owned a house lot of seventy acres with the
river running through it, about fourteen acres of which were east
of the river. This farm, with a house and other buildings, fruit
trees, and fences — all upon the west-side portion of it — he sold in
1733 to Ebenezer Elwell of Branford,and Gideon AUyn of Guilford.
In 1730 he gave John Standly, Jr. of Kensington ^^70 in bills of
public credit for his j£^o interest in the township. He laid out one
hundred acres, with Rose, at the West Branch, in 1730; over a hun-
dred with Mr. Thomas Brooks, merchant, of Boston, at Poland
(then, in Waterbury) in 1731; while numerous other purchases and
lay outs filled the time until 1735, when Mr. Southmayd conveyed
to him fifty-three acres. After the sale of his first house to Eben-
ezer Elwell, he built another house, or at least he sold land in 1737
to John Humaston of New Haven, described as "sixty-nine acres
with a house upon it, with the buildings, fencing, fruit trees, timber,
stones, watering and appurtenances." This deed, his wife, Sarah,
(who must have been his third wife) signed with him. The land
was " by Litchfield line " — bounded north " on land left for a high-
way by Litchfield bounds." In 1739, he had a house at Poland, with
"a brook running on t^ie east side of it." In 1748 Henry Cook and
his son Henry Cook quit-claimed to Samuel and Enoch Curtice
"lands at Poland, originally called Lewis and Judd lots, excepting
one hundred and twenty-five acres." Upon this one hundred and
twenty-five acres that he reserved his house stood. We have found
Henry Cook, of Litchfield in 1727 — of Waterbury in 1729, at which
time he went to Branford and sold to Josiah Rogers of that town
twelve acres of land in Waterbury; and the next year we find
him selling to Joseph Chittenden of Wallingford fifty-three acres
(Chittenden calling him, "my father, Henry Cook);" to Dr. Jeremiah
Hull of Wallingford one hundred acres; to Samuel Towner (Cook
calling him "brother Towner") land " seven score rods north from
his house," and to Elnathan Beach, of New Cheshire, forty acres
off the south end of his farm — and all, before the close of 1731.
The first settler of any town holds, as such, an unique position.

EARLY NORTHBURY.

3'5

and we have given space to information that may serve to identity
the site of Henry Cook's first, and subsequent habitations. We
have found him to be a man of courage, enterprise, and a spirit
that withstood injustice. While he was, apparently, one of the
foremost promoters of the established church, he seems to have
been so incensed one year at having his property four-folded, or
put into the list at four times its value — when perhaps the river
was so high that he could not get to the Town Spot with his tax-
list — that the next year he went over to the Church of England.

While we are not able to present to view the face of Henry
Cook, the soldier of the wilderness, we are able to give as his repre-
sentative that of his soldier grandson, Lemuel Cook. He was, it is
believed, the last survivor of the men who made possible the United
States of North America. He was bom in Waterbury (Northbury
Society), it is believed in 1764, and was the second Lemuel born to
Henry Cook and Hannah Benham — the first Lemuel having died in
1760. The Court of Probate at Woodbury, named a Lemuel among
the living children of Henry Cook, deceased, in 1772. The History
of Kirkland, New York, states
that he died May 21, 1869, aged
one hundred and four years —
but a letter from his youngest
grandchild, Louis P. Cook, of
Clarendon, N. Y., informs us
that he died May 20th, 1866,

Early in 1730 Ebenezer
Blakeslee of New Haven be-
came the owner of sixty acres,
in two pieces, lying "in att
and about the place common-
ly called and known by the
name of twich Grass Mea-
dow;" Joseph Hurlburt, of
seventeen acres, in two
pieces, one of them on a plain
north of the meadow ; and
Joseph Chittenden built a
house that he sold to Bar-
nabas Ford, It was a small »t tub ai.i w onk HiNn-m. .h»i^;
house, and it or its successor ^"^ "" -^ukvivuR o, ink wak m ™e RBvoLnioN.
became the center of the society that was later formed. As will
be seen, the name of the region from 173010 1733 was "Twich" Grass
Meadow. Before the close of the year 173?, so great was the activity
of Henry Cook and his friends that when it became necessary to

3i6 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

group together, for taxation, the fifty-two men who represented
the inhabitants living at Woster (Watertown), Pine Meadow (Rey-
nolds Bridge), and Twitch Grass Meadow (Thomaston), or all that
region lying between Oakville and the north bound of the town-
ship— Samuel Hikcox and David Scott, the listers, inscribed on the
title page of the small tax-book the following: " The List of North
Burey in Waterbury," ignoring Wooster Swamp completely, and
giving to Twitch Grass Meadow and all the region thereabout the
name of Northbury seven years before it was conferred upon the
ecclesiastical society incorporated by legal authority.

The near presence of the hill, from whence the men of Farming-
ton took specimens of ore in 1657, may have been an inciting cause
in gathering inhabitants, and could the inner history of the period
from 1730 to 1735 t)e revealed, we should doubtless find that for-
tunes wej-e dreamed of in the upper valley of the Great river by
more men than poor John Sutliff (the grandson or great-grandson
of the settler), who lived, and toiled, and died, in later years, in the
full belief that the earth of Northbury stood ready to give forth
treasures in metals to the faithful seeker. It is said that he made
reservations relating to mines and minerals in all deeds that he
gave, and the place is still pointed out where he, single handed,
carried on his mining operations. It will be remembered that the
staid planters living at the Town Spot (including Deacon Judd)
owned, against English Grass meadow, "a place called the mines"
i^ 1735- Who can tell how many "specimens" Henry Cook carried
with him when he went forth to induce Elnathan Beach, Dr. Jere-
miah Hull, Josiah Rogers, Joseph Chittenden, Samuel and Phineas
Towner, Samuel and Enoch Curtiss, and Samuel Cook, merchant, to
become purchasers of Northbury lands, or what inducements he
held forth to Mr. Thomas Brooks of Boston, to invest with him in
lands at Poland ! Seven years later we find Mr. Brooks buying
half an acre '* on the plain a little north of the turn of Poland
river, north of his own and Cook's land." In this connection it
should be mentioned that the name of a branch of the Naugatuck
river was changed at about the time of the settlement of North-
bury— from the East Branch to Lead Mine brook ; also, that the
brook enters the river at a point quite near the place opposite
English Grass meadow, where marks still remain which may be
attributed to attempts at mining in view of the recorded evidence
of such an attempt having been there made. Not far below this
lead mine section begins the tract of country once known as Henry
Cook's (first) farm whose southerly end lay in Welton's meadow,
which in turn extended to Andrew's meadow on which the upper
portion of the village of Thomaston is built — its center standing on

EABLT NORTHS URT.

317

" Twich Grass Meadow plain," the meadow of that name lying
below the village.

In so far as our researches extend, it appears that Isaac Castle
(a son of the soil, his mother being the daughter of John Richard-
son) was probably at Northbury soon after the arrival of Cook and
Rose, for, as early as February, 1728, he sold his house and ten
acres of land "by the highway that goes to Scott's mountain," to
Capt. Thomas Judd, and removed to the northward. The present
railroad bridge at Thomaston is in Isaac Castle's meadow of 1744,
through which a highway was laid at that date.

We will not follow in detail the various petitions that were
sent to the Town and to the General Assembly that led to the
formation of the Society of Northbury, but refer the reader to Dr.
Bronson's "History of Waterbury" and to the Rev. E. B. Hillard's
article on "The Church in Plymouth," in "The Churches of Matta-
tuck: 1892. Edited by Joseph Anderson, S. T. D.," where may be
found extended statements. Neither of the above writers however
seems to have taken notice that the town discriminated in favor of
the Society at Westbury, and against that at Northbury.

The first intimation of the desire of the northwest inhabitants
to absent themselves from the new meeting house during the winter
months appears, in our Town Records, in the appointment of the
town deputies to " answer a memorial brought to the General
Assembly in October, 1732." Not a word is said of opposing it, and
the court granted the petition by giving liberty to the inhabitants
to hire a minister to preach the Gospel to them during the months
asked for, for the space of four years — from 1732 to 1736. Dr. Bron-
son tells us that in the spring of 1733 (only five months after the
first petition was granted) the same inhabitants asked the General
Assembly to set them off as a distinct society. Before the May ses-
sion at which the above prayer was offered, on April 3, 1733, the
town convened for the one purpose of considering the condition of
the Northern inhabitants, and " agreed by vote that there might be
a Society in the Northwest Quarter of the bounds of sd. Waterbury
in a convenient time," and chose "Capt. William Judd, Lieut. Sam-
uel Hikcox, Mr. Joseph Lewis, Mr. John Sutliff, Mr. Isaac Bronson
and Capt. William Hikcox as a committee to agree upon and settle
the bounds between the Society called the North Society and the
old Town." Three weeks before the above meeting, thQ proprietors
held a meeting, at which they sequestered three miles square of
land — making the center of the sequestered land " the center " of
the Society that shall there be allowed." This sequestration pre-
vented the layout of any additional land within that territory, and
has been considered as an act inimical to the best interests of the

3i8 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

proposed society — but there is another view of it that ought, at least,
to be considered. In 1736 the proprietors had found it necessary
to look after their timber in the undivided lands " that there might
be no trespass upon it from out of town men," and in all settlements,
commons were a vital need. The proprietors of Waterbury had
abundant commons for the Town Spot, in which were common past-
ures, one for horses, and one for cattle, and in which the wood,
timber and stone were the common property of all the inhabitants,
and it is abundantly proven that anywhere in the commons men
built houses both early and late — a right to do so being generally
respected. Why may we not then consider this sequestration evi-
dence of paternal regard for the future welfare of the village of
Wooster ? Many acres had already been laid out within the bounds
whose title remained to the owners thereof, and it will be remem-
bered that this sequestration was made, not by the town, but by the
owners of the soil. If enacted simply to wait for the time of
increased values, we must consider it a little worldly and advanced
perhaps, but natural, in view of the sudden and increased demand
for lands that had arisen.

March 14, 1734, a town meeting was held, at which ** it was voted
that the inhabitants of the northwest corner of Waterbury shall
have a liberty without being interrupted by sd town to make their
application to the General Assembly in May next for a committee
to appoint a line between the town and the northwest part of the
town, sd Petitioners being att the charge of the committe." This
was the only business before the meeting, and Isaac Bronson was
the moderator. A fortnight later, March 26, 1734, another meeting
was held, at which Capt. Wm. Hikcox was moderator. At this
meeting "A rate of a penny of money on the pound was laid to sup-
ply the town with a stock of powder and lead." After the appoint-
ment of the collector for the above rate, the meeting adjourned for
one hour. It met in the afternoon according to adjournment, when
" the town voted that a committee should be chosen by the town to
consider the circumstances of the northwest part of the town
and settle a line in order to make a Society in the northwest part
of the town and voted that the worshipfull Joseph Whiting Sqr.,
Cap'. Roger Nuton of Milford, Cap'. John Russel of Branford be a
committee to consider the circumstances of the town as above sd
and to settle a line as above sd." The committee was to be called
in sometime in the March following. In all of the above public
expressions by the town I fail to find a straw of opposition. That
nothing should be done in a hurry — seems to be the general tone of
the town, towards the dwellers on the margin of Wooster Swamp.

EARLY NORTUBURT.

319

October 7, 1734, before the above committee had been "called
in," a bill was laid before the town meeting " desiring that a com-
mittee be chosen among themselves to set out the village in the
northwest Quarter of the Bounds and other villages pertaining to
the Town." By this, it will be seen that the town was fully alive
to the fact that disintegration lay before it. The following was the
bill which was acted upon:

Whereas att A Town Meeting In Waterbury upon March Last, warned In par-
ticular for to Grant A Rate for A Town Stock there was some Other things
Irregularly Done att the same meeting which are Matters of Weight, and We Judge
beyond the Jurisdiction of That meeting and also to the Great Dissatisfaction of
many people we would therefore urge that the same Buisness may be re-considered
and the votes then past, which seem to be repugnant to the Common Interest of
the town may be nul'd and made voide— and for the Effecting the buisness there
In proposed of Setling the Society we chuse a Committee Among our selves to set
out that and the other villages pertaining to the Tow^n, which we Judge will be
more Easie and for the better Contentment of the Town In General than to Com-
mit It to strangers. Voted in the affirmative.

It will be noticed that Waterbury still avoided foreign committees
and that this bill was simply to correct the mistakes that had been
made, and did not annul the vote relating to the Society.

Now, at the same meeting in which the above change of com-
mittee was made regarding the society at Wooster, the Twich
Grass Meadow people "Henry Cook, Ebenezer Elwell, Samuel
Towner, &c., laid before the Town a memorial — desiring a liberty to
hire a Gospel minister for some time the next winter, and having
their minister's rate abated for the same term of time. The town
voted they would do nothing in the case."

The special reason why the town favored present Watertown,
but seemed reluctant to grant the same extent of privilege to pres-
ent Thomaston and Plymouth may perhaps be found in the friendly
and paternal regard it felt for its very own, at Wooster. The peo-
ple at Twitch Grass Meadow were strangers to the soil and the
town very evidently wished to keep them closely under its own
observation, or under that of the hamlet at Wooster. Wooster also
needed help in sustaining Gospel preaching, and the Up River
people, then living in present Thomaston, could get to Wooster
without crossing the Great river.

The town meeting records are missing at this point for all of the
year 1735 ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ larger part of 1736, and we have no proprie-
tor's records for 1734 after April — none for 1735, ^^^ none in 1736
until the close of the vear.

CHAPTER XXV.

EVENTS PRECEDING THE FORMATION OF WESTBURY SOCIETY — MR. SOUTH-
MAYD RESIGNS THE PASTORATE OF THE FIRST CHURCH WEST-
BURY SOCIETY INCORPORATED— ITS INHABITANTS — HOUSES AT
OAKVILLE — THE EARLY HOUSES OF WATERTOWN — THE SCOTT MILLS

SCOTT's MOUNTAIN PATTAROON HILL — HIKCOX HILL WELTON

HILL — THE REV. JOHN TRUMBULL — OTHER EVENTS.

THE future historian of Watertown will find an interesting and
profitable field in which to glean facts for the rebuilding of
that township; facts which we may not introduce in this
mere glance at the past of that portion of ancient Waterbury. The
old town seems to have been unduly censured for delaying its
growth; whereas, the town was willing — far more so than the
'* Colonial Authority," that her eldest child, whose maiden name
was "Woster" should be introduced to winter privileges, and be
received into " a separate and distinct '* society of its own — its only
insistepce being that every thing be done decently and in /ega/ order.
One cannot avoid admiring the persistent endeavors made by the
young thing to go alone, and its very audacity in answering nega-
tive answers with louder knocks of petition seems at last to have
wearied the General Assembly into consent. The winter of 1737
must have seemed long to the waiting people, waiting for Capt.
John Riggs, Capt. Isaac Dickerman and Mr. John Fowler to appear
and view their surroundings and circumstances, and tell them,
whether in their judgment, the plan for an ecclesiastical society
ought to be carried out, and great must have been the disappoint-
ment— the winter being past and the May session ended — to learn
that because two of the men named visited Watertown, and the
third man stayed at home, the Assembly declined to accept the
report, but appointed another committee to go over the ground, and
set the bounds for the new society if it pleased them to think there
should be one. The same men were at the same time to inform the
town, and if the town chose to have them do it, and in case it was
willing to pay them the cost of the proceeding, they were to view
the other parts of the town — present Thomaston and Plymouth —
and make report of their acts and thoughts in October, 1738. It
was in September of 1738 that Messrs. John Fowler of Milford, and
Samuel Bassett and Gideon Johnson of Derby, made the journey to
Waterbury, where they were met by Deacon Joseph Lewis, Capt.

EARLY WESTBURT. X2i

Samuel Hikcox, Capt. William Judd, Capt. Timothy Hopkins and
Mr. Thomas Blackslee, who escorted them through Woster. It was
no mean journey performed by that committee, as the report
evidenced. Probably Watertown has never received more import-
ant visitors, and it is unnecessary to suggest that it was an interesting
and exciting occasion — for the fate of every man, woman and child
lay in the hands of the three men. They and they alone could save
two hundred and thirty-seven persons from journeying every Sun-
day from the far-away hills and valleys of river and stream to the
meeting house on Waterbury Green.

It is impossible to pass in review before the events of this period
without being impressed with the conviction that Mr. Southmayd's
heart was burdened and sorrowful beyond hope by the turning
away of so many feet from his ministrations, and that he was influ-
enced in his resignation of the pastoral office by passing events,
although no word of lament appears in the fine and manly docu-
ment preserved by his own hand in our records, in which he tells
his people why he must withdraw from the ministry. Mr. South-
mayd's words spoken in 1737, were explained in 1891, when upon the
disinterment of his remains, it was found that at the time of his
death he was unable to turn his head. In view of the above dis-
covery, the following letter of resignation is of peculiar interest:

Aprill 1738

To the Deacons and Townsmen in Waterbury to Communicate to the Church and
Inhabitants of sd Town.

Beloved Breathren and Neighbours. I the Subscriber, being under great Diffi-
culty and infirmity of Body and it being such as I fear will never wear off but
increase and grow upon me which makes my care and concern very Burthensome
and Distressing, so that the publick work I am engaged in is too much for me and
having served you under very great Difficulty now almost two years and being
quite discouraged as to getting well and finding that a sedentary life is very Destruc-
tive to my health and being very far advanced in years and w^illing and desirous to
Retire from my Public work in the ministry in which I have been with you about
38 years to the best of my ability and am now Desirous trj live more privately. I
take this opportunity for these reasons and many more which might be mentioned
to signify to you that I am willing and heartily Desirous that you would get some
person whom you can affect and pitch upK)n to come among you and preach the
Gospel here and to be with you in order to a settlement as soon as conveniently
may be In the work of the ministry, and I desire you would be as speedy in the
thing as may be for I think I cannot serve you any longer, which Request I hof)e
you will be most Ready and forward U) comply with and Oblidge your friend and
I Distressed Minister who sincerely desires your welfare and prosperity both Spirit-

ual and temporal and his own Ease and freedom. Desiring the continuance of your
prayers for me I subscribe myself your well wisher,

John Southmayd.
21

322 HiaTORT OF WATERBUBT.

It would seem that a special town meeting was called on April
2oth, 1738, to receive the above resignation. The memorial was con-
sidered and the town voted to call another minister, but requested
Mr. Southmayd to continue to serve them as far as he was able. It
then adjourned for five days, and met to appoint a committee, who,
after seeking the advice of Mr. Southmayd and neighboring elders,
was to " call " a minister. Under the circumstances it is not surprising
to find that Mr. Southmayd had not received his full salary for some
time. In settlement he offered to take ;^ioo in money and to have
the use of the Little Pasture as long as he lived. To this proposi-
tion that christian gentleman added; " If that can't be agreed to, I
am willing to leave it to some Indifferent persons to say what is
Just and Reasonable to be done and to settle as to temporals between
me and my People, with whom I have spent the best of my days,
and abide by their judgement in the case."

It is pleasant to find that there was not one dissenting voice
heard in the town meeting, and that Mr. Southmayd's proposal was
at once accepted. It was at this meeting that the committee was
appointed to meet the Assembly's committee, and guide them to
Watertown and Plymouth.

The committee reported in October, whereupon the General
Assembly ** Resolved:

That the northwest quarter of Waterbury beginning at the line dividing
between the towns of Waterbury and Woodbury, at the southwest corner of Capt
WiUiam Judd's g^eat farm, and to continue eastward by the southside of Judd's
farm to the southeast corner thereof; and from thence to extend to the southeast
comer of the old farm of Joseph Nickols, late deceased [1733]; and from thence
northeastwardly unto the place w^here Williams's corn-mill now stands; from thence
an eastwardly course to the southwest comer of Jonathan Prindle's farm, including
the said Prindle's; and from the southeast corner of said Prindle's farm easterly to
the river, and then to run northerly by the river, the river being the east bounds
thereof, until it comes where the west Branch enters the main river and then run-
ning as the West Branch runs to Litchfield bounds; and then running westerly as
the line runs between the towns of Waterbury and Litchfield until it comes to
Woodbury town line, and then running southerly by the line between Waterbury
and Woodbury to the forementioned corner of Capt. William Judd's farm, shall be,
and is hereby made, a distinct ecclesiastical society, with the s^me rights and priv-
ileges of such societies in this government, and shall hereafter be called and known
by the name of Westberry.

The following list of families, and the number of persons in each family, was
reported by the committee to be living in 1738 witliin the above bounds.

John Smith . .

. . 8

George Wei ton, . .

10

Ebenezer Richards,

. 9

Thomas Foot,

. . 9

Samuel Judd, . . .

5

William Scovill, .

. 6

Samuel Thomas,

. . 8

Gershom Scott, . .

5

Thomas Judd, . .

. 4

Thomas Hikcox,

. • 5

James Smith, . . .

2

Moses Bronson, .

. II

Samuel Luis, .

• . 9

Thomas Richards, .

9

Samuel Hikcox,

. 12

EARLY WESTBUHr.

323

Caleb Clark, . . .

9

Ebenezer Baldwin,

. 3

James Brown, . .

8

Daniel How, . . .

9

Jonathan Prindle, .

7

John Warner, . . .

4

John Andrews. . .

6

Stephen Scott, . .

. 4

James Williams,

7

William Andrews,

3

Obadiah Scott, . .

4

George Nichols, . .

6

Jonathan Scott, . .

3

David Scott, . . .

. 5

James Belemy, . .

I

Jonathan Scott, . .

7

Nathaniel Arnold, .

10

Richard Seymour,

4

Eleazer Scott, . .

3

Ebenezer Warner,

. 5

Jonathan Gamsey, .

10

Jonathan Foot, . . .

5

In 1730 the highway up the valley to present Watertown and to
Waterville ran over the Naugatuck river, into and across Steel's
meadow and up on Steel's plain. On the plain it divided and the
Waterville, or Pine Hole branch, followed the valley of the Nauga-
tuck river on the east side of Edmund's mountain, crossing the
river into Hancock meadow — while the Watertown branch went
to the west of Edmund's mountain and followed the valley of Steel's
brook, substantially to Watertown.

The second house built northwestward of Waterbury - centre,
was erected before 17 15 at present Oakville, by young Thomas
Wei ton, who was the son of John, the planter. He married, in 17 15,
the record tells us, Hannah Allford and built a house on the north
side of Steel's brook, against the upper end of Ben's meadow, and
southwest of Turkey brook. This was at the fork of the Woster
and the Scott's mountain roads, and was a lonely habitation, with
the unbridged river between it and possible succor from the town
in time of trial. Here, it is thought, Thomas Welton began house-
keeping with his young wife, for, hereabout, lay his farm and the
land "on Turkey brook northeast of his house where said Welton
formerly ploughed," and here probably occurred the first death in
Oakville, for Thomas died in 17 17. His house seems to have been
left desolate until the coming of Isaac Castle in 1724, who lived in
it four years; sold it in 1728 to Deacon Judd, and moved up to
Twitch Grass Meadow. Deacon Judd almost immediately conveyed
it to James Williams, who, in close connection with his brother
Daniel, built the first mill at Oakville before November of 1729.
Even at that date, there must have been an o/d mill there, for in a
deed given by John Warner to James Williams, land is sold "lying
by the n^w mill."

The traveler passing over the " Road to Woster " at any time
from 1721 to 1735 would find Ebenezer Richardson living in the
house next above the one built by Thomas Welton, and, in so far as
we have investigated, the same house still stands and has been
known for two generations as the " Esquire John Buckingham
place." What befell Ebenezer in the building his house or other-
wise we do not know, but the General Assembly ordered the con-

324 BISTORT OF WATERBUBT,

stable not to demand his tax rate for 1720 — because of the great
distress to which his lameness had reduced him — ^but he got the
better of it evidently for he was a bom wanderer and Pine Meadow
(Reynolds Bridge) called to him in 1737 with clarion tones to come
up higher. He could not resist either the call or a good chance to
sell out, for he left his house and barn and two hundred acre farm
to James Brown, the faithful lover of the Church of England, and
the inn-holder of Judd's Meadow, and went up higher. If we had
any evidence to support the fact, we should write that probably
Brown built the large house and pursued his calling in it. He
ultimately conveyed it to his son Daniel, who sold it to Richard
Nichols. As a token of his adherence to the Church of England,
we may note that "the listers" for the year 1737, gave, as the last
item in James Brown's tax list, " 2 acrs meddow Amen." Dr. John
Warner, a son of the soil, came back from Stratford and before 1724
built a house, which was across the highway from the Ebenezer
Richardson house. Mrs. Richardson and Mrs. Warner were sisters.
On the summit of the hill ** south of Lower Wooster," and south of
what was formerly the Candee place Samuel Thomas lived. A
few years later he died — a soldier in his country's service — ^at Cape
" Britton." His house was on the main Watertown road just below
the " cross " road that comes from Bunker Hill (past Woodruff's) to
the Watertown road, and was formerly known as the " Road to
Watertown by James Brown's." Samuel Judd settled between the
forks of Turkey brook on the upland from whence you can see the
valley of the brook to the point of its union with Steel's brook. A
house place, supposed to be his, still remains in the orchard back of
the house once known as the Eleazer Woodruff place, and later as the
Sunderland place. It is on the old " Road from Westbury to Bucks
Hill " — now, the road from the East School house to Watertown.

Of the Scott family — Stephen's house occupied the present
site of Deacon Dayton's or J. R. Hickcox's house, which is just
above Cranberry brook; Eleazer lived opposite St. John's (Roman
Catholic) church; Gershom, on the east side of the highway above
the present railroad station, between it and the Methodist church;
Jonathan, Jr., above Gershom's house and on the same side of the
road ; Jonathan, Sen., it is believed, on the site of and possibly m
the house so long known as the Wait Smith house, which is now
standing and in good repair. Daniel, the youngest son, lived with
his father. Obadiah Scott lived on the western slope of Hikcox
hill, on the road from Westbury to Buck's hill and near the foot of
the hill. This he sold to the Rev. John Trumbull,* who later built

♦ Mr. Trumbull, in his later years, owned a number of houses. The one on the east side of the highway
is the one pictured, and which tradition points to, as the one built by him.

EARLY WESTBURT. 325

a house below Stephen Scott's on the west side of the highway
probably represented on the Waterbury sheet of the United States
Geographical Survey by the house mark just below Cranberry
brook, and below the Deacon Dayton house. David Scott also
lived on Hikcox hill.

The ancient Scott's Mountain — not the hill now called by that
name — is the culminating dome-of four upward steps to which the
names of Welton's hill, Pattaroon hill, Hikcox mountain and Scott's
mountain were early applied. On Scott's mountain, described as " a
hill between Woster swamp and Buck's meadow," Jonathan and David
Scott had lands laid out in 1690, but the names of Scott's mountain,
Hikcox mountain, and Pattaroon hill, date from 1703. Each eleva-
tion is marked by a depression, not visible when regarded from
certain points of observation. Standing on West Main street and
looking up the meadows Scott's mountain rises on the view in a
fine broad sweep of upland that attracts instant attention. The
ponderous mass of hills, whose highest uplift is Scott's mountain,
rises to a height of 920 feet (or sixty feet higher than our
Long and Chestnut hills). There are few higher elevations within
the radius of its distance from Waterbury centre. It was so
named from grants of land made upon it in 1690 to Jonathan and
David Scott; to Jonathan to induce him to settle here, and to David
to encourage him to remain here. Its present name. Nova Scotia
hill, is not inappropriate as the Scott's possession upon and around
it became extensive and important, but no evidence has been* found
that a Scott settled upon the mountain at an early date. The first
house mentioned as being on Scott's mountain was Deacon Thomas
Hikcox's, in 1728. In 1731 John Judd sold to his brother Thomas
forty-five acres, with a house on it. The first house on Pattaroon
hill was built by Daniel Williams in 1730. The exact date when
Jonathan Scott and his son Jonathan went to present Watertown
and built their houses is unknown. In March, 1722, Jonathan, Jr.
had land laid out northward of Scott's mountain — described as
**east of that called Nonnewage on a brook that falls into Obadiah's
meadow," and the same day "across Steel's brook, northward of
Woster Swamp on the falls of sd brook." At the latter place the
two Jonathans, father and son, built a saw mill, but it is not men-
tioned until 1725. Jonathan Sen. built another mill on the eastward
side of Wooster Swamp. This we learn when a highway was laid
out from Oakville, at Ebenezer Richardson's house, over the top of
Hikcox hill to Jonathan Scott's mill. At about the same date,
there was one laid out to the upper mill.

One of the earliest mortgages of land in Watertown was on
sixty-seven acres of the farm of Nathaniel Arnold, Jr. "The

326 niSTORT OF WATERBURT.

Honourable the Governor and Company of this His Majestie's
English Colony of Connecticnt In New England In A merica" lent
to Arnold seventy-five pounds money, on the 20th of May 1734, for
which Arnold was to pay on the first of May 1742, "seventy-five
pounds in silver at twenty shillings per ounce Troy weight, or in
Gold, or true bills of publick credit on the Colony."

As early as 1736 John Guernsey left the Village, selling his house
and lands to John Smith of East Haddam, who then removed to
Waterbury. Other land owners in the Village, whose names were
new, were Jonathan Kelsey, "Zakeriah** Tomlinson, Jonathan
Guernsey, Samuel Umberfield of West Haven, and Samuel Baker of
Branford, who built a house there which he sold in 1736 to Thomas
Foot for three hundred and ten pounds current money.

The above rapid survey of Water town and its vicinity at a date
before the formation of the Ecclesiastical Society of Westbury,
imperfect as it is, affords us a glimpse of a prosperous community,
whose founders were already moving on to new territory. Like
other first settlers Jonathan Scott, Jr., felt the impulse to move on,
and in 1742 removed to Reynolds Bridge, where he bought the
house and farm of Ebenezer Richardson, who had made up his
mind to "go west," to Middlebury. The house was the very site of
the present red house so long known as the Reynolds homestead.

It was in October of 1738 that the Society of Westbury was
incorporated. The number of families enumerated at that time
was thirty-seven, whose names have been given. At the close of
1739 nine men had been added to the population. They were
Joseph Guernsey, Daniel Scott, Nathan Baldwin, John Warner, Jr.,
Stephen Welton, Edmund Tompkins, Edward Scovill, James
Nichols, Samuel Brown, and Abraham Andrews. The inhabitants
of Westbury parish must have numbered nearly three hundred,
when in 1739, Mr. John Trumbull* a young man of twenty-five
years — was invited by them to take charge of their church. Mr.
Trumbull was graduated at Yale College in 1735. ^^' Bronson tells
us that he sometimes fitted young men for college after he became
minister at Westbury — " that his attainments as a scholar were
respectable, that he was sound, shrewd and humorous, but, that he
appears not to have been distinguished as a preacher — that the
great influence he acquired over his people was obtained by his
generosity, his hospitable manners and friendly intercourse. If
one of his parishioners had lost a cow or had met with a similar
calamity he would interest himself in the matter, head a subscrip-

* This name is, in our records, spelled Trumble — Trumbull not appearing until 1768 when Mr. Trumble's
nephew-cousin, the Rev. Benjamin Trumble, adopted that form of the word.

EARLY WESTS URT.

327

tion for his relief and persuade others to sign the same. It was
said of him that if one of his people turned Episcopalian, he would
buy his farm."

Mr. Trumbull is described as a stout, athletic man, fond of horses
— the life of the man who was not fond of horses in that day of utter
dependence on horses must have been full of bitterness — a lover of
innocent sports, and willing, if tradition be reliable, to add his skill
and strength to help the side of his parish boys in games of contest
with the "Town Spotters." It is said "that the contestants met at
some half-way place (doubtless the Buckingham place, or James
Brown's inn, for we find that Brown did pay five pounds for his
'faculty' of- inn-keeper after his removal to Oakville), and carried
on their doubtless somewhat brutal game of wrestling, during the
autumnal evenings, around a fire." The story is told that on one
occasion when the last of the Westbury champions had been laid
low, a stranger — Mr. Trumbull in disguise — was dragged in to meet
the victor, and that the stranger caught his antagonist's foot and
threw him on the fire. The victor immediately disappeared.
" Great," adds Dr. Bronson, " was the exploit and great the mystery
of the affair; but the secret finally leaked out. The story reached
the ears of Mr. Leavenworth — the new incumbent of the First
Church Society — who the next time he met his brother 'Trumble'.
(both men not long past their college days) rebuked him, particu-
larly, for throwing his rival upon the fire — by which his clothing
and flesh were scorched. Trumbull agreed that he had been guilty
of levity, but, as for the scorching, he thought it his duty to give
his (Mr. Leavenworth's) parishioners a foretaste of what they might
expect, after sitting under his preaching."

Rev. John Trumbull was born in Suffield in 17 15, and was the
son of Jonathan or John (on our records Jon Trumble), whose
ancestor from England, settled in Ipswich in 1645. He married
July 3, 1744, Sarah, the daughter of Mr. Samuel Whitman of Farm-
ington. They had seven children. John, the fourth child and second
son was born in April of /750, and in September of ^757, if the
Connecticut Gazette of that month and year may be relied upon for
the fact, had passed a good examination for admittance to Yale
College, although but seven years and five months old. His mother
had given him instruction in the Latin language, and his father
had taken him through a course of preparatory study, which cul-
minated in a journey to New Haven for the examination. The lad's
biographer gravely notes that "during all this time"— his first
seven years — "he was a boy and liked boyish sports." The Gazette
adds — "but on account of his youth his father does not intend he
shall at present continue at college." It is pleasing to learn that

3»8

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

after he was graduated at Yale, and at the age of sixteen, young
Trumbull liked to sit in the highway and scrape up sand-hills with
other children. We are told • that Mr. Trumbull was ordained at
the house of Deacon Hikcox, about two miles eastward of the
churches. Samuel Hikcox, who was Deacon Hikcox at a later date,
was living at the time on Pattaroon hill, in the house built on the
hill in 1731 by "Daniel Williams, miller." Four years before he
was married, Mr. Trumbull bought of Obadiah Scott, for ;^3oo,
"his home lott on which he then dwelt and all the buildings then
erected — west on highway north on Obadiah Scott, east on Dr.
John Warner, south on David Scott." This was April 29, 1740,
and Mr. Southmayd recorded the deed of sale the same day. The
house stood on the western slope of Hikcox hill, on the road
from Westbury to Buck's
Hill near the foot of the
hill. Mr. Trumbull, at a
subsequent date, which date
has not been learned, built a
house just below Cranberry
brook, or below Deacon
Dayton's house of to-day.
In this house it is supposed
hischildren were born. The
illustration herewith of the
house is copied, by the cour-
tesy of Edwin Whitefield
from "The Homes of our Forefathers, Rhode Island and Con-
necticut," wherein the date of the house is given as "about 1725,"
which must be some twenty years too early.

In October, 1738, the Parish of Westbury was incorporated. On
the first Monday of December the first parish meeting was held.
By a two-thirds vole, it was decided to build a meeting house, and,
perhaps, by a unanimous vote, to seek permission of the General
Assembly to embody in church estate. In May of 1739 a committee
was appointed to repair to Westbury and decide for the people
where the meeting house should stand. In October, the committee
(Wallingford men) reported that they had repaired to the parish,
and "had set up a stake with stones laid unto it in the southwest
corner of Eliezer Scott's barn lot, near to the road or intended high-
way that ran north and south." The Assembly established the
place above described " to be the place where said society should
build their meeting house for the worship of God."

. John

EARLY WESTS URT.

329

In December of the same year the proprietors held a meeting
and gave to the committee for laying out highways in the north-
west quarter full power ** to widen the highway where Westbury
meeting house was appointed to stand so as to accommodate the
house with a suitable green, and to award satisfaction to the owners
of the land that the enlarged highway should take from." The
land laid out in accordance with the above permission was ten rods
on its south side; ten, on its east side; eleven, on its northern side,
and eighteen, on its western side. On this land, without having
obtained a deed of it, the Westbury people proceeded to build.
April 6, 1 741, they had already set up the frame for a meeting
house, for, at that date Eleazer Scott executed a deed of sale ** to
Mr. John Trumble, Capt. Samuel Hikcox, and Lieut. Thomas
Richards, and the rest of the inhabitants of the Presbyterian order^
one piece of land on which they have set up a frame for a meeting
house for the carrying on the publick [worship] of God in said
society in the above sd order'* This meeting house green was bounded
** north on Eleazer Scott's land or the land set for a burying yard,
east on the Burying yard, south on the highway or Stephen Scott's
land, and west on land left for a highway."

The autograph deed of sale of the first burying yard in Water-
town lies before me. Its date is the same as that of the sale of the
meeting house place. In it, Eleazer Scott, for six pounds in money
already received of the town of Waterbury [the proprietors], con-
veys to " the Second Society in Waterbury known by the name of
Westbury parish, a certain piece of land for a burying place lying
by the meeting-house place the east side of sd place — the east side
17 Rods; the north end 6 Rods; the west side 13 Rods & the south
end 9 Rods, with a triangle on the north end of the Meeting-
house place of 22 Rods of Ground." The date when this cemetery
was first used is not certainly known, but, as its deed of conveyance
coincides with that of the meeting-house place, and, as our Town
records give the date of the death of Hannah Richards, the wife of
William Scovill, as occurring on April i, 1741, and as that name is
the first of seven names given in a record made by Deacon Timothy
Judd of deaths in Westbury before July of 1743, we may believe, in
the absence of conflicting evidence, that this grave made in the
spring time of 1741 for Mrs. Scovill was the first one in the hill-side
place of burial that overlooks Wooster Swamp. One can almost
see that long procession, without hearse, without carriage, winding
its way down from Scott's Mountain and across the swamp — the
low bier covered with "funeral cloth " or pall, reverently borne by
neighbors and friends to its resting place. It is safe to write that
around that grave clustered the entire community— for its members

330 BISTORT OF WATERBURY.

were not so numerous that one could drop away and leave no sign
of departure, and the ties of common toil and care and joy still knit
together the lives of the grandchildren, even as they had done the
lives of their sires. Like unto that first burial in Naugatuck in
1709 — this was that of a young wife and mother. As the bundle of
straw, according to custom, was dropped into the grave, and the
skeleton shadow of the meeting-house frame fell over it, four young
children clustered near. One of the number — a boy of nine years
named James — was destined to fill an important and high position,
for in him lay dormant the Reverend James Scovill, missionary of
the Church of England to his native town, and the Society of West-
bury.

THE NORTHBURY SOCIETY.

While we have lingered at Westbury, the Up River people living
within two-and-a-half miles of Barnabas Ford's house have not been
idle. Men like the Blakeslees, whose grandmother we are told
" would take her child in her arms on Sabbath-day mornings, travel
from North Haven to New Haven, hear Mr. Pierpont preach, and
return again after meeting " were not the men to do less than their
grandmother had done, especially when, as we have seen, horses
were plentifully distributed throughout the township; whereas she
is supposed not to have had one in her Sabbath-day journeys to
the House of God.

Nevertheless, with petition, prayer and promise, twenty-six men
besieged Town and Assembly until even the Court wavered and
yielded in so far as to grant the Up River people permission to have
and to pay their own minister all the year for two years, and to pay
no tithes to the First society during that time. John Bronson and
Obadiah Warner were the only petitioners representing the planters.

Having received their inch of privilege in October, 1738, these
importunate demanders asked an ell of liberty in October, 1739.
They were at court in season, and for once everything moved in
their favor, for a committee was appointed to visit the town, and, in
consultation with the First society, to overlook the Up River terri-
tory and report. The report was made at the same session. The
committee said that they had viewed and duly inquired into the
circumstances of the inhabitants and believed them to be able and
sufficient to bear parish charges and become a distinct society. The
limits recommended began at two white oak trees known by the
name of Two Brothers at the northeasterly corner of Westbury
society, followed the West Branch to the river, the river to the
mouth of Spruce brook a little below Upson's island; from that
point a straight line to the falls of Hancox brook; from thence a

EARLY WE8TBURY. 331

straight line to the south side of Mr. Noyes' farm lying on Grassy
hill, thence a due east line to Farmington line, then north by that
line to Harwinton bounds and Litchfield bounds to the first bounds
mentioned. Within the above bounds, the society or parish was
incorporated — to be known and called by the Parish of Northbury.

The thoughtful reader will at once recognize that the formation
of the above societies would necessarily involve the own in cost,
trouble, and well-nigh hopeless endeavor to determine the respect-
ive bounds of the new societies with Farmington, Hartford, Har-
winton and Litchfield. It had not been the custom to perambulate
the bounds year by year, and in process of time old landmarks
became lost, forgotten or obliterated. So long as the margins of the
towns did not conflict in anyway and the lands lay in commons,
slight deviations made comparatively little difference. Out of this
difficulty arising from uncertain and lost bounds atid mutual care-
lessness, town-line roads led the way.

In May of 1741, the indulgent General Assembly had occasion to
repent having yielded to the prayers and petitions of Northbury
and to wish that it had relied upon the wisdom of the First society,
for a plaint went up to it "of the broken and confused circum-
stances *' that the parish of Northbury was under in all its public
affairs. It had neither any regular society meeting nor officers, and
that it might "not be further involved in difficulties and ruined,"^
Col. Benjamin Hall, and Capt. John Riggsof Derby, were appointed
to repair to said society with full power to govern the people and
direct them into the ways of propriety and peace. The society and
all the inhabitants thereof were required " to conform themselves
to the advice and direction of the committee in every respect, on
pain of incurring the great displeasure of the Assembly."

The temptation to linger along the ways trod by the Northbury
people during the pastorate of the Reverend Samuel Todd is most
alluring; for place, pastor and people furnish abundant and unique
material for the pen of the gleaner, who will surely not omit to
mention (unless it has already been given), that the first paragraph
of the Northbury Church records now extant (November 27, 1765)
contains the following vote: "Any member of Regular Standing in
the Church of England shall be admitted to Occasional Communion
with us in this church for the time to come." The second announces-
that "the Church of Christ in the Society of Northbury was formed
about the year 1739. ^^^ R^v. Samuel Todd was pastor of the
Church until 1764, then was dismissed from his charge. After
which, he Refused giving the Church any account of their proceed-
ings under his pastoral charge — their Remaineth no Record."

CHAPTER XXVI.

UNION SQUARE — DEATH OF ABRAHAM ANDREWS — NEW INHABITANTS —
FIRST BRIDGE OVER THE NAUGATUCK RIVER — LEASE OF SCHOOL
LANDS — SCHOOL MONEY — MR. SOUTHMAYD'S GIFT TO NORTHBURY
— THE REV. JONATHAN ARNOLD OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
RECEIVES MINISTERIAL TAXES — THE REV. MARK LEAVENWORTH —
OXFORD PARISH ORGANIZED — CHURCH OF ENGLAND MEN OF 1 748.

— THE "GREAT AWAKENING" — THE REV. JAMES DAVENPORT

MISSING RECORDS — THE MINISTRY LANDS — EXCHANGED FOR LAND
AT THE CLAY PITS — SCHOOL FUND — KILLING DEER — REBUILDING
THE BRIDGE — THE CASE OF JOSEPH GENNINGS.

WHILE we have lingered at the northward, events have
occurred at the heart of the township that are worthy of
mention. Union Square was at an early date a centre of
activity, if not the business centre of the town. Here was the corn-
mill, the Mecca where the material bread of life was ground out for
all the inhabitants; here was a saw-mill, and here, it is thought,
was the tannery that the town encouraged Abraham Andrews to
build. Here Joseph Lewis lived, weaving cloth for ten or twelve
years before he removed to the Straits mountain at Judd's meadows,
to raise rye for export; and here came, morning and evening, the
drifts of cattle to and from their pasture lands over the Mill river,
passing on their way between the houses of Abraham Andrews,
Senior, on the south (on land where Mr. Edward Terrell now lives),
and Abraham Andrews, Junior, on Union Square itself on the left
(for his house was surrounded by highways). The highways there-
about were changed almost with the seasons; so difficult is it to
thread their mazes that one becomes highway-blind in the attempt.
Abraham Andrews* orchard was a certain number of feet from the
north bound of Grand street when that street was reopened in 1709
from Bank street to the Mill river; and in later years it became the
property of Joshua Porter and afterwards it was long in the owner-
ship of his daughter Hepsibah.

In the house that he had built in 1704, Abraham Andrews died
in 1 73 1. He was the last survivor of the signers of 1674.

During the period from 1731 to 1742, new inhabitants came pour-
ing their wealth of family life and possession into the township.
They came singly and in family groups of two, three, and occasion-
ally four brothers. In addition to the names of men already given

EVENTS FROM 17S2 TO 1741. 333

as having arrived at Westbury and Northbtiry, we find those of
Lothrop, Rew, Weed, Merrill, Punderson, Baldwin, Beard, Camp,
Atwell, North, Curtiss, Foot, Hubbard, Nichols, Sanford, Prichard,
Gunn, Sherman, How, Matthews, Adams, Baker, Frost, Holbrook,
Humiston, Johnson, Smith, Coxwell, Williams, Moor, Royse, Terrill,
Doolittle, Gordon, Prindle, Thompson, Truck, Bellamy, Earl, Harri-
son, Hotchkiss, Luddington, Osborne, Seymour, Trowbridge, North,
Preston, Tompkins, Silkrig, Wakelin, Hull, Trowbridge, and perhaps
others.

Despite all this increase of population the proprietors kept on
their unwavering course, meeting the changed conditions with
unchanged front. Now and again the town would welcome a new
man to its list of office-holders — to keep the pound key, or, possibly,
to view the coinmon fence, or to dig the graves — but seldom to its
higher offices until he had been well tried.

It is not possible to follow clearly the progress of events, because
of the missing links in the records. It does not appear at what
time the second school house was built, for we find no account of
the disposition that was made of the timber drawn to the " Meeting
House Green " for it, in 1732. We have no record from January, 1734,
to December, 1736, and it was probably during the interim that it
was built.

The first bridge across the Naugatuck river at West Main street
was also built during that interval. The intimation of it comes
through the laying of a tax "to pay the charges of the bridge."
This was in 1736. Five years later the freshet must have carried it
away, for in March it was voted to repair the bridge over our river,
and three men were appointed " to look after and save what timber
could be found."

Under date of December 10, 1734, we find the following return
of a committee in relation to school lands:

We the subscribers being desired to consult the best method for the

school land in Waterbury, and our judgment is that a committee be appointed to

make sale of all the school land and propriety belonging to the same, and that said

committee make sale of all the meadow lots to the highest bidder at some public

time and be impowered to give deeds to such persons — which deeds shall be held

good for nine hundred and ninety-nine years and that the buyer shall pay the

money down or mortgage lands for the security of the principle and g^ve bonds

yearly for the interest of such sums as he shall give for such particular lands as he

shall so buy * ♦ * * * and that the use of the money which the

above said land shall fetch shall be converted to the use of the school in said Town

for the said term of nine hundred ninety-nine years.

( Joseph Lewis,
Committee f < William Judd,
( Sam"* Hikcox.

The above Written Bill was passed into a vote.

334

HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

John Bronson immediately secured the school land in Buck's
meadow, for forty shillings and one penny an acre — Deacon Samuel
Brown "four acres in Handcox meadow, for fifty- four pounds ten
shillings good and lawful money," and soon very many acres of
school lands were leased for nine hundred and ninety-nine years,
on merely nominal terms — for school lands were abundant and had,
with the exception of the meadow allotments — lain unimproved
from the time of the various land divisions. By 1734 the school
lands must have numbered well nigh a thousand acres. Nearly
two years pass away without record, and then the following entry
is found:

Whereas there was considerable discourse about letting out the school money
which the school land was sold for as often as there should any of the principle be
paid in, that it might not lie unimproved, the town by their vote agreed and im-
powered their school committee to let out the money to such as want to hire and to
take double security by mortgage for the principle, which mortgages are to run to
the school committee for the time being, and to take their notes or bonds for the
interest to run to the school committee as above, so to be disposed and improved
to the use of the school in Waterbury for ever.

The bonds were to be lodged in the "Town Treasurers office," the
treasurer giving a receipt for them. Deacon Thomas Clark held the
office in 1736. In 1738 the town appointed " the town clerk to be with,
and to take care with the school committee in letting out the school
money and taking security, as there should be occasion." The town
clerk's was the only permanent ofiice in the town — Mr. Southmayd
having held it since 1721. The eleventh of December, 1738, must
have been a cold day, for after the above vote (in the meeting house)
the meeting adjourned for one hour — " to meet at Captain Timothy
Hopkins" — where they chose eight men as school committee, Lieut.
Thomas Bronson as town treasurer, and decided that the ^100 that
had been agreed upon (on his retirement from the ministry), to be
paid to Mr. Southmayd in 1740, should be laid upon the list of 1738.
Prudent, thoughtful men ! This act included their neighbors at
Westbury and Northbury as participants in the indebtedness. Per-
haps it was in recognition of this, that Mr. Southmayd gave the
men of Northbury, the same year " one acre of land for publick
use," on which was "a house which the said inhabitants had already
set up under the denomination of a school house, or a house for the
said inhabitants to meet in to carry on the public worship of God
on the Sabbath when they [should] have the means among them."

In 1740 we learn for the first time that there are Professors of
the Church of England in Waterbury, and that services according
to the prescribed forms of that church have been held, by the

EVENTS FROM 1732 TO mu

335

Reverend Jonathan Arnold. Under date of April 14, 1740, that
gentleman sent the following acknowledgment:

To the Collectors of the Ministerial Charges in Waterbury,

Then Received of the Professors of the Church of England in Waterbury the

Areas of what is Due of their Ministerial Taxes to my satisfaction and Request

you will Give them a Discharge. I am

Your Humble Servant,

Jonathan Arnold.

The same professors of the Church of England soon sought, at
the hands of the proprietors of the township, land whereon to build
their church edifice — the story of which will be told in connection
with the history of that church in Waterbury. It is with especial
gratification that we are able to add that no family dissension
appears to have marred the peacefulness of the departure in the
fullness of time of the children of the meeting-house for the little
church on the corner of North Willow and West Main streets.

The entrance of the Reverend Mark Leavenworth into the work
laid down by Mr. Southmayd seems to have been so natural and
quiet, that a ripple of the change of oarsmen failed to strike the
shore where we search the sands for signs of tides that rose and
fell so long ago. Truth compels us however to admit that there are
neither town, proprietors, nor church records covering the period
of his ordination, which Dr. Bronson tells us was in March of 1740.
Among the papers of the Rev. Isaac Stiles of North Haven is one
announcing that he gave the " Right hand of fellowship " at the
ordination of Mr. Leavenworth, and that he preached the sermon
at the ordination of Mr. Todd at Northbury, but no dates are given.

In 1740 certain inhabitants who were " dwelling in the southwest
part of Waterbury woods," together with certain inhabitants of
Derby and of " the southeast part of the township of Woodbury
woods " petitioned in the usual formula that they might become
one entire, distinct, ecclesiastical society. Isaac Trowbridge, the
three brothers John, Jonas, and Joseph Weed, and Joseph Osborne
were the petitioners living in the Waterbury woods.

Within less than three years four parishes were formed, whose
members went out from the old First Church — Westbury, North-
bury, Oxford in part, and St. James's, now St. John's. Of the latter
parish, the earliest list of members known to be extant is found in
a town rate-book of the tax-payers for the [year 1748 — and of the
forty -three men listed as churchmen, thirty -six were in Water-
bury at the formation of the parish — of the thirty-six, twenty-four
were born here and brought up in the First Church, being lineal
descendants of the planters — thirty had been in the same church

J

336 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

for nearly a score of years. Of the remaining six members, Caleb
Thompson, Georpe Nichols and Robert Johnson must have been
attendants at least ten years, and Nathaniel Gunn six years — while
John Brown was the son of Samuel Brown, deacon in the First
Church from 1730 to about 1735; leaving William "Silkrig" as the
only new comer, and he had been here two years in 1740. Surely
these churches ought to love one another, for they are bound
together by all the ties of a century of existence.

No town history of Connecticut can avoid the mention of the
great excitement and its consequent train of events that convulsed
the churches in 1740, and later. Public opinion seems to have pre-
pared the way for a great awakening of the people to the religious
duties of the hour. In this " Revival " great good was accomplished,
and great wrong was wrought. The special feature of it that it is
necessary to introduce here is the fact of the change it effected in
the status of the ancient churches of the colony. Hitherto, the
teaching and the preaching had been exclusively in the hands of
an educated and ordained ministry, there being only " standing
ministers " in the land. While this " Great Awakening " was in
progress, the Rev. James Davenport, from Southold, L. I., visited
Connecticut. He is described by one who witnessed his work, as " a
wonderful, strange, good man, under the influence of a false spirit.
He not only gave an unrestrained liberty to noise and outcry both
of distress and joy in time of divine service, but promoted both
with all his might. Those persons that passed immediately from
great distress to great joy and delight, after asking them a few
questions were instantly proclaimed converts, or said to have come
to Christ, and upon it the assembly were told that a number, it may
be ten or fifteen, have come to Christ already, who will come next ?
He was a great encourager if not the first setter up of public
exhorters, encouraging any lively, zealous Christian to exhort with
all the air and assurance of ministerial authoritative exhorting —
although altogether unequal to the solemn undertaking." The
exhorters came into credit among multitudes of people who chose
to hear them rather than their old teachers, whom Mr. Davenport
referred to as " the letter-learned rabbies, scribes and pharisees and
unconverted ministers." Very soon ".the standing ministers began
to fall in their credit and esteem among the people, and thus the
seeds of discord and disunion were sown, and a foundation laid for
separations." Mr. Davenport made a tour of the churches, examin-
ing the ministers in private — such of them as submitted to his
questions — and then publicly declared his judgment of their spirit-
ual state as converted, or unconverted. Multitudes believed in Mr

EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 1741. 337

Davenport as a man who had inquired at the oracle of God, and " a
minister could not gainsay or correct his wildest and most unscript-
ural words under the price of his reputation.*' People who had great
regard for their ministers were as much concerned lest they should
not stand the trial of Mr. Davenport's examinations, " as if they
were going before the Judge of all the Earth."

In May of 1742, two men of Stratford made complaint to the
Assembly of disorders happening in that town " by occasion of one
James Davenport convening great numbers of people together in
several parts of said town." Mr. Davenport was brought to trial,
the King's attorney producing evidence to prove the complaint, and
Mr. Davenport appearing in his own behalf and with witnesses.
** The court observing the behaviour, conduct, language and deport-
ment of Davenport in the time of his tryal and what happened in
the evening after the matter was in hearing and not gone through
with," made the following announcement: "This Assembly is of
opinion that the things alleged and the behaviour, conduct, and
doctrines advanced and taught by the said James Davenport do
and have a natural tendency to disturb and destroy the peace and
order of this government. It appears to this Assembly that the
said Davenport is under the influences of enthusiastical impression
and impulses, and thereby disturbed in the rational faculties of his
mind, and therefore to be pitied and compassionated, and not to be
treated as otherwise' he might be." Mr. Davenport was, by order of
the court, removed to his home at Southold.

In the light of the above events, it will appear that the rigid
supremacy of the established church of the colony was gone for-
ever. Notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Davenport afterward
returned to Connecticut clothed in his right mind, admitted his
errors, and sought forgiveness of the ministers whom he had treated
amiss, the people declared that " he was turned against them and
was become their enemy — that he had got away from God and
joined in a great measure with the world of opposers and carnal
ministers. They were disappointed, vexed, disquieted in their
spirits, and, on the whole, they all rejected his message."*

Into conditions that are only hinted at in the foregoing allusions,
Mr. Leavenworth, Mr. Trumbull and Mr. Todd were brought at the
beginning of their pastorates. Each pastor and each parishioner
was under the rule of his own mind and the spell of his own tem-
perament while passing through the scenes of the " Great Awaken-
ing." The new order of things had its attractions and its repul-
sions; and without doubt worked its way in some degree into every

♦The Rev. Joseph Fish, Stonington, 1 740-1 763.
22

338 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

meeting-house in the colony. That it wrought to the benefit of the
Church of England there can be no question — many of the staunch-
est Congregational ists making the very highest tj'pe of Episcopal-
ians— while the most ardent followers of Davenport and the en-
thusiasms of religious exaltation seceded in the opposite direction
in order to form new societies in accord therewith. The General
Assembly enacted vigorous laws in the endeavor to restrain minis-
ters from going into other parishes than their own to preach, with-
out invitation from church or minister, and in various ways sought
to quell the spirit of rebellion that had come into action against the
established order. All town, church, and society records relating
to the years in question being lost, it is impossible to give local
facts, but there are indications that Mr. Leavenworth and Mr.
Todd, both young and impulsive men, sympathized with the new
order of things. Dr. Bronson, whose information was derived
from the manuscripts of the late Judge Bennet Bronson, tells us
that "some of the meetings of the New Lights were extremely
boisterous and disorderly, so that on one occasion John Southmayd
Jr., a constable of the town, felt himself justified in appearing in
their meeting and commanding the peace of the commonwealth."
This must have been as early as 1742. Tracy, in his "Great
Awakening," makes the statement that in 1744 the Association of
New Haven County suspended the Messrs. Humphreys of Derby,
Leavenworth of Waterbury, and Todd of Northbury from the
ministry, for assisting in the ordination of the Rev. Jonathan Lee,
on which occasion Mr. Leavenworth " preached the ordination
sermon." Stephen Hopkins accompanied him, as "worthy mes-
senger " from the Waterbury Church. Mr. Todd made the last
prayer with imposition of hands, and gave the right hand of
fellowship" — while the worthy messenger from the Northbury
Society was Moses Blakeslee. In fact, the trio of ministers from
the Naugatuck Valley formed the " Select Council," and ordained
Mr. Lee — who later received from the General Assembly an invita-
tion or appointment to preach the Election Sermon, which is
sufficient evidence that his ordination was ultimately considered
according to " Law and Order." The first appearance in the public
records of Mr. Leavenworth's name is when the ear-marks of his
cattle are given in April of 1741 — they were "three half-pennies on
the foreside of the near ear;" Mr. Todd's name first appears in the
same manner before December, 1740 — his cattle-marks being " a slit
in the top of each ear and a half-penny the foreside each ear." Mr.
Trumble's name appears in 1745, when Mr. Southmayd records:
"the [town] meeting opened by prayer and supplication by the
Rev. Mr. John Trumble."

EVENTS FROM 1182 TO 1741. 339

Among the lost records was one appointing a committee to
sell the ministry land; for we find it, later, ordered to "recover
damages of persons who had bought of it and refused to stand by
their bargain." Mr. Southmayd was appointed "to keep the notes
and bonds of interest that the ministry land was sold for, and
deliver the same to the several societies' committees when orderly called
for'' It was also " voted to sell the remainder of the ministry land
— if under circumstances that it may be sold'* It may have been because
the previous sales of ministry land were held to be invalid, that
the purchasers had declined to receive them. Nevertheless, in
1 741 "it was agreed that the remainder of the ministry land
sequestered by the Grand Committee may be sold, and the use
of the money be to the use of the ministry in said Waterbury."
The " remainder of the ministry land " referred to the one-sixth
part, or its representative, of all that part of our city bounded
to-day by Bank street on the west, East Main street on the north,
South Elm street on the east, and Grand and Union streets on the
south. This, after several changes within the bounds named, was
leased on December 17, 1722, to Samuel Porter and Thomas Upson.
In 1728 the town allowed Thomas Porter to have this ministry land,
if he would give in exchange for it " two acres for one, of his land
lying above the Clay pitts." * What became of this ministry land,
and how in 1738 Thomas Porter had become possessed of it has not
been investigated. Fortunately, the Little Pasture was safe in the
life-keeping of Mr. Southmayd at this time.

When in 1689 the General Court feared the coming of Governor
Andros, it will be remembered that it made haste to give to Wind-
sor and Hartford the large tract of lands lying west of their town-
ships and extending to the Housatonic river. In the subsequent
complication of interests between the colony and the towns, it was
settled that the colony should have returned to it certain lands,
which lands were divided into seven townships; each township was
divided into a certain number of rights, varying from thirty to fifty
pounds per right, and these were sold at public auction at the sev-
eral court houses in the several counties. The money obtained
from the sales was to be used for the benefit of such towns as had.

* As clearly as the records permit us to locate the ** Clay Pitts," they were on or near the Little brook,
north of Grove street, and between Cook and North Main streets. In 1687, Sergeant Samuel Hikcox had
** one piece at the Clay Pitts," bounded south and west on highways — which would be at the comer of Grove
and Cook streets. In 1738 Nathan Beard became the owner of " one piece at the Clay Pitts, containing two
acres, bounded south and east on highways, north on the parsonage land belonging to Thomas Porter and
Southmayd's land, west on Judd's land." South of Grove street, the second Joseph Hikcox owned a triangle
of two acres, bounded by Grove, North Main, and Cook streets (except for a strip of land on the Cook street
side, belonging to George Scott), and, in receiving the grant, the condition was that Hikcox was ** not to
hinder men coming to the Clay Pitts."

340 HI8T0RT OF WATERS UR7,

in 1732, made and computed the lists of their polls and rateable
estate. Each town was to receive the money according to the pro-
portion of its list in that year, and each parish in proportion to its
own list given in in that year — the money to be let out, and the
interest improved for the support of the respective schools forever,
and to no other use. If applied to other use than for the support
of a school in the town, then the money was to be returned into the
treasury of the colony, and the town or parish misimproving it was
to forever lose the benefit thereof. Such was the origin of the
present Connecticut School Fund.

There had been no parish formed in 1732 in Waterbury, but
the list of the Northern inhabitants, it will be remembered, was
returned in that year under the head of Northbury, and perhaps in
anticipation of this event, for the practice was not continued.
However that may have been, the subject of the "Western-lands"
school money was one that disquieted the First Society and the two
parishes until 1741, when the services of Col. James Wadsworth and
Col. Benjamin Hall were solicited and the whole matter was to be
left with them for their decision, and so the trouble was put
aside for ten years. The school-money had, undoubtedly, been
used by Northbury to pay ministerial charges. At the same meet-
ing, Daniel Scott (of Westbury), Ebenezer Elwell, and Gideon
Allyn (of Northbury) — all of whom had been fined for killing deer
(either out of season or within a deer-park) — prayed that their fines
for so doing might be abated, but the prayers were of no avail.
Laws were made to be respected in 1741.

In the same year we find this entry: " they made choice of a
committee (Capt. Wm. Judd, Lieut. Stephen Upson and John Judd)
to go about re-building our bridge over our river in the Country
road to Woodbury." Directions were given for taking advice as to
the form or manner in which the bridge should be built, and leave
was given the committee " to hire it done by the Grale or other-
wise," as the members should agree.

At this meeting, Mr. Southmayd and Capt. Samuel Hikcox
were appointed to represent the town at the County court in
" an action there depending concerning Joseph Gennings becast
upon us by Farmington." Farmington probably won the case, for
the outcome of it lies before me in the form of an indenture
executed the same month — March, 1742. It was prepared by Mr.
Southmayd — signed by Joseph Jenners and Samuel Hickcox and
witnessed by John Warner, Elnatha Bronson, and William Hick-
cox. It contains the usual formula wherein: " I Joseph Gennings
do put and bind myself a servant man unto Capt. Samuel Hickcox

EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 1741. 341

to live with him the full term of five years — all of which term the
said Gennings his said master shall faithfully serve according to
the best of his Ability, his secrets Keep Close, his Lawful and
reasonable Commands Everywhere Gladly do and perform. Damage
to his Master he shall not wilfully do, his Master's Goods he shall
not waste Embesel or purloine nor suffer the same to be wasted or
Purloined, but to his power shall forthwith discover and make
known to his said Master." After the usual negative promises re-
garding taverns, games, etc., on the part of Gennings, appears Cap-
tain Hickcox's agreement. He had evidently given a bond to the
town to save it from charge regarding Gennings. Captain Hickcox
promised according to the usual formula regarding meat, drink,
lodging and apparel during the five years, promising to dismiss
Gennings " at the end of said term Except three indifferent persons,
two chosen by the Master and one by the servant should adjudge
that the master had not had sufficient Recompence for his charge
and trouble — and then Jenness, or Gennings, was not to dispose of
himself without securing his master from one bond, wherein he was
bound to secure the town of Waterbury from being a charge to
them." Before the document was signed, another hand than Mr.
Southmayd's added that neither Captain Hickcox nor his " hiers "
were to dispose of Gennings to any person whatsoever without the
servant's free consent. We will hope that Mary Hopkins, the wife
of Capt. Samuel Hickcox, proved a gentle mistress to poor Joseph
and that he escaped service, and bondage likewise, in due time.

CHAPTER XXVII.

ATTACHMENT OF THE INDIAN OWNERS TO THE LAND BUTLER EARLY

GRANTS SAMUEL HIKCOX SITE OF HIS HOUSE AGREEMENT WITH

HIS BROTHER THOMAS — DANIEL WARNER's HOUSE HIKCOX's FULL-
ING MILL NAUGATUCK's FIRST TWO SETTLERS DIE IN 1713

INHABITANTS BEFORE I745.

NO section of our ancient township invites to indulgence in
speculation more enticingly than does that now known by
the name of Naugatuck. The historical facts that we do
know, combined with the seeming allusions to other possible facts,
reveal the temptations which historians meet to construct theories
and indulge in the belief of them until they are left to hand them
down to their readers as well-founded truths.

The natural gateway of the hills leading into the Straits of the
Naugatuck, and its vicinage on Beacon Hill brook, called by the
Indians Wecobemeas, had long been to the aborigines a favored
region, and when the planters from Mattatuck appeared on the
scene to gather hay and build yards for cattle, its original owners
were inclined to assert their ownership. The familiarity of the
Indians with each valley and hill was attested by the names which
they knew them by, and which are repeated in the outcome of
the treaty made between their owners and the men of Mattatuck
in 1684;

The autograph deed* with its ten marks and its ten red seals
made by eight dusky men and two dusky women, more than two
centuries ago, lies before me — the deed by which they gave away,
by name, twenty parcels of land — nine of them lying on the east
side of the river between Beacon Hill brook, and the Fulling Mill
brook at Union City. There is something of the old Hebrew
grandeur of expression in the wording of this conveyance: "Weco-
bemeas, the land upon the brook or small river that comes through
the straits north of Lebanon and falls into Naugatuck river at the
south end of Mattatuck bounds, called by the English Beacon Hill
brook — and all the lands lying between that and the brook, called
by the name Squontuck, that comes from the east and falls into the
river at the hither end of Judd's Meadow." But alas ! We have no

* See pa^e 192.

THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDDS MEADOWS.

343

interpreter to give us the meaning of Wecobemeas, Wachu,
Panootan, or any one of the twenty parcels "by their names dis-
tinguished,"

The following view is given as seen from the ledge on which
the ancient bound trees stand, called the " Three Brothers."

But we have reason to think that at least one white man dwelt
in Naugatuck before the planters received the deed referred to.
One Butler — perhaps a lonely Quaker — had wandered hither and
built him a house in a sheltered and picturesque nook by an excel-
lent spring of water within sound of the brook which bore his name
— now Long Meadow brook. Of him we know only that the pro-
prietor's records mention " Butler's house — Butler's House brook —
Where Butler's house was." If we admit that he was a Quaker who
had retired from active persecution to the wilderness, it is a simple
matter to infer that as soon as the Puritans up the valley began
their descent upon the meadows near his chosen habitation that he,
being a man not given to contention, quietly closed his door and
retired to the spot long known as "the Quaker's farm," or, in
modern rendering, Quaker's Farms. Tradition has erroneously
bestowed the naming of this region to Dr. John Butler of Stratford,

344 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

who owned the tract at a later date, and who it is easily proven
could not have been the Butler of Judd's Meadows, or the person
who gave the name to the Quaker's Farm.

Judd's Meadows extended from Derby line to the upper limits
of the valleys of Hop brook and Fulling Mill brook. In the words
of the aboriginal proprietors, "from Saugasset to Squontuck and
Achetayquopaug " — inclusive as to the last two.

The earliest known occupation of the meadows and uplands by
the planters was for the use of their cattle. This information
comes through grants that were made, some of which remain of
record. In 1699 Abraham Andrews received one "on the brook that
runs through Benjamin Barnes's yard." This was neither a " door-
yard " nor a yard for drying cloth, but an enclosure for cattle,
designed to keep them in safety from wolves or other wild animals
at night during the season of pasturage — a herdsman attending
them during the day. The brook that ran through Benjamin
Barnes's yard is that now insignificant stream along which the
highway winds from Union City to the New England Railway
station.

This region was subdivided by the English into meadows that
were owned by certain of the proprietors — as Andrews's meadow at
Union City west of the river — Welton's lot up Hop brook tinder the
hills just above Andrews's meadow — ^the Deacon's meadow at the
upper part of Naugatuck village and extending down to, if not
below the bridge — Scott's meadow below the manufactory of L. & W.
Ward. All of the above were the west side of the river. On the
east side, across the highway from Grove cemetery (which is in
Wecobemeas), lay "Ben. Jones's" lot. Hickox meadow was oppo-
site the Ward manufactory, north of the river at the bend near the
"Old Canoe Place." Above the burying-yard of 1709, was Thomas
Warner's allotment. The miller, John Hopkins, obtained his por-
tion of meadow at the lower extremity of the valley in the midst of
a section of country naturally adapted to the raising of rye, an
industry which at a later day became a leading specialty in that
region— kilns being erected for drying the grain for shipment to
foreign countries. Being comparatively near New Haven, the prin-
cipal shipping port, the naturally superior lands in that vicinity
were reckoned among the most valuable in the township for that
purpose, and were appraised a hundred and forty years ago for
more than their market value at the present time — ^that is, the river
lands and those immediately adjacent, just above the straits. From
the rapid and extensive spread of the landed possessions of the
Hopkins and the Lewis families in all the region 'round about,

THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'8 MEADOWS. 345

the raising of rye must have proved a lucrative business in
those days.

Samuel Hikcox, the son of Sergt. Samuel, deceased, had in 1702
a house at Judd's Meadows. The following is the grant that tells of
its having been built : "Dec. 21, 1702. They granted Samuel Hikcox
eight acres of land at Judd's Meadows against Hikcox meadow,
where he has set his house, to take it about his house." He had
probably followed a custom of that period and built his house
before obtaining the land. This house was on the hill on the east
side of the New Haven road of 1686, on the north side of the lower
brook of the two that cross the road and run westward to the river,
and occupied the site where Amos Culver lives. Because the house
is mentioned in that year, he is accounted as the first permanent
settler of Judd's Meadows. From the following ancient autograph
agreement (found in 1890), between Samuel and his brother Thomas,
it would seem probable that the house had not been inhabited in
May of 1704, for the " chimblys " were only begun, and his barn was
in building at that time. Consequently, Daniel Warner may have
been his neighbor in the removal. The following is the bargain,
which from the outline of the paper, seems to have been an indent-
ured agreement. It was written by Thomas Judd, Jr.

This writing made May — i — 1704 witnesseth; That we Sam" Hikcox and
Thomas hikcox, both of Waterbury, by way of exchange have bargained as
follows. First, that I sd Sam" Hikcox by way of exchange have sold to sd Tho-s
Hikcox as follows, my house and house lot situated in said Waterbury [with
bounds]; three roods at the lower end of Munhan [bounds]; ten acres at Hikcox
mountain [bounds]. 2ly, I sd Thomas Hikcox have for the fore sd bargain sold to
sd Sam", eight acres lying at Judd's Meadows in two pieces on the hill north from sd
Sam"'s house butting on highway west ; elsewhere on common — the other piece
being one acers and fourscore rods butting on the highway east ; elsewhere on
common. More, my whole right of that land at Judd's Meadows that was father
Hikcox's, and said Thomas is to finish the barn that he has begun for said Samuel,
and that this is our firm agreement, and that we do bind ourselves, heirs, execu-
tors, administrators, to the faithful performance hereof and to give each other a
confirmation of lands and house according to law is testified by our hands.

Witness

Thomas Judd, Sam"- Hikcox, his x mark

RiCHCHARD WeLTON, ThOMAS HICKKOX.

Further: said Thomas is to finish the chimblys that he has begun for said
Samuel— also 8 acres that I, said Thomas, let said Samuel have by said Samuel's
house, butting southwest on said Samuel's land which is on the same bargain above
written, on the same obligation.

Thomas hickcox.
Witness

Rtchchard Welton.

346 HISTORY OF WATERS UET.

Although Samuel Hikcox's house is the first one mentioned at
Judd's Meadows, it is quite clear that in 1696 a movement thither
was in contemplation by a number of the young men. "Dec. 17,
1696, there was granted to John Richason, John Bronson and Joseph
Gaylord a parcel of land at Judd's Meadows, butting south on Dr.
Porter's meadow, west on the river, and north on the rocks, pro-
vided they build and coinhabit according to articles," and the same
day the same young men, with John Hopkins, received " 14 acres of
land lying eastward from Benjamin Jones's lot at Judd's Meadows,
butting north on the hill, and to run south." In 1697 Abraham
Andrews received his little acre-and-a-half lot the east side of the
brook that ran into Benjamin Barnes's yard. In 1699 Benjamin
Barnes was granted six acres at the west side of the spring, against
his yard; Edmund Scott was to have a piece of land that lay
between his eight-acre lot and his meadow, and Edmund with
Joseph Gaylord, four acres above where Butler's house was, for a
pasture, the four acres to be equally divided between them; Daniel
Warner, ten acres on condition that he would build and remain
five years in the town, which grant makes it not improbable
that Hikcox and Warner were building their houses at the same
time.

There is an entry in 1704 which would make it appear that
Hikcox and Warner were not the only inhabitants south of Squon-
tuck brook in that year. This entry, together with the constantly
increasing grants after 1700 (although no house is specifically
mentioned in the records left to us), is certainly suggestive of more
than two resident families. The item is: '*The proprietors gave
Judd's Meadow men leave to set up a pound for themselves on their
own charge for impounding their own cattle, and such as are left
out in the field when men are at work with them there." Had the
" Judd's Meadow men " been but two^ the permission would surely
have mentioned Hikcox and Warner by name — as distinguished
from the planters who merely went there to cultivate their fields.
The same fate probably befell the first attempts at settlement
in present Naugatuck, as elsewhere in the township. Daniel
Warner's house is not mentioned until 1706, when he received "a
piece of land south of his land his house stands on — to but on
Samuel Hikcox's land south," but, in grants before that time, he
had been given " two or three acres on the south side the brook
where the old path went over the brook " — and " a piece on the hill
at the north end that he had of John Warner extending north to
the end of the hill at the hollow where his cart path goes up," and
"seven acres between the brooks called Daniel Warner's brooks,'

THE 8ETTLEMEN1 AT JUDD' 8 MEADOWS,

347

and six more joining to his own land — all of which, taken together,
betoken a certain resident familiarity, and occur from two to four
years before his house is mentioned.

For five or six years, or from 1706 to 17 12, when Zachariah Bald-
win from Milford appears, we obtain no intimations of a new inhab-
itant— and yet — in 1709 when Mary Andrews, the wife of Daniel
Warner died, it will be remembered that when the town sequestered
the land on Pine hill for a burying yard, it was done with the consent
of the neighborhood. Two families, living perhaps a mile the one from
the other, could not have constituted a neighborhood — even in 1709.
In that year Samuel Hikcox " was granted the liberty of that stream
called Daniel Warner's brook (or Squontuck) from the east side the
going over the sd brook, and a place for conveniency of damming,
so long as he shall maintain a fulling mill, and conveniency of land
to pass and dry cloth." A pound — a burying yard — a fulling-mill,
or the prospect of one, within the first seven years — and but two
men, two women, and twelve children in Judd's Meadows for ten
years ! The improbability of the statement is evident. It is clearly
a case of insufficient record. The supposition, based upon the
known condition of the Samuel Hikcox house in 1704, is that his
eighth child, Gideon, born Sept. 6, 1705, was the fi^st English child
born at Judd's Meadows. The most careful gleaning of Waterbury
records has failed to give additional sign of inhabited occupancy
during the ensuing eight years — Zachariah Baldwin's venture in
171 1 excepted.*

In June of 17 13 Samuel Hikcox was summoned from the scene
of his activities by the dread disease that fell upon Waterbury in
that and the preceding year. His son Samuel — nineteen — died in
July, and Daniel Warner in September, leaving two widows — one
young man, Ebenezer Hikcox, not yet twenty-one — and twelve
children — seven of the number being under seven years of age, as
the inhabitants of present Naugatuck in 17 13.

In the inventory of Samuel Hikcox's estate, his " house, home-
stead and land adjoining" are valued at ;^4o, while his "fulling-
mill " is estimated at forty shillings. Five parcels of meadow land
are mentioned, one of twenty acres (the Deacon's meadow). The
widow was given, in the distribution, the south end of the house
next the brook. The north end was allotted to Ebenezer, who
married the next year. To baby Silans (Silence), born after her
father's death, was given " half the Hand, a lot in Hancock's medo,
part of a bogey medo north of Woodbery Lower rod," (now called
the Clay hole), and, after her mother's decease, she was to have six

* See page 281.

348 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

plates, a brass mortar, a "becor" and a right in the Deacon's
meadow. Mrs. Hikcox and her son Gideon continued to live on the
place, and Gideon ultimately became the owner of the homestead,
by purchasing the rights of his brothers in it. It may be mentioned
here, that conflicting statements, made elsewhere, in regard to this
house place — as, that the house sold by John Hikcox to James
Brown and used by him as an inn, was the Samuel Hikcox place,
arose through the ambiguity of one conveyance and the want of
another — also, that a mistake was made by Bronson in supposing
that the brook which ran down by Samuel Hikcox's house was
the Fulling Mill brook, and, that the New Haven road referred
to, was the later and more eastern road, often called "the Hop-
kin's road." Dr. Bronson also has placed several early settlers at
Judd's Meadows that I have been unable to find, doubtless through
oversight.

The widow of Daniel Warner married Isaac Castle and removed
to Woodbury. Samuel Warner, the eldest son living at the time of
his father's decease — then fifteen years old — made his home in the
house at a later date, and his eldest son, Daniel, seems to have been
the first man born in Naugatuck who lost his life as a soldier in the
service of England. He died at Cape Breton before 1745.

Benjamin Richards was the third young man who tried to estab-
lish himself at Judd's Meadows. He purchased meadow land next
the "Deacon's meadow," and laid out his bachelor land on the
Great hill up Toantic brook. He appears to have selected a build-
ing site on the plateau at the southeast comer of the Great hill.
In the description of his lands, mention is made of " Calkedes lot '*
— the reference intended being to the sale made by Conkapatana
and Tom Indian, his son, of "a small piece of land" in 171 1.
Whatever progress young Richards may have made towards build-
ing remains undiscovered, for his work was arrested by death
in 1714.

The fourth settler was Joseph Lewis, who made his residence in
" Conkapatana's lot," south of Toantic or Butler's House brook and
west of the river, in 17 14. His house was west of present Ward
street, a little below its junction with the river road. In 17 14 also,
John Barnes settled in the Hop Brook valley near the old stock
yards in present Union City. It is said that a part of the frame of
his house is still standing and in use. In the same year Obadiah
Scott built a house at the extreme southern part of the township
near Beacon Hill brook and on the old New Haven road near its
junction with the turnpike. This house was about two miles below
Naugatuck center.

THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'S MEADOWS.

349

In 17 16 Thomas Richards was living at the same place. A
-cartway "led" between the two houses. In 17 16 John Hikcox
had a house on the New Haven road, south of the Samuel Hikcox
house — Ebenezer Hikcox, his brother, also had a house north of
the Samuel Hikcox house. Samuel Warner, son of Thomas, laid
out the land on which Butler's house stood and was living on it
in 17 18. There is a ledge near his house site often called Indian
rock. He also laid out the first land in Millville center, where
Abraham Warner and Daniel Williams afterward lived, and where
Marshall Whitney now resides. In 17 18 also, Samuel Scott — War-
ner's brother-in-law — had a house by his side on Butler's House
brook.

In 17 17 Hezekiah Rew of Milford and James Brown of New
Haven began the purchase of lands at Judd's Meadows, and before
1722 were resident there. In 1722 came Samuel Chidester (a
brother-in-law of Joseph Lewis) from Wallingford.

In 1726 John Andrews went down and built a house at present
Gunntown near a spring, not far from the well known brick store
built by Samuel Gunn. He was the first permanent settler in that
neighborhood.

In 1728 Joseph Lewis, Jr., had a house in the Towantic meadow,
below the site of the old Church in Gunntown.

In 1729 Abraham Warner (youngest son of Daniel, deceased,)
settled at present Millville.

In 1730 Edmund Scott 3d, was living on Great, later Gunn hill,
and Samuel Barnes had a house near his brother, John Barnes, on
Hop brook. In the same year John Johnson and Isaac Bronson
were resident at the " South Farms " as the region was sometimes
denominated.

In 1732 John Weed was living in Towantic meadow, west of
Gunntown.

In 1733 Jonas Weed was on Twelve Mile hill, and Joseph Weed
was on Straits mountain, near the top of the mountain. In the
same year Job Pierson was on the same mountain. About 1735
Thomas Porter left his large house, that stood until after 1840 on Bank
street — the Waterbury National Bank building now occupying its
site — and built a house on land at Judd's Meadows that had been
given to his father by the town in 1686. The house that he built is,
according to tradition, still standing and known, I believe, as the
Whitney house. Tradition also claims that it was removed from
its original site. It was an inn during the War of the Revolution
and Thomas Porter, a grandson of the builder, was inn-keeper.
The old house gives evidence of its age. James Baldwin — a brother-

350

HISTORT OF WATEBBUBY,

in-law of Thomas Porter — he who culled the shingles for the meet-
ing house, probably went down at the same time.

Daniel Williams left present Oakville, and about 1735 ^^ is found
on Straits mountain.

Ii^ 1739 Joh^ Lewis had a house southwestwardly of Joseph
Lewis.

. In 1740 Thomas Matthews was living on or near the Woodbury
line and near the southwest corner of the township.

We have mentioned thirty-one persons resident in Judd's
Meadow between 1704 and 1740. Of this number, during the years
included between 1704 and 1740, Joseph Lewis was the richest man
— in 1734 his taxable possessions being rated at ;^2o6, but in 1739
Stephen Hopkins won the race by a single pound. Twenty-three
years later, in 1762, Nathaniel Gunn surpassed Stephen Hopkins by
three pounds. Therefore, the men mentioned were the three
richest men in present Naugatuck down to the close of the Ameri-
can Revolution. The other rich men were Thomas Porter, Thomas
Richards, Gideon Hikcox, Samuel and John Lewis, Thomas
Matthews, and James Brown. The above statements are based
only on the taxable amounts, as given in the rate-book of the listers
from 1730 to 1784.

THE FULLING MILL SITE.

The fulling mill of Samuel Hikcox at Judd's Meadow was prob-
ably the outgrowth of an earlier mill on Great brook at Waterbury
center. No positive evidence of the existence of such an enter-
prise has been found, but a portion of that brook, it will be remem-
bered, was sequestered very early for that purpose, and it is not
improbable that Samuel Hikcox himself carried on the business at
the center before his removal.

The outline history of that mill-site for a century is interesting,
and may, perhaps, be given as an instance of what may be gleaned
from old records. From 17 13 to 1730 we find nothing in relation to
it. In 1730, Ebenezer Hikcox — the son who remained at the home-
stead— laid out the land anew, which is described as being "at the
place where his father set up the Fulling Mill." In 1733, a mill of
some sort was on this land; whether it was the old mill of Samuel
or a new creation of his son does not certainly appear. In 1733
Ebenezer sold to Hezekiah Rew " the mill and the house over the
mill." In 1735 Rew sold the mill, and apparently the house with
it, to James Baldwin, who prospered in its possession for fifteen
years, owning a grist mill and another mill. In 1750 or 175 1 Bald-
win sold his possessions, including a 200 acre farm, to May Way

THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'8 MEADOWS, 351

and William Hoadly of Branford. May Way soon sold his half
interest in mills and land to Richard Smith of Woodbury, who
immediately appears to have " set up the frame of a house " on
Thomas Porter's land, and before purchasing it. The house he
built was south of Fulling Mill brook, between the river and the
New Haven road, while the mill was north of the brook and east
of the New Haven road— the Daniel Warner house being on the
same side of the road, but south of the brook.

Before Smith had finished his house, Jonathan Beebe of Lyme
appeared on the scene and was so attracted by the advantages of
Judd's Meadow for business that he made him a tempting offer
which Smith accepted and Beebe became a resident. During all
these transitory scenes William Hoadly — known by his friends
(tradition tells us) as "Black Bill " —remained the apparently satis-
fied and unmoved owner of the undivided one-half of the 200 acre
farm, including mills and dwelling house. Mr. Beebe doubtless
brought Eastern ideas and notions from New London and Lyme
into the valley, and Mr. Hoadly probably preferring the old ways,
the two men agreed to divide their possessions. Consequently each
became the owner of a strip here and a parcel there of good, bad,
and indifferent lands. Hoadly eventually became sole owner of
the grist-mill and it is thought of the saw-mill also, Mr. Beebe
retaining a right to lay logs by the mill, and possibly a right in the
mills. When the lands were divided, as above shown, the old
Daniel Warner homestead (called at the sale a small house) was
also divided — the dividing line passing through the chimney.
By the time Mr. Beebe had completed his new house and fence,
he conveyed all that he owned east of his new fence to Mr.
Hoadly.

In the course of time — Mr. Beebe having become, by the grace of
The General Assembly, a Lieutenant, wrote: "Being advanced in
years, and being called to the Wars," and made his will.

Mr. Hoadly seems to have lived and died in the occupancy and
possession of lands, mills, and houses. He built a new house for
his own use, and gave the old one to his son William, who became
successively the owner and occupier of the premises. The long
holding of the Hoadlys gave to the locality a name that became a
landmark for several generations.

William and Jude Hoadly, being brothers and of one mind,
remained in the ownership of the old " fulling mill region " on
Squantuck brook — Jude living on the hill, south of the brook in
a house built by Zera Beebe, and which house is standing at this
date, (1891) — William remaining in the homestead of his father.

352

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Jude was noted for his ingenuity as a designer and worker in
wood. He had a "shop" in that vicinity, if not on the brook,
where he manufactured spinning wheels, and received (it is said)
"a land grant about 1770 for services in the old French War."
In process of time Jared Byington came upon the scene and it
would seem, that having purchased lands from Hoadly, he " set
up " a mill to manufacture nails. Jude Hoadly and Jared Byington
agreed to make a division of lands and other interests and also
the very water rushing down from the hills. Hoadly was to use
it two weeks and Byington two weeks — alternating in its use.

CHAPTER XXVIII.

THE HOP BROOK SECTION — EARLY SETTLERS — ON THE ROAD TO MIDDLE-
BURY — LEMUEL NICHOLS* TAVERN — A BRIDE's BROOK — DR. JAMES
PORTER — EPHRAIM BISSELL — WATERBURY's INDIAN RESERVATION —
NON-RESIDENT LAND OWNERS.

HOP brook rises east of Lake Quassapaug at an elevation of
750 feet above the sea, runs through Cedar swamp north-
ward of the lake and wavers through about fifteen miles
of territory, receiving at least fifteen tributaries in its course to the
Naugatuck river at Union City.

Mention must be made of the early settlers in this section of the
township. The level land along the brook near Carrington's
slaughter house was John Barnes' plain. On it Caleb Thompson
built a house about 1733. After it was finished it was found that
the records were so confused that all rights must be ignored and
the land laid out anew. Poor Samuel Barnes was all the way
through life the victim of mistakes in some form, notably in the
line of his various land records. He sold the land to Thompson,
but it had been so recorded to Barnes that it appeared to be on the
wrong side of the brook, so that it became necessary to turn the
brook around and the hill over, in order to make Thompson the
owner of the land. John Barnes began anew and laid out the land.
Samuel bought it from his brother and re-conveyed it to Thompson,
as being easier than to turn the hill over and the brook around. At
this time Samuel Barnes was living farther up the highway to
Judd's meadows on the west side of the river against Piatt's mills,
and shortly after 1733, he had to lay out his own lands anew — the
records having been lost or the deeds unrecorded. Silas Johnson,
another unfortunate individual, was living just above Samuel
Barnes. John Johnson had been the first settler in that spot in
1726, and Silas succeeded him. John had built his house on common
land, so that Silas, after his father's death, was compelled to have
the spot where his house stood laid out.

On Hop brook, above Barnes* plain and in the vicinity of Brad-
leyville, lay George Scott's eight-acre lot, under which name the
locality was known for a generation. Near this lot there comes in
from the east a branch called Welton's brook, named from John
Welton's boggy meadow, which lay in the valley between Malmalick
and Oronoke hills. Farther up Welton's brook lay a noted point,

23

354 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

known as ScoviU's boggy meadow, and sometimes as Scoviirs and
Gaylord*s meadow. It is now called the Peat Swamp.

In going from Waterbury to Middlebury the first ascent is upon
West Side hill, first so named in a grant made to Samuel Barnes
between 1730 and 1733. Next, to the right, is Bryant's hill. Pass
Tamarack swamp, and Richards' hill is at your right as you are pass-
ing through the swamp. Pass the Boughton place, and Arnold's
hill lies to your left. Cross the Peat swamp, and at your right lies
Gaylord's hill. Lemuel Nichols' tavern before the "Revolution," —
now an old house — stands on this hill. A quarter of a mile further
on, and Oronoke hill is on your left. The Umberfield place is on
the north end of this hill. The John Hine place was in the vicinity.
Cross Gaylord's brook, and to your right is Two-and-a-half-Mile
hill — the southern end of which hill is the rock known as Pine rock
— a boundary point between Waterbury and Middlebury. The west-
ern slope of the above hill is now known as Mount Fair. Between
the Two-and-a-half-Mile hill, and the Three-Mile hill, you pass Bis-
sell's hill at the left, which still bears that name. The old Morse
road went over this hill, and on it were several houses, and later a
blacksmith shop belonging to Joseph Peck. Three Mile hill was
named, I know not how early, but it is mentioned in 1720. When
you have reached Middlebury-Four-corners, you have passed the
southern end of this hill. The village of Middlebury is upon the
northern end of the ridge to which the name of Bedlam was applied
very early. Beyond Middlebury, and next Lake Quassapaug, lies
the hill known in 1686 as the Great Hill east of Quassapaug. In the
first formal layout of one of the early roads to Woodbury which
passed over the summit of Three-Mile hill — at the boundary line
mention is made of the Bride's brook. The langriage is "at the
going down of Wolf Pit hill to the Brid's brook in Woodbury
bounds." The brook in question was a branch of Hop brook, now
in Middlebury. We find one or more Bride's brooks in Massa-
chusetts, as well as in Connecticut, with various traditions attached.
In our own case we may venture a suggestion, not only in relation
to Brides' brooks in general, but to the one at the Waterbury and
Woodbury bound line. The bride for whom this brook was named
was, we will say. Miss Sarah Gaylord, whom Thomas Judd, Jr., mar-
ried in 1688. The Reverend Zachariah Walker, of Woodbury, was
the officiating clergyman on that occasion, and special mention of
the fact is recorded with the notice. As he could not legally per-
form any of the rites of the church or any civil functions outside
of his own parish, the parties in question must have presented
themselves within Woodbury bounds. To have complied with the

WATERBURT LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS,

355

law, the clergyman and the contracting parties must at least have
met at this brook for the marriage ceremony. The various tradi-
tions connected with Brides' brooks undoubtedly had their origin
in this custom — practiced at a very early period when passing from
place to place was attended with difficulties and dangers. Getting
married was not easily accomplished in Waterbury at that period —
in fact, it was impossible, for the want of a proper officer. Young
Judd's father was two years later appointed Commissioner or Jus-
tice of the Peace.

As the Woodbury road of 1720 has been mentioned here, it may
be added that the ancient road to Woodbury is referred to as early
as 1687. It ran over Richards* hill and north of Scovill's boggy
meadow. The survey of 1720 abandoned that route and adopted
what had been known for a time as the lower way, which ran over
Arnold's hill and south of Scovill's meadow. The first mention of
Hop swamp — naturally a region of hops — is in 1687, when George
Scott received two grants of land there. Dr. Daniel and Richard
Porter (brothers) were, perhaps, the first settlers to whom land was
laid out at the swamp. Richard moved to New Haven and gave his
Hop swamp allotments to his sons about 1726. The first actual
settler there was either Ephraim Bissell, or Dr. James Porter.

Dr. James Porter settled at Hop swamp, probably about 1725.
The first mention of his house is found in 1730. It stood at the foot
of the Bissell hill and west of the present Hop Swamp School-house.
Tradition states that when his house was in building the workmen
went from the center in the morning and returned at evening, —
fearing the Indians. In later years, a new house was so enclosed
under the same roof with the old one that the two houses appeared
as one building. When, a few years ago, the house was taken down,
the workmen were greatly surprised £0 find that two independent
frames were set together. So unique was the work, that a drawing
of it was made for preservation. A new house built by the Bough-
ton brothers occupies the very site of the house of 1730.

Ephraim Bissell came from Tolland in 1728. He bought land at
Hop swamp, and in a little swamp north of Hop swamp, which gave
his name to the swamp, and also on the hill still known as Bissell's
hill. The old house site lies at the foot of the hill near the north-
eastern edge of the Hop swamp basin. The cellar walls still stand
and the stones of the big chimney lie fallen in a prominent mound.
A large butternut tree has grown out from the cellar bottom and
apple trees stand about — decaying as they stand. The old well-
place is still to be seen, and the large flowing spring where water
was at hand before the well was made. It was here that a hundred

356 BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

and fifty years ago young Ephraim Bissell bade farewell to home
and family — never to return. July i, 1740, "being designed into
the war in the Spanish West Indies in America," he made his will,
leaving to his wife, Abigail, all his "moveable or Personal Estate
of every kind Quality and species whatsoever and in all parts and
places whatsoever the same shall or may be to her use forever."
Besides numerous possessions in Tolland, Bissell owned 200 acres
in Waterbury. His will was presented at the Probate Court in
Woodbury in 1742 by Mrs. Bissell, who "informed that she had
credible information that her husband died in the West Indies,"
but the estate was not settled until seven years had passed. Bissell
is said to have been at the storming of Moro Castle, and to have
been among the missing. He left two sons — Ephraim and Thomas.
Ephraim died early; for some unknown reason he was placed under
a master who managed his affairs and cared for his property and
family. Thomas sold early his part of the land and removed to
Derby, where he was living at the time of his last sale. His de-
scendants are unknown. The last of the Bissells living on the hill
was Eunice Webb. She lived in the old house on the top of the hill,
and removed with her huvsband, Reuben Webb, to the "West."
That portion of the Moss or Morse road that crossed Bissell hill,
became the Webb road. Deacon Timothy Porter, the son of Richard,
had a house at Hop swamp very early, which he is said to have sold,
after which he removed to New Haven, or Stratford, or perhaps to
both places. Later, in 1740, his house is mentioned in the layout
of a road at Hop swamp. In the same year he sold out and went,
perhaps, to Milford, but a few years later he had returned. The
old cellar place of Deacon Timothy's house is still visible a little
southwest of Hop Swamp school-house and a few rods from the
highway, which formerly ran near the old house, but when changed
left it in the field. His son, Mark Porter, built a house (or received
the gift of one) quite near his father's house. Deacon Timothy
Porter's house and that of his cousin, Dr. James Porter, were about
a quarter of a mile apart.

In 1729 the region about Bedlam meadows had attracted the
favorable attention of men from neighboring towns. Eliphalet
Bristol and Daniel Mallery of West Haven had laid out nearly a
hundred acres at Bedlam meadow and on Bedlam hill; Samuel
Umberfield of the same place, Mr. Samuel Whittlesey of Walling-
ford and Briscoe also had lands on the same hill.

Other early settlers may perhaps be mentioned here, without
regard to date. John Porter, son of Timothy, settled on Bissell's
hill; Timothy Porter, Jr., son of Deacon Timothy, on the same ridge.

WATERBURT LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 357

to the westward, near where Mr. Elliott now lives. Captain James
Porter built a house west of the swamp — where Charles Boughton
last lived. David Porter lived in the old house James built.
Deacon Gideon Piatt built about one mile from Deacon Porter's
house — Charles Nichols now lives at the place; his son Gideon
built the house now standing on the opposite side of the road,
where L. C. Wilmot lives. Benjamin Bement settled southwest
of Hop swamp, between the houses of John and Timothy Porter,
Jr. ; Gamaliel Fenn west or southwest of the swamp, toward
Bedlam hill.

It may be a surprise to our readers to learn that Waterbury had
an Indian reservation. It was on the southeast portion of East
mountain and consisted of fifty acres, and was bought by the pro-
prietors of the undivided lands of New Haven, May 7, 1731, for "the
use, benefit, and behoof of the Indians that now do or hereafter
shall be properly belonging to or descending from that tribe of
Indians called or known by the name of New Haven or Quinepiag
Indians as long as any of that tribe or family shall remain and no
longer.*' The Quinnipiac Indians were evidently moved on, for the
consideration was a quit-claim by the proprietors of New Haven of
"fifty acres at the upper end of the New Indian field, to John Moris
of New Haven." This Indian reservation was undoubtedly occupied,
for we find it called " the Indian farm " down to the time of the
Revolution.

Else Wooster, a daughter, perhaps, of the first John Welton of
Waterbury, as he had a daughter Else, had land on the southeast
corner of East mountain; and Stephen Welton, brother of Else
Welton (whose marriage is not recorded in Waterbury), had land in
the same vicinity. Else Wooster's land was the western bound of
this Indian reservation. The above clue is the only link found con-
necting Else Wooster with Waterbury. As many indications of
relationships are hidden away in land records — in the way of sug-
gestion to future genealogists, as well as for the interest of those
concerned — certain land transactions connecting inhabitants of
other towns with Waterbury for a single decade are introduced.
They are not exhaustive of the records, neither are they chrono-
logically arranged.

In 1724 Josiah Rogers, a blacksmith, of Branford, bought of Ephraim Warner
•* a ;^2o right in the commonage, and seven acres of third Division land to be pitched
for and laid out to him," and Henry Toles of New Haven bought Samuel Barnes's
£^0 right. In 1728 Richard Porter of New Haven, sixty acres at Meshadock
meadow; Mr. Whittlesey of Wallingford obtained 282 acres; Deacon John Stanley
of Farmington, 309 acres, afterward called Stanley's farm; Phineas Towner, 2%
acres west of the Little brook; Joseph Nichols of Derby buys of Thomas Porter and
other heirs of Daniel Porter 10 acres on the Long Boggy meadow (in Watertown),

358 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

and lands to be taken up; Thomas Hopkins of Hartford, 92 acres on the east branch
of Hancox brook, the north side of Taylor's Meditation; Bartlett's swamp is first
mentioned— originally laid out to George Scott, Jr. ; the Rev. Samuel Hopkins of
Springfield had land laid out in the Great "Hallow" in the Southeast quarter,
near Wallingford; Daniel and Henry Toles laid out lands on Barnes's right; Mr.
Samuel Hall of Wallingford received lands; Isaac Hotchkiss of New Haven began
buying in the southeast part of the township, and William Gillitt (Gillet) of Milford
sold to Freegift Coggeshall of Milford, 35 acres not laid out, originally granted to
William Scott.

In 1729 Jonathan Gamsey of Milford bought Stephen Hopkins's house with a
highway on every side on Union Square — "four acres more or less," and nine on
the Farmington road for ;t25o; Charles Lane, of Ripton, Fairfield county, a lot in
the village; James Blakeslee sold the Irving Block comer to Abraham Utter of
East Haven; Daniel Holbrook of Derby became a landholder; Abraham Hodges
secured sixty acres to be laid out; Abraham Utter bought of John Bronson, Jr., his
house and all his lands — 103 acres at Scott's mountain; Moses Bronson sold to
Ebenezer Bronson a house at Bronson's meadow^ in Middlebury; "Tolles* Farm"
became Joseph Nichols' farm, and James Johnson of Wallingford bought lands near
it; Henry and Daniel Toles of New Haven sold to Joseph Osborn of the same place
"one-half of all their lands and rights in land in Waterbury, obtained from their
father, who bought said lands of Samuel Barnes and James Brown;" Abraham
Hodges had removed to Waterbury and bought lands up the river; Daniel Hol-
brook (blacksmith) bought lands, and Stephen Pierson of Derby bought of Holbrook
90 acres, with a house, on Strait mountain near the Derby line, and Pierson's son
Thomas, then in Woodbury, sold to his father 41 acres in Cotton Wool meadow;
Robert Johnson of Stratford bought 20 acres west of Welton's brook, by John John-
son's farm; Caleb Thompson built his first house near David's (Scott's) swamp;
Deacon Stephen Hotchkiss of Wallingford took 50 acres in the undivided land, and
laid out about one hundred acres next Wallingford; Nathaniel Peck of Walling-
ford, farmer, with the consent of his wife Sarah, sold 64 acres at Tailor's meadow
to Dr. Jeremiah Hulls of the same place; Thomas Lee of •' Oosatonuck," province
of Mass. Bay, sold land to Joseph Hurlburt; Samuel Umberfield of West Haven
laid out 74 acres west of Cranberry pond: Eliphalet Bristol and Daniel Mallery
possessed lands in " Bedlam " meadow; Mr. Timothy Johnson of Derby had 30
acres in the undivided lands laid out to him; and William Lamson of Stratford
began his ownership of lands by buying in present Middlebury 20 acres, which he
added to from time to time for twenty-five years.

In 1730 Mr. Southmayd and Samuel Hikcox sell to James Johnson 30 acres in
"Ouze Bass swamp, east of Mad river and north of Farmington road;" Caleb
Clark and Daniel How buy, for ;^22o, 220 acres on the western side of Lothrop hill,
westward from the Long Boggy meadow, and northwest from the Round meadow
— in Watertown; Captain John Wells owns 85 acres at "Twich Grass Brook;"
Joseph Gaylord^ Jr., at Buck*s Hill, where his dwelling house now stands,
receives from Ephraim Warner three acres of land in exchange for Gaylord's land
at Ash swamp; John Wetmore of Middletown sells to Nathan Hubbart (Hubbard)
80 acres in Tailor's meadow; Joseph Harris buys near Round meadow; James Hull
of New Haven, on the south end of the old Town Plot; *• Samuel Hikcox Fulling
Mill" is gone, for land is bought "a little above where it stood," and the Rev.
Samuel Hopkins of Springfield sells land to Joseph Noyes.

In 1 73 1 John Hurd of Stratford gave to his son Nathan Hurd 50 acres on the
road to Wooster swamp, and a little later 50 acres to his son John; Joseph and

WATERBURY LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 359

Martha Smith sold to Noah Tuttle of Branford the home place of Mr. Henry W.
Scovill; James and Eunice Johnson conveyed to Mr. John Punderson the land and
house where now stand the "Arcade" building and the buildings occupied by
Miller & Peck, and by T. F. Judson. The Irving block corner had a house and a
'• smith shop " upon it, for Jan. 25, 1731, Joseph Harris sold it to Obadiah Scott, and
March 25th, Obadiah sold it to James Blakeslee, having added the •• smith shop;"
Mr. John Peck of Wallingford bought of George Welton 75 acres ** about two miles
east from Judd's meadows — this was probably at the Quinnipiac reservation;
Stephen Kelsey bought the house and numerous lands of Thomas Andrews, and
Andrews bought Kelsey's house next Woodbury line — at Middlebury, probably.

In 1732 " Dr. Thomas Thompson, Phisstian," bought the big farm of over 300
acres of Nathaniel Stanley of Farmington. Samuel Umber field of West Haven
sold a lot in the village; Benajah Stone of Wallingford secured land "up the
River"; Noah Tuttle conveyed to Joseph Smith "oneMesuage and tenement of
House Barn and three acres of home Lott" adjoining thereto — ^the Henry Scovill
homestead; Timothy Stanley of Farmington sold to Isaac Curtice, "living at a
place called North Haven," lands at and near Popple meadow; James Johnson lost
thirty acres in Ouze Bass swamp by reason of an execution taken out against him
by Thomas Marks of Middletown; Thomas White of Stratford bought of Johnson
two tracts of land; John Hurd, who declares himself a yeoman, sold to his son
Ebenezer Hurd, "who is a Post-rider," 150 acres— a part of it south of the head of
Roaring brook (a branch of Hancox), and the remainder at " Patuckahs " ring;
William and Mary Parsons of Farmington resigned their rights in land to Samuel
Hikcox; Mr. Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., of Milford became the sole owner in "the
Gristmill and Mill place and mill dam, lying east from the town," together with
the thirty acres belonging to the mill, consisting of "fifteen acres on the Mill plain,
eight acres over the Mad river by the common fence, two acres over against the
mill, and one acre on this side of the river by the mill," and four acres up the river
— this was obtained by virtue of ;f35o money, and a deed from Stephen and Tim-
othy Hopkins, executors of the will of John Hopkins, the miller. Baldwin bought
the next month of Thomas and Rachel Upson a house and lot of three and a half
acres on the south side of East Main street. It was one of the two house lots at
that time on that street between Exchange Place and the eastern street called
the path to the mill — present Cole street. A portion of this land is still in the
Baldwin family as represented by Mrs. Harriet Peck, Mrs. Catharine Smith and
Miss Mary Cook. Stephen Pierson of Derby gave the life- use of 90 acres on Scott's
hill to his son Job Pierson; Thomas Wooster of Derby secured 23 acres toward the
southerly bound; Joseph and Martha Smith again sell the Henry Scovill place, this
time to "Samuel Camp the third of that name of Milford," described as lying in
the middle of the town near the meeting house — beside " the house and bam and
orchards and gardens and trees and fruit trees" — Smith had added during his
ownership a "Syder mill"; Jonathan Foot obtained an order for 30 acres in the
undivided land; Ebenezer Baldwin of Woodbury bought land in Buck's meadow,
just now prominently before the public, because of the action of the city of Water-
bury in condemning land in it and on Buck's Meadow mountain for the laying of
water-pipe lines from its reservoir, into which the waters of the West Branch and
Moose Horn brook are to be received; Samuel Thompson of Farmington bought
sixty acres in Watertown; Matthew Woodruff of Farmington land east of Judd's
meadows "about a mile east from Samuel Warner's house"; Mr. James Prichard
of Milford bought 70 acres with a house " west of the river, near David's swamp," of
Caleb and Rebecca Thompson.

36o RISTOBT OF WATERBURT,

In 1733, Samuel Frost of Wallingford bought of Mr. Southmayd land to be laid
out; Mr. Samuel Beecher of New Haven, a ;^20 right in Waterbury lands; Thomas
Robinson and Joseph Tuttle, Jr., of New Haven, 60 acres on Scott's mountain and
its vicinity; Mrs. Abigail Wright of Wethersfield, 40 acres against Judd*s Jercho;
Captain Theophilus Munson of New Haven, land lying in and about Cotton Wool
meadow; Mr. James Prichard of Milford, for ;£^iio in money, of Stephen Upson,
five acres with a house on it, "lying near the South meadow gate" — this was
virtually the square bounded by Bank, Meadow, Grand and Field streets; Samuel
and Dorothy Camp sold the Henry Scovill homestead — this time it was sold to an
owner who would retain it — Lieut. Thomas Bronson; Dr. Ephraim Warner gave to
his son Ebenezer 20 acres, half of his own dwelling house, and his "smith's shop,
and the tools for smith work." all on Buck's Hill; Thomas Levensworth of Strat-
ford for £'js obtained 75 acres adjoining John Johnson's farm, and on the hill on
the east side of Welton's Meadow brook; Thomas White of Stratford sold to
Joseph Peat of Stratford, two parcels of land — once James Johnson's; " Alexander
Woolcot and Lydea Woolcot, Husband and Wife, which Lydea is the only daugh-
ter and issue of Mr. Jeremiah Atwater, late of New Haven, deceased," conveyed
to Abraham Utter, for ;£"25o. numerous lands, including the Johnson house, and
the hill on which Mr. Hiram Hayden's house stands — in this deed and other deeds
called Welton s hill, from Ephraim Welton who built the first house on it; Thomas
Brooks, merchant, of Boston, mortgaged to John Wass of Boston, ** Distiller," more
than 1500 acres of land in Waterbury and Farmington; Abraham Utter sold to
Nathan Beard, the Johnson house and ten acres, and Welton's hill " of about four
or five acres," bounded by Grove, Willow and Pine streets, with Samuel Scott's
land on the east; Nathaniel Gunn of Derby bought of John Andrews 157 acres with
a house on it, northwardly of Twelve Mile hill; Abraham Andrews of Saybrook
deeded to his brother Joseph Lewis, lands and rights in lands in the township;
John Scott had a house at Meshadock. mentioned here, because not recognized
elsewhere; and Ezekiell Welton, who is said to have gone to Nova Scotia, was
living in Milford.

In 1734 Isaac Bronson gave to his son Isaac the new house he had built, and the
glass he had provided for it. and four acres of land on the south side of the Wood-
bury road, in Middlebury; John and Nathaniel Griffin and Joshua Holcomb of
Symsbury, grandsons of John Welton, the planter, sold their rights of inheritance,
to James Blakeslee, including 10 acres "westwardly of a hill commonly called
Malmalick down southwardly upon the brook that runs through Scovill's and Gay-
lord s boggy meadow"; Samuel Graves of Sunderland, *'Hamsheir" county, in
Massachusetts Bay, sold land "laid out to the hiers of Israel Richardson"; Joseph
"Gearnsey" of Milford bought lands at The Village; Joseph Mix of New Haven
conveyed land which seems to have descended by inheritance from Sergt. Samuel
Hikcox; Amos Camp of Wallingford expended ;£'ioo in land and habitation at
Plymouth; John and Hannah Scott of Sunderland, Mass., conveyed land to Samuel
Graves of Sunderland. This John Scott is a surprise ! He does not seem to be
accounted for, except upon the remote possibility that he may have been the long
lost son of Jonathan. This deed was signed in 1732, recorded in 1734. Joseph
Guernsey of Milford sold a village lot to his brother; Thomas Marks sold " Oze-
Bass " swamp to Nathan Hubbard; the village lots flitted from owner to owner
like birds from twig to twig; the Rev. Samuel Hopkins was busied with his land
sales and exchanges and the laying out of land; Samuel Hull of Derby bought
land at a place called Bear plains, on the west side of the river at Derby bounds;
Samuel Scott was living in Derby; Dr. Jeremiah Hulls bought lands freely; John

WATERBURT LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 361

Morris of New Haven sold his land to Joseph Guernsey of Milford, as did many
other land owners; Caleb Hendrick of Wallingford bought of Jacob Johnson for
£100, 80 acres "about three miles east from the town, near Doctor Hull's land.
This is a peculiar deed, in that it contains the following : " To have and to hold all
that is therein, thereon, or any wayes thereunto appertaining, As mines, minerals,
wood, Timber, stones, water, Water Courses, TurflE and Twigg," suggesting mining
operations on East mountain. Nathaniel Beadle, John and Eleazer Hurd of Strat-
ford, and Joseph Harris of Ridgefield, own land in Waterbury; there was a Free
Holders Court held at Richard Welton's house on Buck's Hill to determine to whom
a seven-acre orchard, or seven acres with an orchard on it, belonged; Mrs. Susanna
Munson of New Haven obtained a Village lot; Samuel Scott of Derby bought four
acres on the northwest corner of Drum hill; Mr. James Bradley of North Haven
secured the right to lay out 100 acres of school land for 999 years — making 385 acres
of school lands sold in 1734; Ebenezer Hikcox sold out all his lands and rights of
land in Waterbury, except the acre on which his mill stood at Judd's meadows;
John Humaston of New Haven bought 20 acres to be taken up in the undivided
land; Thomas and Samuel Barnes sold their father's Town Plot house lot to Mr.
Daniel Curtice of Stratford; Bantum Swamp and Great Pond in Litchfield are
mentioned; in the sale of the Long Meadow School lot it was bounded south
"upon land that belongs to the heirs of old Giffer John Bronson." This name,
applied to John Bronson, the planter, occurs a number of times in the records.

In 1735 Thomas Matthews Jr. of Wallingford bought of Thomas Andrews a
house and 69 acres of land, described as next Woodbury, and by the road that goes
to Woodbury; Stephen Hopkins had a saw mill at Judd's meadow; Joseph Guern-
sey. Jr. of Milford bought of Josiah Piatt of Milford land ** at a place called the
North Village." Mr. John How of Wallingford invested ;f355 in a house and lands
up the river; Deacon Samuel Brown became the owner of the Irving Block corner,
and other lands; Captain William Judd began the purchase of his great farm two
miles and a half out on the Woodbury road, by buying of Ebenezer Bronson three
houses and numerous lands on T\\^o-and-a-half-Mile and on Three-Mile hills —
beside the little " two and-a-quarter rod" piece at Sandy Hollow that Ebenezer
had bought for a Sabbath Day house of Joseph Smith, when Smith owned the
Henry Scovill place; Benjamin Hikcox conveyed to Mary Hikcox and her son
Thomas all his land rights; Benajah Stone sold land up the river; Nathaniel and
Timothy Stanley, both of Farmington, sold to Martha Smith, wife of Thomas of
that town, 100 acres off a larger tract that was conveyed to their father. Lieut. John
Stanley; Samuel Wooster and Else, his wife, of Derby, sold to Nathaniel Gunn
land at Poland, originally laid out to Stephen Welton, deceased; Samuel Moss con-
veyed his right in 400 acres lying between the Spruce Swamp and the West Branch;
Samuel Baker of Branford invested £i() in a Village lot, which he at once trans-
ferred to Robert Foot of New Haven; a deed went upon record, whereby we learn
that twenty proprietors of Waterbury united in 1725, in giving to Nathaniel
Arnold 63 acres in the undivided lands, doubtless to induce so desirable a citizen to
live in Waterbury; Daniel Tommus of West Haven began to buy lands; Basill
Dixwell, formerly of Boston, but then resident in New Haven — a silver-smith —
conveyed to Captain Moses Mansfield of New Haven part of a £so right in the
town, purchased by his grandfather, Mr. John Prout; Mrs. Susanna Munson of
New Haven bought a Village lot; John Morgan of Norwich bought 100 acres;
Stephen and Isaac Hopkins, brothers, who had held their lands in common, agreed
to divide them — ^both having dwelling houses in the eastern part of the town;
Daniel Curtiss of Stratford bought a ^^40 right in the township, originally Benjamin

362 HISTORY OF WAIERBURT.

Warner's; Nathan Tuttle bought land of Edward Scovill; Nathaniel Gunn
augmented his possessions by paying to Joseph Lewis, Jr., £^9^ in money for no
acres and two houses; Eunice Welton of Durham conveyed land at Poland and at
the Village; Ezekiel Welton of Milford Town obtained 7 acres at Isaac's meadow
bars; James Smith of Had dam gave ;f 226 money for four pieces of land northward
of Scott's mountain; and Israel Richardson had removed to Sunderland, Mass.

In 1736, the forty-year-old deed by which Isaac Bronson obtained the lands of
Thomas Newell when he removed to Farmington in 1696, is placed upon record;
Amos Matthews of Wallingford obtains 57 acres of Thomas Andrews* land; Hannah
Tompkins of Woodbur}', for ;^ioo, gets three village lots of 16 acres and 20 rods
each, and parts of three other lots; Jonathan Baldwin buys of John Bronson the
land lying in the point between the Mad river and the Naugatuck river— two acres
in extent; Abigail Woodbridge of Hartford sells to John Warner land of her
mother, Elizabeth Wilson (widely known for her ability as a financier); Samuel
Frost of Wallingford secures his first land in Waterbury; there is paid out of the
Waterbury town treasury fifty shillings in money to Elnathan Taylor for "a triangle
piece of land containing half an acre and fifty- two rods " in present Thomaston
" for a burying place for the inhabitants of the town of Waterbury, lying on the
plain by Elnathan Taylor's house, a little north of it and north of Twitch Grass
brook"; Samuel Baker of Branford buys for £^00 current money land in The Vil-
lage; Abel Gunn of Derby buys of his brother Nathaniel the 30 acres at Judd's
meadows, with two houses on it, which Nathaniel had bought of Joseph Lewis;
Mary Tuttle of Woodbury has 50 acres laid out on her father Daniel Warner's
right; John Rumrill buys a slice of Joseph Lathrop's 400 acres at the West Branch;
Shadrach Seager of Wallingford buys 60 acres next south of Mr. Read's gpreat
farm, next Wallingford bounds; Lemuel Baker had worked for Joseph Lathrop
three years and some months, and was to labor two months more for 100 acres of
land lying near the West Branch; four Wells brothers, all of Stratford, give to their
six sisters — four of them married — 200 acres in the northern part of the township;
Joseph Prime of Woodbury sells to Sergeant Moses Johnson of that town 209 acres
near Break Neck hill.

In 1737 Mr. Benjamin Prichard of Milford bought of Obadiah Warner, for ;f 190
in money, 50 acres at Buck's Hill, with a house and barn upon it; Mr. Samuel
Baker of Branford, 60 acres at Scott's mountain; Richard Porter of New Haven
sold to John Bronson his lands at Popple meadow; Mr. Josiah Terrill of Milford
paid James Brown ;f 814 in money, for his possessions ** at and about Judd's
meadow on the east side of the river" — eight parcels in all, including his house;
Daniel Tommus of West Haven had become Daniel Thomas of Waterbury, when
he sold to Josiah Terrell 20 acres that he bought of his father Brown, at Judd's
Meadow; James Poisson of Hartford quit claimed land to John Southmayd, Jr.,
made over to him by order of the General Court from the estate of Israel Richard-
son, deceased; Mr. Benjamin Harrison of Branford bought in acres, with a house
and bam upon it, of the land that the brothers, Stephen and Isaac Hopkins, had
but latel}' divided, lying in the eastern part of the township; Mr. Samuel Todd of
New Haven purchased 30 acres of division land, formerly belonging to Joseph
Prime of Woodbury; John Alcock secured a ;^2o right in the sequestered and undi-
vided lands; Mr. John Smith of East Haddam expended ;^i94 in Waterbury lands;
Stephen Curtice and Zachariah Sanford of New Haven, ;^20o; Mr. Samuel Cook of
Wallingford, ;f2oo; Mrs. Abigail Tanner of New Haven, ;f2oo; Mr. John Hummes-
ton of New Haven, ;^425 in money, paid to Mr. Southmayd; Samuel Linsley of
Branford, £^\ Nathan Beard, " Plough Right," secured land from a dozen own-

WATERBURT LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS, 363

ers; Nathan and Mary Prindle sold to their brother, Nathaniel Arnold, the house
and land on which they were living in April, 1737; and, in December of the same
year, Arnold conveyed it to Ephraim Warner, Jr., and Ebenezer Judd— as **4
acres with a house, shop, Fulling mill and tainters thereon, the press Iron
plate and other materials for dressing of cloth, lying eastward from the town
by the highway to Buck's Hill;" Moses Tayler and James Pumroy of Hartford
obtained of Robert Foot of Branford his portion of a Village lot, and bought
another of John Scovill; Moses Taylor and James Pumroy of Hartford bought the
32d. lot in The Village, of John Scovill. In 1737 Abraham Utter had left Waterbury,
for he is called " of the Oblong or Woster Sheer in Duchers County, in the province
of New York in America." In this year also, Isaac Trowbridge expended ;f36o,
and Thomas Foot ^^163 in land; John Morris of New Haven bought 10 acres at the
mouth of Hog Pound brook — that is, near the East Farms school house; James
Wakelin of Stratford, land at Judd's Meadow; Jacob Blakeslee of New Haven, 100
acres up the river; Nathan Tuttle, ** living on the Oblong." sold his Popple meadow
land; Israel Richardson "of Sunder Land," son of Israel, and grandson of
Thomas, sold his father s Bachelor right to Capt. Timothy Hopkins; Samuel Sher-
wood of New Milford. Joshua and Mary Judson, Abraham and Elizabeth Curtice,
Gershom and Sarah Edwards, Thomas and Phebe UfiFoot, and Samuel Sherwood of
New Milford, sold rights in land.

In 1738, Nathan and Hannah Gaylord of New Milford, and Samuel Sherwood of
the same place, sell rights in lands; Mathew Blakslee of Wallingford receives the
gift of land; Mr. John Smith of East Haddam removes to Waterbury to take pos-
session of his lands, for which he has paid ;^5o8; the Rev. Mr. Todd owns 115 acres,
about this time; William Ludington of New Haven buys land between Shum*s
orchard and the river (in the north part of the township); Joseph Lothrop writes
himself "of Norwich; " Mrs. Elizabeth Lewis, wife of Joseph of Derby, buys eight
parcels of land; Samuel Cowle Sen' of Wallingford, John Morgan of Norwich,
Shadrach Sagar and Daniel Clark of Wallingford, are land owners. Mr. Roger
Prichard of Milford buys of John Warner a house and barn and 20 acres of land on
Buck's Hill; David and Ruth Johnson (the youngest daughter of Joseph Gaylord,
the planter), of Durham, convey all rights in Waterbury lands to Benjamin Judd;
Edmund Tompkins of Woodbury buys for ;^i70, in money, half of the grist mill at
Oakville of James Williams, including a house and lands, and Samuel Root of
Farmington, fifty acres on Three Mile hill.

In 1739 Daniel and Lydea Pardy of New Haven sell 11 acres upon the side of
Abrigado. given by Lydea's father, Richard Porter; James Waklee of Stratford
buys a £,\o propriety; Josiah Piatt of Milford conveys land; Phebe Wooster,
widow, of Derby, conveys a part of a propriety that was Benjamin Richards';
Elizabeth and Matthew Woodruff, both of Farmington, lay out lands; James Smith
has a house north of Scott's Mountain and east of Obadiah's Meadow, where
William Scovill had 20 acres laid out on the "Ministry Right;" James Bellamy
becomes the owner of 86 rods of land; Mr. Alexander and Lydia Woolcot of New
Haven, and Mr. John and Lydea Eliot of the same place, lay out lands — the first
on a right derived from Timothy Hopkins, the latter from John Gaylord. Eliphalet
Bristol and Daniel Mallery of New Haven sell rights derived from Ebenezer Bron-
son's bachelor lot; Samuel and Sarah Weed of Derby sell land to Edmund Tomp-
kins of Waterbury. John and Ruth Hill of East Guilford sold land; Gamaliel
Turrell of New Milford bought 20 acres at Scovill's mountain lot, and 27 acres at
Buck's Hill on the east side of Benjamin Warner's house lot, and laid out six parcels
of land; Jeremiah Peck for "the consideration of value received" of Mr. Mark

364 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Leavenworth, conveyed to him 46 acres westward of Hop Swamp, and Mr. Leaven-
worth records 151 acres; the heirs of Consider Hopkins of Hartford lay out lands;
Daniel Potter was of Waterbury; Mrs. Susanna Munson, widow, of New Haven,
buys 54 acres of school land. Moses Johnson of Woodbury acquired land; William
Lampson of Stratford sold land to George Nichols, who began the record of his
lands — as, '* 25 acres on the westerly part of Burnt hill, east of the head of the
Little brook, on a popple swamp;" Ephraim Warner sold his half of the fulling
mill, house, and shop, that he had bought from Nathaniel Arnold; John "Morris of
East Haven laid out land with Mr. Southmayd and his son John, east of the town,
and north of the Farmington road. Ephraim Sanford and Obadiah Hill obtain cer-
tain land rights from John and Samuel Stanley of Wallingford — that were derived
through John and Thomas Newell and John Stanley; Daniel Clark takes land at
David's swamp; Mr. Benjamin Harger of Derby buys of Daniel Hall of Derby, and
Josiah Gilbert of Ridgefield, land south of Ash Swamp; Thomas Osborne buys no
acres on Bedlam hill; Hackaliah and Elizabeth Thomas of New Haven, sell, in
I733» to their brother Zadock Clark, Elizabeth's right in land — by a division of the
estate of her mother, Mrs. Rebeckah Clark, late of New Haven; James Fenn
becomes the owner of land on Bedlam hill; Samuel and Elizabeth Knowles of
Woodbury sell to James Nichols land of John Bronson's original propriety, from
their father Ebenezer Bronson's estate; Joseph Peet of Stratford sells to Thomas
Leavenworth two tracts of land — one on the Little brook, the other on Burnt hill;
"Alice " Woster (formerly Else) sells her land at the southeast corner of East moun-
tain to Samuel Burwell of Milford; James Royce of Wallingford sells to his brother
Phineas his right of inheritance in land up the river of their father Nehemiah
Royce; Daniel Brackett of Wallingford buys land in Poland; Mr. Joseph Moss of
Derby, 12 acres on the Twelve Mile hill, at the Twelve Mile stake, bought in 1721,
and not before recorded — this is the 12 acres originally laid out to Stanley, and
adjoined the loo-acre farm the Moss brothers bought of the Indian proprietors on
that hill; Elisha and Abigail Kent of Fairfield also sell a right in the same 12 acres;
Daniel, John, and Ebenezer *• Bowton," Eliphalet and Mary Slason, David and
Mary Waterbury, John and Eunice Fanshaw, all of Stamford, quit claimed their
rights in land, derived through their mother, Mercy Bowton.

In 1740 Lieut. Jeremiah Peck of Milford conveyed to the Rev. Mark Leaven-
worth land to be laid out; Mr. Samuel Hall of Wallingford and Joseph Daring of
Litchfield each bought 20 acres to be laid out; Abram Canfield of Derby laid out 10
acres on the southwest end of Malmelick hill; Zachariah Blackman of Stratford, 60
acres near Grassy hill; Samuel and Daniel Lindly, heirs of Jonathan Lindly, all of
Branford, over a hundred acres on both sides the Mad river; Josiah Rogers of
Branford, land on Patucko's ring, while Josiah Rogers and Josiah Piatt of Milford,
give, each of them, 10 acres '* for the consideration of the First Society in Water-
bury settling a minister, and to make over to their now present minister (Mr.
Leavenworth) as part of settlement; " Josiah Piatt in the same year gave in addi
tion to Mr. Leavenworth 5 acres to lay out, assigning the former consideration as a
motive, and a few proprietors contributed 60 acres for the same end; Walter Hen-
derson of Hartford bought two Village lots; Joseph Hikcox, John and Hannah
Camp of Durham, grandchildren of Joseph Gaylord, sold lands; Mr. Jonathan
Smith of West Haven bought of Thomas Brooks of Boston 60 acres to lay out *' on
the Right that was originally Phillip Judds;" Thomas Clinton of Wallingford
bought an £%o right in the undivided lands; Jeremiah and Hannah O'Kean of
Derby mortgage land a little south of Break Neck hill, which land was given to
Hannah O'Kean " when she was called by the name of Hannah Hawkins, by her

WATERS URT LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 365

father, Joseph Hawkins; " Captain Benjamin Holt of Wallingford becomes a land
owner; and the children of Thomas Judd, Jr., sell their rights in land to "our
brother and sister Joseph Hall and Abigail, his wife, of Wallingford." Abigail is
not mentioned among the children of Thomas, Jr.

The above items represent but a very small fraction of the real
estate transactions enacted during the period. Mr. Southmayd's
duties were indeed arduous, and especially so during the year when
he resigned his pastoral office, and in the year following, his weak-
ness and inability are manifest in the public records. Oftentimes
his strength failed in the midst of the recording of a deed, and
another, and a very awkward hand, took up the work.

CHAPTER XXIX.

SAMUEL HOPKINS, D. D. — JOHN SOUTHMAYD, JR. — SABBATH DAY HOUSES
— BRIDGES — THE "GREAT SICKNESS" OF 1749 — JOHN ALLEN, A
WORKER IN METALS — INVENTORY OF HIS ESTATE — TOWN INDEBT-
EDNESS EXPENSES FOR THE YEAR I749 — WARDS OF THE TOWN

MR. SOUTHMAYD — HIS DEATH IN 1755 — TOWN OFFICERS IN 1760.

NOTWITHSTANDING the preaching of Tennant and Whit-
field and Edwards, the standard of the religion of the
Puritans, held aloft through such stress of tribulation for
so many years, was gradually lowered. Nevertheless, here and
there a rare, unsullied flower of Puritanism raised itself into life
and beauty. Waterbury gave birth and nourishment to Samuel
Hopkins, a royal specimen of that peculiar flower and fruitage —
which specimen, men of coming ages will seek to analyze with sci-
entific interest, and, let us hope, with spiritual insight. It is at
this time that we find him, a young man of twenty-two years,
returning after his graduation from Yale College to his father's
house in Waterbury — to live for some months the life of a recluse,
spending whole days in fasting and prayer, seeking the promotion
of that which to him appeared to be the true religion and spend-
ing his time in promoting it among the young people in the town.
Wherever we follow him, whether preaching a little later for a few
Sabbaths in the Waterbury meeting-house in the presence of Mr.
Southmayd, the teacher of divine truth to him from his infancy, or
seeking to live under the light that fell from the life of Jonathan
Edwards, or preaching to the people of Great Harrington; whether
hurrying home in the hope of receiving his mother's last words,
and tenderly confessing his great love for her; or again speeding
over the same weary miles to find his father dying; whether spend-
ing himself in the care and education of his three young brothers
(all members of Yale College) left to his protection, or in efforts
for the African and the Indian; whether creating a great system of
theology, or performing the lowliest service to man, we find this
grand Puritan an absolutely truthful man! Presently we hear him
breathing forth to himself in the silence of his diary, words like
these; "If all the highest enjoyments of earth were laid at my
feet, to have them to all eternity without God, I would not give
this hour's enjoyment for them all. How swift and how sweetly
do ideas pass the mind, when it is in any measure in a right frame.

1742- 17G0. ^57

And again: "O astonishing that I may say it! I have had a gracious
and most sweet visit from God. My soul adored and loved and
rejoiced in him!" and again, "Have had a sweet time in a
walk in the woods. Had more hope and confidence before God that
I should dwell with him forever in his kingdom than I ever had
before;" and once again, "I have been walking in a rope walk by
myself. There I dedicated myself to Jesus Christ with strength of
heart, with unspeakable joy." But we might go on indefinitely,
repeating the scale of the heights and the depths of that man's
magnificent nature — under Puritanism — without conveying a sin-
gle note of its surpassing grace and sweetness. Would that some
one of Waterbury's sons might honor himself by giving to our
" Meeting House Green " statues in memory of John Southmayd
and Samuel Hopkins.

The esteem in which John Southmayd, Jr. was held by his fel-
low townsmen is well evinced by his election in December of 1742
to the offices of selectman, constable, fence viewer, collector of the
country rate and member of the school committee. Two months
later he died, leaving a wife — to whom he had been married but
three years — and two sons. Daniel Southmayd, his only brother and
younger by seven years, was appointed to fill the vacant office of con-
stable, and to gather the country rate, while Timothy Judd became
townsman, and Lieut. John vScovill served on the school committee.

In 1743 Wallingford was ambitious to have "Courts kept" a
part of the time in that town, and invited Waterbury to join with
her in a petition to that effect, which was agreed to on the part of
Waterbury, provided that "no part of any expense of money in
making the application, or building a court house or prison might
fall upon her." In the same year liberty was granted "to set a
school house where the old school house stood," but no word or
hint has been afforded us as to the location of any school house up
to this period, beyond the fact that when it was voted to build one
in 1731, it was to be " twenty foot square and on the Meeting House
Green," but a year from that day the above vote was cancelled and
we hear no more of a school house until 1743. The probabilities seem
to be that the first house was not on the green — that the second one
was— and that the third one was placed where the first one had been.
This was also the year when the town voted to apply to the General
Assembly that the new bridge over the river at West Main street
might "be made a toll bridge for all that should pass over it except
the town inhabitants."

Sabbath Day houses became prominent in 1743. The earliest
one noticed was in 1731 when Joseph Smith, then owning the Henry

368 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

Scovill homestead lot of three acres, sold from that portion of it
called the Sandy hollow, a two rod square piece to Ebenezer Bron-
son for a Sabbath Day house. The Dr. North residence stands in
Sandy hollow. In 1737 James Porter, then living at Hop swamp,
sold to his brother Thomas the homestead of their father Daniel —
the taxable estimate of which land alone is to-dav rated at over one
million dollars — "except 20 foot square on the east side joining^ to
the highway to build a small house upon." The third one we find
when Stephen Hopkin.s — then living at Judd's Meadow — bought
of the William Hikcox estate, Jan. 12, 1740, "a small Sabbath day
House and twenty foot square of land on which it stands in the
First Society near the Meeting House, bounded south on a high-
way and every other side on Mr. Leavenworth's land." Forty-four
years later Stephen Hopkins' son Joseph sold the above land to the
Rev. Mark Leavenworth, then described as "lying at the south-
east corner of his home lot." It may now be described as the south-
east corner of the homestead land of the family of the late Charles
B. Merriman. This Sabbath Day house had an eventful history in
its later and more secular days. In 1743 William Silkriggs had
liberty to set up a house " in the highway against the north end
of Edmund Scott's house where the discourse was of setting the
church." The land granted was to be twenty by twenty-two feet
in dimensions. In the same year the town "upon the motion made
by some persons for liberty to set up Sabbath Day houses in the
highway, appointed a committee to state what place they should
build on." Ebenezer Hikcox wished to place a house in the Ram
pasture [Willow street south of W^est Main street], but was referred
to the committee appointed to state places for the building of Sab-
bath day Houses. He was probably an attendant of the church
near by. A little later general permission was accorded "such
farmers as had a mind to build Saboth day Houses, of setting them
in the highway against the Sandy hollow above Thomas Bronson's. '
They were to advance into the highway sixteen feet, and extend
along it twenty rods.

In 1745 the town resolved "to apply to the General Assembly in
May or some other time or way to get a settlement of the line
between Farmington bounds and Waterbury." Mr. Southmayd,
Captain Samuel Hikcox, and Sergeant Thomas Porter were empow-
ered with authority to settle the matter. The bridge over the
Great river on the Woodbury road was a source of continual
anxiety, trouble and cost. It was built and repaired and rebuilt
with surprising frequency. In 1748 it was again swept away.
Eighty pounds was appropriated to the building of a new one.

174^-1760. 3^9

" taking the timber and plank left of the old bridge." At the same
time jQ22 was appropriated for the Northbury bridge, ;^22 " for
the bridge over the Mad river, a little below the mill," and ;^22 to
Captain Samuel Hikcox toward a good cart bridge over the river at
his mill. Even the highways in present Watertown were ** spoiled
by the flood " in that year. Nothing is found in relation to a bridge
at Judd's Meadow until 1753, when the inhabitants living there
petitioned for some relief about building a bridge. The town sent
a committee "to view the circumstances and judge of the necessity
of having a bridge and how the inhabitants there were affected to
it." Captain Daniel Southmayd was on this committee. The
report of the committee was acted upon by granting "Judd's
Meadow men leave to draw jQioo old tenor, towards the building a
bridge over the river at the mouth of Toantic [or Long Meadow]
brook where it empties itself into the river," but the grant was con-
ditional,— Samuel Scott, Gideon Hikcox, and John and Samuel
Lewis were required to give sufficient bonds that there should be
no further demands on the town for building or repairing a bridge
in that place. In a " Bridge account at Judd's Meadow " which has
been preserved without date, but somewhat later, at the raising of
the bridge eighty " meals of victuals " were furnished at six pence
each. Among the items of cost are included two gallons of rum
at four shillings per gallon, and "five gallons of Rhum of Capt.
Ezra Bronson, allowed for the Watermen." The charge for a
day's work on this bridge varied from two to three shillings,
but in most instances the town reduced the amount by a six
pence, if over two shillings. In 1749 the townsmen were ordered
to take bonds of Ebenezer Richardson, Isaac Bronson, Jr., and
Stephen Welton for the Woodbury Road bridge. That was a
King's highway, or country road, and it was necessary to keep
it open.

Mr. James Blake of Dorchester, left an account of the severe
drought that prevailed in the summer of 1749, in which he tells us
that it was the 6th of July before any rain came; that by the end
of May the grass was burned up and the ground was white; that
the cattle were "poor, lowing things" wandering in search of food,
and nothing green to be seen. There was so little hay that one
hundred pounds of English hay sold for three pounds, ten shillings;
barley and oats were so pinched that only seed was obtained; Indian
corn rolled up and wilted, and flax failed — that the next spring,
butter sold for seven shillings and six pence the pound, and that
June i8th, 1750, was said to be the hottest day ever known in the
northerly part of America.

24

370 mSTOBT OF WATERBUBT.

The history of the summer of 1749 in Waterbnry is best told in
the brief and terse words of a petition of the inhabitants, addressed
to the General Assembly of the Colony, in October of that year, in
which they say: In the summer past, by the Providence of Almighty
God we have been visited with Remarkable and Sore Sickness,
which spread itself throughout the whole Town in so extraordinary
a manner that in two Parishes scarcely ten families escaped the dis-
temper. Mar^ whole families at the same time were incapable of helping
thanselres in the least degree. It happened at a time when our Hus-
bandry required our utmost diligence and labor, and very much
distressed us on that account. From the middle of Harvest to the
last of September, almost all that were in health were constantly
employed in tending and watching with the Sick, or burying the
Dead. Without the charges commonly arising in like cases on
account of Physicians, Tenders, and loss of time, which are doubt-
less very great in such a Distressing time, these are not comparable
with what we have suflFered by neglecting our husbandry in the
proper season for improving the same. Almost all our Low Meadows
dried as thev stood, so that what of them were mowed were of little
or no value and some not mowed yet. Not above half the usual
number of Acres of English Grain were sowed, and that so much
out of season and so poorly Tilled that we have reason to expect
but a thin harvest in proportion to what we have sowed, so that if
it should please God to favor us with health in the ensuing year,
our Distresses will be great — our Provision to be purchased for our
Families and our Town and Society charges greatly increased on
many accounts.

They besought the abatement of the Country tax upon the list
of 1748. The tax in question was forgiven the people, but the town
received no school money for that year.

Of the disease which caused such sore distress and affliction.
Dr. Bronson tells us that it took the form of a low, nervous fever,
and that if a patient survived the ninth day, recovery was expected.
We have a list of ninety-three deaths which occurred during the
year 1749. According to Dr. Bronson's estimate of the population
in that year — 1500 — the mortality must have been equal to one-six-
teenth of the inhabitants. He also states that " six graves were
open in the old burying ground at the same time." These graves
were probably made for Rachel Johnson, an infant, Susanna
Williams, daughter of Daniel, aged seventeen years, a three year
old son of Obadiah Richards, an infant son of Thomas Hikcox,
Mary, the three year old daughter of Samuel Hickox, and Osee,
the three year old son of Isaac Hopkins, as the first named three

died on the 24th of August, and the second three on two succeeding
days. Three deaths also occurred on August nth. John Barnes,
the shoe-maker, lost four children. Thomas Williams died, and
three of his children. The Scott family lost six of its members,
and the Prichard family seven. The very poor, the utterly desolate,
the solitary, the homeless individuals disappeared from record, and
left no sign. Their numbers we cannot give. John Allyn, or
Allen, had "no near relative,*' and but for the Probate Records at
Woodbury, his very existence as the first known worker in brass
and other metals in Waterbury, would have remained unknown.
The "estate of John Allen" was presented on October 31st, 1749.
** No near relatives, and John Alcox, represented as a man faithful,
was appointed administrator." The inventory consisted of more
than one hundred and fifty items, of which the first mentioned is a
Bible, appraised at ;^2, followed by a Psalm, a Hymn, and a spelling
book. He had a £2 10 shilling gray wigg, a new jQ6 castor hat,
leather, brown Holland, and plush breeches, beside check trousers; a
£iQ camblet coat, a jQio grate coate, and a JQ^ blue streight body,
brown russet vests, blew vest with silver buttons, and, best of all, a
costly green vest; neck cloths of muslin and of silk, red checked and
brown; stocks of cambric and muslin, both checked and plain; hand-
kerchiefs of silk, linen and cotton; woolen, linen, new Holland and
old Holland shirts; caps and mittens; old, and Blew linen, brown,
and Blew worsted stockings; red flowered and yellow plate ribbons,
and a paper ofpinns, beside two snuff boxes, knives, combs, a razor,
brass ink horn and numerous other articles. But what should
interest Waterbury especially is the fact that he was apparently
a silversmith and worker in brass. We quote from the inventory.

£ s. d.

Cash, 21 07 00 I pound of steel,

4 pair of knee buckles, . 2 00 00 6 ounces of copper,
3 pair of shoe buckles, . 2 16 00 5 pounds 6 ounces old iron,

2 pair of cast buckles, 00 17 00 Wire, 00

Pair silver knee buckles and A hand vice, .

stock buckles, . . 3 05 00 A screw plate and taps [?]

Sale knee buckles, . 00 03 00 2 small screw plates.

Glass buttons set in silver, 00 08 00 A wier plate,

Pair of brass buttons, . 00 04 06 Pair of small Dividers,

Knee buckles, . . . 00 03 00 Pair of large Dividers,

30 pounds and 4 ounces of A pair of scales,

brass, . . . 12 02 00 Old files, .... 00

2 pounds 6 ounces cast brass, 01 00 00 A brass box, .

5 pounds of lead, .. 00 15 00

Beside the above, there are knives, a chest, boxes, a leather apron,
a jQi-^ piece of red broad cloth, thread, and silk, and remnants of

£

s.

d.

00

05

06

00

03

09

00

II

00

00

10

00

I

05

00

I

05

00

00

03

00

00

03

00

00

06

00

00

04

00

00

15

00

00

12

00

00

05

00

372 HISTORY OF WATEHBUHr.

dry goods, vials, and more snuff boxes. June ii, 1752, an addi-
tional inventory was presented, containing wooden flasks, a pair of
spring tongs, a brass skillet, sodering iron, an iron spindle, points
of comb teeth, tongs for buckles, copper, a pair of flukes, six pairs
of boxes for great wheels, Juels without any drops; chisels, thread
stockings, and other things, from alspice to seventy bushels of coal,
the latter appraised at £2 02 06.

Poor John Allen! no near relatives! died, it must be remem-
bered, in 1749. His entire estate appears to have been dissolved in
taking care of him in his last illness. It is stated that the adminis-
trator brought in an account of debts due from the estate, which
amount is ;£i73 07*07. "There remains ;£S 02 11 which the court
allows to the administrator in full for his trouble and charge and
discharged him June 15th, 1752" — just four days after the second
or additional inventory was returned. No list of debts against the
estate is on file at Woodbury.

The above view of the case is more than suggested by original
documents that have fallen into our hands of other cases. We give
a single one, showing that however kind and neighborly and chari-
table the inhabitants of Waterbury may have been to their own,
they expected full reward for whatever care was bestowed upon
the stranger within their gates. The case selected is that of Lydia
Cosset. It is entitled :

An account of and Bill of cost of what the Selectmen of Water-
bury have done for Lydia Cosset, daughter of Ranney Cosset, of
Symsbury, from the fifth day of January, A. D., 1749-50, in her sick-
ness in Waterbury, which is as follows:" (The bill was presented
to Ranny Cosset. Captain Samuel Hikcox presented his bill to
the Town of Waterbury six days after the last charge in the ac-
count against Lydia. It is for "his time and money spent in Riding
to Simsburey upon Lidey Cosit Bisnes, three days." In his account
of expense items for the trip, we infer that he stopped once at
"Barnes's," twice at "Owens," twice at "Leweses," once at
" Phelpes," and once at three several places, whose owner's names
are not deciphered). The following is the bill:

I the wife of Nathaniel Meril four days.

2. the wife of Roger Pritchard five days, ....

3. the wife of Thomas Barnes eight days,

4. the widow Prichard one day,

5. the wife of Robert Johnson one day, ....

6. the wife of Benjamin Judd one day, ....

7. the wife of Ebenezer Bronson one day,

8. Philas the negro of Mr. John Southmayd one day,

9. the daughter of Docf^ Porter one day.

£

s

d

2

8

00

3

0

00

4

0

00

0

7

00

0

10

00

0

10

00

0

10

00

0

10

00

0

10

00

174^-1760,

373

10. Rachel Baldwin one day, ....

11. the wife of Benjamin Prichard one day and half,

13. to Ensign Fulford for eight bushels of coal,*

14. the widow Hickcox two days, ....

15. Isaac Nichols three days tendenc, .

17. to the wife of Ebenezer Bronson one day more,

18. to Doct' Levenwurth formedisens,

19. to Doct' Ephrem Warner for Doctring her,

20. to Doct' Benjamin Judd for doctring her,

21. to Doct' Judd for one month bord and tendence,
to the old Doct' Warner for doctring her,

Total

Item George Nicols bill from the fifth of January In Sd year In her
sikness to the 9th day of Fubrey — as follows:

1. by 2>^ pounds of Shauger at 6 a pound, .

2. by five gallons of Rhum

3. by an ounce of treahel water camphor,

4. by 12 pound of candels 3-6 pr pond,

5. by damiag to futher Bed,

6. by keeping her and watchers and nurses,

7. wood and house room 4 weeks 4 pound,

8. per week,

to Keeping the old Doctor one night — and hors,

9. to Sarah Bams 2 weeks more to nurse Said Lyde,

£

s

d

0

10

00

0

15

00

I

04

00

I

00

00

2

10

00

0

10

00

3

19

09

8

09

09

8

01

00

6

00

00

2

00

00

47 10 06

0

15

00

II

00

00

00

10

00

2

02

00

6

00

00

16

00

00

2

10

00

3

00

00

45

03

00

47

10

06

92

13

06

2

10

00

10. and keeping Lydie and — by us, ...

11. to three pints of Rhume more the last fortnight.

12. two weeks and candels and hous room, ....

Note here — this bill of Corst is from the 5th of January until the i8th of Instant

March. *

Thomas Bronson, j

Samuel Hickcox, > Selectmen of Waterbury,

John Scovill, )

Among the bills allowed for the same year, are one to Edward
Scovill, "for keeping Chilson's child;" to Samuel Scott, "for keep-
ing Mary Arbs;" to James Blakeslee, "for making Widow Camp's
coffin, and one for John Welton's child;" to Thomas Porter, "for
curing Stephen Camp's arm, and for riding to Sergt. Warner's to
prize sheep;" to "Reuben Blackeslee of Captain," Abigail Howe,
Thankful Francher, Mary Church, Mary Cobin and Hannah Hull —
all for the care of Widow Camp; to John Scovill, "for holding
three vandues with the Widow Camp's goods, and one day's ten-
dance of Mr. Camp's;" to Jacob Blackslee, "for summonsing and

* It will be noticed that in John Allen's inventory, 70 bushels of coal wcTe-valued at only a little over £,^.

374 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURY.

bringing persons to tend the sick, three days;" to Doctor Ephraim
Warner, "for Mary Arbs* child, and for Mr. Camp."

" Enezer " Welton was another person afflicted with illness.
Joseph Lewis, Jr., (who fell a victim to the same disease) spent a
day in riding after the Doctor for him, and cared for him in person
for two days. John Weed, Abraham Warner, the widow Sarah
Warner, Mehetable Rew, John Lewis, Samuel Lewis and even
the good Deacon Joseph Lewis himself (also a victim) attended
" Enezer " one or more days, while John Lewis spent a day, as his
brother Joseph had, in riding after the doctor for him; Ebenezer
Richardson is credited in the same year "for a Journey of his Wives
Horse to Stratford" (doubtless for medicines). Soon after this
time Chilson's child begins its wanderings from family to family.
Deacon Thomas Bronson lends the town his man and horse to
transport a woman to Farmington, while his son Thomas mends
Phebe Warner's shoes and sends in a bill "for keeping her 40
weeks "at 12 shillings a week. It must not be inferred that Phebe
Warner is a pauper, because she is a **town charge." The two con-
ditions are often confounded, the one with the other. Phebe
Warner — a young girl of fifteen years — bereft of her mother by
death in 1747; of her father and a brother in 1749, and of her only
brother in the next year, became a ward of the town. With a ** dis-
ordered mind," and an inheritance in lands appraised at ;£^2oo, we
follow her in her wanderings from Samuel Hikcox's house to
Joseph Bronson's; from John Judd's to Thomas Bronson's. We
find her spending five weeks in the late Charles D. Kingsbury
house — then newly built by Andrew Bronson — transferred to Cap-
tain Upson's for three weeks, and passed on to the house of his son
Stephen for the next three weeks, while Daniel Southmayd makes
a " gownd " for her, and obtains liberty from the General Assembly
to sell her lands, which sale David Scott achieves in 1752. A con-
siderable number of persons became for one reason or another
wards of the town, as an outcome of the "great sickness" of 1749.
Joseph Lewis, a grandson of Deacon Joseph Lewis, is of that num-
ber. Let us look for a moment at the circumstances surrounding
this unfortunate youth. About 1748 Joseph Lewis, his father,
bought a house and a goodly number of acres on Twelve Mile hill.
The house was described as "near the twelve mile stake," so
often referred to. Bereft of his mother at the age of two
years, of his father at thirteen, and his grandfather Lewis a few
days later, the boy was left in the house — that many of us well re-
member as standing, in its age, on Andrews' hill, summer winds
moaning through its open doors and shaking clapboards — to con-
front the desolate outlook of that cruel time, with only a child's

knowledge of life to lead him. Tradition tells the story that
Joseph went through a corn field and plucked the ears and made a
fire on the Sabbath day and roasted and ate the corn — that he was
publicly whipped for his crime, and that the whipping destroyed
his reason. Dr. Bronson tells us that Joseph Lewis was a town
pauper, and was tried before Thomas Clark, Esq., May 12, 1756, on
complaint of Oliver Terrell, for stealing forty shillings, proclama-
tion money, and condemned to pay six pounds, proclamation
money, with costs of suit, and also a fine of ten shillings, lawful
money, to the town treasurer, and be whipped on ye naked body
ten stripes — costs taxed at jQi 3 3." That "he was whipped accord-
ing to the judgment of the court, and bound out to the plaintiffs as a
servant, till the above sum should be paid." Joseph Lewis was
eighteen years of age at the time of this trial. That he was of
unsound mind, whether by reason of his early sorrows or of his
punishment, seems only too evident from the fact that he never
gained control of his property, his name not appearing on the tax
list, and that as late as 1779 the town sold land belonging to him
for ^400. Still later, we find his guardian, the town, buying for
him a pair of shoes, and getting another pair mended. Neverthe-
less, he served his country as a soldier in the Revolutionary War.

In connection with the above incident relating to Joseph Lewis
Dr. Bronson gives the following estimate of our Puritan ancestors
which we cannot forbear to quote:

Individually, our Puritan ancestors were very much such men as we are — little
better, no worse. There were among them men eminent for virtue, knowledge
and patriotism ; while there was about the ordinary proportion, found in the
farming communities, of the worthless and the vile. A very slight inspection of
the records of the criminal courts will dissipate the dreams of those who contend
that our g^eat grandsires were perfect beings. They were bred in a rigorous age,
and were exposed to peculiar hardships, dangers and temptations. These gave
origin to peculiar moral characteristics — to virtues and to vices which were a little
different from those of other ages and communities. But, on the whole, they, like
us, were average men. We have more science, a more widely diffused literature;
better roads, and bulkier ships, but our men are like their men — shoots from the
same stock. Undistinguishing eulogy cannot properly be applied to any of the
generations of New England; nor will truth justify indiscriminate censure. Saints
and sinners, wise men and foolish, have been, and will continue to be found, in fair
proportion, among all. We do rightly in judging leniently of the weaknesses and
mistakes and even the guilt of our fathers. We make allowances for their circum-
stances, the state of their civilization, the age in which they lived, the modes of
thinking which prevailed at the time, their education, even their temptations and
their prejudices, and the entire g^oup of influences which contributed to mould
opinions.

The above estimate of the men of New England, if applied to
the period subsequent to 1740, seems eminently fair. The "Great

376

HISTORY OF WATERS UBY,

Awakening " was unto sin, as well as unto righteousness. Puritan
New England became thereafter a thing of the past. Its real gold
had become an alloy, still bearing the name and applied to the
ancient usages, but dimmed and imperfect in many ways. The
good men were here, but the " good old time " had vanished.

It is interesting to note that after two generations many of the
old names are still at the helm in town affairs. Year after year
Mr. Southmayd is chosen town clerk, and proprietor's clerk. It is
his hand that pens the long deeds, and records them; that writes
the indentures; that prepares many of the tax lists; that records
scores of highway lay-outs; and carefully preserves the minutest
minutes of every town and proprietor's meeting. We have a little
book of two sheets about eight by eight inches, once folded, and
carefully sewed, in which his hand recorded the town's debts and
credits for the year 1748. Happy Waterbury of the long ago! The
following is the list:

Town Debts for the year 1748:

JL s.

d.

£

s.

d.

Ebenezer Bronson, . . 2 16

6

C. Tho. Blaaksle, .

00

19

10

C. Will Judd, . . I 00

6

Jonathan Prindle,

01

II

5

Abel Camp, . . . 13 12

4

Abel Curtice,

00

12

4

John Judd, ... 04 14

0

Cap. Tho. Hickcox, .

01

II

00

Widow Hannah Bronson, . 00 17

7

Jno. Southmayd, .

3

12

10

Ambros Hickcox, . . 00 15

2

Jno. Scovill,

. 6

00

04

Greorge Welton, . . 2 04

4

AbelSuUiff, .

01

10

00

20 lb granted to Northbury to build the bridge.

Debts allowed 1748:

£ s.

d.

£

S.

d.

C Sam" Hickcox, '. . 05 00

0

Cap. Stephen Upson,

00

12

0

Dan" Southmayd, . 2 15

0

D. Thomas Clark,

00

06

0

Abraham Truck, . . 00 15

0

Richard Nichols,

. 00

12

0

Obadiah Richards, 00 18

0

Jn«. Southmayd,

01

18

6

Account of Debts Due to the Town as

they stand December, 1748,

on Notes:

£ s.

d.

£

s.

d.

Gideon Allyn, . . . 13 15

2

Will Luding^on,

00

10

0

Silas Johnson, . . 00 10

0

John Rew, .

. 04

15

0

Samuel Warner, . . 02 10

0

Jonathan Scott,

00

10

0

Timothy Porter, . . 05 00

0

Jonathan Cook, .

. 00

10

0

Caleb Thompson, . . 2 10

0

Ebenezer Wakelee,

06

12

3

Ebenezer Warner, . 2 10

0

James Nichols, .

. 04

18

6

Benj. Arnold,. . . . 50 00

0

Debts to the Town Due for Creatures Sold, Charges Deducted:

£ s.

d.

£

s.

d.

Deacon Blackslee, . . 8 00

0

Gamaliel Terrill,

9

00

0

Thomas Bams, . . 5 00

0

John Sutliff , Jr. ,

12

10

0

Gideon Hikcox, . . . 14 00

0

Ebenezer Richards,

3

15

0

174£-1760, 377

In 1745 the town indebtedness was still less. In 1749 it was
greatly augmented. Many autograph bills, in which the town is
the debtor, still remain. The approved bills are duly signed by the
selectmen.

Of the number is one, whereby the " Town of Waterjbury is
Indebted to the Perambulators of Farmington Line, for a Quart of
Rhum 00-12-6 and their expences at Camebridge ;^i-io-9. And to the.
Drumer for 2 Days in Ocf, 1747, ;£'i-oi-o.'* Other bills are — one of
Capt. Samuel Hiekcox " for his journey to Stratford," and Ensign
Fulford one "for a journey to Stratford "; to " Capt. Upson for carry-
ing Mr. Camp to Dc** Lewis's o-ioo'*; to Thomas Bronson, Jr., in
1747, *' 16 shillings for 8 meals to the listers "; to "Jane Baldwin, for
sundry articles for cloathing for Mary Earls, for victuling and tend-
ing the widow Chilson two weeks, for fetching a doctor for her, for
four shillings and six-pence paid to the Dc'. total ^S-14-6" (this
was in 1749); to Richard Seymour and Eleazer Scott, thirteen
pounds (the original charge was twenty pounds) for building a
Pound Near the meeting house In Westbury " in 1750; to Stephen
Mathews "for making Mr. Wood's cofen"; to Doctor Benjamin
Warner "for doctoring Edman Scot's family ;;^io-i8-o"; to Thomas
Barnes "for keeping Hitte Camp and Moll ;^23-7-6 "; to Ebenezer
Wakelee "for making Bier and board [for] Chilson 3-0-04" to
" John Scovill for Listers Dinner, &c., JQ2-12-02 "; to " Thomas Porter
for taking Coxe's estate and other things"; to "Ebenezer Bronson
for keeping Moll"; to "John Southmayd for dressing Moll's child
and writing ;^i-i8-oo"; to "William Selkrigg for digging a grave
;^i-i5-oo"; to "Thomas Cole for keeping Thomsan Wood"; to
"Jonathan Baldwin, Jr. for a pair of sheets ;^2-io-oo"; to "me
for rum for the bridg 9 Gallans ;^i2-i2-oo; to rum for — Camp
^03-04-00; to rum for Ebenezer Wostar ;£'2-o5-oo. This is a true
account from your friend, George Nickols"; to "Gershorm Fulford
for viewing Derby Road ; selling Phebe Warner's land; his and his
wives assisting George Scott's wife"; to "Thomas Porter for view-
ing Derby Road; selling P. Warner's land, and for going to Mr.
Hopkins to borrow money for the town." In 1747 Daniel South-
mayd, Abraham Truck, Obadiah Richard, " man, self and 2 cattle,"
Stephen Upson, Thomas Clark and Richard Nickols sent in a bill
"for Drawing bridge Timber out of the river." In 1754 John
Bronson sent a bill for dining the County Surveyor and his
atendence six meals." Even Mr. Leavenworth is credited in 1749
with three pints of Rhum, two pounds of sugar, a pound of candles,
half a pound of butter" and "to Bed, boarding Nurses, House
Room, &c., to the amount of ;£'i3-i6-9."

378 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

There are also accounts of sales made by the town of the worldly-
goods of deceased persons — sometimes without a mention even, of
the once-owner's name — the belongings intimating a young man
without house or home within the town. Occasionally, the load of
indebtedness is lightened by a ray of neighborly kindliness, or some-
thing that looks like it, as, in the following, addressed to the consta-
bles of the town: "These are to Desire you to Abate Caleb
Thompson of his Country Rate made on the List of 1749 so much as
by Law ought to come to the Listers." This request was written by
Daniel Southmayd, and bears his autograph and the signatures of
his fellow listers, John Warner, Stephen Welton and John Sutliff .

A list of debts due to the town, lies before me — the date and the
names I forbear for obvious reasons to give. The following are
some of the terse conclusions arrived at, and expressed against
certain of the names of the debtors : " Nothing done. Ordered to
be stayed. Given in by the selectmen. Dead and lost. Dead and
lost I believe. Poor wretch. In dispute. Very poor, and agreed
to be given in. Poor as Death. Poor enough. Rather poor. As
poor as you please." The latter is against a prominent member of
one of the best known families of the Waterbury of to-day.

In 1749 "it was agreed that in choosing townsmen, constables,
and grand jurymen, each man should bring in a vote for five towns-
men with their names fairly written, and so for three constables,
and so for five grand jurymen." It was in 1749 also that Daniel
Southmayd was first chosen moderator of the town meeting, an
office which he held as long as he lived. For a number of years he
had gradually been taking certain work from his father's over-
burdened hands. We recognize his handwriting on numerous docu-
ments. It is a younger, bolder, less finished edition of the perfect
formula of letters given by Mr. Southmayd for so many years.
Honors gathered about the young man. At thirty years of age
he was "established and confirmed" Captain of Waterbury train
band. He was chosen a deputy for his native town at the
October session of the General Assembly in 1748, and re-elected
seven times. On the tenth of December, 1753, at the Great
Town Meeting he was moderator, elected townsman, and ap-
pointed tithingman. Eight days later, he was chosen to his
last public work. The road, now called the Watertown road, had
just been laid out, then described as "the highway from the
bridge up by the west side of the river through Richards's Eight
acre Lott to the south end of Tompkins's field against Lieut.
Prindle's House." He, with Thomas Barnes, and Thomas Porter,
who was Captain Southmayd's lieutenant, were to lay out a passage

174^-1760. 379

from the highway on the east side the river to the new one on the
west side, and was also " to search into the circumstances of the
mill land and see what title Mr. Baldwin held to the land," for the
reason that the above passage would pass through a portion of the
ancient mill land that was laid out in the meadows.

Twenty-five days after the above meeting the record penned by
Mr. Southmayd's own hand tells us that " Daniel Southmayd, son of
John Southmayd, died about eleven o'clock at night, January 12th,
1754." It is well to believe that Mr. Southmayd's sons were manly,
winsome men, fitted by birth, environment and education to enact
deeds of value to their fellow townsmen, and that the loss occa-
sioned by their taking away was a genuine bereavement to the
town, as well as to the beneficent patriarch of the early church and
township. It increases our admiration to behold John Southmayd,
at the age of seventy-eight years, rising up from the very depth of
sorrow and going on in his fine, patient, effective career, to finish
his course in the very fore-front of duty. Eighteen days after the
death of his son Daniel he was present at a town meeting and wit-
nessed the election of Deacon Timothy Judd as moderator of the
meeting in that son's place, and, after an hour's adjournment, of
Captain Samuel Hikcox to his place as townsman, and Jonathan
Baldwin, Jr., to his place as one of the listers. On the ninth of May
we find Mr. Southmayd with the legislators of the land at Hartford
for a long session of the General Assembly, which continued until
the end of the month, adjourning from time to time. There was no
royal road of ease to Hartford at that date, and every mile of the
long journeying on horseback must have been a weariness to a man
of Mr. Southmayd's years. At the May town meeting he was on
duty, when "it was voted that the town should commence a suit
against Litchfield for not perambulating"; also, that "the town
would be at the charge of paying the surveyor and chainmen for
their time and expenses, and the expenses of the waiters in meas-
uring and planning and settling our north line on the east side the
river between Hartford and Windsor proprietors and this town."
He was also present at the great town meeting in December, 1754,
when the meeting was opened by prayer by the Rev.** Mr. Samuel
Todd, and when Mr. Southmayd was chosen town clerk for the
thirty-fifth successive year, and town treasurer. At the March
meeting following, Mr. Southmayd was absent and Timothy Judd
was appointed to take the notes. At a later date, Mr. South-
mayd made record of the meeting. His days of service were
drawing to a close. The last record made by him, that has been
noticed, was on the tenth of May, when he recorded the laying

380 HI8T0RT OF WATERS URT,

out of a highway in the western part of the town by Dr. Power's
home lot.

Of the last summer of Mr. Southmayd's life, we have no
knowledge. He died November 14, 1755, at the age of seventy-nine
years and three months. Few men have been permitted to serve
any New England town for so long a period, and through so many
forms of service, as did John Southmayd. Forty years he was
pastor of the only Church of Christ, where now there are forty
churches; thirty- five years the town clerk over a territory
embracing one hundred and twenty-five square miles; proprietor's
clerk for an equal length of time, and occasionally serving the
town as recorder from the year 1709 to the date of his election to
that office in 172 1; representing Waterbury repeatedly in the
General Assembly; sixteen times appointed justice of the peace for
Waterbury, and several times for the county; serving the General
Assembly on its committees on numerous occasions, and serving
the people of Waterbury as councilor and legal adviser on every
conceivable occasion, he rounded out his life into a formula of
active beneficence, whose unseen influence is evident in every crisis
of the town, whether temporal, mortal, or religious. Every man
who stood at the helm in the little storm-tossed ship of aflFairs at
his coming in 1699 had passed on and been gathered to his
fathers when this man finished his course and was laid to rest in
the centre of the group of Southmayd graves in the old burial
place.* All that now remains of that group is a photograph. The
Silas Bronson Library building covers its site.

Three weeks after Mr. Sonthmayd's decease the December
town meeting was held. Mr. Leavenworth was present and opened
the meeting with prayer. Deacon Thomas Clark was chosen
to the offices of town clerk, which he held until his death in
1764, and town treasurer. It is interesting to note that in 1755,
thirty -eight offices out of seventy - seven were held by persons
owning the names that held sway before 1700. We find Deacon
Clark carefully framing with a pen line, the following significant
act: "It was voted to give Thomas Doolittle his fine for speak-
ing without liberty in ye town meeting." The bridge at West
Main street was to be substantially fenced on both sides at the
town's cost. The Little Pasture at Mr. Sonthmayd's death re-
turned to the party concerned. In a proprietors' meeting in
1756, it was voted that it should be for the use of the several

*In Mr. Southmayd's will^ made May 37, 1755, is the following request to the Rev. Mark Leavenworth:
It is my will that my Executor at the charge of my estate procure and get engraved four head stones and
four foot stones of Farmington stone, to be set at the head and foot of the graves of my wife, my son John,
and my son Daniel's grave and my own if I don't live to get some of them in my life time.

1742-1760, 381

schools in the town of Waterbury, to be disposed of as the other
school lands had been. In the town meeting of 1756, and of 1757, it
was voted to rent out said pasture for the ensuing year and put the
money into the town treasury. In 1756 the service of the county
surveyor was to be obtained to erect monuments from the white-oak
tree at the river to Farmington line. In 1759 the bridges had again
been carried away; for it was voted to give the Society of North-
bury five pounds for the encouragement of a bridge, provided they
should complete a good cart bridge within a year, to give "the
gentlemen that have built a bridge over the river at Woodbury
road, five pounds to be paid unto them within a year from this
time." The same inducement was offered to Captain Thomas
Porter to "compleat " one at Judd's Meadow. Two years later the
town was as bridgeless as ever.

Unaccountable as it may seem, it was not until 1757 that John
Stanley, Jr., was finally put into possession of his Bachelor lot, and
permanently added to the list of proprietors. About this time,
certain men of large possessions desired to have their lands care-
fully surveyed and the general plan of the farms placed upon
record. Of this number, were vStephen Hopkins (for whom Deacon
Thomas Clark and Captain Daniel Southmayd had made a survey
and plan) and the heirs of Captain Timothy Hopkins — their land
lying at Bronson's Meadow, the east side of Long hill, where they
were allowed to lay out twenty-five additional acres in order to
complete the survey of their farm. The first local officer at Judd's
Meadow was Simeon Beebe, appointed keeper of the pound key in
1759. I^ ^^^ year 1760 no town meeting was held until December.
An unusual number of young men, not long resident in the town,
were elected to office. Nathaniel Lowre, Reuben Hale, Seth
Bartholomew and Usael Barker were of the number. The town
officers were the clerk, treasurer, agent, two packers of provisions
(in which the colony rate was paid), three constables, eight select-
men, twenty surveyors of highways, seven fence viewers, nine
listers, ten grand jurors, eight tithingmen (to compel a proper
observance of the Sabbath in meeting houses, church and town),
two gagers, a sealer of weights and measures, three key keepers for
the pounds, an excise man, a receiver of provisions, three
leather sealers, three branders of horses, and three collectors of
rates, one for each parish. It was evidently deemed wise to
interest as many inhabitants as possible in the good government of
the township. For perhaps the first time the selectmen were
given power to abate the town rates of poor men who made applica-
tion to them, and " a premium of three shillings was offered for the

382 UISTORT OF WATERS URY,

killing or destroying " a grown wild cat, and two shillings for a
fox, if killed by an inhabitant within the town bounds. The select-
man giving an order for the premium was first to cut off the right
ear of the cat or fox shown to him, to prevent a repetition of
reward for the same animal.

The rigidity of the rule against new inhabitants who did not at
once become land owners and otherwise fortify themselves against
the possibility of becoming town incumbrances was evidently
softening. In evidence, we find the following paper, with auto-
graph signatures:

We, the subscribers, being neighbors to Mr. Ebenezer Bradley of Northbury
do certifye that We Esteem him the sd Bradley an Honest, Industrious man and
that he and his family are likely to prove wholesome inhabitants.

Waterbury, February 26th, 1759.

thomas blakeslee Ebe' Ford

Jacob Blakslee Asahel Castel

Caleb Tompson Isaack Castel

Gedion Allen John How

moses blakslee Ebenezer Curtis
Ebenezer Allen

The judgment of Mr. Bradley's neighbors was undoubtedly
justified. In his record of the above testimonial, Thomas Clark
omitted the signature of Caleb Tompson — not so important an
omission, however, as that of the early recorder who failed to give
the name of Benjamin Judd, in his record of the original planters
of the town.

CHAPTER XXX.

SERGEANTS — FIRST COMMISSIONED OFFICER — FIRST LIEUTENANT — FIRST
CAPTAIN — FIRST MILITIA COMPANY IN 1689 — TWO COMPANIES IN
1732 — THIRD COMPANY IN 1740 — WATERBURY IN THE SPANISH
WEST INDIAN WAR — CAPTAIN HOPKINS A RECRUITING OFFICER —
WATERBURY's graves on cape BRETON — A NORTHBURY TRAIN

BAND IN 1754 — WATERBURY IN THE FRENCH AND INDIAN WAR

MUSTER-ROLLS — ISRAEL CALKINS* MEMORIAL.

'"T^HE evolution of the military life of the Colony from the time
I when Major Mason gave thirty days in the year to training
the men of Hartford, Windsor and Wethersfield, is of inter-
est, but we must limit the recital to the simple fact that in 1739 ^.H
the military companies then in being had been formed into thir
teen regiments, and their respective field officers appointed. The
tenth regiment was composed of the train bands of Waterbury, of
Wallingford, the parish of Southington, and Durham. Its field
officers were Colonel James Wadsworth of Hartford, Lieutenant-
Colonel Benjamin Hall, and Major Thomas Miles of Wallingford.

Because of its numerical weakness, the Waterbury train band
had no commissioned officer until 1689 Its earliest sergeants were
John Stanley (who had been a lieutenant in Farmington), and
Thomas Judd. They are so called in 1684. Our only knowledge of
the sergeants of the township is derived through Mr. Southmayd's
perfect system of nomenclature in his records of town meetings.
Not once have we failed to find him giving the individual his mili-
tary title in the year following its bestowment by commission.
The following is the list of sergeants, as supplied by him, from 1721
down to the year 1754. The names are given in the order of their
election. Sergeants John Stanley, Thomas Judd, Samuel Hikcox,
Timothy Stanley, Isaac Bronson, Thomas Judd (Deacon), John
Hopkins, Steven l>pson, John Scovill, John Bronson, David Scott,
Thomas Hikcox, William Judd, Richard Welton, Joseph Lewis,
Thomas Clark, Thomas Bronson, Samuel Warner, John Bronson, Jr.,
Benjamin Warner, Thomas Richards, John Judd, Thomas Barnes,
Thomas Porter, Richard Welton, Jacob Blakslee, Nathan Beard,
Obadiah Warner, Thomas Hikcox, John Warner, William Scovill,
Nathaniel Arnold, Gershom Fulford, Jonathan Prindle, James
Prichard, Samuel Scott, Obadiah Richards, John Lewis, Oba-
diah Warner, Jonathan Prindle, John Sutliff, Amos Hikcox, and

384 HISTORY OF WATERBUHT.

Thomas Bronson. Where names have been repeated, the person-
ality was not identical.

Thomas Judd (Sen.) was the first commissioned officer in the
town. He was appointed an ensign in 1689. John Stanley was the
first lieutenant — in 1689. Thomas Judd, nephew of the first ensign,
was the first captain — in 17 15. Other captains were Dr. Ephraim
Warner, in 1722; William Hikcox, son of Sergt. Samuel, in 1727;
William Judd, son of the first captain, in 1730 (upon the death of
William Hikcox). In 1732, when Waterbury was entitled to a
second company, Timothy Hopkins was made its captain, Thomas
Bronson its lieutenant, and Stephen Upson its ensign — the com-
missioned officers of the First company at that date being Captain
William Judd, Lieutenant Samuel Hikcox, and Ensign John Scovill.
The sixth captain was Samuel Hikcox of the First company, in 1737.

In 1740 the Third company was formed, with Thomas Blackslee,
captain, John Bronson, lieutenant, and Daniel Curtiss, ensign.

Although we are not able to give individual instances of special
devotion to warfare during the earlier years of town life, we have
learned that certain of our planters held interest in land conferred
upon their fathers for services in the Pequot massacre; we have
inferentially believed that they very generally did service during
King Philip's war; we also know that they protected their own
fields and firesides during all the long and agonizing periods of
Indian warfare — but in 1740 a new condition arose. England
declared war against Spain and sent over a proclamation to her
colonies in America announcing that fact, and also that an expedi-
tion was fitting out against the Spanish West Indies, and offering
to any of her colonists who would volunteer to serve in that expe-
dition, a supply of arms and proper clothing, promising that they
should be paid by King George, and should be under the command
of officers appointed by the Governor. They were also assured that
they should share in the booty which might be taken from the
enemy, and when the expedition should be over, that they should
be sent back to their homes. An additional inducement offered was
five pounds, as a premium — to be paid out of the colony treasury.
In July, 1740, the utmost activity prevailed throughout the colony.
Beside putting the sea-coast on the defensive, the government
obtained three vessels to transport the troops to Cuba, and provided
every needful thing for the men, except clothing, tents, arms,
ammunition, and pay, and immediately began the building of the
war-ship, The Defence.

No known muster-rolls of the men engaged in this expedition
are extant, and but three names are known to the writer, of Water-

WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 385

bury men who had active part in that warfare. Josiah Arnold, a
young, unmarried man, of perhaps twenty eight years, the son of
Nathaniel Arnold, made his will on the 4th day of July, 1740, in
which he announces that he is designed to go into the war in the
Spanish West Indies. On the same 4th of July, Ephraim Bissell
made his will, with the same announcement (both wills doubtless
written by Mr. Southmayd). Neither of the young men returned
from the war. Careful research might disclose names of other
soldiers from Waterbury. In August, 1741, recruits were called for,
and a letter containing instructions concerning the levying of
troops was sent to "Captain Hopkins." Our Captain Timothy
Hopkins is the only Captain Hopkins to be found in the colony at
that date, therefore he may have been the recruiting officer who
with Captain Winslow proceeded to enlist not less than fifty, nor
more than two hundred men " to be transported to the isle of Cuba
in the colony sloop. The Defence." The recruiting officers were
empowered to draw four pounds from the public treasury for each
man enlisted. Under the above circumstances, it is perfectly
reasonable to infer that a goodly number of young men were
enlisted by our Captain Hopkins. Young men, under twenty-one,
and without families, drop away and leave no sign in the public
records. Doubtless certain of the missing sons of Waterbury fell
on Cuban soil in 1740 and 1741, whose names may be found on mus-
ter-rolls yet to be returned from their long concealment. In 1743
Stephen Upson was made captain of the First company in Water-
bury.

In February, 1745, the Governor of the Colony convened the
Assembly, to act upon a proposed expedition against his Majesty's
enemies at Cape Breton. As early as 1731 France had encroached
upon the claimed territory of New York, by building a fort at
Crown Point, which encroachment at once called forth an urgent
appeal from that Province to the English crown, in which appeal
Connecticut had been requested to join. Meanwhile, on the island
of Cape Breton, commanding the entrance to the Bay of St. Law-
rence, France had constructed a fortress of wonderful strength, at
a cost of ^1,200,000 sterling. Its ruins to-day give full evidence of
the formidality of this ancient stronghold. The solidity of the
foundation-walls of its citadel and its "shattered bomb-proofs,
whose well-turned arches choked with debris remain," are cited by
S. A. Drake, while he tells us that one may continue the walk along
the ramparts without once quitting them, for fully a mile, to the
point where they touch the sea-shore among the inaccessible rocks
and heaving surf of the ocean itself.

25

386 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

It was the great fortress at Louisburg, on the island of Cape
Breton, that caused Mr. John Southmayd to take the wintry ride
on horseback from Waterbury to Hartford in February, 1745 — that
called up every deputy throughout the colony to the same place.
Not England — she was too busy elsewhere — ^but her weak American
colonies resolved to take the French city and fortress. The utter
amazement with which the project was received by the deputies
may be imagined, but not described. It is mentioned as a "matter
of great importance." The Assembly considered two letters written
by Governor Shirley of Massachusetts, and other papers presented
— and then "concluded and resolved (relying on the blessing of
Almighty God) to join with the neighboring governments in the
intended expedition."

The first step in the work was to encourage five hundred men to
enlist themselves to join the forces from the neighboring govern-
ments in the expedition. The inducements offered were the receipt
of " eight pounds in old tenour bills " for each month of service,
with ten pounds as a premium if the enlisting soldier provided for
himself " a good fire-lock, sword, belt, cartridge box, and blanket,
to the acceptance of the enlisting officer." He was also to receive
one month's wages before embarkation; three pounds additional if
he provided his own blanket, and an equal share in all the plunder
with the soldiers of the neighboring governments. The land forces
were to march to New London, and there embark on transports
which were to be convoyed by the Colony sloop. The Defence,
"equipped and manned with her full complement of officers and
men." The five hundred men were divided into eight companies
under Roger Wolcott as Commander-in-Chief.

The experience of 1740 in the Spanish West-Indies had been
severe, and it evidently told effectively upon the spirits of the
colonists, for the enlistments were not encouraging. A month later
the " enlisting officers were authorized to beat up the drums in the
regiments, and the captains were ordered to call their companies
together under their command for enlisting volunteers, when
required to do so. In May two companies more were made ready and
sent to New London to await the transports. In July, it was neces-
sary to raise three hundred men in addition to the seven hundred
already gone. The three hundred men were to consist of three
companies. Our Captain Samuel Hikcox was placed in command
of one third of the recruits to be then enlisted as their captain for
the expedition; but before the companies were in readiness news
came that the fortresses at Louisburg had surrendered on the loth
of June, after a close siege of forty-nine days.

WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 387

Immediately, 350 men were enlisted to garrison the fortresses
and town of Louisburg until the following June. Among the
Waterbury men who were of the garrison quota, and who doubtless
had already enlisted in Captain Hikcox's company, was Samuel
Thomas, a neighbor of the Captain's, who died at Cape Breton in
1747. Another soldier was Daniel Warner, the son of Samuel
Warner. "On the morning of the day whereon he left his father's
house in Waterbury (being called as a soldier to go to Cape Breton)
in the month of November, 1745, he made a verbal declaration con-
cerning his worldly goods — how they should be disposed in case of
his never returning," and called Thomas Warner of Waterbury, and
Elizabeth Warner of Stonington to witness his will, "which was
spoken in the street near to Daniel's father's house." He com-
mitted all his worldly estate into the hands of his brother, Timothy
Warner, "who was to pay his debts, and on his return to restore all
his estate to him again, and, in case he never returned, Timothy
was to have all, as his own." Daniel never returned to reclaim his
estate. An old indenture is extant, through which it is made
evident that Abraham Barnes, son of Samuel, was a third young
man who lost his life in the same expedition. His little son,
Abraham, at the age of two years was indentured to serve a
neighbor for nineteen years, in which it is stated that his father
died at Cape Breton. This is clearly a case of adoption, perhaps
under the only formula then known as legal. Waterbury thus owns
three of the five hundred graves that lie in the bleak and wind-
swept field bordering the harbor of Louisburg — the graves of
Samuel Thomas, Daniel Warner, and Abraham Barnes. How many
more young men served and returned, or served and perished there
we may not tell.

Thomas Hikcox (2d) was commissioned captain in 1746 of the
First company in Waterbury; Daniel Southmayd in 1747; John
Bronson in 1757. In 1752 the Fourth company was formed — in
Westbury parish — with Nathaniel Arnold, Jr., captain; Jonathan
Prindle, lieutenant; Timothy Judd, ensign. In 1754 Thomas Porter
became captain of the First company, by reason of the death of
Captain Daniel Southmayd, with Obadiah Richards, lieutenant, and
John Lewis, ensign. In 1754, the officers of the Northbury Parish
company were Phineas Royce, captain; John Sutliff, lieutenant;
Zachariah Sanford, ensign.

In 1757 Jonathan Beebe was second lieutenant of the 13th com-
pany in the loth regiment. In the same year the officers of the
Westbury company were Capt. Timothy Judd, Lieut. Ebenezer
Richards, Ens. Edward Scovill. In 1756 Israel Woodward was cap-

388 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

tain of the 6th company in the 2d regiment. In 1759 George
Nichols was captain in Waterbury. In 1760 Phineas Castle served
as captain of the 12th company in the 2d regiment, of which regi-
ment the Rev. Mark Leavenworth was chaplain. In 1760 also,
Gideon Hotchkiss became captain of the First company in Water-
bury, and Stephen Upson (the third) became lieutenant of a com-
pany called the South company, with Jonathan Baldwin its ensign.
In 1 76 1 Oliver Wei ton was ensign of the 5 th company in the 2d reg-
iment; Edward Scovill was made captain of the First company of
Waterbury and Amos Hitchcock or Hickcox lieutenant. In 1762
Stephen Culver was lieutenant. Moses Blakslee was lieutenant in
the 6th company of the 7th regiment and Timothy Clark lieutenant
in the 4th company of the 12th regiment. In 1763 Thomas Richards
was captain, John Nettleton lieutenant and Abel Woodward ensign
of the Westbury company. In the same year Joseph Bronson was
lieutenant and William Hikcox ensign in the Second company in
the First society; Samuel Hikcox, Jr., was ensign of the First com-
pany in the same society and Stephen Seymour of the Northbury
company. In 1764 Stephen Upson was captain of the First com-
pany; in 1765 Joseph Bronson of the Second company with William
Hikcox his lieutenant; the officers of a new company in Northbury
were Captain John Sutliff, Lieut. Stephen Seymour, Ens. David
Blakslee — Lieut. Benjamin Upson and Ens. Samuel Curtis, Jr.,
belonging to the old company. In 1764 also the East company in
Westbury was formed under Capt. Samuel Reynolds. In 1766 the
officers of the Second company in the First society were Lieut.
Samuel Hikcox and Ens. Stephen Welton — in the autumn of that
year Capt. John Welton, Lieut. Jesse Leavenworth and Ens, Abra-
ham Hikcox commanded the company, while Lieut. Abel Woodward
and Ens. Peter Welton were of the West company in Westbury In
1766 there was a "new erected company*' in Farmingbury com-
manded by Capt. Aaron Harrison, Lieut. Heman Hall and Ens.
Josiah Rogers. In 1767 Capt. Jonathan Baldwin, Lieut. Andrew
Bronson and Ens. Samuel Porter commanded the First company.
Daniel Potter was captain of the First company at Northbury. In
1769 Randal Evans was captain of the same company, and Bartholo-
mew Pond lieutenant; Abel Woodward, Peter Welton and Thomas
Cole were the officers of the West company in Westbury; Samuel
Hikcox was captain and Richard Seymour lieutenant of the Second
company in the First society; and Samuel Porter was lieutenant of
the First company. " In the Farmingbury company, Josiah Rogers
was lieutenant and John Alcock ensign. /)f the new company in
Northbury, David Blakslee was captain, Eliphalet Hartshorn lieu-
tenant, and Jude Blakslee ensign.

WATERBVRY IN THE COLONIAL WARS, 389

In 1753 Captain Daniel Southmayd was one of eight gentlemen
appointed to audit the Colony accounts. The treasurer delivered
to them ;^7527.i2S.9d. old tenor, received by the treasurer for duties
on goods, exportation of lumber, for the sale of Weed's estate [in
Waterbury], and for impost and powder money. This money the
auditors ** burnt and consumed to ashes." Its value, as lawful
money, was but ;^855.8s.2d, or eight and more than two-third pounds
for one of old tenor. This depreciation of the currency was due
principally and we might add with an approach to truth, chiefly and
altogether because the colony had been compelled to fight England's
wars. The exact relationship to lawful silver money that bills of
old and new tenor bore at this time is illustrated by a three-farthing
silver-money tax, which it was declared permissible to pay in bills
of credit — the new tenor, at fourteen shillings and seven pence
for six shillings in silver, the old tenor at fifty-one shillings for the
same six shillings.

Early in 1755 ^^® ^^^1 again came for "a considerable number of
forces to be raised because of the invasion of his Majesty's just
rights and dominions in North America, by the French and the
Indians in their alliance." The order of King George, that Con-
necticut Colony should contribute as far as could be afforded to
repel the common danger, was at once complied with. More money
was required than could be well obtained, but more Bills of credit
were at once ordered to be imprinted, representing seven thousand
five hundred pounds lawful money, and a committee was appointed
to make preparations for enlisting, supplying, and furnishing troops
at the cost and expense of the government. Almost immediately
came the order from England for the raising of several regiments.
England's designs in regard to the regiments — where and how they
were to be used — ^remained unknown, when, at the session of The
Assembly summoned in March, 1755, a proposition was received
from Governor Shirley of Massachusetts. It was that the five New
England governments should unite in an attempt to erect a strong
fortress upon the eminence near the French fort at Crown Point.
In order that the expedition might be eminently successful and
the territory secured from any further encroachment of the French,
it was proposed that New York should send 800 men, Connecticut
1000, Rhode Island 400, Massachusetts 1200 and New Hampshire
600. Connecticut was fully aware that the force asked of her was
much too large in proportion to that of New York and Massachu-
setts, but she stopped to consider the situation of her neighbors,
and understood full well the importance of the undertaking, and
at once began the task of getting together one thousand " effective

390 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

men," and empowered her Governor to raise 500 additional men, in
case they should be required to reinforce troops already in service,
and immediately advised her neighbors to do the same thing.
Each member of the General Assembly in March 1755, was re-
quired to swear to keep secret, until given leave to reveal them,
all matters relating to the "defence of our frontiers, and all con-
sultations and resolutions thereon." Mr. Stephen Hopkins and
Mr. Caleb " Humistone " were the required oath-takers for Water-
bury.

I think it may be said that at no time in our history has there
been a season of greater activity in martial life than the year 1755.
It is not known that any men from Waterbury were numbered
among the three thousand warriors who regained Nova Scotia in
June of that year; it is not probable that a single man of our town
was with General Braddock in his memorable defeat near Fort du
Quesne in July, but we have every reason to think that a goodly
number accompanied General Johnson to Lake George in August
of that year, and joined the brave twelve hundred who fought on
its shores — for Gershom Fulford, the blacksmith, was appointed
second lieutenant of the Fourth Company in the Major General's
regiment, and Roger Prichard " quarter-master of Troop of horse
in the Tenth regiment" in March of that year, but we have no
muster-rolls to prove the thought to be according to facts. When,
in May, Oliver De Lancey, Esq^ of New York, appeared before the
Assembly and set before the deputies the exceeding great impor-
tance of raising additional men for Crown Point, it was determined
to give New York the opportunity to raise three hundred men in
Connecticut, to serve under a major of that Province — other officers
to be appointed by this Colony.

In August, General Johnson, at Fort Edward, sent for additional
troops to be sent without delay, and the order went forth for two
regiments of seven hundred and fifty men to be enlisted, and
divided into nine companies in each regiment. The muster rolls of
certain Connecticut companies in service from 1755 to 1762 have
been recently recovered from their long resting place, and are now
in the State library. They have never been published, and are of
valuable interest. Between the first and the seventeenth of Sep-
tember, 1755, the following men enlisted, or were impressed into
service, in the company of Captain Eldad Lewis, of Southington.
The men of this company were from Waterbury and its vicinity.
Of its seventy-three men, thirty-four went from Waterbury. We
have identified these from local records. Other names in the com-
pany doubtless belong to Waterbury men, but for want of sufficient

WATERS URT IN THE COLONIAL WARS.

391

evidence at hand they are not included. The names marked with

a f were from Waterbury.

Captain Eldad Lewis's Muster Roll.

Sworn to at Hartford Feb. 17th, 1756.

First Lieutenant, Isaac Higbee; Second Lieutenant, David Whitney; Sergeants,
Joel Clark,* fSamuel Root— deserted Oct. 24th, fTim* Clark, John Webster.

Clerks, Drummers and Corporals— Joel Clark, clerk; f Ashbel Porter, Samuel
Higby, flsaac Prichard, Ephr* Parker, Ambro* Sloper, corporals and drummers.

Centinels.

Abraham Waters,
f Abel Gunn,

Allen Royse,

Amos Cook,
f Asa Barnes,

Barn* Hugh,
f Benj° Scott,
f Benj" Wetmore,
f Benj" Turril,
t Benj-' Stillwell,
f Caleb Jones,

David Wetmore,
f David Hungerford,
f Dan^ Upson,

Dan' Winston,

Eben' Hopkinston,
fEzeki Scott,
t Eliph* Scott,

Eben' Bracket,

Elias Wetmore,
f John Scott,

Joseph Twiss,
f Joseph Barrot,
f John Barrot,
f Jesse Alcock,

Joseph Rogers,

Elihu Morse,
f Abraham Woster,

Jesse Parker,
f James Doolittle,
f Josiah Stow,
f Joseph Ludington,
f Jon"" Preston,

Levi Thomas,

Linus Hopsk°,

Medad Munson,
t Moses Foot,

Moses Hall, J
f Moses Bronson,

Nathan' Hitchcock,

Nathan' Messenger,

Peter Fenn, [?]

Joseph Merion,

James Scarrit,

Job Bracket,

Hail Hall,
f Sam' Upson,
t Sol** Barrit,

Steph"^ Winston,
t Steph" Blakslee,

t Weight Woster,

Sam' Whedon,
t Sam' Wheler, ?
t Jabez Tuttle,
f Thomas Way,

John Collins,

Willida William,

William Pike,

Zealous Atkins,

Zebulon Peck,

Remember Baker,
f Sam' Warner,

Abijah Barnes,
f Enos Ford,
f Thomas Fenn,

Peter Judson,

Elnath" Sharp, or
Thorp,
t Sam'l How,
f Eben^ Saxston,

Matth* Johnson,

Nath' Lewis,

Moses Austin,
f Bartholomew Pond.

The above company served about three months and the men
were allowed twelve days for the march from Lake George to their
homes.§

Other Waterbury soldiers of 1755, were Henry Cook, Bartholo-
mew Jacobs, Bela Lewis, and William Mancer, but these names do
not conclude the list. It was to carry bread to these and other
soldiers that the horses of the two Waterbury men were impressed
in October of 1755. Bread and flour to the amount of 120,000 pounds

* Dr. Bronson gives Joel Clark as a Waterbury man, but I think he was from Farmington.
t " Died on the asih."

9 In the lists here given, the reader may make allowance for errors in the spelling of names, due to the
muster-roll makers, and also for possible errors in the transcription of names from the muster rolls.

39«

BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

were carried on horses (not more than 500 in number and impressed
in Connecticut) from Albany or its vicinity "for the use of our
troops at the forts at the Carrying Place, and at Lake George."

In the beginning of 1756 it was resolved by the four New Eng-
land governments, and New York, to raise 10,000 men, Connecticut
agreeing upon 2500 as her quota and immediately ordering her
commissaries to procure flour suflficient for that number of men for
four months. The troops were formed into four regiments of eight
companies each. The Sixth company in the Second regiment is
called on the muster roll :

The Waterbury Company.

In the Expedition against Crown Point from April to December, 1756, this com-
pany was commanded by Capt. Israel Woodward.

First Lieutenant, Asa Royse. Second Lieutenant, Joel Clark.

r Oliver Welton, f Ethan Curtis,

J Enoch Curtis, , Tames Doolittle,

Sergeants, 1 ^^^.^^ ^^^^ Corporals, j j^^^ Hoerington,

I David Woodward. I Abiel Roberts.

Drummer, Moses Frost.

Samuel Adams,
Ephraim Allyn,
Stephen Bagley,
Remember Baker,
John Barret,
Nathan Benham,
Joseph Blake,
Tho*. Bray,
Asa Brown son,
John Brownson,
Moses Brownson,
Joseph Bunnel,
Parmineus Bunn^
John Butler,
Israel Calkins,
Elijah Clark,
Ezekiel Curtis,
Hezek*' Davenport,
Jehiel Dayton,
Stephen DuUf [?]
Benj* Ellis.
Benj» Aly (Ely)?

Centinels.

John Fenn,
Joseph Foot,
Samuel Frost,
Luke Fox,
John Gibbs.
Jerimi Gillet,
Jacob Guild,
Jotham Hall,
John Haystens,
Nath' Hitchcock,
Voluntine Hitchcock,
William Horton,
Samuel Lounsbury,
Nath^ Messenger,
Wm. Munson,
Judah Palmer,
Nath» Pardy,
Eliab Parker,
John Parker,
Samuel Pike,
Elnathan Prichard,
Joel Roberts,

Ezekiel Scott,*
Peleg Spencer,
Israel Squire,
Simeon Stow,
John Strickland,
Isaac Terril,
Oliver Terril,
Seth Thayer.
John Tomas,
Charles Warner,
Nath^ Weed,
Will™ White,
Benj* Williams,
Nathan Woodward,

clerk,
Samuel Woodward.
Benj° Woodworth,
Peleg Woodworth,
Reuben Woodworth,
Herrman Worster,
Jonathan Wrif^ht,
Nathan Wright.

All the men of this company were not from Waterbury. Enos
Doolittle, Israel Dayton, and Benjamin Judd were of the soldiers of

* Advanced to Corporal Sept. 28th.

J

WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS.

393

'756- John Sutliff and Abel Curtiss were in Col. Elihu Chauncy's
regiment at Crown Point in 1756. In Captain John Pettibone's
company in the same regiment, among the men from Waterbury
will be found Joseph Smith, John Slawter (sometimes spelled
Slaughter), Samuel Lewis, Thomas Porter, and Joseph Bronson.
This regiment served sixty-three weeks.

Dr. Bronson has given the following list of soldiers who went
in Captain Eldad Lewis' company in the Fort William Henry alarm
in 1757. At this time the militia marched away in headlong haste;
some on horseback for a part or the whole of the way, the residue
on foot — many subsisting themselves at their own expense on
the march, and others at public and private houses and at small
stores erected at certain stages of the course, going in haste too
great to take blankets, or knapsacks, or anything but the soldier
himself and his fire-arms to the rescue! So great was the risk of
delay that the horses, when no longer needed, were left to wander
away, and were taken up in New York, and elsewhere. Months
afterward, by order of the government, these wandering horses
were gathered in, and even the Waterbury horses were returned
to their homes. Under such circumstances went forth the fol-
lowing men from Waterbury:

Lieut. John Sutliff, Moses Cook, [Drummer.]

Sergt. Stephen Wei ton, Ensign Gideon Hotchkiss,

Daniel Porter, Clerk.

Jesse Alcock,
Benjamin Barnes (?)*
Daniel Barnes,
Solomon Barrit,
Simeon Beebe,
Shadrack Benham,
Asher Blakeslee,
Reuben Blakeslee,
Hezekiah Brown,
Thomas Cole,

Centinels.

Benjamin Cook [of

Wallingford,]
Nathaniel Edwards,
Ambrose Field (?),
Nathaniel Foot (?),
Joel Frost,
Jonathan Garnsey,
Thomas Hikcox,
Samuel Judd,
Samuel Lewis,

Stephen Matthews,
Abraham Richards,
Thomas Richards,

W Scott,

Oliver Terrill,
Charles Warner,
Joseph Warner,
Eliakim Wei ton,
Thomas Williams.

In 1757, in Col. Phineas Lyman's regiment, Ephraim Preston was
captain of a company raised for the expedition against Crown
Point, which company was at Fort Edwai;d in August that year,
when "Fort William Henry at the head of Lake George, was
besieged by the French forces under Montcalm. At this time the
English general, Webb, was lying with an army of four thousand
men at Fort Edward, fourteen miles distant." It is said that
** instead of marching to the relief of Col. Munroe and thus saving

* Familiar as this name is and Waterbury bortif there was no one of the name here at the above date.

394 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

the fort, Webb wrote him a letter advising his capitulation. The
messenger and letter were intercepted by the Indian allies of Mont-
calm. The latter, thinking Webb's communication would promote
his own interests, forwarded it at once to the commander of the
fort. A capitulation soon followed."*

The following is the story, as told by the messenger himself who
bore the letter to Gen. Webb. It was entrusted to Sergeant Israel
Calkin (later Calkins) a young man, who was married in Waterbury
by the Rev. Mark Leavenworth, Aug. ii, 1752, to Sarah, the
daughter of William Hoadley, and who lived at Judd's meadow.
He told the General Assembly in Oct., 1758, that he "was a sergeant
in Capt. Ephraim Preston's company in Col. Lyman's regiment, and
was at Fort Edward in August, 1757; that he was sent by Gen.
Webb express from Fort Edward, with despatches for Col. Munroe,
commander of Fort William Henry — that notwithstanding the
utmost caution, he unhappily fell into the enemy's hands, being taken
by Indians. After the surrender of the fort he was by savages
conveyed to Canada, but was there redeemed out of their hands by a
French gentleman, but he was immediately taken with small-pox,
which sore distemper he had very severely — in want of almost
every comfort, convenience, and accommodation. Being by a kind
Providence carried safely through that distemper, he sailed Nov.
5th, 1757, from Quebec for France, where, through inexpressible
hardships, naked and famished, he arrived in the Port of Rochelle
on the 2d of December (the day after his daughter Sarah was born
in Naugatuck.) There, having been confined for fifteen days in a
loathsome Gaol, he was again taken sick and carried to a hospital.
After twenty-one days he was returned to Gaol, where he was kept
under most disagreeable circumstances until placed on board a
cartel ship for England, which ship was twenty-five days on its
passage on account of storms, the ship being so crowded that there
was scarce room enough to lie down, and almost without food or
clothing. He obtained liberty after four months to return to
America. He arrived at Boston Oct. 6, 1758. He assured The
Assembly that during his captivity he had endured calamities, dis-
tresses, and fatigues that were more than words could express, or
Imagination could paint, and that on his arrival at his home he
found that almost all the little Interest he left behind him had been
dissipated and lost in his absence, and that he, with his wife and
three small children, was reduced to the lowest state of want and
necessity " — and all because he had entered upon a most dangerous
service for his country. He asked for his wages during the

*Dr. Bronson.

WATERS UR7 IN THE COLONIAL WARS,

395

time of his captivity and until his return home, and such addi-
tional compensation as might be granted — and received thirty
pounds out of the treasury, "in consideration of his fidelity while
in the service of this Colony and the calamities he sustained in his
captivity."*

In the muster roll of Captain Ephraim Preston's regiment we
find the following Waterbury names in 1757:

Jonathan Beebe, Second Uzal Barker,

Lieutenant,
Moses Matthews, Ensign,
Israel Calkins, Sergeant,
Phineas Beach, Sergeant,
Gideon Allen,
James Baldwin,

James Barret,
Joseph Benham,
Zera Beebe,
Henry Cook,
Jesse Cook,
Andrew Culver,

Justus Dayly,
Samuel Fenn,
Jesse Hotchkiss,
Aaron Luddington,
Bartholomew Pond,
Josiah Stow,
Wait Wooster.

The above soldiers appear to have gone on the occasion of the
" Fort William Henry Alarm."

The muster roll of the following company is given— its members
being from Waterbury and the near-by towns :

2D REGIMENT — MARCH 27 TO NOV. l6, 1 758.

Eldad Lewis, Captain,

Joel Clark, ) Lieutenants.

Gideon Hotchkiss, )
Thomas Richards, Ensign,
Abel Woodward,
Joab Horsington,
Abiel Roberts,

•- Sergeants,

Osee Webster, Clerk,

Cephas Ford,f "j

Tim. Hotchkiss, I

Sam. Wheeden, \ Corporals,

John Strecklin, J

Ambrose Sloper. ) Drummers,

Moses Frost

Ethan Curtis, J

Samuel Adams,
David Arnold,
Moses Ball.J
David Barnes,
John Barrit,
Merwin Beckwith,
Benj. Benham,
Samuel Berley,
John Bill,
Moses Bronson,
James Brown,
Parmenius Bunnel,
Parmenius Bunnel,

John Chapman,
Silas Chapman,

David Clark.
Lemuel Collins,
Jesse Cook,
Abner Curtiss,
David Curtiss,
James Curtiss,
Joshua Curtiss,
Phineas Curtiss,
Cornelius Dunham,
Nath' Edwards,
Samuel EUwell,
Luther Evans,
Eben. Fanf her, ]
John Fancher,
David Fenn,
Samuel Fenn,

Samuel Frost,
Jon. Fulford,
Henry Grilley,
Eben. Hart,
Josiah Hart,
Jason Harvard.^
Amos Hitchcock,
Reuben Hitchcock,
David Hotchkiss,
John How.
Samuel How,
David Hungerford,**
Joseph Ives,
William Judd,
Samuel Kellogg, ft
Bela Lewis,

* The next year Israel Calkins removed to Walpole, N. H., where his son Roswell was born. In 1764 he
had returned to Waterbury, and continued to pay taxes until 1783.

+ Died Nov. 3. $ Died Oct. 7. g Died Aug. 23. I Died Aug. x8. t Died Sept. 29.

»* Died July 22. ft Died Sept. 13.

39^

HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

2D REGIMENT — MARCH 27 TO NOV. 16, 1 758 — Continued.

Abr. Luttington,
Joseph Luttington,
Solomon Luttington,
EldadMix.
William Munson,
David Newel.
Wonks Nobikin
James Noisons,
Judah Palmer,
David Pardee,
Nath^ Pardee,
Eliab Parker,
Gideon Parker,

Aaron Parsons,
Samuel Pike,
William Pike,*
Jonathan Prichard,
Eben. Prindle,
Sam. Richards.!
Eben. Robards,
Barnabas Scott,
Eben. Scott.
Ezekiel Scott,
John Slater,
Kinner Smith,
Samuel Sperry,

Benj. Stillwell.J
Lemuel Thomas,
Gideon Todd,
Samuel Upson,
Thomas Warner,
Thomas Way.
Nath» Welton,
Oliver Welton.
Abner Wetmorc, §
Barth. Williams,
Benjamin Williams,
Jobe Yale, |
Street Yale.

Other soldiers of 1758 were :

Joseph Atkins,
Joseph Blake,
Lieut. Phineas Castle,

Dan. Chatfield,
Lemuel Chatfield,
Dan. McNamara,

Isaac Peck,
Jabez Wooster.

In 1759 Abel Woodward was sergeant under Samuel Gaylord in
the first regiment, and Benjamin Stillwell, corporal. In the second
regiment, Moses Sanford and Jesse Ford were sergeants under Cap-
tain Thomas Wilmot; Justus Blakeslee, Tille Blakeslee (perhaps of
Woodbury), John Fulford, Caleb Granniss and James Hungerford,
who died December 2, were " centinels " or private soldiers. Lieu-
tenant Jonathan Beebe, and Sergeant Israel Calkins were under
Captain Amos Hitchcock, as was also Jabez Tuttle. In Captain Joel
Clark's company, Oliver Welton was sergeant, David Arnold, Wait
Hotchkiss, Eliphalet Preston, James Scarret, Caleb Thompson and
Gideon Webb were "centinels." In the third regiment, in Capt.
Mead's company were Ira Beebe, Isaac Curtis, Samuel Curtis, Isaac
Darrow, John Palmer and Abraham Prichard.

In 1 761, in Colonel Whiting's regiment, were:

Samuel Adams, Ensign,
Johnson Anderson, Corp.,
Titus Barnes,
Daniel Byington,
Jehiel Byington,
Joel Byingrton,
Jonathan Byington,
Benjamin Cook,

Moses Cook,
Israel Dayton,
David Doolittle,
Moses Frost, Drummer,
Ambrose Hikcox,
Jude Hoadley,
Bartholomew Jacobs,
Brewster Judd,

Thomas Judd,
William Judd,
Abraham Lewis,
Gains Prichard,
John Painter,
Nathan Prindle,
Eben Saxton,
Jehiel Saxton,

♦ Died Sept. i6. + Died Aug. a8.

% Benjamin Stillwell was enlisted among other soldiers for this expedition by Lieut. Hotchkiss. Still-
well broke his arm just after enlisting. Dr. Porter set it, and he marched with his company. In October,
Z770, Lieut. Hotchkiss asked the Colony for remuneration for Dr. Porter*s services, and received it.

6 Died Sept. 4. I Deserted Sept. 4.

WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS, 397

Woolsey Scott, Hez. Tuttle, Stephen Welton,

Stephen Scovill, Jabez Tuttle, Benj. Williams,

Nath^ Selkrig, Serg., Reuben Tuttle, Corp., Dan. Williams,

Joash Seymour, Gideon Webb, Obadiah Winters,

Sam. Stow, Ezekiel Welton, Rufus Yarrington.
John Stricklin,*

Captain Eldad Lewis served under Colonel Whiting in the first

regiment from March 15 to December 3, in the year 1762. His

officers were:

[Samuel] Judd.f ) Lieutenants.
John Colhns, )

Oliver Welton. Ensign,

Asa Bray,
William Judd,

Eldad Mix, 1

?11,^^!l!f: \ «-g-°ts. triTl?!^"' \ Corporals.

Jabez Tuttle, ° Joel Roberts, j

John Miles, j John Bronson, J

Jesse Cook,

J

Waterbury names among the centinels were:

Abraham Barnes, Jonathan Fulford, Abner Munson,

Bordon Beebe, James Harrison, John Parker,

Isaac Castle, Elijah Hotchkiss, Samuel Potter,

Charles Cook, John Lewis, Gains Prichard,

Jesse Cook, Aaron Luddington, John Scovil.
Thomas Fancher,

Waterbury has been found nobly to have acted her part in the
Colonial wars. The result of this expenditure of life, service and
money, was, that every pound the English colonists taxed them-
selves for; every soldier they furnished to fight England's war with
France, cost the colonies themselves, a little later in their history,
untold sums of money, and unrecorded lists of human lives. Their
ability and achievement excited the attention of England and
aroused apprehension regarding her own supremacy over this part
of her kingdom. It also awakened the colonists themselves to the
fact of their own united strength. Thus was sown the seed of
Independence, the cotyledons of which the colonists themselves
failed to recognize.

♦Died AujTUSt 6. + App. April 29, 1760.

CHAPTER XXXI.

A. PETITION FROM THE WEST FARMS FOR WINTER PRIVILEGES — A COL-
LECTOR OF EXCISE — MEN OF FARMINGBURY PETITION FOR WINTER
PRIVILEGES — A PROPOSAL TO MAKE NAVIGABLE THE NAUGATUCK
RIVER — DEATH OF DEACON THOMAS CLARK — MR. LEAVENWORTH
MARRIES A BROTHER MINISTER AT MIDNIGHT — BURYING YARD AT
PRESENT WOLCOTT — DEATH OF CAPTAIN SAMUEL HIKCOX — AU-
THORITY OF THE FIRST CHURCH LAID ASIDE — THE STAMP ACT — A
COLONIAL CONGRESS HELD IN NEW YORK — THE NEWSPAPER
"glorious news" — REPEAL OF THE STAMP ACT — A MAY THANKS-
GIVING HARTFORD'S SORROW — ISAAC FRAZIER — THE FRENCH

FAMILY — WOODBURY COUNTY — A PETITION FROM THE SOUTH
FARMS — BAPTISTS — MINISTRY LANDS AND MONEYS — FARMINGBURY
SOCIETY — MIDDLEBURY BURYING YARD.

DURING the period of the French and Indian war and in the
subsequent time down to the dawning of the war of the
American Revolution, Waterbury moved onward in her
town life without any startling deviations from her accustomed
course.

In October, 1760, Josiah Bronson and other inhabitants of present
Middlebury and its vicinity, complaining of their sufferings
endured in reaching places of public worship because of distance
and the badness of roads, besought the General Assembly to grant
them winter privileges under the usual forms. The petition was
granted — the time being from the first day of December to the last
of March, annually, for three years. In the lines given as the
boundaries of the territory, mention is made of Eight Mile brook,
Quassapaug po'nd, Israel Curtise's lot of mowing meadow land, the
lane by Eliphalet Bristol's running to Lt. Samuel Wheeler's, the saw
mill on Hop brook, and a large rock with a number of pine trees on
it east of Ebenezer Richardson's. Ebenezer Porter was left out of
the limits. Three years before this time a similar petition had
been denied. To that of 1757 were appended thirty-three names,
which names are here given:

Isaac Bronson, Ebenezer Smith, Thomas Mallery,

Isaac Bronson, Junior, Arah Ward, James Burges,

Josiah Bronson, Japhet Benham,* Ebenezer pender,t

Stephen Miles, Edward Smith, Daniel Mallery,

♦ [James ?] + Ebenezer Porter.

WATERBUBT'8 LATER TEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN, 399

Nathan ? John Scott, Stephen Abbott,

Daniel Tyler, Reuben Hale, [Dr.] Peter Powers,

Gideon Mallery, Noah Cande, Nathaniel Richardson,

Benjamin Bristol, Daniel Hawkins, Abner Munson,

w^om away — John Weed, Amos Scott,

Ezekiel Tuttle, Andrew Weed, Samuel Sherman,

JaphetBenham, Jun.,* James Bronson, Thomas Masters.

All but seven of the above names were within the bounds of Waterbury.

The good Deacon Thomas Clark was yearly chosen town clerk
as long as he lived; when Deacon Timothy Judd f was not chosen
moderator of the great town meeting in December, Thomas
Matthews or Caleb Humaston received the honor; Deacon Clark
was town treasurer until 1760, when Mr. Joseph Hopkins was
chosen to the office, which he held until 1764.

In 1755 "an act had been passed for licensing and regulating
Retailers and for granting and collecting an Excise on Distilled
Spirituous liquors." Accordingly, in 1756 a new officer was added
to the town list — Jonathan Baldwin, Jr. was chosen " Collector of
Excise." According to this act, any person desiring to retail any
rum, brandy, or other distilled spirituous liquor was required to
obtain an annual license from an assistant or justice of the peace in
his own town, under a bond to the officer of twenty pounds, for
which he was to pay one shilling and sixpence. To the collector
of excise, the retailer was to render an account, upon oath, of all
the liquors he had on hand at his taking the license, and all that he
received during the year, and pay the excise thereon, subtracting
one-fifth part for leakage and wastage. Four pence per gallon was
to be paid to the excise collector for all liquors sold in quantity
less than thirty gallons. A retailer could not sell less than one
quart — although a tavern-keeper might under certain restrictions.
The revenue under this act was for the benefit of schools.
Occasionally, and chiefly because of town-line disputes, a town
agent was appointed for the year — Captain Samuel Hikcox being
so appointed "to represent the town in any action that might be
brought against it at any court of justice whatsoever." Thomas
Matthews, Captain Stephen Upson, Captain George Nichols and
others were so chosen in subsequent years. In October, 1762,
Joseph Adkins [Atkins] living in present Wolcott, with others,
petitioned for the privilege of hiring preaching among themselves
five months in the winter season, carefully setting forth the limits
of the territory to be covered by the permission.

* [James Jr. ?] t Timothy Judd was a captain, a deacon, and sometimes a '* preacher."

400 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

It began on the first long lots in Farmington on the mountain next to Water-
bury, and ran westerly three miles by the south end of the society of New
Cambridge, and to where Cambridge comes into the society of Northbury two
miles to a birch tree at the north end of a ledge of rocks in Stephen Blakslee's lot,
about sixty rods east of his house, then south two degrees east four miles to a
white oak tree marked, thence south twelve degrees east one mile and seven rods
to a bunch of cherry' trees by the west side of the Mad river, thence south two
degrees east about half a mile into a line drawn west from Farmington southwest
corner, thence east a mile and three quarters to said corner, from thence in Farm-
ington line until it comes to the east side of the original twenty rod highway
across the long lots in Farmington, thence northerly straight to the top edge of the
mountain west of Phineas Bams' house, thence on the height of said mountain to
the first mentioned place.

The above petition included " liberty of setting up a school " and
freedom from ministerial rates during the five months. The
Assembly granted the petition in its every part, also yielding them
liberty to tax themselves for the support of the ministry and
school, as societies by law had power to do. The next May, the
First Society presented before the Assembly its side of the
question, setting forth the fact that within the above limits lived
all the inhabitants in the northeast quarter, except two or three
families — that their "meeting house was thrown from the centre
into an extreme part of the society, giving a dangerous aspect and
tending to their destruction.***

Among the events of the period were the following: Grove street
was narrowed two feet near its west end for one hundred feet; a
premium of three shillings was offered for killing or destroying
any grown wild cat or fox — provided that the animal was killed
within the bounds of the town — the selectman to cut off the right
ear of the cat or the fox to prevent any other selectman from
giving an order for the same animal; this premium soon rose to
five shillings, and later was but one shilling; the selectmen were
given power to abate town rates on the application of any four
persons — at their discretion; it was in 1761 that Abraham Hikcox
and Stephen Upson, Jr., laid before the town the following notable
memorial: " Whereas it hath been conjectured that the river from
Waterbury to Derby might with a little cost be made Navigable for
Battooing, we pray that this meeting would Grant that whoever
shall subscribe and work at clearing said River, shall for each day's
work be allowed to have it go off for a Highway day"; in 1763 it
was voted that the Town Rate might be received by the collectors
in provisions— wheat at four shillings, rye two shillings and eight

* Dr. Bronson has entered so fully into the details of the formation of the ecclesiastical societies of
Farmingbury and Middlebury, that it has not been deemed necessary to repeat them here.

WATEBBURY'S LATER YEABS AS A COLONIAL TOWN, 401

pence, Indian corn at two, oats at one shilling a bushel, and flax at
six-pence per pound — provided the payment of rates was made at a
specified time; in the same year the old question of the ministerial
lands and moneys came before the town again, and a committee
was to search the records and report at an adjourned meeting —
adjourned for that purpose — ^but when the meeting was met, it
decided only on the manner of impounding rams, and the annual
premium for killing foxes and wild cats ; and when it was pro-
posed to hear the report of the committee which had been
appointed to search the records of the ministerial land and moneys
dissension seems to have arisen. It is indicated by the words^the
last penned in our records by the then town clerk — " Answered in
the Negative voted to Dismiss the meeting."

Nov. 12, 1764, died Deacon Thomas Clark — "Town Clerk and
Treasurer" — a man of most excellent attainment and of valuable
reputation, who had lived here as boy and man for more than sixty
years.* Mr. Clark lived on the ground now occupied by the City
Hall. Across the meeting house green lived the Rev. Mark Leaven-
worth. Within a few months of the time of Mr. Clark's death, his
third daughter, Hannah, was to be married to the Rev. Solomon
Mead of New Salem, New York. Wedding festivities were pre-
pared for. The guests assembled to witness the marriage cere-
monies, but the Reverend bridegroom did not arrive. A bridge in
his journey of forty miles on horseback had been carried away, but
of this the guests knew not. They waited until the unseemly hour
of eleven at night, when they all went home.. At half-past eleven
Mr. Mead reached Waterbury. At New Salem every preparation
had been made by his people to welcome their pastor's bride the
next evening, and the tiresome journey of more than forty miles
must be begun early in the morning. A messenger aroused Mr.
Leavenworth, and a midnight marriage took place. Very early the
next morning the bride took her departure, the same horse carrying
Mr. and Mrs. Mead, the wedding apparel of the bride being securely
strapped to the pillion.

Ezra Bronson was chosen town clerk and town treasurer a month
after Deacon Clark's death. At this meeting it required eighty-
two ofl&cers to fill the town's quota, two or more ofl&ces frequently
being represented by the same person. It is interesting to note

* Thomas Clark was also a merchant, and the book in which he kept his '* accounts," commencing in
Z727, Dr. Bronson tells us was loaned to him by Mrs. Aurelia Clark, Deacon Clark's granddaughter. Dr.
Bronson deposited it for security with the New Haven Colony Historical Society. He very courteously
gave to the writer an order for its recovery, that it might add to the interest of this work. A most patient
and earnest search for it in the Society's rooms in the late State House and in the Insurance Building, and
also in its new home, has been without reward.

26

402 BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

that the Proprietors are still holding the balance of power — ^more
than one-half of the places being filled by their lineal representa-
tives. Unfamiliar names, in the unfamiliar characters of Ezra
Bronson's pen look up at us from the open page. The Culvers and
Dunbars and Frisbies; Eliphalet Hartshorn, Philemon Sanford,
Isaac Spencer, and Randal Evans have come into office; and young
William Southmayd, grandson of the Reverend John Southmayd (a
few months married to Irene, the daughter of the Rev. Samuel
Todd) we find surveying highways.

Mr. Jonathan Fulford branded the horses; Aaron Harrison,
Richard Seymore, and David Blakslee sealed the leather, Isaac
Prichard still repacked the provisions, in which the people paid
their colony rates; Captain Stephen Upson, Jr., sealed the measures;
eight men were required to make the tax lists; thirty, to survey
the highways; and, so unruly had Waterbury and its dependencies
become, that fourteen tithingmen were deemed none too many to
keep order in the community, and to properly attend to the observ-
ance of the Sabbath Day according to the established law, in a town
of four parishes, three meeting houses, and one church edifice.

On the last day in the year 1764, the town instructed Capt.
George Nichols and Capt. Stephen Upson, Jr., " to go out Eastward
near Joseph Atkins to view and purchase half an acre of land upon
the Town cost in that neighborhood where they shall think it most
convenient for a burying yard." They selected the land now used
for that purpose near Wolcott centre.

In May, 1765, at the age of sixty-three years, Captain Samuel
Hikcox died. He was an efficient and a prominent citizen, holding
an important place in the community.

The authority of the First Church was publicly laid aside in
1765. For nearly a century the governing power had there inhered.
The words of its dethronement were few — a simple announcement
in town meeting declaring that "no regard should be paid to
society nominations for Town Officers." However, a century of
impetus is not soon overcome, and the same men, in so far as we
may discern, were duly elected under the new regime — Captain
Ezra Bronson was chosen town clerk and town treasurer ; the
selectmen were " Capt. Stephen Upson, Jun', Joseph Hopkins, Esq*",
Capt. John Sutliff, Capt. Edward Scovill, Timothy Judd, Esq', and
Lieut. Daniel Potter."

Upon the termination of the French and Indian war the English
government began to devise ways and means to recover from her
English colonies in America that portion of the cost of the conflict
which the colonies had received from England in part payment for

WATERBURT'8 LATER TEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 403

their colonial expenditures. To this end were devised certain
stamp duties, which gave to the bill of particulars its popular title —
**The Stamp Act." The full title of the bill was:

An Act for granting and applying certain Stamp Duties and other Duties in the
British Colonies and Plantations in America, towards defraying the Expenses of
defending, protecting, and securing the same, and for amending such parts of the
several Acts of Parliament relating to the trade and revenues of the said Colonies
and Plantations, as direct the manner of determining and recovering the penalties
and forfeitures therein mentioned. Also ten publick bills and seventeen private
ones.

It is not the province of this simple narrative of the early years
of a colonial town, to enter into circumstantial details of the causes
that led to the Colonial Revolution — and we may only refer to the
general gloom and discontent that crept down upon the people, as
they found themselves deprived of their constitutional rights as
British subjects, by having taxes imposed upon them without their
own consent — the colonies having no representation in Parliament.
The colonists claimed that liberty and freedom were taken from
them, being involved in the above power. In October, 1764, the
General Assembly, convened at New Haven, resolved to petition
Parliament against this bill for a stamp duty, or any bill for an
internal tax on the colony — which resolve was carried into execu-
tion. Mr. Joseph Hopkins and Mr. Ephraim Warner were the dep-
uties from Waterbury who voted on this petition. One year from
that time a Congress was held in New York, composed of the
several governments, " to confer upon a general and united humble,
loyal and dutiful representation to his Majesty and the Parliament,
of the present circumstances of the Colonies, and the difficulties to
which they were and must be reduced by the operation of the acts
for levying duties and taxes on the Colonies, and to implore relief.
One of the instructions to the members of this first Congress must
be noted, because of its true Connecticut ring: In your proceedings
you are to take care that you form no such junction with the other Com-
missioners as will subject you to the major vote of the Commissioners present.
One feels like giving a cheer for Connecticut Colony in 1765!

And all this time while the government was aroused and in
action for its constitutional rights of representation, and privilege
of trial by jury; and expressing in every conceivable way its distress
and alarming apprehensions that the English parliament "should
entertain sentiments so different from its own, respecting what was
ever reckoned among the most important and essential rights of
Englishmen,*' Waterbury continued her planting and harvesting,
her living and dying, only now and then giving a word here, and a

404 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

line there, whereby we may faintly discern the paths in which her
people were led. There are no records for town meetings in the
year 1766. The missing leaf was probably lost in re-binding. It
may have been that it is because of these missing pages that Water-
bury's action on the reception of the following news is unknown.
Certain " rate books " found in the Kingsbury house were enclosed
in newspaper covers. One of the covers is a newspaper, of a single
issue, printed at New Haven on Monday morning. May 19, 1766,
bearing for its title: Glorious News. At eleven o'clock on Friday,
May i6th, there arrived at Boston a brig belonging to John Han-
cock, Captain Shubael Coffin, in " 6 Weeks and 2 Days from Lon-
don." Mr. Jonathan Lowder set oflF to bear the news the brig brought
and "rode very hard,'* reaching New London at 9 o'clock Saturday
night, and waiting, without doubt, until sundown on the Sabbath
day before taking up his journey to New Haven, where he arrived
on Monday morning. And this was the news, from the London
Gazette, of March i8th, 1766: **This day His Majesty came to the
House of Peers, and being in his royal robes seated on the Throne
with the usual solemnity, Sir Francis Molineux, Gentleman Usher
of the Black Rod, was sent with a Message from his Majesty to the
House of Commons, commanding their attendance in the House of
Peers. The Commons having come thither, His Majesty was
pleased to give his Royal Assent to An Act to Repeal an Act made
in the last Session of Parliament. When the King went to the
House of Peers, there was such a vast concourse of People, huzza-
ing, and clapping hands, that it was several hours before His
Majesty reached the House. As soon as the Royal Assent was
affixed to the Repeal of the Stamp-Act, the merchants trading to
America dispatched a vessel which had been waiting, to put into
the first port on the Continent with the news. The greatest rejoic-
ings possible by all Ranks of People were held in London, the ships
in the river displayed their colors. Illuminations and bonfires
abounded, and the Rejoicings were as great as ever was Known on
any occasion." In Boston, it "was impossible to express the Joy
the Town was in on receiving the above great, glorious, and impor-
tant news." The bells in all the Churches were set a-ring^ng, and
a day for general rejoicing was to be held. An hour after Mr.
Lowder reached New London, the guns in the fort were firing, and
New Haven on Monday morning, was in like rejoicings. No paper
it is safe to say was ever more welcome in Waterbury than was this
issue of " Glorious News." We do not know who brought it here
or how long the rider lingered at Stephen Hopkin's gate to tell the
tidings, or who held him fast at Judd's Meadow until the story was

WATEBBURT'8 LATER TEARS A8 A COLONIAL TOWN, 405

retold, but we do know that four days later, on Friday, a special
Thanksgiving day was held throughout the colony. The rejoicings
at Hartford were not only religiously observed, but bells and colors
and cannon played their parts, and " preparations were making for a
general illumination in the evening, when, accidentally, fire was
communicated to a quantity of powder put in one of the lower
rooms of the new brick school house (which stood where the Ameri-
can Hall is now, 1881,) to be delivered out to the military and used
on the joyful occasion. In an instant the building was reduced to
a heap of rubbish. A number of young gentlemen had met to make
sky rockets in the chamber over the room where the powder was
deposited. About thirty were buried in the ruins, of whom six died."

A few days after this Thanksgiving was held, Joseph Hopkins
of Waterbury asked the Assembly for ^^jQz^ 4 8^, or any part
thereof, because Isaac Frazier, a transient person, broke open his
shop (on the north side of West Main street) in the night, between
the 5th and 6th days of October, 1765, and stole and carried away a
large quantity of goldsmith's wares, with some monies." Mr. Hop-
kins pursued the thief with men and horses, and found him at South
Kingston in Rhode Island. He was returned to Waterbury, and
committed to prison at New Haven at the above cost. Dr. Bronson
tells us that Frazier ** was sentenced to be executed, but asked for
perpetual imprisonment, banishment or slavery instead, and that
the request was not granted." We confess to a sense of relief at
finding Dr. Bronson in probable error. According to Mr. Hopkins'
plea, he was convicted before the Superior court, and punished —
but as, after the punishment^ he was bound to Mr. Hopkins for the
payment of the sums expended in his capture, " but continued in
service but four days and then absconded;" and, several years later,
as one Isaac Frazier was " a prisoner in Fairfield county, for a cap-
ital crime," we have ventured to infer that Isaac Frazier was not
executed for stealing Joseph Hopkins's goldsmith wares in Water-
bury.

A committee to remove encroachments from highways had for
some time been an almost annual appointment, but in 1768 the same
committee was impowered "by the majority of its members to lease
for a reasonable rent during the pleasure of the Town, such parts
of the highways as might reasonably be spared." In the same year
the selectmen were bidden to allow the cost of building a room,
eight feet long and six wide, for the use of keeping the Town stock
(guns and ammunition), to any person who should build the same.

When England, at the close of the war with France in 1763, dis-
persed the helpless Acadians and they were doomed to service in

4o6 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

the English colonies, six of the number were allotted to Waterbury.
Special provision was made by Connecticut for the transfer from
town to town of these most helpless mortals. In this year, the
following act in our records is supposed to refer to a family of
French Acadians : ** Voted, to give the French Family in this town,
in order to Transport sd. French Family into the Northward
country, not exceeding Ten pounds, including Charitable Contribu-
tions." It is supposed that they were landed, as were our soldiers
in the Cape Breton expedition, at New London, and were then
passed on from town to town to their appointed destination.

In May of 1768, "the proposal of a New county being erected in
Woodbury" came before the town. This county was to include
Woodbury, Waterbury, New Milford, Newtown, and New Fairfield.
Waterbury's vote on the question was passed in the negative.

During sixty-seven years the inhabitants at Judd's meadow had,
however rough the roads, or bitter the wintry winds, toiled upward
to the Meeting-House green at the Town spot to attend divine
service. In January, 1769, a modest petition for " priviledges " from
Gideon " Hecox " and others of Waterbury, reached the Assembly.
There is about that petition a pitiable little pathos, a half -guilty
something, that is indefinable but potent to tell that Judd's meadow
men felt their position to be that of an erring child, I suspect it
was because they had so often joined in denying winter and society
privileges to their own townsmen, that they were half ashamed to
ask for themselves. Judd's meadow or South Farms is not even
mentioned in the plea. The usual five-months' term of release was
granted during the pleasure of the Assembly. In the same year
Samuel Scott was collector of the colony tax. He became insolvent
and conveyed his estate to the town as security for his collections.
The town ordered his estate sold at a " Publick Vandue " at the
dwelling house of the second Thomas Clark. In 1769 there were
three Baptists in Waterbury. They are so noted in the rate-book
for that year — their names being James Blakslee, Jacob Richmond,
and David Cole. This was the same year in which Joseph Meacham,
a Baptist minister, was prosecuted " at the suit of the king before
the county court of Hartford, for solemnizing a marriage between
Frances Baxter and Abigail Saxton." His punishment was a fine
of twenty pounds, and six pounds cost, in lawful money. On prov-
ing his innocence of intended evil-doing, his fine was forgiven him,
but not the costs.

In 1770 the old question of the disposition of the school moneys
which had been received by the town from the colony — funds which
had arisen from the sale of the seven townships — came anew to the

WATERBURT'8 LATER YEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN, 407

front. The sales had taken place at a time when there was but one
head in the township, and that head was the First church. West-
bury and Northbury had already claimed their proportion according
to their lists in 1732. Of the money arising from the Proprietor's
gift, in 1715, of a jQiso right in lands, the sale of which was to be
used for the support of the ministry, the Church of England now
claimed its equal proportion, and the town agreed that from 1770
the above money should be divided according to the claims of the
various parties, and that the societies or parts of societies that
should thereafter be formed should share in a like privilege. Cap-
tain Samuel Hikcox (son of Deacon Thomas), Captain John Welton,
and Captain Phineas Royce were chosen to go to the Secretary's
office and search into the affairs relative to the matter, and to draw
orders and give receipts relative thereto. The above vote very naturally
was more than distasteful, and it was believed to be " against the
common sense and practice of mankind.'' Party strife entered into
the struggle. It was the Town of Waterbury vs. The First Church
and Society. From the latter emanated most vigorous protests.
That of the Societies* committee of the First Society ran thus :

Whereas the town of Waterbury formerly (when consisting of but one ecclesias-
tical society) was possessed of certain large quantities of lands devoted to the use
of the ministry in the same. And whereas, since the sd town has been divided
into several ecclesiastic^ societies, the inhabitants of sd societies convened in a
town meeting did formerly undertake by their votes to sell part of the sd lands, and
to divide the interest of the moneys raised thereby to and amongst sd societies —
And now the said inhabitants have also voted that a certain party called the church
of England, (which bad no existence in sd town when sd lands was granted to the
use of the ministry therein,) shall have their equal proportion of s<* moneys, all
which votes are an affringement on the property of the first society of sd Water-
bury and contrary to the laws of this Colony Therefore we the subscribers,

society's committee in sd first society, do enter this our protest more especially
against the last of the above sd votes made this day, as it is also against law and
equity and the most important rites and interest of this society and against the
common sence and practice of mankind, and request the same may be recorded in
the office of the town clerk in sd Waterbury. Dated March 12, 1770.

(Signed) Andrew Bronson, Joseph Hopkins, Ashbel Porter, Dan. Welton, Ezra
Bronson, society's committee of the first society of Waterbury.

On the same page the School committee of the First Society
caused its protest to be recorded:

Whereas the Hon^'« General Assembly of this Colony, in the year 1733, Granted
certain moneys raised by the Sale of the Western [lands] (then so called) to the
First society in Waterbury for the use of the schools in sd First society forever —
And Whereas on this Day the Inhabitants of the several societies in a Town meet-
ing have taken upon them to vote, and have voted that the said moneys shall be
Divided to the several societies in Waterbury contrary to the laws of this colony

4o8 mSTOBT OF WATERS URT.

Therefore we the subscribers school committees (intimating two schools as then
existing at the town centre) in the First society Do Enter this our Protest against
said vote as being unlawful unquitable and Injurious to Posterity, and Request
that the same may be Recorded in the office of the Town Clerk in said Waterbury.

Dated this 12th Day of March, A. D. 1770.

Also Mr. Isaac Bronson Protested against sd. vote and Desired the same might

be entered.

Jonathan Baldwin,

Isaac Bronson, Ju°.

Ezra Bronson,

Reuben Blakslee,

School Committee of the First Society of Waterbury,

[The meeting Dismist.]

The First Church, without doubt, felt grieved and defrauded of
that which had been its inheritance. Its power and its riches had
joined hands and were fleeing away from it. A similar hour enters
every human heart in its earthly course.

The next town meeting opened with " Prayer by the Rev'd
Mark Leavenworth." It would seem that it was only on momentous
occasions (born of sorrow or some weighty consideration), that the
civil meetings of the community were fortified by prayer, before the
year 1770.

In October 1770, the Society of Farmingbury was duly incorpo-
rated on lines somewhat less in extent than those over which
winter privileges had held sway. The society line passed through
the middle of the dwelling houses of Caleb Barnes and Elijah
Frisbie. After a series of mistakes in regard to the center of West-
bury Society, the site for the second meeting house was finally deter-
mined. The stake " was set about half a mile north of the old meeting
house, on the west side of the highway from the old meeting house
to Benjamin Richards Junr., in Wait Scott's orchard, about seven-
teen or eighteen rods southwest from Wait Scott's dwelling house,
and about fifteen or sixteen rods west from the highway." The
stake, set by " Bushnel Bostwick, Abijah Catlin, and John Whiting
Esq", was to be included within the sills of the house."

In May 177 1, the First Society asked the General Assembly for
the return of the moneys that had been taken from it, but obtained
no redress. In the same year the selectmen were appointed "to go
and view and find a convenient place for a Burying Place in the
west part of the First society." The site selected was the first
place of burial in Middlebury.

CHAPTER XXXII.

THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES — THE EARLIEST
INTIMATION OF AN APPROACHING WAR — A COMMITTEE OF IN-
SPECTION— WATERBURY RESOLVES TO ABIDE BY THE ASSOCIATION
ENTERED INTO BY CONGRESS — MASSACHUSETTS BOYCOTTS THE
IMPORTERS OF BRITISH GOODS — BOSTON RIOTING — THE BOSTON

PORT-BILL — Windham's gift of sheep — thirteen gentlemen

IN WATERBURY RECEIVE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR BOSTON — WATER-
BURY'S military COMPANIES 1770-1775 — POPULATION IN 1774 —
CHURCHMEN — AN ARMY OF SIX THOUSAND MEN IN APRIL, 1775 —
WATERBURY SENT 152 SOLDIERS — CAPT. PHINEAS PORTER'S COM-
PANY— DISAFFECTION AT NORTHBURY — THE REV. JOHN R. MAR-
SHALL— CAPT. BROWN — STEPHEN UPSON — A " RUMPUS " IN WATER-
BURY— THE REV. MR. INGLIS DR. MANSFIELD — THE REV. JAMES

SCOVILL — BENJAMIN BALDWIN — BIRTH OF THE NATION AT PHILA-
DELPHIA— GENERAL HOWE'S BRITISH FLEET — GENERAL WASHING-
TON'S APPEAL FOR CONNECTICUT MILITIA — WATERBURY TROOPS
REACH NEW YORK — THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE READ —
STATUE OF KING GEORGE OVERTHROWN — MAJOR PHINEAS POR-
TER'S ORDERLY BOOK — WATERBURY MEN IN MANY PLACES.

IN May, 1774, the House of Representatives, tinder solemn and
serious conditions, passed eleven resolutions, which, after
having been in the Lower House read distinctly three several
times and considered, were voted and passed with great unanimity.
In the ist resolution, his Majesty King George is acknowledged
to be the lawful and rightful King of Great Britain, and the duty is
admitted of the people of his kingdom, including the Colony of
Connecticut, to bear faithful and true allegiance to their king and to
defend him in all attempts upon his person, crown or dignity; in
the 2d, the colonists laid claim to all the liberties and privileges of
natural born subjects, as fully as though they had been born within
the realm of England, claiming property in their own estate, and
the right to be taxed by their own consent only, given in person or
by their representatives, that their liberties or free customs were
not to be taken from them, and that they were not to be sentenced or
condemned but by the lawful judgment of their peers, all of which
they claimed by their charter; in the 3d, that the only lawful repre-
sentatives of the freemen were the persons elected by them to serve

4IO HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

in the General Assembly; in the 4th, the right to be governed by
their General Assembly in the article of taxing and internal police
was set forth, with the claim that the same had been enjoyed more
than a century under the charter which had neither been forfeited
nor surrendered, but had during all the century been constantly
recognized by King and Parliament; in the 5th, the Assembly pro-
tested against the erection of new Courts of Admiralty vested with
powers above and not subject to the common-law courts of the
Colony to determine suits relating to duties and forfeitures, as
being foreign to the established jurisdiction of the former courts of
admiralty in America on the ground that it was "destructive of
one of their most darling rights, that of Tryal by Juries," which
was held in esteem as one chief excellence of the British consti-
tution, and a principal bulwark of English liberty; in the 6th, pro-
test was made against the apprehending and carrying persons
beyond the sea to be tried for any crime committed within the
Colony, or trial by any court constituted by act of Parliament or
otherwise within the Colony in a summary way, without a jury; in
the 7th, declaration was made that any harbor or port duly consti-
tuted and opened could not be shut up and discharged except by an
act of the legislature, without subverting the rights, and destroy-
ing the property of subjects; in the 8th, the act of Parliament
inflicting pains and penalties on the town of Boston by blocking
up its harbor was a precedent justly alarming to the colonists and
inconsistent with their constitutional rights and liberties; in the
9th, the Colony promised that whenever his Majesty's service
should require the aid of her people, most cheerfully to grant its
proportion of men and money for the defense, protection and
security of the British American dominions; in the loth, it was
set forth that according to the extent and circumstances of the
American Colonies, there were within them as many loyal, virtu-
ous, industridjiis and well-governed subjects as in any part of the
British dominions, that they were as warmly engaged to promote
the best good and real glory of the grand whole of the Empire as
any subjects within it, and that the colonists looked upon their
connection with Great Britain (under God) as the greatest security
to the colony, which connection they ardently wished might con-
tinue to the latest posterity, declaring that the Constitution of the
Colony of Connecticut as understood and practiced upon ever since
it existed until the late troubles intervened, was the surest band
of union, confidence and mutual prosperity between the mother
country and her colonies, and the best foundation on which to build
the good of the whole, whether considered in a civil, military or

WATERBUR7 IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 411

mercantile light; in the nth, acknowledgment was made of the
duty owed by the colony, to king, country, themselves and their
posterity to maintain, defend and preserve their rights and liber-
ties, and to transmit them entire and inviolate to the latest gene-
rations, and announcing a fixed, determined and unalterable resolu-
tion faithfully to discharge that duty.

When Capt. Jonathan Baldwin, and Joseph Hopkins, Esq.,
unflinchingly declared their unbounded patriotism by subscribing
in behalf of Waterbury to the resolutions, of which the above is a
mere outline, they had been twelve times deputies to the General
Assembly.

The earliest intimation of an approaching war to be found in
our record appears Nov. 17, 1774, when a meeting was warned to
take action on the "nth Article of the Association of the General
Congress." The above "Article" recommended that every town
should appoint a committee whose business it should be attentively
to observe the conduct of all persons touching that Association of
the General Congress, and if any one was found inimical to it
the case was to be published in the Gazette — "to the end that
all such foes to the rights of British America might be publicly
known and universally contemned as the enemies of American lib-
erty." Thereafter, all dealings with such persons were to be broken
off. The town at once appointed its Committee of Inspection.
The men chosen on this important occasion were Joseph Hop-
kins, Dr. Ebenezer Beardsley, Deacon Andrew Bronson, and James
Bronson from the First society; Capt. John Welton from the
.Church of England in the First society; Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss
and John Lewis from Salem; Deacon Timothy Judd, Capt. Benjamin
Richards (who kept a tavern) and Stephen Matthews from West-
bury; Dr. Roger Conant, Jesse Curtis (one of seventeen Curtis
men) and Nathaniel Barnes from Northbury; and Josiah Rogers
from Farmingbury. ,

The people in town meeting assembled, agreed and resolved
faithfully to adhere to, and strictly to abide by the association
entered into by said Congress — and the above committee were to
see the same carried into execution in every article thereof. The
town clerk was instructed to get a copy of the doings of the Con-
gress, well bound, at the cost of the town, and lodge it in his office,
there to remain among the records of the town for the use of future
generations. If it should be decided to hold a County congress,
the committee already appointed was to choose two out of their
number to attend such congress. Thus Waterbury valiantly
pledged herself, and entered with no uncertain voice into the dark
struggle.

412 BISTORT OF WATERBUBT,

Dec. 22, 1774, a second meeting was held, at which an order was
given for a new and larger building in which to store the Town
stock, and to increase the stock to double the amount hitherto held.
This increase was in response to a colonial order and must have
equalled 300 pounds of powder, 1200 pounds of bullets, and 1800
flints to meet the requirements at that date.

Notwithstanding the absence of written evidence, we may not
for a moment believe that the war did not begin in Waterbury in
1770, as well as elsewhere. Nearly all the maritime towns on the
continent could not, at that date, have entered into an agreement
not to import British goods, a few necessary articles excepted, until
the Act of Parliament imposing certain duties on tea, glass, paper,
painters* colors, oil and other articles, was repealed; the Massachu-
setts towns could not have been "boycotting" in 1770 in the most
fundamental manner the merchants who imported British goods,
neither buying themselves, nor suffering any one acting for them
to buy, and saying : " Neither will we buy of those that shall buy
or exchange any articles of Goods with them,'* and voting : " That to
the End the Generations which are yet unborn may know who they
were that laughed at the Distresses and Calamities of this people,
and instead of striving to save their Country when in imminent
Danger, did strive to render ineffectual a virtuous and commendable
Plan," and ordering that " the names of the Importers should be
annually read in Town meeting " — could these things have been, and
this remote town felt no thrill of patriotism ? Are we to suppose
that the story of Griffin's wharf; the cargoes of the brig Beaver, the
ships Eleanor and Dartmouth; the meeting in Faneuil Hall to
determine ways and means of getting rid of the cargoes of the three
obnoxious Indiamen; the adjournment to the South Church; Josiah
Quincy's speech; Governor Hutchinson's refusal to send away the
ships; the return of the committee about sundown to the church
with the report of his refusal; the rush of the sixty-five men to the
harbor, the dock, the ships, the tea — that all this rioting on the i6th
day of December, 1773, in the face of an English fleet and English
soldiers in the castle, had not been told and borne fruit that fell
upon some luckless trader in forbidden luxuries in Waterbury
before 1774?

The Boston Port bill went into operation the first day of June,
1774. By its terms no person was permitted to land anything at
Boston, or at Charlestown. In Boston harbor on Noddle's, Hog,
Snake, Deer, Apple, Bird and Spectacle islands were many sheep
and cattle, likewise hay and wood, all of which the inhabitants of
Boston needed for daily use — and the Port bill denied them. It was

WATERBURT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION.

413

a desperate situation — the neck of Charlestown reached out to the
north for food and help, and the neck of Boston pleaded with the
south for assistance, and by the twenty-fourth day of June the cry
had reached Windham, Connecticut. On that day nine gentlemen
of that town met at their meeting-house door to go forth and
gather food in answer to that cry. In three days they collected 257
sheep which were driven to Roxbury, there to await an opportu-
nity to get them into Boston. A letter accompanied the gift, in
which letter the givers begged the men of Boston to suffer and be
strong remembering what had been done for the country by its founders^ and
closing with the words : " We know you suffer, and feel for you.
As a testimony of our commiseration for your misfortunes, we have
procured a small flock of sheep, which at this season are not so good
as we could wish, but are the best we had. This small present, gen-
tlemen, we beg you would accept and apply to the relief of those
honest, industrious poor, who are most oppressed by the late
oppressive acts."

It was November 22, 1774, that in Waterbury a committee of
thirteen men was appointed to receive donations contributed towards
the relief of the poor in Boston. Col. Jonathan Baldwin (this was a
few days after he received his commission as lieutenant-colonel of
the loth regiment of militia) and Joseph Hopkins of the meeting
house, Captain John Welton, Esq'., and Stephen Welton of the
Church of England received for the centre— James Porter for the
Hop Swamp region — Captain Samuel Hikcox and Timothy Judd,
Esq., for Westbury — Stephen Seymour, Randal Evans and David
Smith for Northbury — ^Josiah Rogers for Farmingbury — Samuel
Lewis, Esq., and John Hopkins for Salem. We are denied the
pleasure of knowing what was sent to Boston from Waterbury as
the result of the ingathering of the above gentlemen.

In order to obtain a glimpse of Waterbury's position in the
militia of the colony at the beginning of the war we must review
her military record for a few years.

In 1770 Waterbury's military officers and companies were: In
the First society, three companies — in Westbury, two (called the
East and the West company) — in Northbury, two — in Farmingbury
one — making eight military companies in the township. The
officers of the first of the three companies in the First society were
Capt. Ezra Bronson, Lieut. Ashbel Porter, Ens. Stephen Miles — of
the second, Capt. Abraham Hikcox, Lieut. Hezekiah Brown, Ens.
Joseph Warner — of the third, Capt. John Lewis, Lieut. Samuel
Porter, Ens. Amos Osborn. Of the West company in Westbury the
officers were Capt. Abel Woodward, Lieut. Peter Welton, Ens.

414 BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

Thomas Cole. The other Westbury company — ^having been the
second in the township in the date of its formation, continued to be
called the Second Waterbury company — its officers in 1770 were
Capt. Samuel Hikcox, Lieut. Richard Seymour, Ens. Samuel Brown.
In Northbury, the First company was commanded by Capt. Randal
Evans, Lieut. Bartholomew Pond — the Second company's officers
were Capt. David Blakesly, Lieut. Eliphalet Hartshorn, Ens. Jude
Blakesly. Of the " newly erected company in the winter parish of
Waterbury, so called," or Farmingbury, Josiah Rogers was lieu-
tenant and John Alcock ensign. In 177 1, Thomas Cole was captain
and Benjamin Richards lieutenant of the West company in West-
bury. Samuel Curtis was lieutenant, Nathaniel Barnes, ensign
in the First company of Northbury. In 1772, Phineas Porter was
ensign in the First company of Waterbury. Samuel Brown was
lieutenant, Michael Dayton, ensign in the Second company.
Samuel Porter was captain, Thomas Kincaid, lieutenant, in the
Third company. In 1773, ^^ changes were made. In 1774, all the
companies of Waterbury belonged in the loth regiment, of which
Jonathan Baldwin was lieutenant-colonel (in the room of Elisha
Hall gone to Great Britain). In October of that year the First com-
pany of Waterbury, Capt. Phineas Porter, Lieut. Reuben Blakslee,
Ens. Isaac Bronson, Jr., became the 2d company of that regiment.
The Second Waterbury company, Capt. Hezekiah Brown, Lieut.
Isaac Benham, Ens. Ephraim Warner (all Church of England men),
became the 12th company. A Northbury company, Capt. Michael
Dayton, Lieut. Stephen Matthews, Ens. Thomas Fenn, became the
7th company; a second Northbury company, Capt. Nathaniel
Barnes, Lieut. Lazarus Ives, Ens. James Warner became the loth
company; a third Northbury company, Capt. Benjamin Richards,
Ens. Nathaniel Edwards, became the 13th company, and a fourth
Northbury company appears — Capt. Amos Bronson, Ens. Samuel
Scovill (both of the Church of England), forming the 14th company.
In March, 1775, Moses Foot of the Northbury parish, with other
inhabitants, informed the Assembly that they had with great care
and expense applied themselves to the use of arms and the art of
war, and prayed to be constituted a military company. In April,
1775, (t^^ next month), Joseph Garnsey of the Westbury parish
appeared with the same request. The Assembly made answer by
commissioning Capt. Jesse Curtiss, Lieut. Moses Foot, Ens. Roger
Conant, officers of the Northbury company, which became the i8th
company; and by commissioning Capt. Joseph Garnsey, Lieut.
Jonathan Roberts, Ens. Benjamin Richards officers of the Westbury
company, which became the 19th company. At the same time

WATERBURT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION, 415

Capt. John Lewis, Lieut. Ira Bebee, Ens. Israel Terril, of Salem
parish, were commissioned officers over that company, which
became the 15th company — all in the loth regiment.

According to the census of Connecticut colony in 1774 Water-
bury had 3526 inhabitants. There were 1228 children under ten
years, 609 girls, 619 boys — 807 young persons between ten and
twenty, of whom 427 were males, 380 females; of this number nine-
teen young women were married, and five young men — of 1407
between twenty and seventy, 700 were men, 707 women; of this
number 132 men and 138 women were unmarried — 21 women and 6
men were over seventy and unmarried — there were 34 negroes, 13
under twenty. Of Indians, but 4 remained, 3 under twenty — one, a
woman over twenty.

We can add that Waterbury's tax-paying population in 1774
consisted of about 750 persons — a very few of whom were women.
These were scattered through the ancient town in the following
manner: 221 belonged at the centre, 212 in present Watertown, 181
in present Plymouth and Thomaston, 46 in present Wolcott, and 91
in present Naugatuck, including the settlers in present Prospect.
The Middlebury settlers were included in Waterbury centre. These
were again divided by their church relations in the following
manner: Of the First society's 221 tax -payers, 140 were numbered
as First-society men, 79 as Church of England men. In Watertown,
Mr, Trumbull's people of the Established Church were 165, Church
of England, 47. In Plymouth, 144 went to Mr. Storrs* meeting
house, 37 to the English Church. In the Salem or Naugatuck
parish, 82 were meeting-house people, 9 were churchmen. In
Farmingbury society or Wolcott, 38 belonged to the Established
Church, 8 to the Church of England. Taking the township as a
whole, we find 571 men paying taxes who belonged to the Estab-
lished Church, and 180 to the Church of England, or, about one man
in four whose loyalty to King George was anchored within the deep
waters of his more or less religious nature. The temptations which
the churchmen experienced to ignore many things that the non-
churchmen felt to be treasonable in their very nature, are clearly
seen to-day. More earnest men were probably never held to duty
on the earth, then these whigs andtories — men that were grown out
of the same conditions of life and habit, men whose ancestors side by
side had lived and died. The story, although it has been breathed
from lip to lip for more than a century, and dropped in innumer-
able words from a thousand pens, will forever remain untold.

It is difficult to make an estimate for the young men of the town
who were old enough for military duty, but not for tax-paying, but,

4i6 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

including all available material, we think there may have been not
far from one thousand men in the township. It is not proposed
to follow the militia companies through the war, but a list has been
made of the men who joined the forces for campaign purposes, and
of certain of the officers who served on the field, by which we are
able to show that Waterbury's place is very near, if not at the head
of the line of towns, and that her number of men is in full pro-
portion to her officers — whereas it has disparagingly been said
that her "men were all officers." In January, 1775, there were
nine militia companies of 540 men.

In April, 1775, it was ordered that one-fourth part of the militia
in the colony should be enlisted, equipped and assembled for the
special defense and safety of the colony. The premium was fifty-
two shillings and one month's advanced pay. Every man provided
his own blanket, knapsack and clothing, and was allowed ten shill-
ings for his own "arms, a good bayonet, and cartouch box." The
colony required 3000 stand of arms and announced that all that
should be made and completed by the first day of July would be
purchased by the colony at a reasonable price. Waterbury went
forth about this time to the Mad river, where she built a "gun
factory " and probably made guns for her country.

An army of 6000 men was raised and divided into six regiments
of ten companies each, 100 men to a company. In the ist regiment,
Phineas Porter was captain, Stephen Matthews ist lieut., Isaac
Bronson, Jr., 2d lieut., David Smith, ens. of the 8th company. Jesse
Curtiss was 2d lieut. and Nathaniel Edwards,* ens. in the 5th com-
pany. James Blakesley was 2d lieut. in the ist company, and pro-
moted to be ist lieut. in the 9th company. Aaron Foot, "sometimes
of Waterbury, sometimes of Litchfield," was 2d lieut. in the 4th
company. In the 2d regiment, Ezekiel Scott was commissioned ist
lieut. in April, and within a month was promoted to be captain of
the 2d company.

In 1775 Waterbury was the twelfth town in point of wealth in
the colony. New Haven, with her ;^72,5i5, stood first. Farmington
stood second with jQ^ 1,582. Waterbury had ;^4i,243, less than ;^5ooo
more than half the wealth of New Haven or Farmington. The
additions have not been estimated. The returns of the number of
soldiers sent in from fifty-five of the seventy towns in 1775 are
determined in this manner. The poll-tax of a soldier, ;^i8, was
abated. Waterbury claimed an abatement on ^^2736 for 152 men
sent to the war. Farmington sent 157 men, New Haven 152 —

* The Nathan Edwards of the Colonial Records.

WATERBURT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION.

417

Farmington (our mother) the most loyal town in the colony ! Her
eldest child, Waterbury, second only to that mother of all the towns
in the commonwealth in the first year of the war !

Dr. Bronson tells us that Capt. Phineas Porter's company was to
be raised in Waterbury; that it was in readiness and about to march
late in May, 1775; ^^^^ ^^^ term of service was not to exceed seven
months. According to the " Record of Service of Connecticut Men
in the War of the Revolution," issued from the Adjutant General's
Office in Hartford in 1889, the enlistment roll of this company is
missing. The names of thirty men belonging to it are given, as
discharged from service in the Northern Department — all but four
of them in November. The first man on the list is John Woodruff
of Mr. Trumble's flock in Westbury. The second man is given as
Jonah Hall, who was from Salem parish, and whose perfect name
was Jonathan Hall. His name on our tax-list is Jonah Hall.
Stephen Hotchkiss of the First church was the third man; Zadock
Curtiss of Northbury the fourth.

The 5th company in the same regiment (the ist) must also
have been recruited from Waterbury, if not in Waterbury. Its ist
and 2d lieutenants, Jesse Curtiss and Nathaniel Edwards; its ser-
geants, Aaron Matthews and Stephen Scott; its clerk, Eli Curtis;
its corporals, Edward Dunbar and Amos Hikcox; its fifer, Giles
Dunbar; its drummer, Joel Judd; beside fifty-one of its centinels.
or privates, were Waterbury men. Their names are :

Elijah Weed,
Ezekiel Sanford,
Lyman Curtiss,
David Foot,
Timothy Pond.
Elisha Street,
Josiah Bams,
Epenetus Buckingham,
John Doolittle,
Josiah Edwards,
David Foot, Jr.,
Consider Hicox,
Joseph Hotchkiss,
Daniel Judd,
Freeman Judd,
Demas Judd,
Thomas Merchant,
Gershom Scott,

Daniel Seymour,
John Eggleston,
Allyn Judd,
Amos Matthews,
Elisha Parker,
Solomon Trumbull,
Isaac Barnes,
Amos Dunbar,
James Fancher,
Solomon Griggs,
Joash Sejj'mour,
Rufus Farrington (Yar-

rington ? )
John Fulford,
Woolsey Scott,
Joseph Lewis,
Stephen Judd,

Isaac Pendleton,
Israel Williams,
Obed Williams,
Bartholomew Williams,
Michael Dayton,
Luman Luddington,
Nathaniel Merrils,
Solomon Way,
Titus Fulford,
Elisha Hicox,
Joseph Pribble,
Samuel Barnes,
Archibald Blakeslee,
Elijah Smith,
James Thomas,
Benjamin Warner,
Bronson Foot.

The above men served from May to December, 1775, and were
at the siege of Boston.
27

4i8 mSTOBT OF WATERBUBT.

Northbury was somewhat turbulent from the beginning. The
earliest signs of disaffection came from that section. John Sutliff,
Jr., and other men who were members of the West company in that
parish, in April 1775 informed the General Assembly that "the
major part of the company, both officers and soldiers were totally
disaffected to the general cause of American liberty, and altogether
refused to adopt the measures advised by the Continental Congress,
but were accustomed to speak and act in direct opposition thereto."
Capt. Amos Bronson and Ensign Samuel Scovill were "cashiered
and dismissed from their military offices." The colonel of the regi-
ment was ordered "to lead the company to the choice of a captain
and ensign and other needful officers." In October, " on informa-
tion of the state, circumstances and doings " of that company, it
was " dissolved," and all persons by law obliged to do military duty
were annexed to the companies under the command of Capt. Jesse
Curtiss and Capt. Nathaniel Bams.

At the same date, " John R. Marshall of Woodbury, missionary,
was cited to appear before the court and answer for his inimical
temper and unfriendly disposition toward the plans adopted for
the defence of the American people." This is the first instance in
which a clergyman was called before the court for hostility to the
American cause. On the same day, certain inhabitants of Water-
bury presented a memorial, in which they advised the court that
Capt. Hezekiah Brown was disaffected to the method advised by
the Continental Congress, and that he said in the presence of a
number of people "that the Congress ought to be punished for
putting the country to so much cost and charge, for they did no
more good than a parcel of squaws; that it was unnecessary expense,
and the Assembly had no right to do it; that Boston had wrongfully
undertaken to quarrel about the tea, and we had no hand in it; that
our General Assembly was as arbitrary as the pope of Rome, when
it cashiered Capt. Bronson and Ensign Scovill; and that he would
not go one step further for the relief of people in Boston than he
was obliged to go." Definite action on both the cases cited seemed
to await the enactment of laws touching this new crime in the com-
munity. The laws came two months later, forbidding any person
within the colony to supply the Ministerial army or navy with pro-
visions, military, or naval stores; prohibiting the giving of any
manner of intelligence; the enlisting or procuring any enlistments
into the service of that army or navy; the taking up of arms against
the Colony of Connecticut or the United Colonies; the piloting of
any vessel, or the giving of any manner of aid or assistance — the
penalty for offense in any of the above particulars being the forfei-

WATERS UBF IJ^ THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 419

ture of estate and imprisonment for a term not exceeding three
years. And, to cover cases like Hezekiah Brown's, any person who
should libel or defame any of the resolves of the Honorable Con-
gress of the United Colonies, or the acts or proceedings of the Gen-
eral Assembly made for the defense or security of the rights or
privileges of the people, should, on proper conviction, be disarmed
and not allowed to have or keep any arms, or to hold or serve in
any office, civil or military, and should be punished by fine, impris-
onment or disfranchisement, or find surety for peace and good
behavior and pay the cost of prosecution. On complaint made to
the Civil Authority and Committee of Inspection of any person
as inimical to the liberties of the Colony, that person was to be
examined touching his innocence of the accusation, and if not
proved innocent, he was not to be allowed to have or keep any
arms. Any person held or screened under the protection of the
Ministerial army or navy, or assisting to carry into execution meas-
ures against America, and having real estates, such estates were to
be attached and held under the care of appointed persons, and
improved for the use of the Colony. The Treasurer of the Colony
held the power to sell such estates by auction, or at private sale.

After the passage of the above act, Capt. Hezekiah Brown, " of
the 12th military company in the loth regiment" was, after trial,
found guilty of disobedience, cashiered, and rendered incapable of
holding any further military office in the colony. The town, how-
ever, had relieved him from office in 1774, at the same meeting in
which the "very jumbled and unintelligible" vote was rescinded,
by which the Church of England had been receiving for four years
its proportion of interest money derived from lands devoted to the
ministry by the town proprietors of 17 15. Hezekiah Brown was a
man of about fifty years, the son of Deacon Samuel Brown, who
came to Waterbury from "Boston, Hartford County" (and not, I
think, related to James Brown). Dr. Bronson tells us that he left
Waterbury early in 1777 and joined the Ministerial army in New
York, received a captain's commission and died among his new
friends, August 27, 1777. His wife, a daughter of Lieut. Prindle,
who had eight children to care for, probably remained loyal to the
colony, for the real estate belonging to her husband was restored
to her.

Six letters, yellowed by time and worn with the touch of a
mother's fingers, are all that remain to tell the story of the fourth
Stephen Upson in lineal descent from the planter Stephen. P>om
them we learn that he, a lad of seventeen years, indentured to a
master with whom he was not happy, ran away, (we infer to Litch-

420 HISTORY OF WATERS UR7.

field) and there enlisted July 12, 1775, in Capt. Nathaniel Tuttle's
company, in the 7th regiment. The first letter, bearing date Sep-
tember 15th, is written from New London. In it he tells his mother
that the soldiers have little to do with tones at New London; that
the troops are throwing up fortifications, but that he is living with
the Lieutenant in a house where there is a family; that he lies on
as good a bed as he did at his master's, and lives as well and feels
better; that he would not go home for anything. It is a boy's
letter with an ache in his heart that he stifles to the last and then
betrays by telling her that he " has written one letter to her but
has had no answer from her, or any letter from any body, and
hopes that she will not slite him so much as not to write to him."
The second letter is from "Camp at Cambridge, Nov. 5th, 1775, ^^^
is written to relieve his mother's anxiety regarding him. He
assures her that it is a time of general health in the camp, adding:
" We are all of good spirits and not afraid of a Cannon. About
swearing, there is some, but not more than can be expected of so
many saylors as there are here." He again assures his mother that
he is more contented than he should be at home at his master's, and
that he shall return to her as soon as his time is out. On Christmas
day he wrote again from Camp Winter Hill, at Charlestown, that
he had enlisted again, five days after his time was expired, for a
year, and that his pay was to be 44 shillings a month, adding: "I
should not have enlisted had it not been that I thought my Country
was in more Need of me here than at home, but I hope to come
home and see you on furlough soon, and to meet with your good
affection at my coming home, and your approbation in my engage-
ment in the army. Our provisions are good and plenty, and bar-
racks are comfortable, considering all things." The third letter is
of but eight lines, written from Roxbury, March 15, 1776. His regi-
ment, he informs her, had that day received orders to march —
adding, "I suppose to New York. Uncle Clark has been to the
Colonel to get liberty for me to go through Waterbury, but cannot."
In May he wrote from New York: "I am determined not to go to
live at my master's any more. If you can get up my indenture I
[would] have you do it. If you can get it up, I will not enlist
again, but come home and live with you — if you cant " — the remain-
der of the letter is gone. There is )'^et another letter written from
New York on his birth-day. It is dated Sept. 12, 1776. In it he
writes: "We expect the enemy to make another push very soon. I
mean to stay here till my time is out. I shall not enlist again
before I come home, for I mean to come home and live with you if
my life is spared so long. I would not have you conserned about

WATERS URT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION, 421

me, but keep up a good spirit, for in time I hope we shall drive
our Enemy off from Our land and have peaceful times again. This
day I am Eighteen years of age. Whether ever I shall see another
birth-day or no I cant tell. God knows. Remember my love to
Mark and Daniel (his brothers), and to my sisters and to all my
friends. Pray write to me as often as you can." The letter closes
with the usual " Your loving son Stephen Upson." The boy folded
it — addressed it " To the Widow Sarah Upson at Waterbury in Con-
necticut," omitting from the lower left hand comer the usual — " To
be left at Landlord Clarks." Three days later, "at the battle of
Harlem Heights," Stephen Upson was killed.

By whatever name known, whether royalist or rebel, whether
Whig or Tory, the grief of the widow of Hezekiah Brown and the
grief of the widow and the mother of Stephen Upson was one
and the same. It was the same story, repeated in Waterbury
from Northbury's remotest bound to Salem's southern limit; from
the borders of Quassapaug's waters to the summit of Benson's hill
and to East mountain— a story of mingled patriotism, loftiest
courage, heroic endeavor and patient endurance, born out of
the sufferings of heroic ancestors, whose vanishing faces were
still luminous with the light of that Liberty toward which the
children of 1776 were marching. Side by side with these ardent
lovers of inherited and chartered rights — in their town, in their
homes, in their very lives were inwoven the lives of other men,
who were actuated by what they believed to be their duty to
king and country — a duty which they honestly pursued through a
pathway of suffering. Dr. Bronson has written of these men:
" They had reasons satisfactory to themselves for their opinion and
conduct. They wished the success of the British government,
because on that success depended their hopes of worldly distinction
and religious privilege. On that, they supposed they must rely for
the permanent ascendency of the Episcopal church in America, its
doctrine, its faith and its worship. To England they were bound
by the strongest ties. From that country their parish clergymen
had from the first received a great part of their support. They
owed it a debt of gratitude, which, if they could not repay, they
were unwilling to forget. . . . They thought, with some show of
reason, that resistance would be in vain, and that the rebels would
soon be compelled to return to duty. It is impossible, thought they,
for the American Revolutionists, without money or discipline, ill
furnished with arms and not perfectly united among themselves,
to resist for a long time the whole force of the British empire.
And there were others, wise men, that entertained the same views."

422 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

He also tells us that " so great was the alienation of feeling, that
parents could not always agree to send their children to the same
school," and that in 1775 a vote was passed dividing the school dis-
trict on the Farmington and Wallingford road into two — one for
the " Presbyterians " and one for "the Church of England;" that,
"when, at one period, thick gloom had settled over the prospects of
the colonists and the church party felt almost sure of a speedy
triumph, some of the more enthusiastic of the party met together
and determined in what manner the farms of their opponents should
be divided among themselves, after the subjugation of the
country;" that "in Westbury the windows of the Episcopal church
were demolished, the principal members of that church were not
allowed to attend public worship, but were confined to their farms."

We are indebted to Dr. Timothy Hosmer of Farmington, for the
following picture of life in Waterbury at this time. It is contained
in a letter written by him to his friend Ensign Amos Wadsworth,
on July 30, 1775,* ^^^ relates to an old red house that is still stand-
ing about two miles from Waterbury centre, on the north side of
the Middlebury road, and on the lower end of Gaylord's hill. I
think, but do not know, that this house was built about 1750, by
James Nichols, the founder of The Park. It is generally accred-
ited, however, to Capt. George Nichols, and the tradition still
lives that two days were spent in raising the large frame, that an
ox was roasted, and that unusual festivities attended the occasion.

The house was sold in 1760 by Capt. George Nichols to his son
Lemuel, who " kept tavern " there during the war and it was the
scene of the events narrated in the letter from which the following
is taken: " There hath been a terrible rumpus at Waterbury with
the tories there. Capt. Nichols' son, Josiah, enlisted under Capt.
Porter in Gen. Wooster's regiment, went down to New York with
the regiment, tarried a short time and deserted . . . came home
and kept a little under cover, but goes down to Saybrook and there
enlisted with Capt. Shipman . . . got his bounty and rushed off
again. Capt. Shipman came up after him . . . and went with
some people they had got to assist them to Lemuel Nichols' where
they supposed he was. Lemuel forbade their coming in, and pre-
sented a sword and told them it was death to the first that offered
to enter, but one young man seized the sword by the blade and
wrenched it out of his hands. They bound him and made a search
through the house, but could find nothing of Josiah. The Tories
all mustered to defend him, and finally got Lemuel from them

* Mr. Julius Gay, of Farmington, gives this letter in his ** Historical Address on Farmington in the War
of the Revolution," 1893.

WATERBUB7 IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION,

423

and he and Josiah pushed out where they cannot be found. This
ran through Thursday. The Whigs sent over to Southington
for help, and the people almost all went from Southington on
Friday. . . . They had near 100 Tories collected upon the
occasion and were together until ten o'clock Friday night. They
dispersed and there was nothing done to humble them." Dr.
Hosmer also wrote that Capt. Nichols was carried before Esq.
Hopkins who had him bound over to the County Court at New
Haven. Local tradition tells another story — " that Lemuel Nichols
was inclined to the King's side in his heart, but took the oath of
Fidelity to the State. One day when a squad of Continental soldiers
was passing along the Woodbury road, he standing in his door, and
thinking himself secure in distance — the house being at that time
more than a thousand feet north of the road — treated them with
derision. The soldiers turned and fired into the house. After Lem-
uel Nichols — Major Morris lived in the tavern; his son Miles when
re-covering the house found three bullets which were supposed to
have been fired into it by the soldiers when passing along the road.
Dr. Hosmer was in error, in attributing to Capt. Nichols a son
Josiah. It may have been his son Daniel or his son William who
was the deserter. Tradition asserts that the house of Solomon
Tompkins in Nichols' Park was the head -quarters of the Tories, but
there was a Solomon Tompkins who was a Connecticut pensioner
of the Revolution in good and regular standing, living in New
York until 1823 and claiming to have been **born in or near Water-
bury, Conn." and, as Lemuel Nichols took "the oath of Fidelity to
the State " soon after the " terrible rumpus," and Samuel Scovill
was not only active in forming a company on July 4th, 1776, but
enlisted for the war in a Regiment of Artificers under Col. Jedu-
than Baldwin of Mass. (which was authorized by Congress), we may
believe that many persons who were at first inimical to the Sons of
Liberty found cause for a change of heart and proved valiant
defenders of the American cause. As early as 1776, the Rev. Mr.
Inglis wrote to the " Society for the propagation of the Gospel in for-
eign parts " that every one of the society's missionaries in New Jer-
sey, New York and Connecticut had proved faithful, loyal servants,
and had opposed to the utmost of their power the spirit of disaffec-
tion and rebellion, and that the other clergy of the church, though
not in the society's service, had observed the same line of conduct;
that to officiate publicly and not pray for the king and royal family
according to the liturgy, was against their duty and oath — and yet
to use the prayers for the king and royal family would have drawn
inevitable destruction upon them — the only course which they

424 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

could pursue to avoid both evils, was to suspend the public exer-
cises. Mr. Inglis also wrote that " Mr. Beach of Connecticut alone
continued to officiate after Independence was declared, affirming
that he would do his duty, preach and pray for the king till the
rebels cut out his tongue." Mr. Beach deserved to own his own
tongue, and I trust retained it whole and entire until he was able
to admit that the rebels were not so black as he had painted
them. The poor clergymen ! They were exempt, as clergymen,
from bearing arms, but I infer that when they had placed them-
selves out of active service by closing their churches, the civil
government called upon them, as members of the colony, to bear
arms; for Mr. Inglis testifies, "that clergymen were warned to
appear at militia musters with their arms — that they were fined for
not appearing, and then threatened with imprisonment for not pay-
ing their fines."

Good Dr. Mansfield of Derby made himself offensively active by
writing to Gov. Tryon that if properly protected, several thousand
men in the three western counties of Connecticut would join him.
This letter was intercepted, and Dr. Bronson adds that Dr. Mans-
field was obliged to flee for his life. The above letter was probably
the occasion of the following: " On a Sunday morning while Dr.
Mansfield was preaching, a guard of American troops marched into
his church. The clergyman left his desk in haste and escaped to
his home, fleeing from thence to the British on Long Island, leav-
ing his wife and infant and seven other children to the care of
others." Dr. Mansfield lived so long and lived so well in Derby
that his venerable and commanding figure, his large white wig and
his broad brimmed hat are still had in remembrance by a few of
his neighbors, while his praise is in all the churches. Of Mr.
Scoviirs church in Waterbury Mr. Inglis wrote that "there was
scarcely a single person found of his congregation but what had
persevered steadfastly in his duty and loyalty." I think, however,
that Mr. Inglis gave too bright a picture for his English society to
gaze upon. I think our list of soldiers in the war will include more
than "scarcely a single person from the Church of England in
Waterbury." Dr. Bronson had the advantage of personal acquaint-
ance in his youth with participants in the scenes presented during
the war, and attributes the fact that Waterbury was to a mention-
able extent free from scenes witnessed in some other towns, in part,
to the prudence and wisdom of Mr. Scovill, of whom he says that:
" He was sometimes threatened. Occasionally, he had reason to
fear injury. In the more critical seasons, it is stated, he often slept
from home in order to be out of the way of midnight calls — ^but he

WATERBUR7 IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 425

■

had the courage, which the Whigs respected, to remain through
the war." Dr. Bronson had evidently never heard of the scenes out-
lined in Dr. Hosmer's letter.

While General Washington was still at Boston, in March of 1776,
two regiments from Connecticut were at New York " employed in
pulling down and carting away the north part of the Fort and
erecting a Fashine Battery about eighteen rods north of it across
the Broad Way to obtain a clear passage for retreat into the bat-
tery, if repulsed by the enemy." A third Connecticut regiment
was building entrenchments on Tower hill — a, mile east of New
York and in plain sight of it and of the Asia (man of war), which
young Benjamin Baldwin of Waterbury informs his brother Jona-
than (student at Yale college) has not as yet fired a gun at the
workers on Tower hill, of which Benjamin was one.

On the 4th of July, 1776, that event of events — the birth of
the United States of America — had taken place at Philadelphia.
Every man who signed his name as witness to the deed knew full
well that unless the colonists could fight longer and stronger than
Great Britain could do, that his signature would prove his own
death warrant — and this was done while one hundred and thirty
English ships were anchoring at their doors, and General Washing-
ton was calling for the militia of Connecticut without loss of a
moment's time to be sent to his aid at New York. Two days before
the Nation was born, Governor Trumbull and his council of eight
trusty men were met at Lebanon to hear the cry from twelve towns
"pressing for powder" — ^under their apprehensions from Canada.
Eight hundred pounds of gunpowder from Elderkin and Wales's
mill, and one thousand pounds of lead from the furnace at Middle-
town were allowed them — the powder at 5s. 4d. per pound, the lead
at 6d.; it was ordered that the row-galley Shark should be paid for
at a cost of £^61 \ twenty-five carpenters were sent to Crown Point
to help build batteries under Gen. Schuyler; it was ordered that the
lead on the water-wheel of Jonathan Kilburn's sawmill should not
be taken from him for the use of the publick until actually wanted
— and then to be taken by the selectmen without further orders
(and this suggests that Waterbury's selectmen may have gleaned
the lead they gathered for the government from Waterbury 's mills);
other orSers were issued, and officers appointed, and then the
important event of the day came before the Council.

It w-as the consideration of Gen. Washington's appeal for the

militia without one momenfs loss of time^ seconded by "several letters

from the Hon**^* President of the Continental Congress " urging the

ame thing "in strong and pressing terms." The battalion of

426 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

militia ordered to be raised for the relief and support of the army
at New York, "by inevitable difficulties of preparation," could not
be made ready so as' to arrive in New York "seasonably for the
expected attack of the enemy." Should that be the case, it was
feared that it "would prove fatal to the cause of American liberty."
Believing that "in that critical situation no efforts could be too
great," it was ordered that the three regiments of light horse
lately established should set forward and march to New York
to stay until the regiments appointed for that service should
arrive.

It was the 20th of June, 1776, that Capt. Phineas Porter of
Waterbury was given a Major's commission on the staif of Col.
Douglas' regiment in Gen. Wadsworth's brigade of State troops
raised to reinforce Washington's army at New York. In less than
three weeks this regiment in which so many Waterbury men
enlisted was recruited and marched to New York. It reached that
city on a most auspicious day. Our weary men were ushered into a
great camp of many regiments under all the excitement of the
knowledge that Gov. Howe was at that moment landing his forces
on Staten Island. The hour was, as nearly as can be determined, 12
o'clock at noon. The day was Tuesday, July 9, 1776. That evening,
all the brigades in and around New York were ordered to their
respective parade-grounds for a purpose — that purpose was that on
each parade ground to each regiment might be read important news.
Washington himself, on the spot near where stands the old City Hall,
sat on horseback within the hollow square formed by a regiment,
and with uncovered head and reverent mien listened to the read-
ing by one of his aids of the Declaration of Independence. This
was not done under the rosy flush of victory but in the fast-
approaching shadow of mighty Britain, strong in all the power,
and radiant with all the pomp of war. And what had a few little
colonies to meet them with ? They had, it is true a new name —
that of States, but cannon and camp-kettles alike were wanting.
The small powder mills in the Connecticut hive could yield them
only a fragment of the powder General Washington had cried for,
day and night, from Cambridge and from New York. The houses
of the inhabitants, diligently searched for fragments of lead, gave
not enough, and it is well known that every homesteacf in New
England was besieged with demands for the last yard of homespun
cloth, that the country's soldiers might not go coatless by day and
tentless at night. Washington refrained from ordering the regi-
ments to be uniformed, knowing full well that his order could not
be effected.

WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 427

After the reading of the Declaration of Independence — after the
grand parade at sunset— after the day was done, there came the
same night a hasty march in which the Connecticut men were not
too weary to join — a march that no commandant ordered, into
Bowling Green.

Only four years had passed since an equestrian statue had been
borne by loyal subjects to a loyal Province. It was a noble horse,
though formed of lead, that stood proudly on its pedestal, bearing
the figure of King George. The Crown of Great Britain was on his
head, a sword in his left hand, his right hand grasped the bridle
lines, and over all a sheen of gold, for horse and king were gilded.
King George faced the bay and looked vainly down on Staten
Island, for his brave ships and his eight thousand soldiers on ship
and shore could not save him from the sea of wrath surging in the
hearts of the colonists at his feet. We all know the story of the
overthrow of the statue, and of the bullets that were made from
the lead of it in Litchfield — ^but Major Porter's orderly book reveals
to us General Washington's reproof to the soldiers for the act:

"The General doubts not the persons who pulled down and
mutilated the statue in the Broadway last night were actuated by
zeal in the Public cause, yet it has so much the appearance of riot
and want of order in the army, that he disapproves the manner
and directs that in future such things shall be avoided by the
soldiers and be left to be executed by proper authority."

The same book mentions the brigades of Generals Heath,
Spencer, Heard, Scott, Wadsworth, Mifflin, Putnam and Phillips, as
being at and in the vicinity of New York — also the regiments of
Colonels Bayly, Mason, Baldwin, Parsons, McDougal, Learned,
Douglas, Kitzema, Malcom, Parker (regiment of artificers). Ward,
Huntington, Chester, Sage, Hardenburg, Reed, Prescott, Nixon,
Marten, Ward, Mansfield and Van Cortland.

The British soldiers in their gay uniforms, who had just arrived,
must have furnished a sharp contrast to our soldiers in their non-
descript attire. No wonder is it that on July 12th: "the General
was very sorry to observe that many of the officers and a number
of men instead of attending to their duty on the beating of the
drum continued along the banks of the North river, gazing at the
ships," remarking that "a weak curiosity makes a man look mean
and contemptible." Nevertheless, the contrast must have been
painful, even to General Washington. We quote from Major Por-
ter's orderly book under date of July 24th :

The General being sensible of the difficulty of providing cloth of almost any
kind for the troops feels an unwillingness to recommend, much more to order any
kind of uniforms, but as it is absolutely necessary that men should have clothes

428 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT,

and appear decent and tight, he earnestly encourages the use of hunting shirts
with long breeches of the same cloth made gaiter fashion about the leg^ to all
those who are unprovided- No dress can be had cheaper or more convenient, as
the wearer can be cool in warm weather and warm in cold weather by putting on
underclothes which will not change the outward dress winter or summer, besides
which it is a dress supposed to carry no small terror to the enemy, who think every
such man a complete marksman.

Meanwhile the Continental Congress had recommended the
Assemblies of the United Colonies to procure clothing, and only-
five days after the Continental troops were reproved for "weak"
curiosity along the banks of the North river, Connecticut had given
forth the order for 3000 coats and 3000 waistcoats of homemade
cloth, — as far as might be of a brown or cloth color — for all the
blankets that could be obtained in the colony, 3000 felt hats, 6000
shirts of checked flannel, or linen, if flannel could not be had, and
6000 pairs of shoes. These articles were proportioned to the coun-
ties. But so dire was the need of the troops at Crown Point and
Ticonderoga, that all that could be hastily gathered was sent on.

So serious was the outlook at this time that stringent measures
were adopted regarding prisoners of war. Hitherto they had not
been confined, being allowed to go, within limits, on their own
parole of honor. At this time an order went forth that no unknown
persons, whether appearing in the character of gentlemen, expres-
ses, travelers or common beggars, might pass from town to town,
unless upon a certificate from Congress, Committee of Safety or
Inspection, or other prescribed officer. Such certificate must men-
tion from whence and whither the traveler was passing and that he
was friendly to the liberties of the American States. All officers,
even to the tithingmen were required to stop and examine all
unknown persons and to require a sight of the certificate the trav-
eler carried, and unless full satisfaction was given on every point,
the officer was to apprehend the person and take him before the civil
authority or Committee of Inspection. Watches were kept in towns
to apprehend unknown persons who might travel by night and
practice mischief.

During this eventful summer Waterbury had her special excite-
ment when the militia companies of the township were ordered to
New York. The British forces were augmented to such a degree
that Washington called for home troops. August 17th, under Lieut.
Col. Jonathan Baldwin, the loth regiment marched. All that
remains in our state archives of the men who went on this service
is the following list of names upon ** an abstract of the marching
money due the company in Lieut. Col. Baldwin's regiment com-
manded by Lieut. Isaac Benham.

WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 429

Sergeants Lemuel Nichols,* Stephen Welt on, Daniel Bronson,
Samuel Leavenworth, Aaron Benedict; Drummer Moses Cook; Coi-
porals John Scovill, Amos Prichard; Privates John Adams, Elisha
Benham, Moses Frost, Titus French, Samuel Frost, Timothy Frost,
Cyrus Grilley, Joseph Hopkins, John Merchant, Samuel Munson,
Lue Smith, Jabez Tuttle, Benoni Welton." The only man not of
Waterbury on the list is Titus French.

There are in the writer's possession certain receipts and frag-
ments of pay rolls once belonging to Col. Baldwin, from which we
gather the following facts. The regiment was five days in going to
New York, and four in returning; Capt. Stephen Yale's and
Capt. Elisha Hall's men were in service forty-two days and were
discharged September 25th; Younglove Cutler went, and was
allowed "a sickness bill" of three pounds and two shillings; Capt.
Jesse Moss received about fifty pounds "toward the sick bills
allowed;" Capt. Elisha Hall received pay for *' extraordinary sick-
ness due to his complaint " — Sergt. Joel Hall commanded Capt.
Hall's company; Lieut. Joseph Newton gave a receipt for the
"wages and mileage dxie to Lieut. Job. Yale, Jonas Hills, Lieut.
Joseph Newton and Daniel Humiston for their services in the cam-
paign to New York in 1776;" Gould Gift Norton gave a receipt for
"his own and the services of Doc. Amos Hull in the Continental
Army in August and September, 1776;" Benjamin Richards com-
manded a company— there is but a fragment of its roll, but enough
to give recognition to " Lot Osbom, Alsop Baldwin, Noah Richards
and David Buckingham; twenty-four men went of Capt. Joseph
Newton's company; Capt. Elisha Hall gave a receipt for the ser-
vices of Sergt. Joel Hall, (taken prisoner later at Fort Washington) ;
Lieut. Moses Foot gave a receipt for a company — eleven names only
remaining of the roll — which are Joel Humiston, Moses Michel, Jesse
Penfield, Ambross Potter, Amos Sanford, Jonah Sanford, John Sco-
vill, Jesse Turner, Obed Williams and Giles Mingo; and the roll of
Capt. Elisha Hall's company is receipted for by Oliver Stanley.
Very many of the men in the militia regiments deserted, being
unaccustomed to the rigors of service, but they nearly all returned
to duty. With the above papers is the following :

Waterbury i6th of Sep. A. D., 1777, then Received of Lieut.-Col. Jonathan
Baldwin fourteen pounds four shillings lawful money in full for the Wages and
Milage Due to those men who Deserted the Service Belonging to Cap. Nathaniel
Barnes Company and my own in the months of August and Sep. last, and Returned
to their Duty agreeable to His Excellency Governor Trumbull's proclamation.

Received by Me, Jesse Curtis, Capt.

♦ The Tory of 1775.

430 BISTORT OF WATERS UBT.

In regard to these deserters, we learn that they were Lazarus
Ives, Aaron Fenn, Benjamin Barnes, Cephas Ford, Paul Griggs and
Elnathan Ives. They were at New York in August and in the loth
company of the loth regiment. "By [medical] advice they
absented themselves and returned home " — having served a month
and traveled 224 miles. They petitioned the General Assembly for
their "pay." Appended to the petition is the statement under date
of September 5 th of Dr. Roger Conant and Dr. Amos Hull that
Lazarus Ives had dysentery and rheumatism. There is also the affi-
davit of seven of their neighbors that the same men were unable to
go to Horseneck in November.

It is estimated that at this time Connecticut had fully twenty
thousand men in the service, while her available force did not
exceed twenty-three thousand.

Waterbury men enlisted in six of the eight companies forming
Col. Douglas's regiment, of which Phineas Porter was major. Every
commissioned officer of its 4th company was from Waterbury.
They were Capt. John Lewis, Jr., ist Lieut. James Warner, 2d Lieut.
Michael Bronson, Ens. Joseph Beach, Jr. There is no roll of its
members, but seventeen names are given of those who received
their discharge at a later date. Fifteen of the seventeen were from
Waterbury. They are, Samuel Scovill, Selah Scovill, Selden Spen-
cer, John Stewart, Abel Sutliff, John Tatterdon (doubtless Fallen-
don), John Tucker, Jared Tirrel, Elihu Tirrel, Samuel Tuttle,
Samuel Webb, Daniel Welton, Thomas Gould who was mortally
wounded Sept. 15th, Titus Mix who was killed Sept. i6th, John
Beach, a sergeant, missing Sept. 15th, Stephen Johnson who was
killed at White Plains, Oct. 28th, and David Welton who was
wounded Oct. 28th.

The militia regiment of Col. Baldwin reached New York about
two weeks before the battle of Long Island. In that battle. Major
Porter's regiment, in which it will be remembered, Waterbury men
fought in six of its eight companies, "was in the thickest of the
fight." In the retreat from Long Island to New York, Major Porter
is said to have been in the last boat which put off in the fog from
the Brooklyn shore. This was about two months after his entrance
into the Continental army as major of the 5th battalion of foot
under Col. William Douglas.*

* His military record is the following : May 1774, Lieutenant 2d Co. zoth reg. of the Colony. Oct., 1774,
captain of the same Co. April 1775 he entered the Colonial army as captain of the 8th Co. in the ist regi-
ment. June 30th, he was major of the 5th battalion of foot, under Col. Douglas. The above appointments
are from the Colonial records. Later he appears as major of his old militia regiment, the loth. In Jan. of
1780 he became colonel of the same regiment, and, when the Waterbury companies at a later date formed
an entire regiment, the 28th, he was appointed its colonel.

WATERS UBY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION.

431

About two weeks later, September 15 th, an attack was made
upon New York. The 5th battalion, under Col. Douglas, to which
Major Porter belonged, and whose 4th company under Capt. Lewis
was composed of Waterbury men, the muster roll of which is
missing, was stationed at Kip's Bay. This was near Thirty-fourth
street. The main body of the army was then at Harlem Heights.
The British ships ascended the North and the East rivers, and
their fires swept across the whole island, under cover of which,
Howe landed near Kip's Bay. The troops fled panic-stricken. This
was the occasion on which Washington is said to have become so
excited that he threw his hat to the ground, exclaiming: "Are
these the men with whom I am to defend America ? " At this
moment, Washington, when " within eighty paces of the enemy and
exposed to capture, was saved by his attendant who turned the
head of his horse and hurried him from the field." It is pleasant
to know that one Waterbury man — Major Phineas Porter — was
between the enemy and the general, for in this retreat he was
taken prisoner. He suffered nearly three months of hunger and
imprisonment, during which time he parted with his knee buckles
and other articles of value for food. Five men are recorded as
missing after the retreat, in his regiment.

David Smith, who ultimately was in command of all the militia
of the State, was another Waterbury man, who at this time and
later, was winning for himself and native town a good degree of
respect. He entered service May ist, 1775, in the 4th company of
the ist Continental regiment, as a private. He was next ensign in
the 8th company. We find him captain in 1776 of a company in
Col. Elmore's Continental regiment, which took the field in July,
under Schuyler, and marched from Albany into Tryon county.
Captain Smith's company was composed of seventy men, nearly all
from Waterbury. His ist lieutenant was Nehemiah Royce, and his
ensign, William Andrews, both from Waterbury. This company
served at " Burnetsfield (German Flats)."

In Wadsworth's brigade was Capt. John Couch of Meriden, with
Waterbury men in his company, and our Nathaniel Edwards for
his ist lieutenant. This company was stationed during the
summer of 1776 at Bergen Heights and Paulus Hook (Jersey city);
in October, at Fort Lee; in November, sent across the river to assist
in defending Fort Washington, where Lieutenant Edwards was
taken prisoner. He did not reach home until November loth, 1780.
Soon after his captivity he had small-pox and asked for full pay for
the time, which was granted. Ira Tompkins, Solomon Trumbull
and David Hungerford, Waterbury men, and of his company, were
taken prisoners at. the same time.

432

mSTORT OF WATERBURT.

In the same summer, in June, two State battalions, under Cols.
Mott and Swift, were raised to reinforce the Continental troops in
the northern department, then stationed at and in the vicinity of
Fort Ticonderoga. The 4th company in Swift's regiment, serving
under Gen. Gates, was commanded by Capt. Stephen Matthews,
who reported eleven of his company killed. He seems to have gone
to Ticonderoga a little after our poor army retreated from Canada
— in the words of John Adams — "disgraced, defeated, discon-
tented, dispirited, diseased, undisciplined, eaten up with vermin,
no clothes, beds, blankets, nor medicines, and no victuals but salt
pork and flour, and a scanty supply of that."

Stephen Matthews* eleven men were probably of the ninety who
were killed in the action on Lake Champlain in October, when the
Americans lost eleven vessels. The names of ten of the above men
are given by Captain Matthews, when he asks for redress for the
arms once belonging to them — which he had saved, but which were
afterward lost. He gives four as from Waterbury — "Job Welton,
Elihu Robards, Jonathan Roberts and Dan Welton." Benajah Judd
was also from Waterbury. The other names are James Warner
and John Nichols "of New Haven,*' Hezekiah Clark, John Parker
and Daniel Clapp. These men must have been among those drafted
from the army, for the navy.

After the battle of White Plains the loth militia regiment was
again called out — "to place itself under General Wooster's com-
mand on the Westchester border." In November four battalions of
state troops were raised, to serve in Westchester, or in Rhode
Island, in the 2d of which Captain Benjamin Richards, ist Lieut.
Isaac Bronson, and Ens. Benjamin Fenn Jr., served.

In December, so appalling was the situation that a very dark-
ness of fear fell upon the American people. Connecticut's prisons
were crowded with Tories; the term of service of the militia was
expiring; some of the New York troops refused to serve, and it
was feared that the people would " rise in arms and openly join the
British forces;" Washington's little army, "not exceeding four
thousand men," was encamped on a plain between the Hackensack
and the Passaic rivers; Heath had a division in the Highlands, and
Lee had a corps on the east side of the North river, and a British
column, led by Comwallis, was approaching Washington. Under
the above circumstances, our General Assembly asked every able
bodied man living west of the Connecticut river to go forward and
offer himself for the service.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

A MORE PERMANENT ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY REQUIRED — JOSEPH
HOPKINS' SERVICES — MOSES DUNBAR I HIS "LAST SPEECH AND
DYING words" — SOLDIERS SUMMONED TO PEEKSKILL — WATER-
BURY OFFERS BOUNTIES — THE DANBURY ALARM — COL. BALDWIN'S
PAPERS — OUR MEN AT TICONDEROGA — IN THE HIGHLANDS — AT
STILLWATER AND SARATOGA — WATERBURY FURNISHES CLOTHING
— PROVIDES FOR SOLDIERS' FAMILIES — VALLEY FORGE — MONMOUTH
— MRS. ISAAC BOOTH LEWIS — ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.

IN 1775 the enthusiasm of the colonists had made it an easy and
a natural thing to raise an army, in a day — for a day. Material
that came to hand had been accepted, and had marched away
in haste — to meet the horrors of defeat and disaster. Eighteen
months had passed since that gala day when half the men of Con-
necticut colony called with proffers of assistance at Boston's doors
— a year and a half, strewn with battles, assault and siege. Several
thousand men had fallen in death and wounds on the field. Bunker
Hill, Quebec, Long Island, Harlem Heights, White Plains and Tren-
ton had written their gory texts on the hearts of the people — but
an older text, written deeper even than battles could write, had
been engraven by the God of Battles in the hearts of the colonists,
urging them to still loftier endeavors.

General Washington's experience with men who enlisted for
short terms, and with the hitherto untried militia regiments, had
been disappointing. A more permanent organization was impera-
tive. It was resolved to create a standing army, whose members
should enlist for three years, or for the war. They who enlisted for
the war and served to the end were promised one hundred acres of
land. Army life had lost its charms. Connecticut farms grew very
attractive, when seen from the field of stern discipline and carnage.
Volunteers for the new army did not press to the front. It was
said that small pox " more effectually retarded the entering into the
service than any other prospect of danger, or fear of the enemy."
In Waterbury, it had at this time gotten beyond the control of the
selectmen.

During this period, Joseph Hopkins was active in the service of
his country. With Capt. Samuel Forbes, he went to the lead mines
in New Canaan, examined the quality of the lead, and prepared a
28

434

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

report for the Assembly (which is printed in American Archives);
he received i8o votes for nomination for election, as Governor's
Assistant; was appointed "to procure fire-arms and gtm-locks to be
made and manufactured in the colony;" and he was at the head of a
committee of five gentlemen who were " severally, or in conjunc-
tion, to search after lead mines, and report any discovery to the Gov-
ernor," who was to report to the President of Congress.

Waterbury furnished at this time a conspicuous martyr — who
died, devoted to the Church of England. It seemed absolutely
necessary to find a victim whose death should prove a powerful
object lesson to the Tories, and to the political prisoners who filled
the prisons. Moses Dunbar was the man selected. The tragedy
and the pathos attending his dying will forever appeal to the heart
of an American — be he the descendant of Whig or of Tory. While
in prison and under sentence of death, Dunbar made an attempt to
escape. Elisha Wadsworth was arrested, fined £40, and sentenced to
one year's imprisonment for assisting him. Wadsworth, in his own
defense, said that " he did not assist him, but simply followed him
out" — that Dunbar "effected his own escape as far as he went."
Wadsworth was released from prison, Oct. 14, 1777, on paying costs
and taking the Oath of Fidelity.

About 1880, in the removal of an ancient house in Harwinton,
the following document — containing the farewell words of Moses
Dunbar to his children, and to this world — was found.

The " Cause " must indeed have been a sacred one, that re-
quired the sacrifice of the man, whose last words were the fol-
lowing :

My Children : Remember your Greater in the days of your youth. Leam your
Creed, the Lord's prayer, and the ten commandments and Catechism, and go to
church as often as you can, and prepare yourselves as soon as you are of a proper
age, to worthily partake of the Lord's Supper. I charge you all, never to leave the
Church. Read the Bible. Love the Saviour wherever you may be.

I am now in Hartford jail condemned to death for high treason against the State
of Connecticut. I was thirty years last June, the 14th. God bless you. Remem-
ber your Father and Mother and be dutiful to your present Mother.

(A true copy — written by Moses Dunbar).

The last speech and dying words of Moses Dunbar, who was exe-
cuted at Hartford ye 19th March, A. D., 1777, for high treason
against the State of Connecticut.

I was bom at Wallingford in Connecticut the 14th of June, A. D. 1746, being
the second of sixteen children, all bom to my Father by one Mother. My Father,
John Dunbar, was bom at Wallingford, and married Temperance Hall of the same
place, about the year 1743. I was educated in the business of husbandry. About
the year 1760, my father removed himself and family to Waterbury — where, May

WATERBURT IN TEE REVOLUTION,

435

ye 30th, 1764, I was married with Phebe Jearman of Farmington, by whom I had
seven children — four of whom are now living. The first year of our marriage my
wife and I, upon what we thought sufficient and rational motives, declared our-
selves for the Church of England — the Rev. Mr. Scovill being then missionary at
Waterbury. May 20th, 1770, my honored Mother departed this life. She was a
woman of much virtue and good reputation, whom I remember with the most
honor and gratitude for the good care and affection she continually showed me. My
joining myself to the church occasioned a sorrowful breach between my Father and
myself, which was the cause of his never assisting me but very little in gaining a
livelihood — likewise it caused him to treat me very harshly in many instances, for
which I heartily forgive him, as well as my brothers, as I hope for pardon from my
God and my Saviour for my own offences. I likewise earnestly pray God to forgive
them through Christ.

From the time that the present unhappy misunderstanding between Great
Britain and the Colonies began, I freely confess I never could reconcile my opinion
to the necessity or lawfulness of taking up arms against Great Britain. Having
spoken somewhat freely on the subject, I was attacked by a mob of about forty
men, very much abused, my life threatened and nearly taken away, by which mob
I was obliged to sign a paper containing many falsehoods. May 20th, 1776, my
wife deceased, in full hope of future happiness .... The winter preceding
this trial had been a time of distress with us .... I had now concluded to
live peaceable and give no offence, neither by word nor deed. I had thought of
entering into a voluntary confinement within the limits of my farm, and making
proposals of that nature, when I was carried before the Committee [of Inspection
of Waterbury?] and by them ordered to suffer imprisonment during their pleasure,
not exceeding five months. When I had remained there about fourteen days the
authority of New Haven dismissed me. Finding my life uneasy, and as I had
reason to apprehend, in great danger, I thought it my safest method to flee to Long
Island, which I accordingly did, but having a desire to see my friends and children,
and being under engagement of marriage with her who is my wife — the banns of
marriage having been before published — I returned, and was married. Having a
mind to remove my wife and family to Long Island, as a place of safety, I went
there the second time, to prepare matters accordingly. When there, I accepted a
captain's warrant for the King's service in Col. Fanning's reg't. I returned to
Connecticut — when I was taken and betrayed by Joseph Smith, and was brought
before the authority of Waterbury. They refused to have anj-thing to do with the
matter. I was carried before Justice Strong and Justice Whitman of Farmington,
and by them committed to Hartford, where the Superior Court was then sitting.
I was tried on Thursday, 23d of January, 1777, for High Treason against the State
of Connecticut, by an act passed in October last — for enlisting men for General
Howe, and for having a captain's commission for that purpose. I was adjudged
guilty, and on the Saturday following was brought to the bar of the court and
received sentence of death. The time of my suffering was afterward fixed to bo
the 19th day of March, 1777 — which tremendous and awful day now draws near,
when I must appear before the Searcher of hearts to give an account of all the
deeds done in the body, whether they be good or evil. I shall soon be delivered
from all the pains and troubles of this wicked mortal state, and shall be answerable
to All-Seeing God, who is infinitely just, and knoweth all things as they are. I am
fully persuaded that I depart in a state of peace with God and my own conscience.
I have but little doubt of my future happiness, through the merits of Jesus Christ.
I have sincerely repented of all my sins, examined my heart, prayed earnestly to

436 HISTORY OF WATBRBUBT.

God for mercy, for the gracious pardon of my manifold and heinous sins, I resign
myself wholly to the disposal of my Heavenly Father, submitting to His Divine
will. From the bottom of my heart I forgive all enemies and earnestly pray Grod

to forgive them all. Some part of Th S *s evidence was false, but I heartily

forgive him, and likewise earnestly beg forgiveness of all persons whom I have
injured or offended. Since my sentence I have been visited by sundry worthy
ministers of the Gospel, who have discoursed and prayed with me — among whom
are the Rev. William Short of Hartford. The Rev. Wm. Veils of Simsbury, my
fellow^ prisoner on account of preaching in favor of the British government, has
been indefatigable in affording every possible assistance to prepare me for my
terrible Exit. He administered the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to me the Sun-
day before I was to be put to death. To these gentlemen, as w^ell as all others
who have shewed me kindness I give my most sincere thanks. I die in the pro-
fession and communion of the Church of England.

Of my political sentence I leave the readers of these lines to judge. Perhaps it
is neither reasonable nor proper that I should declare them in my present situation.
I cannot take the last farewell of my countrymen Avithout desiring them to show
kindness to my poor widow and children, not reflecting on them the manner of my
death. Now I have g^ven you a narrative of all things material concerning my
life with that veracity which you are to expect from one who is going to leave the
world and appear before the God of truth. My last -advice to you is that you,
above all others, confess your sins, and prepare yourselves, with God's assistance,
for your future and Eternal state. You will all shortly be as near Eternity as I
now am, and will view both worlds in the light which I do now view them. You
will then view all worldly things to be but shadows and vapours and vanity of
vanities, and the things of the Spiritual world to be of importance beyond all
description. You will all then be sensible that the pleasures of a good conscience,
and the happiness of the near prospect of Heaven, will outweigh all the pleasures
and honours of this wicked world.

God the Father, God the Son, tmd God the Holy Ghost, have mercy on me and

receive my spirit. Amen, and Amen.

MosEs Dunbar,

Hartford, March i8th, A. D., 1777.
[A true copy by Sylvanus Cooke.]

It is believed that Moses Dunbar was hung from a tree that
stood on the hill, and on or near the site of the Trinity College
buildings. It is said that Moses Dunbar's widow, when an aged
woman, pointed out the tree to her friends, saying: "That is the
tree on which my poor first husband was hung." It is said that at
the moment when the execution took place a white deer sprang
from the near-by forest and passed directly under the hanging vic-
tim. This tradition is pretty firmly established. Dr. Bronson tells
us that " the gallows in a public place was kept standing for a long
time as a warning to others."

In January, 1777, John Slater, who was constable, took up six
runaway Tories at Waterbury and guarded and transported them to
Hartford, "by order of authority," receiving twenty-five pounds and
fourteen shillings for his services. In February, two thousand men

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 437

from Connecticut were summoned to Peekskill. The quota of the
I oth Regiment was 288 men, which made three full companies of
ninety-six men each. Nehemiah Rice [Royce] was appointed ist
lieutenant in Capt. David Smith's company in Chandler's regiment,
and Lieut [Benjamin ?] Baldwin was transferred from that com-
pany to Capt. [Jabez] Botsford's, in Col. Swift's battalion. Stephen
Matthews was captain and Amos Hickox, Jr. lieutenant in the same
battalion. Much of the service of the above battalion was in the
Northern department.

In April, 1777, the Governor and Council of Safety desired and
requested the Connecticut towns to hold meetings for the purpose
of considering what measures to take for raising soldiers for the
Continental army. Waterbury held its meeting and engaged " to
give each non-commissioned ofl&cer and soldier, to the number of
one hundred and thirty-one, who should voluntarily enlist into
either of the eight battalions then being raised in the State,* for the
term of three years, or during the war, twelve pounds lawful money
annually." Six pounds was to be paid on enlistment, or secured on
demand, and six pounds at the end of every six months during ser-
vice. To raise this amount, a tax of one shilling on the pound was laid^
and it was to be collected within one month, A committee was appointed
— any two members of it with full power to give security for the
town to enlisting soldiers, and to draw money from the treasury for
that purpose. Private donations had already been made to men
who had "engaged in the standing army." To those who had
received such donations and would give receipts to the town for
such sums as had been received (which sums were to be credited
upon the first six pounds due), it was promised that the twelve
pound annual premium should be given. The moneys which had
been contributed by individuals were to be credited to the con-
tributors on the shilling-rate. Lest the shilling-rate should be
oppressive to certain individuals, the selectmen were directed to
make abatements of rates on such persons as were poor and ought
to be abated. A number of the abated rate bills, under this act,
remain. It must be remembered that this was the time when
small-pox had gotten beyond the control of the selectmen. I do not
know that any record remains of its work in the town centre, but we
know that at Westbury, Mrs. Noah Richards, Mrs. Edward Scovil,
Jr., young Abel Doolittle, Nathaniel Welton, young Montgomery [?]
Pendleton, [Sarah Judd] the wife of Captain Benjamin Richards,
Capt. Nathaniel Arnold, and Samuel, son to Lieut. Samuel Brown,

* This is the first allusion to Connecticut, as a State, in the records.

438 HISTOBT OF WATEBBUBT.

all died from that disease between the 26th of March and the 19th
of May, 1777.

We have been compelled to ignore the great and stirring events
of the war, and have made no mention of Washington's Christmas
night crossing of the Delaware and his subsequent success in New
Jersey — of his six-months* dictatorship that he might reorganize the
army— of his proclamation commanding all persons who had taken
the oath of allegiance to Great Britain " to deliver up their protec-
tions and certificates and take the oath of allegiance to the United
States." Full liberty was, at the same time, granted to all persons
to withdraw themselves and families to the enemy's lines, but the
edict had gone forth that any man found enlisting soldiers for a
Tory regiment should, on conviction, be executed as a spy. It was
the edict of General Washington, as dictator-general, under which
Moses Dunbar was to remove his family to Long Island, and under
which he was executed.

This was also the period when " Dear Mother England " took
to herself the confusion and shame and lasting infamy of treating
helpless prisoners with atrocious inhumanities — ^beginning with
Gen. Lee as her victim and continuing until her work culminated in
suffocating fifteen hundred starving men, within a few weeks, in
her prison-ships. Under the circumstances, there was nothing left
for the United States but to avail itself of the law of retaliation.
Accordingly, the prisoners who were abroad on parole, were called
in, and subjected to imprisonment. April 17th, Waterbury secured
625 lbs. of gunpowder. On the 26th, Gen. Tryon fell upon Danbury^
where three regiments were gathered, awaiting orders. Military
stores had also been collected there, which were destroyed by the
enemy. It was estimated that 1800 barrels of beef and pork, 800 of
flour, 2000 bushels of grain, 1790 tents, 100 hogsheads of rum, and
clothing for a regiment, were taken or destroyed, accompanied by
the burning of houses and the murder of inoffensive inhabitants.
It is easy to picture the consternation in Waterbury at this event.
Her soldiers must have responded to the alarm, but I have not
found other evidence of their deeds than the following autograph
receipt among my papers :

Waterbury 9th of April A. D. 1778 then received of Lieut. Col: Jonathan Bald-
win Sixteen pounds Twelve shillings & two pence Lawful money to Pay the officers
& Soldiers belonging to the Company under my command for their servis in the
alarm at Danbury in the month of April A. D. 1777. Received by me

Moses Foot Lt.

There is also "A Roster for Col Cooks Regt August 21 A. D. 1777,"
giving the following list of the captains of 29 companies in that
regiment. They are :

WATERBURY IN TEE REVOLUTION.

439

THE NUMBER OF ABLE MEN IN EACH COMPANY.

Capt

. Samuel Camp,

. 29

Capt. Ephraim Cook,

. 40

Charles Norton, .

41

Benjamin Richards, *

32

James Robinson, .

. 26

Phineas Castle,

.. 20

Ambrous Hine, .

26

Sam" Bronson, .

. 38

Caleb Hall.

. 41

Jesse Curtis, .

. 14

Bezeliel Ives,

49

Stephen Seymour,

7

ElishaHall, .

. 40

Thomas Fenn,

. 33

Oliver Stanley, .

. 63

Isaac Bronson, .

18

John Couch, .

. 26

John Woodruff,

. 41

Dan Collins,

28

Nathaniel Bams,

23

Nathaniel Bunnel, .

. 33

John Lewis, .

. 40

Miles Johnson, .

29

Josiah Terril,

10

Miles Hull, .

. 26

Jotham Curtis,

12

Jesse Moss, .

29

Joseph Gamsey,

29

Stephen Yale,

. 34

Of the above 877 men, 434 marched with Lieait.-Colonel Baldwin
to Fishkill in October, as would appear from an " Abstract of money-
paid as a bounty at Fishkill in Oct., 1777." The men were to receive
one pound each (see Record of Conn. Men in the War of the Revo-
lution, p. 523), but there is also the following abstract among my
papers, which I give, and from which it would appear that the
above service was for twenty-seven days :

A Pay Abstract for the lo*'* Militia Reg* from the State of Connecticut com-
manded by L* Col*> Baldwin for service at Fish Kill in Oct^ 1777 —

NO. MBN.

TOTAL
NO. DAYS.

AMOUNT OP WAGES.

Lieut Col« Baldwin

Maj' Porter

Chaplain Stores

Adj* Hough

Qut' Master Hickox

Surgeon Elton [John]

Surg° Mate Gay lord

Serg* Maj' Foster

Qut' Mas*' Scott

Captains Samuel Bronson

B. Richards

Caleb Hall

J. Moss

J. Robinson

O. Stanley

N. Bams

P. Castle

E. Cook

60
60
60
60

59

59
60

62

61

27

23

27
27

27

27

27

27

27
1620

1335
1480

1539
1351

1348

1327
1519
1473

16
II

10

7

13

10

2

2

130

113

"5
127

106

110

109

123

120

4
10

2

5
10
16

8

3
II

2

I

10

II

I

17

19
I

6
9

10

3
6

2

7
2

3i

4
6

3
I

440 BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

In the thirteen Waterbury companies belonging to this regi-
ment on the 2 2d of August in the next year but 221 men are
returned as fit for duty, of which number 99 seem to have been
drafted upon four or more subsequent calls. This account makes
evident the depletion of the regiment by service, enlistments into
the army, and the casualties of war.

When Danbury was raided, Washington's army was still in win-
ter quarters at Morristown, where it remained until May. General
Burgoyne was in Canada, preparing to invade the States with
"seven thousand troops, a train of artillery, and several tribes
of Indians," with the design to advance from the north and cut off
communication between New England and the Southern States. In
anticipation of this attack, the New England militia had been arriv-
ing from day to day at Ticonderoga and at Mount Independence —
which were opposite to each other on the lake, at a distance of over
twelve hundred feet. The two fortifications were connected by a
floating bridge, which had been constructed through enormous
labor and at great expense (and in part by Connecticut men).
Twenty-two piers had been built in the lake — that part of it some-
times called South Bay — and between the piers were fifty-foot
floats, fastened together with iron chains and rivets. On the north
side of the bridge was a large-timbered boom, well-bolted and
riveted, and the boom was still farther strengthened by a double
iron chain. This bridge was thought to form an impenetrable bar-
rier to the passage of any vessel that might attempt it. On Mount
Independence, which was strongly fortified and supplied with artil-
lery, was the hospital where so many of our soldiers were suffering.
While our Waterbury men in Col. Cook's regiment had been hasten-
ing northward to defend Ticonderoga and Independence from the
expected enemy from the north, our Lieut-Col. Baldwin, with his
regiment, was going or had gone to the Highlands to perform a
similar service in preventing the enemy from passing up the Hud-
son river to assist Burgoyne. From Fort Montgomery and Fort
Clinton on the west bank, a boom and chain, on the same principle
as the one on Lake Champlain, extended across the river. Properly
protected by a sufficient number of troops at the forts, the barriers
across Lake Champlain and the Hudson would have proved effective,
but the men of Fort Montgomery and Fort Clinton had been called
off to help Gen. Gates in the north, and Gen. Putnam at Peekskill
had but a small force to guard the stores. Such was the condition
of affairs at Ticonderoga and on the Hudson when early in July
Burgoyne came down upon the Americans, whether for siege or
assault, it was not known. To their astonishment, he ascended

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 441

Mount Defiance, dragging, it is said, his cannon over the tree tops,
thus holding the American fortifications at his mercy, as Defiance
commanded both Ticonderoga and Independence. In the night, the
almost instant flight of the American army was accomplished. The
sick and wounded, a few hospital stores, as many cannon, tents, and
provisions (of which but twenty -days' supply were in the forts), as
could be thrust into five galleys and two hundred batteaux, started
in flight, but Burgoyne's forces burst the bridge between the forts
and followed the Americans, who were forced to abandon artillery,
stores, and even their sick and wounded. On the 19th of Septem-
ber in the battle of Stillwater, and at Saratoga, both Lieut.-Col.
Baldwin and Major Porter were present. Col. Thaddeus Cook's
orderly book, " in possession of the Worcester Antiquarian Society,
reports among those present, the Lieut.-Col., the Major, and others,
but gives no names." In Major Porter's orderly book, I find the fol-
lowing, under date of Aug. 20th, 1777: "The Rank of Each Com-
pany in the loth Regiment of Militia and the names of Each Offi-
cer. Field Officers, Col. Thaddeus Cook, Wallingford; Lieut.-Col.
Jonth** Baldwin, Waterbury; Maj' Phineas Porter, Waterbury," and
as the battle of Stillwater occurred only a month later, there prob-
ably had been no change in the regimental officers. From Dr.
Bronson, it appears that Lieut. Michael Bronson acted as adjutant
of Col. Cook's regiment, and particularly distinguished himself in
the above battles. In October, Sir Henry Clinton, with his forces,
appeared on the North river, before the forts Montgomery and
Clinton, and demanded of the brothers Clinton, their commandants,
a surrender. Being refused, an assault was made and the forts
taken, but a part of the garrisons escaped, leaving about two hun-
dred and fifty men killed, wounded, or prisoners. At the same time.
General Putnam, guarding with insufficient troops the stores and
provisions at Peekskill, was forced to retire from his position.

The above is only the faintest glimpse of the reverses that were
continually befalling our army and cutting off in their youth the
sons of New England. In 1777 nearly three thousand Americans
were slain, or wounded, or made prisoners, before October.

In the history of our town-meetings it is highly probable that no
more jubilant one was ever held than that of Oct. 22, 1777, for the
news must have reached the town that five days before, the British
army, under Burgoyne, had surrendered, at Saratoga. No wonder
is it that the good men, with "Timothy Judd, Esq**, chosen mod-
erator and Abner Johnson Clerk Pro temporary," on the " Request
of the Governor and Council of Safety requesting sundry articles of
clothing for the Continental soldiers," responded, by appointing fif-

442 HI8T0BT OF WATERBURT,

teen gentlemen to carry the request into execution. They were Eli
Bronson, David Taylor, Moses Cook, Peter Welton, Abraham
Andrews, Samuel Hikcox, Phineas Royce, Esq., John Dunbar (the
father of Moses), Caleb Barnes, Joseph Sutliff, Jr., Daniel Alcox,
Simeon Hopkins, Samuel Lewis, Esq., Gideon Hotchkiss and Ira
Beebe. The selectmen were to take the money out of the treasury
or otherwise provide to procure the clothing required, which was
for each non-commissioned ofl&cer and soldier belonging to such
town, one shirt or more, one hunting frock, one pair of woolen over-
alls, one or two pair of stockings, and one pair of good shoes. The
selectmen afterwards presented an account against the State, show-
ing that Waterbury provided at this time, "115 woolen shirts, in
which were 262 J4 yards of shirting; 24 linen shirts, with 65 yards of
linen; 133 hunting frocks [after Washington's suggestion in Major
Porter's orderly book] having 366 yards of toe cloth in them; 130
pair of over halls, having 305^ yds fulled cloth; 184 pairs of stock-
ings; 127 pairs or shoes; and 5 sacks of toe cloth for transporting
clothing." It will be remembered that Waterbury promised to give
a bounty of twelve pounds a year to 131 men who should enlist into
the Continental army for three years or for the war, and it was for
these men that this clothing was to be provided. Many of them
were in Chandler's regiment, and a goodly number in Capt. David
Smith's company. These men of ours had recently passed through
the battle of Germantown, and the cold nights of autumn were upon
them, and the winter at Valley Forge lay just before them.

In December, 1777, to provide for the families of soldiers in the
Continental army, Capt. Stephen Matthews, Thomas Dutton, Jona-
than Scott, Benjamin Munson, Dan" Bronson, Capt. John Welton,
John Thompson, Wait Hotchkiss, Dan" Sanford, Sam" Scovill,
Thomas Fauncher, Capt. Sam" Porter, Gideon Hickcox, Stephen
Warner, Samuel Judd, Jr., Isaac Prichard, Aaron Benedict, Aaron
Dunbar and Josiah Rogers were chosen, and thirty-eight surveyors
of highways were appointed. In Jan., 1778, the " Representatives"
were directed to petition the General Assembly for two more select-
men than the law then admitted; a rate was laid of six pence on the
pound, to be collected by the first of March, and nine men were
appointed to collect it; to provide clothing for the soldiers, were
chosen Joseph Hopkins, Esq., James Porter, Jr., Silas Hotchkiss^
David Taylor, Isaac Merriam, Lot Osborn, Theophilus Baldwin,
Samuel Parker, Capt. Stephen Seymour, Charles Cook, Charles
Upson, Josiah Rogers, Ira Beebe, Ashbel Porter, and Ebenezer Por-
ter, Jr. When we consider the great number of officers selected, we
must also consider the expanse of territory covered by the town-

WATERBUBT IN THE BEVOLUTION, 445

ship, and the exigencies of our men at Valley Forge. Clearing for-
ests with bare feet in December snows, without blankets, with little
food, and no money; building log-huts on the cleared ground, with
benumbed fingers and chilled hearts; falling down under the
enforcing hand of illness, with no pillowing tenderness to soften the
fall — such was the fate of some of our soldiers. No wonder is it
that Waterbury appointed fifteen men to gather clothing. It is
perhaps unnecessary to mention in this connection the unappointed
women, who spun and wove by daylight, and knit by moon and
candle light for the bleeding feet and freezing bodies of their
beloved ones, "gone to the army."

The entire number who wintered at Valley Forge from our town
I am not able to name. Sylvanus Adams, John Saxton, Ezekiel
Scott, Ezekiel Upson, Lue Smith, Joseph Freedom, Mark Richards,
Joel Roberts, Elisha Munson, Elisha Hikcox, and William Bassett
were there, and under the command of Capt. David Smith. Nearly
all of the above were young men — one of them, John Saxton, a boy
not yet seventeen, and Mark Richards was but a few months older.
As three-fourths of the soldiers of the Continental line wintered
at Valley Forge, it will appear that a large number of our men
were among the ^^ thousands" who "were without blankets, and,
after the fatigues of the day, were obliged to warm themselves over
fires all night, having neither small clothes, shoes, or stockings.*'
Half-rations for weeks in succession, four or five days together
without bread, and as many without beef or pork — three thousand
soldiers at one time too ill to perform military duty in a camp of
eleven thousand men — with a powerful, well-fed, well-conditioned
enemy within twenty miles, enjoying all the comforts that Phila-
delphia afforded. Could patriotism bear more or further go ? Out
from that camp came, in June of 1778, the soldiers who fought
the battle of Monmouth with the Royal forces then retreating
from Philadelphia to New York on a day when the heat was so
intense that many soldiers in both armies died from that alone.
It is said that "the tongues of the soldiers were so swollen,
that they could not be retained in their mouths.*' A Waterbury
woman, Millisent, the daughter of Lieut.-Col. Jonathan Baldwin,
fed the soldiers of Washington's army all that day, cooking for
them from morning till night all the provisions that she could
procure.*

* A little later— her father, having gone to New Jersey to escort his daughter home, she being then the
widow of Isaac Booth Lewis — they were on the return journey (Col. Baldwin having one of her two children
on his horse, and Mrs. Lewis the other child on her horse) when in fording a stream, the current bore Mrs.
Lewis's horse from its feet, and carried it down stream. Expecting to be drowned, she managed to throw
her child safely to the bank, and subsequently escaped herself.

444 BISTORT OF WATERS URT.

On the 19th of Jan., 1778, Waterbury held an adjourned meeting :

For the Purpose of Taking into Consideration the Articles of Confederation,
the former moderator not attending, the meeting made choice of Thomas Matthews
Esq' to Lead in said meeting. Then the meeting proceeded to read and consider
said Articles of Confederation, and approved of the first, second, third and fourth.
As to the fifth article it is the mind of this meeting that the Power of Choosing
Delegates to Congress is invested in the People, on this condition we concur, also
approve of the sixth and seventh. As to the Eighth Article, the Method of Propor-
tioning the Tax for supplying the Common Treasury is not satisfactory; as to the
Ninth Article where it mentions the Number of Land forces made by Regulations
from each State for its Quota in proportion to White Inhabitants in Such State, we
had rather chuse it should be in Proportion to the Number of free subjects in Each
State, also approved of the loth nth 12th & 13th Article. After going through the
whole of said Articles, the whole was Put to Vote and passed in the affirmative
Excepting the above Exceptions & reserves, the meeting Dismist.

Thus we have Waterbury*s independent and expressed opinion
upon the national " Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union "
agreed upon by Congress, and quite in advance of that of the
Connecticut Legislature.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

BOUNTIES — CLOTHING FOR CONTINENTAL SOLDIERS — SUPPLIES FOR SOL-
DIERS* FAMILIES — TAXES — CONTINENTAL MONEY — CONNECTICUT
BILLS OF CREDIT — TOWN TREASURER'S ACCOUNTS — ON THE CON-
TINENTAL ROAD — EAST FARMS BURYING-YARD JOSEPH BEACH'S

TAVERN — EVENTS IN I779-I783 — HIRING SOLDIERS FOR HORSE
NECK — THE SOCIETIES OF WESTBURY AND NORTHBURY INCORPOR-
ATED AS WATERTOWN — MISCELLANY — DIARY OF JOSIAH ATKINS —
JUDAH FRISBIE — WATERBURY MEN WHO SERVED IN THE WAR OF
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

THE formula for enlistment into the Continental army — for
which town bounties were paid at the rate of six pounds
for every six months — ^has not been met, but there lies be-
fore me the following receipt :

Waterbiiry, Augfust the loth, 1777 : Rec'd of the Treasurer of the Town of sd
Waterbury the sum of five Pound Lawful money for the Purpose of going into Pub-
lick service and Joining the Regiment under the Command of Col® Comfort Sage at
the Piks Kills in the Room of one that has Paid in their fine. Rec<^ by me

Silvanus Adams.

So far as known to the writer, there are no records of bounties
paid before Jan. 12, 1778. In 1778 and 1779 we find seventy-eight
first, ninety-three second, and ninety-five third bounties paid.
Josiah Atkins seems to have been the first man to receive a third
bounty. It must be kept in mind that only the soldiers of the Con-
tinental line (who entered for three years, or for the war) were the
recipients of the above town bounty.*

Doubtless many bounties were paid not specified as such, but
only those thus designated are numbered, although soldiers* names
frequently appear with six pounds paid in connection therewith.
In some instances, a man received his six bounties at the same time.
The first bounties paid in 1778 were on January 12th to Thomas
Button, for Jonathan Davis, and for Thomas Merchant. Stephen
Welton, Jr., was the third recipient, Ebenezer Brown the fourth,

*After the close of the war, suits were brought by a number of persons who claimed that they were num-
bered with the 131 and had not been paid. I have one in which Samuel Lewis of Watertown claims that'.he
" enlisted at Waterbury, May 24, 1777, in Capt. David Smith's company in Col. [John] Chandler's regiment
and was counted with the 131 men entitled to receive a bounty." Waterbury and Watertown being the
defendants, (in this case) the suit probably grew out of the separation of the towns.

446 JnSTORT OF WATERS URT.

and, in April, bounties were given to George Prichard, Jr., Jonah
Mallory, Isaac Cleveland, Samuel Smith, David Wells and David
Punderson. The first man to receive his second bounty was Caleb
Scott — his father, Gideon, receiving it in his name.

In Dec. of 1777, the town lent ;^2o7 "to the committee to pur-
chase clothing for soldiers in the Continental army ; " but collec-
tions and *• fines for not going into Publick service " were paid in, so
that by May 5 th, there was a little balance left in the treasury. In
November and December of 1777 ^£'47 2 was received in fines, and
this was before the currency became greatly depreciated. In March
or April, 1778, James Bronson made a journey to Pennsylvania, for
the town, at the cost of ;^8-io-.9, which the record refers to, as
"being a present made to the Town " by him. It is notable as being
the only "present" made to the town that is on record to date.*
Everything was conducted by " our fathers " on business principles,
The town was exacting, its citizens equally so.

Clothing for Continental soldiers was furnished by the majority of
the families in town, but provisions were often late in arriving to
home consumers. We find in 1780 that Major Smith was " paid in cash
to make him good for his not having the money seasonable";^! 39-3-4,
and " to Provision purchased for his family to make up the arrears
of the year 1779 ^1^169-15; Ambrose Potter is credited for paying
Samuel Camp ;^iso," to make him good upon the account of his
family not being supplied in season. The accounts of expenditures
remaining to us are too imperfect to be summarized. Scores of citi-
zens received money to provide for soldiers'families, but seldom do
we find any intimation of the individual family cared for. Ezekiel
Sanford (a soldier) had a child that must have called forth the sym-
pathies of the public, for it is twice referred to in the records as a
"poor child." In April, 1779 there was "paid to Capt Nathaniel
Barnes for Ezekiel Sanford's wife for encouragement for her to
take care of her poor child ^£'21-6," and in July of 1780 Ezekiel was

* Gifts had beea made to the First Church by Joseph Lewis and I think bjr other men. The following inter-
esting portion of Stephen Hopkins' will relates to the ** Poor in the town." The will had been probated nine
years at this date : ** Also it is my will that twenty pounds lawful money out of my estate be put upon interest
within a convenient time after my decease to be in bank for the use and benefit of the poor in the town of
Waterbury without limitation of time, the interest of which to be distributed annually at the discretion of the
selectmen of the town of Waterbury for the time being, who are hereby fully empowered in trust with rela-
tion to said legacy to be let out, collected, received and disbursed, and act in law for the purpose above said —
but that the charitable end of this legacy may be fully known and answered, and not perverted for the use of
such poor as are slothful, vicious or unwholesome members of society, it is understood to be my will and is
hereby ordered that the interest to be annually distributed shall be limited and confined to such as are in the
full communion in the regular orthodox churches in this town, which hold and worship according to the
method settled, esublished and now generally practiced in this colony. Stephen Hopkins.**

Woodbury Probate Records, Vol. 6, p. 177.

In the year of which we are writing, the interest of the above gift was one pound and four shillings —
paid to the town by Thomas Hickcox, Jr.

WATEBBURT IN THE BEVOLUTION. 447

^'allowed for keeping his poor child eight months," at the rate of
four shillings a week.

The first purchase of provisions for a soldier's family in 1778,
was made by Capt. Jotham Curtis, who received from the town jQi2
for that use. This was quickly followed by the expenditure of large
sums for provisions, and also for "clothing for Continental soldiers."
Moneys were dispensed for specified purposes as " bounties, provis-
ions, cloathing," and, in addition, "by order of the select men," and,
"by order of the committee." In 1778 the State repaid the Town
;^i677-i7-9 "for defraying the charges of those that supplyed the
soldiers* families last year."

In 1780 our Committee of Supplies received from the State
^^5464. In Connecticut throughout its life as a colony, and as a
state during its first war, there was but one standard of values —
that of provisions. Is there any other to-day ? At this time the
people were taxed almost beyond endurance. The taxes within one
twelvemonth were the following: Nov. 16, 1780, a rate was laid of
six pence in provisions, or double in States* money; the following
January, eight pence in States* money. This is the last recognition
of paper currency in our taxation. On the same day a tax was laid
of three half -pence, payable in provisions; June 21, four pence, in
silver or Gold,* or good merchantable beef cattle at prices which
had been named by the Assembly; July 9, three pence lawful silver
money, or provision, or clothing at prices fixed by legislation.

As a result of oppressive taxation and in return, every man
lived, so far as he could, upon the Town and the State. There
seemed to be no other resource. War is robbery. Government
robbed the people; of men, so that it was with difficulty that crops
could be planted or garnered; of provisions, until famine was at the
doors of the inhabitants, and within the armed camps; of money,
until in one instance in Waterbury it reached a point where Joseph
Atkins paid fourteen pounds of Continental money for a debt of
seven silver shillings. This was near the time when the last of the
two hundred millions of dollars in Continental bills had been
issued. Connecticut bills of credit stood at ten for one at the time
when Continental bills stood at thirty for one — the one being silver.
A transaction for cash meant concurrent payment. Town transac-
tions with individuals are variously estimated — in Continental
money, States money, hard money, old money, cash, and silver —
even counterfeit money was abundant.

Through the courtesy of Mr. Elisha Leavenworth we have the
records of Ezra Bronson, Esq., as town treasurer during several

* The first meDtion of this metal found in our records.

448 HI8T0RT OF WATEBBURT,

years of the war. For the Danbury alarm, Stephen Hopkins fur-
nished 3 bushels of wheat, Ebenezer Hoadly i, John Hopkins i and
1 6 lbs. of pork, Joseph Hopkins, Esq. 38 pounds of pork, "found for
the militia when they went to Danbury," by one cow valued at
;;^i3-io in States money, Moses Cook " 12^ lb. of pork," Timothy
Porter 20 lbs., Benjamin Baldwin 20 lbs., "that went to Danbury,"
and John Thompson is credited " by a horse going to Danbury in a
team." In 1778 Dr. Lemuel Hopkins is credited with doctoring one
Robert Cooper and his wife; Peter Welton went to Hartford "to
request liberty to carry the soldiers* clothing to the camp," at a cost
of j£sy but Joseph Hopkins, Esq., at the same date " went to New
Haven with the clothing." In the same year Silas Constant lent six
shillings in silver to hire soldiers for Horseneck, and Amos Prichard
carried a sick soldier to Southington. The same sick soldier was
probably kept by Josiah Bronson, for at the same date he is credited
for keeping a sick soldier and "getting one pint and a half of wine
and tending." The same poor fellow was attended by Dr. Abel
Bronson, as we find him allowed " by a bill for Docktring a sick
soldier who lived at Lieut. Bronsons." Elizabeth Skinner boarded
a lame soldier two weeks in the same year. " Sick soldiers " had
become such a burden to the people living along the " Continental
road running east and west through Waterbury " that in July, 1780,
the selectmen were directed by the town " to prepare a memorial to
the General Assembly, asking that a provision be made for cost
arising by soldiers when sick on the road to and from the army
belonging to this State." Four months before the memorial was
ordered, the town had bought of Joseph Beach, for fifteen shillings,
"a piece of ground for a burying yard." This was our present
East Farms cemetery, and it is said that the earliest burials there
(before the purchase of the land by the town) were of soldiers who,
worn out and ill, had reached the tavern close by — kept during the
war by Joseph Beach — and there had died.

The confusion and distress of the period is stamped upon the
town records. Entries were evidently made from detached minutes
of town meetings, some of which seem to have been lost or left
unrecorded. Ezra Bronson was unable to do the work required of
him, and Michael Bronson assisted, and the result is to be regret-
ted.

In 1779 Esq'. Judd was paid j£g for "his journey to Lebanon for
lead; John Trumball, Jr., and Joseph Hopkins, Esq., sent in bills
for attending the convention;" David Taylor went to Hartford "to
exhibit a cloathing bill, was allowed j£6 " for damage done a gun in
the public service," and furnished house room and dinners for the

WATER BUEY Ilf THE REVOLUTION. 449

selectmen. They were ordinarily entertained by Ezra Bronson,
his accounts being strewn with scores of dinners for public
officials; but other men, notably Col. Baldwin, furnished "meals"
for selectmen and the civil authority.

In 1780 David Turner is credited "for two days service warn-
ing people to give in account of their grain;" Michael Bronson "pur-
sued after some waggons to Breakneck," furnished 12J4 pounds of
lead, and bailed two pots; Joseph Hotchkiss went to Guilford for
salt; Dr. Roger Conant, deceased, is credited for services; Dr. John
Elton for doctoring Mrs. Clark and Joseph Griffith; Dr. Osee Dut-
ton and Dr. Timothy Porter are paid for services; widow Mary
Clark kept the selectmen two days, and widow Huldah Richards was
one of the women who furnished clothing. In this and other years
dozens of men are credited with "paying Solomon Tompkins," but
no hint is obtained of the nature of the obligation; Joel Blakslee
brought a hogshead of clothing from New Haven; Thomas Bron-
son, Jr., went to Salem after tents; Thaddeus Bronson furnished
wheat flour and pork "for the militia;" Aaron Benedict was paid
"for expenses for the team transporting for the militia marching to
West Point";^25i; Eliasaph Doolittle furnished ;^i 00 "to provide
for some poor people " — and in evidence of the severity of the
weather, Peter Welton was "allowed for carrying the corpse of
John Welton to the grave in that extreme season in the snow 96
dollars" — rendered ^^28-16-0. (Jan. nth "the extremity of the sea-
son" prevented a town meeting). In July, Enoch Scott and others
assisted the county surveyor in measuring the town, and in October
he "numbered the people." These acts were in reference to the
formation of the Societies of Northbury and Westbury into the
township of Watertown.

In 1781 Lemuel Nichols was credited "by a bill for cash paid
out in silver for transporting provisions to Fishkill ;^4-5-ii;" the
widow Clark was paid " for keeping a yoke of cattle that was going
to Fishkill; " Zera Beebe spent the fourth of October making tents;
James Bronson went to camp to procure evidence; Ephraim Warner
lost a chain in transporting provisions to Fishkill; William Rowley
fulled five blankets; Gideon Hikcox and Silas Constant lent the
town six shillings in silver to hire soldiers for Horseneck. In
March, Joseph Hotchkiss is credited for packing and coppering the
provisions that went to Danbury, and Aaron Benedict transported
" for the army " to West Point.* Among the unusual items found

* Young Watertown when only two or three months old furnished her men (ordered for the relief of West
Point) under Lieut.-Col. Benjamin Richards, 707 pounds of wheat flour, and beside other stores, 514 pounds
of salt pork. Waterbury furnished the tents and provisions, and the tents were conveyed to Ridgefield— 40
miles — by " 3 teams, 4 cattle each."

450 BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

in 1782 is one relating to the universal difficulty in obtaining salt.
Joseph Hotchkiss went to Guilford after salt, and Nathaniel Merrils
received money "towards his journey after salt."

Among the mysteries of Capt. Ezra Bronson*s accounts Agur
Mallory appears. Of him we gather that a man of that name paid
taxes here in 1774. In 1778 Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss sent in a bill to
the town " for services in looking a place and moving Agur Mal-
lory," and for "meat, milk, sider, apple butter, firewood, grain and
other articles furnished for him;" October 12, 1779, Capt. Josiah
Terrill received jQ^6 "for twenty days' service in looking after
Agur Mallory when at the Pool." In November of the same year
Titus Hotchkiss served "nine days in assisting him home from the
Pool, at Nine Dollars per Day, ;^24-6-o." Dec. 6, 1779, John Hopkins
is credited with "a sheet to put over Agur Mallory when he went
to the Pool," and Capt. Thomas Fenn "for the service of a horse to
the Pool." In 1780 Jude Hoadly made "a horse litter to carry him
on;" Timothy Wetmore is credited "by a Bill for 8 Days* service
going to the Pool with him;" Enos Warner went "1^ to the Pool"
with him at the same date, and for three or four years Agur Mallory
is "moved " again and again, and must have proved a costly invalid
for the town until in 1782 Mary Mallory apparently came to Water-
bury, and after keeping him three months asked the town to reward
her with the modest sum of four pounds. Nothing further has
been noticed regarding Agur Mallory.

In the town accounts, many times repeated, can be found the
expression : " By service done for the town." No intimation is to
be gained of its nature. " Provisions for soldiers' families " and
" Cloathing for soldiers " and " Sundry articles for soldiers " or for
soldiers' families are found on every page — interspersed with "a
cow," or "a sheep," "a pair of stockings" or "a blanket." Rates
are " turned " and flour, corn, rye and oats are furnished — to be paid
for; the bridges appear in some form on every page, and the follow-
ing facts regarding the hiring of soldiers are found.

The troubles and difficulties attending the hiring of soldiers
after 1779 were almost insurmountable. Enthusiasm had vanished.
Patriotism was not dead, but it slumbered and slept — ^wom to a
weariness that nothing but the near approach of danger, like the
attacks upon the near-by towns, could arouse to new action. When,
in January of 1780, Waterbury was required to furnish thirteen
soldiers for the army for three years, they could not be obtained,
and a compromise was made for one year — the town engaging " to
pay half the bounty or wages which should be engaged by them in
provision or clothing at the prices which such articles commonly

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION,

451

sold for in the year 1774, and the other half in lawful money or
Bills of Credit equivalent to such sum of provisions or clothing at
the time of payment." Other inducements were offered, such as an
immediate supply for the needs of soldiers' families. In July, ten
other soldiers were required, and in November the town was classed
or divided, by an Act of Assembly, to facilitate the raising of sol-
diers. Capt. Ezra Bronson was made " Purchasing Commissary to
receive the provisions to be collected for the use of the Continental
army and forces raised for the defense of the State, upon a six-
penny rate " (by Act of Assembly). He was to provide casks and see
the same well put up. If any man refused to meet this rate, he was
to be made to pay double in States money. A few men did refuse,
but they paid double. The town appointed forty-three men to
inspect the provisions thus collected, among whom were Col.
Phineas Porter, Lieut.-Col. Benjamin Richards, and Major Jesse
Curtis. The date of the above appointment was March 20, 1780. It
was an important meeting. The last rate in Continental money was
laid — three shillings on the pound; the Church of England was
denied any future income from the sale of lands given by the
proprietors in 17 15, and the town voted to prefer a memorial to
the General Assembly, praying that the Societies of Westbury
and Northbury should be incorporated into a separate town, and be
annexed to the County of Litchfield. The conditions offered by
Waterbury were simple and few. The new town was to pay one-
half of the expenses of rebuilding a bridge over the river on the
Woodbury road in the same form as then erected, and half the
expenses of supporting one Agur Mallory; it was required to quit
claim all right and title to the public school and ministerial moneys
— in consideration for which it was to hold all the unsold town
lands within its borders; all military stores and the camp equipage
belonging to the town of Waterbury were to be equally divided
between the two towns, when the new one should be incorporated.
With respect to the dividing lines, a committee composed of men
from each society in the township was to meet and determine the
division and report to the next meeting, but the line was not defi-
nitely established for several years.

On the 17th of September in this year (1780) "General Washing-
ton with the Marquis de la Fayette and General Knox with a splen-
did retinue," left the camp at Tappan (about thirty miles below
West Point) for Hartford. This was with little doubt one of the
occasions when Washington passed through Waterbury. His object
was to confer with the commanding officers of the French fleet and
army (6000 men) which had recently arrived at Rhode Island. He

452 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

was absent from camp nine days, during which time Major Andre
made the fatal journey to West Point or its vicinity, to confer with
Benedict Arnold. The express, sent to meet General Washington
with the direful news of Arnold's treasonable interview (gained by
Andre's capture), taking a different road, failed to meet him. If it
were not for this failure, we might think that this was the occasion
fitting the tradition which tells us that General Washington once
rode loo miles in one day.

In 1781 when Gov. Tryon with a detachment of British troops
marched from King's Bridge to Horse Neck (a former horse pasture
for the town of Greenwich) every effort was made to raise soldiers
for the defense of that point. Waterbury's quota — Westbury and
Northbury having departed from it — was seven men. Abraham and
David Wooster refused to pay their proportion toward hiring a
recruit in the class to which they belonged. David Welton, Henry
Grilley, Stephen and Timothy Scovill also neglected or refused to
pay — but they were obliged "to pay double."

Waterbury was called upon for sixty-nine soldiers after Water-
town was incorporated. Eighteen of the number were required
early in 1781 and were to serve one year from the following March,
at Horse Neck, and were " to be had on as reasonable terms as they
could be procured." The eighteen men were not to be had. Is it
surprising, when ** under their complicated distresses " officers and
men were exhausted ? The confidence of the army in public prom-
ises was chilled almost unto death, and despair had taken the place
of patience and fortitude. All that the army asked was "a perma-
nent and comfortable support." Regimental officers were contin-
ually resigning and exclaiming: "Let others come and take their
turn!"

It was during this winter that Col. Elisha Sheldon's regiment of
dragoons (240 men and 140 horses) was quartered for a time in
Waterbury. There being insufficient accommodation, the town
asked that the regiment might be quartered elsewhere, as "no army
supplies were kept here."

The eighteen men were not secured on the 6th of March, and
some suitable person was empowered to "get them any other way
that should be judged best." It would seem by a subsequent "diffi-
culty " which arose, that Seba Bronson and William Leavenworth
were permitted to obtain soldiers on this occasion. Six of the
above soldiers were Eli Rowley, Asa Chittenden, Ezekiel Porter,
Toto Cornelius (secured for ";^ 18 cash in States' money and he to
receive his wages"), Zebulon Miller and Daniel Williams. May 7,
1 781, Eli Rowley is credited "by Entering the Public Service for

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 453

the Defence of Horse Neck and is to be paid three pounds per
month, hard money — the obligation given by Samuel Scott, Jr."
To or for Asa Chittenden, Eli Bronson gave the obligation. A week
later a call came for ten footmen and one horse and horseman for
the post at Horse Neck. To secure men, the town promised that
the wages offered by the State " should be paid in silver punctually
(one recorder [Michael Bronson] has it perpetually) at 6-8 per ounce,
or an equivalent in Bills of Credit.*' Eli Bronson and Joseph
Atkins were made town agents and empowered to procure the men
and give them " such further sums as they should think proper, if
to be had by April ist.'* Jacob Sperry was appointed to procure
three ox teams, drivers, and carts for Continental service. June 21,
the town held another meeting " for the purpose of contriving ways
and means for procuring the town's quota of soldiers for Horse
Neck and the Continental army." Capt. John Welton was given
"full power to hire seven men" and reward them with "hard
money, provisions or neat cattle." The seven men were obtained
apparently without great difficulty or delay, and the following events
probably influenced the men who enlisted.

In May, General Washington had again journeyed to Con-
necticut to meet Count de Rochambeau, and in all probability
passed through Waterbury at that time. It was on or about
June 2 1 St — the date of the town meeting when the seven men
were to be hired "for hard money, provisions or cattle" — that
the French army under General Rochambeau inarched through
Waterbury, on its way to meet Washington's army near King's
Bridge. What welcome travelers the bonny Frenchmen must have
proved themselves as they journeyed on, for they paid all their
expenses in hard money, committing no depredations, and treating
the inhabitants with great civility and propriety. The officers
wore " coats of white broadcloth trimmed with green, white under-
dress, and hats with two corners, instead of three, (like the cocked
hats worn by American officers). Sixteen months later the same
army again passed through Waterbury. An old inhabitant told
Dr. Bronson (as given in page 359 History of Waterbury, 1858),
that the soldiers marched two and two, and when the head of
the column had disappeared beyond the hill at Capt. George
Nichols, (the Dr. James Brown house, still standing), the other
extremity had not come in sight on West Side hill. What a picture
of Waterbury in 1781 that bit of description affords us ! One could
stand on the East Main Street hill, above its intersection with
Mill street, and have an unobstructed view to the top of West
Side hill.

454

HI8T0BT OF WATERBURT.

The following items relating to the passage of portions of the
amiy through Waterbury are given by Dr. Bronson, and are
undoubtedly authentic. He refers to the main east and west road
through Waterbury, as communicating with Hartford and Middle-
town eastward, and with Fishkill and the Hudson river by way of
Break Neck hill in Middlebury westward, and says that teams for
carrying goods and supplies ran frequently and regularly to and
from Fishkill. It was, he adds, the most southern of the traveled
roads at a safe distance from the sea. The following statements
could not, with him, have been mere traditions, for he had personal
knowledge of the men who were participants in the events narrated.
"In the fall of 1777, after the capture of Burgoyne, a detachment of
the American army with the enemy's splendid train of artillery
passed through Waterbury to the eastward. They pitched their
tents and encamped for the night on Manhan meadow, just above
the bridge. Many people visited the ground to see the beautiful
brass pieces all ranged in line. Gen. La Fayette at one time,
attended only by his aids, lodged at the house of Capt. Isaac Bron-
son— at Break Neck — who then kept tavern. The host introduced
him to his best chamber in which was his best bed, but La Fayette
caused the feather bed to be removed, saying : " Straw for the sol-
dier," and made the straw underbed his couch for the night. He
also on one occasion stopped at the house of Esq. (Joseph) Hopkins,
then "the most prominent civilian in the place." Dr. Bronson also
confirms the statement — made elsewhere, that General Washington
passed through Waterbury on his way to Hartford. He makes
mention of Gen. Knox as being with him, but does not speak of La
Fayette, who was of the party. "The splendid retinue " is referred
to as "a somewhat numerous escort." He adds that General Wash-
ington rode a chestnut colored horse, came across Break Neck, and
returned the salutations of the boys by the roadside. His dig-
nity of manner, set off by his renown, made a durable impression
on all who beheld him. He dined with Esq. Hopkins, who made
many inquiries, and at last became decidedly inquisitive. After
reflecting a little on the last question, Washington is said to have
said : " Mr. Hopkins, can you keep a secret ?" " I can." " So can
I," the General instantly replied.

The passage of the French Army through our town in 17 81. or
in 1782, was marked by an encampment on Break Neck hill where it
remained over one day to wash and bake. In consequence, all the
wells in the neighborhood were drawn dry, and the French army
had an opportunity to test the quality of the water in Hop brook.
In 1 78 1 the same army, impeded in its march to the westward by

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION, 455

rain and freshets,* encamped two or three days in Southington.
The place of its encampment at that time is well established, as
well as that of a second encampment of the same army on French
hill in the same town. The rows of " white washed " Sabbath Day
houses were of interest to the Frenchmen, who thought them the
remains of a military encampment. f

The first recorded case of inoculation J for small pox in Water-
bury was performed by Charles Upson in February, 1782 — the
patient being Ezra Mallory, who was taken care of three weeks
by Wait Hotchkiss. Almost simultaneously with this case, the town
gave, during forty-eight days, permission to all males in the town
over ten years of age, and to all persons living on the east and west
Continental road, "to take the infection of small pox by way of
inoculation." A committee was appointed of fifteen men (" the Rev.
Mr. Mark Leavenworth " being one) whose duty it was " to give
orders respecting the time when the infection should be taken, the
house or houses where the patients should live, the tendance, the
time of their cleansing and the time of their release from restric-
tions— and to take whatever precautions should be deemed expedi-
ent for preserving the inhabitants from taking the infection." A
few days later, it was ordered that the latest day for inoculation
should be March 20th instead of April ist. Cases of inoculation for
the disease that gave such distress and trouble to the soldiers in
camp, and the inhabitants of towns everywhere, were frequent
before the time when in 1784, Dr. Abel Bronson petitioned the town
to name a place " healthy, convenient and secure " where he might
build a house to receive patients for inoculation. Under suitable
restrictions, the consent of the town was gained, and Dr. Abel Bron-
son established a hospital for that purpose, in Middlebury. The
only portion of the building which remains is a single door, which
was removed to a house occupied by the late Burritt Hall. It is
covered with the names of patients who there endured the pains
and penalties of inoculation. Of the number are " Sheldon Malary,
Ezekiel Birdsey, Sam" D. H., Huntington, April 24, 1792; Jared
Munson, Harry Edwards, Richard Skinner, Alfred Edwards, Samuel
Wheeler, John Newton, of Washington, 1795; H. Marshall, Asa
Green, Macomber AUis, Johnson, 23; Samuel Southmayd, Jr., Hodly,
Clark, Sheldon Clark, Leavit T. Harris, and John Gilcrist." Two

* This detention may account for an item in our town accounts of ** Soldiers that worked at the [Grrat
River] bridge."

+ History of Southington.

4: Charles Upson was perhaps the first man to name a child Washington, which he did as early as Sep-
tember, Z775. His second child was named Gates, his third child was named Lee.

4S6 HiaTOBT OF WATERBURT,

sons of Nathaniel Gunn (Enos and Abel), who had, it is said,
received commissions in the British army with the condition that
they should be protected from small pox by inoculation, went, it is
said, to Dr. Bronson's and died there from exposure.*

Of the many traditions which have been kept alive concerning
events occurring in Waterbury, the following are well authenti-
cated. In Union City, on the east side of the river, there is stand-
ing a house that was built by Thomas Porter before the war, and
was occupied as a tavern during the war. To this house there came
on one occasion so many soldiers that they completely filled every
room. So weary were the men that they fell upon the floors,
exhausted, for want of rest and sleep. All night Mrs. Porter and
her attendants cooked for these men, stepping over them as they
worked.

Mention should also be made of the heroism of Huldah Warner,
a granddaughter of the first woman who was buried in Naugatuck.
She was at that time the wife of Samuel Williams, and was, with
two of her children, in Wyoming. The night before the massacre
at that place, her husband, through the aid of their elder son,
Zebah, contrived to get word to her to flee at once. With her
daughter, Rhoda, and a still younger child, Mrs. Williams began
her flight for her former home in Waterbury. She left Wyom-
ing the same night. The next day she made but five miles,
and spent the night without shelter of any kind. Continuing
her flight from day to day (not knowing that her husband was slain
during the first night of her journey), she reached Waterbury and
the house of her sister Elizabeth, the wife of Zebulon Scott. We
find in November of 1778, Zebulon Scott credited by the town with
keeping Widow Williams and two children four months and a half.
One of the two children, Rhoda, became, it is said, the grandmother
of 95 children. Zeruah, the only daughter of Lieut. Jonathan Beebe,
of the same section of the township, hearing that her husband,
Israel Terrel, was ill in camp, took her infant child, Israel, and rode
alone to the Hudson river, and there cared for him until his
recovery.

Joseph Root was one of the force under Col. Stark at Benning-
ton. The night before the battle he was on duty as sentinel. Near

"^The following advertisement is taken from The Connect icni Journal ^ published at New Haven:

INOCULATION.

Any Person desirous of taking the infection of the Small Pox, may be well accommodated by applying

to the subscriber, who has a very convenient house for that purpose, where careful attendance is given, and

every favor gratefully acknowledged, by their humble servant.

Abbl Bronson.
Waterbury^ Sept. tS, 17Q2. 10 W.

WATERS URT IN THE REVOLUTION, 457

morning, as he and his comrade were nearing each other on their
respective beats, there rose up a platoon of British soldiers who
demanded surrender. Upon this both sentinels discharged their
pieces, whereupon the whole company fired, killing Root's comrade
and felling Root to the ground. He soon rallied, to find that he
was only shot through his hat, when he surrendered. He was
finally exchanged, and it was with great pride that the old gentle-
man of 80 years said (to Mr. Laurel Beebe, who gave the incident
to the writer), that the Americans gave two Hessian prisoners in
exchange for him.

Ebenezer Richardson, a man who loved the wilderness, and
moved into it anew whenever neighbors came into view — went at
last to live at Break Neck. This was before the name Middlebury
had been spoken for that territory. His granddaughter, Tamar
Richardson, lived with her father and mother, during the war, at
Break Neck. Of her, her granddaughter Mrs. Gilbert Hotchkiss
has written: " Many times has my grandmother told me of the sol-
diers of the Revolution passing her father's house on the way to
and from Boston and Fishkill, stopping there for provisions or stay-
ing over night, or both, and always keeping a guard. She told how
she and her mother would bake all day as fast as they could, one
ovenfuU after another, the soldiers taking the pies as fast as they
could bake them, and how her arms have been burned from the
heat of the brick oven — and that with weary feet and aching limbs
the only way to get to her room was to walk over the soldiers who
lay thick upon the floor.*' After a life of 94 years, this woman was
committed to the earth, in trust for the Resurrection, in the Grand
street cemetery, and upon her grave-stone was inscribed (until the
city of Waterbury served upon the dead a summary process of dis-
possession)* the following words : "Tamar, wife of Stephen Hotch-
kiss, died Mar. 29, 1853 M. 94^ y'rs."

Dear pilgrim farewell, thy journey is ended.
Thou hast gone to thy rest in the temple of God,

Hast seen the dear Lord who for thee descended
To take thee at length to his blessed abode.

The following list of persons who "left Waterbury during the
Revolutionary War, with the intention of joining the enemy " was
made by Dr. Bronson, and is reproduced here. Certain of the names
appear in our list of soldiers, their owners having served in the

* In 1890 the City of Waterbury decided that it had no longer room for the graves of the men
and women whose part was no insignificant one in giving to the world the ** Thirteen United States." Scores
of the six hundred and eighty-nine soldiers who stood for Waterbury in the American army, lay within
that ground. Corporations sometimes commit, as in this instance, the unpardonable sin.

460

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

my's service. After the war, as his
conviction rested on Roberts's testi-
mony alone, he petitioned the Assem-
bly to discharge him from the execu-
tion. The prayer was granted, but

afterwards the vote was reconsidered
and negatived. The next year (1786),
on petition, he had liberty to pay in
** State securities."

The following list of 689 names of men who served as soldiers
in the war in some one of the various military organizations of the
State, or in the Continental army, has been made from original
documents held as private papers: from War papers in the State
archives; from Bronson's ** History of Waterbury," and from the
"Record of Connecticut men in the War of the Revolution." Dr.
Bronson had a list of 236 names, which he referred to as "very
incomplete."

Every one of the persons included in this list was bom in Water-
bury, enlisted from Waterbury, or lived in the township. In a case
like that of Capt. Jesse Leavenworth, son of the Rev. Mark Leaven-
worth, although he enlisted from New Haven, it has been thought
to be quite just to claim him, and although Aner Bradley when
wounded at Danbury, was not yet resident here, but later removed
into Ancient Waterbury, he and other men under similar circum-
stances have been laid claim to. In the list may be found three
lieutenant-colonels, three majors, thirty-four captains, and twenty-
three lieutenants.

REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIERS.

James Adams,
John Adams,
Luke Adams,
Sylvanus Adams,
Asa Alcox,
Daniel Alcox,
David Alcox,
John B. Alcox,
Samuel Alcox,
Solomon Alcox,
Abel Allen,
Daniel Allen,
Ebenezer Allen,
Gideon Allen,
John Ames,
Samuel Ames,
Ethan Andrews,
James Andrews,

Timothy Andrews,
Lieut. Wm. Andrews,
Joseph Atkins, Jr.,
Josiah Atkins,*
Josiah Atkins.f
Samuel Atkins,
Thomas Atwell,}
Abel Bacheldor,
Josiah Bacon,
Ichabod Bailey,
Clark Baird,
Abel Baldwin,
Alsop Baldwin,
Benjamin Baldwin,
David Baldwin,
Dr. Isaac Baldwin,
Lieut. Col. Jonathan
Baldwin,

Josiah Baldwin,

Ens. Theoph. Baldwin,

Eliel Barker,

Isaac Barker,

Jonathan Barker,

Asa Barnes,

"Azer Barnes, Con-
ductor, 1779-81."

Benjamin Barnes,

Daniel Barnes, died
March 30, 1778.

Jsaac Barnes,

John Barnes,

Josiah Barnes,

Capt. Nathaniel
Barnes,

Samuel Barnes,

Thaddeus Barnes, Jr.

* Probably son of Joseph,
f Son of Josiah. S«e his Diary, p. 47a.

t Enlisted in Sheldon's Light Dragoons, 1777. Description: Farmer; stature, 5 ft. 8 in.; light complexion,
hair and eyes.

WATERS UBY IN THE REVOLUTION.

461

Revolutionary Soldiers — c

Philip Barret, d. April

22, 1778.
Samuel Bartholomew,
William Basset,
Benjamin Bates,
Asa Beach,
John Beach, missing

Sept. 15, 1776.
Joseph Beach, Jr.,
Thaddeus Beach,
Dr. Ebenezer Beards-
ley,*
David Beebe,
Eli Beebe,
Elisha Beebe,
Ephraim Beebe,
Capt. Ira Beebe,
Joseph Beebe,
Martin Beebe,
Reuben Beebe, f
Seba Beebe, enlisted

in Vermont.
Walter Beecher,
David Bell or Ball,

Watertown, 1781.
Benjamin Bement,
Lieut. Aaron Bene-
dict,
Elihu Benham,
Elisha Benham,
Lieut. Isaac Benham,
Samuel Benham,
Thomas Blake,
Amasa Blakeslee,

ontinued,

Archibald Blakeslee,
Asa Blakeslee (des.)
David Blakeslee, died

at Albany.
Enos Blakeslee, d.

Sept. 3, 1776.
Lieut. James Blakes-
lee?
Jared Blakeslee,
Joel Blakeslee,
John Blakeslee,
Obed Blakeslee, black-
smith, dark, stat-
ure, 5, 8.
Zealous Blakeslee,
Joseph Boardman,
Andrew Bostwick,
blacksmith, light,
stature, 5, 7.
Aner Bradley, wound-
ed at Danbury.
Stephen Brister,
Giles Brocket,
Abel Bronson,
Asahel Bronson,
Daniel Bronson,
Dr. Isaac Bronson,
surgeon's mate in
Sheldon's Light Dra-
goons,
Capt. Isaac Bronson,
Joseph Bronson,
Josiah Bronson, Jr.,
Levi Bronson,

Lieut. Michael Bron-
son,

Reuben Bronson,

Roswell Bronson,

Capt. Samuel Bronson,

Selah Bronson,

Titus Bronson,

David Brown,

Ebenezer Brown,

James Brown,

Benajah Bryan,

David Buckingham,

Epinetus Buckingham,

Isaac Bunnell,

Jonathan Butler,

Solomon Butler,

Lieut. Daniel Bying-
tofi,

Jared Byington,

Samuel Byington,

Robert Cady ?

Israel Calkins,

Roswell Calkins,

Abel Camp, \

Bethel Camp, v bro's.

EldadCamp, )

Ephraim Camp,

Capt. Samuel Camp,

Samuel Camp, Jr.,

Cuff Capeny.t

Stephen Carter,

Thomas Cartwright,

Bradley Castle,

Capt. Phineas Castle,

*'* Ebenezer Beardslee, Surgeon," 1775-77, is accredited to Bridgeport, but he paid taxes here from Z769
to 1776, inclusive.

tin Beebe's application for a pension, he states that ** when General Washington retreated (from Long
Island, 1776), Col. Douglass's regiment was the last one to leave the Island;" that he was discharged Dec.
Z776, and on his return to Waterbury ** joined a company of minute men, commanded by Capt. [Josiah]
Terrell, and was out two short tours at Stamford and New Haven; continued as a ' minute man ' for two
years — the company being composed of 60 men and called the Ring^tont company."

$The following is his will: Being engaged in the war for the defense of America, and exposed to the
dangers thereof; I give to Stephen Bronson, £10, to be paid out of a note this day given me by Simeon
Nichols. I give to Moses Cook £6, to be paid by a note executed by sd. Cook and sd. Bronson. I give to
Asa Hopkins my caster Hatt. I give to Joseph Hopkins, Jr., my beaver Hatt. I give to Joseph Hopkins,
Esq., all the remainder of my estate, whether in clothing, notes of hand, or wages due to me, on this condi-
tion—that he, the sd. Joseph Hopkins, shall pay to my friend Timothy a Negro man living with Isaac
Newton the sum of five pounds, and to Silence, a servant of the sd. Joseph Hopkins, the sum of live pounds.
I appoint Joseph Hopkins to be executor.

CUFF CAPENY,
Theodore Wad s worth, I ^^.^^^^^^^

Levia Hopkins, >

This will, dated June 3, X777, was probated Dec. 23, 1777.

462

mSTOBT OF WATERS URT,

Revolutionary Soldiers — continued.

Silas Chapman,

Daniel Chatfield,

Thomas Chilman,

Asa Chittenden, at
Horseneck.

Asahel Chittenden,

Daniel Clark.

Richard Clark,

Ens. Timothy Clark,

John Allin Clay,

Isaac Cleveland,

Johnson Cleveland,

Israel Clifford,

John Cobb,

John Cole,

Thomas Cole,

Major Augustus Col-
lins, 27th Reg. Mili-
tia, May, 1782.

Dr. Roger Conant,
surgeon with Col.
Fisher Gay, June,
1776; died Feb. 8, 1777.

Arba Cook,

Charles Cook.

Ebenezer Cook,

Joel Cook,

Lemuel Cook, last sur-
vivor of the war,

Moses Cook, drummer,

Ozem' Cook,

Roswell Cook,

Selah Cook, farmer, 5,
7>^, dark,

Timothy Cook,

Trueworthy Cook,

Uri Cook,

William Cook, son of
Charles,

Toto Cornelius, at
Horseneck,

Amos Culver,

Reuben Culver,

Benjamin Curtis, d.
Nov. 15, 1776.

Caleb Curtis,

Lieut. Eli Curtis,

Elihu Curtis.

Felix Curtis,

Lieut. Giles Curtis,

Isaac Curtis,

James Curtis,

Capt. Jesse Curtis,

•*Major," on Town ace.
book, 1780.

Capt. Jotham Curtis,

Lyman Curtis,

Samuel Curtis,

Stephen Curtis, 3d,

Zadoc Curtis,

Zerah Curtis. Water-
town, farmer, 5, 8|^,

Joseph Cutler,

Younglove Cutler.

Ebenezer Darrow,
shoemaker, 5, 7,

Jonathan Davis,

Stephen Davis (des.),

Isaac Dayton,

Justus Dayton,

Michael Dayton,

Samuel Dayton,

Daniel Dean,

John Dean, d. at Far-
mingbury, Sept. 28,
1776, on return from
y«camp at New York.
Church record.

Samuel Dowd, des.
Nov. 7, 1778,

Aaron Dunbar,

Amos Dunbar,

Edward Dunbar,

Giles Dunbar,

James Dunbar, far-
mer, 5, 10, light.

Joel Dunbar,

John Dunbar,

JosephDunbar, wound-
ed at Germantown
and White Marsh,
Pa., 1777,

Miles Dunbar,*

Lieut. Thomas Dut-
ton,

Lieut. Titus Dutton,

Isaac Edwards,

Lieut. Nathaniel Ed-
wards, prisoner at
Fort Washington,
Nov. 16, 1776,

John Eggleston,

Surgeon John Elton,

Ebenezer El well,

Ozias El well,

Samuel Elwell,

Randol Evans,

John Fallendon(or Tat-
tendon),

Ithiel Fancher,

James Fancher,

John Fancher,

Rufus Farrington(Yar.
rington, on Family
Rec),

Aaron Fenn,

Ens. Benjamin Fenn..

Jr..
Jacob Fenn,

Jason Fenn,

Jesse Fenn,

John Fenn, 3d,

Judah Fenn,

Captain Thomas Fenn,

Lieut. Nathan Ferrisf

Edmund Fields,

David Finch,

Jeremiah Finch (des.)

Watertown.

* Miles Dunbar became fatigued at the battle of Monmouth, and was left. On his way home, was taken
sick at Newtown. His expenses were paid by the State.

t Nathan Ferris was *' commissioned xst lieut. in 7th Reg. Conn. Line under Col. Heman Swift, Jan.
X, X777; cashiered Oct. 35, for misconduct on the march to Germantown, Oct. 4. He took the oath of allegi-
ance here after Dec. 8, and in the same month enlisted eleven men, John Ames, Ethan and Timothy And-
rews, Thomas Chilman, John Cole, Titus Dutton, Elial and Elijah Parker, Isaac and John Smith and
Thomas Worden. All served under Capt. Elizur (?) Warner. He died in Watertown in x8o8, aged 74 yrs.

WATERS URY IN THE REVOLUTION.

463

Revolutionary Soldiers — continued.

Titus Finch,

John Pontine,

Aaron Foot,

Abel Foot,

Capt. Abraham Foot,
spent a part of his
life here.

Bronson Foot,

Daniel Foot (son of
Nathan).

David Foot, killed at
Fairfield.

David Foot, Jr. (son of
Samuel).

Ebenezer Foot, died at
Horseneck.

Ira Foot,

Ozem Foot,

Capt. Moses Foot,

Amos Ford, dead in
Feb. 1777.

Cephas Ford,

Noah Fowler, Lieut.
Col. 28th Reg. Mili-
tia, May, 1782.

Joseph Freedom,

Castor Freeman,

Robin Freeman,

Charles Frisbie,

Ebenezer Frisbie,

Israel Frisbie,

Judah Frisbie,

Reuben Frisbie,

Elisha Frost,

Rev. Jesse Frost, en-
listed in Southing-
ton.

Moses Frost,

Samuel Frost,

Timothy Frost,

David Fulford,

James Fulford, shoe-
maker, 6 ft, light.

Lieut. John Fulford,

Noah Fulford,

Titus Fulford,

Benjamin Gaylord,

Jonathan Gaylord,

Joseph Gaylord,

Capt Levi Gaylord,

Benoni Gillet,

John Glazier,

Daniel Goodrich,

Jabez'*Goodill," '

Lieut. Enos Granniss,

James Granniss, died
at Monmouth after
amputation of a leg.

Levi Granniss,

Benjamin Graves,

Simeon Graves,

Paul Griggs,

Samuel Griggs,

Solomon Griggs,

Cyrus Grilley,

*'Philo G r u m s e y,
Watertown, 1781."

Chauncey Guernsey,

Jonathan Guernsey,

Capt. Joseph Guern-
sey, was one of the
guards at Andre's
execution.

Southmayd Guernsey,

Reuben Hale,

Benajah Hall,

Isaah (Isaac ?) Hall

Jonah Hall,

Nathaniel Hall,

'•John Hannan, Water-
town."

Daniel Harrison,

Jabez Harrison ?

John Harrison,

Ambrose Hikcox,
"drummer during
the year past. May
20, 1776,"

Lieut. Amos Hikcox,

Jr..
Consider Hikcox,

Darius Hikcox,

Elisha Hikcox,
Gideon Hikcox,
Capt. James Hikcox,
Josiah Hikcox,
Capt. Samuel Hikcox,
William Hikcox, Jr.,
Ens. Jared Hill, paid

taxes, 1783,
Benjamin Hine,
Hollingsworth Hine,
Hezekiah Hine,*
Hezekiah Hine, Jr.,
Reuben Hine, died at

Horseneck,
Eliakim Hitchcock,
Zachariah Hitchcock,
Culpepper Hoadley,
Ebenezer Hoadley,
Jude Hoadley,
Philo Hoadley,
Silas Hoadley.
William Hoadley,
Joseph Hopkins,
Lemuel Hopkins,
Samuel Hopkins,
Abraham Hotchkiss,
Asahel Hotchkiss,
Eben Hotchkiss,
Capt. Gideon Hotch-
kiss,
Jesse Hotchkiss,!
Joel Hotchkiss,
Joseph Hotchkiss,
Stephen Hotchkiss,
Truman Hotchkiss,
David Hubbard,
Benjamin Hull,
Colwell Hull,
Ezra Hull,
James Hull,
Joseph Hull,
David Humiston,
Jared Humiston, farm-
er, 5, 5. light, red
hair; enl. 1777, des.
1782.

* Hezekiah Hine and his seven sons — but not all living in Waterbury — are said, by his descendants, to
iiave served in the war.

tWent to camp to nurse his brother Eben, who had camp-fever, and died from the same disease.

464

mSTORT OF WATEBBURT,

Revolutionary Soldiers— continued.

Jesse Humiston,
Joel Humiston,
Timothy Humiston,
David Hungerford,

enl. June 28; pris-
oner Nov. 16, 1776;

died Jan. 29, 1777.
James Hungerford,
Jedediah Hyde ?
Lieut. Lazarus Ives,
Caleb Johnson,
Levi Johnson,
Samuel Johnson (des.)
John Jordan,
AUyn Judd,
Balmarine Judd,
Brewster Judd,
Chandler Judd,
Daniel Judd,
Demas Judd, confined

in the prison-ship,

Jersey.
Ebenezer Judd ?
Freeman Judd, lost a

gun in the Quebec

expedition.
"Immanuel Judd,

died Apr. rg, 1778."
Joel Judd, d. Apr. 5,

1779.
John Judd, farmer, 5,

8, dark.
Levi Judd,
Richard Judd,
Lieut. Samuel Judd,
Stephen Judd,
Thomas Judd,
Walter Judd,
William Judd,
Martin Kellogg,
John J. Kenea, taxed

in 1784.

Samuel Kimball,
Joel Lane,
Nathaniel Lane,
Richard Lawrence,

tailor, 5, 9.
C a p t. Asa Leaven-
worth,

Capt. Jesse Leav-
enworth,

Mark Leaven-
worth, Secre-
tary and assist-
ant Adjutant-
gen, to Gen.
Wooster.

Nathan Leaven-
worth, Sur-
geon's mate,
8th reg. "Mass
Line" from
Feb., 1780, to
close of the
war. See "Yale
in the Revolu-
tion, 1S88."

Samuel Leavenworth,

Caleb Lewis,

"Clear Lewis,"*

David Lewis,

Capt. John Lewis,

Capt. John Lewis, Jr.,

Joseph Lewis,

Samuel Lewis, Jr.,
Northbury.

Silas Lewis,

Joel Lines,

Isaac Livingston,

Joseph Loomis?

Josiah Lounsbury,f

Aaron Luddington,

Abraham Ludding-
ton ?

J

CO

o

CO

O

<
pr

r

p
<

S3
o

Luman Luddington.
d. Oct. 19, 1776.

John Major (des.),

Daniel Mallory,

Jonah Mallory,

Timothy Mann," hired
for a two months'
Tower of Duty,"

1779.
Levi Marks,

Philip Martin,

Aaron Matthews,

Amos Matthews,

Jesse Matthews,

Capt. Stephen Mat-
thews, J

Amasa Mattoon,

John Merchant,

Thomas Merchant, Jr ,

Ens. Isaac Merriam,

Jesse Merriam (or
Merriman).

Joel Merriam,

Ichabod Merrill,

Nathaniel Merrill,

Charles Merriman,
Watertown — drum
major.

Moses Michael (Mitch-
ell?)

Timon Miles,

Z e b u 1 o n Miller, at
Horseneck.

Giles Mingo,

Dan Miner,

Joseph Miner,

Amos Mix,

Eldad Mix,

Levi Mix,

Samuel Mix,

Titus Mix, killed Sept.
16, 1776.

♦Erroneously given as "Caleb" in " Family Records." No other record.

^"Died in the Camp at Boston, Josiah Lownsberry, 'Prentice to Asa Levenworih, February 24, 1776,"
— Timothy Judd's Record.

$ Under date of Julys, 1776, Stephen Matthews advertises in the Connecticut J ournaly New Haven:
" Deserted from my company in Col. Swift's Battalion, Frederick Barents an Irishman, a thick, well set
fellow, wears his own black Hair, is pitted with the Small Pox, says he lately lived near Boston, and formerly
lived at Hartford; has left a Wife and Child in Woodbury. 'Tis said he has since listed in another Com-
pany." ** Five Dollars Reward" is offered for his capture and confinement in Goal, " that he may be dealt
with."

WATERS UBT IN THE REVOLUTION,

465

Revolutionary Soldiers — continued.

Nathaniel Morris,

Linus Moss,

Joseph Munn, negro.

Benjamin Munson,

Elisha Munson,

Heman Munson,

Isaac Munson,

Samuel Munson,

Noah Murray,

Lemuel Nichols,

Cyrus Norton,

Zebal Norton,

Moses Noyes,

Abijah Osborn,

Ebenezer Osborn ?

Elijah Osborn,

Joshua Osborn,

Lot Osborn,

Samuel Palmer,

Jonathan Pardee,

Aaron Parker, killed
at Horseneck.

Eliab Parker,

Elijah Parker,

Elisha Parker,

Isaac Parker,

John Parker, '* died in
camp."

Ensign Samuel
Parker,

Augustus Peck,

Benjamin Peck,

Isaac Peck, drowned
while in service.

Joseph Peck, died of
camp fever,

Ward Peck,

Capt. Daniel Pendle-
ton,*

Isaac Pendleton,

Jesse Penfield, farmer,
5.8.

Lieut. Samuel Pen-
field,

Lemuel "Pete" (Pe-
ters, negro).

Hezekiah Phelps,

Richard Pitts, d. Aug.
6, 1819.

Gideon Piatt,

Biamabas Pond,

Bartholomew Pond,

Beriah Pond,

Ira Pond,

Moses Pond,

Munson Pond, killed at
Horseneck.

Lieut. Timothy Pond,

Lieut. Ashbel Porter,

Ebenezer Porter,

Eldad Porter,

Ezra Porter,

Ezekiel Porter, at
Horseneck.

Ens. James Porter,

Joseph Porter,

Maj. Phineas Porter,

Capt. Samuel Porter,

Truman Porter,

Ambrose Potter,

Daniel Potter,

Eliakim Potter,

Lake Potter,

Lemuel Potter,

Samuel Potter, d. Nov.

15. 1777.
James Power,

Amasa Preston,

Hachaliah Preston,
missing Sept. 15,
1776.

Jonathan Preston,

Joseph Pribble,

Samuel Pribble, bom-
bardier,

Amos Prichard,

Benjamin Prichard,

George Prichard,

George Prichard, Jr.,
Isaiah Prichard,
Lieut. Jabez Prichard,

had removed to Der-

by.
Jared Prichard,
Joseph Prichard, died

at Saybrook, 1777.
Nathaniel Prichard,
David Punderson,
Nicholas Ransom,
Theophilus Ransom.
Eliatha Rew, resided

here, 1 768-1 774.
Capt. Sam Reynolds,
Lieut. Col. Benjamin

Richards,
Ebenezer Richards,
Mark Richards,
Samuel Richards,
Abiel Roberts, Jr. ,
Gideon Roberts,
Joel Roberts,
Jonathan Roberts,f
Seth Roberts,
Josiah Rogers,
Joseph Root,
Samuel Root,
Eli Rowley (des.)
Elijah Royce,
Capt.Nehemiah Royce

(sometimes Rice).
Phineas Royce,
Samuel Royce,
Riverius Russell,
Amos Sanford,
Archibald Sanford,
Lieut. Daniel Sanford,
Ezekiel Sanford,
Joel Sanford,
Jonah Sanford,
Moses Sanford,
Zacheus Sanford,
Asa Sawyer,

**^ Captain Pendleton's Company of Artificers, wholly raised in Connecticut, was the only body of men
from the State that served south of Virginia during the Revolution.'' At least twenty of its men were from
Waterbury.

t Lieut. Jonathan Robbards died Dec. 9, 1775, with a mortification in his leg, says ** Timothy Judd's re-
cord of deaths in West bury.'' He evidently was not this Jonathan.

30

466

HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

Revolution a ry Soldiers^con tin ued.

John Sax ton,

Nathaniel Scarrett,

Amasa Scott, farmer,
5, lo. light.

Caleb Scott,

Ebenezer Scott,

Elijah Scott,

Enos Scott, d. SepL
29, 1778.

Ethiel Sc<3tt,

Capt. Ezekiel Scott
(Major?)

Ezekiel Scott (private).

Gershom Scott, Jr.,

Stephen Scott,

TJri Scott,

Wolsey Scott,

Amasa Scovill,

John Scovill,

Ens. Samuel Scovill,

Selah Scovill,

Stephen Sco\nll,

Timothy Scovill,

John Sea ,

Simeon Sears,

Jeremiah Selkrig,

Nathan Seward,

Daniel Seymour,

Joash Seymour,

Capt. Josiah Seymour ?

Capt. Stephen Sey-
mour,

Z a d o c k Seymour,

"Shelton, negro."

Edmund Sherman,

Ens. John Slater,

Allen Smith,

Anthony Smith,

Daniel Smith,

Major David Smith,

Elijah Smith,

Isaac Smith,

James Smith,

Job Smith,

Joel Smith,

John Smith,

Levi Smith,

Lue Smith,

Samuel Smith,

Tabor Smith,

Patrick Snow,

Dr. Daniel Southmayd.
was living m Middle-
town.

William Southmayd,*

** Anod Spincer,"

Ansel Spencer,

Elihu Spencer,

Elisha Spencer,

Selden Spencer,

Elijah Steele,

Rev. Andrew Storrs,
chaplain loth militia
Reg., at Fishkill,
Oct., 1777.

Ens. John Stoddard,

Samuel Stow,

Elisha Street,

David Strickland,

Capt. Sam. Strickland,

Abel Sutliff,

John Sutliff,

Ichabod Talmage,

John Tattenden, Re-
ported dead in 1778,
but returned and re-
ceived his bounty
after that date.

David Taylor,

Theodor Taylor,

Amos Terrell,

Elihu TerreU,

Enoch Terrell,

Ichabod Terrell,

Isaac Terrell,

Israel Terrell,

Jared Terrell,

Joel Terrell,

Capt. Josiah Terrell,

Oliver Terrell,

Thomas Terrell,

Asa Thayer,

Samuel Thomas,

James Thompson,

John Thompson, Jr.,

Stephen Thompson,

Elnathan Thrasher,

Amos Tinker,

John Tinker,

Ira Tompkins.

Solomon Tompkins,

Solomon Trumbull,
prisoner at Fort
Washington, died
(1776?).

"John Trumbull's ne-
gro, "f

WilliamTrumbull(with
Waterbury soldiers)

Jesse Turner,

William Turner,

Ezekiel Tuttle,

Hezekiah Tuttle,

Jabez Tuttle,

Capt. Lucius Tuttle,

Timothy Tuttle,

Abraham Tyler,

Benjamin Upson,

Ezekiel Upson,

Jesse Upson,

Noah Upson, farmer,
5, II, fair.

Stephen Upson, killed
Sept., 1776.

Increase Wade,

Thomas Warden,

Lieut. James Warner,

Justus Warner,

Capt. Joseph Warner,

Martin Warner,

Stephen Warner,

Edward Warren, was
at the surrender of
Comwallis.

Solomon Way,

Samuel Webb,

Elijah Weed?

Jesse Weed,

David Wells,

Benjamin Welton ?

Benoni Welton,

* There is an error in the ** Family Records" regarding the date of his death. He died July 31, 1778.
+ Was it '* Grig," who was " mustered unfit for service, May, 1776.*'

WATEBBURT IN THE BE VOLUTION,

467

Revolutionary Soldiers — contin ued.

Daniel Welton,

David Welton,

Elijah Welton,

James Welton,

Job Welton, '* died in
camp."

Capt. John Welton,

Josiah Welton,

Samuel Welton,d. May
10, 1777, of camp dis-
temper.

Shubael Welton.

Stephen Welton,

Stephen Welton, Jr.,

Thomas Welton. 3d,

Josiah Wetmore,

John Whitney, Water-
town, farmer, 5, 5,
dark.
Philemon Wilcox,
Bartholomew Williams,
Daniel Williams.
Obed Williams,
Reuben Williams,
Samuel Williams,
Aner Wooding,
Abel Woodruff,
Edward Woodruff,
Capt. John Woodruff,
at Fishkill, i yyS—had
smallpox.
Jonah Woodruff,

Lambert Woodruff,
Samuel Woodruff,
Abel Woodward,
John Woodward,
George Wooldridge,

Watertown (des.)
Benjamin Wooster,
David Wooster,
Hinman Wooster,
Moses Wooster, ) ^
Walter Wooster, i B*

/ CO

Thomas Worden,
Abraham Yelles,

or
Ambrous Yellis.*

The following is all that remains of Timothy Judd's record of

-deaths of Revolutionary soldiers :

** died in the Camp 6. 1776. Died in New

hn Parker, Job Wei Yo

obbards, and John Sea Solomon Trumble &

77 Died in Newtown

from Captivity dur

77 Died in Y
T. Samuel."

When the chapter on the French and Indian war was prepared,
the autograph record of deaths in Westbury made by Timothy
Judd, had not been seen by the writer. It contains the following
names of persons who died "in camp/' or "in the army:"

July 22, 1758. Died in
the camp at Lake
George, Mr. David
Hungerford.

Aug. 28, 1758. Died in
the camp at Lake
George, Samuel
Richards.

Sept. 4, 1758. Died
in the camp at Lake
George, Daniel Stow.

Sept. 5, 1759. Died, Gid-
eon Robards, in the
army at Crown Point.

Sept. 12, 1759. Died,
Caleb Thomson, in
the army at Crown
Point.

Nov. 14, 1759. Died
in the camp at Crown
Point, Bartho. Will-
iams.

Dec. 22, 1759. Died,
William Thomson,
at Number 4.

In the summer 1760.
Died in the camp,
James Andrus.

Nov. I, 1760. Died
this side Green Bush
in his return from
the camp, Joseph
Blake.

Aug. 5, 1761. Died at
Crown Point, Serj:
John Strickland with
the Small Pox.

Died in the Camp at
Crown Point, No-
vember, A. D. 1 761,
John Painter, Jun.

It is with regret that we leave this list of soldiers, and make no
mention of the individual men who had part in the special scenes
that marked the closing events of the war. Men are included in

*'*Paid Ko Ab* Yelles his first and second bounty, ^\-z\ paid \.o Ambrous Yellis his third and fourth
bounty, i^ia." Town treasurer's account book.

468 HISTORY OF WATEBBURT.

this list, who crossed the Hudson river in June, 1781, from West
Point and marched to Peekskill and there encamped "on fields of
corn and grain and meadow," to await the arrival of the same
French army that passed through Waterbury and tarried to wash
and bake at Break Neck; men who marched from three o'clock one
morning to sunrise the next morning with but two hours' rest, and
then were bidden to advance rapidly to assist the troops who had
engaged the enemy at Kingsbridge; who set off on the 21st of
August, not knowing whither, with boats mounted on carriages and
soldiers' packs carried on wagons following in the army's train;
who marched through Princeton — the one hundred front windows
of whose college building gave light to no student within its walls
— through Trenton, through Philadelphia, ''raising a dust like a
smothering snow storm," the soldiers marching in slow and solemn
step regulated by drum and fife in a line extending nearly two
miles, the general oflficers duly mounted on "noble steeds elegantly,
caparisoned" — the French army following the next day, "in com-
plete uniform of white broad -cloth, faced with green; " men who met
on the Delaware river the express, with the news that a French fleet
of thirty-six ships of the line and three thousand land forces had
arrived at the mouth of Chesapeake bay.

Men included in that list sailed (in some one of the eighty ves-
sels that were made ready at the head of Elk river) down that
river, and into Chesapeake bay, and heard at Annapolis (that town
with a State-house, but no church) the news from Connecticut, of New
London's grief and Fort Griswold's slaughter. With bows plough-
ing through the billows they sailed in gales that blew up the mouth
of the great Potomac, and entered James river, getting as they went
a view of the grand French fleet, riding at anchor in Chesapeake
bay; said to be the most noble and majestic spectacle ever seen by
the American army; they reached the harbor and landed at the
most ancient English settlement in America (finding but two
houses on a river bank, where once Jamestown had been); they
encamped within one mile of the redoubts of the British army, and
began the siege of Yorktown.

It was an uneven struggle. Seven thousand Britons shut up in
a small village with its water-way of fifteen miles completely blocked
by French ships, and a force of nearly twice their own number lay-
ing siege to it, commanded by General Washington, Major General
Lincoln, General Knox, Baron Steuben, General the Count Roch-
ambeau, and the Marquis de la Fayette.

Early morning of one day saw redoubts of the enemy abandoned;
early morning of another day saw American redoubts that had been

WATEEBURT IN THE REVOLUTION, 469

thrown up by night; and every day, while cannonading went on
from the town, our men labored in the trenches and spent the night
in creeping nearer the enemy's redoubts. They saw the York nver
strewn with horses, for which Comwallis had no forage; they met
the poor negroes, stricken with smallpox, sent out by Cornwallis;
they beheld, when the batteries were ready to open on the town,
General Washington put the match to the opening gun that led the
way for the five days' cannonading, during which " the whole penin-
sula trembled with the incessant thunderings" of the hundred
pieces of heavy ordnance; they were near enough to see the awful
havoc made on Englishmen who manned the lines, by bursting
shells; they had part in the bayonet assaults made on English
redoubts, where Colonel Hamilton of Connecticut led the troops,
and a Wallingford man (John Mansfield), led the "forlorn hope"
that assaulted the redoubt at the left of the line, while Frenchmen
attacked that at the right (for numbered with the forces were Ward
Peck, and Abel Bachelor, and Edward Warren) ; they watched the
enemy's guns, as one by one they were silenced; they saw the white
flag as it came out from the beleaguered town; they formed a part
of the right line of Washington's army (not very neat, not all in
uniform), as it stretched itself along a mile of roadway, Washington
at its head; they looked across the roadway at that other line of
soldiers, Frenchmen, in complete uniform, with Count Rochambeau
at its head; they listened to the music of the band (stirred by the
soft timbrel) while awaiting the advance of the captive army of
Cornwallis, without Cornwallis at its head; they beheld General
O'Hara in his place, "followed by the conquered troops, as with
slow and solemn step, with shouldered arms, colors cased, and
drums beating a British march," they passed between the combined
armies of the American forces and the French troops to the spa-
cious field, where each man laid down his arms; they looked on,
while, divested of every warlike accoutrement, the veteran and
latewhile victorious army of seven thousand, two hundred and
forty-seven men was led captive, and under guard, back to York-
town.

With this memorable siege and surrender, the stirring activities
of the war may be said to have closed, but not the actual and
moving woes and distresses that assailed soldier and inhabitant
everywhere throughout the thirteen states while awaiting the
evolution of the perplexing complications that arose at home, and
in Europe, before peace could be declared on a satisfactory basis.
It was necessary to keep up the army through two weary winters
more, and to add recruits, as the men, from inevitable causes, fell

470 HI8T0ET OF WATERBUBY.

away from the ranks — this condition we have seen exemplified in
the desperate endeavors made to fill WaterLury's quota in the later
requisitions made by Connecticut.

It is with regret that we leave this list of soldiers without a
record of acts of individual heroism, which we know must have
taken place among men — many of whom, in the words of Washing-
ton: Were of the veterans who patiently endured hunger, naked-
ness and cold; who suffered and bled without a murmur, and who
with perfect good order retired to their homes without a settlement
of their accounts, or a farthing of money in their pockets.

Of the six hundred and eighty-nine men who were of Waterbury
and in the war, but two, so far as known to the writer, left upon
record their individual achievements. The two men were Judah
Frisbie and Josiah Atkins.

The diary of Judah Frisbie may be found in Orcutt's " History of
Wolcott." It gives, in detail, the march of Captain Phineas Porter's
Waterbury company to New York in 1775. The company met on
the 31st of May, "and had a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Leavenworth.'^
It marched for New York June ist, at noon, and went that day
thirteen miles " to the stores in Derby." Derby (we learn by this
statement) had in 1775 military stores garnered at a point five miles
** above Derby town," or, the " Derby stores "must have dated back
to the French and Indian war, from which point, the second day's
march was to Stratford. After a stay of three weeks at Fairfield,
the march was resumed. Porter's company joined its regiment
(General Wooster's) below Greenwich, and Col. Waterbury's regi-
ment also being there, the two set out for New York. Below Rye,
the regiments met General Washington, " who passed in a genteel
manner and there followed him a band of music." Washington,
at this time, must have been on his way to take command of the
army at Boston, for this meeting was June 27th, and he arrived at
the camp in Massachusetts, July 2, 1775. The Waterbury company
"got into barns in the Bowery, it being very stormy," June 28th.
The next day the regiment encamped "a little back of New York,"
where it remained three weeks. It was then ordered to Harlem.
August 8th, as many men as were able went to Long Island " in
pursuit of the regulars that were robbing the inhabitants of their
cattle, sheep, etc. They were at Plumb Island, Shelter Island and
at East Hampton, for three weeks." September 8th, the regiment
received orders for a march to Canada. Six vessels carried the
troops up the river. While embarking, a young man named Isaac
Peck, a sergeant of Captain Porter's company, was drowned. The
regiment landed at Albany October ist, and went into barracks,

WATEBBUItT IN THE BEVOLUTION. 471

but through fear of small pox, removed to Greenbush; October
loth, marched through Albany, crossed the Mohawk river to the
Half Moon, thence through Saratoga to Fort Edward and Lake
George, which lake was crossed to Ticonderoga. Late in October
the regiment went up Lake Champlain to Crown Point, marched
six miles on the east side of the lake and lodged in the woods one
night, the next night on an island forty miles above, the next night
in the woods thirty-five miles further north, traveling northwards
still; near St. Johns (the objective point of the expedition), a gun
from that fort wounded one man. Miry woods next bewildered
the regiment, which had "heavy pieces" to get through, but at
night, by the help of " the French," the river " Sorell " was crossed,
and an encampment arrived at. The next night, the regiment
began a battery within about sixty rods of the fort, working at it
two days and three nights, during which time a " considerable
number of bombs, cannon balls and grape shot" were fired at the
builders, but not a man was killed and only a few men were slightly
wounded. After one day's firing from two batteries, during which
two men of the regfiment were killed and one wounded, the fort
capitulated, and three days later the regulars marched out with
their arms, the artillerymen going out first with a field piece, and
the train following them. " They paraded and laid down their arms,
our people taking possession of them." The sixth day of Novem-
ber the regiment marched for Montreal. Judah Frisbie remained
at the "Half- Way House, to take care of a sick man," until his
company returned on the i8th of November, when the journey to
the southward began. They rowed on the lake and slept in the
woods four days and nights, when the ice forced them " to leave the
lake and take their baggage on their backs," in which plight they
arrived at Ticonderoga. After marching every day for fourteen
days, the longest march in any one day being twenty-two miles,
Norfolk, Conn., was reached on the 9th of December, 1775. Captain
Porter's company is, by the above diary, made to givQ an account of
every day of its more than six months* absence from Waterbury,
except for the twelve days in which the company marched to
Montreal and returned to the " Half- Way House " where Frisbie
again joined the regiment.

The diary of Josiah Atkins should be left to make its own
impression, without word of comment. Any town, any people,
any nation might hold with emotions of profound consideration
and lofty regard the man who wrote it. An army composed of
men like this one might conquer the world and leave no foe in its
pathway.

472

mSTOBT OF WATERBUBT.

The period covered by the diary extends from the 5th day of
April to Oct. 15th, 1781, just four days before the surrender by Lord
Cornwallis. Josiah Atkins received from Col. Gimat, at the Camp
before Yorktown, on Oct. 9th, permission to pass to the Highlands
in the State of New York. His last words were written six days
later. The following are extracts from the diary now in the keep-
ing of the " New Haven Colony Historical Society."

A Journal of Josiah Atkins, Waterbur>% Farmingbury Society in Ye State of
Connecticut, N. England. Written by himself , A. D., 1781.

January, 1781, I enlisted in the Continental service, engaging for three years.
On the 5th day of April following, marched to join the army at the Highlands . . .
arrived at the camp the 8th of sd. month where I was joined with Col. Sherman*s reg-
iment, in Capt. Benton's* company. Our business at present is learning the military
art. Provisions — good beef, and bread. April 20th. Tainted meat, which continued
to the 28th. In the meantime our allowance is shortened, at first to half, then to a
quarter, and sometimes we draw nothing through the whole day. May 5th, Con-
tinental Fast. // was observed, and I heard a sermon preached by Mr. Baldwin,
our chaplain, from 2 Chron. 20th, latter clause of the 15th and 17th verses. It
appeared the most excellent sermon I ever heard on that subject. Plenty of pro-
vision comes again from Waterbury, but does not continue long; for five days, little
bread and no meat.

May the 15th I set out, which was very unexpected, to join the Infantry down
at the southward.

He was one " of a guard to take on cloathing, money and arms
to the infantry." He was ten days on the march to Philadelphia,
where he tarried several days and witnessed three men executed on
Philadelphia common for robbery, and the pardon of three more.

They appeared to be somewhat penitent before their execution, but said noth-
ing to the spectators. They all plead guilty, and some signed their own death
warrant. O, my God! teach me that I am a dying man, exposed continually to the
devouring dart of the King of terrors! and, if it be consistent with thy holy will,
keep me from every evil, particularly from sudden death; but above all things
grant that I may continually have such trust and confidence in Thee, as not to be
surprised by death, let it be sudden or not, sooner or later; but, whenever it shall
come, may I be landed safely in the mansions of eternal rest and peace. May 27th
we left Philadelphia and sailed for the head of Elk.

He notes every point of interest on the journey, describing
towns, forts and battlefields.

Rye is now in the bloom in this country. The small pox prevails much in this
town [Newcastle, where he landed to proceed by land]. Two small children were
inoculated at one and the same time, died at the same time and were buried
together at the time we landed, about ten rods from the place we lay. But thanks
be to God, I have not taken it yet, and I pray Him to keep me from it till a conven-
ient opportunity to have it to advantage. However, may I have an htmible
confidence in Him at all times, and in all things.

* Selah Benton of Stratford.

WATERS URT IN THE REVOLUTION, 473

Passing on from New Castle to Christan, the head of Elk,
Charlestown in Maryland, the Susquehannah river (which " it took
all night to cross with the men and wagons "); he notes the strange
trees and plants, describing and contrasting them with the trees
and plants of Connecticut. Reaching Baltimore on Sunday, June
3d, after describing the town, he wrote:

This is the first time I have had the satisfaction of seeing people regard the
Sabbath since I began my march. How affecting the consideration that I am
obliged to pass by, while others are worshipping in the courts of my God. This
brings fresh to my mind my friends at home, who are now worshipping God in his
appointed way. And behold I am here! How lamentable my circumstances.
Once I lived in peace at home, rejoicing in the divine favour and smiles, but now I
am in the field of war, surrounded with circumstances of affliction and heartfelt
disappointment. Once I enjoyed the pleasant company of many friends, but now I
am among strangers in a strange land.* Once I could go with my friends to the
house of the Lord, but now I spend every Sabbath hastening to the field of blood
and slaughter. Once I could take delight in reading and hearing the word of the
Lord preached, but now I can hear little or nothing besides the profaning of God's
holy name and Sabbath. When shall I again be suffered to stand in the court of
my Lord and my God ? How vastly different is this part of the world from the
ideas I used to have of it. Instead of a plain, cleared country (as I used to think
it), I find it covered with vast, lonely woods. Sometimes 'tis ten, fifteen or twenty
miles between houses, and they say we have a place to pass that is thirty. This day
(June 6th) we pass General Washington's plantation, which is of large extent.
Some men in these parts, they tell me, own 30,000 acres of land for their patrimony,
and many have two or three hundred negroes to work on it as slaves. Alas ! That
persons who pretend to stand for the rights of mankind ^ for the liberties of society,*
can delight in oppression and that even of the worst kind. Many of the slaves are
without clothing, almost without provisions, having very little for the support of
nature. What, pray, is this but the strikingly inconsistent character pointed out
by the apostle: While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the ser-
vants of corruption. But when I speak of oppression it readily brings to my mind
my own troubles and afflictions. Am not I oppressed, as being obliged to leave my
own state of peace and happiness, friends and relations, wife and child, shop and
tools and customers, against my mind and expectations, and come these hundreds
of miles in the capacity of a soldier carrying the cruel and unwelcome instruments of
war. Alas ! My heart is full ! But I forbid my pen. Oh ! That I were as great
as my grief, or less than my name ! Oh ! might I forget what I have been, or not
remember what I must now become ! We pass his Excellency's house, and 'tis said
we march ten miles on his land. We also went into a beautiful church and saw
his pew. We came to Colchester and passed the ferry where the river will let up a
large ship. The country here (and in Pennsylvania) abounded with cotton, growing
on a small bush, planted every year in May, and ploughed and hoed like com. The
7th we pressed a negro wagoner, belonging to a widow who had 900 slaves. And,
what is remarkable, she, according to this negro, keeps them all victualed and
clothed. This I think worthy to be noted. The 8th we continued our march in a
great wdlderness and dined on the ground. We expect soon to join the Marquis,

* A note in the journal adds: The inhabitants chiefly unfriendly.

474

HISTORY OF WATBBBUBT.

who is pursuing the enemy. The 9th we lodged on the ground the Marquis
marched from yesterday, and which Gen. Wayne left to-day noon. We are all in
pursuit after the British enemy.

The loth we came up with the baggage belonging to the Marquis. This is a
long and tedious road, thro' a wilderness where no water is to allay our parching
thirst. But there is a greater drought with respect to hearing the word of the Lord.
Is not this the Holy Sabbath? But where am I, and what am I about? O Lord,
forgive my sins, for though I am here, yet my heart is at home with thy worshipping
people. We still direct our course through this lonesome desert. We marched not
far from fifty miles without finding above one or two houses and as little water,
finding none unless in swamps or mud holes. At night we passed Gen. Wayne and
joined the infantry at 8 o'clock on the morning of the nth, after a long and tedious
march of more than six hundred miles, which cost us near a month's time, together
with much fatigue and great hardships. Gen. Wayne joined soon after, and the
militia are coming on. We march at 2 o'clock and expect to come up with the
enemy in a day or two. Our infantry this day (except those who came with me)
had dealt out to them, one Holland shirt, one lining one, one frock and two pair of
overalls. At revelle-beating we marched off the ground and passed along a solitary
desert where we were in great strait for drink (houses being as seldom as colleges
in Connecticut, and wells as scarce as virtuous pools).* This day we had one
month's pay in hard money. ... At the rising of the sun on the 14th we marched
twelve or fifteen miles before we halted, and, though the last night was so severely
cold that we could not lie warm with all the clothes we had, yet, after the sun rose
the heat increased to that degree, together with the dust and want of water, as to
render the air almost suffocating . . . for we found not a drop of water all the
way. We came near famishing all. Some fainted, while others dropped with
weary legs by the way, and this was only a forenoon's march. What may we not

expect in the afternoon and what must be our fate through the summer

The 15th we lay, 'tis said within four miles of the enemy, who retreated all the
night and got some start of us. The next day we began our route at break of day
and continued it till the middle of the afternoon, and then encamped in the woods
about fifty miles from Richmond.

This morning we had our General's [Wayne] applause for our fortitude to bear
hardships with patience — meat being out and our bread but poor. It is made
chiefly of coarse Indian meal, which we wet and bake on barks, on stones. How-
ever, we not being used to such bread, nor such a country, the day being intensely
hot, and the night as cold (we having no tents to cover us), our march long, water
unwholesome and rum not very plenty, and the great and unexpected distance
from home — all these together make my trials almost insupportable. Among the
many insects that trouble us, wood-ticks are not the least, for they are exceeding
many and exceeding troublesome. There is also a most venomous spider, and a
small creature that afflicts us far worse than wood-ticks. Yea, though they are the
smallest living things I ever saw (I think they would hardly be discerned were it
not for their colour, which is scarlet red), they go through one's clothes, creep into
the pores of the Skin, where they cause it to swell to the degree of a bee sting and
are exceeding itching and smarting, and sometimes dangerous. They have a shell
like a tortoise. The inhabitants call them Gigars, and they comparatively are as
thick as the dust of the earth.

The enemy are now in Richmond. The 17th, marched fifteen or twenty miles.
O Lord God our fatigue and troubles are so great that one can scarcely attend

♦See Agur Mallory.

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 475

even so much as to think on thy Holy Day! Yea, we can scarcely attend to our
necessary food. But may we sooner forget what to eat than the Sabbath of the

Lord There was a duel fought this day between a militia officer and

Lieut. Wheaton of the Connecticut line, in which encounter the latter was killed,
or at least mortally wounded. He was our brigade quarter-master, or wagon-
master general. The i8th we lay still; sent out scouts, and took some pris-
oners belonging to Tarlton's light-horse. When we went after Tarlton's light-
horse, we went without our pieces being loaded and with our flints taken out, that
no one might fire a gun. General Wayne, whom they call "Mad Anthony" and
'* Sword-in-hand," intended to have put them all to the bayonet. About dusk, the
Marquis stole a march on the enemy, but without success. [The next night was
spent in marching, by which the enemy's camp was reached at sunrise, but the
troops were fled, ** perhaps well for them." Days of marching (the march beginning
at I o'clock in the morning), and retreating; to and past Richmond — where were
large stores of various kinds, much private property, and many thousand hogsheads
of tobacco— followed; *• the troops seldom catching more than two hours sleep
in twenty-four," not taking time for food, and exposed daily to small pox. He
writes: on June 23:] I must shut my book for the present. The drum beats for
parading. The news, the enemy are upon us! On this, we formed a solid column
in order to receive their horse, which were approaching with their infantry, whom
they preceded. They came in sight, but durst not give us battle. They retreated
precipitately, by which we soon understood they w^ere a rear guard, sent back to
cause us to make a halt, that our foes might slip away with their main body and
baggage. Here I must take notice of some villany. Within these days past I have
marched by 18 or 20 negroes that lay dead by the wayside, putrifying with the
small pox. How such a thing came about, appears to be thus: The negroes here
being much disaffected (arising from their harsh treatment), flocked in great num-
bers to Comwallis. This artful general takes a number of them (several hundreds)
inoculates them, and just as they are growing sick, he sends them out into the
country where our people had to pass and repass. These poor creatures, having
no care taken of them, many crawled into the bushes about and died. This is a
piece of Cornwallisean cruelty. He is not backward to own that he has inoculated
4 or 500 in order to spread the small pox through the country, and sent them out for
that purpose, which is another piece of his conduct that wants a name. But there
is a King far above the British King, and a Lord superior to their lords. . . .
[Executions for desertion, marching, alarms and an account of the harvests follow,
and then an enumeration of the opposing forces. The British army, according to
accounts, was about 5,000. The American army he estimates, by supposition, to
be 2,500 regulars, 300 volunteer light horse, 300 rifles on horseback, 300 foot,
besides 3 or 4,000 militia. The 20th, a skirmish ensued; the killed on the enemy's
side amounted it was said, to 200. They were obliged to retreat to the main body.
. . . . On the 6th of July they came unexpectedly upon a large body of the
enemy all paraded in a line of battle. The inhabitants had declared that there
was no enemy within six miles.] He writes: Our officers and soldiers, like brave
heroes, began the attack * with, at first, but a handful of men. The contest began
at five and lasted until dark. The riflemen, some of them, 'tis said, stayed and
scirmished with the enemy in the woods all night, so that they have not found time
nor opportunity to pick up their dead. Our party consisted only of the brigade of
infantry and one brigade of Pennsylvanians (and these not more than half of them

*The battle of Green Spring.

476 BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

engaged) and a few riflemen. The enemy were more than six times our number.
Our loss of men cannot yet be ascertained. The enemy gained the ground, but
have no cause to glory — their dead from all appearances being many. We retired
five miles that night to rest and get some refreshments of which we stood in much
need. [The action began at the moment the infantry had halted to take food
after a long march] having had neither victuals, rum, nor water, and all we then
had was one gill of vinegar to 4 men. How great was thy mercy, O Lord, in our
deliverance! The like was hardly ever heard of ! Six hundred men have attacked
and stood the fire, sword, and bayonet of the force of an army of 5,000, yea, of the
whole army under Lord Cornwallis. Where we were often broke, often formed;
several times almost surrounded; and yet all (as I may say in comparison of what
might have been expected) came oflE again in heart! Wonderful Providence! Our
general, the Marquis had two horses shot under him, yet he is not daunted. He is
collecting his army and designs to have another action immediately if the enemy
will. O Lord, impress my heart with a grateful sence of thy goodness in preserving
me, my life and health. While so many of my acquaintances, have since the last
Sabbath, been numbered with the vast congregation of the dead. O Lord, my
God, I acknowledge, that though thousands should fall at my side, and ten
thousand at my right hand, yet thou canst protect me .... in the night of
the arrows of death. Thou Lord directest every ball, that none can wound unless
by thy permission.

I cannot forget this memorable action ! So few as a 1000 men should attack the
whole British force and lose no more, even when we were several times cut off and
scattered to and fro. The fatigues of the day I cant describe, and being weary
before we began ! Our general gave us great applause. He assured us that he
himself was eye-witness to our two regiments attacking the whole army with spirit.
Immediately after this action, Cornwallis crossed the river and embarked on board
his shipping with the greatest precipitation, leaving a large number of beeves half-
dressed.

[The journal next relates — after marches and a day's rest — a description of a
complete gig-mill, ** having two wheels and two pair of stones," accompanied by a
** Draft of the above described gig-mill wheel." This is followed by an account of
the bite of a venomous spider on the shoulder of a man, for whom the doctor could
do nothing, "the victim continually rolling over and screaming out horribly."
Atkins relieved him by '* opening a vein " and "feeding him freely with salt and
water, so that he felt some immediate ease and in 2 or three hours was comfortable."
A few days later he wrote :]

I am at present among the invalids and unfit for duty, but Providence has so
ordered it as to make me instrumental of some good to my country, at least to my
fellow soldiers; which is, by letting blood and drawing teeth. This last I practice
very much, there being not another tooth-drawer in the whole army, and the other
considerably — because few doctors have tools to let blood. . . .

July 15th. Marched 15 miles to James river, the other side of which the enemy
are landing down below us. Our men begin to sicken already: what then, alas !
shall we see when dogdays come on? Next month is the season for the fever and
ague. The 17th we lay still and cleaned our arms and clothes. The i8th three men
were drowned in James river, swimming. . . . 21st. At ten o'clock we received
intelligence of four gun boats coming up the river — supposed to be in order to catch
our general — the Marquis, who quartered near the river. On this, about 500 of us
pressed forward with two field pieces to scare them back again. We marched 8
miles and came upon them. Our engineer directed his shot so well as to strike

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION,

477

through the hull and cut away the foremast of one of the boats. The second shot
took the rudder, and what our other 28 shot must have done, it appears must have
been considerable. They immediately towed down the river. We foUow^ed them 4
miles but could get no more shot at them. We retired and came to camp that even-
ing, having traveled 24 miles.

[The 22d was Sunday. The recurrence of that day throughout the journal bears
witness to Josiah Atkins's firm faith and devout spirit, and evinces a remarkable and
genuinely cordial love for the day and its observances.] This day, at court martial,
2 corporals were tried and broke; 5 men sentenced to receive 100 lashes apiece, and
one *]ofor being absent at roll- call. Three received their punishment. The others
are suspended till to-morrow— /^r^ not being time : There have been six others
punished within 5 days past. [Is it surprising that it was difl&cult to persuade men
to enlist ?]

23d. Last night was so excessively cold, that I think I scarcely ever suffered so
much with it in one night in my life. This day, I went to the hospital to recover my
health.

25th. A man was executed this day in our regiment for breaking up a house,
and robbing it.

26th. Thunder and rain for these many days. Some are very sick in the hos-
pital. The number increases both here and in camp. . . .

29th. This is the first day of the week: But alas ! where is the Sabbath ? Is
there any in Virginia? Is there any in the 13 States of America? True, in New
England they pretend to keep it. But do even they keep it as they ought ? Do they
call it a delight ? The holy of the Lord, honorable ? Truly, is it not to hQ feared,
that for the most part this is only a bare pretence ? The fear of pimishment is the
real motive. . . .

31st, One of our regiments has crossed the river. I am yet in the flying hos-
pital, which is very disagreeable. We marched at 4 o'clock A. M. and encamped 2
miles out of Richmond.

Aug. 3d. We marched through Richmond (where the small pox is very plenty)
and encamped 6 miles above. Here we buried one of our number, who died this
day on the road, in the hospital waggon. We buried him in a wood. He was aged
23 years. His name, Rufus Robins, and unmarried; his parents live in Lyme in
Connecticut. He died of camp distemper. . . .
The 5th. This morning sun has blest the earth.

It hath unsealed my eyes :
This is the day of joy and mirth
That saw our Saviour rise.

[After a second stanza, the day's march of 8 miles began. At evening, he added
three more stanzas.] Gen. Wayne is on his march to join the marquis; the enemy,
'tis said, are blocked up in the Bay and cant get out, though they have made sev-
eral attempts.

The 6th. It is reported that the enemy is landing down against York.

The 7th. We lay still in a garden, where I saw some rarities — viz.: bean trees,
fig trees and the like.

The 8th. Our troops marched down towards York; the sick towards Hanover
and I among the sick.

The loth. We have a convenient house for a hospital .... We have a supply
of some fruit, as green corn, apples, pears, peaches and watermelons, by the
negroes; but, at a dear rate. Apples, pears, and peaches cost one dollar apiece
(Continental currency), and watermelons 30 dollars

478 HISTORY OF WATERS UBT.

The 1 8th. General Wayne lyeth at Newcastle, our troops at and the

enemy at York

23d. This day I have been sent for two ways. A man sent and desired to hire
me, in order to instruct him how to make files, gimblets, knives and forks, etc. and
the doctor sent for me to come and live with him, in order to assist him in his
hurry of business, dealing out medicines, dressing wounds, etc. [Daily arrivals
from the army were taking place at the hospital *' three waggon loads" having
arrived from the brigade the day before,] I am at a loss which will be the most
profitable invitation to me. It must be the former, I being best acquainted with
that work, but the doctor is so importunate, that I promised him to come to- mor-
row, if I should be no worse.

24th. I came to the doctor's assistance and as far as I knew, gave him satisfac-
tion. I have such thirst for medical knowledge, that were I capable of the business
in which I am now engaged, I should be content without prospect of wages.

27th. The number of our sick increases.

28th. We have some of whose life we despair.

29th. We are out of hospital stores suitable for the sick, in particular, medicines.

30th. We expect, and are continually waiting for the medicines to come.

31st. [He was called up to see Henry Evans, thought to be dying. The next
day, Pendleton of Penn. died. *• They buried him in a coffin, which was purchased
with one of his shirts." His descriptions of thunder storms, in one of which he and
others received a shock, are vivid. Occasionally, a man died *• out of the hospital "
whose name is not given and the "sick" were constantly increasing, which ren-
dered his business truly fatiguing. We cannot omit the following:] In the morn-
ing I rise at daylight and go about a quarter of a mile to wash; then comb my hair;
and then I recommend myself to God. After this I have nothing to do but to sit
down to dealing out and putting up medicines for all the sick; where I continue till
8 o'clock, which is breakfast time: Which done, I visit the hospitals with the doc-
tor, which takes us till 10 o'clock. From that time till dinner, I spend among the
medicines: Dinner over, I have to carry the medicines to all the men in each hos-
pital— one, is half a mile distant, with 8 rooms in it. From this I come directly
back and visit 7 or 8 houses more, some 5, some 7 rooms, where I deal to every man
his particular portion. Some will have 8, some 6, and generally they have 4 in a day
— which, multiplied by 300 (there being so many, or more sick) will amount to a great
many [portions]. Besides, I have to give particular directions to every one (and
sometimes 2 or 3 times over, by reason of their stupidity) how and when to take
them, lest they should do wrong, and the medicine lose its effect. All this,
together with the feelings nature has given me for the sick and wounded,, give me
very great care, trouble, fatigue and anxiety of mind; with which, I return home,
the day being spent, take a little supper, enter my chamber, close the door, and
after recommending myself and them to God, and my friends and all to his care
<my thoughts being in a great measure composed), I take my rest.

*• Then with my tho'ts composed to peace

I give mine eyes to sleep;
Thy hand in safety keeps my days,
And will my slumbers keep."

— D. W\

Sept. 4th. Last Sabbath the news came that the French had landed a number
of troops, and this day we hear our men are gone to join them. I hope we shall
not lose all this fatigueing summer yet. But gracious God, spare the blood ! No
more wounds, nor sudden deaths, if it consist with thy blessed will ! But I can

WATERBUBT IN TEE BEVOLUTION,

479

sing of mercies as well as judgement: Yea, the Lord is my song. Providence
has called me from home, .... into this distant land, where is no man I
ever knew or saw before (save one), yet he hath given me friends. I am eyed with
friendly notice, while other recruits as good (perhaps much better), are treated as
strangers. How comes this about ? From whom comes preferment ? And whence
the favors I now enjoy? .... Who would have thought that I should be
chosen to that business I am unacquainted with .... while others are
neglected, who by long practice and experience have proved themselves skillful

in it My business is fatigueing but far easier for me than the

disaffected camp, and the loathsome instruments of war. I have as good provisions
as I could wish, cooked ready to my desire. I have as beautiful chamber as any in
Virginia to myself, and can retire when I please from the notice of any one but
God. Add to this a good state of health and I am as happy as it is possible for
Virginia to make me. Yea, since my coming here, I have almost forgot my native
home. O Lord, fill my heart with a sense of thy goodness .... and when I
enter my room, whether joyful or pensive, may this strike a divine calm on my
soul — that I have no continuing city here .... and may this turn my
thoughts on seeking another and better, even an heavenly one, whose builder and
maker is God.

The 5th (September) we have much news stirring and if all be true, we shall
soon have a large army in this quarter. His Excellency, 'tis said, is on his way to
join us. [Here follow matters of special hospital interest, deaths, the illness of
the "doctor," whereby all the care of the patients fell upon Atkins ; which together
with the sudden changes from heat to cold, with wet, foggy weather, affected his
own health. Terrible storms with thunder and lightning arose,] filling the minds

of all with almost unsupportable horror the airy heavens

rending o*er our heads with tremendous, awful claps of thunder, that seemed to
echo from pole to pole ! and the earth under our feet appeared all glowing with
electrical flames.

The 13th. Last Saturday the 2d division of French troops joined our army with
5,000 men, and his Excellency, Gen. Washington, is to join in a few days, and the
report is that 10,000 militia are to be in readiness to take the field immediately.*

[The 17th Josiah Atkins was taken ill with a violent pain in his head. The 19th
he wrote:] My headache increases and medicine cannot remove it till God put to
his hand. It continued till the 27th, all which time I got little nourishment and no
sleep, but what I obtained by the help of anodyne pills

October the ist. I continue better, though full of pain.

The 2d. This day I made application for a pass to return to the northward.
But I find that I cannot obtain it without going 120 miles right from home, and
then 'tis uncertain whether I obtain one or not — which is enough to discourage one,
being sick and lame. But I leave the affair with God my disposer.

The 3d. To-day I concluded to journey to the regiment [for his pass].

The 4th. This day I obtained my recommend from the doctor, about 10 o'clock.

Hanover, 4th October, 1781.

Josiah Atkins, of Capt. Douglas's company in Col. Gimat's regiment laboring
under a confirmed rheumatism^ which will render him unfit for any further duty
in the field this campaign, is hereby recommended for leave to retire into the
country for the recovery of his health. John Simpson. Surgeon.

*On the X5th Josiah Atkins's son, Josiah, was born in Waterbury. He died at the age of x8 years.

48o BISTORT OF WATERS URT,

About 12 I set off, feeble and faint hearted ; but I hope God will go with me.
Travelled lo miles.

The 5th. Was overtaken by a waggoner from Southington (one Thorp), and his
waggon being chiefly empty, he was pleased to let me ride. We came as far as N.
Kent court house where we put up. This is about 20 miles from N. Castle.

The 6th. This is the Lord's day. It is something stormy, but we expect to
reach Williamsburg, which is 15 or 16 miles. I concluded to tarry here over the
Sabbath, (though we came about noon) in hopes that there was some meeting house
in this place. But I was disappointed: and standing about in the cold (there being
no fire for soldiers), I took the fever and ague to my great sorrow.

The 8 th. I set out on foot for the camp. I reached it about the middle of the
afternoon. Had a fit of the ague.

The 9th. Completed my business * by lo o'clock, and set off for Williamsburg,
where I arrived before night — 12 miles. Lodged in the flying Hospital.

The loth. I left Williamsburg and continued my march till the 12th at night,
when I reached the hospital very weak and low — having the ague and fever every
day.

The 13th. I thank thee, O Lord for the prospect, and wilt thou hasten the time
when I shall again stand in the assembly of thy people. Though thy Sabbaths are
forgotten almost everywhere, yet I have reason to hope that 'tis not entirely neg-
lected in my native State.

Oct. the 15th. I recruit but very slow; my ague and fever is very severe on me
at present.

The diary of Josiah Atkins contains on its opening page the fol-
lowing pathetic entreaty. It is without date, but was probably
written in July, or August, 1781.

My Dear Friends and Fellow Soldiers: — As we are engaged in a bloody
war, the fate of which is uncertain; as we are drawing near the enemy and can
expect nothing but fighting; as in any action some may fall; and as my life is as
uncertain as any others; so should it be my fate to drop and yours to survive, you
may chance to light on this book and its contents, with the other things I may hap-
pen to have about me, which 'tis probable will be a watch, a pair of silver shoe
buckleSy knee buckles, stock buckle, brooch, stone sleeve-buttons, and perhaps
some money. These, I will freely give you. Yea, I bid you welcome to them on
your [en] gaging to grant me this request. To use best your utmost endeavor to
send this book with its contents to my dear wife, whom [I] have left at home to
mourn my misfortune. Should this fall into the hands of our [enemies] I have no
expectation of its ever reaching [her]. But should any of you, my friends and fel-
low soldiers, take this, I expect, I request. Yea I [have] reason to exact it at your
hands. You may think this of small importance: However, You must suppose
that it will be satisfactory to her (on whose account it was written) to hear my fate,
You may think the matter is difficult; but I assure you 'tis not. If you convey it to

*■ Josiah Atkins being rendered unfit (by sickness) for service in the light infantry — Has permission to
pass from this to the Highlands in the State of New York to rejoin the regiment to which he belongs.

J. GIMAT, Li. Co/. Commandant,
Camp before York, 8th Oct., 1781.

The commissaries of the respective Posts are requested to furnbh the above Soldier with provision as
it shall become due. J. GIMAT, Lt. Col, Commandant,

Camp before York, 8th Oct., 1781.
This was the day the American forces began the firing on Yorktown.

WATEBBUBT m THE BEVOLUTION, 481

any of the infantry belonging to Waterbury in Connecticut (my wife and friends
living in that town), or to any who belong to Woodbury or Watertown or any of the
towns adjacent, it will hardly fail to readi my house, Josiah Atkins in .Waterbury,
or in the Society of Farmingbury. Give them some ot your bounty to induce them
to be faithful in discharging their trust in delivering this to my wife. This is a
thing I so anxiously desire, that if you do not use your utmost endeavor for this
purpose, I cannot forgive you, neither will God (unless by bitter repentance — but
the things you have taken will rise in Judgment against you). Thus I entreat you
by these powerful inducements, and I could use many more — but relying on your
goodness, generosity and benevolence, I shall add no more; assuring you, I ever
was while in life, the friend and well-wisher of all the soldiers.

JOSIAH ATKINS.

P. S. Shotdd this fall into the hands of any other person than a soldier, I do
request and expect the same kind treatment at their hands, and though I nor mine
should not be able to reward you, yet God will.

The journal also contains a number of letters, addressed to
his wife, in one of which he makes the following reference to his
journal: *'I cannot say a perfect one, as some things were left
out through mistake, and many more on purpose, because I thought
they would afflict you more than comfort — they being afflicting to
me." He also makes allusion to his "full disappointment of the
business that induced him to enlist in the army (which alone could
give him content in the service);" refers to his little daughter as
"my little innocent, my heart's delight," and again, as " Sally, my
babe, my darling ! who is the delight of my eyes." There is one
very remarkable letter, in which he pictures the physical and men-
tal effects of his trials upon himself, until he was obliged to banish
thoughts of his best friends from his mind, as though they had been
his most dangerous foes. The letter ends with the words, "I
thought I could not be contented to take my last little portion of
land (though but my length and breadth), and leave my lifeless
lump on this barren soil ! However, when I reflected that this bar-
ren soil of Virginia must be enriched with the rich manure of Con-
necticut; that my little lump was no dearer to me than another
man's to him; that our cause is just and must be supported, and
that God will raise the dead here as well as in Connecticut — these
thoughts put me to silence, and I became (I hope) in some measure
resigned to God's will."

I have not been able to learn in what manner or by whose hand
the diary of Josiah Atkins was returned to his wife. It seems
probable that he died at the hospital at Hanover, to which he had
returned on October 12th, after his journey of 120 miles to procure
his passport, in order to join his former regiment in the Highlands
of New York. In a letter addressed to his wife, and included in

31

482 HI8T0BT OF WATEBBUBT,

the diary, he counsels and urges her, in the event of his death, to
marry again; but to make provision, in that case, for his daughter
Sally.

Josiah Atkins married Sarah, the daughter of Deacon Josiah
Rogers, Jan. 31, 1779. His daughter Sally was bom Nov. 20, 1780,
and became the wife of Asahel Lewis. His son Josiah, born Oct.
15, 1781, died in 1799. The estate of Josiah Atkins was in the Pro-
bate court, at Waterbury, in February, 1782. Mrs. Atkins married
in 1790, Amos Culver. A granddaughter of Mrs. Sarah Culver
remembers how tenderly her grandmother (who died in 1845) cher-
ished the little book, which always held its own place among her
treasures. It is said of Mrs. Culver that the boys of the neighbor-
hood in which she lived would leave their games at any time to
hear her talk, and that she had great influence over them.

That this valuable and unique addition to the history and the
literature of the war should be presented to the public only after
the lapse of more than a century, is truly surprising.

Waterbury, as it was found at the close of the long, the desper-
ate, the demoralizing struggle for freedom — when the soldiers
returned from making war, to make for a time but indiflEerent citi-
zens— was, in many of its aspects, a new Waterbury. Into it came
a new impetus, wrought from contact with the outside world.
Men could not mingle for so long a time with the army from
France and participate in the scenes that marked the closing year
of the war, and not with their return, bring a new spirit into the
town.

The festival, held on the plain at West Point, in honor of the
birth of the Dauphin of France, in May of 1782, was not without its
far-reaching influence. The sight of a thousand men working for
ten days to erect a "curious edifice, six hundred feet long," and
supported by a grand colonade of one hundred and eighteen pillars,
made of the trunks of trees; the adorning of it with "American
and French military colors," with emblem, device, and motto ; the
parading of the whole allied army " on the contiguous hills on both
sides of the river, forming a circle of several miles in open view of
the public edifice"; the feasting and the demonstrations of glad-
ness that followed, were not in vain.

On April 19th, 1783, eight years from the 19th of April, 1775,
the commander-in-chief ordered the cessation of hostilities between
the United States of America and the king of Great Britain. In
May of 1783 the Society of the Cincinnati was formed. Its mem-
bers were all oflicers in the Continental army. Major David Smith,
Captain Nehemiah Rice (Royce), Dr. Ebenezer Beardsley, Major

WATERS URT IN THE REVOLUTION, 483

Ezekiel Scott and Isaac Bronson, (who was surgeon's mate) were
the Waterbury members of the Connecticut Society; Surgeon
Nathan Leavenworth, of the Massachusetts Society. The treaty of
peace was signed September 23d. On November 2d, Washington
issued his " farewell orders to the armies of the United States,"
concluding with the words : " And being now to conclude these his
last public orders, to take his ultimate leave in a short time of the
military character, and to bid adieu to the armies he has so long
had the honor to command, he can only again offer in their behalf
his recommendations to their grateful country, and his prayers to
the God of armies. May ample justice be done them here, and
may the choicest of Heaven's favors, both here and hereafter,
attend those who, under the divine auspices, have secured innum-
erable blessings for others ! With these wishes, and this benedic-
tion, the commander-in-chief is about to retire from service. The
curtain of separation will soon be drawn, and the military scene to
him will be closed forever." On the 25th of November the British
army evacuated New York, and the American troops, under Gen-
eral Knox, took possession of the city. This event was soon fol-
lowed by the public entry of General Washington and Governor
Clinton. The scene enacted in Francis' tavern soon followed,
when Washington not with words, but with tears and kisses, bade
farewell to each of the principal officers of his armies, and went
out in silence to the barge that lay in waiting at " White Hall," to
convey him on his way to Annapolis, whither he went to lay before
congress the commission under which, as Commander-in-chief of
the armies of the United States, he had led armies and colonies to
honorable independence and victorious peace.

Since writing the above, the following miscellaneous facts have
been gathered. To the list of those who " joined the enemy " have
been added the names of Samuel Doolittle, Thomas Fenn, Titus
Finch, Jesse Hikcox, Jared Hikcox and Robert Hotchkiss.

Daniel Finch absconded October i, 1776. He deserted the enemy
the 13th of August, 1779, returned home, and was ordered to reside
in Hartford.

Seth Warner deserted in December, 1776. He "made his escape
at the risque of his life from Newport," and threw himself upon the
mercy of his country. He was allowed to return to Waterbury and
be confined within the bounds thereof under the care of the select-
men, if the town was willing to receive him; if not willing, he was
to go to Windsor.

Richard Miles was induced to repair to New York, where he
joined the enemy. November 11, 1778, he escaped, returned to

484 HEBTOBT OF WATBBBUBT.

Waterbury and took the oath of fidelity. He was restored to his
rights on paying the cost of prosecution.

Joseph Mun of Waterbury, a ''poor African servant" of William
Nichols, petitioned May 2, 1780, for his liberty, he having served in
the war. He stated that he " was sold to Thomas Seymour, Esq., of
Hartford, then to Daniel Barber, and so from one to another until
he came into the hands of William Nichols, who, on condition of
his faithful service for three years, encouraged him with his free-
dom," which Nichols refused to grant at the end of three years'
service. Mun then oflEered to enlist, and Nichols consented. Mun
enlisted in Thaddeus Cook's regiment in 1776, and continued to
serve almost continually until 1780. Before Nichols absconded he
gave a bill of sale of Mun to Thomas Hikcox, Jr. Mun's petition
for liberty was not granted. April 5, 1781, he was discharged (at
the Highlands) from service by Col. Durkee, on account of a broken
arm and stiflE knees. Hikcox, through his lawyer, John Trumbull,
who had hitherto contested the petition for emancipation, now
withdrew his opposition (a broken - armed, stiff -kneed slave not
being profitable to a master). The petition was finally negatived
in 1785.

In March, 1781, Stephen Matthews petitioned for pay for fifty-
five tons of hay which he had bought at the request of the State
Commissary and which was stored in Wallingford. He transported
it to Waterbury, but no receiver had been appointed for it, and it
was exposed all winter. "Sheldon's whole regiment of horse fed
upon it for six days and left such receipts as he pleased."

Dr. Isaac Baldwin, physician, was employed by the State to
attend Ebenezer Hibbert — a soldier in Col. Swift's regiment — dur-
ing his sickness in Waterbury in October and November, 1778. He
paid him nineteen visits, for which he charged the same number of
pounds and shillings. His bill for medicines was appended.
William Rowley, who had nursed and boarded Hibbert, had received
his pay in 1780, but no bill for medical services had been paid. Dr.
Baldwin's petition was denied.

Col. Angel's regiment, of Rhode Island, passed through Water-
bury in September of 1777.*

Captain Curtis, of Waterbury, and his company "belonging to
Col. McClellan's regiment of new-raised troops," were ordered to
march immediately to New Haven, for the defence of that place, on
August 28, 1778.

* See also ** Break Neck *' in the Place-name Chapter, for account of the passage of the French army.

WATEBBUBT IN THE BEVOLUTION, 485

To the list of Waterbury's Revolutionary soldiers are added the

following :

Preelove Blake, Eldad Hotchkiss, Nathan Page,

Richard Blake, Medad Hotchkiss, Nathan Piatt,

Daniel Brown,* Reuben Matthews, Elisha Stevens,

Jonathan Carter, (died August 2, 1779), Benjamin Terrill,

Simeon Cole, Christopher Merriam, Jedediah Turner,

Mark Hopkins, Job Oviat or "Uffit," Capt. Samuel Upson,
(died at White Plains),

Among the errors which, of necessity, have been embodied in
the "Adjutant General's report of Connecticut Men in the Revolu-
tion ** (and which each town in the state should correct while such
corrections may be made), perhaps the most noticeable one in our
own town is that relating to Josiah Atkins. f There were two men
of that name, both from Waterbury and cousins, who were in service
at the same time in 1775.

By an error, the name of Joseph Atkins has been placed upon
the roll on page 354, in Captain Douglass' company — whereas, it
should be Josiah Atkins. If we needed other evidence than the
diary (of his service), we have only to turn to page 351 and find
there the names of Henry Evens — of whom Josiah Atkins has told
us: "On the night of August 31, 1781, I was called up to see Henry
Evens, thought to be dying ; " and of Ruf us Robbins, of whom,
August 3, he wrote: "We marched through Richmond and
encamped six miles above. Here we buried one of our number, who
died this day on ye road in ye hospital waggon. We buried him in
a wood. He was aged twenty-three years. His name, Rufus Rob-
bins, and unmarried. His parents live in Lyme, Connecticut."

It may also be mentioned that our Lake Potter (so named from
the fact that Lake's father, Daniel Potter, was, on the day of Lake's
birth, August 13, 1759, on Lake George, he being then in service in
the French and Indian war) is concealed under the name of Lake
Patten.

Waterbury, at the close of the war, found herself territorially
reduced by the towns of Watertown and Plymouth of a large sec-

* In command of the fort at Milford in 1779. Benjamin Hine was associated with him.
t Josiah Atkins, whose diary has been given, wrote the following letter, which, having been carefully
preserved, lies before me:

Camp at Stillwatbr, Nov. vb ioth, 1777.
Dkar Sister— I would inform you that I am well at present, but having orders to march immediately
cannot stay to write. I send you a copy of our affairs, which is good news to every soul that loves freedom.
I must say no more. Josiah Atkins.

P. S. I may have mist the day of ye month, but am not certain.
Abigail Atkins,

At Farmingbury.
Josiah Atkins taught school in Farmington from October, 1770, to April, 1772.

486

HISTORY OF WATBRBXTBY.

tion of her former domain, and of perhaps fully one-half of her
wealth and population. Nevertheless, the following summary of
the tax -list for the year 1782 reveals to us a total valuation of more
than ;;^2o,ooo, and an enumeration of a little over 400 taxpayers —
whereas, the estimate at the beginning of the war, when the town
was a unit, was about 750 taxpayers.
The following is :

A true List of the Polls and Estate of the Town of Waterbury ratable by Law
on the 20th Day of August, 1782, Errors Excepted.

No.

326 Polls from 21 to 70 years of age, at ;^ 18
76 Polls from 16 to 21 " " *• 9

459 Oxen, &c., . . . ** 4

929 Cows, &c. ... "3

424 Steers, Heifers, &c., of 2 years, " 2
386 " •' " I year, .

528 Horse kind of i, 2 and 3 years old, .
602 Swine, .....
310 Dwelling Houses,
2816 Acres of Plow Land,

Upland, Mowing and Pasture,
Boggfy Meadow, mowed,

** •* not mowed,

Meadow Land,
Bush Pasture,

Uninclosed Land, ist Rate,

2d
3d
Riding Chair with open top,
Silver and other Watches,
Steel and Brass Wheeled Clocks,
Wooden Wheeled Clock,
Ounces of Silver Plate,
Additions were made of about .

4613
212

II

556

4721

4074

4935
1982

I

13

9

I

21

i«

«<

i<

(I

<(

(f

It

((

<i

li

K

((

(<

f (

((

(<

<(

(<

((

<«

t(

4(

;f5.868

. 684

1836

2787

848

386

1894

602

242

1405
1845

53
I

208

472

407

246

49

3

1.9

27
I

600

A List of Persons Assessed for
List of August, 1782.

PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS.

Isaac Baldwin,
Preserved Porter,
Abel Bronson,

TRADER OR SHOPKEEPER.

Irijah Terril, .

TAVERN KEEPERS.

William Leavenworth,
Samuel Judd, .
Jacob Sperry,
Isaac Bronson, Jr., .
Thaddeus Bronson,
Thomas Porter, Jr., .

Faculty, with the several sums assessed on the

BLACK SMITHS.

£ "^^ Samuel Frost, Jr., . . * £ S

• 12 Ephraim Warner, . . .12
— Ard Wei ton. . . 12

Dan. Tuttle, . . . .10

• 30 Jared Byington, ... 8

Elijah Sperry, . . . .5
30

25 TANNERS AND SHOEMAKERS.

15 William Adams, ... 10

. 20 Charles Cook, . , .5

15 Isaac Hopkins, . . . 8

. 15 William Adams, Jr., . .5

WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION,

487

GOLD SMITH

Joseph Hopkins, .

OWNERS OF MILLS.

Col. Jonathan Baldwin,
Lemuel Hoadly,
Sebe Bronson,
George Nichols,
Jobamah Gunn,

CLOTHIERS.

£2% William Rowley, .
Elijah Osborn,

JOINER.

25 David Prichard,

6 WHEEL MAKER.

. 10 David Byington,

^2 MALSTBR.

. 18 Uri Scott. .

Dated Jan. 21st, 1783.

John Welton,
Daniel Byington,
Simeon Hopkins,
JuDE Hoadley,
£u Bronson,
Noah Baldwin,
Stephen Ives,
Amos Culver,

;^5
5

5

5
5

;^408

Listers

of
Waterbury,

CHAPTER XXXV.

FROM 1783 TO 1825 — "the critical PERIOD OF AMERICAN HISTORY"

THE QUIET LIFE OF WATERBURY IN THOSE STIRRING TIMES — ITS
LOSSES OF TERRITORY BY THE WITHDRAWAL OF SEVERAL TOWNS
— ITS LOCAL GOVERNMENT — ITS TOWN MEETINGS AND THE DUTIES

OF ITS SELECTMEN — THE STIMULUS OF THE WAR OF l8l2 A

SPIRIT OF ENTERPRISE IN TRADE AND MANUFACTURE — THE
STRUGGLE FOR A NEW CONSTITUTION AND ITS FINAL SUCCESS —
THE DISESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES —
AN ACCOUNT OF THE GREAT OHIO MOVEMENT — THE EXPERIENCES
OF SOME WATERBURY EMIGRANTS.

THE opening years of the period at which we have now arrived
have been called with truth "the most critical period in
American history." The surrender of Cornwallis occurred
October 19, 1781. But the real end of the Revolutionary war dates
from Washington's proclamation of a cessation of hostilities, April

19, 1783-

Often as the story has been told in these modern days, the full

significance of the crisis that followed the close of the Revolution-
ary war is still far from being popularly appreciated. The jeal-
ousies which separated state from state, the vast distances which
divided the remoter portions of the country, the rude facilities for
travel, the varying views inherited and developed of the several
sections, and the natural fear shared by all of the encroachments
of a central power if one were constituted, combined to strengthen
a spirit of division which boded ill for the hopes of those who, like
Washington, cherished the dream of national unity. It is hard for
us of to-day to realize the actual conditions of travel at that time
in New England and the only occasional means of communication
which existed. John Fiske tells us that "in 1783, two stage coaches
were enough for all the travellers, and nearly all the freight be-
sides, that went between the two cities of Boston and New York."
Forty miles was a good day's journey, starting at three o'clock in
the morning and ending at ten o'clock in the evening, ** if the roads
were in good condition." Such a journey was not only tiresome
and slow, but hazardous as well. Says Mr. Fiske : *

♦ '* The Critical Period of American History," page 6i.

AN ERA OF BEC0N8TBU0TI0N, 489

Broad rivers like the Connecticut and Housatonic had no bridges. To drive
across them in winter, when they were solidly frozen over, was easy; and in pleas-
ant summer weather to cross in a row-boat was not a dangerous undertaking. But
squalls at some seasons and floating ice at others were things to be feared. More
than one instance is recorded where boats were crushed and passengers drowned,
or saved only by scrambling upon ice-floes.

If it took a week or ten days to make a journey of this kind
from Boston to New York, the means of postal communication were
equally slow and uncertain. Says Professor Dexter of Yale in his
paper entitled " New Haven in 1784 *' :

Post-riders took letters twice (or in severe weather, once) a week to New York,
doing a large commission business, to the benefit of their own pockets, by the way.
The return mails from New York divided at New Haven, one going each week via
New Loudon and Providence to Boston, the other taking the inland route to the
same destination by Hartford and Springfield, and by each route there was a
return mail weekly.

Professor Dexter notes that the New Haven post-office was " the
receiving-office for all the inland region not served by the Hart-
ford, New York and New London offices." He adds that " thus
not only all letters for such near points as Cheshire, Wallingford,
and Waterbury, but all for towns as far off as Litchfield and New
Milford, were left in New Haven to be delivered to any one bound
for those parts.'* If no Waterbury man stopped to get the letters
received in New Haven for his town, for example, these letters
were advertised in the New Haven newspaper. They were sent to
the dead letter office at Philadelphia if the advertisement failed in
three months to discover those to whom they were addressed.

When we consider how uncertain was postal communication
at this period, how completely out of touch were even adjoining
parts of the country, the growth of the influences that made for
disunion is not to be wondered at. It is perhaps easy to understand
the hostility between Connecticut and New York, but it is much
more difficult to understand the similar hostility between Connecti-
cut and Massachusetts, communities derived from the same source
and governed by the same purpose. New York, for example, laid a
duty on Connecticut fire-wood, a business which brought in no
small income to the thrifty Yankees. In retaliation the business
men of New London, in mass-meeting assembled, unanimously
agreed to suspend all commercial intercourse with New York. On
the other hand, when in 1785 the other three New England states
virtually closed their ports to British shipping, Connecticut not
only threw hers wide open, but followed this up by laying duties
upon imports from Massachusetts. These incidents illustrate how

490

mSTOBT OF WATEBBUBT.

strong was the feeling of hostility of state toward state without
regard to neighborhood or, as in the case of Massachusetts, simi-
larity of origin.

Then it must be remembered that the country which had been
drained by the exhausting war had very generally increased the
evils of poverty by the experiment of inflation. Connecticut and
Delaware are the only states among the thirteen that escaped the
paper money craze and the consequent depression after it was over.

Without going further into the details of existing conditions, it
may be interesting to sketch hastily the remedy which was found
and the prominence of Connecticut in the task of discovering the
remedy. As will be remembered the proposition of Washington
for a convention to consider means for improving the navigation of
the Potomac grew, as he in his far-sightedness had anticipated that
it might and hoped that it would, into the movement which led to
the assembling at Philadelphia in May, 1787, of the Federal con-
vention which framed the constitution. The delegates to this con-
vention from Connecticut were Oliver Ellsworth, afterward chief-
justice of the United States, Roger Sherman, and William Johnson,
afterward president of Columbia college and a fellow of the Royal
society. The first rock upon which the deliberations of the conven-
tion seemed likely to split was the question whether membership
in the Federal Congress should be apportioned according to popula-
tion or according to states. Naturally the former plan was favored
by the larger colonies, and the latter by the smaller. When things
looked darkest Oliver Ellsworth and Roger Sherman suggested
what is known as ** the Connecticut compromise," which was finally
adopted in substance. Franklin's pithy comment on it was that
" when a joiner wishes to fit two boards, he sometimes pares off a
bit from both." By this compromise it was decided that the mem-
bership of the lower house of the Congress should be determined
on the principle of population, while the membership of the upper
house should be determined upon the principle of statehood. With
this obstacle to harmony removed an important advance was made
toward the possibility of union. A little later, when the question
at issue was the method of electing the president, Mr. Ellsworth
was one of those who suggested the device of an electoral college.
Still again, when the convention was at a loss what to do in case of
a failure to choose a president by the electoral college, whether
such a choice should be given to the Senate representing the states
or to the House representing the popular vote, Roger Sherman came
forward with a compromise, which was carried, to this effect, that,
in such a case, the House should elect the president, but that the

AN ERA. OF RECONSTRUCTION,

491

vote in the House should be taken by states, and not by a simple
counting of members. The device of the Federal Supreme Court
to interpret the constitution, the distinguishing feature of the
American system of government, which is without a precedent in
history, was shaped largely in a committee of which Mr. Ellsworth
was a leading and influential member.

From this hasty review we are able to appreciate the important
part played by the representatives of Connecticut in framing the
constitution of the United States. Connecticut also had the honor-
able distinction of being the fifth state to ratify the adoption of the
constitution (by a vote of 128 to 40), the ratifying convention being
in session for only five days. It would be gratifying if we could
find traces in the local records of the interest taken by Waterbury
in the exciting events and important discussions which were the
birth-throes of a nation. We know indeed that John Hopkins and
John Welton were the delegates from Waterbury to the convention
which did its business so rapidly in ratifying the new Federal con-
stitution, over which the conventions in many other states wrangled
with much tediousness and little patriotism. But the names of
these delegates constitute almost all the information now at hand
in regard to this important matter.

Indeed, one of the curious things in studying our local history
is the absence of evidence bearing upon the relations of Waterbury
to the general trend of history-making events. Elsewhere the story
is told of the contributions of Waterbury to the war of the Revolu-
tion. But when we search for local testimony of the local effects of
the war, what we find is of small significance. It is recorded that
on December 8, 1783, Col. Phineas Porter, Michael Bronson and
Dr. Isaac Baldwin were chosen a committee to '* appertain " — which
probably means " asqprtain " — the sum paid by each class in town
" for raising recruits into the Continental army for the last three
years," and to report to the next meeting. At the next town meet-
ing Ira Beebe was added to this committee, and there the matter
apparently dropped. There is also reported the curious case of
three brothers, Ozias, Cyrus and Zibe Norton, who were fined jQ$
apiece for failing to perform a tour of duty when drafted into the
Continental army. The town ordered a discretionary committee
to examine these five-pound notes to see whether the town treas-
urer would be justified in accepting them. He probably was, as no
more appears about the matter. On April 12, 1784, this curious
minute appears in the record:

Voted: That the selectmen dispose of pots, tents, and camp equipage, belonging
to the town, to the best advantage of the town, at their discretion.

492

BISTORT OF WATERBUBT,

These insignificant, even puerile, items constitute the sum total
of our official knowledge of the effect of the Revolution upon
Waterbury. The last of the three, that concerning the disposition
to be made of the supplies left on the hands of the town at the close
of the war, illustrates the spirit of Yankee thrift which dominated
the conduct of public business in those days. This may perhaps be
called significant, as it shows how painstaking was the economy
then practiced in public affairs. That we are denied any larger
view, in the local records, of the relation of the community to the
world outside is a matter of no small regret.

Turning to the physical conditions of Waterbury at the begin-
ning of our period (1783) it may be described as a town thirteen
miles in length, with a population of over 2000 and less than 3000.
The process of disintegration by the splitting off of settlements
within its borders had already begun. Three years before, in 1780,
Westbury (now Watertown) had been set off, and in the division
Northbury (now Plymouth) had gone with Westbury. Waterbury
had thus been deprived of more than half of her population. In
1774 the number of inhabitants in the whole town was 3526. This
was a very respectable number as populations were reckoned in
those days. For example, Professor Dexter states in his pamphlet,
already quoted, that in 1784 New Haven had 7960 inhabitants,
and the number must have been considerably smaller ten years
earlier when the Waterbury figures are given above. This shows a
closer approximation in size between Waterbury and New Haven
than one would have supposed to be probable. In 1790 Waterbury
had 2937 inhabitants and Watertown 3170, a total of 6107. This is
an increase, taking Waterbury and Watertown together, of 2581
inhabitants in sixteeu years, which included the war period; or an
increase of seventy-three per cent. The larger part of this increase
was probably in Watertown.

The causes which led to the splitting off of these settlements
from the original centre were largely ecclesiastical, and are treated
more at length in another chapter. It is interesting to note that
these town secessions always followed the same order of process.
First, there was a demand for what were called ** winter privileges;"
next, came the establishment of an ecclesiastical society; then at
last the settlement, of which the church was the centre, became an
independent town. By the phrase "winter privileges" was meant
the privilege of having an independent minister in a particular set-
tlement during the winter months. The inhabitants of such a set-
tlement were thus relieved from going a longer distance to church,
and of paying their share toward the support of the minister of the

AN ERA OF BECONSTRUCTION. 493

town — it being of course remembered that at this time the salaries
of Congregational ministers were raised by assessing members of
the society according to their showing in the grand list, their
church being a state church. As the greater burden was thrown
upon the rest of the town by granting " winter privileges " to any
special settlement, the request for them was naturally opposed by
the town. This opposition was increased when the settlement
asked for the privilege of supporting its own minister all the year
round, and of being relieved of contributing at all toward the sup-
port of the town minister. The last step, the founding of an
entirely independent town as distinct from an ecclesiastical society,
of course threw heavier burdens upon the original town, and was
still more strongly opposed.

The first settlement to follow the example set by Watertown was
Farmingbury (now Wolcott). Farmingbury had obtained independ-
ent church rights, that is, was an independent ecclesiastical society,
as early as 1770. It was seven years after Watertown obtained its
independence, and seventeen years after it had itself secured its
own church rights, that is, on December 26, 1787, that a memorial
was presented from Farmingbury asking Waterbury to consent
** that Farmingbury make application to the next General Assembly
to be made into a distinct town and awarded to one county." The
memorial adds :

And considering that nature has formed said parish in such situation as makes
it very inconvenient for us to be annexed to any other town, we therefore flatter
ourselves that you will not fail to grant us our request.

The town of Waterbury appointed a committee to consider the
memorial of Farmingbury, which that committee proceeded to do
for some six weeks. On February 5, 1788, this committee found
itself in doubt "as to the expediency *' of granting the above request
"on any consideration whatever." This was rather a high-handed
way of treating the would-be seceding town and must have been so
regarded by the Farmingbury people. At any rate, not long after
this a memorial was presented to the General Assembly by Farm-
ingbury asking to be incorporated as a town "in another county."
Something more than four years after the first Farmingbury
request was made of Waterbury, or in April, 1792, the selectmen
appointed a committee to treat with a Farmingbury committee. By
the next October the town voted to give up opposition to the wish
of Framingbury, but on these conditions, the date being October 8 :

I. Society of Farmingbury within eight days to give to the rest of the societies
in Waterbury a legal acquittance of all their right in the public, ministerial and
school moneys, and other property.

494 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

2. Secure to the remaining societies twenty pounds lawful money as an equiva-
lent consideration for the support of their part of the Great Bridge of the Great
river on Woodbury road [what is now the West Main street bridge].

3. Become bound to support their equal proportion to the grand list of all the
town poor, or that may be such at the time their memorial shall be granted.

4. Become bound to pay their proportion according to list of all debts that have
occurred during their continuance with us.

Three and a half years later, or in the spring of 1796, Farmingbury
was made a distinct town by the name of Wolcott, and Waterbury
" appointed a committee to settle and adjust all matters and con-
cerns " between the two towns.*

Oxford was the next settlement to secure independence of
Waterbury. It won its victory in three years and a half, while the
struggle of Wolcott lasted nearly nine years. It was on April 29, 1793,
as related in Bronson's '* History," that Joseph Hopkins, as agent for
Waterbury, was directed to oppose the application of the society of
Oxford to the General Assembly for town privileges. Two years
and a half later, in October, 1795, Waterbury again voted to resist
the attempt to obtain independence which had been renewed by
Oxford. A third attempt the following spring was met by similar
resistance. The following autumn, in October, 1796, Oxford
obtained the desired act of incorporation.

The case of Middlebury, which follows that of Oxford, is typical
of the process of separation already described: first, " winter priv-
ileges," then an independent society, then an independent town.
It was in 1786 that these winter privileges were established at West
Farms (now Middlebury), an agreement having been reached with
the Waterbury ecclesiastical society to allow preaching there for
eight Sabbaths of that winter. The next winter the sum of jQg was
appropriated for paying for these winter privileges. Three years
after, or in 1790, West Farms and the adjoining portions of Wood-
bury and Southbury were made into a distinct society under the
name of Middlebury. The church was organized in 1797. Its first
pastor was the Rev. Ira Hart, who was installed in 1798, and its first
deacons were Seth Bronson and Nathan Osborn. Church independ-
ence having thus been firmly established, town independence was
naturally next desired. In 1800, or three years after the organiza-
tion of the church, the society of Middlebury petitioned the Gen-
eral Assembly for an act of town incorporation. Again Waterbury

* On the west side of Chestnut hill in the woods by the side of what appears to be an old highway or
wood road, B. F. Howland found a stone marked May 17, 17 — , an 'original corner (the southwestern comer)
of Farmingbury society. It is now the town comer, having been so made in x8oi. The slab, resembling an
old gravestone, is supported by other stones. On it are the letters R. W. for Richard Welton, S. R. for
Street Richards, and A. B., perhaps for Amasa Beecher.

AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION,

495

is ready with its futile opposition. On May 22, in anticipation of
the expected — the Middlebury petition was presented to the Gen-
eral Assembly in June — "Joseph Hopkins, Esq., and Mr. Richard
Welton " were authorized by the town to secure an accurate survey
of Waterbury and of the Waterbury river (its length through the
limits of the town), in order the better " to enter a defence against
the petition of Middlebury." At the same time that these gentle-
men were appointed, Waterbury, perhaps learning wisdom by expe-
rience and perhaps not, chose a committee to confer with the Mid-
dlebury memorialists and "hear their propositions." This com-
mittee was composed of Messrs. Joseph Hopkins, Noah Baldwin and
John Kingsbury. On October i, 1801, Waterbury again voted in
town meeting to oppose Middlebury in her petition. On September
20, 1802, special agents were appointed by Waterbury to go before
the legislature and press the opposing argument as strongly as pos-
sible. So the fight went on with varying success for five years
until October, 1807, when the act of incorporation was obtained. In
the following November, Waterbury held a town meeting and
appointed a committee to arrange affairs with Middlebury " agree-
ably to the act of incorportion." At this town meeting Dr. Nimrod
Hull, one of the selectmen, was " excused " and withdrew. This is
something quite unusual, according to the town records, and prob-
ably is to be taken as an indication of the bad feeling engendered
by the long controversy, which very likely in its different phases
led more or less to personal disagreements. The last record closing
up the Middlebury chapter reads as follows:

Voted: To appropriate the moneys awarded by the state committee in the affair
of Waterbury against Middlebury ($600) as a perpetual fund for supporting a bridge
across the Waterbury river.

There is in this use of the award which Middlebury was forced
to pay a suggestion of the bitterness which had been stirred up
and of a disposition on the part of Waterbury to keep that bitter-
ness alive.

The rights of Middlebury in the case are well set forth in her
petition to the General Assembly of May 5, 1807. This petition
states that there were about 175 families included in the Middle-
bury society. Of the heads of these, iii signed the petition. Out
of these 1 1 1 families, eleven had the name of Bronson and four of
Porter. In the petition it is stated that the meeting-house at Mid-
dlebury is about six miles from the centre of each of the towns of
Waterbury, Woodbury, Watertown, Oxford and Southbury. It is
further stated that Middlebury is separated from Waterbury " by a

496 HIBTORT OF WATBRBUR7.

rough and uninhabitable " tract of country, which forms a natural
obstacle, making travel to the centre of the town inconvenient.
According to the petition, the length of the Middlebury society
at that time was about five miles, and its width about three and
three-quarters miles. Its grand list was estimated to be $20,960.67.

With the separation of Middlebury, we have the last of Water-
bury 's losses from the incorporation of new towns during the period
under consideration. It is true that Columbia (now Prospect) had
an independent ecclesiastical society in 1797, but it did not become
an independent town until 1827. In Salem (now Naugatuck) an
ecclesiastical society was organized in 1773; ^ church was organized
in 1781; an edifice was built in 1782, and its first pastor, the Rev.
Abram Fowler, was settled in 1785. But the town of Naugatuck
was not incorporated until 1844.

Turning from the physical conditions of Waterbury to its cor-
porate structure, if that phrase is allowable, we first note that the
town authority found its visible embodiment in the persons of its
selectmen. These, acting under the instructions of the town meet-
ings, transacted a great part of its business. One of the principal
things entrusted to them was the care of the poor, and the frequent
litigation which grew up between towns over conflicting claims in
regard to public duties owed to the poor was in the main superin-
tended by them. This function of the selectmen has been de-
scribed at length in another chapter. So we will pass over it here
simply noting, as illustrating one curious function which has been
entirely lost in these modem days, the duty imposed upon them by
the town meeting of December 12, 1785:

Voted: To desire the selectmen to provide for Augur Mallery without setting
him up at vendue the year ensuing.

This means that the services of the unfortunate pauper were not
to be bid off at public auction beside the whipping-post at the end
of the Green.

Next to the care of the poor, the most important duty devolving
upon the selectmen was the care of the roads, determining their
location and alterations (of course under the direction of the town
meeting), attending to cases of encroachment and to giving leases,
taking in charge suits brought for damages — for example, the
claim of John Baxter for injuries he received on the Mad River
bridge, the settling of which was referred by town meeting to the
selectmen, December 16, 1790 — and other similar matters too numer-
ous to mention. The selectmen also handled the public money and
had charge of the odds and ends of town business.

AN ERA OF REGONaTBVCTION. 497

It may be interesting to know the names of the selectmen in
Waterbury at the beginning of our period. The town meeting of
December 8, 1783, chose five selectmen: Col. Phineas Porter, Capt.
Isaac Bronson, Capt. James Porter, Charles Upson and David
Hotchkiss. The same town meeting chose Michael Bronson as
town clerk. The question of the pay the selectmen received is an
interesting one. On December 14, 1789, the town meeting voted
" to desire the selectmen to do the business of selectmen, except in
perambulating and surveying the highways, gratis, or without fee
or reward." The town meeting of ten days later voted " to recon-
sider the vote requesting the selectmen to do the business of
selectmen gratis." The town meeting of a week after that voted
to reconsider this last vote and to adhere to the original, or "gratis,"
vote. The selectmen evidently objected to being paid simply with
honors and the gratitude of the town, for the town meeting of a
year after, on December 13, 1790, voted "to give the selectmen who
have served the town the year past three shillings for each day
they have spent in the service of the town during that time." This
rate of pay continued to be the usual allowance to selectmen for
years afterward.

Though receiving so moderate a remuneration, the selectmen
must have handled a large revenue, considering the size of Water-
bury and the general amount of money in circulation. They raised
a rate of fivepence on the pound by the grand list of 1783, which
was paid in wheat, rye, Indian corn, oats, flax, beef and pork, at
such market price as the selectmen deemed it right to accept at the
time of payment. A rate of threepence on the pound by the list of
1788 was payable in merchantable goods, such as wheat at six shil-
lings the bushel; rye, three shillings and sixpence the bushel;
Indian corn, three shillings the bushel; buckwheat, two shillings
and fourpence the bushel; oats, one shilling and twopence the
bushel; flax, fivepence per pound, and sheep's wool two shillings
per pound.

The matter of bridges comes up again and again as one follows
the records of the town and notes the duties of the selectmen. The
principal bridges of Waterbury are described in full in another
chapter, but it may be interesting to note in passing a contempora-
neous description of the river, the *• Great Bridge" over which was
the cause of so much trouble, to be found in President Dwight's
travels. He writes:

The Naugatuck river rises in the Green Mountains, in the township of Norfolk,
near the north line of the state. Thence, in a course generally south, it passes
through Winchester, Torrington, Harwinton, Plymouth, Waterbury and Oxford to

32

498 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

Derby. Its length is about forty miles, its current rapid, and, when swollen by
freshets, as it often is very suddenly, violent and destructive. It furnishes a great
number of mill-seats, and is in many places lined with beautiful intervals. Not-
withstanding the roughness of the country through which it passes, its bed is worn
so deep, and to so uniform a surface, that from Waterbury northward one of the
smoothest and most level turnpike roads in the state has been formed on its banks.

It may be also interesting to note in this connection that during
the Revolution the road leading through Waterbury east and west
was a fine one, much used in army movements.

In the work of superintending the roads the principal assistants
to the selectmen were the "surveyors." The term is not used in its
modern sense, but means simply overseers, or as we should say in
modern phrase, "bosses of the job." The number increases as we
follow the records down. Thus, in a record of a town meeting held
December 13, 1784, we find that thirty-nine surveyors were chosen,
while at a town meeting held December 9, 1793, we find that there
were fifty-nine chosen. This increase in numbers does not proba-
bly mean any great increase in the number of roads, but simply
that the work of road making and road mending was done more
carefully. The citizens " worked out " their road tax, and the sur-
veyors were the men who saw that it was properly done. At the
town meeting of December 9, 1793, above referred to, some reformer
raised the question whether this was the best way of doing it.
A motion was made " to mend the highways in this town in
future by a tax," that is, presumably, the taxpayer was to con-
tribute money instead of his time and work. The consideration
of this motion was postponed and it was rejected at the following
meeting.

How many attended these town meetings ? We have no way of
forming any very accurate estimate. At the annual town meeting
held the second Monday in December, 1800 (just at the end of the
century), the vote on the proposed road from the centre of Water-
bury to Naugatuck stood sixty-two in the affirmative and seven in
the negative. This was probably a full meeting, but there is no
means of determining what proportion of those who attended voted.

Where were the town meetings held ? Almost invariably in the
meeting-house of the Congregational society. But between 1787
and 1793 we find various records of adjournments to the "com-
pany" school-house — owned by a private corporation — and to the
house of Capt. Samuel Judd. All the significance that attaches
to these adjournments is probably that the meeting-house was
undergoing repairs, or for some other reason was not in its usual
condition to accommodate a town meeting.

AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION, 499

What was the time of working on the roads, the principal busi-
ness that concerned town meetings ? There is a record that on
December 27, 1784, the town meeting voted **to desire the surveyors
of highways to call out the inhabitants of the town to work in the
highways four days in the year, two in the spring and two in the
autumn, but not later than the last of October." A similar vote
four years after adds that the days must be chosen " seasonably,"
and the surveyors are ordered " to make presentment of parts of
days in all cases where people shall be guilty of late coming or mis-
spending their time." It is very evident from this that the habit
of shirking road work was perceptibly growing, and this may
account for the increase in surveyors already referred to.

As has been said in speaking of the selectmen generally, a not
unimportant part of their duties was the disposition of cases of
encroachment upon the highway, or of cases where the use of the
highway was granted to individuals upon certain conditions. Thus
on December 27, 1784, we find Joseph Hopkins complaining that
Moses Frost has erected a dwelling house in the highway so as to
prevent the complainant from using his only convenient lot for
building, and that he is encouraged in this by some of his neigh-
bors. Hopkins, the complainant, further avers that Frost will thus
secure a legal title to the part of the highway he has appropriated
— which, however, would have been next to impossible in law — and
thus perpetually injure the value of his own lot. The town meet-
ing in passing upon the case put it into the hands of the selectmen,
instructing them to remove the house and other encroachments, or
grant relief in some other w^y. A few weeks later, the town meet-
ing received a memorial from Joseph Boardman, a shoemaker, who
asked permission to extend his house on to the highway, as it would
be the most convenient place for him to put a shoe-shop, and the
town meeting granted him the permission. Two years later was
granted the petition of Ephraim Warner, John Cossett, Benjamin
Upson and Noah Baldwin, to obtain the lease of a certain public
piece of ground for the purpose of building a cider mill upon it.
Two years later, in 1789, the town meeting referred to the select-
men the petition of Widow Martha Welton for the lease of a certain
piece of ground near the meeting-house for her use as a garden,
"desiring them to do what appears to them just and right," but not
to lease "said ground for a term exceeding ten years." A few
months later the town meeting granted a lease of a small piece of
land near his house to Noah Candee for a garden spot, but for a
term not exceeding five years. These are typical cases of encroach-
ments on the highway which came up for disposition before the

Soo

HISTORY OF WATBBBURT,

town meeting, and which were often referred to the selectmen for
final adjudication. Their decision must often have required the
exercise of unusual good judgment to keep the peace and to pre-
vent hard feelings.

In this connection, as it concerns highways, it may be noted
that the question of allowing swine to go at large was one con-
stantly before the town meetings. It seems to have been largely
a question of the size of the swine. Thus one town meeting in
1788 voted to allow all swine " weighing fifty pounds and upwards"
to go at large, while a town meeting in 1793 made "free common-
ers " of all swine weighing " forty-five pounds and upwards," and
of all swine under forty-five pounds, provided that they were "well
yoked."

One of the minor duties of the selectmen included the charge of
the less important articles of property coming into the possession
of the town, for example, books. These were probably Statutes
such as are distributed to-day by the General Assembly, or such as
may be obtained in the form of public documents through congress-
men from Washington. The care which was taken in distributing
these books, to see that they passed into the proper hands, illus-
trates the thrift of those days and the way in which public prop-
erty was guarded, even in the smallest matters. One vote may be
cited as typical of many others, that of the town meeting of Decem-
ber 13, 1784 :

Voted : That one of the law books now the property of the town be kept in the
town clerk's office.

Voted : To sell the remainder of the law books at public vendue to the highest
bidder, and that the additional Acts which shall come out hereafter will belong to
the purchasers of said books on their paying one penny per page, the money to be
paid into the town treasury for the use of said town.

This public auction was, by the way, not held at the whipping-
post, as some have suggested, but at any convenient place chosen
by the selectmen. Auctions at the whipping-post were almost ex-
clusively those of articles seized on execution and disposed of by
the sheriff.

It may be worth while here to select a few statistics showing
what was the wealth of Waterbury at this time, thus giving some
possible idea of the size of the interests placed in the hands of the
selectmen. The grand list of Waterbury in 1779, ^^^ year before
Watertown secured its independence and took away probably more
than half of the population, was ;^ 38,504. In 1790, ten years after
the secession of Watertown, Waterbury 's grand list was £ 19,722.
In 1784, Waterbury is reported to have had 452 oxen, 11 22 cows and
heifers, 481 horses, and 60 dogs. In 1794 it had 582 oxen, 1897 cows

AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 501

and heifers, and 635 horses. These figures show but small change
in the totals, and indicate that the town was increasing very little
in the amount of its live stock.

While, however, Waterbury was apparently standing still, we
find indications in the records that business was on the increase.
The town meeting of December 29, 1788, appointed fence-viewers,
sealers of weights and measures, leather sealers, key keepers and
cullers of timber. Four years later we find it recorded that James
Smith, Cyrus Lewis and David Norton were chosen packers. Still
later there is a minute that the county courts " may appoint suitable
persons, not to exceed three, to be inspectors and packers of beef, pork,
butter and lard; also to inspect lumber, onions, hay, pot and pearl
ashes and fish." The appointment of these new kinds of officials,
the introduction into Waterbury public life of new functions, shows
that the town is feeling the stirring of new business ambitions and
is making ventures in the direction of outside trade. The exporta-
tion of pork and beef, if one may use so large and Chicago-like a
word as exportation, for whose quality these official inspectors
were held to be responsible, was a business which was promoted
largely through the push and enterprise of Col. William Leaven-
worth (see Volume II, page 235), always a public-spirited citizen.
The potash trade, too, was not inconsiderable, and 'Squire Ezra
Bronson had a potash yard near the present site of St. John's
church. The " cullers " of timber above mentioned had to put
their official seals on the hoops and barrel staves which were
packed in " shooks " and shipped to the West Indies. Thus it is
seen there were possibilities for foreign trade here in Waterbury
even before its great manufacturing boom had set in.

And this reminds us that we are approaching a period, the begin-
ning of the new century, which early developed those great inter-
ests that have since given to Waterbury so conspicuous a position as
a New England manufacturing centre. It would be interesting to
know, if we only had the information at hand, what effect, if any,
was produced here by the great events which were changing the
world's history, the French Revolution, the rise of Napoleon, and
the wars which altered the map of Europe. But in regard to all
this we are left to individual speculation. We do know, however,
of the general effect upon the country and on its trade of these
events, producing results of local interest. The general situation
is thus sketched by Professor Taussig, in his " Tariff History of the
United States":

The industrial situation changed abruptl)' in 1808. The complications with Eng-
land and France led to a series of measures which mark a turning-point in the
industrial history of the country. The Berlin and Milan decrees of Napoleon, and

502 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

the English Orders in Council, led in December, 1807, to the Embargo. The Non-In-
tercourse Act followed in 1809. War with England was declared in 18 12. During the
war, intercourse with England was prohibited, and all import duties were doubled.
The last mentioned act was adopted in the hope of increasing the revenue, but had
little effect, for foreign trade practically ceased to exist. This series of restrictive
tneasures blocked the accustomed channels of exchange and production, and gave
an enormous stimulus to those branches of industry whose products had before been
imported. Establishments for the manufacture of cotton goods, woollen cloths,
iron, glass, pottery and other articles sprang up with a mushroom growth. . . .
The restrictive legislation of 1808-15 was, for the time being, equivalent to extreme
protection. The consequent rise of a considerable class of manufacturers, whose
success depended largely on the continuance of protection, formed the basis of a
strong movement for more decided limitation of foreign competition.

Here then we have the real beginnings of that tariff controversy
which has so long formed an exciting issue, more pronounced at
some times than at others, between the two parties in the United
States. Into this controversy it would of course be out of place to
enter here, but it is interesting to note that it started from this
"war boom," thus giving an opportunity for the development of
a race of mechanics who have since made New England manufac-
turing what it has become, the marvel of the country if not of the
world. The history of the birth and growth of Waterbury's manu-
facturing interests is told in full in our second volume. Suffice it
to say here that Waterbury felt the stimulus which was being
applied generally to the thriving towns of Connecticut and New
England. It had its woollen mill (which, however, ended in failure)
and five clock factories at one time, besides a largely increased
trade in buttons. In his sermon entitled ** Three-quarters of a Cen-
tury; a Historical Retrospect," the Rev. Dr. Joseph Anderson says :

■

In 1783, according to the grand list, there were in the town of Waterbury four
steel and brass clocks, one wooden clock, seven watches, one '* riding-chair," twenty
ounces and ten pennyweights of silver plate and money at interest to the amount
of £33' Judged by these various tests, the condition of our town was low.*

But just at the opening of the century, a few enterprising men began the busi-
ness of clock-making, and in 1802 Abel Porter & Co. entered upon the manufacture
of gilt buttons. These industries, as you are well awai'e, increased rapidly in
strength and importance; the war of 1812 gave to the button trade, especially a new
impulse; machinery was invented for the more rapid production of wares for which
a market stood open, and in due time wealth began to flow in. With increasing
pecuniary ability, and increasing intelligence, came in the luxuries of a modern
civilization. As one reform after another was accomplished in the world without,
Waterbury felt the effect of it; and as one invention or discovery after another was

* But does not the fact that the Company school-house or Academy was built in 1784, and that the con-
tracts for two new churches were given out in 1794, prove that Waterbury was, on the whole, prosperous, and
had not felt greatly the effects of the hard times and the drain of the war which are reported elsewhere ?

AN ERA OF BECONSTBUGTION.

503

appropriated by society at large, it found its way to this provincial village, estab-
lishing a new bond between the mother-town of the Naugatuck valley and the great
outside world.

But not only was it a time, as Dr. Anderson has described it, of
increased trade and manufacturing, of increased inventions — it was
in 1793 that Whitney invented the cotton-gin — ^but it was also a
time of increased enterprise in the way of pushing goods out per-
sonally into distant markets. In short, the day of the "drummer"
was at hand, or, as he was then known, the peddler. President
Dwight, in his "Travels in New England and New York," has
given a graphic account of the progress of the peddler, the fore-
runner of the modern drummer :

The peddler's load is composed of tinware, pins, needles, scissors, combs, but-
tons, children's books, cotton stuffs, a smaller or larger assortment to offer to his
customers. A number set out with large wagons, loaded with dry-goods, hats and
shoes, together with tinware and the small articles already mentioned. These
loads will frequently cost the proprietor from one to two thousand dollars, and are
intended exclusively for the Southern and Western States. It is frequently the fact
that from twenty to thirty persons are employed by a single house in manufactur-
ing and selling tinware and other articles. The workmen, furnished with a suf-
ficient quantity of the raw material to employ them for six months, are sent by
water in the autumn to Virginia, North and South Carolina and Georgia. They
station themselves at some town in the interior, where the employer or agent has a
store, well-furnished with such articles as the peddlers require. As the stock of
each peddler is exhausted, he repairs to the store for a supply. In this way a large
amount of goods are vended during the six or eight months they are absent.

In commenting on the above, A. Bronson Alcott, who was him-
self a native of Wolcott and lived there until he was nineteen, notes
that "not less than ten peddlers from Wolcott often went south
during several seasons. These were mostly employed by a house in
Southington." There can be but little doubt that this constant out-
going of peddlers from hereabouts to the south and west had an
important though probably unnoticed influence on the social char-
acter of Waterbury and its vicinity. It is Shakespeare who says
that " home-keeping youths have ever homely wits." Experiences
in different parts of the country, contact with different customs
and modes of thought, even though it were a rude, pioneer way of
seeing the world, must have contributed not a little to enlarging
the horizon and increasing the broadness of those early drummers
or peddlers. And the ideas which they brought home must have
proved stimulating to those whom they left behind in the quiet New
England environment.

We have already referred to the jealousies and rivalries between
states which even went to the extent of hostile tariffs before the

504 HISTORY OF WATEBBURT.

adoption of the Federal constitution, and to the Embargo act,
which in the end proved so strong a stimulus to home manufac-
tures, and we cannot leave the period of the war of 1812 without a
passing allusion to the Hartford Convention with its famous quasi-
endorsement of secession as a remedy in an extreme case. The
general hatred of Jefferson in New England, because of his adop-
tion of French philosophy, and the (unjust) belief that he favored
France rather than England (largely on account of his hostility to
England's Christianity), the acquisition of Louisiana, with its addi-
tion to the strength of the Southern section overbalancing New
England, and the tremendous damage inflicted on New England com-
merce by the Embargo act, all combined to bring about the Conven-
tion, which was held in Hartford between December 15, 1814, and
January 5, 1815. It was called to consider the interests of the New
England states in relation to the war with Great Britain. It con-
sisted of twelve delegates frem Massachusetts, seven from Connec-
ticut, three from Rhode Island, two from New Hampshire and one
from Vermont, the delegates from the last two states representing
counties. The president of the convention was George Cabot of
Massachusetts, and the secretary was Theodore Dwight of Connec-
ticut. Besides endorsing various demands on Congress the report
which the Convention issued denied " any present intention to dis-
solve the Union," but admitted that "if a dissolution should become
necessary by reason of the multiplied abuses of bad administration,
it should, if possible, be the work of peaceful times and deliberate
consent." Although the declaration and demands of the Convention
accomplished nothing beyond their endorsement by the legisla-
tures of Massachusetts and Connecticut for the consideration of Con-
gress, they have often been quoted as proving that the spirit of
secession did not originate in the South. It was the taunt of Sen-
ator Hayne of South Carolina, regarding the Hartford Convention
and the part in it which was taken by Nathan Dane, that called
forth perhaps the most eloquent passage of Daniel Webster's cele-
brated reply to Hayne.

A subject not second in importance to the effect of the war of
181 2 on the business life of the state and of the town was the sub-
ject of a new constitution. The position of Connecticut after the
Declaration of Independence was an anomalous one. Her consti-
tution still continued to be, despite her separation from the British
Crown, the charter granted by Charles II. in 1662. This charter,
although nominally proceeding from the throne, really proceeded
from the people of Connecticut. Its first draft was, as a matter of
fact, prepared by the General Court in Hartford. The king was

AN ERA OF BEC0N8TBVGTI0N.

505

petitioned to bestow his royal favor and grace " according to the
tenor of a draft or instrument " that the General Court submitted
for his formal approval, as is stated in the petition for it. And, as
is held in Swift's " System of the Laws of Connecticut," ** the appli-
cation of the people for the charter and their voluntary acceptance
of it gave efficiency to the government it constituted — and not the
royal signature." Previous to the granting of the charter, the guar-
antee of government rested on the compact which had been entered
into between the towns originating the colony, and under whose
authority the General Court had been constituted. The fact of
separation from Great Britain and of the establishment of an inde-
pendent government did not change the status of the charter as
the constitution of the state. The General Assembly in October,
1776, after endorsing the Declaration of Independence of July 4,
made this additional declaration:

That the form of civil government in this state shall continue to be as estab-
lished by charter received from Charles II, King of England, so far as an adher-
ence to the same will be consistent with an absolute independence of this state on
the Crown of Great Britain.

In the revision of the laws of 1784, in an act containing a decla-
ration of popular rights, it is again declared that " the ancient form
of civil government contained in the charter from Charles II, King
England, and adopted by the people of this state, shall be and
remain the civil constitution of this state under the sole authority
of the people thereof." These declarations by the General Assembly
show that recognition of the charter as a true constitution was as
solemnly affirmed by the authoritative representative body of the
state as it was possible to affirm it. Still, there were those who
called in question its validity as a constitution. As early as 1782,
says J. Hammond Trumbull in his ** Historical Notes on the Con-
stitution of Connecticut," to which we are largely indebted for the
facts here used, there appeared a pamphleteer who propounded " A
Modest and Decent Inquiry," whether Connecticut had "strictly
and properly speaking, any civil constitution." This pamphleteer
stated that the declaration made by the General Assembly in 1776
was " looked upon by the more thinking and judicious only as a
temporary thing, until our troubles should be over and our inde-
pendence acknowleged." When, in 1786, a bill was offered in the
House of Representatives to reduce the number of its members, and
objection was made that a constitutional question was thus raised
which the General Assembly was incompetent to decide, Mr. James
Davenport, the author of the bill, declared during the debate: "We
have no constitution but the laws of the state. The charter is not

5o6 HISTORT OF WATERS UR J.

the constitution. By the Revolution that was abrogated." Mr.
Trumbull says, however, that "prior to 1800 the number of those
who denied the validity of the act of 1776 and maintained the neces-
sity or the propriety of calling a convention to frame a new con-
stitution was very small."

This question became soon an issue of politics. The Federalists
upheld the doctrine that the Charter was a valid constitution. The
Anti-Federalists, or the " Republicans " as they called themselves,
or the ** Democrats " as their opponents called them, maintained
that the Charter was not a valid constitution. The Anti-Federal-
ists, or Democrats, by which name we shall hereafter call them, as
they thus soon came to be historically known, date their existence
as a separate party, according to Mr. Trumbull, from the *^ Middle-
town Convention," of September 30, 1783. This was called to
oppose the "Commutation act" by which Congress granted five
years' full pay to the officers of the Revolutionary army, in lieu of
half-pay for life. The adjourned meeting of this convention, which
presented a remonstrance to the General Assembly against the
Commutation act, contained representatives from about fifty
towns, a majority of all the towns in the state. This shows that
from its very beginning the new party had at least a respectable
basis for its existence. On the question of ratifying the Federal
constitution in the convention of 1788, ratification was carried by
about a three -fourths vote, 128 to 40. "This," says Mr. Trumbull,
" nearly represents the relative strength of the two parties in Con-
necticut at this time and for some years afterwards." Mr. Trum-
bull gives a list of the prominent Democratic leaders of this period,
including, as he says, " distinguished patriots of the Revolution and
men of influence in the General Assembly." In this list are Wil
liam Williams of Lebanon, a signer of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence, Gen. James Wads worth of Durham, Gen. Erastus Wolcott
of East Windsor, and (a name that is of special interest to readers
of this history) Joseph Hopkins, Esq., of Waterbury.

A curious feature of the struggle now beginning is to be found
in the sneers levelled at Connecticut conservatism. The fact that
Connecticut was so " slow-going " as to rest satisfied with a consti-
tution which was a relic of monarchy afforded infinite opportunity
for jest to Democratic editors, pamphleteers and orators. ^These
sneers were by no means confined to the state. Mr. Trumbull
quotes Cheetham's paper, the Republican Watch- Tower of New York,
as saying in its issue of June 17, 1801:

The sentiments of the state [Connecticut] have been marked, as well while a
colony as now, with a steadiness that excludes both retrogradation and advance-
ment. Like an isthmus, inanimate and immovable, she bids defiance to the

AK ERA OF REGONaTRUGTION,

507

meliorating progression made on both sides of her. The advancement of political
science generated by our Revolution has neither changed her constitution nor
affected her steady habits. ... A fanatic veneration for a pampered, deluding
and anti-Christian priesthood, renders [her people] the dupes of their cunning, and
subservient to their power. . . . And the citizens, really honest, but enveloped
in superstition, are converted into instruments by the cunning of their priestly rul-
ers, to debase themselves and to exalt their oppressors.

In the last clauses of this remarkable tirade the really sensitive
spot in the workings of the state government under the charter is
at last touched. That tender spot was the irritation over the posi-
tion as an established church which was held by the Congregational
body. The agitation against the established church, which finally
aroused the Episcopalians and the other non-conformists — how
odd it seems to apply the term " non-conformist ** to the Episco-
pal church; but that was its exact status in Connecticut for many
years — became in the end strong enough, in conjunction with the
issue made against the charter by the Democrats as a party, to
overthrow it and bring about the adoption of the constitution of
1818. But this is some years in advance of the publication of the
squib from Cheetham's paper above quoted. In the spring election
of 1805 the principal issue was a new constitution, but the Federal-
ists and supporters of " steady habits " easily carried the day. Soon
came the events which led to the war of 18 12 and the inauguration
of new industries, already described, and for a time the thoughts of
the people were diverted from the question of Charter versus con-
stitution. The agitation was renewed in 18 16, and reached success
the following year. The conditions which led to the agitation
against the established church, resulting in its overthrow, are thus
sketched by Mr. Trumbull:

By a colony law of May, 1697, every town and society was required to provide
annually for the maintenance of their minister in accordance with the agreement
made at settlement, by a tax levied " on the several inhabitants according to their
respective estates." A minister settled by the major part of the householders of a
town or society was, by a law passed in 1699, to be accounted the lawful minister
of such town or society, and the agreement made with him was declared to be bind-
ing on " all of such towns." And when in 1708 the General Assembly, by an act
"for the ease of such as soberly dissent from the way of worship and ministry
established by the ancient laws of this government and still continuing," extended
to all qualified dissenters in the colony the same liberty and privileges granted by
the toleration act of William and Mary, it was with the special proviso that this
should not be construed " to the excusing of any person from paying any such
minister or town dues as are now or shall be hereafter due from them."

In 1727 an act was passed directing that all taxes collected for support of the
ministry from members of the Church of England should be paid to the settled
minister of that church; and if, in any parish, the amount so paid should be insuf-

5o8 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

ficient to support the minister, the members of his church were authorized to tax
themselves for the deficiency. Two years afterward, similar privileges were granted
to Quakers and Baptists. At the revision of the laws in 1784 [the period which we
have under consideration] the act of 1708, recognizing " established churches," was
omitted; and in October, 1791, the General Assembly passed '*an act securing
equal rights and privileges to Christians of every denomination in this state.*'
Every dissenter [meaning Episcopalians, Quakers, Baptists, and others not Congre-
gationalists], who should lodge with the clerk of an ecclesiastical society a certifi-
cate of his having joined himself to any other than the established denomination
was, " so long as he shall continue ordinarily to attend on the worship and ministry
in the church or congregation to which he has chosen to belong," exempted from
the payment of society taxes for the support of public worship or the ministry.
And all churches and congregations of dissenters so formed were empowered to
tax themselves for maintaining their ministers, building meeting-houses, etc

This, it would at first seem, was a sufficient recognition of inde-
pendence to satisfy the Episcopalians, Quakers, Baptists and other
dissenters. But the mere fact that they had to lodge their certifi-
cates with the clerk of a Congregational church in order to escape
taxation was regarded by these dissenters as a badge of inferiority
and was resented. On the other hand, those who did not belong to
any church, and did not care to connect themselves nominally with
any, were under the law still liable to be taxed for the support of
the established Congregational churches. Episcopalians also had
another grievance. The legislature's refusal to grant the powers
and privileges of a college to the Episcopal academy at Cheshire,
or to grant a charter for a new Episcopal college in Connecticut,
especially when contrasted with the generosity of the General
Assembly to Yale, made the members of that communion feel very
sore toward the existing regime. A measure of conciliation was
passed in October, i8t6, by which the balances due the state from
the United States, on account of disbursements for the general
defence in the war with Great Britain, were divided up between
the different denominations, the established church getting a
third, the Episcopal Bishop's fund a seventh, and Yale college
a seventh. But this division pleased nobody and the irritation
was not allayed. In 1794, the Episcopal society here in Water-
bury was strong enough to give out contracts for the building of a
new church. The questions, then, which agitated the Episcopalians
and other dissenters in the rest in the state must have aroused
no little feeling here in Waterbury.

The final triumph of the champions of a new constitution was
effected by an alliance made in 181 6 between the Democrats and
the Episcopalians. In that year, a " toleration " ticket was nomi-
nated by the opposition to the Federalists. At its head was placed

AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION, 509

Oliver Wolcott, formerly a strong Federalist, but one who had
opposed the re-nomination of John Adams, and who had for the
last eight or ten years approved in a general way the course of the
Democrats under President Madison, successor of JeflEerson. For
lieutenant-governor, Jonathan IngersoU of New Haven was nomi-
nated. He was a Federalist in good standing, but a prominent
Episcopalian and senior trustee of the Bishop's fund. When the
votes were counted it was found that Mr. Wolcott was defeated,
but that Mr. IngersoU was elected, he having polled a considerable
Federalist vote. In April, 1818, the same ticket was re-nominated
and Wolcott and IngersoU were both elected, the anti-Federalists
also carrying the majority of the Assistants and the majority of the
House. This settled the fate of the old charter which had come
down from the days of Charles II. The Democrats and Toleration-
ists were united in favor of the new constitution, while the Feder-
alists were divided, the agitation having become so strong that in
a number of towns the Federal representatives were instructed to
vote for a new constitution. When the General Assembly met in
May, i8i8, Governor Wolcott said in his message:

If I correctly apprehend the wishes which have been expressed by a portion of
our fellow citizens, they are now desirous, as the sources of apprehension from exter-
nal causes are at present happily closed, that the legislative, executive, and judi-
cial authorities of their own government may be more precisely defined and limited,
and the rights of the people declared and acknowledged. It is your province to
dispose of this important subject in such manner as will best promote general satis-
faction and tranquillity.

The House appointed a special committee to report appropriate
resolutions under which a convention could be called for consider-
ing a new constitution. By this report the Fourth of July was
chosen as the day when the freemen of the towns should elect
delegates to the convention. Objection was raised to the choice of
so patriotic a day for so patriotic an object on the curious ground
that it was too much of a holiday. The animus of this objection
was shown in the answer to it made by Col. John McClellan of
Woodstock, who said that, although " he knew the Fourth of July
was a merry day," he yet thought that " if the people began early
in the morning they would be able to get through before they were
disqualified to vote." Evidently in those days the ** merriment" of
Fourth of July consisted largely of a literal stimulating of patriot-
ism. At any rate, the elections of delegates to the constitutional
convention were held on July 4, 181 8, and as a result the Tolera-
tionists controlled the convention by a considerable majority. The
delegates from Waterbury to this convention were Timon Miles and

5IO BISTORT OF WATERBUBT.

Andrew Adams, the latter a Salem (or Naugatuck) man. It met
August 26 in the hall of the House of Representatives in Hartford,
and Governor Wolcott was elected president.

The question of the establishment was disposed of in the seventh
article of the new constitution — the article "Of Religion." Says
Mr. Trumbull:

The Federalists contested its passage at every point, and succeded in modifying
in important particulars the draft of the committee, but they could not prevent the
complete severance of Church and State, the constitutional guarantee of the rights
of conscience, or the recognition of the absolute equality before the law of all
Christian denominations.

The constitution as finally accepted was approved by a vote of
134 to 61. It was then referred back to the towns to be voted upon
at the town meetings to be held on the first Monday in October.
Mr. Trumbull says that " ratification by the people was for some
time doubtful." It was, in its final shape, more or less of a com-
promise and was in some respects distasteful to the Democrats,
and might, in Mr. Trumbuirs opinion, have failed of ratification
but for the fact that many Federalist votes were given for it. Elias
Ford was the presiding officer of the town meeting in Waterbury
which decided the important matter of ratification. The ballots
were written, containing simply the word " Yes " or " No." The
result is thus recorded by the presiding officer:

This certifies that at a town meeting legally warned and held at Waterbury on
the first Monday of October, 1818, according to the edict of the General Assembly,
May last, for the ratification of the Constitution formed by the Convention, the
votes in said town were in the affirmative 191, in the negative 103.

There was one other movement which belongs to this period in
which Connecticut bore a prominent and honorable share. That
movement was the great emigration to Ohio by which a new terri-
tory was peopled with New Englanders, carrying with them to the
then remote west their own traditions and ideals of popular govern-
ment. The territory which thus received the best that New Eng-
land had to give passed into the hands of the Federal government
by the voluntary cession of their claims by New York and Connec-
ticut. Everything to which the latter state laid claim was included
in this cession of 1780 except 3,230,000 acres on the southern shore
of Lake Erie reserved for educational purposes. The fund derived
from this tract was thus applied, and is to-day, and in 1800 Connec-
ticut surrendered all rights in this territory to the United States.

At the close of the Revolution, Gen. Rufus Putnam of Massa-
chusetts formed a plan for settling in these ceded lands the penni-

Alf ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION.

511

less soldiers of the war, Congress to sell them the lands at a nomi-
nal price. Congress would thus obtain an income and make to them
some substantial return for their services which, with the treasury
depleted as it was, it was impossible to make in any other way.
The matter was formally taken up by Holden Parsons of Connecti-
cut and Rufus Putnam, Manasseh Cutler, Winthrop Sargent and
others of Massachusetts. They formed a joint stock company for
the purchase of lands on the Ohio river and for the settlement
there of impecunious veterans of good character. Before this com-
pany could carry out its purpose, it was necessary for Congress — it
should be remembered that this was in 1787 and that the constitu-
tion was not adopted until 1789 — to formulate general principles
for the government of the northwestern territory. The man who
was most prominent in obtaining from Congress the necessary leg-
islation was Dr. Manasseh Cutler, then forty-five years of age and
a graduate of Yale. After graduation he had taken degrees in the
three learned professions of divinity, law and medicine, and had
gained as well a considerable reputation as a man of science. In
addition to these advantages, he was gifted with a charm of man-
ner and knowledge of men that made him a true diplomat in his
skill in dealing with the members of a legislative body. The ordi-
nance of 1787 which defined the principles of government in the
northwestern territory — a remarkable assumption of Federal
authority by a body so generally pusillanimous as was Congress
then — and which in Daniel Webster's opinion produced " effects of
more distinct, marked, and lasting character" than probably any
other single law by any law-giver, was in the main the work of
Manasseh Cutler. Under this ordinance of 1787 the territory was
governed by officers appointed by Congress, there was unqualified
freedom of public worship with no religious tests for any public
officials, and slavery was not permitted, although slave-owners were
allowed to reclaim runaway slaves who escaped into the territory.

Connecticut had already shown that alertness of spirit which
finds a natural outlet in emigration, as attested by her settlements
in the Genesee region and in the Wyoming valley, which last had
<:aused her many bloody controversies with Pennsylvania. It was,
then, what one would have anticipated, to find Connecticut taking
an active part in the initial Ohio movement. One of the Ohio Com-
pany's first bands of pioneers left Danvers, Mass., in December,
1787. The second band followed from Hartford in the following
January under the leadership of Col. Ebenezer Sproat. They
encountered obstacles that would have proved insurmountable to
less determined men. The Alleghanies were almost impassible.

512

BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

Gen. Rufus Putnam says in his journal that they "found nothing-
had crossed the mountains since the great snow, and the old snow,
twelve inches deep, nothing but pack-horses." Gen. Putnam adds :
"Our only resource was to build sleds and harness our horses to
them tandem, and in this way, with four sleds and men marching in
front, we set forward." After overcoming such obstacles as these,
the expedition finally arrived in April at what is now Marietta.
They built, for protection against Indians, a substantial stockade
containing a building with seventy-two rooms, where in case of
necessity nine hundred people could be accommodated. It was
classically christened "Campus Martins."

The experiment thus auspiciously begun, and favored by Wash-
ington and other leading men not interested in the company, did
not prosper as was at first anticipated. Indian wars, besides the
direct loss of valuable lives, prevented the material success of the
farmers and for a time frightened others from joining them. The
whole movement was exposed to a merciless fire of ridicule in New
England, which, though unwarranted, no doubt proved a strong
deterrent to emigration. When at last Marietta had fought its way
to an assured existence, the settlement at Cincinnati and the gen-
eral opening up of the Western Reserve region (Connecticut's own
peculiar domain) had proved formidable rivals. At last the special
Ohio emigration movement is merged, as the end of our period
approaches, in the general emigration movement to the entire tract
included in the Northwest.

The closeness of tie binding Connecticut to the Ohio settlements
is well stated by Alfred Matthews in his article, "The Earliest Set-
tlement in Ohio," contributed to Harper's Magazine for September,
1885. Mr. Matthews says:

The Western Reserve as a whole is essentially a reproduction of Connecticut —
a copy in which the colors of the prototjrpe appear at once faded and freshened;
but Marietta is a brilliant, faithfully exact miniature of New England — a picture in
which not only the outward form of resemblance, but the very spirit of likeness, is
presented. . . . The traveller from Massachusetts or Connecticut, who feels a
most uncomfortable stranger within the gates of almost any other town along the
Ohio, finds himself at home in Marietta. If he sojourns there a few days, he dis-
covers that the names of the people whom he meets are familiar ones in his native
state. It requires no stretch of imagination to detect resemblances to New Eng-
land facial types, to New England manners and to New England speech. The sub-
stantial dwellings have a comfortable, thrifty appearance, a homely dignity of
expression which recalls those of the older Eastern States. The stately elms which
shade the streets and spacious door yards offer a pleasant suggestion of a New Eng-
land village; the surrounding landscape seems but to sustain the illusion; and even
the little steamboats upon the Muskingum are like those which ply upon the Con-
necticut river far up in Massachusetts.

AN ERA OF BEC0N8TBU0TI0N, 513

Mr. Matthews also notes that in the year 1800 the Muskingum
academy was opened at Marietta, the first advanced school in the
state of Ohio. It was presided over by David Putnam, a graduate
of Yale and a grandson of Gen. Israel Putnam.

Waterbury had its share in this noble pioneer enterprise which
laid deep and strong the foundations of New England life in what
was then a wilderness. A number from this vicinity joined the
Ohio emigration movement, encountering hardships which it is
difficult to-day to realise in establishing their new homes in the
forest. Among those of whose removal to Ohio we have reliable
data — furnished by the late Mrs. Caroline A. Barnes of Tallmadge,
O. — is Esther Upson, who was born in Waterbury in 1799, married
Amadeus Sperry, united with the First church under the preaching
of the evangelist Dr. Asahel Nettleton, and set out in July, 1819,
with her family in an ox team for Tallmadge, arriving there the
following September. Another Waterbury woman whose home was
in Tallmadge, was Mrs. Jane Saxton. She died there in her ninety-
ninth year, the oldest resident of the place. Two Waterbury broth-
ers, Lucius and Abner Hitchcock, removed to Tallmadge in the
spring of 1822. Abner's wife was a Waterbury woman, Emma, daugh-
ter of Reuben Upson, and it is related that they began their house-
keeping in a log house like the rest of their neighbors. Still another
Waterbury woman, Mrs. Emeline Fenn, who removed with her
father's family to Tallmadge in 1820, made the journey from Con-
necticut to Ohio in an ox team. Of Ebenezer Richardson, who was
a native of Middlebury, and who removed to Tallmadge in Febru-
ary, 181 9, it is related that he made four journeys to Connecticut on
foot to pay visits to his old friends, and also returned on foot. On
one of these journeys he started in company with a man who trav-
elled on horseback. So good a pedestrian was Mr. Richardson that
he reached Waterbury two days in advance of the man who had a
horse to ride.

These little incidents, more or less trivial in themselves, throw
a strong light on the perils which they had to endure who tried the
hazard of new fortunes in the days of the Ohio emigration. It
gives us of these modern days a certain sense of appreciative near-
ness to their noble struggles and achievements to find among them
those who can lay claim to an original home here in Waterbury.

With this inadequate sketch of the Ohio movement, we bring
the history of the period to an appropriate close. It was in many
respects the most remarkable period in our country's history. It
saw the adoption of a new constitutipn, which has been the admira-
tion of the world, and the successful launching of an experiment

33

5U

HI8T0BT OF WATEHBUR7,

in popular government hitherto untried on any immense scale.
It was a period which included great changes in the life of Europe
through the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon, and by
those changes the life of our own country was affected to no incon-
siderable degree. It was a period that saw the new nation hold
equal contest with the mother country, and attain to an unexpected
supremacy on the sea. It was a period in which the spirit of enter-
prise and business adventure led to results which are only now
beginning to be appreciated. It was a period in which the initial
wave of immigration first invaded the great west. It was a period
which gave to Connecticut a new constitution and forever abolished
hateful church distinctions before the law. During all the upheav-
als of the times, the life of rural Waterbury went on in quiet
remoteness, yet not in separation, from the great events which
made the world over.

SOME PROMINENT MEN OF THE PERIOD.

Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, son of Isaac and Mary (Morgan)
Bronson, was bom in Waterbury, at Breakneck, in June, 17 13. He
was a man of robust constitution, cheerful disposition and iron will,
and took a prominent part in the religious, social and military life
of the town. He belonged to a family, several members of which
were Revolutionary officers.

On July 23, 1735, ^® married Dinah, daughter of John Sutliff,
who died the following year. He married his second wife, Sarah,
the widow of David Leavenworth of Woodbury, May 15, 1740. She
lived until August 28, 1767, and was the mother of seven of his chil-
dren. A few months after her death, that is, on December 23, 1767,
he took to wife Rebekah, relict of Joseph Hurlburt of Woodbury.
After thirty years of married bliss she passed away on June 5, 1797,
and one year later (June 12, 1798) he married Mrs. Huldah Williams,
who survived him. He died, February 20, 1804, at the ripe age of
ninety. (For his children see Ap. p. 26.)

Captain John Welton, the eldest son of Richard and Anna
(Fen ton) Welton, was born January 6, 1726-7. He was a farmer of
Bucks Hill, and had only the ordinary advantages of an English
education. From an early period he was a prominent member of
the Episcopal society and held the office of senior warden. At the
beginning of the Revolutionary war he espoused the cause of the
colonies, became a moderate Whig and was confided in by the
friends of colonial independence. In 1784 he was appointed a jus-
tice of the peace, and the same year was elected to the legislature,
of which he was a useful and much respected member for fifteen

AN ERA OF RBC0N8TRVCTI0N.

sn

sessions. It is said that few men were listened to with more defer-
ence than he. He died January 22, 1816. (For his children see Ap,
p. 151. A sketch of his son Richard isg^iven in Volume II, page 238.)
Captain Amos Bronson, the eldest son of John and Comfort
(Baldwin) Bronson, was born February 3, 1730-1, at Mount Jericho
near the Naugatuck river. He fitted for college with the Rev.

John Trumbull of Westbury, and graduated from Yale in 1786. He
married Anna Blakeslec of Plymouth, and having become through
her influence an Episcopalian, educated his family in that faith. He
named his eldest son Tillotson, after the distinguished Church of
England divine of that name.

5i6 BISTORT OF WATBRBURT,

Captain Bronson built the turnpike road extending along the
banks of the Naugatuck from Jericho to Salem bridge, which in
those days was considered an achievement of no ordinary kind.
The new road obviated the necessity which had before existed of
fording the stream six times, and removing twenty-five or thirty
sets of bars in journeying between the two places which it con-
nected. He died in September, 1819. (For his children see Ap. p. 23.
A. Bronson Alcott, of whom a sketch is given in the chapter on
literature, was his grandson and namesake.)

Deacon Thomas Fenn, the son of Thomas Fenn of Wallingford,
was bom in that town in 1733, and while still quite young removed
with his parents to Westbury. On April 19, 1760, he married
Abiah, daughter of Richard and Anna (Fenton) Welton. He served
as a captain in the Revolutionary war, and was a representative
first of Waterbury, and afterward of Watertown, in the legisla-
ture. It is a remarkable fact that he was a member of the General
Assembly for thirty-five sessions, beginning in 1778. He was a
justice of the peace, and held the office of deacon in the Watertown
Congregational church for many years. Throughout his long life
he was an influential citizen, much respected by his fellow-towns-
men. He died August i, 1818. (For a list of his children see
Ap. p. 50.)

Lieutenant Jared Hill was born in North Haven in 1735. He
married Eunice Tuttle, who was bom in the same town in 1737.
Both were descended from the first colonists of New Haven, Eunice
Tuttle being a direct descendant of William Tuttle. They removed
to Waterbury in 1784, and purchased a farm on East Mountain.
They had twelve children, all of whom, except Samuel, were born
in North Haven. Jared Hill was a private in the French and
Indian war and a lieutenant in the Revolutionary war, and had the
reputation of being a good soldier. He died April 20, 18 16.

Samuel Hill, the youngest son of Lieutenant Jared Hill, was
born in Waterbury, September 4, 1784. In 1807 he married Polly
Brackett, eldest daughter of Giles and Sarah Brackett, who was
born in North Haven, November 17, 1786. He was educated at the
common schools and learned the carpenter's trade, which he fol-
lowed in summer during his life, but taught school in winter. He
was a fine musician and served in the capacity of fife major in the
Second regiment from 1807 to 18 18. In the chapter on literature
he appears also as a poet. He died April 26, 1834. After his death
the family removed to Naugatuck, where his wife died October 8,
1853. Both were buried in the Grand street cemetery, and their
remains were afterward removed to Riverside. For their first

AN ERA OF REGONBTBUCTION. 517

four children see Ap. p. 65. Besides these there were two others,
Ellen Maria and Robert Wakeman. (For R. W. Hill see under
"Architecture" in the second volume.)

Lieutenant Aaron Benedict, the son of Captain Daniel and
Sarah (Hickok) Benedict, was born in Danbury, January 17, i745-
In 1770 he removed to Waterbury, and settled in the eastern part of
what is now Middlebury. He was a leading man of the town, and
represented it in the legislature of 1809-10. He served in the
French and Indian war, and was a lieutenant in the war of the
Revolution. Mr. Benedict was a true type of the old-time, strong-
minded, public-spirited man. He was possessed of much more than
ordinary ability, and was the builder as well as an owner to a large
extent of the Straits turnpike, in the days when turnpikes held
the same relation to the country at large as railroads do at the
present time. On December 13, 1769, he married Esther Trow-
bridge, and died December 16, 1841. (See Ap. p. i8.)

Giles Brackett (written also Brockett) was born in North
Haven, April 30, 1761. On November 17, 1785, he married Sarah,
daughter of Deacon Stephen Smith of East Haven. Both he and
his wife were descendants of the first New Haven colonists, and his
mother was a direct descendant of the Rev. James Pierpont. He
was educated at the common schools, was bred a farmer, enlisted
and fought in the Revolutionary war, and at its close returned to
his farm in New Haven. In 1800 he removed with his family to
Waterbury. He lived first at East Farms, and afterwards bought a
farm on what is now Dublin street. He was a representative in
the General Assembly in 1809. He and his wife were for many
years members of the First church. They were persons of a happy
temperament, very courteous in demeanor, generous and thought-
ful of the happiness of others, honored and beloved by their family
and friends. Mr. Brackett died June 2, 1842, and his wife Novem-
ber 27, 1841.

Ethel Bronson was born in Waterbury, West Farms (now
Middlebury), July 22, 1765. He was the son of Isaac and Mary
(Brocket) Bronson, and a younger brother of Dr. Isaac Bronson
(Vol. II, p. 861). He was a prominent citizen of the town, a justice
of the peace and a member of the legislature for six sessions. In
May, 1804, he removed to Rutland, Jefferson county, N. Y., and
became the agent of his brother Isaac for the sale of lands. He
was three times elected to the New York legislature, was judge of
the county court in 1813, and was president of the Jefferson County
bank. On December 30, 1787, he married Hepzibah, daughter of
Joseph Hopkins, and died in 1825. "He was not ambitious for

5i8 HIBTOBY OF WATERBURT.

public office, but in those qualties that make a good citizen, a kind
neighbor and a valued friend, he was preeminent. He was kind
and liberal almost to a fault, yet public spirited and enterprising,
and possessed a character marked by the strictest integrity," (See
Ap. p. ZS-)

Giles Ives was born at North Haven, April 25, 1774. On October
9, 1799, he married Abigail Gilbert of Hamden, and soon after
removed to Waterbury. He lived on West Main street, a little west
of State street. He was a farmer, and a quiet man. but greatly
respected by all who knew him. He owned land near his home on

AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION.

519

West Main street, and State street was opened through his prop-
erty. (For his children see Ap. p. 76.)

The Hon. Alvin Bronson, second son of Josiah and Tabitha
(Tuttle) Bronson, and grandson of Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, was
born May 19, 1783. He attended the district school in winter and
worked at farming in summer until he was thirteen years of age,
after which he spent twelve months in the family of Captain Isaac
Bronson, being engaged as an errand boy in a small country store.
For the next three years he was employed as clerk in the store of
Irijah Tyrrel, in Salem society. Afterwards for one quarter he
attended the well known school of James Morris, Litchfield South
Farms, and completed his education by spending a year with the
Middlebury pastor, the Rev. Ira Hart. Thus qualified, and before
the age of seventeen, he taught a district school in Woodbridge.

After serving again as a clerk for a year and half, he went into
business as a merchant on Long Wharf, New Haven, and for four
years conducted a successful trade with the West Indies. He after-
wards engaged in the coasting trade on the great lakes, and with
his partners conducted the larger part of the commerce of the
lakes for the two years preceding the war of 1812. They established
a store at Oswego — which afterwards became his home — and
another at Lewiston. During the war he was appointed military
and naval storekeeper, and was captured with the remnant of
stores on hand. After the war the business was resumed, and car-
ried on until 1822. In 1822 he was elected to the New York state
senate, and in 1829 was returned again and placed on the finance
committee, upon which he served for three years. As chairman of
that committee he prepared an elaborate report on capital, cur-
rency, banking and interest, which was published as ** Senate Docu-
ment, No. 106, April 12, 1833," and attracted much attention.

He furnished to Dr. Bronson's History of Waterbury an inter-
esting autobiography which fills pages 450 to 455.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

THE LIFE OF THE PEOPLE FROM 1783 TO 1825 — THEIR MANNER OF DRESS
AND THEIR CUSTOMS — THEIR HOLIDAYS AND HOW THEY OBSERVED
THEM — THE WAY IN WHICH THEY LIGHTENED THEIR TOIL BY
MAKING PLAY OF WORK — THEIR OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH —
SOME DISTINCTIONS IN EARLY MORALS — THEIR AMUSEMENTS PURE
AND SIMPLE — SOME OF THE PROMINENT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
"AGE OF HOMESPUN."

IN the chapter preceding this we have considered the principal
events which belong to the period from 1783 to 1825, both
national, state and local. We may now turn from the things
which the people did and the things which happened to them, to
the people themselves, the manner of their life, how they dressed,
their interests, amusements and customs. As we all know in a
general way, the inhabitants of Waterbury early in the century did
not fret greatly about the fashions, although they looked to France
for them in those days just as we do to-day. The men wore broad-
brimmed hats, broad-tailed coats with huge pockets, long waistcoats,
breeches and worsted socks. The socks, except those of the parson
and the doctor, which were silk, were knit at home by the wives.
The women had small pinched bonnets,* linen short-gowns for work,
and dresses with the waist as abrupt as possible and the skirt very
scant. Pretty girls, however, never looked prettier than they did
in those days, with muslin "Vandykes" over their shoulders. The
house-mothers had small shawls worn in the same way. Their
garb, uncouth as it may seem to us to-day, was suited to their needs,
and, being home-made, endured "to the third and fourth genera-
tion." Almost every woman possessed one good silk gown brought
from over the sea, carefully laid away in lavender in her chest of
drawers, to be looked at on stated occasions, smoothed with a lov-
ing hand and put by again with a half -sigh for memory's dear sake.
Portraits taken at this date, showing the styles abroad, give dresses

* In z8o8, at the New England Methodist Conference in New London, the women had donned these
*' mode'* bonnets as the proper head-gear for this solemn occasion. During the week before, the one mil-
liner of the town had made seventeen of these, each one a little more ** pinched " than the preceding; a
minute model for them having been brought by a circuit preacher from Middletown in a snuff-box ! The
reader will remember how the elderly maiden in Longfellow's " Hyperion," having but a scant supply of
ribbon, as she sat on the left side of the aisle, charged her milliner to " put the bow on the meetin'-house
side of the bunnit."

LIFE IN THE '* AGE OF HOMESPUN,"

S2I

much like the recent popular " princess " robe. One of these pic-
tured ladies, in a toilet worn at Madam Washington's first reception,
has on a huge brown hat flaring at the crown, with a heavy cord and
tassel knotted round it above the brim. In 1811 a woman looked as
if clothed in a long, scant, loose gown, corded at the waist with
many frogs d la militaire down the front. The bonnet was as much
like a coal-scuttle as anything to which we can compare it, with an
amazing knot of feathers over the edge, the hair bunched above the
eyes and curled down on the cheeks like "Crazy Jane." By 1815
the brim had spread, the crown in style like a two-quart measure
rose with a mass of plumes on one side, and a military cape, much
trimmed, covered the shoulders. Altogether madam looked like a
female trooper. In 1820 the huge-brimmed hat came into vogue
and feathers galore topped it off.* The waists were now "indi-
cated," the sleeves being high on the shoulders and puffed to the
wrist. A turnover collar, a knotted scarf and a heavy, brilliant
long shawl with embossed borders were "all the go." The hair was
parted in the middle and much be-crimped. By 1828 the milliners
had changed the bonnet to a flaring hat, with huge puffs of hair on
each side of the head and portentous bows wherever they could
stick them. An over-dress, with huge sleeves, pointed cuffs, collars
reaching out beyond the shoulders and opening over an embroidered
skirt, made, strange to say, a very pretty costume. The military
style of 181 1 and 1815 had passed away with the war, and a really
lady-like garb was coming in. Does one think that these changes
affected Waterbury ? A writer speaking of New London, which
was a maritime town with vessels constantly going and coming,
and thus keeping constantly in touch with the outside world, says
that in 1820 the women still clung to the funny little close bonnet
fastened on with long pins, the plain linen cap with close border,
and the short red cloak with the hood falling back. The men still
wore enormous steel shoe-buckles and vast checkered pocket-hand-
kerchiefs.f Would not the little inland towns pattern their style
of dress after one which knew " what was what " in the great out-
side world, because it was constantly " trading " with it ?

We think of those days, and rightly, as simple days, when pomp
and show and vanity of -dress were but little esteemed as compared
with the importance in which they are held to-day. But do we not
exaggerate the simplicity of those earlier days ? At any rate, when
the rank and fashion of the colonial time, and even of the time

♦ Ooe» considered the height of perfection, worn by a young belle on her first visit to the capital, would
have held in its crown two volumes of the Waterbury History,
f Miss Calkins' History of New London.

522

HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

following the inauguration of the Republic, appeared in their finest
on some day of state, the effect was artistically brilliant much
beyond any ordinary gathering of our own time. It must have
aroused a spirit of pride in mere externals that savors very much
of the same devotion to fashion which we moderns deplore. For
example, Edmund Quincy, in his chapter on Commencement day
contributed to the " Harvard Book," thus describes the scene:

The old meeting-house, which was admirably constructed to display an audi-
ence, must have had a gorgeous effect in the days of gold lace and embroidered
waistcoats and peach-bloom coats, of silver- hil ted rapiers, of brocades, of the
"wide circumference of hoops and the towering altitude of crape cushions." I
recollect a venerable lady telling me how she sat up ail night in an elbow chair the
night before Commencement in 1753, for fear of disturbing the arrangement of her
hair, which had to be dressed then or not at all, such was the demand for the ser-
vices of the fashionable coiffeur of the time.

From this last little incident it is evident that the minor vanities
held strong sway then in the feminine bosom, and it is not probable
that they lost any of their seductive charm with the passing of the
years.

But to return from a state occasion at New England's princi-
pal capital to the ordinary life of humbler Waterbury. We have
spoken of materials for clothing as being raised at home. An itin-
erant weaver * dressed other people's cloth, put up his loom and
tossed his shuttle, in nearly every household. He was followed by
the tailor, who twice a year made up the various garments of the
various families. It may be interesting to note in this connection
the cost of these humble services. We have the bill of a tailor who
followed his craft here in Waterbury, for the years 1818-20, for the
board and other expenses of John Morse, son of Josiah Morse, who
began boarding, so the bill states, with the man who presented it,
December 17, 1818. The items are as follows:

1818.

Oct. 28. To making pantelloons, . . . $ '33

To footing stockings, . . .25
1819.

Jan. 14. To making vest, . . .42

To silk and twist for vest, , .12

April 30. To cloth pan telloons and making the same, . 2.50

♦" To the Promoters of American MaDufacture": William Russell, Stocking Weaver, "is positive that if
furnished with good yam— slack-twisted — he can turn out in hb loom gloves and stockings preferable to the
imported." — Litchfield Monitor of March 6, //Q?.

James Sutton, one of the first Irishmen who came to Waterbury to live, was a weaver. In 18x3 he worked
for Austin Steele. Tommy Hood of the same trade fled to Waterbury, having got into trouble with the gov-
emment.

LIFE m THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUNS

523

June 8. To four yards of cotton shirting, 33 cents per yard, 1.32

To making two cotton shirts, . . . . .60
To one yard and a half of striped linnen and making the

same, . . . . . . . .75

To two yards of woollen cloth, one dollar and 33 cents

per yard, ...... 2.66

To trimings and making pantelloons, . . .33

To one pair of woollen stockings, . . . .50

To two yard and quarter of woollen cloth, . 3.95

To making coat , ...... 1.50

To 14 gilt buttons, ..... .50

To silk twist and thread for coat, . . . .20

To cloth for pantelloons and making, . . 1.50
June 8. To two yards and half of linnen cloth, thread and making

the same, ...... i.oo

To four yards of cotton cloth, thread and making, 1.75

To triming and making vest, . . . . .33

Nov. 10.

1820.
Jan. 12.
Mays.

$ 20.50
To board and schooling at ten shilling per week two

years ending Sept. 17, 1820, . . . 173.33

To boots and shoes found by Andrew Bryan, . 10.00

Total,

$203.83

To provide shoes for the household, every hide was saved and sent
to the tanner, being returned in assorted leather. The ambulating
son of Crispin arrived at set seasons with his lapstone and awls,
and did not leave until every foot was shod. We have said that the
woollen stockings were knit by " women-folk *' at evening. Light
was expensive in the remote days of which we write, and farmers
and farmers' wives were too tired, even if they had the desire, to
sit up very late. Generally, linless in case of illness or death, small
towns like Waterbury were darkened ere daylight had fairly fled.
As for knitting, however, experts could "set on," or "bind off," or
" round a heel," by the sense of touch alone. The tallow " dips,"
which were the sole dependence for lighting, were expensive,
although they were home-made. The smallest odds and ends were
therefore preserved and burnt out on sharp points provided for the
purpose, set on a spring in the handsoitie brass candlesticks which
had a place in so many households, heirlooms from beyond the sea.
Flax was raised and put through the various processes of rotting,
hackling, dressing, and last of all, spinning. The little wheel was
a familiar friend, and ladies of wealth and position did not scorn to
produce the finer kinds of thread, though in large families the burden

524 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT,

of this work was generally borne by some itinerant spinner.* The
women of those days also had the sensible habit of finding pleasure
in work. The girls of the period were often accustomed to take
their wheels with them when they went to pay a visit, and thus for
a day or two, perhaps longer, hostess and guests would pass the
hours of spinning in social chat.

Cotton, that is, raw cotton, was as yet a curiosity, and it was not
known whether it grew on a plant or on an animal.f Every farmer
(and Waterbury folk were principally agricultural at this time) pos-
sessed a few sheep, and the wool from these was spun at home.
Merinos had become a craze and fortunes were made and lost in a
day. A ram was sold for $1000 and a ewe for $100. Col. Humphrey
of Humphreysville (now Seymour) imported 300 in 1810. The
Hon. N. B. Smith of Woodbury won a fine gold medal as a prize
for a ram exhibited at one of the annual cattle fairs of that day at
Brookline, Mass. These fairs would be counted remarkable even
to-day. The cattle shown were often of the finest breeds and came
from remote parts of the several states. Returning from the sheep
to the spinning of their wool in the household, we find that the
most ordinary sight, as one entered, was the dye-tub which stood in
the deep chimney corner, well covered over. On cold winter nights
it formed a most desirable, cosy seat, which was well appreciated
by the young people. S. G. Goodrich tells us :

When the night had come and the rest of the family had gone to bed— they did
not "retire" in those days— the dye-tub became the anxious seatf of some lover
whose lady fair sat demurely in the opposite corner. Some of the •' first families
in Connecticut " can tell of such courtships.

As was natural, the houses of those days were as unpretentious
as the manner of living. Once in a while we find a house which
might be called a ** mansion," and contained a ball room, but resi-
dences of this class were conspicuous for their rarity. Perhaps as
good a type as any of the better class of houses was that of Mr. John
Nichols. Afterward remodelled it became the residence of the late

* John McCloud, the first ScotchmaD to locate in Waterbury,'earl/ in the century, was a flax-draper.

It is pleasant to record the fact that she who did the spinning with such amazing skill in the New
England cottage at the Centennial at Philadelphia in 1876, and also at the *■*■ Wayside Inn " at the World*8
Fair of 1893 in Chicago, is a resident of Waterbary. She was the cynosure of all eyes at both those great
exhibitions. People who meet her to-day, when her spinning-wheel is not in Bight, are surprised to find her
anything but aged and snow-white of hair. With flying flngers and swift feet she makes the ** big wheel"
sing and whirl merrily. Those who have the good fortune to stand near her on such an occasion have the
chance of beholding the very " poetry of motion " in the active person of Miss Mary L. Tower.

t In 1894 we raised 67-zooths of the world's production of cotton for that year.

X No chaperone was required then or dreamed of, unless, perchance, the coming in of the '^ father" to
wind up the clock might, as it creaked aggravatingly, be considered a suggestion of watchfulness over a
pretty daughter. Within the dye-tub itself, associated with so many possibilities of romance, was the "blue"
for the linsey-woolsey short-gowns, aprons and mixed stockings.

LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN,"

525

Dr, James Brown and stood on the site selected for the new High
school.* This house, it is said, as well as several other houses of
the class, was copied from an old house in Farmington, built by an
officer in Burgoyne's army who was quartered there after the sur-
render.f There were few wealthy people in Waterbury at this
period, although the story is probably apocryphal that but one man
in the town could get his note discounted at the New Haven bank.
Those were the days when $20,000 was looked upon as a fortune.
Socially speaking, Farmingbury (now Wolcott), West Farms (now
Middlebury), and Westbury (now Watertown), were probably in
advance of Waterbury. They were conceded to have greater
wealth. A curious evidence of this fact is found in the superiority
of the Watertown stores, for it was generally customary, at least in
the earlier part of our period, for people here to go to Watertown
to do their shopping. It took v«ery little, judging by our standard,
to make one " well off.*' The family of the widow Tamar Hotch-
kiss, living on East Mountain, is instanced. This family had money
at interest — the widow having received a pension for her husband,
who had been a soldier in the Revolution — owned the only cider
mill in the neighborhood, and bought wheat flour by the barrel.
The "general run" of people at this time were satisfied with rye
flour and corn meal and an occasional ten pounds of wheat, bought
for some special occasion, such as Thanksgiving. This illustrates,
in a homely way, how little it then took to live in comparative
luxury. Carriages of any sort were very rare in the early part of
the nineteenth century. There was but one wheeled gig in Water-
bury for a long time. Pleasure coaches were all imported. When
Pierpont Edwards drove through the state in 1798 in a four-wheeled
chariot, he attracted more attention than would a coaching party
of New York "swells'* in a very remote country village to-day.
Most of the travel that was not on foot was on horseback, the
women, as a rule, using pillions and riding behind. A little
later, the "riding-cloth** came in. This was a large piece of cloth
attached to the back of the saddle. When in use it was spread out
on the horse's back and the extra rider sat on it, facing the animal's
tail. When not in use it was rolled up at the back of the saddle.
Whole families went to church on horseback, "ride and tie,*' as it
was called. The father and older children started ahead, the mother
and the smaller ones following on the back of the family horse.
When the latter overtook the pedestrians there was often an ex-

♦ See Vol. II, page 346.

t There was a pretty one and a half story house with a veranda — something of an exception — with
dormer windows, where the building of the Young Men's Christian association now stands, as noted by Mr.
Kingsbury.

526 HISTORY OF WATERBUUY.

change, the mother taking her turn at walking. There were few
social distinctions in those days, at least in this part of New Eng-
land. In Massachusetts and in New York, as well as in New Hamp-
shire, the lines were drawn more strictly. The minister was the
most conspicuous social figure in the ordinary New England town.
When he jogged by in decorous fashion on horseback, the children
were expected to form in line and make their " obeisance." His
pastoral calls were events, and his word was largely law in many of
the more important affairs of the town. He often stayed in the one
parish during his life and commanded general respect, mingled
sometimes with more or less of awe. The descriptive phrase "a
pope in his parish " is not without literal truth when applied to
this period. The other two learned professions had a prestige then
which they have almost entirely lost to-day. A man who repre-
sented a college education stood for social superiority because of
that fact — something which we no longer accord to mere learning.
This is in its way a tribute to the place which "brains" held in the
general esteem at that time. If one were to assign a social rank to
the three professions, the minister must come first, the lawyer
second, and the doctor third. All, as a rule, were more or less
farmers, especially the minister, who eked out his narrow income
by cultivating his land. It is stated that one country clergyman
of this period, whose salary was only $500 a year, started suc-
cessfully in the world a family of two sons and six daughters,
giving each daughter $500 as a dowry when she married. This
was accomplished by thrift, by prudent management of the farm,
and by taking boys to board and fitting them for college. This
case is typical of many other clergymen of this period. When
the minister travelled, the houses of his brother ministers were
always thrown hospitably open to him, and the drain on his
resources was small. The doctor, nearer the end of the period
under review, made his rounds in a two-wheeled sulky, a vehicle
which had room for himself alone and for his supplies of medicine
Life was not then, any more than now, a ceaseless round of routine
toil. There was the occasional break, looked forward to no doubt
with anticipation, as the seasons brought around the great func-
tions of the year. Such were, in homely phrase, butchering-time,
candle-dipping day, soft-soap boiling, " sugaring-oflE," and other
similar opportunities of fun and frolic. These were important
events in every small town and every household. Small families
would club together and share one "beef critter" among them.*

* The itinerant butchers would only do their work at certain phases of the moon. Otherwise the meat
** would shrink in the pot.*'

LIFE IN THE '* AQE OF HOMESPUN."

527

Other families would each own a whole one, as their means per-
mitted. The larger farmers who had outside "help" would
often hang one to freeze solid "for fresh." It would remain so all
winter. On occasion the axe was resorted to, literally to hack out a
dinner or so. A second one would be " salted down." In midwinter
the hogs were "prime " for slaughter, if there was a good body of
clean dry snow * on the ground. On a certain day by early dawn the
work was begun. By nightfall the bodies were hanging in the out-
buildings to cool off. The next day they were cut up and salted,
certain portions being set apart for the toothsome sausage, others
for head-cheese, souse, ribs and roasts, and the tails for the young-
sters to cook in the ashes. Such hams are not known nowadays !
They were rubbed three times, at intervals of two weeks, with a
mixture of salt, sugar and spices in exact proportion, resting be-
tween times in a large cask, the drippings that oozed from them
being poured over them every day. When such ceremonies were
to take place, huge fires were lighted early in the big out-kitchens.
Heavy brass kettles were hung on the long-armed and many-hooked
cranes,f and an immense boiler sent up volumes of steam, which
froze on the rough-hewn beams, despite the roaring flames. On
butchering day, ghostly carcasses hanging to the beams in their
pink beauty were all that remained by nightfall to tell of the
tragedy of the past twenty-four hours. All the year round, a huge
open cask, raised above the ground, stood full to the brim of wood
ashes, with several spouts at the base. The soft rains of heaven
fell upon the ashes and formed the leach used in making the soap
of our ancestors. In the soap-making season, this product of ashes
and rain and clear brook water was poured into the big kettles to
do its work. That work consisted in eating up to the smallest
morsel the grease that had been saved and clarified throughout the
previous year for this special purpose. The work having begun,
you can see in the whirling mass that the grease is proving non-
resistant. Over and over it turns. After a certain point is passed,
it thickens into a marble-like brown mass. An expert stands by to
watch it, for it is evident that the "soap is comin'." The skilled
eye and the quick hand know what to do — to add more leach, to
boil further, or at the proper moment to dash in cold water and give
the mass a sudden chill. See how it feels this ! It whirls and
whirls, hesitates, gives one last long gasp, and the year's supply of
soap has "come."

* Spareribs and certaia other cuts were packed in snow in barrels, and set where they would keep frozen
for weeks, a first-class ** cold storage " being thus provided,
t See Longfellow's " Hanging of the Crane."

528 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

Candle-dipping day was an equally busy one in the late fall. A
monster brass kettle received the tallow, which was put through
two scaldings and skimmings. When strained, this was lifted oflE
the fire and placed in two deep vessels one-third full of water. The
wicks were prepared the evening before, men, women and children
making merry over the work. They cut the wicking into lengths
and twisted these sharply one way, then slid them, doubled, over
the long, slender candle-rods, when they themselves twisted readily
in the opposite direction. With the two rods between the fingers
of each hand, the solemn process of dipping began. Down into
the melted tallow and up into the air went the wicks. At first very
little tallow adhered, but soon, dip following dip, one began to see
that candles were forming. " Six to a pound '* and long and thick!
Before a great while others must be dipped. New workers took
hold and gave the first a chance to rest their aching arms. When
all this was over, long racks of rods hung heavily laden with candles
between rails raised on bricks. The end had been reached and the
supply of light, such as it was, had been produced for the ensuing
year. The new " dips " were now ready for use.

When the days grew longer, and it " froze o' nights and thawed
daytimes," they watched the maple trees as they began to drip from
the point of every little twig. Then the elder spouts, which the
boys had whittled out in the evenings by the blaze of the big fire,
were taken out, examined and made ready. Every farmer had at
least a few maple trees, and those of a certain age were tapped, sev-
eral auger holes being bored, above and below, four or five feet
from the ground. If the trees were of generous girth, a second line
of holes was usually made at the base. Into these the elder spouts
were inserted and pails were hung beneath them. In warmer days
the pails filled fast. Every passer-by was privileged, even expected,
to stop and take a drink. All day, until the evening chill checked
the running, the men and boys of the farm carried in the flowing
pails, and emptied them into barrels, where by nightfall there was
usually a sufficient supply for boiling down. Then merry groups
gathered in the big out-kitchens where, since mid -afternoon, fires
had been roaring under the hugh brass kettles. These were no
ordinary fires, for into them went the selected odds and ends of the
wood-pile, seasoned for the purpose. There were moments of diver-
sion from the work in hand. Potatoes and corn were roasted,
apples toasted, and prophetic nuts* were placed on the andirons.

*The prophetic nuts were placed on the andirons in pairs and were anxiously watched. Some of these
couples hopped apart, some burst apart, some would jump into the fire together. Rarely, one would pop
out on to the bare floor, its mate following quicicly after. This wa<t considered an omen of future marriage.

LIFE IN TEE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN," 529

Presently there was a hush. The chief of ceremonies holds up his
hand. The exciting moment has come when the syrup is ready for
" stirring off." Four stalwart men lift off the big kettles and set
them on bricks placed on the floor. With long, paddle-shaped
sticks, they stir the seething, ropy mass. Slower and slower move
the paddles, as the resistance of the syrup increases. This marks
the end of the process of granulation, and sugar-making labors for
this season are over. If "sugaring off" proved a merry time in
the spring, " commoning day " in the fall was looked forward to
with eagerness, at least by the small boys. This was the time after
the grass had been cut and the crops removed from the common
field, when it was the custom to turn in the cattle, horses and
sheep, for pasture. This description of it is given in Bronson's
" History " :

It was the practice to name the day on which the fields should be *• cleared " and
when the people might turn in their cattle, etc., "commoning day." This was
late in September or early in October. At the appointed time, early in the morning
or immediately after sundown, the whole town was astir. All the four-footed
beasts that lived by grazing were brought out. driven in long procession to the
meadow gates, and '* turned in " to crop the fresh herbage. There they remained,
luxuriating and gathering fatness, till the late autumnal frosts, The writer's recol-
lection, extending forty years back (the period referred to is about 181 5), furnishes
him with some refreshing scenes connected with the opening of the common field.
Boys who used to drive the cows a mile to pasture hailed the time with lively
feelings.

One of the occasions of general work and fun which should not
be overlooked was the ** raising." It was enjoyed with all the more
zest because it came only at rare intervals. In long lines, the
neighbors who gathered handled the immense beams and their
tackle of heavy ropes, while the small boys stood around ready with
their baskets of pins. Well built were the houses of those days and
long did they last, as a survivor, scattered here and there over our
New England, testifies even to this day. Of course, there were
refreshments served, consisting principally of doughnuts and cider
and the women enjoyed the occasion perhaps as much as the men.
They often sang at their work, some person being appointed to
** deacon off" the lines. When it was a church raising, this singing
was an important part of the services, if such they may be called.
They tell a story of Pierpont Edwards, the unsanctified relative of
the saintly Jonathan Edwards, which shows that exuberant spirits
in those days were not held as completely in check as is now popu-
larly supposed. A certain country parish in Connecticut started to
build a new church. The structure got as far as the roofing, when
the money gave out and the work stopped. What was to have been

34

530 HISTORY OF WATERS UBT.

a sanctuary stood some years in its bare framework, when finally it
tumbled down. This was regarded as disgraceful and a new efifort
was put forth to build the meeting-house. Pierpont Edwards was
appointed to " deacon oflE " the hymn at the raising. They sang
with a will the first two lines which he gave them:

Except the Lord doth build the house
The workmen toil in vain;

but they were somewhat startled when he gave them the next

two lines: Except the Lord doth shingle it,

'Twill tumble down again.

Our ancestors — to return to the every-day round of ordinary
life — were not dependent for their meat on the pork barrel,
important as it was, or on the salted and "hung" beef.
Although mutton was rare, there was always plenty of poultry.
Geese * and turkeys abounded in every barn-yard of any size. The
ganders were plucked twice a year. The turkeys, as a rule, were
fine specimens. The breed was constantly improved by the big
wild birds. " Spoiling for a fight," they paid frequent visits in the
spring to the barn-yard fowls. Immense flocks of pigeons f fairly
darkened the air as they flew over in September and October.
They fell victims by the thousands to nets, decoy birds and hun-
dreds of old muskets. There were also not a few vegetables in those
days to give variety to the diet. These included potatoes, onions,
squashes, beets and turnips principally. The usual bread was a
mixture of rye and Indian meal. Wheat bread was scarce and only
brought out for company or used in the sacrament of the Lord's
supper. The table of the plain people was generously spread, the
whole household, including the "help," as a rule sitting down
together. The menu included often, in addition to what has been
mentioned, hash served with cresses, mustard and horse-radish, hot
cakes and maple syrup, apple butter, J honey, doughnuts, pickles,
ginger cakes, and pies of every kind and variety. In Waterbury,
that still popular favorite, turkey and cranberry sauce, was evi-

* Flocks of wild geese, fiying south, sometimes dropped an exhausted or wounded bird. This stranger
would remain contentedly with the barn-yard fowls until spring. In a case known to the writer, the mate of
the deserting bird left the flock, too, and joined it. The next year, after several flocks had gone northward,
the pair recognized the cry of their own flock, the last that season. They gave an answering ** honk,*' rose
into air, and flew away with their companions from whom they had been so long separated.

t A traveller by the name of Bennett, writing of New England in 1740, speaks of the immense quantities
of these wild pigeons. He says: ** They are larger and finer than any we can procure in London, and of
a deliciously wild, gamy flavor. They sell for 18 pence a dozen. "

t This was a sauce of apple and quince, put down in the fall to freeze for winter use; or a sauce made
of sweet apples and boiled cider, preserved in the same way.

LIFE m THE *'AQE OF HOMESPUN."

531

dently a favorite then. In proof of this may be mentioned the
significant fact that two frolicsome brooks were named Turkey
and Cranberry brooks, respectively — brooks that never failed to
remind people of their existence at every flood time.

A great addition to the comfort of the home was the wood-pile.
Before the crops were planted in the spring, and after they had
been harvested in the autumn, several weeks were given up to
tramps in the forests, to procure the year's supply of wood. This
was not an insignificant task. In addition to the actual labor,
thought had to be given to the selection of the diflEerent kinds
needed, to the various supplies wanted, and to the matter of cutting
the different sizes. First the trees must be "blazed, " that is, those
to be chosen for firewood had to be marked in advance. Back logs
for the kitchen fire-place, usually five feet by three, required at
least two hundred huge hickory or walnut trunks four feet long
and twenty-four inches in girth. The second logs were much
smaller and shorter than the back logs. After these came the fore-
sticks, and hundreds on hundreds of others, fire building in those
days being an art on which much depended and which required
just the right assortment of wood. All these varieties, as soon as
the snow came, were sledded to the wood-yard. The custom of
turning work into fun and promoting sociability by community of
labor, of which we have had so many instances in these pages,
found fresh illustration in the *' wood spells, " which lightened the
toil of these expeditions. These were commonest when the parson-
age was to be supplied. The spoils of the forest being at last
safely landed in the back yard, the long, slim, snapping chestnut
sticks were selected for the brick oven. When they had been
reduced to coals, the latter were taken out with a long handled
shovel called a " peel." Then the oven was brushed out free from
dust and great pans of bread were put in to bake. Even after these
had been "drawn," there was still sufficient heat to bake the
numerous pies waiting their turn. After the pies came the pork
and beans, which were left in the oven all night. By morning they
were thoroughly cooked and ready for the breakfast table. Baking-
day was usually Saturday, and perhaps to this fact may be attrib-
uted the New England habit of making the Sunday breakfast of
pork and beans. While chestnut was the wood for the brick oven,
only hickory and oak were used in the fire-places. Other woods
were too dangerously apt to snap out into the room, and against
this there was little protection, as fenders were then almost
unknown. Ash was hardly used at all. It was so full of sap ♦ that
. — _ ■ ■ ■ ■ .

*Ash sap ^^boilias *' was regarded as a sovereign cure for ear-ache.

532 HISTORY OF WATERBURY,

it would put out a small fire. After they were once started for the
season, fires were built to last all the year round. It was no small
misfortune if the sparks were smothered after the fire had been
banked with ashes for a winter's night. This meant that a tin box
of blazing coals must be borrowed from the nearest neighbor, who
might live even a mile away. Of course these coals must be
brought back as quickly as possible, and this in turn meant that the
person who carried them must go at top speed. Hence arose the
old saying, "Have you come after fire?" when a neighbor made a
noticeably short call. As friction matches were unknown at this
time, the only recourse, if no blazing coals could be borrowed, was
the flint and steel. To use these required skill. When the flint,
struck sharply against the steel, threw out a spark or two, the
manipulator must catch these on some scorched linen or punk, and
quickly nurse them into a flame. As the flint might be dull or the
tinder damp and refuse to light, the process was often a tedious
one, very trying to the temper. Pine wood was used largely for
common furniture and coffins. " White wood " provided the lining
for bureau and table drawers. Curled maple was greatly sought
after by cabinet makers in the city for elegant bedroom sets. Oak
was largely used for beams and rafters. Big and dangerous — from
our point of view — as were the fires of those days, it is curious to
note that until the day of air-tight stoves few of those old-fashioned
houses burned down. That so many of them afterward succumbed
is thus explained: Up against the broad back of the ancient chim-
ney sparks climbed out in safety. When such a chimney was
boarded up and a pipe-hole was made for the stove, the pipe rested,
all unknown, against a coating of mortar. In process of time this,
dried and fell, and a vast chestnut beam was exposed. A hun-
dred times probably, when the pipe was red hot, the beam smoul-
dered a trifle and went out. But the hundred and first time it was
prime for a conflagration, and the grand old home was gone forever.
We have touched upon the ordinary routine of life and also upon
some of the ways in which our ancestors lightened their toil. This
is the " reverse " of the picture of those days which is so often held
up to us, reproducing the sternness which seemed to dominate their*
life. From some points of view it appears impossible to exagger-
ate the dark colors of the picture. That was a time when the
expression of emotion and tenderness was, as a rule, suppressed, as
unworthy of a spirit which was to conquer human nature in its
devotion to religious duty, and outward nature in its devotion to the
necessity of an environment of hardship. The watchword of this
doubly determined life was "discipline," and in the family the rule

LIFE IN THE '^ AQE OF HOMESPUN." 533

of this discipline was cast-iron. Lullaby songs were rare. Babies
of the household were often put to bed in the dark, and left to
whimper themselves to sleep. Says Nathaniel Smith, the first
Chief Justice of Connecticut:

I never remember that my mother took me upon her knee or kissed me. Birth-
days were passed by in silence, as though seasons to regret, and no tender gifts or
mementoes were ever exchanged between parent and child.

This is the dark side of the picture. It is the side, as has been
said, which has been so often held up to us that we have forgotten
that there is another. But that other side certainly existed. Not only
did our ancestors find amusement in their work, but they also had
amusements in which they indulged merely for the sake of amuse-
ment. Says Professor Dexter of Yale, in his monograph, '* New
Haven in 1784," read before the New Haven Historical society
(from which we have quoted in the preceding chapter) :

I have not time to dwell on details of the social life of a century ago; if it was
not the hurried and feverish life of the present, no more was it the ascetic and con-
strained life of a century earlier; there was abundance of gayety of a simple sort;
and the shopkeeper published prompt advertisements of the arrival of fresh
invoices of "gentlemen and ladies' dancing gloves for the City Assembly," of
*• chip-hats of the newest taste," of '* new figured, fashionable cotton, chintz and
calicoes, proper for ladies' winter dress," of "elegant figured shauls," of "ladies'
tiffany balloon hats," and so on ad infinitum^ — showing that human nature had the
same kind of interest then as now.

As one part of their social life, we must remember this as the time when domes-
tic slavery was general in New Haven. The importing of slaves was forbidden
since 1774, but the papers have ocasional, not frequent, advertisements for the sale
of likely negroes, or it may be a famil}" of negroes, in respect to whom " a good
title will be given "; sometimes it is for a term of years (perhaps till the attainment
of legal majority, when by the will of some former owner, freedom was to be
given), and sometimes it is noted that, in the lack of ready money, rum and sugar
will be taken in part payment. The relations of masters and slaves were in most
cases here the best possible; yet sensible men were uneasy under the inconsistency
of the system, and President Stiles writes in his diary in December, 1783: "The
constant annual importation of negroes into America and the West Indies is sup-
posed to have been of late years about 60,000. Is it possible to think of this with-
out horror ? "

This gives us a sketch in outline of the reverse of the picture to
which we have referred. We pass, then, to some of the relaxations
and amusements during the later years of the eighteenth century
and the opening years of the nineteenth, in which our ancestors
indulged distinctly for the sake of being amused. To begin with
boyhood, every lad could whittle, and whittling was a source of infin-
ite diversion in grown-up years as well as in boyhood. To the habit
of whittling we no doubt owe, in large part, the development of that

534

HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

Yankee ingenuity which made him a "Jack-of-all- trades." The typi-
cal Yankee, as readers of Mrs. Stowe's stories will remember, is
always represented as busily whittling when thinking, talk-
ing or simply idling. Those Yankees had good tools to whittle
with, fine steel jack-knives of England's best make. In the garret
on rainy afternoons much of the whittling was done, and it added
many useful "helps " for the mother. These "helps" included such
articles as wooden spoons, simple frames, reels for clothes lines,
and boxes that were wired together and ornamented with an etch-
ing burnt in on the cover. As Daniel Webster well says: ** The boy's
knife educated the nation of skilled mechanics and inventors."
This whittling was, in a way, more or less aesthetic. " The first
whistle my brother made for me from the gnarled old willow by
the brook," says the Hon. S. G. Goodrich, "had music in it for me
such as has never been equalled since." Wrestling was a natural
result of the superabundant bodily strength characterizing the men
of those days. Robust by birth, toughened by their out-of-door
life, as a matter of course they often matched strength with
strength, and delighted in pitting their local athletic champions
one against the other. Meetine: around a camp-fire, the match was
opened by the second-rate wrestlers. When one of these had been
" downed," the defeated champion would call upon another from
his side to resume the contest. The purpose was, of course, to tire
out and vanquish the victor. The matches between the Waterbury
and Westbury boys were famous. It was during one of these
matches that the Rev. John Trumbull, the Westbury pastor, threw
a braggart stranger (as related in full elsewhere) into the fire.
''Coasting" was a natural and favorite winter sport, and the happy
voices in some more lonely spot made the night musical with
shouts and laughter. A favorite coasting place in Waterbury was
the hill along whose ridge Hillside avenue now runs. The momen-
tum was sufficient to carry the coasters across " Bushell's bay " (the
frog pond which occupied the site of the present Waterbury Green),
and land them where the City hall now stands. This reminds us,
in passing, that this frog pond offered "no end of fun" to the small
boys in stoning its numerous occupants. Hunting was then as pop-
ular a sport as it is to-day, and much more generally practiced.
Every household was possessed of some kind of a musket or
"queen's arm." Every boy could shoot and shoot to kill. At one
time many beavers were to be found in Waterbury itself. In the
neighboring woods squirrels were numerous. In autumn pigeons
were to be had for the asking, and there were thrushes in the larger
trees. Bobolinks tempted the hunter from the tops of the tall

LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 535

weeds, and the doves in the bushes were an easy prey. The red
foxes were a nobler game; coon hunts were as popular then as now,
and the woodchuck was the special prey of the small boy.

Of all the principal occasions of the year, perhaps " training-day"
should be mentioned first. " Going to muster" was the grand annual
frolic. Every town which had sixty-four soldiers — only able-
bodied men were soldiers — and a sufficient number besides for offi-
cers, formed a foot company. The officers were elected by the men,
and two drums were allowed to each company. In smaller towns,
which lacked the required quota, only the sergeants and inferior offi-
cers were elected by the soldiers. These train-bands were by no
means merely carpet soldiers. In King Philip's war they were
called out more than once. In 1675 their efficiency was severely
tested, and the very existence of the colonies at this crisis depended
in no small degree on their thorough training. In more recent
times special volunteer companies, formed by men of tried military
experience, did on the whole better service than the train-bands,
and were more generally depended upon. On ** training-days " the
children were as much ** in evidence " as their elders. The booths,
containing generous supplies of gingerbread, were the especial
delight of the youngsters, and gave them a chance for extravagance
for which long preparation had been previously made in the hoard-
ing of stray pennies. This gingerbread was baked in large sheets,
and the question of how much, broken off from one of these sheets,
constituted a ** penny's worth " was a most important one. Another
day, dear to the youthful heart, was "Independence day," to use
the old-fashioned name. Then, as now, it was a day devoted to
noise. Its culmination was reached when some musty old cannon
was dragged forth from its hiding-place, loaded to its limit and dis-
charged to the infinite risk of life to all in the vicinity. Another
holiday of wide-spread popularity, which has now become simply a
local institution, was " Commencement day." Edmund Quincy, in
the " Harvard Book " (already quoted in this chapter), thus describes
its observance:

The whole population of Boston seemed to precipitate itself upon Cambridge.
The road was covered with carriages and vehicles of every description, with horse-
men and footmen going and returning. The common near the college, then unin-
closed, was covered with booths in regular streets, which, for days before and after,
were the scenes of riot and debauchery. The village indeed had the look of a fair
with its shows and crowds and various devices for extracting money from the
unwary.

What is true of the popular recognition of Harvard's Commence-
ment in Massachusetts applies equally to Yale's Commencement in
Connecticut. Every town sent its delegation of representatives to

536 HI8T0B7 OF WATERBURT.

take part in the festivities at New Haven. Ordinary people used
Commencement as a date to reckon by, as we use the Fourth of July
or Christmas. An amusing last century story is told by the Hon.
F. J. Kingsbury, of a woman living on a farm in this vicinity who
complained one year that her hops were undersized. " But," ex-
plained a neighbor, " you picked them too soon. It isn't time to
pick hops yet." " I always pick my hops on Commencement day,"
she replied. " But," returned the neighbor, " they have changed
Commencement. It came earlier this year," — something which the
woman could hardly believe possible, so sacredly immutable was
the festival. Among other stated occasions which permitted relax-
ation and social enjoyment, Thanksgiving day comes first in im-
portance. Originally, of course, it was a purely religious institu-
tion. But when it came to take the place of Christmas, its original
character was gradually modified and a large part of the day was
given up to hilarity and social mirth. Fast day, on the other hand,
retained its original character for a much longer period. Never-
theless, there is evidence extant that it was not entirely devoted by
everybody to prayer and fasting solely. Election day, at first
appointed for inaugurating the governor in his office, came in time,
as Professor William C. Fowler of Amherst says (in his " Notes " to
the Centennial papers prepared some years ago for the Congrega-
tional Conference in this state), ** faintly to resemble Coronation
day in England." On that day election-cake was to be found on
every tea-table, and election balls were fashionable in the evening.

Passing from special days to general forms of amusement, it is
to be noted that singing schools were a popular diversion with the
young people. In this vicinity they were often held on Sunday
evenings. Singing seemed a safe and appropriate outlet for pent-up
spirits which had been held under the strictest control from sun-
down of the Saturday evening before. It is said of those who con-
ducted these singing schools here in Waterbury that they were
more than usually successful teachers. Corn huskings — at which
finding a red ear carried with it the privilege of a kiss — occasional
barbecues and clam-bakes in the forest or by the sea-shore, sleigh-
riding in the winter, when frequently from ten to fifty sleighs were
brought into requisition, kite-fiying in the spring and ball-playing
in the autumn complete the list of the principal minor diversions.

There were certain institutions of those days which might pos-
sibly, from one point of view, be classed among the amusements,
although amusement was not properly their object. The ** vendue"
was one of these, that is to say, the public auction of goods and
chattels taken out on writs of execution and sold at public sale by

LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 537

the sherifiE at the whipping-post, where they had been previously
advertised. It is seldom at any time, or under any circumstances,
that a public auction fails to draw a crowd. In these earlier days,
in a village as quiet as was Waterbury then, the tap of the drum
which summoned would-be purchasers and mere on-lookers to the
scene of the auction must have met with a general response. The
whipping-post is another institution which certainly filled the place
of a public amusement, if it did not actually constitute such an
amusement.* It is a creditable statement to make that only at rare
intervals was any one found deserving of this debasing punishment.
But now and then there were cases where culprits were sentenced
to receive a half-dozen lashes on the bare back. As late as 1805 it
is recorded that on one occasion the school was " let out " that the
scholars might witness the whipping, and learn for themselves
what petty thieving, lying and brawling led to. The last man who
was publicly whipped in Waterbury was Walter Whelan. The
whipping- post was abolished by 1820, and by 1830 all reference to
it disappears from the statute-book. Some may be disposed to won-
der that public whipping should have lasted here in Connecticut
into the present century. But when we consider that objections
against public executions have only recently received anything like
a general recognition, one perhaps is led to wonder rather that the
whipping-post was abolished as soon as it was. It is interesting to
note in this connection that the whip for wife-beaters and other
brutal criminals has its advocates to-day among some of the most
advanced poenologists, and that in the most successful institution
of the kind in the world, the Elmira (N. Y.) reformatory, corporal
punishment is a most efiEective part of the system, and is recognized
as such by students of high standing.

In the category of such semi-amusements as we have been consid-
ering, it may not be unfair to include " going to funerals." When we
consider how many people in modern life, especially in the smaller
places, find a strange satisfaction in attending obsequies, it is per-
haps no marvel that at this older period the custom had so univer-
sal a vogue as almost to entitle it to be classed as an entertainment.
The scene at a country funeral can easily be pictured to him-
self by any one who is at all acquainted with rural New England
to-day, so persistently does the custom survive. In summer the
women crowded the house of mourning in decorous silence, while
the men were gathered about the doorsteps in small groups, and
some few sat upon the grass at a little distance or leaned against
the fence. The eulogy of the departed at times occupied an hour

* See further, Vol* II, p. 6a.

538

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

in its delivery, and as a matter of course included a detailed per-
sonal obituary.*

It must be noted before we leave the amusements of this period
that it was at the very end of it that the travelling circus first made
its appearance. It was of course a circus without a menagerie, but
included a clown and an exhibition of minstrels. The main part of
the programme was devoted to feats of strength and agility, and
the band played as noisily then as now when the performer made
his bow to the audience after the successful performance of his
"act."

In passing next to the more formal life of the people, it may be
said, perhaps to the surprise of some, that dancing was an amuse-

[

C^uarttr S^aiL

M^^

^iSe//nM ^'^^idyrrutrri^^

Is rc^pectfullfj solicited to attend a Bull at jB.
Ih Udell's Ball Hi om on JVediiesdai/^ Feb. Stlu,
m2,at2o\'l^c!:,P.M.

II. c ./OK, > JMana* C a- smith.

ment not tabooed, even by the more strictly religious, until the
latter part of our period. The balls were usually held in the state
room of the tavern, at least in the smaller towns, but the larger
residences often contained ball-rooms. This was true of the resi-
dence of David Hayden, Esq., which stood on East Main street
where the church of the Immaculate Conception now stands. We
give, in fac-simile, an invitation to a ball at Mr. Hayden's residence,
the original being in the possession of Mrs. S. E. Harrison.
The dances in which our ancestors indulged were, of course,
square dances and contra-dances, these last being such as the

* Funeral reform was not unheard of X30 years ago. The first number of the Conntcticut Courant^
dated at Hartford, October 99, 1764, says : " It is now out of fashion to put on mourning at the funeral of
the nearest relation, which will make a saving to this town of ;^9o,ooo sterling per annum. "

LIFE IN THE '' AOE OF HOMESPUN/' 539

Virginia reel and "money musk" — " straight figures," as they were
called. The change in public opinion in regard to the propriety of
dancing among religious people of the stricter view dates probably
from the revival conducted here in Waterbury in 1817-18 by the
Rev. Asahel Nettleton, the celebrated revivalist. As related in
another chapter, Dr. Nettleton labored in Waterbury for some
two years, and he produced a strong impression upon the religious
views of those who came within the sphere of his influence. It is
rather curious to note in this connection that Dr. Nettleton himself
first felt what the old theologians called " conviction of sin " after
attending a ball on Thanksgiving night in 1800. This was at North
Killingworth, when Nettleton was a farmer's lad just about old
enough to go to balls. His young companions at this time were
making arrangements to establish a dancing school and naturally
expected his cooperation. This he would not give them, although
he refused to tell the reason. When later in life he became a revi-
valist, his views on the subject of the sacrifice that Christians
should make were so intense and severe that it is not remarkable
that they led to a very general abandonmeut of dancing in those
parts of New England where he preached. Here is a typical extract
from one of his sermons:

For what does the sinner sell the blessings of the Gospel? Not for value
received, but for mere trifles — one morsel of meat — a momentary gratiflcation —
for these he parts with the joys of Heaven. It may be for the sake of present ease
— or for a title of worldly honor — a puff of noisy breath — or perhaps for the sake of
obliging a conipanion, who is the enemy of God — or for the sake of indulging some
beloved lust. In the indulgence of these pleasures, the conduct of the sinner may
be attended by the stings of conscience. It is true no one expects to complete the
bargain. But many do it. Temptation comes and conviction goes.

The change of view during this period in regard to dancing is thus

summarized by Professor Fowler of Durham in his " Notes, "

already quoted in this chapter:

Dancing was for a period a frequent amusement among the young people in
most of the towns in the commonwealth of Connecticut. The people learned good
manners, first from the district schools, secondly from public worship, thirdly from
the military, and fourthly from dancing. But in time there grew up an opposition
to dancing among certain religious people of the Congregational order. So great
was the opposition that in some places it led to church censures. In one case, a
deacon, an excellent man, at the marriage of his son took one or two dancing steps
in passing through the room where they were dancing, to obtain his hat. For this
he was brought before the church to make his confession. This he refused to do,
declaring that he could not see any wrong in what he had done, but was willing to
say that he was sorry that he had grieved any of the brethren.

Professor Fowler mentions a number of similar cases. One was
that of a young lady, highly educated and of excellent character,

540 HISTORY OF WATERS UBT,

who was also a member of the church, and who had attended
a ball with the approval of her father and mother, they, too,
being church members. One of the deacons of the church
requested the pastor to commence proceedings of church disci-
pline, but to his credit be it recorded that he refused to do it.
Another is the case of a young man who was excommunicated for
attending a ball which he had been admonished not to attend by
some of his fellow church members. Professor Fowler adds:

Dancing masters were employed and dancing schools patronized by the people,
though some had conscientious scruples concerning the practice. These scruples
were in some cases, however, ingeniously put at rest. A miss of twelve from the
country, spending the winter in New Haven, was sent by her friends in that city to
a dancing school. This fact became known in due time to her neighbors in the
country, one of whom said to her mother, while in company: ** I hear that your
daughter attends dancing school in New Haven." The mother evasively replied:
*• She attends a ' manner school.' " '* Oh, is that all ?*' rejoined the neighbor; " it is
a good thing to attend a manner school. "

Professor Fowler also notes that dancing was not uncommon at

weddings, and that the mirth was often uproarious. He makes this

quotation from Mrs. Emma Willard's sprightly poem entitled

"Bride Stealing":

Next creaked the tuning violin,
Signal for dancing to begin —
And goodly fathers thought no sin.
When priest was by, and at a wedding,
Peggy and Molly to be treading.
Nay — spriest himself, in cushion dance,
At marriage feast would often prance.
The pair of course led up the ball,
But Isaac likdd it not at all.
Shuffle and cut he would not do.
Just bent his form the time to show,
As beaux and ladies all do now;
And when the first eight-reel was o'er.
Stood back to wall and danced no more;
But watched the rest above them rising,
Now chatting — then thus criticising:
** When Christian fathers play the fool,
Fast learn the children at such school;
Better it were to mind the soul,
And make the half-way covenant whole;
And priest, when son like that he sees,
Were best at home and on his knees."

In the early part of the period, in remote rural communities
(a description which fits Waterbury at that time) the dancing was
characterized by a simplicity that now seems almost incredible-

LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 541

Unoccupied houses were often chosen as the scene of the dances,
and the only refreshment was well water, which had to be drawn
with an old-fashioned sweep. The girls of that time were not infre-
quently accustomed to dance in iheiv bona fide hsiTQ feet. It is always
a subject of curious study to note the moral distinctions of any
given period. At the very time when dancing came under the ban,
when Sabbath-breaking was thought to be almost as heinous as
house-breaking, and when card-playing was looked upon as wicked
in the extreme, taking chances in a lottery was considered a per-
fectly legitimate form of speculation. During the agitation against
the established Congregational body, when the Episcopal church was
so justly indignant at the few privileges granted to it (a subject
which has been reviewed at length in the preceding chapter), license
was granted to that body to "run a lottery'* to increase the bishop's
fund. In discussing this subject, in his address as president of the
American Social Science association (1894), Frederick J. Kingsbury
says:

There certainly is what may be called a fashion in morality. I had occasion not
long since to examine the papers of a lawyer and judge who held a deservedly high
social position in the community where he lived a hundred years ago. I was some-
what startled, I might almost say shocked, at finding among them a great number
of lottery tickets. But when I came to see the purpose to which the proceeds of the
lotteries were to be applied, and remembered the history of the times, I was
relieved. A hundred years ago the lottery was the popular form of benevolence. I
found tickets in lotteries for building churches, endowing colleges and schools,
building bridges, augmenting a fund for the support of a bishop— for almost every
form of worthy and commendable public enterprise. In the same receptacle, side
by side with the lottery tickets, I found the record of a public prosecution against
an individual for permitting a game of cards to be played in a private house. And
I said, ** Who are the righteous, and where are the foundations?" Like Mrs. Peter-
kin, I sat down and thought, but with the same result that attended Sam Lawson's
cogitations as described in *' Oldtown Folks." *' Sometimes," said Sam, " I think —
and then again — I don't know."

Consideration of the varying moral standards which obtain in
difiEerent communities and at different times suggests naturally
the different view of drinking and of drunkenness which then pre-
vailed. The great temperance reform had its beginning in the ear-
lier part of the century and belongs to the period of which we are
writing. The main facts of that early agitation may be found in
the chapter devoted to philanthropy and reforms. The extent
of the drinking habit was such that one wonders why the reform
did not find an earlier beginning. As a matter of course, the
under cupboard in almost every household was well stocked
with various kinds of liquors. Cider was the universal table bev-
erage, and West India rum was in general use. Every laborer had

542 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

his half-pint per day, especially in summer weather, and to neglect
to offer a drink to a friend was a confession of poverty few were
williiig to make. The ever present demijohn filled with mm stood
always at hand for hospitality or for private use, and the morning
dram was almost as regularly taken — by the men at least — as was
the breakfast. At installations and at funerals alike the hospitable
glass was passed frequently and potently. The Rev. Dr. John
Todd of Pittsfield has testified to the fact that he once actually saw
toddy mixed on the lid of the coffin. The following description
of the Rev. Noah Benedict of Woodbury is representative of the
period:

On general trainings, the band, with beating of drum and squealing of fife,
formed in two lines before the parsonage. At this signal, the reverend clergyman
proceeded to the making of a most bewildering mixture consisting of rum, and
eggs, and sugar, and boiling water. Two huge handled glass mugs, daintily
engraved in Old England, now received their fill of the drink of New England.
The gentleman, in his long silken robe of ceremony, with cocked hat, silk stockings
and silver shoe-buckles, made ready to go out and greet the band. One last cere-
mony, one important touch, was given when with a red-hot iron he stirred up rap-
idly that which now became flip! He bowed to the delighted men, took a swallow
from each mug, and then passed them around until all had had a taste. Heading
the procession, he next led them to the tavern, where he presided at dinner.

A curious text on which the preachers of that day, had they so de-
sired, might have delivered a sermon on the evils of the social glass,
is to be found in this extract from the Litchfield Monitor of May, 1793:

Died at Waterbury of intoxication, on the eve of the 21st, a smart, active negro
girl of about nine years old, belonging to Mr. John Nicholls, at the house of the
Rev. Mr. Hart, with whom she lived. Mrs. Hart was abroad, and Mr. Hart, quitting
the house for a short time, to attend on some labor in a lot adjoining, inadvertently
left a bottle of spirits uncorked in a closet to which she had access. On their
return they found her inebriated to a very considerable degree, though not past
speaking, and she disgorged, as they supposed, most of the stuff she had swallowed.
She appeared out of danger and was permitted to sleep, but was soon lifeless. A
physician could ncrt restore her. This unusual accident is a serious admonition to
parents and masters of children not to leave this more than common poison within
their reach.

Such a nalive comment as this on so shocking a fatality well illus-
trates the point of view of that day in regard to the practice of
drinking. Spirits are actually called "poison," but the only caution
suggested in regard to them is not to leave them where children can
reach them. The popular drinks of that period, when something
more elaborate was desired than cider or rum, were " Huxham's
tincture," tansy bitters, and "Hopkins's elixir." French brandy
was the luxury of the rich and wine was used for the sacrament
alone. Every family made gallons of " elixir proprietatis," a dis-

LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN:' 543

gusting concoction for the more sensitive stomachs of to-day. The
cupboard was adorned with beautifully engraved decanters, and
beside them stood tall glass mugs, delicately etched, and slender-
legged drinking cups. Usually, the most elegant piece of furni-
ture in an ordinary home was this corner cupboard. The upper
shelf was devoted to teacups and saucers of rare old china, by the
side of which were the wine glasses, clear as crystal. Beneath were
the quart and pint glass measures to hold flip and cider, many of
them richly engraved, sometimes with a coat of arms. A piece or
two of silver and some extra fine pewter filled the remaining space.
In addition to what seems to us their shocking drinking habits, our
ancestors made use of various semi-drugs in a manner no less
shocking to our more aesthetic tastes. These included "camphire,"
" sal volatile," and rhubarb root — this last carried in every pocket
and constantly nibbled at, and sometimes scraped off and roasted
on a "peel" as a remedy for children with digestive ailments;
also hartshorn and lavender for " the nerves." This list probably
looks no more peculiar to us than will a list of many of the things
we commonly use to-day to our remoter descendants.

The one conspicuous feature in the life of the period was the
meeting-house. That life centered, in the church to a degree that
it is now hard to understand. As we have seen, it was the prelim-
inary settlement which formed a new ecclesiastical society that led
in the end to the independent town, and it was largely the agita-
tion over church distinctions which brought about the adoption of
a new constitution here in Connecticut. Devotion to the church
found expression in the sacredness attached to Sunday observance,
which is so marked a characteristic of the period. Custom founded
on a strong public opinion kept those who might have otherwise
protested against the exactions of the Sabbath from openly express-
ing their views or acting upon them. What was called "desecra-
tion of the Lord's Day " seldom occurred. Bronson's " History "
gives the curious case of Isaac Bronson, a leading man here in
Waterbury, who was convicted of doing "servile labor," before
Timothy Hopkins, justice of the peace. Mr. Bronson's sister had
been ill at the mother's, four miles out of town. She lived with
him, and asked him to take her home on a pillion one Sabbath
evening, which he did, as he declared, "without thought of harm."
For this he was fined and debarred from the sacrament. He appealed
the case, but the decision of the justice was sustained. This
occurred in 1737, but the law which Bronson was convicted of
breaking was still on the statute book in the earlier part of our
period. This illustrates the extent to which the observance of the

544 HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Sabbath could be legally enforced. A vivid picture of the country-
church of that day is given by A. Bronson Alcott, a native of Wol-
cott, in his "New Connecticut":

The meeting-house (Wolcott) was a plain building without a steeple. The pews
below were old-fashioned box or square pews, numbered on the doors, and the seat-
ing of the members was according to their age, the elderly nearest the pulpit, the
aisles leading to it being swept and sanded. The pulpit was very high, and beneath
it, extending in front, w^ere the seats for the deacons. The front galleries extended
around three sides with raised seats behind and at the south end. Between the
stairways were high seats for the young people^who preferred them.

The scene in one of these churches is easy to be recalled: the older
members of the congregation listening with strictest attention to the
long prayer and the longer sermon — except where nature was too
strong to be overcome and the drowsiness of rest after hard toil
asserted its supremacy — and the " tithing-men " preserving order
among the more irreverent youngsters. The spirit of fun was not
wholly to be suppressed even under their system of discipline.
The story was told even then with relish of how John Trumbull,
the author of " McFingal," whose father was the pastor at Water-
town, tied a wig of his father's on the head of the family dog and
sent the animal to church. The dog stationed himself on the pul-
pit stairs, out of the preacher's sight, where, however, he convulsed
the congregation. When at last the preacher discovered the cause of
the unseemly outbreak he simply shook his head, saying, in an aside:
"That's some of John's work," and went on with his discourse. But
an incident of this kind was so startlingly exceptional as to deserve
quoting simply for that reason. Rarely did anything humorous
break in to disturb the solemnity of a service in a New England
meeting-house. The discomforts which were endured by attend-
ants on worship at that time required a true Spartan spirit. In the
winter, especially, the cold was intense in the unwarmed meeting-
house and the worshippers sat through the long services, half be-
numbed, although their sufferings were somewhat mitigated by the
general use of foot-stoves. In summer there were touches to the
scene which have now been almost forgotten, the long turkey-
feather fans whose constant " swish " added new vigor to drowsi-
ness, and the little pieces of fennel, dill and caraway, which were
held in the mouth and called '" meetin'-seed." As the hour for ser-
vice arrived, the pastor entered the pulpit, clambering up a steep
stairway and shutting himself in with small half-doors, under a
gfreat sounding-board that looked like a giant extinguisher. The
congregation remained standing until the preacher reached his
desk. After his acknowledgment they re-seated themselves, and

LIFE m THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 545

he gathered his silken robe about him, and with dignity took his
own seat. The singing would seem remarkable to modern ears.
The hymns were mainly " deaconed off," two lines at a time — only
a few in the congregation having hymn-books of their own. The
choir was divided into four parts, being ranged on three sides of
the gallery. The key-note was given by striking the tuning-fork
on the choir rail or by a pitch-pipe. There were two services, one
in the morning and one in thle afternoon, with an hour between.
The ordinary luncheon consisted of doughnuts and cheese and hot
spiced cider. With this short interval for relief from the strain,
the average New England household devoted hours in succession
on Sunday to the cultivation of religious fervor and theological
lore.

It was indeed a "land of steady habits" which thus comes to
view. And the correctness of the familiar characterization is
emphasized by the account of the state of society toward the close
of the century, furnished in the following extract from the unpub-
lished journal of Samuel Miles Hopkins, LL. D. (whose biography
is given in Volume II, pages 823-825):

Farewell, Litchfield and Goshen, a country of storm and winter and frightful cold
and snow, and of hardy, active, reading, thinking, intelligent men, who may prob-
ably be set forth as the finest commonalty upon earth.

As an example take a glance at the state of society in Goshen. In that town of
1200 people there w^as no such thing as a poor or dependent family; no tenant, no
rich man, except a single merchant. Every farmer tilled his 100 or 200 acres of
land, chiefly with the labor of his own or his sons* hands. Until I left Connecticut
I had never seen a person, male or female, of competent age to read and write, who
could not do both. In different parts of the town were library associations, as is
common in New England, and that in our neighborhood contained the most popu-
lar works of history, many of the works of Addison and Pope, and some of Johnson,
Hume, Blair. Beattie, etc., and they were much read.

I have attended an election there, and the decorum and order were not less than
appears in divine service. No such thing as party was perceptible, even if there
was a feeling of it. The man who should in any way, direct or indirect, by himself
or his friends, have intimated a desire for office would by that very fact lose it. I
remember hearing my father say of such a man that he "shook hands rather too
much " and seemed to be fishing for popularity. If he had not shaken hands so much
my father might have voted for him.

These habits produced a wise and stable government and a most perfect obedi-
ence to the laws The admirable form of the old constitution of Connecticut was
adapted to bring men forward slowly into public life and to keep them much under
public view. When long approved, they held their seats very firmly; and the upper
house (the senate) of that state has at times braced itself against the whole of pub-
lic opinion and of the popular branch, and defeated an unwise but momentarily
popular measure. It contained twelve men. My great-uncle, Joseph Hopkins of
Waterbury, was elected a member of the legislature seventy consecutive times, that
is, twice a year for upwards of thirty-five years (and my impression is, for thirty-six

35

546

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

or thirty-eight years). George Wyllis of Hartford, the third of that family who was
secretary of state, was elected to that ofEce by the governor and council a little
before he was twenty-one years of age, on the death of his father. But the election
of secretary of state belonged to the people except in cases of vacancy ad-tntertm.
The people then, by a general vote of the whole state, elected him to the same office
sixty (or one or two more than sixty) successive years, and he died in office at upwards
of eighty. Such were the habits of a people whose government was the most dem-
ocratic of any on earth, except that of San Marino.

It is a homely rustic picture whose outlines have been roughly
sketched in the foregoing pages. It is startling, when one stops to
think of it, that it is a picture of life only a comparatively few
short years ago, belonging to the early part of our own century. It
is not a life that any of us would go back to, and yet, if it had not
been lived here in New England, in all its God-fearing strictness
and rigorous simplicity, this America of to-day could not have been
what it is. There are certain things about it that we cannot recall
without a sense of loss and a regret that they have ceased to be.
There are certain picturesque touches which refine it, and in its
quaintness it appeals to us even aesthetically. As Horace Bushnell
said, in his discourse at the centennial celebration of Litchfield
county on August 13 and 14, 1851:

A hundred years from now, everything that was most distinctive will have
passed away. The spinning wheels of wool and flax that used to buzz so familiarly
in the childish ears of some of us will be heard no more forever — seen no more, in
fact, save in the halls of the antiquarian societies, where the delicate daughters will
be asking what these strange machines are and how they were made to go. The
huge hewn timber looms that used to occupy a room by themselves in the farm
houses will be gone, cut up for firewood, and their heavy thwack, beating up the
woof, will be heard no more by the passer-by — not even the antiquarian halls will
find room to harbor a specimen. The long strips of linen, bleaching on the grass,
and tended by a sturdy maiden sprinkling them each hour from her water-can
under a broiling sun — thus to prepare the Sunday linen for her brothers and her
own wedding outfit — will have disappeared, save as they return to fill a picture in
some novel or ballad of the old time. The heavy Sunday coats that grew on sheep
individually remembered, more comfortably carried in warm weather on the arm,
and the specially fine striped blue-and-white pantaloons of linen just from the loom,
will no longer be conspicuous on processions of footmen going to meeting, but will
have given placc/to showy carriages filled with gentlemen in broadcloth, festooned
with chains jj^^alifornia gold, and delicate ladies holding perfumed sunshades.
The churches, too, that used to be simple brown meeting-houses covered with rived
clapboards of oak, will have come down mostly from the bleak hill tops into the
close villages and populous towns that crowd the waterfalls and the railroads; and
the old burial places where the fathers sleep will be left to their lonely altitude —
token, shall we say, of an age that lived as much nearer to heaven and as much
less under the world. The change will be complete.

A little further on Dr. Bushnell draws a picture of some neigh-
borhood gathering, when a sleigh full of old and young had joined

LIFE IN THE '* AQB OF H0ME8PUN:'

547

a merry party in some friendly home — noting in passing that " if
those ancestors of ours undertook a formal entertainment of any
kind it was commonly stiff and quite unsuccessful " — the fire blaz-
ing high with a new stick for every guest, and no restraint and no
affectation. Dr. Bushnell continues:

They tell stories, they laugh, they sing. They are serious and gay by turns.
The young folks go on with some play, while the fathers and mothers are discussing
some hard point of theology in the minister*s last Sunday's sermon; or perhaps the
great danger coming to sound morals from the multiplication of turnpikes and
newspapers ! Meantime the good housewife brings out her choice stock of home-
grown exotics, gathered from three realms, doughnuts from the pantry, hickory nuts
from the chamber, and the nicest, smoothest apples in the cellar; all which, includ-
ing, I suppose I must add, the rather unpoetic beverage that gave its acid smack
to the ancient hospitality, are discussed as freely, with no fear of consequences.
And then, as the tall clock in the corner of the room ticks on majestically toward
nine, the conversation takes, it may be, a little more serious turn, and it is sug-
gested that a very happy evening may fitly be ended with a prayer. Whereupon
the circle breaks up with a reverent, congratulative look on every face, which is
itself the truest language of a social nature blest in human fellowship.

With this picture, so graphically drawn, it is well to close the
chapter. In it the nobler side of the "age of homespun," as Dr.
Bushnell felicitously calls it, is drawn with an artist's hand, the
homely details being neither exaggerated nor idealized. It is a
picture all the pleasanter for the eye to rest upon because of the
ruggedness that frames it in, and the bleakness just outside the
farmhouse door that forms its background.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

FIRST HIGHWAY IN CONNECTICUT — COUNTRY ROADS OR KING's HIGHWAYS
— ROADS TO FARMINGTON — TO NEW HAVEN — TO WOODBURY —
THROUGHOUT THE TOWNSHIP — VILLAGE HIGHWAYS — RE-SURVEVS
AND ALTERATIONS — TURNPIKE ROADS — THE PLANK ROAD.

THE first highway made in Connecticut was from Hartford
to Windsor. It was to be for cart and horse and was made
upon the uplands. It was not ordered until April of 1638, or
more than two years after the settlements began.

What more conclusive proof than the above do we need of the
correctness of the statements of the earliest historians and letter
writers, when they tell us that the so called wilderness of New
England was, to a considerable extent, an open forest, "kept so, by
being burned over twice a year by the Indians" as well as by the
large trees which shaded out the undergrowth.

To the open forests were added the natural openings along the
streams, known as meadows. The term " meadows " was not then
restricted, as now, to grass or mowing lands, but was applied to any
naturally cultivable land, and the same early writers tell us that
cattle could find ample pasturage in the woods, and considerable
hay could be cut in the open places without breaking ground or
sowing seed.* The Indian's hard and plain paths ran where there
were objective points of interest, and these the white man naturally
followed in going from place to place, or in exploring the country —
the chief trouble being to learn the best route to take to reach a
desired point without being misled to follow deviations of a local or
special character, foreign to the object in view. It was from the
very multiplicity of these trails that the necessity arose for mark-
ing or blazing the trees when any highway or recognized route was
sought to be established, and this method, for a time, answered
very well.

As land began to be laid out along the travelled path, and cart
roads became necessary to move crops and goods from place to

* The elder Winthrop, after having been a short time in Massachusetts, wrote, in 1630: Here is as good
and as I have seen in England, but none so bad as there. Here is sweet air, fair rivers, plenty of springs,
and the water better than in England.

In November of the same year, he wrote : My dear wife : We are here in a paradise. Though we have
not beef or mutton, yet, God be praised, we want them not^our Indian corn answers for all. Vet we have
fowl and fish in great plenty.

OLD HIQHWATa AND STBBETS. 549

place, the future need of recognized highways dawned — and so to
preserve space enough to allow of choice of road-bed on convenient
and satisfactory ground, without the removal of large rocks or
stumps, and, to exempt it from intrusion by layers out of lands,
highways were prepared for; — sometimes a number of years in
advance of their actual use, by placing heaps of stones, called mon-
uments, at the corners or angles, and at convenient distances
between, to designate the lines of the highway as against the claims
of adjoining land-owners. A little later, as the need of future
highways grew imminent, lands were granted, or divided, subject
to the same — the expression in the conveyance being: "without
prejudicing highways."

In process of time the marks on the trees became obliterated or
indistinct. The trees themselves disappeared. The heaps of stones
became displaced or confused with similar heaps, used to denote
other land boundaries, and the custom was made legal of entering
upon record a description of the course of the highway, the dis-
tances and directions between boundaries, with the mention of any
distinctive objects along the route, or of guiding facts to help in
recovering lost lines, and fixing in the minds of surveyors salient
points when laying out adjoining lands.

At first, only some of the most important highways were
recorded, a re-survey or new layout being necessary to obtain a
proper description of them; but at length, by degrees, all highways
came to be reviewed and placed on record, except a scattered few —
and these — either because they were too well known to admit of
question, or because they were unimportant — seem never to have
been recorded.

For the above reasons, in following the records of highways we
are not taken back to the beginning of travelled ways, but are intro-
duced to them at a comparatively remote and transitional period,
and become acquainted with them by degrees and installments —
the laying out of new city streets denotes the intended develop-
ment of a section, the record of the old time highways development
accomplished.

When Waterbury was settled, there was a road from Hartford
to New Haven, one from Milford to Farmington, and Wallingford
also had her connections with the outside world. In 1643 each town
was ordered to choose two surveyors yearly. The surveyors had
power to call out every team, and person (from sixteen to sixty
years) fit for labor, one day in each year to mend the highways, and
were enjoined to have special regard to those "Common wayes"
which were betwixt town and town. In May of 1679 the roads

SSo

HI8T0BT OF WATEBBUB7.

"from plantation to plantation" were "reputed the Country roads or
King's highways," and it was recommended that the inhabitants of
the various towns should first clear such roads "at least one rod
wide." Five years later, in 1684, complaints were made of the
"wayes between towne and towne" that they "were encum-
bered with dirty slowes, bushes, trees and stones," and the Court
ordered that forthwith the highways should be well amended from
their defects, and so kept. The surveyors in each town were
enjoined to do their duty, and the Surveyor's oath was promulgated
as an inducement to action.

In preparing a village site for Waterbury in 1677, it seems to have
been the duty of the Colonial committee to lay out the village high-
ways, and also to indicate what should be the official highway con-
necting the new town with Farmington, and thus with Hartford.
Accordingly, we find that the authorized highway of 1677, which
was perpetually sequestered by act of the " Grand Committee " in
1679; which was further reserved and encroachments upon forbid-
den by the proprietors in 1722; which was re-surveyed and formally
entered on record in 1754 was substantially East Main street, the old
Cheshire road to East Farms school-house, thence up the hill in the
line of the present road until past the Austin Pierpont place, when
it turned northeastward across the present pasture lot where the
old road-bed may still be seen, and came into the Meriden road a
little westward of the old Farmington corner — now a corner of
Wolcott and Waterbury. From there the road ran eastward on the
south line of Farmington nearly where the Meriden road now is,
until the brow of the mountain was reached, when it went down
by the present peach orchards of Barns & Piatt into the Quinnipiac
valley, and there joined the early road between Milford and Farm-
ington. Grants of land at East Farms and on the way thither in
1686 and later; layouts of land near the Meriden road in the
extreme eastern part of the township in 1722; conveyances of land
on the route scattered along through many decades, confirm beyond
question the location of this road as " the road to Farmington.*

For the line of the Indian highway, see page 220. Besides this
King's highway to Farmington, there were two recognized roads
leading to the same town. Just before Mattatuck was settled, the
southerly and westerly portions of Farmington township were laid
out in "long lots," many of which were owned by our planters.
Between these long lots, highways and cross-highways were plotted,

* About three miles from the centre on this road, in 1749, Joseph Beach and Cornelias Johnson were
granted liberty to advance three rods into the highway, for thirty rods. Two years later the town conferred
the land upon them, they having built their houses there.

OLD HIGHWAT8 AND STREETS. 551

if not laid out, and these probably served as avenues through which
some of these wandering paths reached Farmington.

The second recognized road to Farmington (see page 218), re-
ferred to as "the new road as we go to Farmington" in 1686, is
found by record passing between the Hog Field hill south of
Woodtick, and Woodtick. It probably connected with and entered
Waterbury by the way of the very early path over Long hill from
Bronson's meadow. On its eastward way, it probably joined one of
the Farmington highways that were plotted through her long lots
before Waterbury was — that is, after the road left the bounds of
our township.

An early Waterbury path, mentioned in 1696 on the Farmington
records as in Poland, ran through Bristol, and doubtless is the foun-
dation for the tradition, faithfully adhered to by many persons, that
the first road from Farmington came over Fall mountain. Spindle
hill, along the west side of Ash swamp, west of Chestnut hill, along
the western side of Long hill to Walnut street and so on down to
East Main street. The " Chestnut hill path " is mentioned in 1686.

In 1724 we again find mention of another "new road to Farming-
ton." At Spindle hill this road left the hill, apparently near the
school-house, turned northeastwardly to Mad river and then east-
ward to the line of Farmington, and there it is reasonably certain,
if not established, that it met the Alcox road of present Wolcott. It
passed through Wolcott north of the centre, across roads now known
as Plumb and East streets, and down the mountain into Southing-
ton valley. These roads of 1686 and 1724, as mentioned, were prob-
ably but new sections of road connecting former highways or trails
on the Waterbury side with those on the Farmington side.

Before 1720 we have few recorded highways. It must not, how-
ever, be taken for granted that the highways about the town, and
even the more distant ones were not formallv laid out at a much
earlier period than we find them on record. Many of them make
their first appearance as re-surveys. Many are recorded as laid out
at a certain time, when we know that the highway in question had
been in use for a number of years.

As an instance of the delay to make record, is the statement of
Benjamin Barnes and Stephen Upson in 1720 — that they had been
appointed with " Leftenante Judd " to lay out highways to the mill.
They then state what they had done at least eighteen years before
that time — for Lieut. Judd died in 1702.

The earliest date of a highway accompanied by a layout that is
on record is Grand street, from Bank street to Union square, and
that was the date of the re-opening of the street, at which time we

552 HI3T0RT OF WATERBURT.

assume that it was much narrower than in Samuel Steel's original
layout of the village plot. In 17 12 it was 3 rods wide at Bank street
and 5 rods at Union square.

In 1716 Sergt. Stephen Upson and Abraham Andrews laid out
"the Country road to the corner, of New Haven bounds." They
began "at the mouth of the mill trench" on the east side of Mad
river (they call it Mill river). It ran to Horse Pasture bridge, to
Smug Swamp brook (where the path then went over) to Thomas
Hickcox's land, to a rock on the east side of the Country road^ to a cart
way newly made over a stony swamp, to a black oak stadle on the
west side of tfie Country road on the hill against Sergt. Upson's land,
through Daniel Warner's 8 acre lot, to the Fulling Mill brook, to
Doctor Porter's land, under the hill to the Great Hollow (between
the Hill Side cemetery and that of the Roman Catholics), up the
hollow to a plain that leads toward the Burying Yard (Pine Hill),
eastward to Samuel Hikcox's plowing land, to the west side of
Hikcox's house, over the plain to the brook that runs to the river,
under a hill and over a brook, to Thomas Richards's house, to
Obadiah Scott's house (beyond which it turned eastward), to the
cart way that Judd's Meadow folks use eastward toward New
Haven, "and so to the end of the bounds as we suppose." This
road was 4 rods wide its entire length.

The repeated reference in the above to the former Country road
to New Haven evidently refers to the first one laid out, or ordered,
in 1686.

The next year, Dec. 15th, a highway was laid out "The west
side The River," down to Joseph Lewis's house lot. It will be
remembered that passages or ways twenty feet wide were very
early laid out through the Common Field meadows, and this highway
began on one of those passages at the Long meadow bars and ran
across a comer of Doctor Porter's plain which lay west of Pine
Island, turned west under the hill to the west side of Carrington's
8 acre lot, then a west line up the hill to the north end of Samuel
Barnes's land, then southwest the west side of Bronson's 8 acre lot,
over a little brook, then "whealing" southward down to and west
through John Barnes's land, to Hop brook, down the brook, across a
part of Abraham Andrews's Judd's meadow lot, over the brook,
west to the Great hill (Gunn hill, a portion of which is now known
as the Terraces), southwest of John Barnes's farm, southwest past
a corner of a lot of Benjamin Richards (deceased), southwest down
to Butler's brook, down the brook on the north side to Samuel
Warner's land, and over the brook to Joseph Lewis's 25 acre house
lot. His house was a little west of Ward street.

OLD HIGH WATS AND STREETS.

553

The next day, and it was December weather, two of the survey-
ors, Thomas Hikcox and John Bronson, laid out a 4 rod highway to
Thomas Andrews's land at Turkey Hill. This was, in part, the same
Prospect road that now passes in sight of the Turkey Hill reser-
voir. It is described as beginning at East Main street (they call it
the Country road), and at "the highway that lies between Daniel
Porter's land and Jeremiah Peck's land" (believed to be originally
Ne well's Cart way), or the way that once answered to present Dub-
lin street, although running at a different angle. This road ran
south over the Mad river, up along the south side the river to the
east end of William Hikcox's land against Gaylord's plain. The
original plain is where Rogers & Brother's mill is. The upper
Gaylord's plain is where Silver street begins.

The road then ran east over the river, by the river to the end of
the plain, then crossed the river and ran southwardly to the north
side of Samuel Hikcox's field (a part of it was probably in St.
Joseph's Cemetery), thence east, and eastwardly up the East moun-
tain where the road now isy across one corner of Samuel Porter's farm,
south by the east side of it, and along the west end of Thomas
Andrews's land.

The same day they laid out a 4 rod highway from the New
Haven road across the south end of the " Abrigado " to the above
East Mountain road.

Without date, two roads are recorded, one from Buck's Hill to
the vicinity of Wheaton's station, or the ancient " Hancox Brook
meadows" above Greystone; the other, from Buck's Hill to Wel-
ton's ice pond.

THE EARLY WOODBURY ROADS.

There were three early roads to Woodbury. The first one is
mentioned in 1687 and at that date ran over Break Neck hill. A
lower road is mentioned in 17 18 and earlier. An upper road is found
about the same time. It is not until 1720 that a lay-out of the road
of 1687 appears upon record. At that time, it comes duly labelled
as: "A road towards Woodbury so far as our bounds went."
Isaac Bronson, Timothy Standly and Thomas Judd laid it out.
They began on West Side hill, where Highland avenue is. They
called the place "our west bars." The bars were in the common fence.
The first course of the road ran to the west side of the old Bunker
Hill road and was twenty rods wide to that point. From thence
the road was to be ten rods wide. It took the course of the pres-
ent Middlebury road to the Park road, up the Park road to the foot
of the first hill (Richards, so named from the first Obadiah Rich-
ards's 2 acre lot), where it entered the " lower way." It then turned

554

HISTORY OF WATERBURY,

southward and ran along the east side of the hill crossing its south -
em point, and came out into the present road opposite the Oronoke
road which it followed to Oronoke hill, where it diverged from the
lower way and ran over the northern extremity of the Oronoke
range. The old road is still used, and there is a house on it which
was long occupied by the Umberfields. It unites with the present
Middlebury road near Pine rock — a well known point in the Water-
bury and Middlebury line. It followed the present road by the
south end of Mount Fair, then went northwestward down its west
side in the course of the present road to the ancient Richardson
place at Bronson's meadow, where Ebenezer Bronson lived in 1729,
and Ebenezer Richardson in 1750, and his son Nathaniel kept
tavern in Revolutionary days.*

From the Richardson house the road ran to the west side of the
big meadow anciently called Race plain, over the top of Three Mile
hill, past Prime's land, about Isaac Bronson's farm (where it was
already 6 rods wide), then " to run whereabouts the path now runs "
10 rods wide through Isaac Bronson's land and to the end of the
bounds. It met the road from Woodbury at the Woodbury line, " at
the going down of Wolf Pit hill to the Brids brook in Woodbury
bounds." This is called "the Country road to Woodbury" in 1735.

The "upper road to Woodbury" connected with the meadow pas-
sage of 20 feet which began near present Mattatuck street, ran
along the east side of Manhan meadow to Brown's bridge over the
Manhan canal, across a corner of the meadow, to and across the river,
through Steel's meadow to Steel's plain, and up the plain to the point
where the early roads to Watertown and to Plymouth began.

The upper Woodbury road left this meadow passage a little
below the Almshouse, followed the course of Jedediah's brook to
Isaac's meadow bars, not far from where the Bunker Hill road joins
a cross road from Watertown. It followed substantially the pres-
ent Bunker Hill road, and Poverty street to the Woodbury line.

The " lower road to Woodbury " we find nowhere laid out as a con-
tinuous road. It was in use in 17 15, if not earlier. It diverged from
the road of 1720 at Oronoke hill, went by the present clay hole,
through Hop Swamp, over Bedlam hill and through Bedlam.

THE day's work OF DR. EPHRAIM WARNER AND JOHN BRONSON.

April 5, 1724, the highways of the northeastern section received
attention. One was laid out to Buck's Hill. It began at the clay

* Here, tradition tells us, that General Washing^ton dined on one occasion, his horse, meanwhile, bein^:
made fast to an enormous elm tree, lately standing, in front of the inn. And here is repeated the same story
that Dr. Bronson gives us concerning General Washington and Esquire Hopkins, with Nathaniel Richardson
as the " decidedly inquisitive " questioner.

OLD HLQEWATS AND STREETS,

555

pits (vicinity of Grove and Bishop streets) and continued to about
Division street (Edmund Scott's pasture) 6 rods wide, was then
increased to 20 rods, which width continued as far as Mrs. Pear-
sall*s house (the layout says, Obadiah Scott's house). From there,
it continued in the path by the east end of Buck's Hill, unto Richard
Welton's house. From Welton's house it ran northward " in a path
to Handcox Brook meadow at Warner's and Welton's land."

The same day, they marked a road or highway from Obadiah
Scott's house lot on the East side of Wigwam Swamp brook to the
Pine Hole bars, 4 rods wide (Buck's Hill road to Waterville).

On the same day, they began at the east end of Buck's Hill and
ran east, northeast, to a great white oak tree that stood at the south
end of Benjamin Warner's house lot, and east and north to Ash
Swamp brook. It then ran to the " New Road to Farmington "
until they got over the Mad river to Farmington bounds, which
point was then marked by "a tree with two branches, and a stone
in the crotch."

The same day, these industrious men laid out a highway from
" Sergt. Welton's Israel's field," that ran south, down Barnes's plain,
" and so to run south and by west through the Chestnut Hill Rocks,
and through Mantoe's House Rocks, and then on the west side of
Lewis's meadow to the north end of Edmund's pasture."

In 1727 the already existing highways leading to and about
present Watertown were formally laid out by two John Bronsons
and Thomas Hickcox. One of these began on Steel's brook a little
above Isaac Castle's house (southward of Joseph Baird's house),
between the brook and the path. It was 8 rods wide to Spruce
brook (above Oakville station). From John Warner's line (the Oak-
ville Pin company's dam is about the north end of his line) it was
to hold so wide to Jeremiah's brook and to Steel's brook. It was
"to run up against Ebenezer Richardson's house" (the James
Brown, John Merrill, Esquire Buckingham and Davis house). From
that place it was 6 rods wide to Samuel Thommus's corner (near the
late Cande place), then 4 rods wide for 15 rods, then 8 rods to Cran-
berry brook, from thence 4 rods to the village line — just on the
western side of Watertown village.

The same day, they laid out a road from the Richardson house
above, to Jonathan Scott's mill.

In 1729 a road was laid out from the Farmington road to Timothy
Hopkins's Hog-field. Beginning at the old saw-mill path (where the old
Cheshire and the Meriden roads diverge), it continued in the path
that goes to said Hopkins's to Si little this side of Spruce Swamp, west
side of the swamp to Jeremy's brook that comes out of Upson's

556 HISTORT OF WATERBURY.

meadow, and continued the highway in that path to said Hopkins's
barn,* 12 rods wide all the way. This old path, here laid out, was
probably the old second road to Farmington.

From Hopkins's barn it took its way over the brook, and up the
hill, and "along by the path that now is, to the Samuel Hikcox land
and north of it over the Mad river, and then came to the said path
and then kept the path almost all the way to the Hogfield and then go
eastwardly to said (Hopkins's) hog-field." From Hopkins's barn f the
road was but 6 rods to the top of the hill beyond it. From that
point 12 rods. May 29, 1729, a highway was laid out over Burnt
hill to Buck's Hill path. It was in an old path. It ran up Cook
street to Pine street, out Pine street to Burnt hill, up Burnt hill and
on in the old cart path to the north end of the hill and down east-
ward to Buck's Hill path.

In 1729 three highways were laid out at Judd's meadow, one of
them through Oak and Maple streets to the river, down the river
on the east side to Ward's island, across the island to the west side
the river, down the river to the Straits mountain or near it, across
the river to the mouth of Beacon Hill brook. Another one left the
New Haven road near the bend below the Great hill (a portion of
Mulberry hill) and went winding down into the valley at Grove
cemetery, and on down the river side to Beacon Hill brook. In the
same year, near Thanksgiving time, Stephen Hopkins and Joseph
Lewis laid out the road that still is known as the Hopkins road. It
began at the south side of the Fulling Mill brook and ran to the
New Haven road west of Straitsville.

The first Hopkins road connected Stephen Hopkins's original
home-farm on his hill with James Baldwin's grist mill at the old
Fulling Mill site on Fulling Mill brook to the northward, and, with
the New Haven road at Thomas Richards's house in the other direc-
tion. The road was in the form of an ox-bow, with the lane lead-
ing to the Hopkins house through the lots at the apex. The lane
crossed the valley of the brook on which we think Stephen's saw-
mill stood in 1734, and went up the hill eastward to his house. The
second one (that ran to Straitsville) was known as the New Haven
road, being adopted as a route from Waterbury to that city, by way

* The Elijah Frisbte house, now gone, occupied the site, and was, with little doubt, built by Timothy
Hopkins before 1718, at which date his house, at this locality, is mentioned. It may have been merely his
farm house, and he, with his family, may have been living in the one half of his father's house in town at
the time his illustrious son Samuel was born — but the mention of this house in 17x8 makes the place of
Samuel's birth (in 1720) uncertain. The wbe men of Waterbury in the eighteenth century, came, notably,
from the East.

t In 1739 we find this one referred to as '*the highway that goes from Capt. Hopkins's Farm house to
town."

OLD HIQHWAT8 AND STREETS.

557

of Pearl lakes (called in the layout of it " Spectacle ponds ") and
the Potter cemetery, and many persons thought this was the orig-
inal route.

The road "from Woodbury road towards Litchfield," began
almost at the point where the middle road to Woodbury began in
1720. It was laid out in 1729. It ran from West Side hill to the
rear of Westwood, to Richards's house on the Bunker Hill road,
along by the west fence of the Common field to the gate at the
upper end of Ben*s meadow, then to James Williams's house, then to
George Welton's house on the hill between Steel's brook and Tur-
key brook near lower Oakville, then up over Patteroon hill and
Hickcox mountain, lengthwise of both, and on over Scott's moun-
tain to the northwestward, and at last reached Obadiah's brook
north of Watertown centre.

In 1729 and in 1730 the particular and private highways through
the northern meadows beginning at Steel's meadow and extending
to Buck's Meadow field were laid out, also other meadow passages.
Some of these were pent roads, " the proprietors of the Common
field having liberty to keep up their fence, maintaining a Gate or
Bars."

The upper road to Woodbury was laid out in 1730 by William
Judd and James Porter. It is the first highway that we have where
the length of the courses is given. It began at Isaac's meadow bars
and ran one mile and 56 rods to Joseph Nichols's corner, but, after
running five courses (215 rods) beyond the corner, the surveyors
gave it up and continued to Woodbury bounds in the old and easy
way.

In 1732 a highway ran along about where South Main street runs
below the Mad River bridge to City Corners. It is described as
" going through Mad meadow."

As early as 1735 began the exchange of highways. Perhaps
the first one was that through Manhan, Steel's and the Hancox
meadows.

The same year, a highway a third of a mile long was laid out at
"John AUcox across his land," and another highway northward
from this, "beginning a little east of Allcox barn and running north
80 rods."

" For the more convenient passing and re-passing of the people
that live upon Waterbury River north and others," a highway was
laid out from the spring at Buck's Meadow mountain. This road
ran in a general direction southward and was intended to relieve
the general discontent of the northern people at having such a hard
road to travel to reach the meeting-house on Waterbury Green. It

558 HISTORY OF WATBRBURT.

ran through the notch of Buck's Meadow mountain, through the
Capt. William Hikcox and the Samuel Hikcox farms (about a rod
west of Samuel's house), to Joseph Bronson's land, where it came
upon the bank of the river, down to Hikcox island, and south to
the upper end of Steel's meadow into the highway which was the
universal passage up the meadows.

Henry Cook and others at the northward as early as 1731 had
petitioned for and obtained a highway " from the (northern) extent
of the bounds to Henry Cook's farm, and from thence to the high-
way that goes by George Welton's house." This road began at "the
head of the bounds," ran down along on the west side of the river,
but not bounding on it except in two 60 rod runs — the first where
it began, and the second near it. It crossed the West Branch and
came down across Scott's Mountain where it touched Scovill's
northwest corner and ran 104 rods to his southwest corner. Below,
it joined the highway that John Bronson and John Scovill had laid
out two years before, beginning on West Side hill at the Woodbury
road and running "towards Litchfield." Thus we have the Litch-
field road of 1729 finished in 1731 by this union on Scott's Moun-
tain. The people managed to get along with it for seven years,
and then William Judd and George Welton, who had been appointed
** to lay out highways in the northwest quarter of the bounds and
alter others if need be," changed its course along Scovill's land on
the mountain and reduced its width from fourteen to four feet at
that place. The distance from the head of the bounds to the point
of union was about six miles.

In 1737 a highway began at the northwest corner of the bounds
and followed the Woodbury line down, and then ran southwest
from village lot in one tier to village lot in the next tier, until it
reached Watertown. This was laid out as a Country road to Litch-
field. It cannot be found in its former haunts to-day, so many have
been the changes.

From this point onward the highways become too numerous for
mention even. The era for agricultural development was come,
and Waterbury lands at the village, and elsewhere, were in active
demand. The history of highways now became, in a measure, the
history of the town. From and including 1730 to 1741 more than
fifty highways were laid out. One began at Capt. Hopkins' Round
Hill lot, ran up that hill and across the Long hill to the highway
on the Saw Mill plain; and another one ran from the highway over
Long and Chestnut hills to Mantoe's rocks. It began at the bottom
of the Long hill, ran northward and northeastward up the hill to
the upper end of John Bronson's Chestnut Hill land (about a mile

OLD HIQHWA78 AND STREETS,

559

and three-quarters), when it turned northwestward 72 rods into the
same highway from which it started.

The highways or streets in and about the city have been intro-
duced in the narrative history to such an extent that their re-men-
tion here is, perhaps, unnecessary, but it may be well to repeat
that in the original village plot present Linden and Bank streets
were one street, although not precisely in their present lines.
Ancient Cook street came winding down the hill and probably
joined this highway at Grove street; it was anticipated and provis-
ion made for it, which appears in the record of a grant of 1686,
which grant was of land near the head of Little brook (which rises
on Drum hill). In 1687, or about that date, the highway is recog-
nized as in existence. About 1708 Cook street, from Grove down
to North Main, was substituted for the original Linden street route.
In 1708 North Main street which is the final result of this ancient
highway was turned farther eastward.

In 1729 there was a formal layout of Cook street from Grove to
Pine, and from Pine eastwardly and on over Burnt hill, which lay-
out has been given elsewhere. Four years later, in 1733, Cook street
was formally laid out from Pine northwardly. In 1737 Pine street
was laid out from Willow street to Cook street. It had been in
existence as abundantly proved by grants and lay-outs of land
from 1687 on down to 1737, at which last date it joined Cook street
about a quarter of a mile above its present junction. The change
to the new union took place about 181 2. Bank street to Grand was
in the original plan. During its history it has been known as the
" Road to Beaver meadows," the ** Road to Thomas Porters," and, in
a few instances as "the Road to Judds meadows," for the reason
that somewhere above present Meadow street the road divided, one
branch turning eastward, crossing Great brook, going down about
in the direction of South Main street, only farther to the westward.
Somewhere about present Liberty street, it met with a highway
that started on Mill plain near Union square. This highway ran
southwesterly to the point of meeting, and the two proceeded
together as a " Road to Judds Meadow," and went on through Mad
meadow.

The other branch of Bank street (still remembered as a low,
sandy way from Meadow street to the river, and over which the
alder, pussy willow and hazel-nut bushes presided, nodding their
consent to the passage of an ordinary vehicle, but covering their
garments with fringes of hay as often as the venturesome owner of
a load dared to risk his tons down the overgrown passage) went on
in about its present course, passing close to the eastern terminus of

560 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

the now absent Hop Meadow hill, crossed the river, threaded the
sand hills as best it could until it came to Meadow lane near the
school-house, through which it wandered and wound to Town Plot
height. Bank street on-the-hill was not laid out until 1780. The
very earliest way up Town Plot was, it is thought, up the border of
Sled Hall brook.

The present road from Town Plot to Piatt's mills, or its repre-
sentative, was laid out in 1740, and is described as beginning "4
rods west of James Hull's comer at the south end of the old Town
Plot lot," and running south generally to the ** southeast corner of
Silas Johnson's house lot," where it met the west-side Judd's
Meadow road. In 1740, a short highway was made in Northbury,
which began: "Att A highway that Goes Northward and South-
ward by the house they meet in A Saboth dayes and we Run East-
ward About fourty three Rods to the River." The above highway
began "between the sd meeting house and John How's then dwel-
ling."

The earliest Town-Line road noticed was made about the time
that the duties of the perambulator became burdensome. It began
"at the lower corner of our bounds joining to Wallingford bounds"
and ran the length of the township at that side, and up to the
Farmington road. It met this road by Shelton Hitchcock's house.
A stone still marks the place of meeting. In its 2 rod course it
passed through lands of Mr. Turney, Gideon Hotchkiss,* " Hickcox
land," Mr. Southmayd's, Mr. Hall's, and common lands.

The road from Watertown to Middlebury, as originally laid out,
w^as surveyed in 1741. It began at the Woodbury road at Break
Neck hill, ran a little west of Josiah Bronson's house, through Isaac
Bronson's farm, to the northwest comer of "Prince's alias John-
son's farm," to the southeast corner of and through Stephen Up-
son's, Capt. Judd's, Thomas Upson's and Tuttle's farms, through

* The following letter, written by Gideon Hotchkiss, when in service in the French and Indian war, to
his son Jesse, also in service at '* No. 4," has josi been found, and will be of interest:

Saratoga, August x6, 1757.

After my tender regards to you, hoping that these lines may find you in good health as I am at present

and so was your mother and brothers and sisters, and all your and our friends when I came from home. You

will hear the melancholy news of our upper fort. I understand you was well the last I heard from you. I

am glad to hear from you and of the welfare of all our friends. Give my love to Lieut. Beebe and to Cor. Weed,

and lell Cor. Weed that I would not have him send any letter to me but what he is willing every one should

see, for they break almost all open that comes. You will hear the reason of our being here. I have not time

to write for the men are now agoing and so I must conclude with a word of advice to you beseeching of you

to seek to him that is able to deliver you and to sanctify and cleanse you from all sin. O my son I beg of God

to fit you for a dying hour, this is the only time, now while you are in health.

Gideon Hotchkiss.

Jesse, the then young soldier of 19 years, lived to return from that war, but lost his life in the later war»
dying, "with the army," September 29, 1776.

OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 561

Stephen Upson's 30 acre farm to the notch of Jeremiah's hill (where
a road is to-day). Beyond the notch it was laid out through
lands of Stephen Scott and Richard " Saymour " before it joined
the Litchfield road just west of Watertown village. In the same
year there was a lower road from Westbury to Woodbury.

The Westbury meeting-house is mentioned in connection with
a highway in 1742, and the "Parish Meeting-House '* at Northbury

in 1743-

In 1744, among the highways laid out, was the one at Thomas-
ton, from the river to the last monument at Farmington bounds.
This road was 8 rods wide where it ran through common land.
A road was run up from Shelton's orchard on Buck's Hill to meet
this Thomaston road to Farmington; one was laid out from Walling-
ford bounds to **a place called Hog Pound brook" on the Farm-
ington road, and one on Twelve-Mile Hill.

In 1745, there was one from Edmund Tompkins's saw-mill to the
road at the West Side bars; from the, north end of Jeremiah's hill,
to Woodbury bounds; from the country road to Litchfield, to Wood-
bury bounds; from Break Neck, to a highway between the houses
of Gunn and John Weed. A number of highways in the south-
west quarter were also laid out.

In 1745, Stephen Kelsey was living on the old New Haven road
on the farm lands lately owned by Charles Lounsbury, and a road
(now perhaps represented by Lounsbury or Glen street) was laid
out, described as " from the south end of Mad meadow to the high-
way that goes by Stephen Kelsey's house."

In 1746 the village highways and cross highways were laid
out. In Northbury parish, 1747-1748 were the harvest years for
highways. They grew in a day and "sprang into being on all
sides.

In 1748 the line between Waterbury and Farmington was ad-
justed on the 15th of April, and on the 25th, Samuel Hickcox,
Thomas Porter and Daniel Southmayd met three men of Farming-
ton at the southwest corner of that town (south of our Farmington
road) and amicably perambulated north on the line to the Eight-
mile white-oak tree, and "with good agreement renewed each
monument." The above point had been a disturbing one to the
proprietors for some twelve years — the controversy having been
between them and the proprietors of the Hartford and Windsor
west lands.

During the summer of 1748, and for the entire year of 1749, not
a highway was laid out or altered; probably owing to the "great
sickness " of those years.

36

56^

HISTORT OF WATSRBURT.

In 1750, Mr. Southmayd records that a highway was for-
merly laid out to Meshadock and not finished (perhaps inter-
rupted by the death of a member of the committee), and he
then records the unfinished portion of it, and ten more high-
ways. Of the number, was one from Ebenezer Richardson's house
on the Woodbury road to the road from Hop Swamp to town; a
new one to Derby bounds; one from the highway a little north
of Eliakim Welton's house to Farmington bounds (about two miles) ;
also one of 100 rods in length and 4 rods wide, described as
" from the highway that lyeth upon the old Town Plot up to Sled
Hall brook, beginning on the north side of the brook and running
northward between Nichols's and Southmayd's and Bronson's land
to the twenty rod highway."

One may be pardoned tor leaving highways for a moment to say that this land
of Southmayd's was sold in 1773 by John Southmayd, his grandson, of East Had-

dam, to William
Adams, who un-
doubtedly built the
house here pictured
at some time be-
tween 1773 and 1781,
for William deeded
it to his son John in
1781 (15 acres with
a. house on it), and

tioned when he
bought the twenty-
six acres. Adams
owned four of the
Town Plot lots and
all the way to tbe broolc. John bought nut the other heirs and in one of his pw-
chases from them mention is made of the old saw-mill dam, on Sled Hall brook —
possibly of 1674, certainly of a later day, for the Adams family owned rights in a
saw-mill there a century later. Early in the present century John Adams sold his
60 acre farm, with house, barn and cider-mill, to Edward and Levi G. Porter. In
iSii they sold it to Eli Terry of Plymouth. In 1813 Eli Terry sold it to Samuel
Chipman. and the proposed cloclt factory t>ecame a bark mill. The house built by
William Adams is standing in iS^;.

In and after 1750 the records are burdened with numerous alter-
ations and changes made to accommodate individuals. As an
instance, Mr. Southmayd desired Cook street, on the west side of
his Little Brook pasture, to be altered, and it was done to suit his
wishes. His pasture lay along Little brook above Grove street.
The same day Grove, west to Willow street, was re-stated. At this
date, William Adams owned the St. Margaret property and its

OLD HI0HWAT8 AND STREETS, 563

vicinity. Robert Johnson, whose house figures extensively in high-
ways, lived at the southwest corner of Cook and Pine streets, and
Sergt. Thomas Barnes was living in the old Johnson house of 1890.
Likewise, the highway on the old Town Plot against the south bars
was changed from the north to the south side of Lieut. Thomas
Bronson's and Stephen Upson's lots, at their desire, and — occasionally
it happened that after a highway was laid out past a man's farm, if
he bought land across the road, the highway would, at his request,
slip around to the other side of his new land in the most accommo-
dating manner. In a few instances, after the laying out of a high-
way, the bounds became lost and the work was all gone over again.
This occurred notably in a Scott's Mountain road.*

In 1753, **Upon the Desire of Lieut. Jacob Blackslee and many
other of the Neighbours," a highway that went up Twich Grass
brook was altered, because where it was laid ** some part of the way
was so bad that it was very difficult to make It Feazable to Travill
In." In the alterations made "the town was put to no charge, for
the inhabitants that requested it bore the charge of it." That part
of the highway to Derby the west side or Twelve Mile hill was also
"found to be unpassable" and a new one laid out from Hawkins's
corner to the east side of Toantic brook, to Derby bounds. Where
new highways were laid out through a man's land in alteration of
an old one, the old highway was given to him in exchange. See
" The Town and Tompkins's Agreement, Vol. I, of Highways, p. 122.
The simple acknowledgment of this exchange on the highway
records, signed by land owner and the selectmen, was sufficient
evidence of title for town or individual. From 1750 onward, these
changes in highways are so numerous that to follow them is im-
practicable. One meets agreements like the following, in 1754:

We have agreed that the highway laid across our farms shall run by Daniel
Sanford's door between his house and barn straight across to Ezekiel Sanford's
house, from thence to Samuel Peck's house on the west side, and from thence south
about forty rods, and from thence west to the highway between Mr. Hall's and my
land. Samuel Peck,

Ezekiel Sanford,
Daniel Sanford.

Our Watertown road of to-day dates from Nov. 27th, 1753, begin-
ning at the bridge, and running to the upper Woodbury road, above
the present school-house. The rest of the way was laid out later and
went through Edmund Tompkins*s land by way of an exchange for
an older highway. The last highway that Mr. Southmayd recorded

* See Vol. I, pages 1x7 and xxS, Waterbury Highways.

564 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

was laid out May 8th, 1755, and recorded May loth, and is, I think,
the only one to which he failed to append his name. The highway
was from Dr. Powers's corner to a former highway at Timothy
Porter's corner. It ran from Bedlam (in present Middlebury).

The first one recorded by Thomas Clark was the formal layout
of the Farmington road from Farmington bounds to Willow street,
in 1754. From the southwest comer of George Nichols's house lot
(on which the new High School building will stand), across to Mr.
Jonathan Baldwin's line on East Main street, was nine rods.
From Baldwin's land on the south side, the line of the street was
run to Center Square on Ebenezer "VVakelee's" land; on the north
side of the street on Thomas Bronson's and James Nichols's land to
the same point "Through the Town street" to Willow street, it was
laid the same breadth as it then was, " butting on each side on the
ends of each man's house lot, as it was then fenced," and the bound-
aries were set at the corner of each man's lot by Thomas Clark,
John Scovill, John Judd and Thomas Porter, until they came to
Ebenezer Bronson's and John Scovill's corners, or to the long-time
Judge Kingsbury and Judge Bronson corners — now belonging to
Frederick Nuhn and F. H. Humphrey.

The first money paid by the town for land for a highway appears
in the case of Isaac Castle, who at the time had gone to Northbury
to live. The highway eastward from Northbury bridge was turned
through his land, and he accepted the old highway and nine shil-
lings in money. By 1758, highways began to receive their third
alteration, or layout. At this time the surveyors were giving
much attention and time to the requirements in the southwest
quarter. In 1759, the selectmen of Waterbury and Litchfield having
met and perambulated the town line and agreed on the placing of
the monuments, they discharged each other from service for three
years.

When we find in the year 1762, about twenty highways laid
out, or re-surveyed with alterations, in a single neighborhood, the
effort to catch even glimpses of the swift changes taking place in
the township and condensing them in a single chapter seems futile,
and the question of where the men were found to work them is a
serious one, although one day's work in the year for each man, had,
perhaps, been increased to four days at that period.

In 1765 a re-survey of that part of the Country road to New
Haven was made "from Gideon Hikcox to town." It began at his
house (the late Josiah Culver's last homestead) in Naugatuck, and
retraced the old route down the hollow between the cemeteries (at
that point connecting with the road that led to the old first bridge —

OLD HIQHWAT8 AND STREETS, 565

where the dam now is) and ran by Beebe's land, by or through
Capt. Thomas Porter's land, by Beebe's house, on the west side of
William Hoadley's mill, and between Tinker's house and Thomas
Porter's house (given to Thomas, by his father, Capt. Thomas, thir-
teen days before). This survey places this old house, still standing,
within fourteen rods of Hoadley's mill, on the bank of the brook,
thus giving us information concerning its removal since that date,
which tradition confirms. One leaf of this survey is missing, also a
leaf from the re-survey in 177 1 of the Hopkins road of 1729, which
ran from James Baldwin's mill, Hoadley's in 1765, east to Hopkins'
farm, and southwest to the New Haven road.

In 1776, The town and proprieters chose a committee for the pur-
pose of re-surveying "the Highway that goeth to Woodbury."
They began on Christmas Day. Hitherto, the surveys to Wood-
bury had been made by starting from the top of West Side hill.
This time, they began at Mr. Andrew Bronson's corner by his house
(Judge Kingsbury's), and ran across West Main street 4 rods and
II feet for the breadth of the street and ran west 15° 50' north
43 rods, where the width of the road was reduced to 68 feet. When
it reached the bridge the road was three rods wide. The old
crossing place of the river had been 8 rods below where this survey
placed it, so the road was widened at the river to 11 rods, by
turning down the river 8 rods, which added to the 3 made it 11, in
order to meet the old path. The west side the river, it started 11
rods wide, and wound up the hill in various widths until it came
to the old 20 rod highway where the layout of 1720 started, from
which point onward it followed for the greater part of the way
the first survey, and its intermediate alterations.

THE ERA OF TURNPIKE ROADS AND STAGE COACHES.

During the war the task of maintaining the highways became^
especially burdensome by reason of the absence of many of the
young workers. One by one the towns of the State applied to the
General Assembly that the roads might be cared for by taxation.
The river roads were the most difficult to keep in order, being
washed by freshets, and from 1740 onward the work of building
bridges had been unending — therefore, when the era of turnpike
roads arrived, the people stood apparently willing to receive all the
good it might bring to them. It would cost too much money for
the taxpayers to convert existing roads into "dug -roads" and
"turnpikes" and so capital — which came to bless and to antagonize
the people — received a welcome.

566 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Toll was first taken in this state in 1792. It was where the high-
way ran through the Mohegan reservation between New London
and Norwich, and was collected three years before the turnpike road
between New London and Norwich was incorporated. A little later,
toll was taken on the "Stage Road** through Greenwich, and in
1794 a "toll gate*' was established on the "Post Road'* from Nor-
wich to Providence.

The first turnpike company incorporated in the state was the
Oxford company. It ran its stage-coaches through Litchfield to
Massachusetts.

In 1797 came The Straits Turnpike Co. It was established to
build a turnpike road from New Haven court house to the court
house in Litchfield. The first meeting of the company was at the
house of Irijah Terril in Waterbury (Salem Society), in Nov., 1797.
Three turnpikes were to be erected on this road — one at some
proper place between the house of Elihu Harrison in Litchfield and
the house of John Foot in Watertown; one between the house of
Joseph Nettleton in Watertown and Salem Bridge in Waterbury,
and the other between the place in the highway called The Straits
(of Beacon Hill brook) in Woodbridge and the school house north
of Noadiah Carrington*s house in that town.

This road, in its day, engendered much bitterness and strife. The
people of Waterbury centre wanted to have it pass through the vil-
lage, which was by many persons considered the natural way for
it. Aaron Benedict was one of the incorporators, and his influence
with the other directors, it is said, prevailed with them to have the
road pass his house, on the plea that that was the most direct route.
Waterbury centre was side-tracked and dissatisfied, while Water-
town and Salem Bridge grew apace. It became an accepted route
between New Haven and Albany and during busy seasons a pro-
cession of teams was passing over it night and day. One is not
surprised that Waterbury grew restless and longed for the quieting
influence of " stage *' horn and wheels.

At length the bridge at Salem needed repairing, and the Turn-
pike company for its own convenience, apparently, made some slight
repairs, which Waterbury refused to pay for. Finally, a freshet
took away the bridge and the town proposed to make the company
replace it, but the company sued the town for a new one and suc-
ceeded in showing that their layout did not include the bridge.
Just above the bridge, across the low land bordering the river, the
company built a dyke to protect the road from overflow during
freshets, which, it was claimed, turned the water under the bridge
with so much force as to undermine one of the abutments and let

OLD HIGHWATa AND STREETS. 567

fall the new bridge that the company had compelled the town to
build. The town sued the company for damages, but obtained no
redress.

This was, perhaps, the first contest between the Corporation and
the People of Connecticut. The contest has gone on at large from
that time to the present — and has ended at last, it is said, in the
State being completely and comfortably swallowed by a railroad
company.

After Waterbury centre was thoroughly beaten in trying to do
anything with The Straits Turnpike Co., the people resolved to have
a turnpike road of their own, and in October, 1801, *'The Waterbury
River Turnpike Company " was incorporated. It was to run from
a point near the center of Naugatuck, about forty miles, to the
north line of the state. Among the incorporators were Noah M.
Bronson of Waterbury and Asher Blakeslee of Plymouth. The dam-
ages to individuals for land taken, were to be paid by the town
wherein such land lay before May i, 1802. Four turnpikes or gates
for the collection of toll were allowed — one in Colebrook, in Tor-
rington, at the bridge place across Waterbury river by Samuel Rey-
yolds' house in Plymouth (whereby we have the name Reynolds
Bridge), "and one other at or near the house of Jared Byington, Esq.,
in Waterbury (Salem)." "Reynolds* bridge" was to be built and
kept in repair by the company. Other bridges, that the towns had
been liable by law to build and maintain, were still left to the towns.
The stock consisted of 1680 shares — the value of a share not stated.

At each of the four turnpikes the fares were 4 cents for each
person or horse — for each chaise with one horse and passengers,
i2j^ cents — for each four-wheeled pleasure carriage or stage-coach
25 cents. No animal was allowed to pass the gate without the pay-
ment of one-half a cent. Exceptions were made. If a man were
going to church, or to a society meeting, to a funeral, to a town or
freeman's meeting, or to a gristmill, to military duty, or, if he lived
within two miles of the gate and went not more than two miles
beyond it on his farming business, he paid no toll. Four years later,
another gate was permitted, and in 1822 there was one provided for,
south of the point where Spruce brook comes to the river (above
Waterville).

As the Straits Turnpike Company was the first to inaugurate
the War of Corporations versus The People, so the Waterbury River
Turnpike Company was the first to wound the community by dese-
crating the graves of the fathers — its road being built along the east
side of the river above Salem Bridge, between the cemetery and the
river, on land properly belonging to the cemetery. The work was

568 HISTORY OF WATERS UBT.

carried on by digging into the bank and undermining the graves,
without any support being furnished, so that some of the earliest
buried and principal of the forefathers had their bones exposed by
the action of the elements and were left sliding down and scattered
about for the gaze of the indifferent passer-by. This action was
seconded by the Derby railroad, which was built through an Indian
burying ground and the ancient bones and buried implements were
shoveled out like rubbish.

The era of turnpikes brought the era of taverns on a large scale.
Many of them became notable. On the New Haven and Litchfield
route were Bishop's tavern at Watertown,* Selah Scovill's a mile
north, Simeon Smith's at Morris, Daniel Beecher's and Irijah
Terril's at Naugatuck, Ahira Collins's at Straitsville, and on the
Plymouth route Samuel Judd's held its own at least to 1816, in
which year, the inn-keepers were Daniel Beecher (Salem), Samuel
Judd, and Stiles Thompson (Middlebury).

It was said that at a certain date the stock of the Waterbury
River Turnpike Co., was " all owned " or at least controlled by two
men, Victory Tomlinson, and one of the Bronsons at Waterville.
The story is also told that Tomlinson owned all the turnpike from
his neighborhood (Mount Tobe) to New Haven, and, that he, not
being known, was arrested as a vagrant as he sat one day by the
wayside eating his dinner. He defended himself by saying that
he was on his own property. Being asked to explain, he replied
that he " owned all the turnpike." It was said to be his ambition
to own all the land between Mount Tobe and New Haven.

It often occurred, at about that time, that capitalists made them-
selves conspicuous by their shabbiness and coarse manners, and
were mistaken for suspicious characters. Indifference to public
opinion in the matter of dress and social observances on the part
of those who were rich and thought themselves above criticism, led
to strange complications, and furnished abundant and abiding anec-
dotes for the story teller.

The Naugatuck valley was a centre of the turnpike interest, it
being not only the home of the earliest turnpike road in the state,
but was itself traversed about 1820 by the Humphreysville and
vSalem road, which was cut into the foundations of the hills along
the east side of the river. It was also the starting point of other
roads. In 1812, came the Southington and Waterbury turnpike
road, which is now called the Meriden road. The western gate was
within two hundred rods of the house of Reuben Lewis, in Wolcott.

* There were several others less conspicuous — in fact on all much travelled roads a tavern sign was to
be seen every two or three miles— learasters had their favorite stopping places, and in this way farmers found

a market for hay and grain. F. J. K.

OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS,

569

In 1823, the Woodbury and Waterbury Turnpike road was pro-
jected and probably accomplished.

Notwithstanding the fact that Waterbury centre was not on the
main turnpike road from New Haven to Litchfield, it steadily grew
in numbers, and its activities were increased, as will be seen by the
following "Assessments on Mechanics, &c., in Waterbury in 1816 ":

ATTORNEYS.

Legrand Bancroft,
Bennet Bronson,
Cyrus Clark,
Samuel Frisbie.

PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS.

Edward Field,
Joseph Porter,
Nimrod Hull,
Jesse Porter.

INN KEEPERS.

Daniel Beecher,
Samuel Judd,
Stiles Thompson.

TRADERS.

Burton & Leavenworth,
Lampson & Clark,
E. & A. Spencer.

GRIST MILLS.

Leavenworth, Hay den & Scovill,
Lois Pajme,
Jobamah Gunn,
Jesse Wooster.

SAW MILLS.

Eli Adams & Co. ,
N. Piatt,
Levi Wooster,
Benj. Farrel.
Asa Hoadley,
Elias Clark & Co.,
David Downs.

CARDING MACHINES.

Herman Payne,
Alfred Piatt & Co.

CLOCK MAKERS.

Clark, Cook & Co.

BUTTON MAKERS.

Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill,
Amasa Goodyear,
Grilley & Wooster,
Scott & Beebe.

BELL FOUNDER.

Erastus Lew^is.

WOOLLEN FACTORY.

Scovill, Lampson & Co.

FLAX MILL.

Smith, Piatt & Co.

TANNERS AND SHOEMAKERS.

Ashbel Stevens.
Andrew Bryan,
Culpepper Hoadley.

CLOTHIERS.

Daniel Steele,
Leveritt Candee.

TAILOH.

Asahel Adams.

SADDLER.

Moylen Northrop.

HATTER.

Elijah Hotchkiss.

COOPER.

Anson Sperry.

BLACKSMITHS.

James Brown,
Martin Stephens,
David Stephens,
Lyman Hitchcox,
Obed Tuttle,
Jesse Scott,
Thaddeus Hotchkiss,
Elisha Smith.

CARPENTERS AND JOINERS,

Lemuel Porter,
John Downs,
Samuel Root,
Chauncey Root,
David Prichard, Jr.
Dyer Hotchkiss,
William Hoadley, Jr.,
Richard Ward,
Nathaniel Carroll,
Eliel Mann.

570

HI8T0RF OF WATERS URT.

During the period between 1797 and 1826, some one hundred
and twenty turnpike roads were constructed. The Waterbury road
was annulled in 1862, but before that date the road had been given
up, except for about eight miles of its southernmost portion ^
whereon it kept a toll-gate between Waterbury and Naugatuck.

In 185 1 Plank roads came into repute. Seven were constructed
in three years. The Waterbury and Cheshire Plank Road Co. was
incorporated in 1852. Three Waterbury men were among the incor-
porators, William H. Scovill, John P. Elton and Arad Welton. The
capital stock was $20,000. Shares $50 each. The toll-gates were at
least three miles asunder, with a toll not exceeding three cents a
mile for any vehicle drawn by two animals.

As this is written the last turnpike road in Connecticut passes
out of existence, the committee of the superior court, Judge Brew-
ster, F. J. Kingsbury and C. S. Davidson having made their report
on the " Derby turnpike " — which report values the franchise at
eight thousand dollars, upon the payment of which sum the road
passes to the towns through which it runs, New Haven, Orange,
and Derby.

The following interesting history of the " Bury Road " is given
by Mr. Kingsbury:

THE BURY ROAD.

About 1840 Silas Hoadley, who lived at Greystone, tried to per-
suade the town of Waterbury to build a road from Downs*s saw
mill, half a mile above Waterville on the Hancock brook, to the
Plymouth line a little below his house. The distance was not
much over a mile, but it was very rocky. The Waterbury authori-
ties did not think the convenience of the road warranted the
expense and declined to build it Then Hoadley brought a petition
to the County commissioners, and after a long hearing with able
counsel and a cloud of witnesses the commissioners ordered the
town to build the road. In the testimony a great deal was said
about its being a better way than we had heretofore of reaching
Plymouth Hill and Bristol — also that it shortened the distance
from the Waterbury factories to large tracts of woodland, etc., etc.
The road was built at a cost, I think, of about $1700. It made a
very picturesque drive along the valley of the Hancock brook and
some one gave it the name of " Bury " road, which it retained* as
long as it existed. The road crossed the brook near Downs's saw
mill, and went the rest of the way to Hoadley's on the east side.
In 1853 or 4, the Hartford, Providence and Fishkill R. R. was laid
out taking this road from the bridge north and entirely destroying
it. Suits were brought against the railroad to get damages or a

OLD HIGHWAT8 AND STREETS, 571

new road, and I think the case went to the Supreme court, but
through some legal technicality nothing was accomplished. Then
Mr. Hoadley began another long and expensive fight to compel the
town to build a road on the west side of the brook. A road was
built there, but I have the impression that Mr. Hoadley failed in
his suit and built the road at his own expense. After a few years
Mr. Hoadley died — a freshet carried away a considerable portion of
the road and it has now been impassable for several years. It is
a great saving in distance — and would make a very pretty drive and
really ought to be rebuilt — although perhaps the mere economic
use would hardly justify it. Mr. Hoadley had acquired a competence
in the manufacture of clocks, but his fortune was seriously impaired
by his expenses in connection with this bit of road. Probably if he
had built it entirely himself in the first instance it would have been
much more economical.

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

THE WATER-POWERS OF WATERBURY — FIRST THE GRIST MILL AND THEN
THE SAW MILL — SOME OF THE BEGINNINGS OF LARGE MANUFAC-
TORIES— OTHER ENTERPRISES THAT HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN — A
CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO STREAMS.

THE Story of Waterbury's industrial development is in its
beginning the story of Waterbury's water-powers, and these
next demand our attention. If in these days of steam and
electricity we are tempted to forget how largely industrial devel-
opment owes its initiative to the water-power, we are reminded, by
the latest engineering feat, that progress often doubles on itself.
The discarded water-power of yesterday finds its vindication in the
harnessing of Niagara to-day, and the transmission of its power to
places of manufacture many miles distant. Along the track of the
most matter-of-fact narrative, a chronicle of Waterbury's water-
powers for example, lie curious suggestions, if one but looks for
them. These, however, can be only hinted at in this general way.

GRAIN MILLS.

As Mattatuck was twenty miles from Farmington, the site of the
nearest,* or at any rate the most accessible, mill for grinding grain,
and as there was no road but a cart path over the mountain, one of
the obvious needs of the new settlement was a "grist mill." The
Grand committee under date of November 27, 1679, either of their
own motion or at the suggestion of the townspeople, advised the
inhabitants to build a sufficient corn mill (doubtless meaning by
"corn" grain of all kinds), and said further:

And for encouragement we grant such persons [builders of the mill] shall have
thirty acres of land laid out, and shall be and remain to them and their heirs and
assigns forever, he or they maintaining the said grist mill as aforesaid forever.

* According to Davis's '* History '* a mill was built at Yalesville in 1677, and there was another on
Wharton's brook in the lower part of Walling^ford, bailt in 1674. Either of these was nearer than Farming-
ton, but probably there was no practicable road in that direction. There is mention in a layout of land in
x686, near the junction of Beaver pond brook with Mad river, of the place " where the mill stones were brought
over." They would hardly have been brought from Farmington by this route, and it may be that the stones
from the Wharton brook mill, which seems to have been replaced by the one at Yalesville, were brought
over to do duty here, as this would be a natural route, but evidently not at this time an easy one, or the fact
would not have made sufficient impression to be so noted. They may have come this way from New Haven.

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 573

Stephen Hopkins, who was the owner of a mill in Hartford, accepted
the proposal, built a mill and sent his son John to run it, but did not
come here himself or remove his family hither. The mill and the
land allotment attached to it became the property of John. He was
from the beginning of his settling here a prominent citizen, and his
descendants have perhaps furnished more men of distinction than
any other family to be found in the town's history. The mill was
built soon after the committee's vote of advice. It was perhaps
already arranged for, and it seems to have been satisfactory, as on
February 5, 1680, the record of the committee says:

It is further concluded that Stephen Hopkins, who hath built a mill at that
plantation, shall have the thirty acres appointed and entailed in a former order to
such as shall erect a mill there, and so much more land added to the said thirty acres
as may advance the same to be in value of ;^ioo allotment. There is also a house
lot containing in estimation two acres granted to Stephen Hopkins as conveniently
as may be to suit the mill, and the aforesaid Thomas Judd and John Stanley and
the present townsmen [are] to lay it out to him, and also a three acre lot, according
as the other inhabitants have granted to be laid out [to them ?] by these same per-
sons for him.

The mill was built on Mad river (sometimes called " Mill river "
from this fact) where the Scovill Manufacturing company's factory
now stands.* The dam was placed across the narrowest point,
where the two hills approach each other, very near the north end
of the present south rolling mill. The mill stood immediately
south of the dam, the north end of it resting in part on the wall of
the dam. It had a fall of about eight feet. Portions of the lower
timbers of the old dam, or its immediate representative, remained
in place until about 1876, when they were finally torn out in the
progress of improvement. The mill dam was open to the road for
a short distance above the mill. It was utilized sixty years ago as
a place to water horses and to wash wagons, as a bathing place for
boys, and also for baptism by immersion. The writer remembers
on one occasion having seen the ice broken away for this last
named purpose.

The accompanying illustration shows the situation of the mill f
with reference to the pond, probably as it was from the beginning,
although the building here pictured was not very old. The mill
was in the north end of the building next to the pond, and the mill

* When the mill was built the name of the river was ''^Roaring- river." After the building of the mill
the name was changed to " Mill river." Because the mill dam sent the water back on Daniel Porter's three-
acre lot, the town allowed him a part of the highway on Grand street, near the corner of Bank.

t This cut appears again in Vol. II, p. 277. The original sketch was made by Lucien I. Bisbee, book-
keeper in 1835 for J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill. In the cut in Vol. II, p. 278, dated 1858, the building in the
foreground is the office, and stands on the site of the miller's house.

574

niSTOBT OF WATERBURT.

door is seen near the north end of the building, looking in the cut
more like a long window than a door. The south end of the build-
ing is the rolling mill. The building on the extreme right is the
button factory, built in 1830 to take the place of one on the same
site which was burned. The miller's house at this date stood in
front of the mil! on the west side of the road. The house lot
of two acres was at the corner of Ea.st Main street and Exchange
place, the property now owned by the heirs of William Brown,
It extended east to Great brook, and the house stood fifty or sixty
feet westward from the brook. Later it became the property of
Ephraim Warner and for many years prior to its demolition, some-
where about 1840, was known as the Ephraim Warner house. At
one time it was a hotel.* John Hopkips had also another house near
the mill, probably for the
miller. A portion of the
thirty acres was laid out
to him south of Union

E[ street, running down to,
and perhaps below. Liberty
street. This whole tract
was known for many years
as Mill plain. It is some-
times called on the records " Hopkins's Mill plain," and sometimes
"Hopkins's plain." This is to be distinguished from "Sawmill
plain," at the east end of Waterbury. Several pieces were given in
different parts of the town to complete the thirty-acre grant. To
carry out the agreement in regard to the ^100 propriety the for-
feited allotment of Deacon Langton was granted to Hopkins, the
provision being made that one-half the allotment should be entailed
to the mill, as were the thirty acres in case the committee "granted
the same." On February 16, 1682-3, the committee ratified the
action, naming John Hopkins as grantee. This is the record:

In reference to what lands are granted by the inbabitants of Mattatuck to John
Hopkins the present miller we do well approve of. and in case they shall see cause
to ease the entail of any part ot the ^ftoo allotment we shall not object against it

Occasional troubles between the town and the miller arose which
gave rise to several modifications of the original agreement, and a
removal by vote of the town of the entail from some part of the
land. On January 17, 1732-3, Stephen and Timothy, sons of John
Hopkins and executors of his will, conveyed their interest in the
mill and the thirty acres to Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., of Milford (who

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES.

575

was, however, Jonathan Baldwin, Sr., of Waterbury, as he had a son
known as Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., also frequently as Colonel Bald-
win). Jonathan Baldwin died in 1761, and the mill property passed
to his heirs, and finally into the hands of Colonel Phineas Porter,
who married Mr. Baldwin's granddaughter. In 1783 Phineas Porter
conveyed it to Lieutenant Aaron Benedict and Captain Benjamin
Upson, and thereafter for some years the mill is referred to on the
record as " Benedict & Upson's mill." In 1805 Aaron Benedict sold
his half to Lemuel Harrison, who, apparently, also acquired
Upson's half. In 1808 Lemuel Harrison sold his interest to Abel
Porter, David Hayden, Daniel Clark and Silas Grilley, who con-
stituted the firm of Abel Porter & Co., Waterbury's first gilt button
makers. They purchased the property for the button business.
The firm afterward became Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, then
J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill, and finally the Scovill Manufacturing com-
pany, as related in Volume II.

The mill remained a mill long after there ceased to be any use
for it. At last it got out of repair from lack of use. About 1850
scfme men of no influence or standing attempted to raise the ques-
tion whether the mill lands had not been forfeited by failure to keep
up the mill. These lands for the most part had long before been sep-
arated from the mill and sold to various persons. The equities were
so evidently in favor of these holders that the ancient proprietors
(as many as could be found) met and voted to release any supposed
interest they might have under the mill grant. Dr. Bronson* has
quite a full history of the matter, and seems inclined to the opinion
that the proprietors acted without due authority. He apparently
does not bear in mind the vote of the committee of February 6, 1682,
giving the proprietor inhabitants the right to ease any part of the
entail that they should see fit to, which right was certainly acted
upon once, if only once.

One would hardly expect that Mattatuck would remain depend-
ent upon one grist mill for fifty years. But the present writer can
find no allusion to any other in the records until November 25,
1729, when John Warner deeded to James Williams a piece of land
near "the new mill." This was at the mouth of Spruce brook, a
small stream running into Steel's brook on the west side, from the
north end of Bunker hill, the spot where now is the old dam of
the Oakville company. The road at that time seems to have fol-
lowed the stream more closely than at present, and to have passed
by the mill. The following year (1730) John Sutliff from Branford
built a grist mill at the falls of the Naugatuck about two miles

♦ See his History of Waterbury, pp. 83-90.

576 HI8T0RT OF WATEHBUR7,

below Thomaston, where Henry Terry afterwards had a woollen
mill and where there is now a knife factory. A few years later
there was a grist mill on Fulling Mill brook (p. 350). By this time
grist mills had ceased to be a novelty and were built where and
when they were wanted. Some of them will be alluded to as we
follow up the history of the various streams.

SAW MILLS.

Next in importance to the grist mill as a necessity for the set-
tlers of Mattatuck, if not before it, comes the saw mill. Naturally
then we find that the two were started practically at the same time.
The first reference to the saw mill comes only three years after the
vote to encourage the building of the grist mill — that is, accepting
the reference (quoted below) as establishing the fact that the saw
mill was in operation at that time. Be this as it may, the first saw
mill was situated on the Mad river at Sawmill plain, and probably
where the leather factory now is — some thirty rods south of the
Meriden turnpike. Reference has been made (p. 218) to a piece
of land laid out to Samuel Hickox, Jr., " three acres at the Pine
swamp by the path that leads to the saw mill." This was on Jan-
uary 3, 1686. Dr. Bronson (page 90) thought this might refer to the
place where the clock factory now stands, a little south of Cherry
street, and where it is known that there was an early saw mill. But
Pine swamp, when Dr. Bronson wrote, had not been located, as it
has been since. It is the swamp on the north side of the Meriden
turnpike, just on the edge of the Sawmill Plain school district.
Carrington brook runs through it, and it has been sometimes called,
from that fact, " Carrington's swamp." So this seems to locate the
early saw mill beyond a doubt. It is clear from the report of the
committee* that they had clapboards there as early as 1682. They
may have been "riven" like shingles and finished with broad-axe and
draw-knife (they were sometimes made that way), and they may-
have been dragged over the mountain from Farmington. But
boards would be wanted for many purposes, and in the excuses for
delays in finishing buildings nothing appears about any difficulty
in getting lumber. It looks, therefore, very much as if this saw
mill might then have been in working order as early as 1682. There
appears to have been a grant of thirty acres of land to encourage
the building of this mill, as there was in the case of the grist mill.
The original record of this grant is probably on one of the lost

♦ See page 179.

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES,

577

leaves. At any rate nothing appears of it in the records until
November 28, 1722,* when the proprietors by vote

agree that the grant of thirty acres to the old saw mill proprietors shall stand good,
only they shall be obliged to take it in the undivided land in one piece, or every
one to take his part of the thirty acres by his own land.

On April 15, 1723, we find this:

There was laid out to Edmund Scott two acres wanting ten rods, at a place
called Cotton Wool meadow, which land came to him by being a partner in the
old saw mill.

Why this delay was permitted when the early settlers seemed
so avaricious of land, is not easy to imagine. One Macy (McKinney,
Makenny, Mackey, or something idem sonans, the spelling varying
greatly), had a ten acre grant near the first mill, and may have
been the man in charge. He soon disappears.

At a town meeting on January 6, 1698-9, liberty is given to set
up a saw mill by the corn mill, on certain conditions. But at a
meeting held in February, 1699-1700, this vote was cancelled, and
leave was given to Sergeant Bronson, Deacon Judd, John Hopkins^
Samuel Hickox and John Richardson, to set up a saw mill at the
corn mill, they making and maintaining two rods of the dam from
the corn mill east. Whether anything was done under this vote
there is no e\4dence, unless it be a vote passed March 18, 1701, by
which Stephen Upson and Benjamin Barns were appointed a com-
mittee to lay out the mill lot at the mill and what highways are
needful for the '^ mils.'' This is distinctly written in the plural.
The fact that it was necessary to lay out the highways about the
mills more than ten years after the corn mill had been in use is
significant. If there was a mill there it was probably on the bank
near where the button factory afterwards stood. The owners of
the mill at one time had a saw mill some distance lower down on
the east side of the river, but nothing appears in regard to this
until many years later. On January 30, 1 699-1 700, the town gave
liberty "to them men that see cause for to set up a saw mill at the
north end of the long hill, the liberty of the streeme and conven-
iency of pounding [ponding?]" and the right to improve the land
they needed to set the mill on and to lay logs and the like, the
land to be their own so long as they maintained a saw mill at
that place. No further trace of this mill is to be found. It may
be added that after about 1720 saw mills increased in number
rapidly.

♦ Vol. I, Highways, page 413.
37

578 EI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

FULLING MILLS.

The conditions of life in the " Age of Homespun *' — as described
in a preceding chapter — included the process by which the wool
from the back of a particular sheep became a coat on the back of a
particular member of the family to whose flock that sheep belonged.
It is not strange then to find indications that, in the fourteen
years since the settlement of the town, there had been consider-
able progress in sheep-raising, as attested by the record of January
20, 1692 (page 330), that "there was sequestered the Great brook
from Edmund Scott's lot down to Samuel Hickox, Jr.'s, lot, for to
build a fulling mill." As nearly as can be ascertained this sequester
covers the ground at present occupied by the Waterbury Manufac-
turing company, or possibly also the next privilege below, near
where Nathan Prindle had a fulling mill some forty years later.
Whether there was any fulling mill built at the time of the sequester
is uncertain, but this same Samuel Hickox, Jr., went to Fulling Mill
brook at Judd's meadow about ten years later than this, and in 1709
had a fulling mill there which gave the brook its name, — the first
regarding which we have positive evidence (see p. 347). A fulling
mill was not an elaborate structure. It is quite possible that Hickox
may have had one on Great brook, and that there were others also.
By a record of January 10, 1705, we find that two acres were granted
to Dr. Daniel Porter at the south end of his land "for the conven-
iency of setting up a fulling mill on Carrington brook," where he
may have had one. By a record in April, 1737, we find that Nathan
Prindle sold to Nathaniel Arnold a fulling mill which was near the
corner of North Main and Cherry streets. Dr. Bronson thinks this
mill was built about 1728. Not long after this, Nathan Beard built
one on the Naugatuck at the mouth of Hancock brook. From this
time we find frequent references to fulling mills until about 1835,
when the manufacture of domestic woollen cloth mostly ceased. By
that time it was cheaper to buy than to manufacture it.

WATER-POWERS IN GENERAL.

THE NAUGATUCK.

Persons who are unfamiliar with the early history of Waterbury
have probably — and naturally — the impression that the foundation
of the manufacturing business here is the water-power of the
Naugatuck river. Such persons will be surprised to learn that in a hun-

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES, ^79

dred years, from (about) 1750 to 1849, there was but one place within
the boundaries of the present town where the power of the Nauga-
tuck river was used, namely, at Platfs mills, about three miles
south from the centre. It was the smaller affluents of the Nauga-
tuck which furnished most of the power. Perhaps a brief notice of
the mill sites on the various streams in their geographical order is
as simple a method as any of giving some account of the industries
assisted by water-power. It is well nigh impossible, however, to
make such a list exhaustive, so many very small streams having at
various times been utilized. In many of these cases all memory
and trace of the work itself and the people who did it have
disappeared. A considerable number also known to exist have not
been definitely located.

Beginning at the lower end of the ancient town, and proceeding
northward, the first power is Ward's, about a mile below Naugatuck.
This was established by Richard Ward about 1835 for the manufac-
ture of clocks. It has remained in the family and is still used
for the manufacture of small brass goods. A power (2) lately
abandoned and united with the one next above was last used by the
Goodyear Metallic Rubber Shoe company, — before that by the
Tuttle Manufacturing company. It was taken from the one above
by extending the canal in 1847, and reunited in 1892. The old power
(3) at Naugatuck centre (which appears first on the record in 1824)
was used by Silas Grilley and Chauncey Lewis (Milo Lewis was
with them later) in the manufacture of buttons.* The Platts mills
property (4) was purchased by Lemuel Hoadley of Ezekiel Upson
in 1772. There is no mention of a mill in the deed, but there is a
reference to it as a landmark in a deed a few years later. The
natural inference then is that Lemuel Hoadley built the mill soon
after purchasing the property. About 1800 Jesse Hopkins had a
nail factory on a portion of the property. The road to it was over
the hill almost west from the turnpike passing near Elijah Nettle-
ton's house. The mill stood on the east side of the present road,
which was opened about fifty years ago. A canal ran parallel with
and near to, the river along the west side of the present road.
Between this and the river were several small shops, including
a saw mill, a flax breaker and a wire bench. There were various
other industries pursued here, mostly in a small way. About 1849
the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing company (5) put in a tur-

* J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill used the factory while rebuilding theirs, which was destroyed by fire in 1830.
In 183 1 it was sold to Sylvester Clark, who manufactured eight-day brass clocks; but about 1835 it was sold to
John Tillou, who manufactured spinning machinery for some years. It is now owned by the Goodyear India
Rubber Glove company.

58o HISTORY OF WATERS UBY.

bine wheel at their factory which was turned by water from the
Naugatuck. The fall was obtained by a deep tail-race running to a
point known as " Long meadow bars " at the foot of "Nichols's
meadow," and draining a small pool known as "Nichols's pond."
This gave a fall of about nine feet, but it was abandoned about 1885.
In 1848 a company called the Waterbury Water Power company
was formed to utilize the power in the Naugatuck opposite the
borough (6). By an arrangement with the Naugatuck Railroad
company the canal was formed by building a raised track for the
road. This privilege was first used by the Manhan Manufacturing
company for making felt cloth; afterward by the American Flask
and Cap company, and is now the property of the Waterbury Brass
company. On March 7, 1737, Nathan Beard purchased of Daniel
Porter a tract of land on the Naugatuck river, at the mouth of
Hancock brook (7). Soon after, he had a grist mill there, and later
a fulling mill. All trace of this privilege has long since disappeared.
He sold the land, reserving the mill, to J. Scovill, in 1745. The mill
was afterward owned by Seba Bronson, who also had another on
Steel's brook. There was a privilege (8) owned by Samuel Hickox
some distance above Waterville, near the Brown bridge, so called —
now abandoned. It was there in 1745 (see Bronson, page 99). The
privilege (9) at the falls where John Sutliff built his mill in 1730, is,
the writer thinks, the first in the town on the Naugatuck. It is now
in Thomaston. It has been used for a woollen mill, a clock factory,
and probably for other purposes; and is now used for a knife
factory.

LONG MEADOW BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west, a short dis-
tance below the central part of Naugatuck village. The first power
on this stream is now occupied by the Dunham Hosiery company.
For many years (i) it was used as a woollen mill by William C.
De Forest. It was Scott's grist mill in 1770. Butler's house (p. 122)
was near here, a little to the south. The Rubber works (2), long
noted as having a wooden wheel of the largest diameter in the
state (the writer thinks fifty-six feet), was formerly Candee's
woollen mill. Silas Constant, Stephen Warner and others had a
saw mill there (3) in 1777. How long it had been built is uncertain;
probably not very long, from the phrases used. There was also
a cluster of small powers at Millville (4 to 9) established, for the
most part, in the middle or early half of the last century, by
some members of the Gunn family. Nathaniel Gunn had a saw
mill in 1739. Osborn's saw mill (10) was located on this stream.
Samuel Wheeler had a saw mill (11) in 1749, and later a carding

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFA0TUBE8, 581

mill. Arab Ward had a grist mill (12) soon after. The stream from
Towantic pond enters Long Meadow brook near this point.
Towantic pond lies to the southwest and Long Meadow pond to
the northwest. In Chapter IV (p. 40) the two are spoken of as one,
but they are in fact half a mile or more apart. Long Meadow
brook was often called Towantic brook in the record, which prob-
ably accounts for the confusion of names.

HOP BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west a little below
Union City. A privilege (i), now belonging to the Upson family,
was first used by Eliel and Amory Mann for the manufacture of
mouse traps, spools and other small wooden wares. It was used later
by Lyman Bradley and Gilbert Hotchkiss in the manufacture of
pocket cutlery. A privilege (2) sometimes spoken of as " the Falls,"
now known as Bradleyville, is the one used by Abram Wooster in
1752 for a sawmill, and byAmasa Scovill in 1785. About 1840 Lyman
Bradley made cutlery here, and since then Samuel Root has carried
on the same business. (3) In 1781 James Porter sold Asa Leaven-
worth, then of Watertown, a grist mill here. In the first half of this
century Asa Fenn had an axe factory on or near the same place.
In the interval it had changed hands many times. Isaac Bronson
had a saw mill (4) at Break Neck — now Abbott's. This was proba-
bly the first saw mill in that part of the town. There was also (5)
a small shop near the " Dennis place," so called.

FULLING MILL BROOK, NOW GENERALLY CALLED CITY BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the east at Union City.
The first attempt (i) to utilize it for mill purposes was made by
Samuel Hickox, who set up a fulling mill before 1713.* Ebenezer
Hickox (son of Samuel) built a grist mill on the same spot, soon
after the year 1733. In 1737 he sold it to Hezekiah Rew with the
house over the mill. Rew sold it the same year to James Baldwin,
who deeded to William Hoadley of Branford and May Way of
Waterbury in the year 175 1 about 200 acres of land with the grist
mill. Soon after, Hoadley bought out Way, and at Hoadley's death
it went to his sons, William and Jude. The mill property was in 1799
sold in part to Jared Byington. William Hoadley retained the mill
and his house lot. Hoadley ran the grist mill until about 1810,
when he sold it to Ebenezer Scott. Byington deeded his part to his
sons, Jesse and Isaac, and they conveyed the property in 1808 to

* See Bronson's History, page 93.

582 mSTOBY OF WATERBURY.

Amasa Goodyear, Joseph Nichols, Henry Grilley, Jr., and Joel M.
Mnnson, under the firm name of the New Haven and Baltimore
Button company. Their shops were a little east of the grist mill.
Mention is made of a trip hammer shop, and a patent nail cutter
(this trip hammer was probably the first one used in the town of
Waterbury). Amasa Goodyear manufactured forks, cast buttons,
spoons and molasses gates. After Goodyear failed (about 1831) the
factory was occupied by different parties until about 1842, when
Clark Warner and Lampson Isbell commenced the manufacture of
carding machines. Afterward the business was carried on under
the name of the Naugatuck Machine company. Their buildings
were destroyed by fire several years ago. A new building was erected
and pumps were made for a short time. It is now occupied by a
house builder, George Parks. There was a saw mill (2) mentioned
as early as 175 1. It was probably a little east of the grist mill,
but it may possibly have been as far up the brook as the ivory
button shop mentioned below. The saw mill had disappeared
before 1805. Edwin Scott had a carding mill (3) in operation on
this mill site in 1805. Jairus Downs was running a clothier's shop
at this place in the year 1819. Amasa Goodyear built before 1831
a store on or near this mill site. After Goodyear failed (about
1831 or *32), Robert Isbell and Letsom Terrell made japanned tin but-
tons in the store building. Since then George and Eldridge Smith
made buttons in the old store. This building was used for a paper
box shop when it was destroyed by fire a few years ago. It was
never rebuilt. Lucian Judd built a shop (4) about 18 19, in which
he manufactured wooden buttons for a number of years. Lucian
Judd and David Wooster (a brother of Jesse) here drew copper wire,
about 1825, and continued this business for a considerable time.
They were probably the first to draw copper wire in the town of
Waterbury. Between 1830 and 1840 Smith & Hopkins made cloth
buttons in this shop. Afterward Alonzo Wheeler entered the firm.
About 1859 the business was removed to Saugatuck. The prop-
erty is now owned by James Bird, who formerly made differential
pulleys. He is now making buttons. Anson Smith and his son
Harry built a shop (5) on this site about 1822. They manufactured
ivory buttons. About the year 1826 they sold their plant to Amasa
Goodyear, who made buttons and other similiar things. After Good-
year failed, Asahel Smith and Oscar Hotchkiss made buttons at this
place, and subsequently Asahel Smith and Harry Tomlinson also
until about 1839. Eben Tuttle commenced the manufacture of
hoes here about 1843, and continued the same until the Tuttle Man-
ufacturing company was formed. They were later located below

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFA0TURE8, 583

the centre of Naugatuck. The Connecticut Cutlery company about
1867 or 1868 built a new factory. Since they closed up their affairs
the factory has remained most of the time unoccupied. At present
D. & H. Pratt occupy the place as a thimble shop. Lorin Isbell (6)
built a shop on this site about 1828. He made bone buttons here
for a number of years. Afterward Oscar Hotchkiss and Amos Ellis
manufactured buttons here for a short time. About the year 1849
Harris and Robert Isbell made covered buttons in the old build-
ing. They enlarged the shop and continued in the button busi-
ness for two or more years. Afterward Silas and Perkins Grilley
made ivory headed nails at this place. The old shop and the saw
mill that stood near by have both disappeared. The shop (7) that
Asahel Smith formerly occupied was built about 1840. A larger
factory was built several years ago by his son, Edwin F. Smith.
The firm is now E. F. Smith & Son. They manufacture ivory and
metal buttons. The Union Knife company (8) was organized about
1850. It was destroyed by fire several years ago and never rebuilt.
A button shop (9) was built by a son of Ransom Russell about 1850.
After being occupied by W. H. K. Godfrey as a thimble factory, it
was for a time used by D. Pratt. It was destroyed by fire and never
rebuilt. About 1855 W. S. Kelly built a suspender factory (10) here,
using it for a short time. Nothing has been done here for years.
The shop (11) first occupied by Monroe Terrill for buttons, is now
used by H. Twitchell & Son, manufacturers of safety pins and sim-
ilar articles. On a branch from the south is a shop (12) where
Samuel Grilley made metal buttons about 1807, and Horace Smith
about 1841.*

SMUG BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the east, about two miles
below the centre of Waterbury. Near its mouth is the factory of
the Smith & Griggs company (i). This privilege was originally an
iron foundry built by Merrit Nichols or his father, Joseph, early in
this century. About 1838, Dr. David Prichard made german silver
spoons there. A few years later Henry A. Matthews, John Forest
and others started a manufactory of small metal wares, calling it
the Hope Manufacturing company. This gave the settlement
the name of Hopeville, which it has since retained. Spencer
and Bennet Prichard had a small shop (2) about half a mile up the
stream. This subsequently (about thirty years since) passed into
the possession of William T. Mabbott, who manufactured buttons

* For this account o( the privileges on Fulling Mill brook, and for facta respecting several other privil-
eges in Naugatuck, we are indebted to Mr. William Ward.

584 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

and other pearl goods. This gave to the ponds there the name of
Pearl lakes.

MAD RIVER.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the east, at the south-
ern part of the city of Waterbury. The first power was utilized
(i) by Colonel William Leavenworth about 1802. In 1810 he leased
it with "a turning shop standing thereon." Its subsequent history
is merged in that of the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing
company. On the east side of the river, near where Daniel Steele's
cloth dressing factory stood later, there was a saw mill (2), prob-
ably the one belonging to the Baldwins, on which they paid
taxes in 1788. It is possible that this saw mill was the outcome
of the permission given to erect a saw mill near the grist mill
in 1699, as it belonged in 1788 to the people who owned the
grist mill, although it was probably a later enterprise. On the
west side, where the American mills now are. Colonel Leaven-
worth established a saw mill and grist mill about 1800. In 1804
he deeded an interest to Daniel Steele. In 1805 they leased a
portion of the grist mill to Towsey, Gibbs & Co., for a carding
machine. Daniel Steele subsequently had a carding and cloth
dressing shop on the east side of the river. About 1830 this was
occupied under a lease by Joel Johnson. On the west side Colonel
Leavenworth carried on clock making, somewhat extensively for
the times. After his failure, wood turning, small hardware making
(called whitesmithing), pearl button making, and other small indus-
tries were pursued there until 1830, when Charles D. Kingsbury
sold the property to the Naugatuck (afterwards Beecher) Manufac-
turing company. After its failure E. E. Prichard, Julius Hotch-
kiss and C. B. Merriman began the manufacture of India rubber
suspenders there. This, later, became the American Suspender
company, and finally the American Mills company.

The Scovill Manufacturing company (3) occupies the site of the
first grist mill, the oldest privilege in town. It remained a grist
mill, although portions of it may have been used for other purposes,
until September 21, 1808, when Lemuel Harrison deeded it to Abel
Porter and others. Then it became a button factory with a grist
mill attached, as is elsewhere related. About 1836 Leonard Piatt
built a small factory (4) for the manufacture of button eyes, a few
rods west of Dublin street and south from Mad river. The water
was taken from the river some distance east of Dublin street, and
the ground now covered by the Meriden and Waterbury railroad
station was used as a reservoir. About 1840 this privilege was
merged in that of the Scovill Manufacturing company. Not long

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 585

after, the button-eye business was purchased by David B. Hurd, who
continued it until his death, at a shop near the present site of the
church of the Sacred Heart. As it may not be noticed elsewhere,
it is proper to say here that before the invention of the automatic
machine by Leonard Piatt, button eyes were made in a slow way
on a machine worked by a crank and lever, by hand and foot power.
This machine of Piatt's was a very important improvement. He
was a staunch Episcopalian, a steady church-goer. Before he per-
fected his machine hjs worked at it a long time, had spent all his
money and was much depressed. Joel Johnson, with whom he lived,
related that one Sunday, while in church, all at once Piatt's man-
ner changed; he looked bright and clear, sat up straight, lifted his
head and paid close attention to the sermon. The next day the
machine was completed. Johnson, however, had too high a regard
for Piatt to ask invidious questions.

What is known of late years as the Leather factory (5) — and prior
to that as the John D. Johnson property — appears to have been first
utilized in 1813, when James Scovill, Austin Steel, and the firm of
Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, established a woollen factory there.
They were compelled to close it on the opening of the market to
English goods by the peace of 1815. There lies before the writer an
application for insurance on the property, under the name of the
Waterbury Woollen Manufacturing company. It is without date,
but was probably made when the buildings were new. It describes
the property as consisting of one boarding house, 36 by 40, of two
stories; one factory, 54 by 34, of three stories, heated by a Russian
stove; one finishing shop, 30 by 21, of two stories, all of wood; one
dye house, 40 by 24, sides and ends of stone. The machinery, in-
cluded in two buildings, comprised four single carding machines,
one double, one picker, one jenny, twelve broad looms, one narrow
loom, one shearing machine, two presses, two kettles, and two blue
vats. The value of the whole (given by items) is $12,260. About
1830, Austin, Daniel and Ransom Steel, with some out-of-town capi-
tal, again attempted the manufacture of woollen goods, but were not
successful. John D. Johnson carried on both the woollen and a
metal business there for some years, from about 1833 to 1848. The
plant then became a tannery under the charge of Harlow Roys,
Samuel N. Bradley, William Davis and others, which business was
continued until about 1870, when the privilege was absorbed in that
of the Scovill Manufacturing company.

The site of Rogers & Brother's plated ware factory (6) — or near
the site — was very early a saw mill. It was probably built by Mr.
Southmayd or one of his sons. William Rowley had carding and

586 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

cloth dressing works here about the middle of the last century, and
associated with him in the business, or before him, was one George
Gordian. William Rowley, Jr., succeeded his father, and they
owned considerable land about there, which was long known as
the Rowley farm. The privilege remained dormant for a long time,
but was brought into use by Holmes, Hotchkiss, Brown & Elton
about 1831, and was for many years a successful brass factory.
Pins were first made in Waterbury at this place. On the site of
Barnard, Son & Co.'s shear factory (7), at the Revolution, was a mill
known as Hough's. It was owned by Judge Hopkins; probably
Hough was the miller. Hopkins sold it to Deliverance Wakelee, who
sold it to Captain George Nichols in 1781. In 1796 Joseph Payne
had it. About 1835 Joel Johnson had a woollen (satinet) factory
here, and later it was used for making cotton warps. There was a
small shop (8) forty or fifty rods above that just mentioned, but fed
by the same pond. Harmon Payne had a cloth dressing and carding
machine there early in the century. It was used for awhile by Tim-
othy Porter in the same business, and bone buttons were made
there. It has disappeared. Rutter*s leather factory (9) stands on
the site of the first saw mill. This is the place where firearms
were made by Ard Weltoh. It was owned for some years by Sher-
man Bronson, and used for a button factory. This is the last privi-
lege on the stream in Waterbury. Those in Wolcott will be found
in Orcutt's " History." On a mere rivulet running into the east
side of Rutter's pond, and near the house of Charles N. Frost, there
was from 1820 to 1830 or later, a small water power utilized for a
number of purposes at different times. There at one time horn
and bone buttons were made in large quantities (see Volume II,
note on page 260). The property seems to have belonged to the
Frost family, but the name of the button maker was Leverett Judd.

GREAT BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck on the eastern side at the rail-
road bridge near Holmes, Booth & Haydens. The first privilege was
near the corner of Canal and Meadow streets (before Meadow street
was opened). The factory (i) was reached by a lane which is now
Canal street, which took its name from the canal leading to the fac-
tory along this line. Lemuel Harrison or James Harrison had a
small building here, spoken of as a "factory, so-called," about 1800.
In 181 1 Orlando Porter conveyed a quarter interest in the shop to
Zenas Cook, describing it as the new part of a clock shop (it had
been partially destroyed by fire), and as standing on Lemuel Harri-
son's land and owned in common by Lemuel Harrison, Daniel

I

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES, 587

Clark, William Porter and said Orlando Porter, doing business
under the name of Lemuel Harrison & Co. The property passed
into the hands of Harrison's creditors and was bought by David
Prichard, who with his son, Elizur E., carried on the clock busi-
ness there for a while. Later it was sold to E. E. Prichard, George
Beecher, W. H. Merriman and W. H. Jones, and used as a button
factory. It passed through many hands and uses, but was last used
by the American Ring company under the management of Edward
Chittenden. The water for the factory was taken from the brook
on Grand street near South Main. In 1814 (2) a clock factory was
built on the east side of South Main street between the present Jef-
ferson and Union streets. The proprietors were Daniel Clark,
Zenas Cook and William Porter. The water was taken from the
brook at East Main street, carried in a ditch along the high land
near the line of Spring street to a point below Jefferson street, and
then across to the factory in a wooden trough. The enterprise was
not successful. Buttons were afterward made there, but it was
early converted into a dwelling house and was occupied and proba-
bly owned by Ard Warner. On Brook street before it was opened
was a concern (3) started by Leonard Prichard as a button factory
about 1848, and afterward owned by Isaac E. Newton. It was used
as a manufactory of sewing machine needles. The water was taken
from about the same point as the one named above. It was aban-
doned as a power about 1880.

In the rear of the buildings on the north side of East Main street,
near the present west line of Elm street (4), in the early years
of the century, was a building used by James M. Cook and later
by Mark Leavenworth and others for a clock factory. It after-
ward passed into the hands of Anson Bronson, and was used by
him for the manufacture of horn and bone buttons. It was next
transferred to W. & A. Brown for making hooks and eyes. Its
power was finally absorbed in that of the Mattatuck Manufacturing
company, now Piatt Brothers. In 1848 the Mattatuck Manufacturing
company (5) manufactured umbrella trimmings and cloth buttons.
Its business was begun in the factory on Canal street and moved to
the present site. The water is taken from the brook on Elm street
near Kingsbury street, but is little used now for power. The site
now occupied by the Matthews & Willard company (6) was origin-
ally taken by H. Hotchkiss and others for a hook and eye factory
(the first in Waterbury), conducted by John J. Hatch about 1835.
Jared Pratt also manufactured cast brass andirons here. Hotch-
kiss sold his interest to John Sandland, Sr. The property has
changed hands many times, but is now owned by the Matthews &

588 BISTORT OF WATERBUR7.

Willard company. The site of the Waterbury Clock company (7)
was one of the early saw mills of the town, owned by the Bronson
family, the date not being precisely known. Dr. Bronson thought
it was the town's first saw mill, but as has been shown, this was an
error. It remained a saw mill until bought by the Waterbury
Knitting company in 1852. It then passed into the hands of Whit-
tal, Lefevre & Co., the Great Brook company, Stocker & Co., and the
Clock company. A mill that stood on the north side of Cherry
street near the angle (8) was the site of an early fulling mill, Nathan
Prindle's. Dr. Bronson fixes the date as 1727 or '28. Mark Leaven-
worth owned and occupied the site many years as a clock factory
and button factory. The property passed from his estate to the
Knitting company, and the power was absorbed in theirs. It is
possible that this is the site sequestered to Samuel Hickox, Jr., for
a fulling mill in 1692. The Waterbury Manufacturing company's
privilege (9) was established by J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill in 1849, ^^^
the manufacture of german silver goods. This business was after-
ward removed to Wallingford, and William R. Hitchcock & Co.
occupied the factory for the manufacture of buttons, being suc-
ceeded later by Hitchcock & Castle and the United States Button
company. The small stone factory on Division street (10) was built
by Edward Robinson about 1870 or a little earlier. It belongs to
the estate of Henry C. Griggs. The privilege of the City mills,
so-called (11), was established about 1850 by William Perkins. The
reservoir was built mainly through the instrumentality of J. M. L.
& W. H. Scovill for the benefit of the Waterbury Knitting company,
but in part also for the other privileges on the stream. It was
occupied by E. U. Lathrop for a feed mill for some years, and since
then by Maltby, Hopson & Brooks. About 1820, Elias Clark and
John Downs built a saw mill (12) nearly east of Clark's house, now
Liebrecht's. Its remains were visible not long since, and probably
are visible still. It was reached by a private way running from the
Bucks Hill road near Clark's house to the Chestnut Hill road.

LITTLE BROOK.

This stream enters Great brook on the west side at the corner of
South Main and Scovill streets. It turned the first wheel in town
for strictly manufacturing purposes, that at James Harrison's clock
shop, started in 1802, and standing near the corner of Spencer ave-
nue and North Main street on land leased of Stephen Bronson.
A few rods above this. Colonel William Leavenworth had a dis-
tillery (2), which passed into the possession of Joseph Burton, and
so became Mrs. Willard Spencer's. William Perkins rented it for a

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 589

carpenter's shop and put in a water wheel for sawing, etc., about
1836. Willard Spencer and Ambrose Ives in 1839 made patent but-
tons there. It was afterwards changed into a dwelling and occupied
by Mr. Spencer for several years. The site is now occupied by a
frame dwelling next south of the brick block on the corner of
North Main and Kingsbury streets.

BEAVER POND BROOK.

This stream joins Mad river at the angle near the upper end of
the Waterbury Brass company's East mill pond. Its privileges in-
clude (i) a saw mill between the mouths of East Mountain and
Turkey Hill brook, which was built by Benjamin Farrell about
1826, and was used until about i860. Next (2) there was a small shop
belonging to Thomas Payne and used for turning wooden bowls,
etc., at about 1800. Then (3) there was an ancient saw mill, about
which nothing beyond its existence and disappearance has been
learned. All the above appear to have been below the entrance of
Turkey Hill brook. Wedge's saw mill (4.) was built about 1864-5.
At the crossing of a road leading to Prospect, is a privilege (5) of
some importance, in use before 1800, certainly one of the earliest
manufacturing sites in the town. There Andrew Hoadley and An-
drew H. Johnson made spinning-wheels and other articles of wood;
there Amos Atwater had a grist mill; there Sala Todd made sim-
ilar goods; there Enoch W. Frost made matches, and William Sizer
some light metal goods, and Lambert Russell buttons. On the
road from East Farms school-house south is a saw mill (6) built by
Asa Hoadley and later owned by Joseph Moss. Near the plank
road there is a privilege (7) used by Orrin Austin, about 1820, for
a grist mill, and for parts of clocks. It has now gone to decay.
There is a saw mill (8) of modern date on one of the upper tributa-
ries, perhaps in the town of Prospect.

TURKEY HILL BROOK.

This stream comes into Beaver Pond brook not far from its
mouth. There was a saw mill on it in the first half of the century,
owned by Isaac Hotchkiss. Joseph Payne put up a small shop near
the present city reservoir about fifteen years since, which was
bought by the city.

SLED HALL BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west near the hospi-
tal. It drains Tamarack swamp, which sixty years ago was heavily
wooded and yielded a very good flow of water. It is now cleared

590

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

and drained, and yields very little. (The writer thinks that the
name of this brook is properly Sled "haul," and that it derived its
name from the fact that there is a piece of still water in the Nauga-
tuck near its mouth, which would freeze in winter and make a good
place for crossing the river with sleds. It was just here that the
first winter pioneers had their huts, and it is a fair inference that
the name dates from that time; but this is conjectural.) When the
place was small and the wind southwest, in the fall of the year, the
sound of the stream as it came down the hill was loud and clear all
through the village. It is a sound very distinctly associated in
the minds of the older inhabitants with Indian summer weather,
moonlight nights, a clear crisp air and many pleasant memories.
There was a saw mill on this brook a little east of the Town Plot
road, not far from 1750. At one time, some years later, Captain
Jacob Sperry had charge of it. He fell into the penstock and broke
his leg. It was said that his cries were heard in town, and that
people went from there to his relief.

PARK BROOK.

This stream enters the Naugatuck near the mouth of Steel's
brook. The writer gives it this name as he knows of no other, and
it comes from the north end of the ** park." It was utilized by Aner
Bradley as a power in connection with a plating shop, on the east
side of the Watertown road, between i860 and 1870.

steel's brook.

The privileges of Steel's brook include Slade's mill (i) at Oak
ville, which was built in 1854 by Joseph H. Baird. The site now
owned by the Oakville company {2) is that of the oil mill referred to
in a deed of 1807, from Stephen and Daniel Matthews to Mark
Leavenworth, of 24 acres of land in the south part of Watertown,
"with a fulling mill, carding machine and house on the same, and
an old oil mill standing near on Joseph Woodruff's land, as reserved
to us in our deed to said Woodruff." It was at this point probably
that James Bishop had a saw mill and grist mill about 1830. Mer-
riman & Warren afterward made webbing suspenders here, and it
was temporarily occupied by several other persons. Near the upper
Oakville factory (3) Seba Bronson had a grist mill, probably after
he sold the Baird mill on the Naugatuck near the mouth of Han-
cock's brook. About the time of his death (1829) General Gerrit
Smith made pewter buttons here. It then went into the hands of
Scovill & Buckingham, who made brass butts and other brass goods

OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES.

591

here. From them it was transferred to the Oakville company.
The Williams grist mill (4) near the old dam has been spoken of
under " Grist Mills." Bennet Hickox built a saw mill (5) near the
east end of the present Oakville dam, somewhere about 1850. It
was used only a short time. The mill at Rockdale (6), where
Wheeler & Wilson began their sewing machine business, now
owned by S. Smith & Son, seems to be the lineal descendant of a
saw mill built by David Scott about 1725. In 1764, Nathaniel Arnold
sold to Abraham Norton a fulling mill privilege on Wooster brook.
Probably it was at this point. Heminway's silk works (7) date
from about 1845. There seems to have been no mill there before.
Greenville (8), so-called, was the site of Jonathan Scott's saw mill
in 1722-25.

TURKEY BROOK.

This stream comes into Steel's brook at Oakville, and has a saw
mill built by Samuel Copley about 1840. It was afterward owned
by Eleazar Woodruff. It is now the property of F. C. Slade.

HANCOCK BROOK.

This stream joins the Naugatuck about half a mile below the
village of Waterville. The first privilege is the one at Waterville
(i), the history of which is given in Volume II, page 29. About
half a mile up the brook is an old saw mill site (2) established about
1750 by one Scott. It was owned for many years by David Downs,
and later passed into the possession of Joseph Welton. A wooden
building was added twenty-five years since, which has been used by
Lewis Garrigus for woodwork and by the Tucker company for the
manufacture of brass nails. The *' falls" (3) at Hoadley's (or Grey-
stone) are within the boundaries of Plymouth. Amos Hickox,
and afterward Abraham Hickox, had a saw mill here in the last
century. Calvin Hoadley, later, had a grist mill here. About
1808 Silas Hoadley, at first with E. Terry and S. Thomas, after-
ward by himself, began to make clocks, and continued the manu-
facture with fair success for many years. It has since been used
for the manufacture of cutlery and other small wares. Knouse &
AUender were the last occupants.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

THE INTEREST OF EARLY CONNECTICUT IN EDUCATION — AIMS OF THK
COLONISTS — FIRST SCHOOLS IN THE TOWN — CHANGES IN THE
SCHOOL SYSTEM — SCHOOLS AWAY FROM THE CENTRE — SCHOOL-
HOUSES — INCOME FROM SCHOOL LANDS; THREE DISTINCT SOURCES
— CONDITION OF THINGS AT THE END OF THE COLONIAL PERIOD

— PROVISION FOR GRAMMAR SCHOOLS — THE FIRST WATERBURY
ACADEMY THE ERECTION OF A BUILDING TWO SCHOOLS IN IT

— TEACHERS — PROSPERITY AND DECLINE — REMOVALS OF THE
BUILDING — ITS LATER HISTORY.

IN the early days none of the colonies showed greater apprecia-
tion of educational advantages than Connecticut. It was nat-
ural that communities boasting such men as John Winthrop at
New London, John Davenport at New Haven and Roger Ludlowe
at Hartford should be zealous in furthering the cause of education,
and it is said that in no case did a settlement defer the establish-
ing of a school until the second year of its existence. As early as

1641 we find that the General Court of New Haven colony ordered
"that a free school should be set up"; and the Hartford records of

1642 mention an appropriation of ^1^30 a year to the town schools, also
a decree that the schoolmaster shall be "a scholar, no common man,
a gentleman," and two years later the General Court enacted that
every township containing fifty householders should " appoint one
within their town to teach all such childern as shall resort to him
to read and write, whose wages shall be paid either by the parents
or masters of such children, or by the inhabitants in general," while
any township containing a hundred or more families was enjoined
to " set up a grammar school." The stringent rules in reference to
education found in Roger Ludlowe's Connecticut code of 1650, are
of great interest. This code, which is almost identical with that
enacted by the General Court of Massachusetts in 1642, decreed as
follows:

Forasmuch as the good education of children is of singular behoof and benefit to
any commonwealth, and, whereas many parents and masters are too indulgent and
negligent of their duty in that kind; it is therefore ordered by this court and author-
ity thereof, that the selectmen of every town, in the several precincts and quarters
where they dwell, shall have a vigilant eye over their brethren and neighbors, to see,
first, that none of them shall suffer so much barbarism in any of their families as
not to endeavor to teach by themselves or others their children and apprentices so

THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY. 593

much learning as may enable them perfectly to read the English tongue, and knowl-
edge of the capital laws, upon penalty of twenty shillings for each neglect therein;
also that all masters of families do once a week at least, catechise their children and
servants in the grounds and principles of religion.

Moreover provision was therein made even for the religious instruc-
tion of the Indians.

There are those perhaps who look upon compulsory education
as a novelty, but these laws of the early fathers were as strict as
those of to-day, while extending in addition over the domain of
religion. It is on record that the schools were established to pre-
vent "that one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to keep
men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, . . . and that learn-
ing may not be buried in the grave of our forefathers, in church
and commonwealth, — the Lord assisting our endeavors." The deep
sense felt by our forefathers of the importance of education is
illustrated by another law which provides that such as shall "apply
themselves to due use of means for the attainment of learning"
shall be free from "payment of rates with respect to their per-
sons,"— the immunity from taxation to last only so long as the
studying should continue; and this is even more clearly demon-
strated by the fact that when the project of founding a college in this
section of the country seemed impracticable, the Connecticut and
New Haven colonists generously aided the little college struggling
along at Cambridge, Mass., by a voluntary contribution, made by
each family, of "a peck of corn, or twelve pence money," towards
the maintenance of poor scholars therein. In the statutes of 1702
the same provisions as the preceding are retained, with the addi-
tion of an annual tax of forty shillings on every thousand pounds
in the grand list, to be distributed among those towns only which
maintained their schools according to law.

With various modifications in regard to details the same objects
were steadily pursued throughout the colony, namely, the mainte-
nance, first, of an elementary school in every neighborhood con-
taining a sufficient number of children; secondly, of a Latin school
in every large town; thirdly, of a college for the higher culture of
the whole colony. There is no reason to doubt that the same pro-
gressive spirit prevailed in Waterbury as in the other settlements.
Although the first reference to schools, in the town records, occurs
as late as 1698 (see page 248), it is probable that a school, taught by
the younger Jeremiah Peck, had been established fully ten years
before that date. We find that in 1699 the town granted thirty
shillings and the "school money" for the encouragement of a
school for three months. In 1702 two committees were appointed,

38

594 HI8T0BT OF WATERBURT.

one to engage a schoolmaster to teach school for three months, and
the other to " hire a school dame for to keep school in the summer,
and for that end to make use of what money shall be left that is
due to the school for the school lands, after the schoolmaster is
paid." Two years later the records state that Isaac Bronson and
Benjamin Barnes were chosen a committee to " hire a schoolmaster
to instruct in wrighting and reeding," and to have what the coun-
try (the colony) allows for that end, also to engage a dame for the
summer school, renting the school lands at some public meeting, to
provide funds for that purpose. The first mention of a school
building appears December 8, 1707, when a committee was chosen
to "see after the building of a school-house which the town by vote
passed to be built." At what time this vote had passed does not
appear, but two years later (December 28, 1709) the same commit-
tee was reappointed to "carry on the work of building a school-
house in the town," whence we may infer either that the building
had not been begun, or that the work had dragged on from year to
year.

Up to this point the management of school matters had been
entirely conducted at town meetings. But events were so shaping
themselves that a change of some kind was inevitable. As a set-
tlement grew in size and population, the assembling of all the chil-
dren at one point for instruction became impracticable. We find
this fact recognized in an act of the General Court passed in 171 2
by which the parishes or ecclesiastical societies were constituted
school districts, the management of the schools, however, still
remaining in the hands of the town. The act of the General Court
was as follows:

All parishes which are already made, or shall hereafter be made by this Assem-
bly shall have for the bringing up of their children and maintenance of a school
in some fixed place the forty shillings in every ;^iooo arising in the list of estates
within the parish.

By a natural modification the authority vested in the towns was
gradually transferred to the ecclesiastical societies, and we find a
later act in which not only is this implied, but a further advance
indicated in the establishment of "school societies." This act
decrees that "all inhabitants living within the limits of ecclesiasti-
cal societies incorporated by law shall constitute school societies,
and shall annually meet some time in the months of September,
October or November."

These changes, which had taken place in the first years of the
eighteenth century in the older towns, occurred in Waterbury
somewhat later. The old school-house at the centre, which up to

THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY,

595

this time had answered all the requirements of the town, had been
repaired in 1720, and three years afterward the town voted that the
school committee should "yearly demand the country money," the
money required to be raised by the colony laws of 17 12, "and also
the money which the school land was let for, and pay for the school
in this way." It was also voted that the committee should annu-
ally make report of their receipts and disbursements at the great
town meeting, and that this annual report should be put upon the
pages of the records. From the report of the committee thus
appointed it appears that their receipts for the year were jQ6 9s,
and that their disbursement to the school amounted to the same
sum, and that there was coming to the town "twenty-five shillings
in Dr. Warner's hand, and seven shillings and six pence in Richard
Welton's hand," for school lands which they had hired. "These
votes and memoranda of the town clerk" says Bronson in his
"History" (page 236) "prove the earnest endeavors of the early
people of Waterbury, in a time of great embarrassment, to provide
a means of elementary education for the young."

Although the original limits of Mattatuck included eight towns
and parts of towns, the population as late as 17 12 centred closely
around the Green. As time went on and little settlements were
established at points remote from the centre, " each neighborhood
that would keep up a school, and had a sufficent number of scholars,
was allowed a proportion of the school money."* From the records
it would appear that in 1730 there were settlements, with a sufficient
number of inhabitants to justify the establishment of schools, at
Judd's Meadow (now Naugatuck), Wooster Swamp (now Water-
town), and Bucks Hill. It was voted, December 10, 1734, that a
school be kept during the whole year following, as the law directs;
seven months at the centre, nine weeks at Wooster Swamp, and
seven weeks at Judd's Meadow. In 1737 the vote was that the
school should be kept twenty- one weeks at the centre, twelve weeks
at Wooster society, six weeks up the river, that is, at Plymouth, six
weeks at Judd's Meadow, and three weeks at Bucks Hill, the num-
ber of weeks being proportional to the number of scholars. The
same master taught all the schools, going from place to place for
this purpose.

In February, 1730, an attempt was made in Waterbury to secure
a new school-house, but the project was voted down in town meet-
ing. In December of the same year it was voted to " build a school-
house on the meeting-house green where the old house stood," but
the fathers exercised a wise man's privilege, and within a few days

* For the earliest notices of outside schools see Bronson, p. 237.

596 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

the decision was reversed. We can learn nothing more on the sub-
ject until 1743, when we find that the town " granted liberty to set
a new school-house where the old house stood."

From references already made to the early records it has been
seen that certain lands were set apart for school uses. It is impor-
tant to distinguish accurately in regard to the three kinds of school
land, so-called, whence the money for the support of the schools of
Waterbury was derived.

There was, first, the land known as the '* school lots," which had been set aside
by the early proprietors for the purpose of leasing. This land was valued at ;f 150,
and the income from it was to be employed for the benefit of the town schools. For
a number of years this land was rented and the money disposed of by the town,
the funds being sometimes misappropriated and used for public objects other than
educational. The care of it occasioned some trouble and expense at various times,
and it was at length thought best to devise some means of disposing of it legally
and profitably. A committee appointed for the purpose of considering this matter
reported, December 10, 1734. recommending that the school lots be sold at auction
at some public place, the money thus obtained to be ** converted to the use of
the schools." The sales commenced almost immediately, and this excellent plan
was duly carried out. (See pages 333, 334.)

At the time when the respective claims of Hartford and Windsor were adjusted,
the colony had obtained possession of seven townships in the western part of Litch-
field county. In 1733 these townships were sold, and the proceeds of the sale
added to the local school fund of the towns and societies of the colony. In Water-
bury the First society claimed for itself alone the entire portion of this fund accru-
ing to the town, basing its claim upon the fact that it was the only society in exist-
ence in the town at the time of the passing of the law. It was not until after
several years of discussion and wranglings that a vote was passed (in 1770) decree-
ing that thenceforward the moneys should be divided among the several societies,
and parts of societies in the town, both those then established and those hereafter
to be brought into existence. The controversies and lawsuits which began when
the new societies were made independent towns, combined with bad management,
put an end to the dispute by dissipating the money.*

The third source of revenue was the sale of Western territories belonging to the
state. In 1773 Connecticut formed a township, on the Susquehanna, called West-
moreland, extending indefinitely to the westward, which was annexed to Litchfield.
In 1786 Connecticut ceded this Western territory to the Federal union, reserving
the tract on the southern shore of Lake Erie, still known as the Western Reserve.
As Litchfield county resigned all claim to the town of Westmoreland, congress
recognized the right of the state to this territory, which embraced an area of
4,000,000 acres. Of this immense area, a section measuring a half million acres
was granted to citizens whose property had been destroyed by fire or otherwise
during the Revolutionary war (whence the name Fire lands) and the remainder was

* For farther details see Bronson's '* History," pp. 240-242. The following receipt, the original auto-
graph of which is preserved among the papers of the First Congregational society, may be regarded as a
souvenir of this period of dissension :

" Reed. March X2th, 1795, of Capt. Saml. Judd and Capt. Benjn. Upson, by the hands of Richard Bryan,
seven pounds one shilling on part of an Execution in favor of John Woodruff, etc., against them and others
as committees of the several Ecclesiastical Societies in Waterbury, obtained at Litchfield Superior Court,
January term, 1795.— William Hii.lhousb."

THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY. 597

sold in 1795 for $1,200,000, the proceeds being added to the state school fund. Con-
necticut in 1800 ceded her right of jurisdiction over the reserve to the United States,
and in the same year ceased, as a state, to control the fund. By an act of the legis-
lature, the care of the fund was committed to James Hillhouse, under whose wise
management it steadily increased. The proceeds of this fund are distributed
annually to the various towns of the state, and it is this money, in addition to the
school tax, which places the schools of Connecticut upon so favorable a basis.

The condition of the educational system in Connecticut at the

close of the colonial period has been described by Noah Webster as

follows:

The law of Connecticut ordains that every town or parish containing seventy
householders shall keep an English school at least eleven months in the year, and
towns containing a less number at least six months. Every town keeping public
school is entitled to draw from the treasury of the state a certain sum of money
proportional to its census on the list of property, the deficiency, when any occurs,
being raised by a tax. To extend the benefit of this establishment to all the inhab-
itants, large towns and parishes are divided into districts, each of which is supposed
to be able to furnish a competent number of scholars for one school. In each district
a house is erected for the purpose by the inhabitants of that district, who hire a mas-
ter, furnish wood and tax themselves to pay all expenses not provided for by the
public money. In this manner every child in the whole state has access to a
school. The school is kept during the winter months, when every farmer can
spare his sons. In the summer a woman is hired to teach small children who are
not fit for any kind of labor. In the large towns scholars either public or private
are kept the whole year, and in every county town a grammar school is established
by law.

From this closing sentence of Noah Webster's statement it
appears that the enactment of 1644 had been carried out, or at any
rate was still recognized as in force at the close of the colonial
period. As a matter of fact, it was found impracticable at first to
enforce the requirement; but by 1672 grammar schools, or, as they
were frequently called, Latin schools, were established in the chief
towns of each county, and these were supported in part by grants
of public lands, and sometimes by individual endowments. By
degrees, when there was difficulty in establishing the local grammar
school, as part of the public system, it became common for the
clergyman of the town to fit young men for college, or for a college
graduate to open at his own risk a place of instruction for those
whose parents desired them to pursue a more advanced course of
study than the district school could provide. In such cases, if there
were a few men of ptiblic spirit and energy to encourage the under-
taking, an academic institution would be established sooner or
later, supported in some instances by private bequests and in others
by corporate powers and grants of public lands obtained from the
legislature. Thus it was that the first Waterbury Academy came
into existence.

598 HISTORT OF WATBBBURT.

THE FIRST ACADEMY.

Until the year 1784, there was no school in Waterbury of a
higher grade than the common or district school. About this time,
however, the Rev. Joseph Badger opened a school for girls. Its
success awakened among the people of the town a desire for a
school of the first class for both sexes, with a suitable building. A
subscription was started, and a building, to be forty feet long, twenty
feet wide, two stories high, with gambrel roof, two dormer windows
on each side, and a chimney at each end, was commenced on the
south side of the "Green," opposite to where the City hall now
stands. It is not known whether the cupola was built at this time
or later. The promoters of the building failed to receive money
enough to finish it, and it seemed as if the plan must be abandoned,
when Stephen Bronson, Benjamin Upson, Dr. Isaac Baldwin and
John Curtiss came forward with the proposal that they would finish
the building, on condition that they should have control of it until
the money was refunded. This offer was accepted, and the build-
ing, when completed in the fall of 1785, presented a quite impos-
ing appearance. Two schools were opened, one for girls on the
first floor, under the care of Mr. Badger, and one for boys up stairs,
under the care of David Hale, a brother of Captain Nathan Hale of
Revolutionary memory. Jeremiah Day, afterward president of
Yale college, and Bennet Bronson, afterward Judge Bronson, were
among his pupils. For a time scholars came in from adjoining
towns to attend the schools, which were very prosperous. The first
winter there were 150 pupils. The next year John Kingsbury,
who had just graduated from college, joined the corps of teachers,
and remained connected with the school until 1788 or '89, when he
went to Litchfield to pursue his law studies. We do not know how
long David Hale remained with the school, but his name used to be
mentioned frequently by the old inhabitants during the first quarter
of the present century, and he seems to have been a teacher of
great ability and popularity. Mr. Badger remained with the school
two years, that is, until 1787, at which time he accepted a call to
Blandford, Mass., and there remained until 1800, when he became
a pioneer home missionary at the west. It is recorded of him that
he was a brave man, who, before entering college, had bean a sol-
dier in the Revolution, and that in the war of 1812, while nominally
a chaplain, he had rendered great service to General Harrison as a
guide and assistant. Throughout his life he was very poor, and in
his later years depended mainly upon his Revolutionary pension for
support. He died in 1846.

THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY, 599

These three, Badger, Hale and Kingsbury, are the only teachers
that can be named of those who served while the academy stood
upon the Green. It appears that the school, in the height of its
prosperity, was furnished with the first bell ever brought into the
town. At first, as there was no cupola on the school-house, it was
hung in a willow tree near by, where it served not only to call the
children to school, but also to summon the people to worship on the
Sabbath. Charles D. Kingsbury, who died in 1890 at the age of
ninety-four, said that he remembered the tower on the building
after it stood on West Main street, and that it was circular in form,
with supporting pillars six or eight feet high.

The prosperity of the school, which was so great that both
stories of the building were filled with scholars, did not continue
long after the departure of the teachers already named; at all
events it appears that about 1790 James Harrison was making
clocks in the lower story of the building.* It was probably between
that time and 1800 that it was removed to a lot on West Main street,
near where Central avenue now is. Its removal was brought about
in an amusing way. At a meeting of the officers of the militia
regiment, which was held at Captain Samuel Judd*s tavern, prob-
ably prior to the year 1807, to prepare for the annual " general
training," the question arose where the general muster should be
held. Some urged that it should not be held in Waterbury, as
there was no good place in which to parade and perform evolutions.
Captain Judd being present, or hearing of the discussion at the
time, said, "I'll tell you what to do; move that school-house over to
the corner of my lot, and then there will be room enough." The
idea met with general approval, and in a short time the building
was removed, the order of transfer being given by Colonel William
Leavenworth, and the way prepared for holding the general train-
ing on the Green. After the removal the building became the
school-house of the West Centre district; the upper room was used
for the school, the lower for religious purposes, town meetings,
singing schools, etc. It also served as Town hall, until about 1807,
when, as it became necessary to make repairs, the two stories were
thrown into one, the cupola was taken down, and the bell hung
under the roof. A division was made into two rooms, separated by
a swinging partition, which on account of its weight was divided
into two parts. This could at any time be swung up, and both
rooms thrown into one. On the south side of the partition was a
door for a passage between the two rooms. The east room was

* Judgifij? from the charges entered in his books, he made two clocks per month, at a price of about jQ^
each.

6oo HiaTORT OF WATERBURY,

occupied by the district school of the West Centre district, and the
west was sometime^ used for a private school, though it appears
that after the "stone academy" was built in 1825, the west room
was used exclusively as a cloak room and a play room for the
children. By a vote of the district, the bell in the old building was
removed to the belfry in the new academy. The district school was
held most of the time in the old academy building until about 1836,
when, as it would no longer answer for a school without consider-
able repairs, the district sold it at auction to Samuel J. Holmes for
about forty dollars. It was then moved back from the sidewalk
and altered into a dwelling-house. In the summer of 1878 it was
transferred about 400 feet to the northwest, into a vacant lot, to
make way for the laying out of Central avenue. Thus the old aca-
demy survived four removals. The main timbers, which are of
white oak, ten inches square, are still in a good state of preserva-
tion.

Among those who taught when the building was on West Main
street are the following:

Ashley Scott, Samuel Root, Ira Hotchkiss of Naugatuck, a Mr. Porter, the Rev.
Mr. Williams, the Rev. Virgil H. Barbour, John Clark, Elijah F. Merrill, Israel
Holmes (ist), Phebe Hotchkiss (a sister of Deacon Elijah Hotchkiss), a sister of
Phebe Hotchkiss, whose name is not known, Miss Warner of Plymouth, Elmer
Clark of Bucks Hill, Mr. Peck of Watertown, Mr. Robinson, Miss Norton (after-
ward married in New Mil ford), David Trumbull Bishop, Janet Judd (afterward
married to a Mr. Beers of Watertown), Harriet Powell, Julia Upson of Southing-
ton (afterward married to Joseph Rogers of East Haven), and Phebe Bronson
(afterward married to Dr. William A. Alcott, the author). The last teacher was a
Miss Clark of Middlebury.

Great sacrifices were undoubtedly made to erect this academy-
building. The population, including Plymouth, Watertown, Mid-
dlebury, part of Oxford, Naugatuck, Prospect and Wolcott, did not
exceed three thousand, and the amount in the " grand list" of 1786
was only ^17,000, or $60,000 as money was then rated. It was as
great an undertaking to erect and equip this building as it would
be for the Waterbury of to-day, with its present population and
wealth, to erect one costing $500,000. If we had no other evidence,
we could safely infer from the churches and school-houses of a cen-
tury ago, and from the instructors who labored in them, that the
forefathers were sterling men, men who believed in education and
religion, and were willing to deny themselves, that knowledge and
righteousness might be advanced in the community.

CHAPTER XL.

SABBATH-KEEPING AND SUMPTUARY LAWS — THE EARLIEST CONNECTICUT
CHURCHES — TOWN AND CHURCH IN MATTATUCK — JEREMIAH PECK,
JOHN SOUTHMAYD, MARK LEAVENWORTH — THE "GREAT AWAKEN-
ING*'— THE REVOLUTION — MR. LEAVENWORTH's CHARACTER —
THREE MEETING-HOUSES — THE EARLY CREED — DECLENSION AFTER
WAR — EDWARD PORTER, HOLLAND WEEKS, LUKE WOOD — REVIVAL
UNDER NETTLETON — ORIGIN OF PRAYER-MEETING, OF SUNDAY
SCHOOL — DANIEL CRANE — A CHRONICLE — SALEM SOCIETY — A
CHURCH AND A MEETING-HOUSE — DEACON HOTCHKISS'S ACCOUNT
BOOK — GIFTS OF LAND — REMOVAL TO THE VALLEY — MINISTERS
AND DEACONS.

THE absence of any very early legislation in Connecticut Col-
ony concerning the Sabbath is an evidence of the deep and
wide-spread observance of its sancity in the lives and hearts
of the colonists. For more than thirty years no allusion was made
touching the possibility that the Sabbath could be desecrated by
the people, and a similar absence of written law in regard to it is
found in the early records of Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay.
The Indians were the first apparent offenders. In 1666 it was
ordered that whatever Indian or Indians should labor or play on
the Sabbath within the English limits, or on the English lands,
should pay a fine of five shillings, or sit in the stocks one hour.

The evil was evidently growing, for in 1668 it was ordered that
if any person should " prophane the Sabbath by unnecessary travel
or playing, or should keep out of the meeting-house during the public
worship unnecessarily, if there was convenient room in the house,"
the offender should meet the same penalties that had fallen upon
the Indian. It was not until 1676 that the order came requiring
any person either on Saturday night or on the Lord's Day night,
though it should be after the sun had set, who was " found sporting
in the streets or fields, or drinking in houses of public entertain-
ment, or elsewhere unless for necessity, to pay ten shillings for
every such transgression or suffer corporal punishment for default
of due payment." Servile work on the Sabbath was forbidden at
the same date. It was defined as "works not of piety, charity or
necessity." ** Prophane discourse or talk, rude or unreverent be-
havior," were not to be permitted on that holy day, and if it so

6o2 HISTORY OF WATBBBURT.

happened that the offence was " circumstanced with high handed
presumption," the judge had power given him to augment the
penalty.

In 1676 "God's worship and the homage due to him" required
" reading of the Scripture, cattechizing of children, and dayly prayer
with giving of thanks to be attended to by every Christian family,"
and the neglect of those obligations was declared by the law to be
a great sin, " provoaking to God to power forth wrath on such f am-
alayes or persons," and the Court solemnly advised the ministry in
all places ** to look into the state of such families, convince them,
and instruct them in their duty, and encourage them to perform it,"
and advised the townsmen to " assist the ministry to reform and
educate the children in good literature and the knowledge of the
Scripture." If any governors of families proved obstinate and
would not be reformed, the grand jury presented such persons to
the county court, to be fined, punished, or bound to good behavior.
All persons were forbidden to make, or wear, or buy any apparel
exceeding the quality and condition of their persons or estates, and
any tailor who fashioned any garment for any child or servant, con-
trary to the mind of the parent or master, was compelled to pay ten
shillings for his offence. Excess in apparel was, at the same time,
declared unbecoming a wilderness condition and the profession of
the gospel, and it was ordered that **what person soever should
wear gold or silver lace, or gold or silver buttons, silk ribbons, or
other superfluous trimings, or any bone lace above three shillings
per yard, or silk scarfs," should be assessed to pay rates on an estate
of ;^i5o, — the same amount that men were accustomed to pay to
whom such apparel was allowed, as being suitable to their rank. Ex-
ceptions were made in favor of magistrates, public officers of the
colony, their wives or children, and of settled military commissioned
officers, and also of those persons whose quality and estate had been
above the ordinary degree, although then '* decayed."

The above laws were in full force and effect in 168 1 when the
planters of Waterbury assembled their families around the Green.

The " most auncient towne " in Connecticut is Wethersfield. It
was so determined by the General Court as early as 1650, and the
statement is incorporated in the **code of laws" of that year.
In that most ancient town — then known as Watertown — the first
church of Christ in Connecticut was organized. On May 29, 1635,
the church in Watertown in Massachusetts Bay granted ** a dismis-
sion " to six of its members, " with the intent that the six men
should form anew in church covenant on the River of Connecticut."
The names of the six members were: "Andrew Ward, John Sher-

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1826, 603

man, John Strickland, Robert Coe, Robert Reynold, and Jonas
Weede.** In April, 1636, the first court of which we have record in
Connecticut Colony was held at Newtown (now Hartford), and
before it the six men presented "a certificate that they had formed
anew in church covenant with the public allowance of the rest of
the members of the said churches.'* The "said churches'* were
undoubtedly those of Newtown and Dorchester (Hartford and
Windsor) — which churches had removed, as churches, from the Bay
to the Connecticut river.

The second and third churches, those of New Haven and Mil-
ford, were formed August 22, 1639 — that at New Haven by the
appointment of twelve men chosen by the freemen, who out of the
twelve men thus chosen did select seven of their number to begin
the church. By the covenanting together of the seven men and
their reception of other men into their fellowship, the church was
gathered. In like manner in 1652, the Farmington church was
established with its "seven pillars." Two of the seven men, many
years later, were personally interested in the settlement of our
township (see p. 148).

What minister first preached in Waterbury we do not know, but
it seems almost safe to say that it was the Rev. Samuel Hooker (see
p. 159), for what could have been more natural than that his love
for the more than thirty members of his Farmington church should
have led him to visit Mattatuck, whither they had removed, and
minister to their spiritual comfort in the wilderness.

As early as 1679 Mattatuck was one of two "newly begun'* set-
tlements within the colony, who were seeking for a minister (see p.
184). In February of 1681, or as soon as the majority of the plant-
ers were living here, the question arose concerning the lot that
should be for the minister's use, which question involves the proba-
ble presence of a minister to use it. That the colony, through its
committee, was vigorously interested in procuring a settled minis-
ter, certainly as early as 1683, appears from the "Diary of the Rev.
Noadiah Russell,*' tutor at Harvard in 1682. Early in 1683, he wrote:
"I received a letter from Major Talcott of Hartford, in behalf of
Mattatuck, to invite me to be their minister, which I answered neg-
atively.*' Major Talcott doubtless met with many similar disap-
pointments in his efforts, for during the ensuing six years there
has not been found on record the name of a minister in connection
with the people of Mattatuck. Nevertheless, that there had been
a minister appears again from an item in the town records of 1686,
when the question came before the town concerning the lot that
s\io\i\6. he and remain iov the minister's use, and there is sufficient

6o4 HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

evidence to warrant the belief that Mr. John Frayser was in Water-
bury, and living in the house that had been built for him, and that
he served the people as their pastor during a part if not the whole
of the period between 1684 and 1689 (see p. 210).

The history of the town and the history of the First church, from
the beginning down to October, 1738, are so blended, that their sep-
arate estates cannot be defined. The story of the invitation sent
to the Rev. Jeremiah Peck to become the settled minister here; the
pledge given by twenty-five men of Waterbury concerning his sal-
ary; the town's unanimous action in presenting house and lands to
Mr. Peck and gifts to his sons; the escort provided to transport him
from Greenwich here; the events of the year in which he came; the
reasons why he could not baptize the children of his people until
he became an ordained minister over the Waterbury church; the
known events of his life, together with the petition to the General
Court by some of the inhabitants of Waterbury for permission to
" proceed to the gathering of a Congregational church"; the court's
happy response, and all that we know concerning the most impor-
tant event that ever took place within the Naugatuck valley — the
organization of the First church of Waterbury — together with the
story of the efforts of the people to build a meeting-house under
adverse environment, have been so fully given between pages 210
and 233 as to make their repetition here unnecessary.

Mr. Peck was sixty-seven years old when he came to undertake
the organization of a church in a territory but fifteen years out of
wilderness-estate — a task of no small dimensions even to a yoimg
and vigorous man. Having been bom in the city of London, Eng-
land, or its vicinity, in 1623, Mr. Peck came, with his father, to this
country when a boy of fourteen years. Before 1660 he was preach-
ing, or teaching school, in Guilford. In that year he' was invited to
take charge of the collegiate school at New Haven, which was a
colony school instituted by the General Court in 1659. In 1661 he
was invited to preach at Saybrook, and was there settled as a min-
ister. In 1666, early in the year, he removed to Guilford. Together
with certain other ministers and churches in the New Haven and
Connecticut colonies, Mr. Peck is said to have been decidedly
opposed to the " half-way covenant " adopted by the General Synod
of 1662, and to the union of the two colonies under the charter of
Charles II, — which union was effected in 1665. So great was the
discontent of Mr. Peck and others that they resolved to emigrate
from the colony. Removing from Guilford in 1666, he became one
of the first settlers of Newark, N. J. He preached to the neighbor-
ing people of Elizabethtown and settled there, as their first minis-

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1826. 605

ter, in 1669 or 1670. In 1670, and again in 1675, he was invited
by the people of Woodbridge, N. J., and in 1676 by the peo-
ple of Greenwich (Conn.), to settle with them in the minis-
try, but he declined these several invitations. The invitation to
Greenwich was repeated two years later, and he had a similar
call from Newtown on Long Island. Late in the autumn of 1678
he became the first settled minister in Greenwich, where he re-
mained (despite at least one urgent " call ** — to Barnstable, Mass.)
until his removal to Waterbury, in 1689. He is said to have
refused to baptize the children of non-communicants, at Green-
wich, in 1688.*

It will be readily understood that Mr. Peck's life and energies
must have been well-nigh spent when he came to his final pastorate.
A review of the events that occurred between the date of his arrival
and the organization of the church will give convincing proof that
his work here was not less trying than in any one of the frontier
towns where he had served, and he seems to have fallen before the
burden of it. We learn that " some years " before his death he was
" disenabled from the work of the ministry by a fit of the appoplex "
(see p. 229). Accordingly, we find that but four years after the
church was organized and Mr. Peck was ordained as its pastor,
another minister is mentioned as the "present minister," and in 1696
that the children of Waterbury were taken elsewhere for the rite of
baptism.

Mr. Peck's will (in the form of a deed of gift) is recorded at
page 6 of Volume I of Waterbury Land Records. It is a long and
interesting document, dated January 14, 1696, and acknowledged
the next June (1697). It affords abundant evidence of an ample
estate. Mr. Peck still held forty acres of upland and ten of meadow
in the town of Greenwich " in a place called Biram," and a two-
hundred acre farm which had been given him by the General Court,
besides his numerous holdings in Waterbury lands. He bestowed
all his "husbandry tools, as carts, plows, axes, hoes, chains, or other
implements," with "all the stock, horses, oxen, cows, sheep and
swine," without enumerating them. He left to his wife "all his
movables within doors, excepting a silver tankard," which he gave
to his son Jeremiah. \

*See ** A Genealogical Account of the Descendants of William Peck of New Haven, Conn. By Darius
Peck of Hudson, N. Y."

t Mrs. Joanna Peck executed a will in the form of a deed of gift, October 7, 1706, leaving all her estate
to her sons, Jeremiah and Joshua, except that she gave to her daughter Anna, "a wainscot cupboard, the great
table, the biggest pewter platter, and the choice of two more platters;" to Anna's daughter, ** the draw box
and a two-year-old heifer;" to Jeremiah's daughter (Johannah, then eighteen months old), the brass pan.

For other items relating to Mr. Peck's will, and to his last days, see pp. 233 to 335; also ''The Churches
of Mattatuck,^' pp. 173 to 183.

6o6 HI8T0RT OF WATERS UBT.

The following, from "The Churches of Mattatuck" (pages 184,
185) is descriptive of this period:

In the year 1699, and before the death of Mr. Peck, this church received the
ministrations of a young man who became the most learned and distinguished
lawyer in New England. When he came to Waterbury he was fresh from Harvard
college. It is pleasing to know that this people appreciated the ability of the Rev.
John Read before opportunity had been given him \.o prove it elsewhere. He made
a deep impression. The town was stirred to activity. There was a determination
and an earnestness in its efforts to secure Mr. Read " for the work of the min-
istry " that the years have not obliterated from the records. It is almost pathetic
to read of the inducements offered by a people whose ratable estate was but £1^00,
and the number of whose taxable citizens was but forty -seven. He was offered £$0
by the year in provision pay, ;f 10 in wood and ;£"2o in Jabor, in the same year that
the salary of the governor of the colony was but ;f 120 in provision pay. It must be
remembered that this town, as a town, was less than fourteen years old, and that
less than forty men had built one house for the minister, in which his life (for be
was an invalid) was drawing to its close. Undaunted by the magnitude of the
undertaking, the town promised to build a new house for Mr. Read. It was to be
thirty-eight feet long, nineteen feet wide; to have two chimneys from the ground,
and, apparently, a chamber chimney. The town agreed to *• dig and stone a cellar,
clapboard the house and shingle it, and make one end of it fit to live in." As a
present gift, independent of the town s action, the proprietors gave him ten acres
of upland. Yet more was there in the heart of this generous people to do for him.
After he had been ordained two years the house and the house lot of two acres at
the southwest comer of West Main and Willow streets, with sl £iso propriety, was
to be his own. Negotiations went on. From time to time another persuasive voice
was added to the committee, to entreat Mr. Read to dwell here, but, at last, as
winter was drawing near, Mr. Read drew away, for the old record bears witness to
the fact in these words: *• Deacon Thomas Judd was chosen a committee to
endeavor by himself and the best counsel he can take, to get one to help him in the
work of the ministry, and to bring a man amongst us. upon probation, in order to
settlement, z/ he can.

The Rev. John Southraayd, \«rho came to Waterbury to preach
when he was but twenty-three years of age, wove the pattern of his
life so closely into the history of the town, that it is impossible to
separate the one from the other. The young town and the young
minister grew side by side. The story of the New England minister
before 1740 vibrates with life for the coming historian, aild few
clearer, steadier, more benign leaders may be found than our own
Southmayd. The reader is referred, for his life and work, to the
history of the town from 1699 to 1755, and also to *'The Churches of
Mattatuck," pp. 187 to 196. He was the ordained pastor of the First
church from May 30, 1705, to March, 1740 (p. 335), and acting pastor
for torty-one years. His resignation of the pastorate may be found
on page 321. It occurred six months before the formal organization
of a second ecclesiastical society within the township (Chapter
XXV). His legal pastorate probably continued until the ordination

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 18£6. 607

of the R9V. Mark Leavenworth in 1740. Owing to a chasm in our
town records, covering the period including Mr. Leavenworth's
advent into the pastorate of the church, we have little knowledge
of its accompanying events (s^e pp. 335, 338). Mr. Southmayd was
a strong man in character and intellect, a man of wealth and of
great influence in the community. He lived seventeen years after
his resignation of the pastoral ofl&ce, acting as magistrate and fill-
ing various positions of public trust, and doubtless remaining by
far the most influential member of the church to which he had
ministered.

He was succeeded by Mark Leavenworth, who, after preaching a
few times on trial, wa^ in June, 1739, unanimously invited to the
pastorate.*

Mr. Leavenworth was the sixth son of Dr. (and Deacon) Thomas
Leavenworth of Stratford, where he was born in 17 11. His mother
was Mary, daughter of Edmund Dorman. He graduated at Yale
college in the class of 1737, under the presidency of the Rev. Elisha
Williams. Having secured one of the Bishop Berkeley scholar-
ships, he remained in New Haven two years, studying theology,
and was licensed to preach October 10, 1738. His ordination took
place in March, 1740, several months after his removal to Water-
bury. He received a ;^5oo "settlement," and his salary was fixed
at ;^i5o a year. But recent conversions of prominent men to Epis-
copacy had created distrust in the minds of cautious Congregation-
alists, and Mr. Leavenworth was required to give a bond for ;^5oo,
to be paid to the society " if he should, within twenty years from
that time, become a churchman, or by immorality or heresy render
himself unfit for a gospel minister, — to be decided by a council."
Undoubtedly the becoming a churchman was the thing to be
specially provided against. In about nine years, however, the
society, apparently of their own motion, released him from his
bond. In February, a month before the time for his ordination, he
married Ruth Peck, daughter of Deacon Jeremiah Peck of North-
bury parish, and granddaughter of the first minister of the church.

He had hardly become fairly settled in his ministry when all his
tact, judgment and influence were put to the test. There had been
a great deterioration in morals, and doubtless some lapses in
religious doctrine; but when, in 1740, the Rev. George Whitefield
went through the country speaking, in words such as few men have
the power to utter, of righteousness, temperance and a judgment to
come, all New England trembled, and the cry rose up, " What shall
we do to be saved ? " Young men like Mr. Leavenworth, with high

♦ The following account of Mr. Leavenworth is abridged from F. J. Kingsbury's paper in " The
Churches of Mattatuck," pp. 197-308.

6o8 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

hopes and earnest enthusiasm, threw themselves into the move-
ment, fully believing that it was the Lord's doing, while the older
and more conservative people of longer experience, of whom Mr.
Southmayd was a representative, saw in it but a temporary wave of
excitement, already accompanied by some excesses, and doubted
much whereunto the thing would grow. Cries of heresy were in
the air, the odium theologicum was aroused, and in 1744 Mr. Leaven-
worth and two others, for assisting at the ordination of the Rev.
Mr. Lee of Salisbury, who was supposed to be in sympathy with
the new movement, and whose church was gathered under the Cam-
bridge platform, were tried and suspended from all associational
communion. It does not appear, however, that the relations of Mr.
Leavenworth to his people were very seriously affected. He was
evidently a man of broad charity, and of a catholic spirit, for in
1747 he declined that part of his salary which was raised by tax on
the Episcopal portion of the inhabitants, although his legal right
to it was clear; but his sense of justice rebelled, and he seems
always to have had the courage of his convictions. In 1749 a great
and fatal sickness appeared in the town (p. 370). Dr. Bronson esti-
mates the deaths at six per cent of the whole population. There
were hardly enough of the well to care for the sick and bury the
dead. There was difficulty in getting medicine, and Mr. Leaven-
worth volunteered to go on horseback to Norwich and procure a
supply.

In 1750, after several years of enfeebled health, the first Mrs,
Leavenworth died, and not very long after he married Sarah,
daughter of Captain Joseph Hull of Derby. She was a person of
much character, dignity and influence. She was the mother of all
his children except one. She survived him several years, and died
in 1808. She was universally known as Madam Leavenworth, a
title which was perhaps due to her position by the etiquette of the
time, but was due to her personality also, and perhaps in part to
her two- wheeled chair or chaise — the only vehicle of the kind in
town.

In 1760, when about fifty years old, he accepted the position of
chaplain in Colonel Whiting's regiment, called into service to repel
the attacks of French and Indians on our northern frontier. He
was away from home on this service eight months. Hollister says:*
" The amount of fatigue endured by the Connecticut troops was
almost incredible." Putnam was there as lieutenant-colonel, and
wherever he went there was very apt to be fighting and sure to be
work. Mr. Leavenworth was appointed chaplain again the follow-

♦ History of Connecticut, Vol. II, p. 97.

THE FIBSl CHURCH TO 1826. 609

ing year, but probably felt that he was needed at home. When the
Revolutionary conflict came on there was no doubt where he would
be found. He threw himself into it with all the enthusiasm and
energy of his nature. He was early on the state committee for rais-
ing troops. Were it not that he was now well on in years, he would
probably have been found again at the front.* In 1793, at the age
of eighty-two, when the inconsistency of slavery with freedom
began to impress itself on the public mind, we find his name on
the list of the new "Society for the Promotion of Freedom" — a
fact showing again his ready sympathy with new ideas whenever
their tendency was to the uplifting of humanity, and his prompt-
ness to act in the line of his convictions.

The last prominent public act of his life was when in 1795, at
the age of eighty-four, he laid the corner stone of a new meeting
house for his people— the third erected by the old society.

Mr. Leavenworth is described to us as a man of medium size,
erect figure and quick movement. He had much dignity of manner,
but a quick sense of humor, and was on terms of familiarity with
his people, though the distance which in those days existed between
the minister and his flock was doubtless duly maintained. Dr.
Bronson has preserved several anecdotes illustrating these traits in
his character. \ The life of a New England country minister, how-
ever busy, useful and influential it may be, leaves behind but a
meagre record for historic uses, and it is only by detached facts,
accidentally preserved, that we are able to reproduce to any degree
the times in which he lived, his influence upon them and his per-
sonal character. In an account book of the society, covering the
last thirty years of the century, J we get (or think we do) bright
little flecks of light on the benevolence of Mr. Leavenworth's
nature, through the receipts he gives, sometimes discharging the
society from its dues at a time when there was a balance in his
favor, sometimes announcing that the rate bill given to an indi-
vidual to collect for him had been satisfied, and requesting that the
collector be discharged. The unwritten lines that lie only half
obliterated beneath the language used, impel the belief that the
widow, whose ministerial rate to Mr. Leavenworth was but " seven
pence," and who brought " nine quarts of corn " to pay it with, was

* Three of his sons did go— -one with Arnold on his first trip to Boston, another serving as surgeon dur-
ing the whole eight long, tedious years. All three were graduates of Yale.

t Bronson's History of Waterbury, pp. 389, 390.

% This volume (about eighteen inches by seven, and containing about eighty leaves) has recently been
returned to the church. On the cover is written : " Society's Book." On the inside of the cover is inscribed :
" This book belongs to the first Society in Waterbury, and is a gift from the Benevolent Esqr. Hopkins,
A. D. 1770.'* Its first date is January, 1770, and a few accounts are brought to it at that time " from the old
book."

39

6io HISTORY OF WATBRBURT,

was not sent empty-handed away. He was evidently a man of
affairs, and took an active interest in everything relating to the
public welfare. That he was a good business manager appears
from the fact that he lived in a hospitable and somewhat elegant
manner, and sent three of his sons to college. He also became a
a large landholder, in the days when land was the principal source
of wealth. Dr. Samuel Elton used to speak of the impression made
upon him as a boy, when Mr. Leavenworth, then certainly not less
than eighty years of age, preached in Watertown. He remembered
him as a man of medium height, of erect figure, bright, dark eyes,
and a commanding voice. He stood for a moment in the pulpit,
looking around upon his congregation, and then announced his
text: " Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live
forever?" His theme was the changes that had taken place in that
congregation within his own memory, and the impression he pro-
duced upon his youthful hearer remained vivid and profound after
seventy years.

The long period of Mr. Leavenworth's ministry was one of
upheaval and excitement. First came the ** great awakening," and
soon afterward the seven years' struggle of the French and Indian
war; and this had hardly closed when the conflict began with the
British government, which ended in the war of the Revolution,
when neighbor was set against neighb6r and friend against friend.
A large part of the Episcopal society, which had now grown to be
quite strong, sided with the mother country, and the town was
almost equally divided in opinion. There was dissension, friction,
and doubtless much hard talking, but on the whole, things went as
peacefully as could have been expected. After the Revolution
came the perhaps still more trying period of almost anarchy, so
that nothing was settled or sure until after the adoption of the con-
stitution and the inauguration of Washington as first president, in
1789. What a half century for a man to have lived through! and
what an experience — to have borne the burden of responsibility
for the religious, moral, social, secular and political welfare and
training of two or three generations, in such a time of turmoil and
unrest! To have successfully carried a church and a town through
such a period and maintained the love and respect of the people
implies character and ability well worthy of our admiration and
our praise,

Mr. Leavenworth died August 26, 1797, in the fifty-eighth year
of his ministry. An obituary notice published at the time of
his death closes with these apparently just and well considered
words :

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 18£5. (Ju

To the endearing qualities of a kind and affectionate husband and'parent were
very apparently united in this reverend father that piety towards God, that
diffusive benevolence toward men, that undisguised frankness and dignity of
deportment, that persevering faithfulness in office, that unshaken trust in the
merits of the Saviour, that heavenly-mindedness and calm converse with death,
which abundantly evidenced to all his acquaintance the child of God and the
heir of heaven.

The reference to Mr. Leavenworth's connection with the third
meeting house leads us naturally to glance backward over the his-
tory of the meeting houses which preceded this. The first step
toward the building of a house of worship in Waterbury was made
in 1691, by petitioning the General Court for assistance in the
work. The court granted Waterbury its country rate (see pp.
231-233). Eight years later the pulpit and seats were in course
of construction. In 1702 — ten years after its foundations were
laid — the house was finished (p. 249). It stood about in the
centre of the present Green, with its main entrance on the south
side, and doors on its east and west sides. It had a pulpit and
seats, but no pews, and it had seating capacity for about 300
persons. In July of that year a committee was appointed "to
place the people where they should sit." There is, therefore,
reason to think that Mr. Peck had no meeting house to preach
in during his pastorate here, and that young Mr. Southmayd
was the first and only officiating minister in that church edifice.
After six years, alterations and improvements were made (p. 278).
After six years more, a gallery was built around three sides of
the audience room, and other changes were introduced, which
occupied four years (see pp. 288, 289, and for further changes,
293, 294).

The story of the building of the second meeting house — ^begun
in 1727 and finished in 1729 — has been fully told by the aid of Mr.
Southmayd's little meeting-house book (see pages 283-300 of this
volume). Within eleven years of its building there went out from
this house, of its members and congregation, a sufficient number of
persons to form a church society in Westbury, one in Northbury,
one in Waterbury (the Episcopal), and one, in part, in Oxford.
Because of these and subsequent departures, the meeting house
served to accommodate the people for sixty -eight years. Mr.
Southmayd was the only minister of the first church edifice, and
he and Mr. Leavenworth were the only officiating pastors of the
second.

After 1740, we no longer find on our town records minutes of
church or ecclesiastical affairs. Dr. Bronson tells us in 1858 that

6i2 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

the society records of the First church were in existence a few years
before that date. His father, Judge Bennet Bronson, had made
notes from the records, and from these notes Dr. Bronson obtained
information that covers the period of thirty years, from 1740 to
1770. He says that in 1752 the town* "voted to repair the meeting
house by having windows in front, of twenty-four squares of seven
by nine or nine by ten, with window frames." He gives also the
following items: In 1769 "those who are seated in the seats" had
permission " at their own expense to turn them into pews," and^
"that men and their wives may be seated together in the pews."
The extant church records begin in 1795, and the society records in
t8o6. But from the old account book, already referred to, we leam
that between 1770 and 1793 frequent repairs and some alterations
were made in the meetinghouse; in 1778, new steps; in 1786, a new
window; in 1789 it was shingled, and in 1792 the interior was im-
proved. We also learn who furnished the wood for the steps; who
put in the new window and many panes of glass; who furnished
the "putte;" and, of the shingles, the names of the men who
brought them by the thousand, and that 2700 were left, and taken
by Mr. Leavenworth at a reduction from the price given by the
society. The following items appear in the way of improvements
or embellishments in 1792: "Twelve sticks of twist to make a fringe
for the cushion for the pulpit, five skeins of silk for the same and
three of twist." At about the same time there is an entry that sug-
gests the possibility that Benjamin Upson (who was chorister, and
who at a later date received the public thanks of the church for his
efficient services), was assisted in his songs of praise by the timbrel
or small drum, as two " taboreans " are among the articles furnished
to the society by him.

The sweeping of the meeting house from year to year was done
asaruleby the choice maidens of the church, with an occasional
exception in favor of a dignified matron, a lieutenant or other youth,
or a poor slave. The first man on the list was Moses Cook, who swept
in 1771, assisted by the "Widow Upson." They were succeeded in
1774 by "Silence," a slave of Joseph Hopkins, in 1778 by Dinah
Cook, and in later years by Mrs. Susanna Bronson, wife of Captain
Ezra, Jesse Hopkins, Lucy, Hannah and Sybel Cook, Aurelia,.
Rusha and Sarah Clark, Ruth Adams and Lieutenant Samuel Judd.
The average payment to each was about ;^i.ios a year, sometimes
in wheat and rye. But two and sometimes three were engaged in
the work at the same time.

* As our town records for 1752 contain no such vote, he must have found the minute on the now missing
church or society records.

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 18g5. 613

Regarding the first bell in Waterbury, nothing very satisfactory
can be said. Lambert, in his " History of New Haven Colony," says:

In 1740 it was voted to purchase a new bell of about 600 pounds weight for the
second meeting house in Milford, the old one being cracked. The old bell was
taken at the foundry for old metal, in part pay for the new one. It was brazed and
sold to a society in Waterbury, and now (1838) hangs in the belfry of the church at
Salem Bridge, and is considered to be the best bell in the state."

The second meeting house apparently had a bell, probably the one
here referred to. There was no meeting house in Salem until 1782,
and the cracked bell did not, we may think, lie forty years in the
foundry. In 1788 the following item is found: "By a grant of the
society to pay for the bell ^^3.4S." The school house bell appears
by name in 1790, in which year two persons are paid, apparently for
ringing two bells. "Africa"* had the pleasure of ringing that
early bell for three months. Samuel Harrison is credited in 1791
"for work at the school house bell and wheel."

From a single stray leaf of the society records, recently recovered,
we glean that in 1793 a committee was appointed to inspect the meet-
ing house and estimate the cost of necessary repairs. The report
must have been unsatisfactory, for it was decided to build a new
house of worship. About one-third of the voters were averse to
leaving the old meeting house, and it can readily be seen that their
hearts clung to it with strength and with all the power of its grand
associations. It had been the meeting house of the township — the
place where the last of the founders worshipped — the church home of
Southmayd, of Leavenworth for more than half a century. White-
field's voice had been heard within it, Hopkins and Bellamy had
stood there; from out of it four congregations had gone, — with
unutterable sorrow to the one that remained; with pastoral bless-
ing and unwritten benedictions had passed from its doors men and
boys on their way to serve England in her many wars, and, at last,
to serve themselves with liberty against England's behest.

For our knowledge of the building of the third house of worship
we are indebted to Dr. Bronson. He tells us that on January 2,
1795, the society voted to build a meeting house, and appointed a
committee to fix on a plan and place to build. The site chosen was
near the old spot — east of it — the size sixty by forty-two feet. It
was decided that the church should have a steeple, should be
covered the ensuing summer and finished by November i, 1796.
To defray the cost of it a tax was laid of three shillings on the
pound. A contract was made with William Leavenworth to build

♦ He was born September 16, 1772, and was the son of Fortune, a slave of Dr. Preserved Porter.

6i4 HI8T0BT OF WATEKliURT.

it. The price agreed upon was ^^850. For the above reason, Mr.
Leavenworth's bill of items does not appear in the society accounts.
But the contract did not include the stone steps, which were quite
noteworthy, if we may judge of thetr

lid importance by the cost of
obtaining them. They were brought
from Cheshire, and many were the
journeys made from Waterbuiy to
fetch them. They were laid in De-
cember, 1796. John Adams and Noah
U. Norton " helped to lay them."
The only " liquor for the workmen "
mentioned in the account book was
used on this occasion. The corner
stone of the building was, it is said,
inscribed with the initials of Mr.
Leavenworth's name. Many of the
stones used in the foundation walls

THE FIRST OHUROH TO 18 f 5, 615

of the Second Congregational church were from this church build-
ing of 179s, and it was hoped that in the changes made in 1894 by
the Odd Fellows the corner stone of a century ago might be found,
but it was not seen.

Dr. Bronson says that the new meeting house was dedicated in
1796. Probably he fixed the date from the time mentioned in the
contract for its building. The precise date of its dedication seems
to be determined by an extant letter, written by the Rev. Edward
Porter to Dr. Trumbull, asking that gentleman to preach the " dedi-
cation sermon in the meeting house on the 3d of May, 1797." Mr.
Leavenworth lived but three months and seventeen days after its
dedication.

Reference has been made to the extant records of the church as
containing no earlier date than 1795. There is no doubt that
records of the church were kept, perhaps from the beginning, but
they were probably included in Mr. Leavenworth's manuscripts,
and met the same fate as these, whatever that may have been. To
these manuscripts there is an interesting reference in the first
volume of records, in the report of a meeting held on March 5,
1800. A petition was presented by certain persons who desired
baptism for their children without being themselves communicants
in the church, and this statement follows in the minutes:

In deliberating upon this petition, the question was brought into view, *' How
shall we consider the standing of those persons who owned the covenant twenty or
twenty-five years ago? the practice being abolished by Mr. Leavenworth about
that time." Being unable to determine with precision who such covenanters were,
Deacon Joseph Hopkins and Deacon Stephen Bronson were appointed to ask Madam
Leavenworth for the liberty of looking over the manuscripts of her deceased hus-
band. Parson Leavenworth, that the names of the covenanters might be ascer-
tained.

The first volume of records itself opens with a quotation from
these manuscripts, as follows:

On the eighteenth of November, 1795, Mr. Edward Porter was installed col-
league pastor of the First church of Christ in Waterbury, with Mr. Mark Leaven-
worth, who has served in said church fifty-six years. He was preceded by Mr.
John Southmayd, who served the church about forty 3'ears; and he was preceded
by Mr. Jeremy Peck, who was the first settled minister in this town, but who served
not many years, as he was in advanced age when he was introduced.

This memorandum — apparently in the Rev. Edward Porter's hand-
writing— is described as ** an extract from MSS. of the Rev. Mark
Leavenworth."

It will be proper to introduce here what follows immediately, on
page 3 of the records — namely the "confession of faith and cove-

6i6 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

nant/' These are probably the work of Mr. Leavenworth, although
of what date within the long period of his pastorate it is impossi-
ble to say. The confession, while more of the "old school" type
than that which superseded it in 1832 (see Volume II, page 586), is
remarkable for its simplicity and brevity, and also for its omissions.
It is as follows:

We believe there is one only living and true God, in three personal characters,
the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, in whom are all natural and moral perfec-
tions; the Maker, Preserver and Governor of all things.

We believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the word of
God, containing a perfect rule of faith and practice.

We believe that God made man originally in his own image, in knowledge,
righteousness and holiness, and that by the violation of the covenant made with
the first man, Adam, he and all his posterity fell into a state of sin and misery.

We believe that it pleased God from the beginning to choose some of this fallen
race to salvation through sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth, and
that in the fulness of time he sent his Son, Jesus Christ, into the world to redeem
and save sinful and lost men by perfect obedience and most bitter sufferings, even
unto death, by way of atonement and satisfaction for sin: and that he is the only
Saviour, Prophet, Priest, and King of his people.

We believe that he arose from the dead on the third day and ascended on high.

We believe that repentance of sin, faith in Jesus Christ and new obedience are
conditions and qualifications of eternal life.

We believe that baptism and the Lord's supper are of divine institution, to be
attended and observed by his people in all ages, to his second coming.

We believe the doctrine of the general resurrection both of the righteous and
the wicked; the general judgment and the life everlasting. And

We believe that Christ hath, and to the end will have, a church and kingdom in
the world; hath appointed ordinances and set officers in his church, for the edify-
ing of his saints, and perfecting his body, the church.

The "covenant" that follows the creed is also brief and eminently
reasonable — a covenant which no sincere member of a Christian
church to-day could hesitate to adopt as his own. Its opening sen-
tence contains a reference to "the sins and follies of our lives," and
this note, historically significant, follows at the end: "This clause
has, by vote of the church, been lately prefixed to the covenant, in
order to supersede the necessity of public and particular confes-
sions of immorality of which those who are candidates for church
privileges may formerly have been guilty."

In the record book the covenant is immediately followed by an
interesting "Catalogue of Church Members," showing the actual
constituency of the First church at the close of 1795. '^^^ ^^st con-
tains ninety-three names, thirty-seven of which are names of men.
The first is " Mark Leavenworth, Seignior Pastor," the second,
" Edward Porter, Junior Pastor," then "Andrew Bronson and Joseph
Hopkins, Deacons"; and the rest follow in alphabetical order,

THE FIRST CHURCH TO 18U. 617

including the wives of the senior pastor and the two deacons. A
large proportion of the prominent men of the community are, of
course, included, and the last name (not in alphabetical order) is
"Mingo."*

In the account book which has been referred to as containing
the only records of the parish between 1740 and 1795, there is
almost nothing in relation to the period covered by the Revolu-
tionary war. One would be led to question whether the usual ser-
vices were conducted. The following item is interesting, being "A
copy of the Rev'd Mr. Leavenworth's Discharge to the year 1782":

Waterbury, Nov. 29, A. D. 1782.

This may Certify that the Society in Waterbury are discharged from all Obliga-
tions to me by way of Salary to the year 1778, Inclusive, by me.

Mark Leavenworth.

When Mr. Leavenworth became an invalid, certainly as early as
February, 1794, he entered into an agreement with his people to
receive a certain amount of money " in lieu of his salary." Mention
is made of two payments of j[^^q each. At this time also we find
the following persons apparently "supplying the pulpit": Josiah
Edwards, Heman Ball, S. Williston and Edward Porter.

The effect of the Revolution on the church and religion must,
upon the whole, have been good; but its immediate consequences
might almost be characterized as disastrous. That the Episcopal
parish should have suffered was a matter of course. But in the
First society, where one would suppose the success of the colonial
cause ought to have involved an increase of prosperity, the actual
result was a long and serious decline in religion. In the Christian
Spectator for June, 1833, there is an elaborate article, written by the
Rev. Luther Hart, formerly pastor of the church in Plymouth,
entitled, "The Religious Declension in New England during the
Latter Half of the Last Century." As Mr. Hart clearly shows, the
declension was very real and very widespread, and Waterbury was
involved in it. It came partly as a reaction from the violent meas-
sures and extreme views of the revival period, and partly as a result

♦ Dr. Bronson in his History (p. 321) says: " The first slave in Waterbury of which I have ceruin knowl-
edge was Mingo, who was the property of Deacon Thomas Clark, about 1730. He was then a boy. His mas-
ter used to let him for hire by the day, first to drive plow, then to walk with the team. At Deacon Clark's
death in 1764 Mingo was allowed to choose which of the sons he would live with. He preferred to remain at
the old homestead with Thomas; but after the latter commenced keeping tavern, he did not like his occupa-
tion and went to reside with Timothy on Town Plot. He had a family, owned considerable property, and
died in x8oo.''

It appears from this list that Mrs. Susanna Munson, who was one of those that were excommunicated for
"going off to the Methodists," was "the wife of Samuel Munson," and that Mrs. Sarah Hoadley of the same
little company, referred to in Vol. II, p. 696, was *'the wife of Andrew Hoadley." The five converts to
Methodism are marked in the catalogue, " Rejected, Sept. 16, 1800."

620 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

college, who filled up the time until October. From the payments
recorded in the account book it would seem that during one-half of
the year 1798, or thereabout, the church was without a pulpit supply.
At a meeting on October 18, 1799, "the question was put whether
this church approve of the Christian character and ministerial
qualifications of Mr. Holland Weeks." It was " voted unanimously
in the affirmative," and Mr. Weeks was invited "to take the pastoral
care and charge of this church." Ten days later his answer " was
read by the clerk [Mr. Porter] in the following words," and it is
remarkable, as compared with most of the documents of the period,
for its directness and brevity:

Brethren of the First church of Christ in Waterbnry:

I have taken your call into consideration. I view it as a call of Providence, and
therefore accept. That the Lord may bless the latter end of the near and inter-
esting relation into which we are now entering even more than the beginning, is

the prayer of your affectionate pastor elect.

Holland Weeks.

In anticipation of the ordination which was about to take place, a
day was set apart for fasting and prayer, " agreeably to apostolic
example," and Mr. Weeks was ordained pastor on November 20,
1799.

The young man thus introduced into Waterbury life was born
in Pomfret in 1768, and there passed his early years. He graduated
at Dartmouth college in 1795, and received from Yale the honorary
degree of M. A. in 1800. "I began," he says, "in 1784, at the age of
sixteen, to turn my attention with peculiar interest and conscious
delight to the study of Christian and experimental theology."* It
was natural, with such tastes, that he should study for the ministry,
and Waterbury was his first parish. In a communication to the
American on February 24, 1874, E. B. Cooke spoke of him as a man of
commanding personal appearance and more than ordinary ability.
This estimate is borne out by the published sermons of Mr. Weeks
which have been preserved (see Volume II, page 954) and by his
subsequent career. Another old resident — Mrs. Hannah Morris, the
first person baptized in the third meeting-house — described him to
the writer as a tall and portly man, with full face, black hair, dark
eyes and a fine tenor voice. He was so fond of singing that if a
brother minister — a home missionary, for instance — was " occupying
the pulpit," he would take his place in the singers' gallery. He
was a school visitor, and tried to teach singing in the schools. He
was fond of children and familiar with them, and in his pastoral
visits was very apt to have the little ones in his lap. On Decem-

* See Vol. II of The Ntw Churchman (x843-*44), p. 726.

THE FIRST CHURCH T

ber lo, 1799 — three weeks after his ordina
Byron, a daughter of Moses Hopkins, Esq., •
a granddaughter of the Rev. Dr. Samuel
brought back to the home of her ancestors,
(for four of whom see Ap. p. 148). The :
roofed house — stood a little south of whei :
building now stands, but was afterward re :
Not only does Mr. Weeks as a Waterbu ;
nineteenth century, but we may look at h •
the commencement of a second era in tl <
pastors; and no contrast could be greate
second era and the first. From the organ i
the death of Mr. Leavenworth, it was scan :
ister, yet the number of pastors was only
Porter, four. But between 1800 and 1865 t
and two "acting pastors," besides nine or
the pulpit was vacant or filled only by (
however, stayed with the church a little :
causes of his leaving are indicated in his 1 1
was published and has been preserved. H i
(pages 16, 17):

I do not claim to have been without my foibles ar :
I have in any measure been faithful will be made to
There may be some who are gratified by the event :
are others whose feelings of friendship exceed the |
cordially reciprocate every such sentiment which 1
seem to those who are not fully acquainted with evei ;
ration might have been prevented. It is true it mi \
stand what has been done by the society. Methods <
great measure to fail, and I have felt myself unable, \ i
myself to the work of the ministry. Of course m]'
seemed to be at an end. It is true I have had friend ;
generous presents for my support. And I now than <
expressions of their love. But it has been judged b;;
it would not be expedient for me to tarry, under thesi
tion has therefore been dissolved. Yet my heart's •:
this Israel is, that they might be saved. I also n<!
prayers for me and my family, in our present dark aii

It is probably upon these frank statemo
based, in Kingsley's " Ecclesiastical Contril

* Horace Hotcbkiss in his (unpublished} Reminiscences says that
ing the esteem of his people, and remained only a few years," and se
an exhibition of passion and cruelty by Mr. Weeks in " beating an un
lie square. The affair," he continues, ^* created a good deal of indigs
the stuffed skin of the horse was seen standing near the church do
holding a large knife. It remained during the day, in sight of Mr. V
for a fuller and perhaps more nearly colorless statement in regard to tl

6ai msTOBY OF WATERBURT.

Mr. Weeks "was dismissed for want of support." The prospect for
him, as wel! as for the parish, seems to have been gloomy enough,
but Mr. Weeks survived these early trials and many others, and
lived to do his Master's work in various vineyards. The discourse
just referred to was preached December 21, iSq6. He had made
known his desire for a dismission in November; the society had
voted to unite with him in this object, but " not to submit pecuniary
matters," and his dismission had taken place on December 10. It
was a year later (December 30, 1807) that he was installed as pastor
of the church in Pittsford, Vt., organized in 17S4. On August 9,
1 8 15, he was installed pastor of the First church in Abington, Mass.,
and while he held this position his theological beliefs underwent a
great and serious transformation. It appears that his first contact
with the opinions of Swedenborg took place during iiis Waterbury
pastorate. He found in the possession of the Rev. Israel B. Wood-
ward of Wolcott one of Swedenborg's books, and spent two hours in
its perusal. It appeared to him to be "a most wonderful produc-
tion"; how to account for its existence he could not determine to
his own satisfaction; and he found afterward that "a curiosity
remained with him to know moreabout it." Some years after this,
apparently while settled at Pittsford, he met with another Sweden-
borgian work, the " Halcyon Luminary," and his curiosity was still
more excited. But it was in 1818, after he had been at Abington
for three years, that he " was led to the sight of an old minister's
library" at Sandwich on Cape Cod, which contained a number of
Swedenborg's works, and " commenced reading on October 10." The
result was a prolonged mental conflict and, at length, on May 21,
1820, the preaching of a sermon to his congregation (see Vol. II,
page 954) which led to a trial for heresy before a council of
churches and to his excommunication. " All the evils which I
anticipated," he afterward said, " came upon me, and some that I
did not expect. But never for a moment do I regret that I became
a receiver of the heavenly doctrines." By a remarkable concurrence
of events, however, a home for himself and his family had been
prepared in advance in the new town of Henderson, in western New
York, near Lake Ontario, and to that place he removed soon after
the termination of his pastorate. He became a farmer, but at the
same time made use of his opportunities to preach the new doc-
trines he had received to his neighbors, and was instrumental in
establishing there a congregation of the New Jerusalem church.*

In Kcndenoa. One of [Ihtk. Edff
htauDC Ihs tnoUier al Duniel H. Bu
AI ChlcHgD Id iBq3 ni mo larsDly di
ETAOBtDii, Til., JaaiiATy ij, tiq\.

THE FIRST CHURCH 2

He lived to a good old age, happy in the
found the way of truth and righteousn
friends and children on July 24, 1843. It
ary notice in the JVew Jerusalem Magazine
was a man of warm and kind feelings, of
acute reasoning powers. He had an elev
and importance of the ministerial office,
only of the necessity of leading a life of
taining sound doctrines in order to the ad^
If we may judge from the circumsta
Weeks's dismission from Waterbury, the 1
prosperity of the First church was not rea
ted, in 1795, but a dozen years later. The 1
a consequence of the Revolutionary war
and more serious until this time. The tli
to have been built without a serious strugj
the result in part of a spirit of rivalry — th
engaged at the same time in a similar tas
of the meeting-house there was no other
several years to come. In 1774 the popul
was 3526; in 1790 it was 6107 — an increa
cent — and in 1800 it had increased to ov<
within the original limits. But the chie
within the bounds of the First society, a
showed few signs of a vigorous life. In i
membership numbered only ninety-three, 1
accessions, except in January, 1800, and J
Many minor tribulations had followed tl
meeting-house. The steeple would not si
much trouble; the division of ministerif
other societies — notably with Middlebi
annoyance and cost. When Mr. Weeks w
laid a tax to raise $400 that was due on his
however, soon followed, which the present
his bicentenary discourse, described as foil

Between 1800 and 1820 a double traasformation
epoch a marked one in the history o£ the town and
large that new era of prosperity was entered upon v
in the light and warmth of which we have grown to
beginning of the century Waterbury was an ordinc
than an average supply of attractions, and a poor p]
mation of the surrounding towns it was a kind of Na2
could be said. But it had in it what was better than
group of ingenious, industrious, wide-awake men, an<

6j4 history of WATERBURT.

of events an hour of golden opportuoity. In this quiet, unpromising village, just at
the opening of the century, the manufacture of gilt buttons and of clocks was
begun, and from that time until now the " brass industry " has steadily grown, and
has transfonned not only the old village, but the entire Naugatuck valley. The
record becomes doubly interesting when we find that in spiritual things also there
was a revival of prosperity.

But it came slowly. The Rev. Mr. Weeks, in his farewell discourse,
said to the people, "You will feel, I hope, the great importance of a
speedy re-settlement of the gospel ministry. The longer you
remaia destitute, the greater the probability is that the state of the
church and people will become more and more uncomfortable,
broken and divided. If possible, let the first candidate you employ
be the one on whom you fix your affections to be your minister."
The hope thus expressed was hardly fulfilled, for the pastorate
remained vacant from December, 1806, to November, 1808. Mr.
Porter, the former pastor of the church, was on the committee for

supplying the pulpit during 1807, and to him was committed the
care of the ministerial money. As early as April, Andrew Eliot,
son of the Rev. Andrew Eliot who had recently died in the Fair-
field pastorate, and a graduate of Yale in the class of 1799, was
unanimously invited to become pastor, and the invitation seems to
nave been pressed upon him; but in a frank and manly letter,
which has been preserved,* he declined the call. He was settled in

• Mr. Eliu'i letier ii u tolLowi ;

If EW HfivEH, July 7th, iioj.

ClHTLIH»:

THE FIRST VHURCH TO 18tB. (,2$

New Milford in February, 1808, and continued there until his death
in 1829. In 1818 he was made a member of the corporation of Yale
college. In September {1807), Thomas Rugglcs, a still younger can-
didate—a graduate of Yale in 1805, and licensed in 1806 — preached
for at least three Sundays," and Reuben Taylor (Williams college,
1806) and other candidates, or at least "supplies," followed; but
without definite result until August of the following year. At a
meeting on August 25, 1808, the church unanimously "approved of
the Christian character and ministerial qualifications of Mr. Luke
Wood, "and "invited him to take the pastoral care and charge of
this church." The society "concurred," offering him a salary of
$450 a year and the use of the " little pasture." A long communi-
cation of acceptance from him was placed on record, a " fast " was
appointed, according to custom, and Mr. Wood was ordained and

-^

installed, November 30, 1808. In preparation for his ordination
a committee was directed to take charge of the meeting-house

•uch cireunulan

ea wo

uld p1i«

• man

with ionB. giv< r

imp,op.rld.»of

1 might

lead 10

■ mode

the procnt, leu

honariblg to the

try and i

njuriou

lGgcth.r with the

■dviceoC those

niniite

T. whom

WUh Ihe in»

t linceie wijh»

Wlhe

.yofyc

ud rupeci, [ tub

Kribe myielf

Man. JohD

Kincbury. Ed-

»rdPo

r«r, Elij

.hHot

♦The ".uppl

la "who p.Mch

edin .

,98 ■«=!

.edje..

Hotchkiu, Edward Field.

£1,41 a Sunday. Ac the time above referred to Ihe fee
brought to view in a Hid way hy Mr. Eliol'a receipt

626 . SISTOST OF WATERBURT.

on that day, and to reserve sufficient seats for the council and
clergy."*

Luke Wood was born in Somers in 1777. He was a grandson of
Thomas Wood, one of the first deacons of the church in Somers,
and in his early years " sat under the ministrations " of Dr. Charles
Backus. He graduated at Dartmouth college in 1802, and pursued
his professional studies under the eminent Dr. Emmons. He
received the honorary degree of M. A. from Yale in 1808, and
Waterbury was his first parish. His daughter, Mrs. William Rus-
sell, the mother of Dr. Francis T. Russell, in a letter addressed to
the present writer, some years since, spoke of the cordiality and
hospitality with which he and his family were received in the
parish. But she added:

After snecessive years of a faithful pastorate, lie was stricken with a cont^oos
fever to which he had been exposed during a season of unusual sicliness. He did
not recover for some months, and was left with an ulcer in his side which eventu-
ally made it necessary for him to obtain a minister in his place. Mr. Nettleton,
the distinguished revival preacher — then on a circuit near Waterbury — was ready
to come at my father's request. During his stay with our family and the people,
my father was under tbe care of a surgeon in CanCoo (Conn.), where he was obliged
to remain some months on account of a surgical operation and for his recovery
after.

Dr. Nettleton's visit, here referred to, resulted in an extensive
*' old-fashioned revival " — the most wide-spread and important that
has occured in the history of the Waterbury churches. At the time
of Mr. Wood's coming, there had not been an addition to the church,
except by letters of dismission from other churches, in six years.
During the seven years preceding Nettleton's engagement twenty
persons had been received on profession of their faith. The " mor-
tal sickness" which prevailed in the spring and summer of 1815
failed to make any marked impression on the religious condition of
the community. "Whatever serious effects," said a writer in the
Religious Intelligencer at the time, " might be expected to arise from
the heavy judgments with which we had been visited, they appeared
to be lost upon us. Vice, immorality and irreligion appeared to
gain additional strength, and the cloud that overshadowed us in a
moral point of view appeared fraught with tenfold darkness." In
the following February, however, tokens of religious interest began
to appear, and these continued to increase for some months. A
man who had been " an open opposer " of religion became converted,
and in June special meetings for prayer began to be held. Soon

THE FIRST CHURCH

afterward the Rev. Lyman Beecher of I
Nettleton spent a vSunday with the churc ;
made with Mr. Nettleton to begin "a ser
tinned his labors in Waterbury for sev- i
markable results. " The work became ve: (
it embraced all ages from youth to gray \
whole families came under deep convicti*
lowed immediately. The records show 1 i
August seventeen were received to the c i
February (1817) seventy -one, in April foi
making a total of 118, of whom no wer« 1
"**f ruits of the revival." *

These, however, were not the only ;
which had taken place in the church an
were results of a less definite kind, some o '
evil; but besides these there were certi :
came into being about this time, the or
associated with the revival, and the valu( i
great in the later life of the parish. Thes
the church prayer-meeting, the Ladies' B 1
auxiliary missionary society. The missioi i
extinct, but for some years it had a flot
church. At a meeting of the church, Se 1
agreed to " unite with the other churchei
constitution for a society auxiliary to the 1
missioners for Foreign Missions." The soc
Waterbury, one for men and the other foi '
lished "report" which has survived, it aj :
Bennet Bronson, Elijah Hotchkiss, James
and S. B. Minor, and such women as Mr .
Humiston and Mrs. Edward Scovill, were t i
was besides a large corps of collectors.!
society was in its origin more definitely coi
It was formed almost in the midst of the m :
It consisted of young women whose hearts '
thing in the line of Christian philanthrc|

* See Dr. Bennet Tyler's "Memoir of Nettleton/* pp. 90-94. Ii
two children were baptized in the First church on one Sunday.

f A list of subscribers in the women's branch, extending from 3 :
which it appears that the customary annual contribution was tweoi
reported from Waterbury were, from the men's "association" $35.60
is added that " of this sum four dollars were from Mrs. Humiston, a d:
by said society for the benefit of Foreign missions/' and^that " four
and a string of beads."

6zb EISrORT OF WATBRBfTRY.

was the making of clothing for young men who were stiidyiog for
the ministry, and the society continued to work for this for twenty-
five or thirty years. The first president was the pastor's daughter,
Ursula Wood (afterward Mrs. William Russetl, whose letter was
quoted above); the first vice-president Polly Clark (Mrs. Merlin
Mead); the secretarj' Anna M. Leavenworth (Mrs. Green Kendrick),
and the treasurer Maria Clark (Mrs. John T. Baldwin). During the
pastorate of the Rev. Henry N. Day a society auxiliary to this was
organized on Town Plot, which was at one time more flourishing
than the parent organization.

The origin of the ehureh prayer-meeting cannot be precisely
fixed, but it certainly belongs to this period, although it had an
intermittent life for some years afterward. As regards the Sunday
school, however, it was not only a product of the renewed spiritual
life of the people; its beginning is definitely indicated. It appears
from statements quoted in Volume II (p. 581), that it did not have an
uninterrupted existence, but there is no quejtion that it came into
being in 1819. In July of the previous year the church "voted to
appoint a committee for the purpose of setting up a Sabbath
school," and the committee reported on June 26 (1819), " that there
should be a president, a vice-president and three directors." The
report was adopted, and Elijah Hotchkiss was made president aod
Edward Field vice-president. Further details are given as follows,
in a memorandum prepared in 1857 by Deacon E, L. Bronson:

The Sunday school was established in the gallery of the old church by Anna M.
Leavenworth, Polly Clark and Ruth \V. Holmes, who were subsequently assisted
by Candace Allen. Susan Cooke. Hulda Hitchcock and several others. It consisted
at first of fifteen or sixteen female scholars. There was much opposition on the
part of many of the members of the church, as the few Sunday schools they had
then heard of were designed principally for the benefit of those who were too poor
to avail themselves of any other opportunity of gaining instruction. The scbool
was continued, however, for several years, but without any formal organization,
and only during the summer months. The course of study and the recitations were
confined chiefly to the Bible and the "Shorter Catechism."

About 1822. the pastor, the Rev. Daniel Crane, gave the following notice: " Mr.
Israel Holmes will meet the children in the West Centre school-house, and instruct
them to the best of his ability." • The school still held its sessions during the sum-
mer months only. About 1825 it was re-established in tbe meeting-house, and Dea-
con Benedict was chosen auperiutenilenC. He was succeeded by John Clark. Deacon
P. W. Carter, for two years, and Horace Hotchkiss, after which it was continued as
a permanent institution. But its history, preserved as it is only in the memories of
its members, is not very definite or reliable.

\c SibtMIh achool."

THE FIRST CHURCH '

Mr. Bronson's list of Sunday school si |
additions, is as follows :

Elijah Hotchkiss, Israel Holmes, Aaron Bene i
Horace Hotchkiss, Seth Fuller, Edward Clarke, Fr s
Charles Fabrique, Josiah A. Blake, Isaac R. Brc :
Crane, Edward L. Bronson, Arami Giddings, Joi i
Fletcher, George W. Beach, Solon M. Terry, J. ; i
Lester M. Camp, Wilson H. Pierce, Alexander C. <
W. Goodenough.

Mr. Wood's pastorate was brought to a
the revival culminated. Up to June, i^
church, as already stated, were ii8; in A i
tions, in October there was one, in the ^\
and in 1819 only one. And in the mean
developed for such preaching as Mr. Wo< 1
a time," as Mrs. Russell states the matt
quoted, ** when my father resumed his oflfi'
felt in his preaching than in Mr. Nettlet<
some dissatisfaction was expressed, whi:
turbed my father's mind, and he was ev<:
vote of the church on November i, ii\
"Voted that this church does not approve
Rev. Luke Wood, and that under existing
bers are of opinion that his usefulness i
them is at an end." To this action Mr. W<:
posing under certain reasonable conditior
dismission. The council was called, and li
pastorate November 19, 1827, having lat
sickness and many trials, for very nearly
his health was somewhat restored he eng;;
in western New York and Pennsylvania.
Cheshire, Westford, Clinton and West Har
to Somers, his native town, where he spi
days. He died on August 22, 1851.*

After Mr. Wood's dismission the chu
pastor for three years and a half, the pu
variety of ministers. With the qualificati
Clark, who had recently come here to 01
p. 537), the people were so well satisfied t
a unanimous call, early in 1820, but it wa

* The Congregational Journal of February 4, 1852 (published i
r Qotice filling three columns, devoted chiefly to an account of Mr. W

630 HISTOnr OF WATEItBURT.

than a year elapsed ere another candidate was found upon whom they
could unite. He appeared in the person of the Rev. Daniel Crane,
and "at a church meeting legally warned, and opened by prayer,"
on May 28, 1821, he was invited to take the pastoral charge. The
society "concurred," voting a salary of §450 a year, with the use of
the so-called parsonage lot, and he was installed on July 3.

He was the son of Joseph and Hannah Crane, and was born in
Cranetown (now Montclair), N. J., April 13, 1778. He graduated
from Princeton college in 1797, and afterward studied theology
under the Rev. Amzi Armstrong of Mendham, ^f. J. He married
Hannah, daughter of Dr. Matthias Pierson of Orange, N. J., by
whom he had two children, Eleazar and Abby. At the time of his
coming to Waterbury, his son was about twenty years of age and
his daughter a year or two younger.

With one exception, Mr, Crane's pastorate was the shortest in
the historj' of the parish, and if we may judge from the records it
was almost destitute of incidents worthy of mention. Its pecuni-
ary condition — partly, perhaps, as a result of being so long without
pastoral care— was very unfavorable. The attempt had been made
to sell the pews, at first for $7000 and then for $5000, and, that plan
proving a failure, to lease them for two years, then for one year,
then to lease a part of them; and finally the old seating plan was
resorted to, without satisfaction, and another plan was tried, — "age
only to be considered and no one degraded"; then again, to seat
according to "list and age," every year to count for %io. But
neither plan nor device satisfied the people. In i8zo pews might
he leased for two years. In 1821, in order to raise a salary for the
support of preaching, pews might be leased for one year. In 1822
they went back to seating the meeting-house, but this time by "list"
exclusively. In 1824, they were again leased and might be taken
by persons not belonging to the society. The spiritual life of the
parish was also at a low ebb. It is true that in November, iS;o,
eight persons united with the church on profession of faith, but
there was nothing else to indicate that the reaction which had set
in so soon after the Nettleton revival did not still continue. Early
in Mr. Crane's pastorate seven were "added to the church," but
these, with five received at later dates, were all who were admitted
on profession during his three years' ministry.

The one notable thing in the history of the period is the serious
rupture and prolonged conflict between the pastor's family and one
of his leading parishioners, John Clark. Mr. Clark was a man of
intelligence and cultivation {a graduate of Yale college in the cla.ss
of 1806), and the conflict which took place must have seriously

THE FIRST CHURCH

affected the peace and well-being of the <
community. The occasion of the trouble '
Mr. Crane had brought with him from N
Clark hired to do work in his home. 1
Crane to relinquish his claim upon the
collision of claims and opinions and an a
matter came before the church on Januar
tee was appointed to confer with Mr. Clar
between him and the pastor. Two weeks
was made against Mr. Clark, and on Fel
submitted to the consociation. The diffi(
three months afterward the church voted
ship and watch from our brother John Cla
The healing of this breach, so far as S
were concerned, is related in Volume II, pa
time Mr. Crane's hold upon the parish had
took such shape that on January 4, 1825, tl
Mr. Crane the sum of $100 on condition
before May i. The church, in April, vote(
to dissolve the pastoral connection het^
people. The consociation met on April 21
tion reached the following result:

Voted unanimously that in consequence of the di
the society the dismission of Mr. Crane is expedie :
missed from his connection with the church and s :
happy to find on inquiry that nothing has occurred ,
injurious to the moral or ministerial character of Vi 1
and cordially recommend him to the churches as i :
We deeply lament those unhappy divisions which hj '
place of their pastor, and pray the great Head of tt :
in love, and to furnish them with another pastor \
faith and lead them in the way of salvation.

The answer to this prayer was delayed :
Crane removed from Waterbury to a pai
and from there after some years to Ch
Chester he bought a farm near Cornwal
remainder of his life devoted his attenti
tion of his land. He discontinued prea<
sional supply for the Rev. Jonathan Sti!
church he attended in that place. Whe:
wife was still living, although she had b 1
son died many years ago, leaving a famil
whom (a daughter, Mary) survives. His < !
inent citizen of Cornwall and died childle

Sjs

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

interest in questions of the day, whether pertaining to church or
state. He was an uncompromising abolitionist, and in 1844 he and
three other citizens cast the first anti-slavery votes ever polled in
Cornwall. " He was," says an old friend, "a man of sterling char-
acter, whose sincerity and earnestness never failed to impress men,
whether in the putpit or in society." He died at his home in Corn-

wall i

tS6i.

The further history of the First chnrch is given in Chapters
XXXII and XXXIII of the second volume.

Samuel Hopkins, the eldest son of Timothy and Mary (Judd)
Hopkins, was born in Waterbury, Sunday, September 17, 1721. He
says, in his autobiography: "As soon as I was capable of under-
standing and attending to it, I was told that my father, when he
was informed that he had a son born to him, said, if the child
should live he would give him a public education, that he might be
a minister or a Sabbath day man, alluding to my being born on the
Sabbath." This design was abandoned for a time, as the boy
seemed to have no inclination to study, preferring to labor on the
farm at home. When about fourteen years of age, however, a
change came over him in this respect. His father was quick to
perceive it, and placed him with the Rev. John Graham of Wood-
bury, under whose tuition he prepared for college and successfully
passed the Yale examinations in September, 1737. The subjects to
which attention was at that time chiefly directed were logic, math-
ematics and such other studies as tended to develope the students
into profound philosophers, but not graceful and accomplished
scholars, to foster individuality of thought, but not felicity of
expression. During the early part of his connection with the col-
lege, he made a public profession of religion in Waterbury, includ-
ing, of course, acceptance of the Calvinistic doctrines. Afterward,
however, he doubted the genuineness of his conversion and was
much moved and depressed by sermons which he heard from
Whitefield, Tennant and Jonathan Edwards, on the occasion of
visits made by these men to the college. Indeed he was so deeply
affected by Mr. Edwards's celebrated sermon on "The Trial of the
Spirits" that he resolved to go to him, and beg to be allowed to
become an inmate of his home when his college days should end.
Immediately after taking his degree, in September, 1741, he
returned to Waterbury, and spent three months in retirement.*
At the end of that time he set out for Mr. Edwards's home, in

THE FIR8T CHURCH

Northampton, where he was very kindly :
divine and his wife. After he had spen
roof, his religious views became clearer ;
on April 29, 1742, he returned again to
duly licensed to preach the gospel. In
year he supplied the pulpit of Mr. Bellan
weeks, while the latter made a short prea
he accepted an invitation to preach in S
that place until the following May. He
ampton, where he opened a school, and a
his theological studies. But after a few \
seek a change of residence on account <
bles. He was evidently regarded as a m
an unusual number of invitations to prea
ment, and it was considered a proof o-^
when he accepted an invitation to pre£
Great Harrington). He settled there in i

Soon after his ordination the French i
and he took a deep interest in it, even sh
joining scouting parties on occasions. Dt
he lost by death his mother, his infant b
sisters. He took upon himself the care a
remaining brothers, one of whom — ^Jam<
promise, died before he had completed 1
Hopkins seems to have been unfortunate
prises, for we read of two instances in wh i
a more fortunate suitor was preferred
forced to relinquish the object of his ho :
he succeeded in capturing the affection ;
Moses Ingersoll of Great Harrington, wh(
13, 1748, and was the mother of his eight :
in that place.

He continued his ministry at Housatot i
meagre supplies and the opposition of ene :
At the end of that time his strong ;
party aroused so much feeling among 1
he felt his usefulness to be at an end, ai 1
to unite with him in summoning a cou
nection. After his dismission he preac
During the April and May of 1769 he c i
church in Hoston, then spent several we<
Me., where he was invited to settle. He
to accept instead an invitation to Newpo

634 HI8T0RT OF WATERBCRT.

were so pleased with his ministrations that they called him to be
their pastor. While he was giving this matter his thoughtful con-
sideration, the minds of the people were inflamed against him by a
sarcastic pamphlet which was circulated among them, so that when

^^^.

u^^^^^y^/^

he was ready to give a favorable answer to the church committee,

he was met with a request to withhold his communication until the
opposition had subsided. Shortly afterward a vote was passed, by
thirty-six against thirty-three, that they did not want his services.
When this fact was communicated to him he quietly inquired

THE FIRST CHURCH

whether, if there was no supply engage
on the following Sunday. This request
a discourse which so affected the conj
meeting on March 26, 1770, his call ^
mously. The period which followed in
kins calls " the sunniest period of his m
December, 1776. General Clinton and L<
possession of the town, and Mr. Hopkins
itants were forced to fly. During the ne
Connecticut and Massachusetts, awaiting
possible to return to the then desolatt
house was used as barracks by the invi
and the windows had been demolished, sl\
in spite of a flattering call to Middleboro
ise of a generous salary, he preferred to
church and congregation which he lov<
them until the day of his death.

Mr. Hopkins found in Newport his se<
a woman of great intellectual gifts, who
a famous boarding-school for girls in th
September 16, 1794. In 1790 Brown univ
the degree of D. D. Nine years later 1
which affected his speech, but did not dij
He so far recovered as to resume his paro
until October 16, 1803, when he delivered
revival in his church. A few hours afte
an apopletic fit, and although he regaine
rallied, but failed gradually until Decem
died quietly at his own home.

Dr. Hopkins occupied a peculiar posi
land theologians of the eighteenth centui
theological transition. He stood midwa
teacher, Jonathan Edwards, and the moi
ing school of " humanists " who served
ture of old established New England bel
in the spirit of Edwards's teaching, to an
who were brooding with dissatisfaction
not settled in the works of that eminent
taken an impossible task, — " to make Ca
lectual system, impregnable to assault f
gradually to differ from Edwards on mai

He rejected, for example, the dualism in the c
love. From the time of Calvin onward it had been
while justice punishes the reprobates. No greatei

6^6 HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

to maintain, as Hopkins did, that the essence of Deity was love which extended to
universal being. But when it was attempted to incorporate this truth with the
tenets of Calvinism, when it appeared that the divine love to universal being was
sending to eternal perdition the great majority of those then living, the situation
was even worse than before. One could possibly endure that justice should bear
the brunt of so awful a necessity, but that the essence of divine love should require
it, seemed like a caricature and mockery. It was impossible to combine the new
statement with the inhumanity of the old system without leading to a result incon-
gruous beyond description. It is evident, however, that Hopkins felt from a dis-
tance the coming humanitarianism which was to change the face of human
thought.*

In trying to reconcile the dogmas of uncompromising Calvinism
with the teachings of his own kindly heart, he was continually led
into these contradictions and inconsistencies. He preached and
published a series of sermons with the title, " Sin through Divine
Interposition an Advantage to the Universe, yet this no Excuse for
Sin or Encouragement to it." Again, he maintained simultaneously
the doctrine of the supremacy of the divine will, and the theory of
voluntary freedom in the human being. And we must not omit
to mention what is known as the chief characteristic of the Hop-
kinsian theology, the doctrine of disinterested submission, as it is
called, or " a willingness to be damned," as the last and highest test
of spiritual excellence.

But with his ruggedness and inconsistencies, with his eccentric-
ities and lack of polish, there was combined so much manly integ-
rity, so profound and conscientious a seeking after truth, so earnest
love for his Maker and his fellow man as to make the whole char-
acter both grand and admirable, and give us cause to be proud to
point to Samuel Hopkins as one of the sons of Waterbury.f

OTHER EARLY MINISTERS RAISED UP IN THE FIRST CHURCH.

Jonathan Judd, son of Captain William and Mary (Root) Judd,
and grandson of Deacon (and Captain) Thomas Judd, was born in
Waterbury, October 4, 17 19. He was first-cousin of the Rev. Dr.
Samuel Hopkins, and in college was his classmate and his bosom
friend. He graduated from Yale in 1741, and became the first min-
ister of the second parish of Northampton, Mass., now the town of
Southampton. A church was gathered there in 1743 and he was

* ProfcMor a. V. G. Allen in " The Transition in New England Theology," Atlantic Monthly^ Vol.
LXVIII, p. 771 (December, iSji). The article is a luminous statement of Hopkins's place in the great theo-
logical transition which has been going on for a century past in New England and elsewhere. See also Dr.
William E. Channing*s reminiscences and estimate of him, in Vol. IV, of his ** Works," pp. 344, 347-354; also
a sketch in the Congregational Quarterly y Vol. VI, pp. 1-8, by the Rev. Lyman Whiting.

+ For Dr. Hopkins's place in literature see Vol. II, p. 953. The most important biography of him— that
by Professor Park — is there referred to.

THE FIRST CHUBCE

ordained June 8 of that year, and filled
years. He. and his cousin, Dr. Hopkii
a long time, but an alienation of feeli
course, took place in consequence of
views. By direction of his will his \
nearly 3000, were burned; but two or
He died July 28, 1803.

On November 28, 1743, Mr. Judd n
Captain Jonathan Sheldon of Sheffield,
father of the Rev. Sylvester Judd of
author of the once-famous novel " Marg
merit.

Daniel Hopkins, D. D., a younger bi
uel Hopkins, was born October 16, 1734
tory studies with his brother, and grad
1758, with the highest honors. His th
sued under his brother's direction, ai
views were adopted by him and ear
licensed to preach by the New Haven 2
soon afterward took charge of a pari?
On account of failing health he gave u
eight years, during which he was occ
manual labor. In 1766 he was invited 1
gregational society of Salem, Mass., an
the settled pastor of the church.

Mr. Hopkins was deeply interested i 1
colonies for independence, and was cho
Provincial Congress. In 1778 "he ws
Conventional Government, and served
In the meantime a disruption took pi 1
Salem. The majority became Presby :
tional minority, recognized by an eccle
nal Third church, adhered to Mr. Hopl i
this church on November 18, 1778, ar
until 1804, when a colleague was pro vie
of D. D. from Dartmouth college in i8<

Dr. Hopkins has been described as
esting preacher." In his social interco
affability and courtesy. " His tall an I
by a high, triangular hat, gave such di
ments that no man who walked the str :
respect and veneration. The remark
appearance and bearing he strikingly 1

638 HISTOBY OF WATERBURT.

the latter part of his life he became much interested in benevolent
enterprises. He took an active part in the founding of the Massa-
chusetts Missionary society, and for the last two years of his life
was its president. He published two sermons, one on the death of
Washington in 1800, and the other at the dedication of the New
South meeting- house in Salem in 1805.

He married, in 1771, Susanna, daughter of John Saunders of
Salem, by whom he had six children. He died, after a distressing^
illness, December 14, 1814.

Benoni Upson, D. D., was born in the " Farmington part" of
what is now Wolcott, February 14, 1750. His father was Thomas,
the grandson of Stephen Upson, and his mother was Hannah Hop-
kins of Waterbury, sister of the Rev. Dr. Samuel Hopkins. He
graduated at Yale college in 1776, and was ordained pastor of the
church in Kensington, April 21, 1779. He remained here until the
close of his life, having been furnished during his later years with
a colleague in the pastorate. In August, 1778, he married Livia
Hopkins, daughter of Joseph Hopkins, Esq , of Waterbury, by whom
he had eight children. In September, 1809, he was made a member
of the corporation of Yale college, and in 1817 received from his
Alma Mater the degree of D. D. In an obituary notice published
in the Religious IntelHgenier, Vol. XI, p. 415 (November 25, 1826), he
is described as "a pious, affectionate and discreet pastor, tender
and highly beloved in the conjugal and parental relations, endeared
to a numerous circle of acquaintance, and distinguished for urbanity
of manners, hospitality and benevolence." He died November 13,
1826. (See, further, Orcutt's History of Wolcott, p. 354.)

Benjamin Wooster, son of Wait and Phebe (Warner) Wooster,
was born in Waterbury, October 29, 1762. He was a soldier in the
war of the Revolution, He graduated from Yale college in 1790,
and studied theology with the Rfev. Dr. Edwards of New Haven.
After being licensed to preach, he occupied himself for a time in
missionary labor; but in 1797 was ordained pastor of the church in
Cornwall, Vt. He gave up his charge in 1802, and spent three years
in the service of the Berkshire Missionary society. On July 24,
1805, he was installed in Fairfield, Vt., and labored assiduously not
only in his own parish but in the surrounding country, until bodily
infirmity compelled him, in 1833, to discontinue his work. During
this time he was once a representative to the General Assembly of
the state, and twice a member of the " Septennial Convention con-
vened by the Board of Censors." He was opposed to the war of
1812-14, but in 1814, when the British came up Lake Champlain, he
headed a company of volunteers, although he was over fifty years

THE FIRST CHURCH

old, and ** on the very day he was to prea
marched for Plattsburg. " For this patri(
of New York, sent him a magnificent Bib
the fly leaf." Mr. Wooster was a man ol
as of great wit and i*eadiness of repartee.
He married Sarah, daughter of Israel
leaving three daughters and a son. Mr. V
Vt., February i8, 1840.*

Aaron Button, the youngest of the
and Anne (Rice) Button, was born in that
is now Watertown, May 21, 1780. He pui
under the direction of the Rev. Azel Bac
ated at Yale college in 1803, was instruc
dent Bwight, and was ordained Becet
of the First church and society in Gui
charge June 8, 1842, mainly on account 0
between himself and his people on the
was a member of the corporation of Yah
his decease.

A few months after his separation fro
the service of the Home Missionary soci<
tory), and was invited to settle over the
Burlington. When about to return to
arrangements for a permanent removal t
sick. He reached New Haven with diffic
dangerous illness, from which he never c
died in June, 1849, and was buried in the i
in Guilford.

Mr. Button was an earnest, faithful an i
among the churches, and true in all the r< '.
early and consistent friend of temperani 1
was ready to suffer, if need be, in the disc
his duty. He published a few sermons, i
the Christian Spectator,

His wife, Boreas (daughter of Samu \
town), whom he married in April, 1806,
Their son, the Rev. Samuel William So
graduate of Yale college in 1833, was pa
(the North church) of New Haven, from

* See Spragae*8 ** Annals of the American Pulpit," Vol. I,
Davie Butler, Albany, 1888. Sprague makes the year of Mr. Wo< I
Butler's. The letter above referred to was published in Niles's R •
sermon concerning him, by the Rev. A. W. Wild, has been publis:

640 HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

1866, aged fifty-one years. Another son, Aaron Rice Dutton, a

graduate of Yale in 1837 and a lawyer in Washington, D. C, died

May 4, 1885, aged sixty-nine. Their daughter, Mary Dutton, so long

a teacher of a widely known school for girls in New Haven, died
in 1888.

THE CHURCH IN SALEM SOCIETY.

Naugatuck was the last child to leave Waterbury, having
remained at home until 1844. But it is 130 years since "Stephen
Hopkins and others, inhabitants of the first society in Waterbury,"
asked the General Assembly to grant them " a winter parish for
four months in the year, namely the months of December, January,
February and March." The original grant, with the autograph of
George Wyllys, secretary, which was sent to Judds Meadow, has
been preserved. It is for the term of three years from the rising
of that Assembly (October term, 1765). The bounds of the parish
were in brief as follows:

They began at Long Land on the north, and continued east across the Walling-
ford line far enough to "comprehend" the first tier of lots in that tovraship, then
ran south to New Haven bounds; from thence west to the three trees called the
Three Brothers; thence south in the line between Milford and New Haven to Leba-
non brook; from thence west to Naugatuck river to where Spruce brook empties
into the river on the west side; from thence to the highway where it turns south
by Thomas Osborn's lot to Derby; from thence to Meshadock brook where Moss's
road crosses to Westbury; from thence east to the Long Land.

The land within the above bounds belonging to Oxford society was
excluded, also " Samuel Porter and his lands/'

At the expiration of the three years Gideon Hickcox and other
inhabitants asked for an extension of the privileges formerly-
granted. The General Assembly renewed the grant with a few-
changes in the bounds, the chief one being that the eastern bound
did not include the first tier of lots in Wallingford. This grant
was to continue according to the pleasure of the Assembly, and per-
mitted the inhabitants to hold service at Judds Meadow five months
in the year.

Of the period of the winter parish, from 1765 to 1768, it is not

known that any records remain. Stephen Hopkins probably made

provision for the services, obtained the ministers and kept their

receipts. The following is the earliest evidence extant of the

services of a minister:

New Haven, Agusts 25, 1769.

Then Received of the Committee of Judds Meddow Winter parish the sum of
sixteen pounds, on the account of my Son's public labours among them.

Samuel Munson.

THE GHVRCH AND 80CIE1

There is also an autograph letter writtet
and signed by Nathan Hale, in which th<

I went from the Commencement to my Father'
state as to my Health that there is no probability i
this winter. I have not been able to preach but ot
ment and that was half the next Sabbath after I sa

The letter is addressed: ** To Mr. Hotch
Waterbnry."

In 1767 "the list of the Estate of the
Society, exclusive of the Church of Engla:
amount, divided as it then was for winter ]

Southern Winter Parish (Judds Meadow),
Western Winter Parish (Middlebury),
Eastern Memorial (Farmingbury), .
Leaving for the First Society,

Testii

At the October term of the Assembly in
" Southern Winter Parish '* petitioned
" Bushnel Bostwick, Thomas Darling and
Esq"," were commissioned to hear the ;
society, and two of them, having conferre
following letter, the autograph of which 1

Gent*'-

On conferring with Mr, Darling touching

Prospect of viewing your Circumstances so as to ^

Assembly before it riseth, if we should attempt it <

think it more adviseable to postpone the Time to

which time we purpose to meet (if you have no O

have full Opportunity to be heard which may prob

them as well as to us as we are very desireous to

undoubtedly rise the next week.

We are Gentl" yc

Hum*** sev^*

Capt. John Lewis,

&
Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss.

The above gentlemen, when the time
convenient and necessary that a new
Accordingly the Assembly resolved tl:
within the following limits should be n
tinct ecclesiastical society, to be known
Salem:
41

642 IIISTORT OF WATERBVBT.

Beginnin;; at a rock near the road from the town plat in Waterbury to New
Haven, distant from the meeting-house in Waterbury two miles, one half and sixty
rods, called the Mile rock, and thence to nin east one degree and thirty minutes
south to Wallingfiird line; thence in said line to the tree called the Three Brothers,
thence south to the Beacon Cap. thence to the s<jutheast corner of a farm formerly
belonging to James Richards [Pricharil] lying on Beacon hill, thence west to the
mouth of the Great Spruce lirook the west side of Naugatuck river, thence keeping
the brook westwardly to the mouth of the brook that comes off from Red Oak hill,
theuce northwesterly to the place where Moss's road crosses Derby line, thence
northwardly in said road to Enos Gunn's dwelling-house, thence a north line so far
as to intersect a west line from said Mile rock.

It may be interesting to the present generation to know exactly
how much money was expended by the Judds Meadow men in get-
tine the above act passed, and to whom it was paid:

£ s. d.

May. 1772, an account of money at Hartford paid out at the

Assembly to take care of the memorial o 7 to

October, 1772. money paid out to Mr. Hillhonse, , . . 060

For money paid out , . . o 6 S

For money paid at New Haven o o 11

May, 1773, paid to Mr. Hillhouse, 060

For money paid out at Hartford 0137

For money paid out agoing to Westlield o 1 S

For money paid to Mr. Hillhoitse,

El have the memorial s

The first society meeting was held on the first Monday in June,
1773. Captain Gideon Hotchkiss was chosen moderator; Ashbel
Porter clerk; for society's committee. Captain Gideon Hotchkiss,
Captain John Lewis, Stephen Hopkins,* Samuel Lewis, Esq., and
Captain Samuel Porter. At this meeting a "rate " of two pence on
the pound was laid (John Hopkins collector). At the next meeting,
m December, Gideon Hickox, J. Lewis, Jr., and John Hopkins
were added to the society's committee, and a school committee con-
sisting of Isaac Judd, Israel Terrill and Ashbel Porter, was
appointed. It was voted that "the school be paid by the rate, what
the pubHck money doth not pay,'' with Thomas Porter, Jr., the col-
lector, and a tax of five pence on the pound was laid. In 1774
Daniel Warner was chosen grave digger. In 1774, also, the first
attempt to secure stated ministrations of the gospel was made. In
August, Mr. Remily was invited to preach on probation; in Octo-
ber, Mr. Miles was called for settlement; in April, of 1776, the Rev.
Abraham Camp was invited on probation; in March, 1777, the Rev,
Mr, Barker received the same invitation; in January, 1781, it was
decided to give a call to the Rev. Medad Rogers.

• The elder Stephen Kapkin>,wbopemJ»ned (or i>WiiiierPaiiih in 176;. had died in 17^9.

THE OHUROH AND 80CIB

During all these years we must not J
was reducing the life-forces of the cou
of its people and even the products o
prising that Judds Meadow obtained t
years of stress of war; but it is exceedii
that they kept on in their endeavors ti
their coming meeting-house grew in
tions. Even in 1776, they took a step
During all this period, 1 773-1 781, no cl
church waited for a minister, perhaps
organization took place February 22, 17*
the advice and assistance of Mark Lea
bull and Alexander Gillet." The origit
were:

i

Gideon Hickox, Mn

Mrs. Sarah Hickox.

Samuel Lewis, Mn

Mrs. Eunice Lewis,

j Amos Osbom, Job

i Mrs. Elizabeth Osbom, En<

j Ashbel Porter, Sar

i Mrs. Hannah Porter, Sar

Gideon Hickox, Jr., Sar

When the site for the meeting-house
there was a wide difference of opinion i
The territory now within the town of Pi
proportion of the inhabitants of the soc
the meeting-house to be as near to their
like their predecessors in other societie
The Court's committee set the stake h;
the river, on land of Gideon Hickox. O
obtained a title to it, the meeting-hous
and society. As the years go on, the
man did for this first meeting-house ii
its interest :

May, 1782, for work done towards the Meeting
For going to Goshen for a lode of clabords.
For carting timber a day.

\ For a day to West Haven to get shells.

}f For carting a load of shells and paid for them.

, For 2 days making pins [for the frame].

For my cart to cart stones a day, by Philip.

II

* For some reason (perhaps he was on service in the war), '
He, however, was admitted to fellowship the next month.

644 mSTORT OF WATERBURY.

The above and other charges are succeeded by the following:

December 20, 17S2— Paid twenty pounds toward the Meeting-House which was
my signment. Beside what I found raising.

June 17, 1781. Things that I provided for the Raising of the Meetipg-House
and Steeple:

For a Barrel of Sider.

For a Bushel of Ingeu Meal.

For Half a Bushel of Malt.

About nine pounds of salt pork.

About thirty pounds of fresh pork.

For two the beat sheep I had.

It was said in 1876 by the Rev. Charles S. Sherman in his memo-
rial discourse (delivered at Naugatuck in commemoration of otir
national centennial) that there were no records showing when the
building was completed, but an old account book has delivered up
the secret in the following words:

Monday June 17: 1782. This day we laid the silts oE the Meeting-House and
Steeple in Salem and finished Raising on Saturday Morning June 22: 1783.

Thursday; November: 28: 17S2: this day we met in our new Meetiog-Honse, it
being a day set apart by these States for a day of publick thanksgiving.

For all of the foregoing facts relating to the building of the
meeting-house we are indebted to Captain Gideon Hotchkiss, one
of the first two deacons of the church, who faithfully recorded
them in his account book at the time of their occurrence.*

The building seems to have been fully equipped with its " fore
door" and "communion table" in time only for the ordination of
the first settled pastor, of whom the account book says:

Salem, December 4, 1784. This day we agreed with Mr. Fowler to attend His
ordiaation in this place on Wedne.sday, the 12 day of January next.

Wenesday: January: 12. 1785: this day the Rev* Mr. Abraham Fowler wasor-
dained over the Cliurch and Congregation in Salem.

Wenesday March: 13: 1799. This day the Rev* A" Fowler was dismissed from
the Church and Congregation in Salem.

Two years after the first service was held in the meeting-house
on the hill, on December 12, 1784, Gideon Hickox, the owner of the
land on which it stood, conveyed it to the church and society.

This church building remained on the hill forty-nine years. It
had a bell in 1794 (if not earlier), at which date it was agreed to
have the meeting-house bell rung, at the cost of the society, on
each Sunday for all public meetings which are held at the meeting-
house, for funerals when desired, and at nine o'clock each night,
Saturday nights excepted.

• Under date of April ii. 173;, he tecotded: Thii day 1 mnuumi tbe snonu it lie* Blidin Ibe iiraadm.

THE CHURCH AND SOCIETY IN SALEM, 645

In regard to the non-heating of meeting-houses, the generally
accepted theory is that our ancesters looked upon the proposed
heating of them as a kind of desecration. The writer has not met
with the slightest proof that this theory is founded on fact. The
destruction of a meeting-house in the days before insurance com-
panies had their origin, would have been an irreparable loss to a
society. To have accomplished the heating of one with wood-fires,
even had the meeting-houses been built with chimneys, would have
been well-nigh impossible, and would have involved night service
both before and after the day of meeting. To say that the meet-
ing-house was of too much importance to take the risk of its burn-
ing by having a fire in it, is undoubtedl)' true.

In March of 1831 Daniel Beecher made a deed of gift to the
society, as follows :

For the consideration of the good will which I have to the ecclesiastical society
of which I am a member, a piece of Land lying in Salem society a little westward
from Salem Bridge, containing Two Roods and Ten rods [bounds here omitted],
to be used as a public green and to erect a Meeting-House thereon for said Society
and Church, holding the doctrine and faith and practice of the present Society and
Church, provided that said society or any other person shall not erect any Building
or any other obstruction between the Meeting-House to be erected and the south
line of said piece. . . . It is understood that provided s* society should wish
to remove s<* Meeting-House hereafter from s* land, they have liberty so to do, to
sell s** land and apply the avails for the benefit of s* church and society.*

To this land, given by Daniel Beecher in 1831, the meeting-house
on the hill was removed the same year. In 1853 after a service of
seventy-one years the old meeting-house was again moved to give
place to the present church edifice. A portion of this building is
still in use as a store. A fire partially destroyed it in 1893.

Mr. Abraham Fowler was the first settled minister. He was
ordained in the meeting-house on the hill, January 12, 1785, and
installed over a church of thirty-one members. He was dismissed
March 13, 1799,! leaving a church that had lost at that date by
death, it is believed, but four of its 122 members. The pastors,
to 1844, were as follows:

* Two months after the above deed was recorded, Daniel Beecher also gave, for ** the consideration of his
good will to the Episcopal society of Salem in Waterbury," ninety rods of land directly south of his former
gift. It is described as '*an oblong square ten rods East and West and nine rods North and South." It was
given "for the purpose of a public Green," with restriction of building between the church then on the same,
and the north line. Ten years later ihe same Daniel Beecher *' for the consideration of his friendship for his
descendants and Family connexions'* — conveyed to them a plot of ground west of the Episcopal church —
«* for the purpose of a family burying Ground and no other." It was six rods and twenty links east and west
by two rods and nineteen links north and south.

t Among the scarcer pamphlets of the present day is the following: **A Farewell Sermon, delivered at
Salem, in Watcrbury, April 17, 1799, By the Rev. Abraham Fowler, late Pastor of the Church in that Society.
Printed by George Bunce. New Haven: 1799." Another of Mr. Fowler's published sermons is referred to
in the chapter on Masonry.

646 BISTORT OF WATERS URY.

Mr. Abraham Fowler, January 12, 1785, to March 13, 1799.
Mr. Jabez Chadwick, December 2, 1800, to March, 1803.
Rev. Stephen Dodd, 1811, to April, 1817.
Rev. Amos Pettengill, January, 1823; died Au^st 19. 1830.
Rev. Seth Sackett, October, 1834, to January, 1838.
Rev. Chauncey G. Lee, January, 1838 to November, 1840.

The deacons for the same period were:

Samuel Lewis, 1783; died in 1788.
Gideon Hotchkiss, 1783; died in 1807.
Elisha Stevens, 1788; died in 1813.
Calvin Spencer, 1791; died in 1846.
Truman Porter, 1813; died in 1838.
Thaddeus Scott, 1813; died in 1832.
Lucian F. Lewis, 1834; removed 1853.

Deacon Calvin Spencer, Deacon Elisha Stevens and Mr. Israel Terrill were, on
March 27, 1803, appointed ruling elders.

During the sixty-three years that the Salem church was one
of the churches of Waterbury it had a settled pastor but thirty-
nine years. It was organized without a pastor; in 1800 it enter-
tained, apparently without a pastor (at the house of Irijah Terrill)>
the members of the " Consociation of the Western District of New
Haven county," consisting of eleven reverend elders and ten dele-
gates ; it passed, without a pastor, through the momentous period
of religious excitement caused by the preaching of Nettleton,
during which time eighty-two members were received into its
old; and when, in 1831, the old church building and its congre-
gation came together into the valley, they came without a pastor —
for he had preceded them into the valley of death.*

When, in the coming time, the History of Naugatuck shall be
written, and the history of her First church shall take its place
therein, the coming writer will doubtless search the records of
the church and society with care, and will be rewarded with much
valuable information — notably in regard to her sons and daughters
who went out to settle towns in New York and Ohio, and whose
history remains unwritten. And surely that writer will be able
to give testimony to the patriotism of a church organized on the
anniversary of Washington's birthday, the sills of whose first
meeting-house were laid on the anniversary of the battle of Bunker
Hill, and whose first service was held to give thanks that the
Revolutionary war was virtually at an end.

* The Rev. Amos Pettengill, who died in 1830 and was buried in Hillside cemetery. For his literary
record see Vol. II, p. 955.

CHAPTER XLI.

A REACTION FROM "INDEPENDENCY" — THE YEAR l*J22 — "BISHOP BROWN,"
IMMIGRANT— THE FIRST MISSIONARY — MESSRS. ARNOLD, MORRIS
AND LYONS — DR. MANSFIELD'S LONG MINISTRY — THE PARISH OF
ST. JAMES, AFTERWARD ST. JOHN'S — THE FIRST CHURCH — JAMES
SCOVIL, FIRST RECTOR — REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD — TRIALS FOR THE
MINISTER AND THE PEOPLE — SOLOMON BLAKESLEE AND OTHERS —
A SECOND EDIFICE, 1 796 — ^'dR. TILLOTSON BRONSON — VIRGIL H.
BARBER, S. J. — ALPHEUS GEER, FROM 1814 TO 183O — ST. PETER'S,

northbury — Christ's church, westbury — st. Michael's, nauga-

TUCK.

NEARLY all of the early Massachusetts settlers regarded them-
selves as members of the Church of England, but they had
evangelical leanings and were opposed to what they thought
excessive liturgical and prelatical observances, — a reforming body
within the church. They had, however, in this country developed
a decided church polity of their own, and had practically become
"Independents." The government was organized on a religious
basis. The early towns were really churches; the minister was
" called " in town meeting, and his support was provided for
by town grants and a town tax. The beliefs and methods of the
Church of England, as then practiced, were not congenial to them,
and they were allowed as little foothold or countenance here as was
deemed consistent with a due regard for the ultimate powers of
the English government. Time and distance, however, while they
emphasized and rendered possible a great divergence of faiths and
practice in some minds, softened early prejudices, and a love and
longing for the old church and her forms grew up in many hearts.
Her shortcomings were forgotten, her virtues were more clearly
seen, especially where they could be favorably contrasted with the
deficiencies^of the New England system. In this way, or in some
such way, a preparation for a reaction had for some time been
going on.

The year 1722 was a notable one in the history of the Episcopal
Church in Connecticut. In that year Dr. Timothy Cutler, rector of
Yale college, the Rev. Samuel Johnson, a graduate and former tutor

648 HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

of the college and at that time pastor of the Congregational church
in West Haven, and Daniel Brown, a tutor in the college and a class-
mate and intimate friend of Johnson's, all declared their adhesion
to the Episcopal Church, gave up their positions and left for Eng-
land to be ordained — there being no Bishop in this country until
some sixty years later. On April 13, 1723, Brown died of small-
pox in England, greatly mourned and lamented. The other two
were duly ordained and returned to this country to pursue their
work.

In this same year, 1722, James Brown, a resident of West Haven,
then about thirty-eight years of age, a cousin of the father of the
above named Daniel Brown, and doubtless a parishioner of the
above named Samuel Johnson, removed from West Haven to Water-
bury. He lived at Naugatuck on the east side of the river, was a
farmer and hotel keeper and soon became a somewhat prominent
man in the new settlement. Some years later he removed to Water-
town, to the place known of late years as the Captain John Bucking-
ham place, above Oakville.

He is said to have been the iirst Episcopalian in Waterbury.
Perhaps he had been a fellow-student and investigator with his
cousin and his pastor. He certainly sympathized with them, for his
Episcopacy was of so pronounced a character, and his zeal so active,
that he earned for himself the soubriquet of " Bishop Brown " from
his jocular neighbors. He seems for some years to have been the
only incumbent.

There were, however, doubtless a few persons already here who
knew something of the Episcopal Church and were well disposed
towards it. Witness the following: The Rev, X. A. Welton writes,
" Mr. Stephen Hopkins Welton has an old prayer-book containing
the following inscription, which I copied from it myself ":

This book wa.? first the property of my great-grandfather, Richard Welton,
who was the first male child born of English pareats in Waterbury* and one of the
first Episcopalians ia said town. At his decease it became the property of my grand-
father, Richard Welton, Jr., and at his decease it t>ecarae my property. I gave it
to William S. H. Welton, the eldest son of ray nephew, the Rev. Alanson W. Wei.
ton, deceased. Said Samuel [sie\ is the fifth generation from theorig^inal proprietor
of this book and the sixth from the only man of this name that was ever known to
cross the Atlantic and settle in these British Colonies.

All the way by primogeniture.

Attest: Abi Welton.

THE KPmaOPAL PARISR

Richard Welton, first named above, wa
record, March, 1680, and by family traditic
died in 1755. So he may not have had 1
Brown came here; and the possession of tl
as proof of his opinion, but from the f
extreme end of the town from Mr. Brow
were among the first to join with him, i
were already well affected.

It is recorded that in 1734 Mr. Johnson,
ascended the valley of the Naugatuck as ft
tised an infant son of Nathaniel Gunn.* '.
tory of Episcopacy in Connecticut says of
undoubtedly the first instance in that toi
child to God * by our office and ministry,'
which the forms of the liturgy were use
Church of England."

All organized work of the Church of Ei
that time was under the charge of an En
founded in 1701 and styled the Society fc
Gospel in Foreign Parts. In later years tt
erable, and became so well known that fc
initials " Ven. S. P. G." were a sufficient d
continued to have charge of all church wo
the Revolution. It appointed the clergy,
received their reports. In 1737 it appo: 1
Arnold (who had succeeded Mr. Johnso: 1
church in West Haven, but had later emb
sionary for West Haven, Derby and Water
families (some accounts say two or three, c
at this place, desired the ministrations of
did not reside here and his ministry was '
have baptized two children here. He was .
graduate of Yale College (1723.) He seei 1
erratic disposition and not adapted to a j
two or three years after this, occasional s ;
Mr. Johnson, then of Stratford, and Mr. ]
Rev. Theophilus Morris was the next m i
fixed his residence at Derby. He was an :
contemporaries, the Rev. Mr. Johnson, wr I

He is in many respects a gentleman of good a< :
^em likely that he will suit or be suited with tl 1

* Presumably Abel, born August la, 1734.

650

mSTORT OF WATBRBURT.

people, so that I very much doubt whether he will be happy in them or they in him,
and I wish that he was better provided for and that some young man previously
acquainted with this country or that could suit his disposition to it, were provided
for them.

One reads between these lines pretty clearly what Mr. Morris's
limitations were. He seems to have been a well meaning man with
considerable energy, but his zeal was not according to knowledge;
he involved himself in difficulties with his brethren here and he
soon after returned to England apparently to his own and their
relief.

Mr. Morris's successor was the Rev. James Lyons, an Irishman
by birth, of whom the historian of the church says that "if he had
genius and zeal, he was another example of a tiller in the field that
needed a special missionary to watch him and keep him from run-
ning his plough upon the rocks." Mr. Lyons was here about four
years. He resided in Derby and preached one-third of the time in
Waterbury. During these years, notwithstanding some defects in
the missionaries in charge, the church had greatly increased. In the
year 1740 the famous Whitefield preached throughout New England,
and his preaching was followed by a condition of intense religious
excitement. The result of this was to turn the attention of the staid
and moderate portion of the community to the more quiet and con-
servative methods of the Episcopal church, and there followed a
great accession to the Episcopal ranks. Dr. Bronson says: "The
prosperity of the Episcopal church in Waterbury dates from about
1740." It is said that twenty-five heads of families at one time
transferred their membership from the Congregational to the Epis-
copal society.

Mr. Lyons's successor was the Rev. Richard Mansfield. He was
the son of Deacon Jonathan Mansfield of New Haven, and was
born there, October i, 1723, and graduated at Yale college in 1741.
For five years he was rector of the Hopkins Grammar school, and
as during this time he connected himself with the Episcopal church
(the Hopkins Grammar school being distinctly a Congregational
institution) and still continued for some years to hold the position,
it is evident that even at that early age he must have possessed a
rare combination of firmness, gentleness and attractive traits of
character. In 1748 he was ordained in England and appointed a
missionary, on a salary of £20 a year, to the villages of Derby, West
Haven, Waterbury and Northbury, and established himself at
Derby, that being a convenient point for the care of this extensive
charge. On October 10, 175 1, he married Anne, daughter of Cap-
tain Joseph Hull of Derby. She had reached at that time the

THE EPISCOPAL PARISH

mature age of fifteen years and four tnc
had, the preceding summer, married the
the Congregational minister of Waterbt
Mansfield administered the affairs of 1
faithfulness and success. After Mr. Sc
parishes in the neighborhood Mr. Mansfi
to Derby and vicinity, and there he li^
and respected, until April 2, 1820, when
seventh year of his age and the seventy
one of the longest, if not absolutely th
on record. His Alma Mater in 1792 c
degree of D. D., he being the first Episcc
she extended that honor. He was one of
succeed Bishop Seabury, but declined to
ninety-sixth year he presided over the c<
Bishop Brownell.

As early as 1742 measures were taken t
ship, and application was made to the t
After some negotiation, in April, 1743, the
of a site, jQi2 in money to pay for such a
cure. The site had already been selected
building made. Although the sum of ^i i
as consideration (perhaps to make the a :
gift legal), the lot was really presented to
is described as taken from his house lot.
West Main and Willow streets, the lot n i
Mitchell — and is described as forty-five '
twenty-eight feet on the west, fifty feet 1
nine feet on the east. The church and pa: :
James. In those days church buildings i
was customary to have a small building i:
fire-places, where those who came from a I
hour between services and be warm and C( 1
their luncheon, and could fill their fcJot ;
service. These buildings were called Sa 1
the language of the time, "Sabbady hou
sort containing several rooms stood on i :
where is now the residence of Mrs. Will i

* Early marriages were more common then ihan now, and there i
stances. I do not know what they were. Perhaps she was very pn

t In 1744 thirty-nine members of the church, having first obtain I
applied to the legislature for ** parish privileges ''--one of which w(
was rejected.

652 HI8T0RT OF WATERBURY.

This was an era of prosperity for the parish. It received several
valuable gifts of land from members and a rectory was built by
subscription. This was on land given by Oliver Welton and must
have been not far from where F, L. Curtiss's house now stands.
It was the third lot from Willow street. Oliver inherited it from
his grandfather John. He gave it, while yet a minor, with consent
of his guardian, the Rev. John Southmayd, and confirmed the deed
after he attained his majority.

In 1759 Mr. Mansfield gave up the northward end of his large
mission field and was succeeded by the Rev. James Scovil, who
took charge of Waterbury, Northbury, New Cambridge (now Bris-
tol), and later of Westbury. He fixed hts residence at Water-
bury, thus t>ecoming tlie first resident rector. He was son of
Lieutenant William Scovil and grandson of Sergeant John Scovil,
who was one of the original settlers of the town. He was
born January 27, 1732-3, and probably in the house on Willow
street long known as the "old Johnson House," which was taken
down, after being partially destroyed by fire, in 1889, being at
that time by far the oldest house in town. This house was
■liuilt by Sergeant John Scovil for his son William, and left to
him by will in 1725. About the time of James's birth, William
Scovil exchanged places with Abram Utter and removed to that
part of Westbury known as Nova Scotia hill. The dates on the
record indicate that this removal took place subsequent to the
date of James's birth, but there was a tradition in the family
that he was born at Nova Scotia hill. When James Scovil was
about ten years old, his mother having died, his father married
Elizabeth, daughter of James Brown, before mentioned as the
first Episcopalian in Waterbury. Whether she brought Episco-
pacy into the family I cannot say, but it came about that time,
as William Scovil's name appears as a member of the Congrega-
tional society not long before. When young Scovil was about
twenty years of age, an injury which rendered him lame for a
time and placed him under the care of Dr. Porter made him
turn his attention to study. He was placed under the care of
the Rev. Mr. Southmayd, who found him so apt a scholar that
he urged his parents to give him a college education. This
being approved, he at once began his classical studies. He re-
mained with Mr. Southmayd until cured of his lameness, and
completed his preparation for college at home, probably under
the care of the Rev, Mr. Trumbull. He graduated at Yale in
1757. A year afterward the vestry of St. James's parish voted
to contribute to the expenses of his journey to England for

5

TEE EPISCOPAL PARISH

ordination,* to give him ;£2o, sterling,
nothing at Aum, and half of whatever h(
the use of the glebe. Ifum then mean1
of those vestrymen, perhaps none, had e
1759, he was ordained in Westminster
Rochester, and returned as a recognize
auspices of the " Ven. S. P. G." He was ;
at his ordination, with a folio Bible and P
volume, for use in the church, f

Mr. Scovil continued in his mission, mi
his several charges, until the disturbances
the assistance of the society in England,
of great hardship for Episcopal congreg
sympathized with the mother country and
selves, and especially upon the clergy, m
quently open hostility. Mr. Scovil, thougl:
neighbors, did not escape his share. On or
ing with his cows from a pasture on the w<
at night-fall, he discovered a man loading
of a wood, whose conduct awakened his suj
hastened to him and asked him pleasant
The man replied, rather angrily, " I shou
had not spoken to me, for I knew you
advised him to leave his cows and take tl ,
or he might fall a victim to others who '^ i

* The following document has recently been found among the |
Rev. Dr. Gammack :

" Northbury in Waterbury, July ye 27, A. D. 1758. We the Su 1
the sume that we subscribe in this paper unto Lieut. Jacob Biakslec 1
October next ensuing the date hereof : and we the subscribers do by I
be firmly bound to the said Blakeslees to pay to them the sums that
said, and the money is to be delivered by the said Blakslees to Mr. ! ;
England for Ordination for Waterbury, Northbury and Cambridge I

jQ 8. d.qr.

Caleb Thompson, on 0.0 May Way,

Isaac Castel, o 16 11.2 David Wa ,

Asahel Castcl, o 8 5.3 David Bla 1

Stephen Blakeslee, . . . . o 7 6.3 Jacob Blal 1

Obediah Scott, o 5 3.1 Mary Fon

Ebenezer Ford, . . . ' 5 5.1 Enos Ford

Moses Blakslee, o 10 i.o Ruben Bh :

Ebenezer AUin, .... o 15 9.3
There is also a memorandum of payments showing that Abel Curti
scriber, paid x shilling ; also the following : " Over paid by me, Jao 1

t After doing duty here for many years, it was by a vote of the 1
itants of the towns of Columbia and Waterbury in Ohio. Some i
O., a son of Dr. Tillotson Bronson, finding that the book was no lo; ;
brought back to this place, where it now remains in good conditio
Scovil. It has the seal of the ^' Ven. S. P. G." and bears the imprii

■6s 4

EI8T0R7 OF WATERBURT.

him and might not be appeased by being spoken to. Mr. Scovil
thought it best to take this advice, and leaving his cows crossed the
fields, waded the river and hastened to his home. Party spirit
seems, however, to have run very high just then. He did not feel
safe in his own house, and leaving it at night he secreted himself
in a barn which belonged to him on Long hill, where he remained
hidden for some time, various members of the family supplying
him with food. One of his sons, returning on one occasion from
this place of concealment, was met by two soldiers, who took his
horse from him and compelled him to walk as a prisoner to Strat-
ford (about thirty miles), where he was detained some time in con-
finement. He had been guilty of no overt act, and naturally
resented this treatment.*

At the close of the war the English society and the British gov-
ernment offered liberal inducements to loyalists who should remove
to the British colonies. It seemed impossible, in the disturbed
condition of things, for the parishes here to give Mr. Scovil an
adequate support, although they offered to do all that they could.
In 1788, after having visited New Brunswick and officiated there
for several summers {returning to spend the winters with his people
here), he removed there with his family, five years after the close of
the war — thus terminating a connection of almost thirty years w*ith
the parish. He became rector of Kingston in New Brunswick,
where he died December 19, 1808, in the fiftieth year of his ministry.
He was succeeded by a son and by a grandson in the same parish.
His wife, who was a daughter of Captain George Nichols, a promi-
nent citizen of this town, died in 1835, aged ninety-three. AH his
family went with him except his eldest son James, who had mar-
ried and settled here, and who continued to occupy his father's
residence, near the corner of North and East Main streets, front-
ing the public green. The barn where the Rev. Mr. Scovil was
hidden, which stood on almost the highest point of Long hill, was
accidentally destroyed by fire only a few years since. Dr. Bronson,
in his History {page 302), quoting in part some other authority, says
of him:

Mr. Scovil was known for punctuality and faithfulness in the discharge of his
duties. He taught his people from house to house, comforted the aged, instructed
the young and made himself agreeable to children. ... He bad a gjave and
becoming department and was sound in doctrine.

hcRev.Di.CLirlc, i]
. Hcwu then nui

dum ID regard to Mr, I

THE EPISCOPAL PARIA

The withdrawal of the " Venerable S
disturbed state of the country, left the
elsewhere, in an impoverished condition,
a hard struggle to maintain its services.*
Solomon Blakeslee, the Rev. Chauncey Pi
Foot each oflSciated for a short time. Th
services to this parish and the remainder
bury and Woodbury. Plans were also dis
of these parishes in one, but they were n

Mr. Blakeslee was a graduate of Yal
1785, was ordained deacon at St. Paul's
1789, and priest at Middletown by Bishop
service here was in 1789 it must have be
ordination as deacon. He afterward sue
St. James's parish, New London, and serv
eastern part of the state. He died in il
Prindle was a nephew of the Rev. Jam<
VVestbury. He was for some years rectoi
ward rector at Plymouth, Salem and O:
the old cemetery at Gunntown. He was
ated at Yale in 1776, and died August 25
fifty years. He was a man of consider
character, and an indefatigable worker
related of him that he swam his horse thi
ous flood in the Naugatuck river rather tl 1
for a service. David Foot was born in
1760, graduated at Dartmouth college in
at New London by Bishop Seabury, Jui
appointed to serve in Hebron and Cha
same year he was ordained priest at Not [
here, he became rector at Rye, N. Y., whe 1

On November 13, 1784, Dr. Samuel Seal
for the office by the clergy of this diocese
year at a meeting held in Woodbury, v \
Connecticut at Aberdeen, Scotland, beco :
of the American church. He reached tl i
May, 1786, a committee from the parish -v ;
and desired him to visit Waterbury. I
time, but on October i, following, it is r ;
here 256 persons. That must have been < :
the population, and the occasion was c :

* During the forty years in which it was under the care of
|6ooo in money, besides liberal gifts of books.

656 BISTORT OF WATERBUR7,

among "churchmen." This, too, was in the darkest days of the
church here, before Mr. Scovil had finally left, but when he was
preparing to go, and when they were as sheep without a shepherd.

In October, 1791, the Rev. Seth Hart, who had been officiating-
for some time previous as lay reader, was ordained deacon by
Bishop Seabury at Watertown, with the agreement that he was to
officiate here half the time, the other half to be divided between
Salem and Woodbury. His salary was ^40, lawful money, the first
year, to be increased jQi annually until it reached ^45, and the use
of the glebe. I suppose this was equal to about $150, but it was in
"ready money," which went a great way in those days, and the use
of the glebe was doubtless of considerable value. Mr. Hart's min-
istry here is said to have been quite successful, but he only
remained about two years after his ordination, and then removed
to Wallingford. He officiated also at North Haven, and four years
later he removed to Hempstead, Long Island, where he remained
rector until his death, March 16, 1832. He was bom in Berlin
(Conn.), June 21, 1763, graduated at Yale college in 1784, was
ordained deacon October 9, 1791, and priest at Huntington, October
14, 1792. It is recorded of him that he was a good scholar, an
amiable man, a successful teacher and an acceptable preacher.
While here he owned and occupied the place next south of St.
John's church (E. M. BurralPs), including the ground where the
church now stands and several acres of adjoining land. When he
left, several liberal persons bought his place and presented it to the
church, the old rectory before mentioned having become unfit for
use. It was afterwards sold, and the present site was repurchased
about 1847.

The affairs of the parish and its people were now clearly pros-
pering. The old St. James's church, at the corner of Willow street,
had been occupied nearly fifty years, and both the needs and the
pride of the parish demanded a better house. In April, 1793, dur-
ing the Rev. Mr. Hart's 'ministry, a committee was appointed **to
agree upon a place to set a church and the bigness of the same,"
and in September following, having voted that the society were
willing and thought it necessary to build a church, Eli Curtis, Esq.,
Jude Blakeslee and Captain Amos Bronson were chosen a com-
mittee "to set a stake for the place where to build a church."*

* These gentlemen were all non-residents. Eli Curtis was a lawyer residing in Watertown, and I think
Mr. Blakeslee and Captain Bronson were both from Plymouth. Difficulties and heart-bamings so frequently
arose in those days from differences of opinion as to the proper location of churches and schools that it was
quite customary to call in a committee of disinterested persons from neighboring towns to ** set a stake."
Whether this parish in its wisdom avoided all trouble by appointing the committee at the outset, or whether
some difficulties had already arisen, I do not know. That there were difficulties, however, very clearlv appears.

TUB EPISCOPAL PARIS.
Whether this committee acted or not t
but m December following another comn
ter of Derby,
Thoi

water of
Cheshire and
Abner Brad-
ley of Wood-
bury, were
appointed,
and this time
under the
sanction of
the coun ty
court, which
had jurisdic-
tion when ap-
plied to in
■such matters.
Still they
were not quite
satisfied, and
in the follow-
ing March the
court and
committee
were asked
to place the
stake five rods
further south,
so that the
first stake
must ha ,
been, driven
very near
where the
Soldiers'
monument is.
On February
9. 1795. a vote

was passed . ..

directing the committee to build a decen
fifty.four by thirty-eight feet, with a decei
-at the east end of the same.
42

658 HISTORF OF WATERBUBT.

This church building was a great credit to the parish. Its gallery
windows were arched at the top — a feature which was supposed to
give it a churchly appearance — and it had a tall, slender, gracefully
taperiiig spire, on the top of which shone a bright gilt star, with
a handsome gilt vane just beneath. David Hoadley was the archi-
tect. The interior was divided into square pews with seats 00
three sides; the ceiling was arched between the galleries; the
pulpit was high, with winding stairs on each side and the reading
desk in front of it below. They were of dark wood, probably
cherry. The robing-room was near the entrance of the church.
After reading the service, the minister walked the length of the
church to the robing-room, laid aside his surplice, returned and
slowly mounted the long pulpit stairs in his black gown. If done
with dignity this was quite an effective part of the service. The
crowning glory of the church consisted of two large fresco paint-
ings, one at either end of the arched ceiling of the church on the
pediment over the pulpit and over the choir gallery. As I remem-
ber them, they occupied the whole of the pediments, or ends of the
arch. They were painted in different shades of green on a white
ground. The subject of that over the pulpit was the baptism of
Jesus by John in the river Jordan. The Jordan was a very respect-
able stream, looking nearly a quarter of a mile wide in the picture,
and the landscape on the further side was quite inviting, I always
thought, while looking at it, of the hymn;

On Jordan's stormy banks I stand.
And cast a wistful eye

To Canaan's fair and happy land,
Where my possessions lie.

The river seemed altogether too deep to wade. The picture at the
other end was a village green on which was a church — the church,
I suppose, in which the picture was — with rather stiff trees and a
long row of people moving toward the sanctuary, conspicuous
among whom was the rector, marked by his shovel hat. To my
boyish eyes these pictures were marvels of art. At the same time
that this church was being built, the Congregational society was
erecting one at the other end of the Green, and a healthy spirit of
emulation was doubtless of considerable advantage to both build-
ings. The new church was consecrated by the name of St. John's
on November i, 1797, by Bishop Jarvis,

After Mr. Hart's departure the pulpit was partially supplied for
a time by the Rev. Alexander V. Griswold and by the Rev, William
Green. Of Mr. Griswold nothing more need be said here than that
he subsequently became Bishop of Massachusetts. The Rev.

THE EPISCOPAL PARm

William Green was a graduate of Dartm
vras ordained deacon by Bishop Seaburj
1 8, 1793. To the record of the ordinatio
Green was ordained on my own personal
recommendation of Rev. Dr. Bela Hubba
licensed to preach and purposes to go int
mouth college catalogue says that he c
Where he spent the few years that intei
here and his death I have not learned.

Soon after the completion of the ch'
the Rev. Tillotson Bronson, who had offi
for some months, became the rector, wit
was to officiate here three-fourths of thi
Salem society. His salary was §250. L
able longer to support his family on this s
unable (or unwilling) to increase it, he p
mon, and retired, with the approbation of
will of the people. Dr. Tillotson Brons
sity, 1 813), was a son of Captain Amos Brc
residence was at Jericho on the Naugat
there January 8, 1762, fitted for college w
bull, Congregational pastor of Watertov^
1786, studied theology with Dr. Mansfield
ordained deacon September 11, 1787, and
He preached for a year in Vermont an<
was the missionary ground 06 that peri
Boston and at several places in this state
While in Waterbury he lived in a house 01
taken down in 1882 to make room for
owned the place and sold it to his success
From Waterbury he went to New Have
Churchman' s Maj^azine, a periodical then re
he continued to edit with ability for 1
months, however, after leaving Waterbur
Convention principal of the Episcopal a
n removed there, and after a long and suc<

\\ ' of that institution he died September 6, i

ji man in the church and plenty of material

^. phy, but most of it relates to his life afte

I notice on the record (as a sign of pr
^ i799» a committee was appointed to pro

^ chase a bass viol. On December 8, 1801

I the pews." This consisted in allotting t

66o HISTORT OF WATERBURT.

the members of the congregation according to their " dignity," the
standard being a fixed one, based partly upon age, partly on the
amount of tax paid and partly on ofl&cial or social standing.

Dr. Bronson was succeeded by the Rev. Virgil Horace Barber,
who remained here from June i6, 1807, until May 6, 1814. He was
a son of the Rev. Daniel Barber of Claremont, N. H. He was
ordained deacon June 9, 1805, and priest, September 20, 1807. I have
not been able to learn where he was educated, but he was a schol-
arly man and a superior teacher, and while here maintained a
school of high order. He doubtless discharged his ministerial
duties with zeal, but it was as an inspiring and instructive teacher
he did most for the generation to which he belonged, and his influ-
ence was long felt. It is said that he required his own family,
including the pupils who resided with him, to converse in Latin.
He was, however, eccentric and somewhat unpractical. I find this
entry on the parish records when he had been here but six months:
"December 29, 1807. Voted to send Mr. Justus Warner to the
town of Claremont, N. H., to know the reason of Mr. Barber's not
returning to this town, and to give Mr. Warner $14 for his
expenses." There were no telegraphs, and letters had evidently
failed. We know that Mr. Barber came back, but why not sooner
remains a mystery. He left here to become principal of an acad-
emy at Fairfield, N. Y., but two years later (in 1816) became a
Roman Catholic, and, placing his wife and children in a convent,
went, in July, 1817, to Rome, and after a period of study, became a
priest in the Society of Jesuits. A clergyman who had known him
here visited him in Rome, and found him an inmate of a Jesuit
college under the name of Signor Barberini, clothed in the habit,
and practicing the austerities which belong to the order. After his
return from Rome he went in 1822, by direction of his superior, to
Claremont, where he established a Roman Catholic church. Later
he was sent on a mission to the Indian tribes in Maine and to
various towns in that state where there were Roman Catholic resi-
dents without pastors. He was afterward assigned to duty in
Maryland and that vicinity. He died at Georgetown, D. C, March
27, i847.*

* The Rev. Daniel Barber, the father of Virgil H. Barber, was a native of Simsbury, and was bom
October 3, 1756. In 2827, when he was seventy-one years old, he published, at Washington, D. C, a pam-
phlet entitled ** History of My Own Times," which is of considerable value as a picture of the period. He
was a soldier in the Revolution, and kept a diary, portions of which are contained in his pamphlet and are
also copied in the sketch of Simsbury in Barber's Historical Collections of Connecticut. The Barbers seem
to have been an independent family, much given to speculative theology (the main source of recreatioa for
thinking people in those times), and always having the courage of their convictions, if not a little to spare.
Daniel's father and mother each had their own views and stood by them. ** They could never agree,** 9*J*
Daniel, "as to their points of faith." When Daniel was twenty-seven years old he became an EpiscopaliaA,
at thirty an Episcopal clergyman and at sixty-two a Roman Catholic. This was in 18x8, when he publicly

i

THE EPISCOPAL PARISl

In September, 1814, the Rev. Alphc
become rector, at a salary of $600, **pro'
one-third for his services one-third of
finally passed was to pay him $400 for tw
itig Mr. Geer and Gunntown to settle for
Geer was born at Kent, August 7, 1788, gr;
in 1813, was ordained deacon by Bishop 1
June 12, 1 814, and priest by Bishop Gris^
in 1 81 5. He remained in Waterbury near,
fall of 1814 to the spring of 1830. He vn
where he remained about fourteen years,
at a number of places in this state. He d:
3, 1866. While here he lived first on Soutl
the Judge Hopkins place, on West Main st
Geer's pastorate was one of quiet and moc
was not at that time much growth in the t<
clergyman, who was expected to live to soi
of his glebe, he was a very fair representat
of his time. On Sunday, October 20, 181^
Hobart of New York, then acting as bish
was temporarily without a bishop, a class
being the largest class ever confirmed
manuscript from which the information i:
obtained, adds: "It is thought the large 1
bishop in this country." The writer was
256 confirmed in the same place by Bish
before, but these two classes, both of th
seldom been exceeded in numbers. Mr. G
George Jarvis Geer (D. D., Trinity, 1842) \
cessful clergyman in the city of New Yc 1
Rev. William Montague Geer, is now one (
of Trinity parish in that city.

annouaced his change and left hia church in Claremont. There see:
7 biographical statements as to whether the father or son first entered I

V ability is that the father started first, but the son outstripped him in

such a spirit of self-sacrifice and such a lack of sense. When Virgil ;

a Roman Catholic priest he was thirty-four years old and his wife t

and no means of support. The mother and children were placed in i
0i to study. All became prominent in the church of their choice. W >.

' )t Sister Mary Augustine (or as it is frequently written, Austin). Sh<

^ x86o. Their son, Samuel Joseph, became a priest of the order of J

^0 February 33, 1864. The youngest and last surviving member of th

lyf the Convent of the Visitation in St. Louis, two or three years since.

^ Besides the ** History of My Own Times." Daniel Barber wrote '

^ and recommended to a very near Friend and Others," — a pamphlet I

•i Memoirs of Vermont and New Hampshire," by Bishop Goesbriand, 1

^ «m/, Philadelphia, June z, 1894.

BISTORT OF WATERS URT.

ST. PETER'S PARISH, NORTHBURY.

In Northbury, at "the Hollow," now Thomaston, a building was
erected about 1738 (on land given by the Rev. John Southmayd,
pastor of the First church), which was used as a place of public
meetings, for religious purposes, and also for a school-house. After
a few years a portion of the society wished to build a new church
and preferred to have it on the hill. This led to a division. Part
of the society built a new house and went to the hill, while the
others remained at the old place. Dr. Leonard Bacon of Newf
Haven used to say that "anger and marriage were converting ordi-
nances." This view of the matter was illustrated in Northbury, for
it was not long before this remnant left in " the Hollow " became
an Episcopal parish, or at any rate a band of people worshipping
according to the liturgy of the Church of England and receiving
the occasional ministrations of the missionaries of the Venerable
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, Messrs. Morris, Arnold,
Lyon and Mansfield.

Dr. Bronson's History (page 310) represents the majority of the
congregation as having become Episcopalians and having voted
out the minority with the Rev. Samuel Todd, the Congregational
clergyman, and Dr. Beardsley has followed this in his History of
the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. But the Rev. E. B. Hillard,
in some researches made in 1888, while he was pastor of the Con-
gregational church at Plymouth, found a document which puts a
somewhat different face on the matter. As this document does not
appear in the Colonial Records, and is valuable evidence on a con-
troverted, or at least misunderstood, matter, it is reproduced here,
foursereir. It is dated at Northbury, October 8, 1740:

To the Honorable and General Assembly convened at New Haven:

We, the subscribers, having in time pa.st applied ourselves to this Assembly for,
and they being so complaisant to us ward as to grant us, the liberty in the first
place to hire the gospel preached with us in the winter sea.'Wn, which privilege we
thankfully improved, and after that, through their benignity toward us we obtained
the privilege of hiring the gospel preached with us for the space of two years, and
having no house in the centre of qs convenient to attend the public worship in, the
Rev. Mr. Southmayd encouraged us to erect a small house for that use, by giving
us a parcel of land in the centre of us for that end, upon which we built a small
house and in a short time carried on the public worship peaceably in it. And after
we had met in the house about a year our necessity was so great of enjoying the
gospel ordinances, upon our request (though we were very small) the Assembly was
pleased to favor us with society privileges, upon which in a little time we gave Mr.
Samuel Todd a call to settle in the work of the ministry with us, of which he
accepted, and, being settled with us, we find our obligations to him full as much.

THE EPISCOPAL PARI

if not more than we can answer; and it being ev
that a certain number among us are striving to i
still, which, if obtained, we despair of answerin*
we humbly conceive that the forementioned hou
will answer the present necessity of the society t<
we freely dedicate to that use, and request, if tl
house may be established the place of public wor
so the charge of building a meeting-house or an^
vented at present.*

At the October session the assembly apj
the following May, "being informed ol
circumstances of the parish at Northb
committee to conduct said' society in tl
and advise and direct where they shal
public worship." In October following
committee, in part the same persons, to
of it all was that the party favoring a n
carried the day, but the disaffected porti
stuck to their school-house, and soon ai
themselves members of the Church of E

In 1759, when the Rev. James Scovil 1
bury, he gave one-half his services to
bridge. In 1771, Northbury and New (
up for themselves. Dr. Bronson says tl
a minister. In 1773 the Rev. James Nicli
became the rector, supplying the two ] »
to Litchfield. During the Revolution 1 1
been held, although there were many
section of the town, the feeling being 1
great number of disaffected persons, sc 1
ously for their opinions. Among them \ '
hanged for treason at Hartford (see Vol :

In 1784 an Episcopal society was le;
enabling act, and for the next few yes i
vices as they could secure temporarily,
the Rev. Philo Shelton, the Rev. Tillot 1
Edward Blakeslee appear on the recoi :
1788 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle became 1
bury and Westbury, and so remained ui t
was incorporated as a separate town.

* The signers to this document are: William Ludenton,
Fordf John How, Isaac Cassel, Thomas Blasle [Blakeslee],
Humaston, Phinehas Rice, Daniel Curtis, Gedian Allen, Jen t
Elwell, Samuel Frost, John Sutlef, Samuel Jacobs.

t Colonial Records, Vol. VIII, pp. 373, 424.

BISTORT OF WATERBUR7.

CHRIST'S CHURCH, WATERTOWN.

In 1764 twenty persons (whose names are given in Bronson's
History, page 308) entered into an agreement "to hold public wor-
ship in Westbury on those Sundays when there was no preaching
in Waterbury," and to make arrangements to build an Episcopal
church. They met at the house of James Doolittle in the winter and
at Ensign David Scott's in the summer. The next year (1765)
Captain George Nichols of Waterbury gave them a lot, and by
October, through the efficient management of Captain Edward
Scovil, they had a building fit to occupy, although not completed.
It stood, as nearly as can be ascertained, on the east side of the road
leading to Waterbury, about a quarter of a mile southward from the
green and a little southwest from the Congregational church, which
stood within the old cemetery enclosure, or nearly so, at the
southwest corner. The Episcopal church is supposed to have been
on the south side of the road leading east.

In 1773 the Rev. James Scovil of Waterbury agreed to give one-
third of his time to this parish, and it continued under his care so
long as he remained in Waterbury. This was nominally until 17S6,
although during the last two years he was absent much of the time
in New Brunswick. In 1788 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle, a native of
Westbury, a nephew of Mr. Scovil and a Yale graduate of 1776, then
in deacon's orders and previously a lay-reader, took charge of the
parish, having also the church at Northbury under his care. In
1793 a new church was built, and consecrated by Bishop Seabury as
Christ's church on November 18, 1794. This church stood on a
piece of ground purchased of Samuel Southmayd, at the intersection
of the streets near the site of the present church.*

ST. MICHAEL'S, NAUGATUCK.t

This parish was formally organized February 16, 1786, at the
house of Jobamah Gunn, and fourteen persons enrolled themselves
as members. They mostly resided in the western part of Salem
society, which was then known as Gunntown, the Gunns being a
prominent family there. Services were conducted at some private

A. BuckinghBm. The houie itself (ronted ihe tiul, the «Mt lint bciDg nearly in u lint with Mr. Buckinf.
hun'j cut fenct. In ijia Wllenoirn became ■ Kpanls town.

tThii rollowing nkctcli hu beta mintly taken liom a nuauicripl hittoty a< the parish pHpimd by the
Rev. E. C. Gardner, for tlie uk of which 1 am indclitcd la the kinilDHi of the preaent reclar, the Bcv. J. W.
EUmortb— F. F. K.

THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 18S0, 665

house, usually by the minister officiating in Waterbury, one Sunday
in a month, sometimes every third Sunday; the services of the
intervening Sunday being conducted by a lay- reader. In 1803,
after several unsuccessful efforts, a small church building (the vote
says 44 by 34 feet) was sufficiently finished for use. This stood,
according to the record, "on the hill, about fifty rods west of
Jobamah Gunn's dwelling house," which still retains the local
name, Church hill. In 1806 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle, who was
then settled in Watertown, was engaged to preach in the parish one-
fourth of the time. The following year he divided his time equally
between this church and the one at Oxford. He continued in
charge until 18 14. The Rev. Alpheus Geer of Waterbury then took
charge of the parish, and preached there one-third of the time. This
arrangement continued until 1830, when Mr. Geer left Waterbury.

In 1832 the church was taken down and removed to a place near
its present position, at the centre of Naugatuck. It had never been
finished inside. It was now completed and was duly consecrated on
June 8, 1832. During the interval occupied in removing and finish-
ing it up, services were held in a hall in the factory of W. C. DeForest,
which was fitted up by him for the purpose. During this period the
Rev. William A. Curtis and the Rev. T. J. Davis successively minis-
tered here, dividing their time between this parish and Bethany.

On July 21, 1833, the Rev. Oliver Hopson began his ministry.
He was the first resident rector, and after the first year gave his
whole time to the parish. His connection with it lasted nearly
fourteen years and until after Naugatuck became a separate town.

EPISCOPACY IN MIDDLEBURY.

A considerable number of the members of the Gunntown parish were apparently
residents of Middlebury. At the time of the removal of the building to Naugatuck
centre, one of the reasons given was that a new parish had been formed in Middle-
bury. We learn from the journals of the annual Protestant Episcopal Convention
that a parish at Middlebury, without name, was admittted in 1830. It appears to
have been mostly under the care of the Rev. Oliver Hopson, mentioned above. In
1835 the bishop reports twelve persons confirmed there. In 1841 Mr. Hopson
reports that ** his engagement terminated at Easter, since which no stated services
are held there." In 1843 he reports at Naugatuck "nine communicants formerly
numbered in the Middlebury parish." No further reports appear, and in 185 1 the
parish was dropped from the list. It is supposed to have owed its existence mainly
to the efforts of Larmon Townsend, a merchant at Gunntown, near the church,
who afterward removed his business and residence to Middlebury. He was an
ardent ••churchman," and frequently officiated as a lay-reader. He died May 11,
1858, aged eighty-one years.

CHAPTER XLII.

THE GRAND STREKT CEMETERY — EARLY BURIALS AND GRAVE-DIGGERS

REMOVALS TO RIVERSIDE — PROTESTS AGAINST NEGLECT — S. M.
JUDD'S map — KATHARINE PRICHARD'S WORK — SOME OLD HEAD-
STONES ENLARGEMENTS — CONVEYED TO THE CITY — PROTESTS

AGAINST DESECRATION — STONES AND REMAINS RESCUED — THE
BRONSON LIBRARY IN POSSESSION — PINE HILL AND HILLSIDE IN
NAUGATUCK — NORTHBURY, WESTBURY AND FARMINGBURY CEME-
TERIES— EAST FARMS — GUNNTOWN — MIDDLEBURY — BUCK's HILL —

BROCKETT — WOOSTER — A HISTORY OF BELLS — BELL-RINGING

TOLLING FOR DEATHS — OTHER PRACTICES.

THE GRAND STREET CEMETERY.

'"F^HE earliest mention that has been noticed upon our records
J of a burial place in Waterbury is in 1695, as follows: " The
town grants to Edmund Scott a parcel of land lying within
the common fence, butting east on the burying-yard, north on the
fence, west on the highway." It has already been mentioned, on
page 235, that the custom prevailed at an early date of appropriat-
ing the foot of the minister's garden for a burial-place; and as Mr.
Peck's house-lot extended to present Grand street — the land at first
occupied by this cemetery being a continuation of the same — there
is no doubt that the practice was followed here. This was the only
place of burial within the township until 1709. There had died
during this time, besides the Rev. Mr. Peck, ten of the proprietors
of the town, two wives and mothers, four young men, and, at least,
fifteen children. Of their graves, the only memorial that remains
is the gravestone of young Benjamin Barnes, pictured on page 173.
The office of grave-digger seems to have been filled by appoint-
ment, with the other town offices, at the yearly December meeting,
upon occasional years; Benjamin Barnes being the first person so
chosen — in 1700. Edmund Scott's name is next mentioned, he hav-
ing filled the office in 1708, 1717, 1720 and 1722; Richard Porter in
1711, 1712 and 1713; Thomas Richason until 1716; Samuel Barnes in
1719; Moses Bronson in 1724, and in 1725 it is recorded that "it
was left with the townsmen to procure somebody to do it.'* John
Wei ton dug the graves in 1726, 1727 and 1729; after the latter date
the only appointments on record are: "Jonathan Scott, son of
Edmund," for 1737; and for 1738 "James Pritchard was made choice
of to dig the graves as there shall be occasion."

BURYING GROUNDS AND 1

From this time until near the close ol
of the history of this place. " Buryin^-
and " Ram Pasture lane " are referred
land; but whose hands prepared the last
places of our beloved ancestors, traditia
Bennet Bronson left a manuscript list of
which he says was copied from Captain 1
(See Ap. p. 158.) From this we infer tha
sexton from 1797 until his death in 18:
John S. Tuttle probably followed Upson, i
Tuttle. Henry Garry Hotchkiss became
charge of the ground until he left town ii
^ry American said of him: "During the
charge he has done all that was in his pov
granted him by the selectmen, to keep it i
to the necessary repairs, for which he si
very inadequate remuneration."* Sturg
dian of the place from 1862 until its desti
that the first interment that took place
of Henry Grilley, aged eighty-nine years

Soon after the opening of Riversi
movals from the old to the new place of
old place soon showed the effects the
with fragments of coffins left uncovered
head and foot stones, became features
many years had passed, the ground w
briars and bushes, save that a few carel
graves of their buried friends and rel
time to time called public attention to it
and in June, 1875, the Rev. Dr. Anden
evening lecture to his congregation, a pi
stones and beautifying the enclosure af
lish church yards, but his words fell
time thereafter, certain persons petitic
mission to extend • Church street to
granted. On April 27, 1884, Dr. Ande
course upon this and other burial place
he said:

It is a closed up and desolate place, right in t
time, it is not only one of the most conspicuous
most desirable. It seems eminently fitted for s<
can take an interest. The people of Waterbur
it go to be used for business purposes; but why
and place in the centre a building worthy to ser\

* He died May 33, 1867, and was buried not far from the I

66S

HISTOBT OF WATERBURT.

... If we can thus make use of this ancieot and now neglected burial place,
and at the same time preserve every vestige of historical record which it cont^los,
why should we not do so ? . . .

About a. year ago, with a laborious care which only those can fully appreciate who
have attempted a similar work. Slurges &I. Judd procured and prepared the data
for a complete map of the Grand street burj-mg ground. This map when finished
will aim to contain every recogniiable grave in the entire enclosure, those graves
which have inscribed headstones being clearly distinguished from the others.

Mr. Judd's map was accompanied by a record of the names and
ages of the persons so interred, as found upon the headstones, and
a list, so far as known to Mr, Judd, of persons there buried, without
monumental stones — including the Roman Catholic cemetery. In
1890 and 1891, a copy of the entire inscriptions upon the stones —
not including the Roman Catholic portion — was made by Katharine
Prichard. Julius Gay of Farmington also made a transcript of
names, dates and ages in 1 885. A comparison of these lists shows that
no stones had disappeared between 1885 and 1890. Miss Prichard's
record of 1890 gives a few names
not noted by Mr. Gay, and about
fifty not given by Mr. Judd.

A word may be said of some
of the older stones. That of
Benjamin Barnes
has already been
noticed; the next
in age is lettered
as in the margin, it
being the stone set "
up by Deacon Judd in loving
remembrance of his daughter,
Sarah; and it is interesting to
note that no older one bearing
a date was to be seen when Fred-
erick J. Kingsbury was a boy.
The name of Thomas Hikcox,
the second Waterbury deacon,
was upon the third oldest, the
date 1728. This stone was buried
in the great transformation. Per-
haps the stone that will interest
the greatest number of readers
of this History is that of Han-
nah Hopkins, wife of John, the miller, and fore-mother of a long
line of distinguished men. Her descendants to-day are many, and

BUBTINO OB0UND8 AND T

k.

« ,

i.

M I

D cx: 8

J730

1

it is a matter of regret
unknown. She died May
not identified, is inscribe*
It might be Michael, son
date been 1734. Joseph N
Perhaps the most curious

small field stone about six inches

thick, lettered on both sides as here
shown. Dinah was the first wife of
Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, who was
grandfather of Silas Bronson. A
stone with the inscription here given

marked the resting-place
George. Mrs. Thomas Jud
These stones comprise £
bearing dates prior to 174
bearing dates between 17
placed at the graves of th
great sickness of 1749 and 1750 (see page
though varying in size. All were pointet
The carved red sand-stones, with cheru
crowned — came in use after 1750,* and m
The number of persons whose age \
150; of these, fifty-five were between eij
age, and the following fourteen over nir 1
94; Mrs. Jonathan Baldwin, 97; Amasa
Bronson, 91; Thomas Bronson, 92; Timot
Hotchkiss, 94; John Judd, 98; Captain
Leavenworth, 92; Taraar, his wife, 93; I'
102; George Prichard, brother of David, i
The following lines were engraved up
young men, brothers, who died more tha 1

s w

a Iun-I6
J738

one:

The Genius of music beamed forth 1
Of earth's fading endowments a sa(
But his soft busy eye shall forever 1 ■
When sun, moon and stars all cease i

On the other:

O when pale death his featur
How deep the pang. O ! gri<
But hark! his silent whispers
Parents and mourners, cease
Go and prepare in death to s

* See note on page 380.

670 HIBTORT OF WATEHBURT.

Another young man died away from home in 1823;
He died among strangers no kindred near
To wipe away a falling tear
Oh Lord how oft thy wrath appiears
And cuts off our expected years.

But not all the epitaphs are of this style, as note the two following;

Sleep on dear youth, heaven's high almighty King;
Hath to eternal summer changed thy Spring.

Know thou, Oh Stranger to the fame

Of this much lov'd, much honored name

For none that knew him need be told —

A warmer heart, death De'er made cold.

Some of the burial customs of the older time are toijchingly
referred to by Horace Hotchkiss in a contribution to the Waterbury
American in 1876;

I well remember as a child, sin years old, being taken ont of bed one cold
autumn night [October 28, 1S08] to stand beside the death-bed of ray mother. .

. . Afterward, as she lay in her coffin, my childish curiosity was occupied ia
studying the initials formed on the lid with brass-headed nails, as was then the
custom. Men came, and taking up the bier, carried the cofRa to its resting place in
the old burying ground, while we followed on foot.

I remember wheo a boy often examining the old headstones. Some were
rough from the field, others were so overgrown with moss that, UDtil it was
removed, neither name nor quaint epitaph was traceable, making it true that " the
dead forgotten lie." In the custom of that time, the coffin was borne to the grave
on men's shoulders, in some cases two or three miles or more."

The first enlargement of this burial ground was made in June,
180S, when an exchange was effected with Mrs. Sarah Leavenworth,
widow of the Rev. Mark Leavenworth, by which the town received
about an acre of land on the east, and Mrs. Leavenworth twenty-
five rods on the south and $25. In 1823 (in accordance with a state
law) the care of the grounds passed into the control of the First
School society. On January 31, 1842, this society appointed a com-
mittee "to purchase one and one-fourth acres of land south of the
burying ground, at $50 per acre, to grade the ground, to build a suit-
able fence, to repair the hearse and hearse-house, and make such
other repairs as to expend the two mill tax laid by the society this
evening." " Mr. Warner was also authorized to purchase a hearse
and pail" (see Volume II, page 489, note). The land just mentioned
belonged to Edward G. Field and was conveyed to the society
through his guardian, Joel R. Hinman, in 1843.

i, JoKph p

BURYING GROUNDS AND Tt

The land occupied by the Roman C
cemetery lay south of the south fence of
yard, and was purchased from J. M. L. Sc
it was gained by a road from Grand stree
ing ground (see Volume II, page 732).

On April 26, 1882, the legislature by s
empowered the town of Waterbury by the
to convey its interest in the old Grand si
of Waterbury. The act, while providing
vidual interests in the old burial grounds

The city shall make arrangements for suitabL
which the remains and monuments remaining in s
removed, in all cases where the friends of those boi

not provide for the same Upon the paf

payment to the parties of the respective sums, and
of the remaining bodies and monuments from th
burial grounds shall be used as a public park by the
may be used for any suitable public building or othi

This act was ratified by a vote of the c:
the next few months, the only persons
against this proposed action, so far as \
Sarah J. Prichard, Mrs. Lucy Bronson I
Mrs. Gilbert Hotchkiss; but the advocat;
Bronson Library upon the site in questioi 1
ard made the following " appeal " for the \
burying yard of Waterbury in the Americc \

At a date and in a manner to us unknown, br t
history of this town, there was set apart on the hill 1 :
bury as Burying Yard hill, a certain parcel of la i
wherein for the space of an entire generation all
the plantation of Mattatuck and town of Waterbur

On Friday, March 27, 1801, Joseph Hopkins diec
ance as senior assistant judge of the county court.
Mr. Hopkins, who had been buried outside the
yard, and within the land of his friend and neig 1
that lady conveyed by deed to his heirs 648 sqi ;
grave and also that of his wife, which land was tc
burying ground for the said Joseph Hopkins. Esc
their descendants forever, with liberty to enclose tl 1
shall deem expedient."

Since 1801, three enlargements have been mac \
The deeds conveying the land have, in all cases, ]
to be devoted, notably the last one, bearing date \
L. Scovill did convey by deed to William Tyler
diocese of Hartford, in trust for the Roman Catho •
of land adjoining the burying ground. Said dee

6j2 HI8T0BT OF WATBRBURT.

" Provided, and this deed is upon the condition that the ahove described premises
are to be used and occupied for the purpose of a burying ground and do other pur-
pose." Should the Roman Catholics relinquish their right to this land, it would,
without doubt, revert to the heirs of J, M. L. Scovill. and the same dilemma would
occur in an attempt to divert the other lands from their specified uses. The heirs of
Joseph Hopkins are many and are scatered far and wide throughout the United
States. The heirs of the " inhabitants of Waterbury in 1805 " are tens of thousands,
dwelling no man knoweth where, and the heirs of the planters of Mattatuck, the
owners of the ancient " God's acre." no man may number.

Let us look for a moment into the mortal history of this bit of land, and ask :
Are we willing to let it go ? For more than a century, there were gathered into
the western portion of this most ancient place of burial within the township the
men and women who braved the perils and endured the toils and bore with heroic
fortitude the untold severity of the struggle with dood and wilderness, with want
and woes that would appall stouter hearts than beat with us to-day. Here lie the
mothers who guarded their children alike from peril by beast of the forest and
stealthy tread of outraged Indian. Here were gathered for their long rest, in the
place of their choice, the men who wrought mightily for us, in ways that need no
mention, and whose integrity of purpose is the chief glory that glistens so brightly
above our commonwealth to-day. These men and women, who lie beneath the sod
in marked and unmarked graves, are they who trod the wilderness to come hither,
who lirst turned the soil to make it glad with harvest, who built the first houses aod
created the first homes, surrounded by the hills that shut them solemnly in. They
reared the first house for the worship of God in this then great wilderness. It was
they who gathered sadly on Burying Yard hill and made within this ground the
unknown grave of the first unknown dead of their number, who was borne— we
know not when, we know not how — to this lonely place of burial.

Here lie the mortal remains of men whose names, as the centuries grow, will rise,
as the nurot>er of them increases, into higher places in the estimation of coming
generations. Already men and womea are coming hither, are making long jour-
neys to the old burying yard, to search therein for some memorial that shall enable
them to say : " This is the spot where lies my ancestor of honored memory."

Let us beautify the place where rest the proprietors of Mattatuck, where lies
the first minister of the town, the Rev. Jeremiah Peck; where lies his successor,
the Bev. John Southmayd. whose services as public recorder deserve untiounded
gratitude ; and bis successor, the Rev. Mark Leaveaworth, whose long pastorate
deserves a long, unmolested rest. Let us honor the graves of our early physicians,
Dr. Daniel Porter and the aged Dr. Ephraim Warner. We will name but one
name more, save that of Deacon Thomas Judd, and that name shall be Hannah,
the mother of the Rev. Samuel Hopkins and the grandmother of Samuel Hopkins,
D. D., the sound of whose name and the light of whose life should keep alive and
illumine the place of his birth forever. There are heroes lying here ; men who lived
and fought and died, full of patriotic love of country. There is one family name
that has come down through all the generations from the time of 1678, and is there
engraved on seventy-seven tombstones that still stand despite the ruin into which
the place has fallen, in testimony of the faithfulness with which the Bronsons
remembered their dead.

Oh, let not the coming generations that shall return to Waterbury reproach us of
to-day in that we let go the one thing that we ought to prize most of all that we
have of inheritance — the graves of our fathers, of the men who lay down to die in
the full trust that the place they had prepared for their burial would remain for-

BURYING GROUNDS AND TOL

ever inviolate. Shall we prove ourselves less true
Boston and the men of Hartford, who turn proudly t
and would not bestow them, even to hold the tomb o
a Washington ?

Mrs. Dudley's protest appeared in the Rept

the following emphatic terms:

I have been notified, as a lineal descendant of be
Samuel Hickox, that there is talk in Waterbury of
into a public park. It seems incredible that the L
nineteenth century should record an idea of that kin<
tives buried in that old graveyard in Waterbury, and
seven protests against desecration — one for each close
started your manufactories; their eyes beheld your pin
for it. Their ears heard Indian yells and English g
out bodies sought repose in six feet of ground some oi
people think it is too much to allow them. Who will add

Mrs. Hotchkiss wrote as follows — also in th

Will you allow me space to add my protest to Mrs.
tion of the old Grand street burying ground. I have
mothers, a father and stepfather, also many other r>
times has my grandmother told me of the soldiers of t
her father's house on the way from Boston to Fishkill
for provisions or staying over night, or both, and alw
The present generation can hardly realize the suffc
early days of the soldiers and of those remaining at
valuable ground that they secured for their last resting
venerated dust to remain in, undesecrated by this ge
otism enough to beautify and keep it as the most sa
thus to honor those who fought and worked for the li
those who have been endeavoring to obliterate these s
late, for they may yet be buried in Waterbury thems*
may follow their example by endeavoring to make a
it is less than twenty- five years since there were inte
no ! away with such thoughts ! and let every sober, c
arise and say, Let us honor, defend and beautify tl
dead are laid, even if that ground happens to be loca

On January 4, 1891, the town deeded t"
Volume II, page 74). On April 24, Charle:
of the city, complied with the requirem
tioned act only so far as to cause excavati
remaining stones to be sunken out of s\{
always, over the graves to which they b<
two or three stones were buried togethei
grouped in what was once the vault. Ap:

43

674 BISTORT OF WATSRBURT.

bury*s " Black Friday " ! * The grounds were subsequently graded,
the trees closely trimmed and a retaining wall built on Meadow
street, and a portion of the land was conveyed to the board of
agents of the Bronson library, as appears from the deed recorded
in Volume CXXVI of the Land Records.

When the excavation for the cellar of the Bronson Library
building was made, many stones which the city had buried were
taken out of the ground in a fair state of preservation; but no one
cared for them, and the oldest and most valuable, lying scattered
on the surface, were crushed under cart wheels.f Such as remain
are now in the cellar of the librarj-. The bones exhumed were
buried, after much delay, in the southwest corner of the lot deeded
to the library.

A record of the bodies removed in the spring of 1891 was kept
by N. J. Welton. Some were taken out of town, some removed to
Mill Plain cemetery, and others to Riverside. Among them were
the remains of Susanna, wife of Thomas Bronson (and great-grand-
mother of Dr. Henry Bronson), who had been buried 150 years.

OTHER EARLY CEMETERIES.

PINE HILL BURYING GROOND.

The second place of burial within the limits of the town was at
Judd's Meadows (see page 278). The oldest legible inscription to
be seen to-day is " A. Lewis, 1740," which refers to Abram, son of
Deacon Joseph Lewis, who died in December, 1740, aged twenty
years; the latest is: " Sarah B, Terrel [wife of Horatio] died October
14, 1836, aged 29 years." In a chart of this plot of land made by Wil-
liam Ward of Naugatuck, there are forty-four recognizable graves,
thirty-three of which are marked with legible inscriptions. Of the
others, it is believed that four, bearing initials, one of which is " B "
in each case, mark the graves of the four children of John Barnes
who died in the great sickness of 1749. Eight of the persons whose
ages are given were over seventy years of age, and two — Gideon
Hikcox and Sarah, his wife— had lived more than ninety years.
Fifteen of the stones bear the name of Terrell.

In 1890, William Ward, Willard Hopkins and James S. Lewis
were appointed a committee by the town of Naugatuck to build

• Dr. ADderaon oq thai d»y leicucd Ihe te
lombstaiiEIDl ihc Re*. Mark Lcaveowonh iiii<
BionHin Dudley had before tb» cauKd to be

+ S««i»nideHigned J, A., ia tilt Amcri

5[ Ihe Rev. /

nhn

1 Sonthmayd.

and

.xby Hopkioi

ind

. fiu^mlk ot

=¥. John Southmayd,

"TheChurcl

ie.<

il Muialuck,

"PI

'- 7. «. »S7-«6l-

BURYINO GROUNDS AND Ti

a wall on the south boundary of this ce:
bank on the west side. The sum expend
more and Mr. Ward were recently appoin
Grove Cemetery association to report a pit
which they have not yet completed. T!
Ward, this ancient burial place has been
side cemetery of Naugatuck, as a benefit
inhabitants of the town of Naugatuck, ai
Cemetery association as trustee.

HILLSIDE CEMETER

The first grave made in Hillside cemet<
son of Deacon Elisha Stevens, upon land
his own house. The date was March 9, i7<
ruary 7, 1800) Deacon Stevens, for $6.25, de
its selectmen, sixty-three rods of land it
little southeast of my dwelling-house, an
proved for a burying ground, . . . but
on my own land, reserving one and one-
where I and my family have made some
May 12, 1830 — from the heirs of Elisha St
thirty-five rods on the north side and nine
side of the land deeded in 1795, "reservi:
adjoining the one and one-half already r< :
been " set in order *' without and within t :
under the direction of Mr. Whittemore, a
the Grove Cemetery association.

NORTHBURV BURYING P :

The earlier of the two burying yards i
in present Thomaston. It was laid out a :
December 9, 1735, ^^ land having been ]
Taylor (see page 363). The only right I
" a right and liberty for myself and my I
it." The Town hall stands upon the lai <
cemetery.

The burying yard upon Plymouth hil
the village green. The earliest burials •
about 1749; at least the oldest stones beai 1
ground is in a good state of preservation

WESTBURY BURYING ' (

The reader will find on page 329 the r t
place of graves and a word-picture of the [

676 HISTORY OF WATSRBURT.

of which was April i, 1741. The original list of deaths kept by-
Timothy Judd is in possession of his descendant, James A. Skilton
of New York, and is the oldest record of that nature which remains
to us. It is a small book, measuring four and a half by three and
a half inches, and has lost one leaf in the front and a portion of one
leaf at the back. Mr. Skilton thinks that when the Rev. N, S. Rich-
ardson printed in 1845 his Record of Mortality in Watertown, he
evidently had not seen this book, as his memorandum differs in
many ways from the original; also that his father. Dr. Avery J.
Skilton of Troy, N. Y., had not seen it when he made his copy in an
account book kept by James Skilton from iSoi until 1848. "At what
time these records were so copied, or from what originals, I have."
says Mr. Skilton, "been unable to learn." A few of the items of
interest found in the original and not in the copies are the follow-
ing:

Sept z3. 1761. Dropt down dead in the path uncle Tho. Upson.

Nov. 16, 1764, Died uncle John Root of Kinsington in his seventy-ninth year.

March S, 1765, was taken in a fit at Che Widow Stow's, DocL Mun of Woodbur>-
8c died in about seven minutes.

June 2, 1768. was taken with an Appoplectic & died Immediately the wife of
Stephen Judd. Lydia by name.

June 8, 1773. Died with the consumption, in his passage from Sandacroix, Tim-
othy Richards.

July 28. 1754: Died Serjant David Strickland.

March 15. 1766: Died old Mr. Joseph Prichard [of Milford].

July 30, 1768; Died, Serg. Caleb Clark.

June 27, 1769; Died at Stephen Matthews" house, James Parker of Chester, a
boy of about ten years of age.

May 7, 1770: Died in a fitt of Approplex, as the jury adjudg^ed, Mr. Benjamin
Wet more.

Sept. II, 1771: Died Jack Negro Man to Benjamin Richards.

Aug. 14, 1772: Died with the kick of a colt, within a little more than 14 hours,
tho eldest child of John foot, aged 5 years.

January 17. 1773: Died James Outis (?) a. Tranchent Person at the widow
Edwards' house.

January 13, 1774; Died Abi, eldest child to Jacob foot .... and the same day
Justus Daley's leg was cut off.

February s, 1774: Abijah Gamsey'sleg was cut off,

Jane 7, 1775: Died Bethel, son to William Scovill, killed by a Trees falling on him.

December 14, 1776: Died Daniel Tyler's Junr, two children, which were all he
had, and were buried at Break Neck.

March 23, 1777: Died Ensign James Smith.

March 21, 1778: Was killed with the fall of a tree. Edward Scovill. Junr.

Oct. 16, i77g: Was killed with a cart the only son and child of William ScovilL

Jan. II, 17S1: Was drow'd in a well, a son to Eldad Andrus.

June 5. 1781: Died Seth Blake. (Last entrj.)

For other deaths, taken from this book, see pages 437 and 467,

BURYING GROUNDS AND Ti

FARMINGBURY CEMEI

At a town meeting held December ,
Nichols and Captain Stephen Upson, Jr.,
to go out eastward near Joseph Atkins*
an acre of land upon the town cost, in tha
shall think it most convenient for a bury
In Bronson's History (page 229) this dat
statement is made that the above action
Joseph Atkins lived near the present c
purchase was the beginning of the Wolco
The oldest inscribed stone standing thei
Lieutenant Heman Hall; the date is 1769.
mittee was appointed to confer, and cont:
Ham Stevens "for a small tract of land
the public for a burying ground, and to t
report to the town." On June 16, 1797 — tt
society became the town of Wolcott — Wat'
cott should be paid jQ^, los., to be applied
their burying ground. In 1797, Stevens s
of the burying ground, and Wolcott appoi
with him, which was finally accomplish
Stevens' name appears on the Waterbury
dent of Southington.

In March, 1772, the society of Farn:
grave diggers, indicating the existence of
which, at the centre, John Barrett had c
The second we should not fail to menti
Waterbury limits or not, Waterbury resid
It is on Pike's hill, and but six stones bea
The names are Alcox, Blakeslee and Br
1776 to 1791.

EAST FARMS CEMET]

"It is supposed," says Sturges M. Jud(
ments at East Farms were of two Revolt
here on the march from Newport, R. I., t(
That this tradition may be correct save
from the petition which Dr. Timothy P
the General Assembly, in which he state
a portion of the army, under command o
Island, passed through Waterbury; that
count of a wound in his ankle, by which '.
life or limb, was left under Porter's care

678 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

whenever he should present his bill to Captain Thomas Button,
collector of state taxes, his taxes would be abated; but Dutton kept
the bill for three years and then returned it.

On January 31, 1780, a committee was appointed by the town to
purchase one-fourth acre an the request of Captain Phineas Castle.
On April i, was surveyed "a piece of ground, five by eight rods, at
the East farm," which Joseph Beach sold on April 28 for fifteen shil-
lings, described as " in my meadow, a little southwest of my dwell-
ing house, with the privilege of passing to and from said burying-
yard from the Country road" (see page 448). The oldest inscribed
stone seems to be that of Experience, the wife of Joseph Beach, who
died September 20, 1789.

In 1855, the plot was enlarged by a gift of land from Charles J.
Pierpont. By an act of the legislature passedin 1878, the East Farms
Cemetery corporation was organized.

GUNNTOWN CEMETERY.

Nathaniel Gunn, who died October 25, 1769, was buried in Pine
Hill cemetery, as was his first wife, Sarah, who died in 1756. His
widow — also Sarah — was buried at Gunn town in 1797. These facts
have led to the belief that this burying-yard was not laid out until
after 1760, and probably not until after the organization of the
Gunntown Episcopal church in 1784. Dr. Enos Osborn, born after
1737, gave the ground to the Episcopal society, but after the church
was removed to Salem, some rights must have remained with the
Osborn family, for Enos Adams, a descendant of the family, in i860
deeded it to the town of Naugatuck.

The oldest person here buried is Mrs. David Peck of Derby, who
died in 1867, aged more than one hundred years. The earliest death
here recorded is that of a child of Noah and Abigail (Gunn) Sco-
vill, who died in 1790, although there seem to be some older graves
unmarked. The young man from whose gravestone the following
inscription is taken, was of marked ability, and was in charge, at the
time of his death, of workmen who were building a church steeple:

Erected to the memory of John A. Smith, son of John and Jennett Smith, who
was killed instantly at Madison, Ct., by falling from the steeple of a church. May
18, 1838, aged 20 years.

"Beneath this sacred mould, rest, hapless youth

At whose disastrous end e'en strangers wept.
Whose dying bed was the cold earth, and whose

Last groan nor friend nor parent herd —
Parental love, denied to sooth that hour.

O'er thy dear dust this humble stone erects,
To bear thy precious name and publish

To the passing traveller thy woe."

BURYING GROUNDS AND TO.

After the church edifice at Gunntown \
of Salem, and the new Congregational chu
said that Daniel Beecher conveyed to the
the rear of its church for a burial-yard, ai
time it was in use.* Removals from it w
etery, while other graves still remain ui
sheds now belonging to that church.f

MIDDLEBURY BURYING

The earliest place of burial in Middlel
page 408), has entirely disappeared. Two
ent graveyard are known to have been ren
those of two daughters of Captain Isaac £
son, who died in 1776 and 1777. The f
January 27, 1794, seems to refer to the pr<
that the petition of Mr. Eli Bronson, prayi
in Middlebury society, be referred to the
grant said petition and make such comp<
of said ground as they think best."

buck's hill CEMETEl

On December 30, 1789, "on motion of J
a suitable piece of ground sequestered f 0 1
northern part of this town, it was voted
to choose out a suitable piece of groun(
above purpose if they think prudent." A
in the Buck's Hill cemetery, of dates befc i
been made to the original layout, and th \
surround it were presented by Joseph We I

BROCKET (or POTTER) CE 1

On March 27, 1813, Zenas Brocket deec \
Rev. Samuel Potter, certain pieces of Ian I
of Spectacle pond so called, containing ab 1
included a burying ground of twelve ro I
conveyed by this deed." The earliest bur: !
the two sons of Mr. Potter, one of whom I
1804. Franklin Potter, the present owne
and its present dimensions are nearly one i
as a place of burial by the inhabitants :
vicinity.

* See note on page 645.

t It is said that a complete list of the burials in Gunntown ce
able for reference at this time.

68o BISTORT OF WATERBURY.

WOOSTER CEMETERY.

This is a small plot of ground lying south of the Potter burial
ground, now within the limits of the town of Naugatuck. The ear-
liest interment was that of Walter Wooster, who died July 2\, 1829,
ajjed eighty-two years; the latest Sylvester B. Bailey, aged sixty-
tive, in 1892. There seem to have been only about twenty burials,
nearly all bearing the name of Wooster,

For an account of cemeteries opened since 1825 see Volume II,
pages 786 to 789.

BELLS AND THEIR USES.

The history of church bells in old New England communities is
a subject by no means barren of interest, and the ancient customs
connected with bell-ringing are worth studying. Although it is so
recently that they have fallen into disuse, there are few to-day who
know much about them. Their connection with deaths and burials
was so close that this would seem to be the proper place in which
to give some account of them.

Bronson in his History of Waterbury makes the following refer-
ence (page no) to primitive New England customs: "The drum
was a favorite instrument among our ancestors, and was put to
many uses. It answered the purpose of a town bell. It called the
people to meeting on Sundays. It summoned them to the fortified
houses at night. It gave the signal for the town gatherings on
public business. It told the people when to turn out 'to burn about
the common fence.'" The use of the drum as a legal signal for
sheriff's sales — in which property was advertised "to be sold at
beat of drum " — -has continued until very recently. The Connecti-
cut statutes of r866 prescribe this method of giving notice; but
the daily paper and the town sign-post seem now to have taken the
place of it. It is quite probable that the drum was used in Water-
bury for the purposes indicated for at least a hundred years. It
was gradually superseded by the bell, and the hell having once
secured an established place, new uses were developed which it
successfully supplied.

On page 613 it is remarked that the second meeting-house
(1729-1796) "apparently had a bell," and that it was probably the
one sold by the people of Milford, about 1740, "to a society in
Waterbury." In that case the statement on page 557 of Bronson's
History, repeated in this volume (p. 599), that the bell of the old
academy was the first in town, must be incorrect.*

BURYING GROUNDS AND t

The grant " to pay for the bell," mad<
(p. 613), would seem to indicate either a
standing debt, or else payment for the
for ringing it. But in any case, the thii
had not been finished long ere it was
The subscription paper for this bell wa
lias since disappeared. Fortunately, ho
the Waterbury Republican of August 19 of
list of the subscribers, and the bill, show
bell. The heading is as follows:

We, the subscribers, hereby promise to pay to
Davis and Jesse Hopkins, society's committee, foi
hanging a bell in the steeple of the meeting-house
in Waterbury, the several sums annexed to our ri
of December next, provided the sums hereto su^
sufficient to purchase a bell that shall weigh six hv
six hundred and fifty pounds weight, and hang th

To this agreement, we are told by the ..
subscribed, and all but nine had check n
that payment had been made. ** The a
shillings to jQ^y and the total amount
$430/* The receipt, which we reproduc
procured was a hundred pounds heavier
reckoned upon:

The First Society of the tov

To FeNTON & CoCHRi

To a bell weighing seven hundred and forty
shillings and three pence per pound (eigh

shillings)

Also altering a P. bell weighing 24 pounds at 2-3

Also two brass gaging boxes weighing four an

pound

Before the purchase of this bell, tha
to some extent as a church bell. The
give the Episcopal societ)'' the use of t
occasions" has already been referred
met the requirements of both parishe;
ence to a bell on the Episcopal chui
date than 1823, 3,nd there is no im

I records until 1827 that the bell of 179;

\ factory. On March 5 of that year, hov\

682 BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

society's committee have liberty to sell the bell of the meeting-
house at their discretion," and on November i6, 1829, it was " voted
to lay a tax of one and one-half cents on the dollar on the list of
1829 to be appropriated to the purchase of a bell, payable the first
day of March next." Of this proposed purchase there is no further
mention in the records, but in the Reminiscences of Horace Hotch-
kiss (already quoted elsewhere), there is an interesting reference to
to it. He says :

For some years subsequent to the erection of the two churches, the bell of the
Congregational church was used for both societies for Sabbath and funeral occa-
sions. The old bell was at length broken by undue ringing, one Christmas Eve,
and it was decided to hang a new one before the installation of a pastor which was
just about to take place. Mr. Israel Coe sent a bell from New York, but when it
was tested, on the Saturday previous to the installation, it proved unsatisfactory.
Determined at all events to have a good bell for the coming occasion, I proposed to
Edward Scovill that we should drive over to Hartford, that afternoon, to procure
one, and return at evening. The weather was intensely cold and the snow was
drifting heavily, but we equipped ourselves with shovels and blankets, and left
Waterbury about noon.

On the Southington plains, in consequence of the drifts, we were obliged to
shovel the paths for long distances, and reached Hartford only at night- fall. Dur
ing the evening we secured a bell whose tones we liked, and at 9 p. m. started on
our tedious homeward drive of thirty miles over the mountain, with the bell in the
sleigh,— an additional weight of more than half a ton. By urging the horses and
by frequent shovelling we reached the brow of the mountain at midnight, but
beyond that the road was so blockaded that we could proceed no further with the
sleigh. We resolved to ride home on horseback, leaving our load behind, but on
attempting it our frequent falls and the bitter cold convinced us that this, too, was
impossible; so we led the horses to a house about half a mile distant, and arousing
the occupants, found quarters until the next evening (for although the strict Sab-
bath laws of my earlier life were not then in force, we were unwilling to give occa-
sion for scandal because of having travelled on the Sabbath). After sunset on Sun
day night we extricated our sleigh by aid of oxen and slowly proceeded home.

The bell was hung on Tuesday, and on Wednesday it rang out a joyous sum-
mons to the installation. Long afterward it called the people to worship and gave
them notice of occurring deaths. I think it is but a few years since this last custom
was dropped in Waterbury. At a funeral the body was carried to the grave on
men's shoulders. Occasionally the bearers were relieved by others, and as they
went on, the slow and solemn tones of the passing bell filled the air. (This, I sup-
pose, was from a Saxon custom notifying the people to pray for the soul of the
departed.) The bell was also rung on week days, at early morning to give notice
when to rise, at 12 o'clock for the mid-day meal, and at 9 p. m. to indicate the hour of
retiring.

The bell procured by Messrs. Scovill and Hotchkiss became in
its turn unsatisfactory. On December 26, 1853, the society voted
that the society's committee should be authorized to exchange the
present bell for a new one, the new one to weigh not less than 1500
pounds, nor more than 2500. The date at which the exchange was

BURYING GROUNDS AND 1

made does not appear in the record, but
ment. The bell was evidently taken "(
22, 1855, the society took action as follow

Voted that the bell now hanging in our church
we do not think it for our interest to purchase it.

Resolved that this society is under no obligat
Holbrook's foundry, and that the committee be di
they think the interest of the society will be best s

Four months later it was still there, or el
appointed again; for it was voted (July
hangs we are not satisfied with it, — as re;
ing it and the tone given out when it i;
mittee be instructed to advise Mr. Blake
an opportunity to remedy the difficulties.

The people of St. John's parish were <
riences than these. On the night of J
steeple of their church was blown dow
nearly 4000 pounds, fell with it. It str
broken timbers in such a way that it rec<
the church was destroyed by fire on t
1868, the bell was melted and fell in

An account of the chimes at St. Joh
p. 620, and in the chapter on music.

The following account of the somewh 1
ringing which prevailed here for many
by Mr. Kingsbury:

Bells were rung for church services, for deaths I
alarms—such as for lost children — and for secular
complete that it needed only a few strokes to mak

For church services the peals were in four stro ;
the second and third. A first bell was rung an :
The second bell began ten minutes before the tin ;
few minutes finished with a slow toll. This secor I

It was in ringing for a death that the elabon I
most noticeable. When the bell was to be rung t
death had taken some one away, it was at first sl< .
indicating the sex and proximate age of the dec
five for a boy, seven for a woman, nine for a m 1
bell was rung for several minutes, the strokes b i
four, but in other respects like the ringing for chi <
able time, which was a matter of judgment on t
by the age and social position of the deceased, 1 .
and, attaching a small rope to the tongue of the
tongue against the side of the bell. The age wf
rest of a few seconds after each ten strokes. If w
ceased who among the persons known to be ill hi i
that a non resident had been brought here to i

684 muTOUT OF WATBRBURY.

matter of inquiry. Frequently this was shouted to the sexton from below by some
curious persfin in the pauses of the bell. The bell was rung in groups of two
strokes to give notice of the funeral when held in the church, and sometimes when
held at private houses, and it was very slowly tolled while the body was being car-
ried on a bier upon men's shoulders to its last resting place. As the town grew
larger the custom of ringing or tolling the bell for a death was gradually given up.
Not long ago I was making some inquiry as to the time when it ceased, when to my
surprise the bell of St. John's was rung and tolled for Mrs, Palmyra Cotton, who
had just died in her one hundred and first year.

Alarm bells were rung in rapid peals, the bell tumingover and over and ringing
without cessation. Fire was the usual cause of alarm, but the bell was rung in the
same way to call people together to hunt for a lost child, and was recognized as
the legitimate method of general alarm. It seemed to say. "Something is tbe

The surplus vitality of the youngsters in a country town frequently found vent
in playing some mischief with the bell. One young man fastened a piece of twine
to the tongue of the bell, and to.ik the other end in at the window of his room, not
far off. In the night there came a slow, muffled, spiritual toll. The supernatural
was more in fashion then than now, and a certain feeling of awe seized the listen-
ers. The young man's room was visited. He sat up in his bed and wondered with
the rest, or rather, more than the resL Subsequent investigation or confession — I
forget which— showed that his end of the string was fastened to his great toe; and
the spirits were laid. Somewhere — it may not have been here — a similar tolling
was found to have been caused by a string fastened to the horns of a ram tethered in
the upper part of the church and supplied with hay. In reaching for the hay he
pulled the cord which tolled the bell. On the night before New Year's or Christ-
mas day, the boys would sometimes get into the church and set the bell a ringing
with an alarm peal. What happened to one of them was told ia rhyme some fifty
years ago, and is repeated in Volume II. page 936.

Before the days of steam most of the factories in town had bells.
These have been superseded by steam whistles. The startling
effect produced by these upon the auditory nerves was the theme
of a piece of verse published in the American in March, 1864, entitled
"The Stranger in Town," and " respectfully dedicated to Brown's
gong." Says the poet:

He is told by a passer-by that it is a steam whistle, and concludes
that it is without parallel in all his previous experience:
In my far western home I often have heard
The yell of the panther, the scream of the bird;
But of noises unearthly — strange though it seem—
I've never heard aught like the whistle of steam.

It strikingly illustrates " how use doth breed a habit in a man," that
in 1895 the sound of the steam whistle is quite unobserved, unless
it is sounding an alarm of fire or is carried shrieking through the
city at midnight on the top of a locomotive.

CHAPTER XL]

INDIAN AND ENGLISH PLACE NAMES FROM
end" — THE MEADOWS LARGELY NAl
THE MOUNTAINS, HILLS AND STREAl
THEIR SONS — EXCEPTIONS.

THE men of Farmington had pert
government to improve the landi
associated planters of 1674 came
period was, with little doubt, preceded bj
of desirable meadows for the cultivatioi
grains, hops, and other commodities — un
protective power of the General Court.

It is, therefore, not surprising that
remaining Indian place names of the 1
certain English place names, which we
days of the region, because we have n
them with any names known of record
Taylor is the most prominent. Like M
occupies a conspicuous position in the
country. While not so much higher thai
more commanding or extensive views,
when viewed from other eminences for
space between the valleys of the Naug
brook, at or near their confluence.

It was quite natural, therefore, that i

one of the points of demarkation in the ]

and we can readily believe that Mr. Tayl

mark when viewing the region, or exp

evidently had regard for elevated and 1

name of Taylor's Meditation was given

range east of the east branch of Hancocl

have no further knowledge. Of But]

lived and had a house in present Nau

of Mattatuck took formal possession o

and Golden and the Buck who probs

Hill may have been and probably wer<

1674, while a Wooster, undoubtedly, g

swamp lying east of Watertown, befor

out to the planters of Mattatuck. N

686

UIsrOHT OF WATERBURY.

names, we find in our early records no additional evidence that
a Butler, Taylor, Macy, Golden, Buck, or even a Steele lived in
Waterbury during its first forty years.

The need of local names was imperative. For a time Indian
names were probably accepted, but gradually these were dropped
from the speech of the people, and English names were substituted.

The various allotments of land gave opportunity for designating-
a given locality by its owner's name, and at a very early date we
learn to follow the line of meadow lands for eighteen miles — from
Welton's meadow at Thomaston to Ben Jones's meadow {lying be-
tween Grove cemetery at Naugatnck and the river).

The division of the township into four quarters — by the Nanga-
tuck river, and the Farmington and Woodbury roads — assisted in
designating lands; and the mountain lots and hill lands soon
became known by the respective names of their owners.

The modern names are not included in the following list.

■' Know all men by these presents,
that I, John Nichols of Waterbury in
New Haven County, taking into con-
sideration that all inankind sent into
this Terrestrial world were by nature
entitled to theequal enjoyment of Water,
Earth, and Air, until those pestilent
words «/n<f and f/iine were introduced
by Cain and Abel in personal propertv.
and adopted by Abram and Lot. which
produced an actual division of their real
estate by the removal of one over Jordan
into the plains, whilst the other remained
in the hill country, whereby Jordan lie-
carae a line betwixt them, from which
period the tenure of lands has generalty
been regulated agreeable to the several
constitutions holding jurisdiction there-
of, and by virtue of which, under
Providence, I possess in fee simple a
small landed estate, while my indigent
Neighbor hatli not a place to lay his
head. Conscious of thesefacts. andfrom
motives of benevolence, duty and charity.
I do hereby give, g^rant, bargain and con-
vey unto Stephen Judd, my neighbor, as
aforesaid, and unto Sarah, his wife, the
following messuage or tenement of land
lying in Waterbury aforesaid, at a place
called Abrigador in the first society, be-
ginning at a heap of stones, my comer

ABRAGADO— The rocky
occupying nearly all the area lying within
the great curve described by the Mad
river just before its union with the Nauga-
tuok river, was known to the first inhab-
itants as Abragado. The region is now
encompassed by Dublin, River, Bridge,
and Washington streets. In process of
time the name has undergone various
changes — from Abragado to Abragadow,
to Abrigador, The origin of the name is
of special interest. See p. 51.

It is first mentioned in existing records
in 1699, at which date the following
grant was transcribed from a record
then so old, or worn, that its date was
gone, showing that the name, proba-
bly, was here before the plantation
was: "There was granted to John Rich-
ason, William Hikcox and John Gay-
lord, thirty acres of land atl ye east
end of a drag ado provided they im-
prove it and inhabit four yeirs after Im-
provement and build according to origi-
oall articles not pregedising highways
former grants nor drifts of cattell. "

It was upon the " Abragado " that the
land lay, which was the subject of the
following unique deed of 1S03 (see Vol.
II. p. 794}. It may be found in Vol.
XXVIII, p. 439, of the Land Records,

ENGLISH PLAGE NAMES i

joining the highway that leads to Colum-
bia (Dublin street), and runs southwest
ten rods then northwest six rods, then
southeast to the first corner, twelve and
a half rods, butted east and north on
highway, west on my own land, and
south on the heirs of Jonathan Baldwin,
deceased, or common land, to be by them
quietly and peaceably enjoyed during
their natural lives and then to descend
in fee tail to Elizabeth Judd, the eldest
daughter to said Stephen and Sarah, if
she shall choose to occupy and improve
the same, if not to such of her brothers
and sisters as she, the said Elizabeth,
shall choose to resign the same unto, or
to her, the said Elizabeth's heirs; and I
the said grantor, do hereby convey the
above described premises with this posi-
tive and express condition only, that they,
the said Grantees, shall not sell either the
property or use thereof, nor shall the same
be liable for any debt due or demand of
I he said Grantees or the use thereof; but
the same is given for the sole use and
purpose before mentioned, and that only
(viz.) for a building spot and garden to
render said Grantees comfortable through
life, and if the said Elizabeth shall not
survive the said Stephen and Sarah, then
to descend to their next eldest surviving
daughter and to her heirs."

The land deeded lies on the south
side of Bridge street and west side of
Dublin street. It is now or was recently
owned by George Barns.

ARNOLD'S HILL— From Nathaniel
Arnold. Beyond the Boughton place on
the Middlebury road — the hill to the
left.

ASH SWAMP— Now covered by the
waters of the Chestnut Hill reservoir.
[Patucko's ring of pre-historic days was
probably a circular fort in the swamp at
that point, but it became a very elastic
ring, stretching northward nearly to
Spindle hill, and eastward to the Mad
river.]

ASH SWAMP BROOK— Now Chest-
nut Hill brook.

smal
west
oldF

thef

BA

laid
south

BE
west
tucko
••Bee
brook

BE.

BE.
205.

BE.
east !
tuck
of th<

1673.
TH
Nathi ,
came i
had li
the <
Engl;
Davi<
acres I
east ;
Steel
subst I
appr< ■
of D I
proxi [
prese 1
sold '
he o'
land. :
boug
ing \ .
mill.
Late
Bron :
kins,
oblit :

it IS

local :

688

HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

BEAVER MEADOW, THE BEA-
VER MEADOWS, COVE MEADOW
— The ancient boundaries were Burying
Yard hill, a line of coves that separated it
from Manhan neck on the northwest, Hop
Meadow hill, Great brook and the river.
The modem limits may be desbribed
as Meadow street, the tail race of the
Waterbury Brass company, the river and
the remaining sections of Hop Meadow
hill, together with Great brook. Along the
land of the Brass company and the present
junction of the New England and Nauga-
tuck railways lay Long cove. It was
about a quarter of a mile in length. Mid-
dle cove lay next, and Mud cove was near
the western terminus of Hop Meadow
hill. A fourth cove, perhaps sixteen rods
long, lay in the meadow a little westerly
of Field street. Through Long, Mid-
dle and Mud coves coursed the same
stream which crossed West Main street
a little west of the Green. From Mud
cove to the river, the stream was known
as Tophet or Tophet brook. Middle cove
was of slight depth and in 1849 it had
disappeared. It was customary in the
early years of the century to draw loads
of hay through it.

Sixty years ago the coves afforded ex-
cellent fishing ground; pickerel, roach
and bullheads being abundant. Samuel
H. Prichard informed me that he had
caught many wild duck and mink in and
about the coves, whose waters have now
disappeared.

BEAVER POND BROOK— The large
tributary of the Mad river which comes
into it from the east at the point where
the East Mountain road crosses the Meri-
den railroad.

BEAVER DAM BROOK— The same
as Beaver Pond brook.

BEAVER POND HILL — The hill
at East Farms, north of the Beaver
pond.

BEDLAM BROOK— Either what is
now Long Meadow brook, or a brook
running into the same at the present
"Widow Bradley place."

BEDLAM HILL— The hill on which
Middlebury centre is. The name is now
applied to that portion of the hill south
of the centre, which is 120 feet higher.
On it Amos and Abel Scott had lands.
Aaron, John and Gamaliel Fenn*s farms
lay there. On its eastern side is '* Ben
Fenn's pool," a boiling spring that never
changes its temperature and thaws the
ice that forms around it. In 1784 there
was a school-house on the hill.

BEDLAM MEADOW— Later called
Long meadow; now partly covered by
Long Meadow pond. In 1771 Daniel
Hawkins's house was on the west side of
it.

BEN'S MEADOW— From Benjamin
Judd, in 1679, who was quite prominent
in public affairs while he remained here.
On Steele's brook, above Steele's meadow,
and Isaac's meadow. It was originally
the meadow northwest of the ** poor
house," where a race course now is.

UPPER BEN'S MEADOW — The
next bit of natural meadow above Ben's
meadow, near Slade's mill and near the
mouth of Turkey brook. In 1797 this
meadow is described as being " near
Benjamin Richards' new dwelling-
house," and, as ** ^% acres more or less "
—at which date it was sold by •* Bela and
Olive Blakeslec, Hezekiah Brown, James
Warner, Jr., and Joanna, of Pl3anouth,
and Preserved and Rachel Hickcox of
Sangersfield, Otsego Co., N. Y, to Seba
Bronson and Benjamin Prichard."

BEN'S MEADOW HILL— The ridge
of hill land lying westward of Ben's
meadow.

BEN'S MEADOW GATE — Where
the Wooster or Watertown road passed
through the common fence.

BENSON'S HILL— The hill where
Wolcott centre now is. Named for Jacob
Benson, who was the first known resident
on that hill, if not within the present
bounds of Wolcott.

BENSON'S POT— A remarkable pot
or well in the Mad river at the Mad River

ENOLian PLACE NAMES 01

falls, where Prichard's mills now are.
Benson and Benjamin Harrison had a
mill at the place.

BIG MEADOW POND— Covers what
was Southmayd's meadow in the north-
west part of present Watertown, and
was described when laid out as "on a
Sprain of Woodbury river." The road
running up to the eastward of it is the
Litchfield turnpike from New Haven,
of 1797.

BIRCH HILL— In Middlebury. It is
now Camp's hill, or at least contiguous to
it. It lies southerly from Hop swamp.

BIRCH PASTURE— On Willow street,
north of Ridge wood.

BIRCH PASTURE— By Mad meadow.

BISCOE*S HILL— The southern end
of Bedlam hill. Jeremiah Peck laid out
120 acres on it in 1721. Samuel Biscoe
from Milford lived there, and Nathan
also, it is thought.

BISSELL HILL— The hill northeast
of Hop swamp, south of the Bronson*s
meadow which is at Race plain, and east
of Three-Mile hill.

BISS ELL'S SWAMP— At the foot of
Three-Mile hill, southward of it.

BLOCK HOUSE HILL, BLACK
HOUSE HILL— *• The south end is
north of the road from Northbury to Cam-
bridge."

BREAK NECK, OR THE BREAK
NECK HILL— In the division of lands
of 1688 Thomas Warner was to have * • two
acres for one of meadow at the southward
end of the Break Neck hill as we go to
Woodbury." Thomas Warner sold the
meadow acres to Isaac Bronson about
twenty years later, who settled there,
and the name Break Neck was used to
designate, with an occasional variation
to *• West Farms," present Middlebury,
until the incorporation of the town. It
is now used, as at first, to designate the
high hill between the branches of Hop
brook in Middlebury. Historians have
repeatedly assigned the name to a later
date — telling us that it "was derived

44

from til
falling
while €
gage oi
mand o

Thel
on the
foUowii
officer.
Cromot
tells thi
on June
and a hi
commeo
ment as
occupiec

Then
ing we V
march \
were ve
tion of <
tavern \
ington.
for Brea
est diffic
mountai
delayed
In a sid :
" Breaki
It well <
cult api !
and wit 1
mills, in
at the s
Barnes's
as " an !

BRIA

northwe
name u: I

BROC

north si i

BROr :
river at 1
the cent 1
road to 1
cial int(
landmai :
was ass:
planter) '
mentior 1

690

mSTORY OF WATEBBXJBT.

path to Bronson'a meadow." Here it was
that Timothy Hopltins (son of John the
miller) had land in 1715. and he had a
house therein 1718,

The ruin of a house still stands on
the west side of the Wolcott road.
at the junction of that road with a
highway that goes around the north
end of I^ong hill. The stone chim-
ney, freed from the house frame, is a
pictnresque monument to the memory of
a home. In it are four fire-places, each
one of which occupied diagonally a comer
of a room, while the chimney itself is
twisted to the square of the ridge of the
house. The brick ovens are deep-set
within the large fire-places, and two
cranes still hang in place. Ebenezer
Warner built the house and lived in
it from about 1747 until his death at
the age of ninety-four years in 1805.
la the same house was born Ebeneier's
son Justus, by whom, it is said, the
red house standing across the high-
way was built. Justus removed after
the death of his father to Ohio—
where, after having lived fifty years in
Connecticnt and fifty years in Ohio, he
died in 1856. Reuben and Elijah Frisbie
also lived at Bronson's meadow. Elijah's
house was gone in 1801, a stone in the
bound line between Waterbury and Wol-
cott, at that date, being " set where the
centre of the house was."

BRONSON'S MEADOW— The large,
fair meadow-tract between Three-Mile
and Two-and-a-Half-Mile hills in Middle-
bury, named from Isaac Bronson, the
planter, in 16B8. His son Ebeneser set-
tled there until he exchanged with Wil-
liam, son of Deacon Judd, and came to
live on the Deacon's comer (southwest
corner of West Main and Willow streets).
William Judd did not stay long, if he ever
lived at the meadow, and, eventually,
Ebeneier Richardson became the settler
there. It is on the old Woodbury road
east of Three-Mile hill. Nathaniel Rich-
ardson, Ebeneier's son, built a house on
the opposite side of the road, which is
Still standing.

BRONSON'S BOOGY MEADOW—
From John Bronson. in 16SS. Its loca-
tion is not satisfactorily determined. It
is, perhaps, the swampy tract between
the branches of Hop brook, northwest of
Break Neck hill.

YOUNG BRONSON'S BOGGY
MEADOW — The low meadow land
northeast of Chestnut hill on Ash swamp
brook, above the Wolcott road.

BUCK'S HILL— This is one of the
hills whose name has remained un-
changed from the beginning of the town-
ship. It either belongs to the period be-
fore the planters came, or it may have re-
ceived its name from some member of
the Buck family. Abraham Andrews
(the cooper) had a brother in-law whose
name was Buck, and the Buck family of
Wethersfield was closely connected with
others of the first settlers here. Tradition
conveniently accounts for the name by
the supposition that it was named from a
buck, which leaped from a certain rock
on that hill.

The earliest grant of land on Buck's
hill was made in 1699 to Ephraim War-
ner and John Welton— " twenty acres at
the east end "—but no Welton appears to
have lived upon the hill until 1709.

Israel Richardson was the first per^oo
who had land recorded on Buck's hill.
On April r8, 1701, John and Ephraim
Warner, father and son, were granted
land adjoining each other on the nortb
side of the hill, which they divided by a
highway, and also bounded south by a
highway. On these lots they at once
proceeded to erect houses opposite to
each other and near a famous spring,
called Israel's spring — the father appar-
ently designing the house he was build-
ing for his son John. John and his son
Ephraim had formerly lived neighbors
to each other— the father, at the north-
east comer of West Main and WUlow
streets— the son, at the comer of Grove,
Willow and Pine— while John had prob-
ably lived with his father. At about this
time the elder John Warner removed to
Farmington. Soon after, or about the

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES 0.

same time, the two youthful Gaylords,
Joseph and John (who already were land
o\9Tiers on the hill), concluded to build at
the same place, and obtained the south
end of the lot on the west side of the
highway, where each built a house. The
"Warner houses were probably built in the
season of 1701 — the Gay lord houses in
1 702. Ephraim Warner sold to his cousin
Benjamin Warner in 1703, and removed to
Woodbury. It will be remembered how
rejoiced the people were to get him home
again (as Dr. Ephraim Warner) after the
sorrowful days of 17 13. He then lived
on the Irving block <sorner, but later in
life returned to Buck's hill. It is thought
that he then lived on the east side of the
highway, not far from the * 'Buck's leap,"
and, in the same house where Roger
Prichard lived in 1760, and Elias Clark at
a later day. The house is now occupied
by Feodore Liebricht. Dr. Ephraim War-
ner's sons, John, Obadiah and Ephraim,
all settled on Buck's hill. Joseph Gay-
lord sold his house in 1709 to Richard
Welton. Richard had been down at
Durham, working for Joseph, and took
the house in payment for his labor. He
lived on the hill forty seven years, and
his descendants lived and prospered there
long after his decease.

BUCK'S MEADOW, BUCK MEAD-
OW — Mentioned in 1679. On the river
above Mount Taylor. Frost's bridge is
against it.

BUCK'S MEADOW MOUNTAIN—
The elevation lying along the meadows
and extending northwestward to Deep
River brook. The more elevated portion
of Buck's Meadow mountain, west of the
source of Turkey brook, is the fine, mas-
sive wealth of highland that frames
Watertown on the northeast, the Scott's
mountain (910 feet at its highest point)
of ancient Waterbury. Buck's Meadow
mountain extends southward to Ed-
mund's (Scott's) old mountain.

BULLHEAD POND— The small pond
north of Waterville village, and near the
factory of the American Pin company.

BUI
small 1
West :
Brass

BUL

head

Namec

Woodt

BUL
point G
Bull pli

BUN
The na
was un
locality
Former

BUN
it was
Woodbt
ols setti
it was c
and Wo

BUR]
It rises
rectly 1
are rap
probabl
date.

BUR'
Street t
ing yar<

BUT
island \
with th

BUT

at the
tween ii
Thoma

BUT

Naugat

CAN

1781.
brook.
Swamp
Waters

CAN

tioned

Zebulo

Waters

692

CANOE PLACE^There were doubt-
less Canoe places wherever it was con-
venient tor tbe owners of canoes to use
them. One is mentioned on the Mad
river, another apparently at Union City.
The name is now applied to a spot at the
bend of the river below Naugatuck.

CANNON BRIDGE— The bridgeover
Mad river, at Dublin street. Mr. James
Porter says he was told by some of his
peoplt that after the war of the Kevolu-

mSlOBT OF WATEJiBUltT.

L old

t up

1 the

ground near the bridge, and that the
bridge got its name from that eircum-

CARRINGTON'S BROOK — From
John Carringtoa, an original settler.
The tributary of the Mad river, rising on
the east side of Long hill and entering
Mat! river through the raceway of the
East brass mill.

CARRINGTON'S PONDS— The pair
of small, round ponds between the old
Cheshire road (now so-called) and the
Plank road, east of Carrington's brook.
Named from John Carrington.

CARRINGTON'S SWAMP — The
swampy tract on Carringlon's brook
south of the old Cheshire road and
mostly, if not wholly, north of the Plank

CATTAIL MEADOW— Mentioned in
1740. North of Eliakira Welton's house.

CEDAR SWAMP— At the head of a
branch of Hop brook, east of Lake
Quassapaug. Mentioned in an Indian
deed of 1684.

CEDAR SWAMP— In the " northeast
corner of the bounds near the Great Rock

CHESTNUT HILL— The hill north-
east of Long hill that is S60 feet in
height. The Rev. Jeremiah Peck had
land on it. There is a remarkable little
pond on the summit of the hill. City
Mills pond lies at its southwestern side
and the Chestnut Hill resen-oir north,
west of and between it and Patucko's
Ring.

CHE.STNUT HILL MEADOW— Now-
covered by City Mills pond. One arm of
the pond is over Joseph Ijcwis's meadow.
Tbe second Samuel Hikcox had land in
it, and a grant of land for a yard near by.

CLARK'S SWAMP-Near the mouth
of Carrington's brook, named from Clart,
the son of John Carringtoo, the planter,
or from Deacon Thomas Clark, who
owned land there.

THE CLAY PITS- North side of,
and at Grove street. Land extending fram
the Buck's Hill road westerly to a (ive-
acre tract belonging to Samuel Hikcox,
which separated it from Cooke street-
is described as " at the Clay Pitts." On
the south side of Grove street at the same
point, the second Joseph Hikcox had
land; he was '• not to hinder men coming
to the Clay Pitts."

CLINTON HILL, OTHERWISE
NEW CANAAN— Near and west of
Spindle hill. It is q6o feet high and on a
clear day Long Island Sound may be
seen from it. It was perhaps named
from Samuel Clinton, who lived. Ihere In
'795-

COMMON FIELD— The enclosed land
of the proprietors, in which each held
lands according to the number of pounds
propriety which he had, the highest
;£ioo, the lowest /50: although a man
might augment his lands by buying his
neighbor's rights in the field.

COMMON FENCE— The fence en-
closing the above lands, which fence was
made by each proprietor in proportion 10
the number of acres he owned within the
field.

COMMON LAND— The unappropri-
ated laud of the township, held by the
proprietors in fee, but devoted to no
si>ecial purpose.

COMMONS— The sequestered or re-
ser\-ed sections of the toivaship, devoted
to special and particular uses, in which
every man had a common right to get
wood, timber and stone. In the seques-
tered land were the common pasture, the
pasture for horses and the reservation

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OB

where young cattle were kept during the
summer, and where the bog-hay was
stacked, this being then the staple mnter
food for growing stock. And at a later
date the Green and the highways were
used, under certain conditions, for pas-
turing cows, and the cows so pastured
were known as Common cows. This was
under Borough rule.

COOPER'S CORNER— From Abra-
ham Andrews. It is that portion of his
meadow allotment which lay between
the Naugatuck and Mad rivers at their
junction.

COOPER'S POND— A small collection
of water, near the present junction of
East Main and Orange streets— fed by
springs.

THE COOPER LOT— On the east
side of Cherry street, running from East
Main to Walnut streets. The Tailor lot
(from John Warner, the tailor) lay next
east of the Cooper lot, and Standley's
Timber adjoined ihat on the east.

COTTON WOOL MEADOW— Ed-
mund Scott owned land there in 1722 as
one of the •• proprietors of the old saw
mill." The name is supposed to have
arisen from a plant now growing in the
swamp. Daniel and Abraham Osborne
owned lands in it in 1770. It is now in
Osborntown and is called Cotton Wool
swamp.

CRANBERRY BROOK— Crosses the
highway to Watertown a little below the
site of the first meeting-house and the
old cemetery of that town. Cranberry
pond and Cranberry meadow are on the
same brook, south of Richard's moun-
tain, the site of the first house in Water-
town, 1 701. First mentioned in 1722.

CROSS BROOK— In Watertown. It
rises at the north end of Scott's moun-
tain, near the original Hungerford house
and flows northwestward into the West
Branch. Bidwell's saw mill is on it.

CROW HILL— *• About three miles
southeast of Waterbury meeting-house."
"Near Tavern brook." Directly north
of Turkey hill.

DAV
David »
David i
brook V
same li
Porter,
is that )
crossing
Nuhn's
low anc
of Flag
tween tl
enters tl

DAV]
at the m
pied by

DAVl
Town P;
settled,
on condi
cattle CO
was nat
It was ii

DEAI
road, •*
the anci :
meadow
Jeremy'i

DEA(
DEEI
Scott's I
Naugatt I
tween '.
Meado\\

DEEI
the east :
not kno'
of land
whethei
turn the 1
wild re
for deer :
extends
Mount
the deei 1
narrow !
from tb
range,
stakes £
the dee; :

694

HISTOBY OF WATBRBURT,

here would afford excellent hiding places
for the hunter. Mr. Southmayd had land
laid out on the range that was culti-
vated.

DEVIL*S CART PATH— Mentioned
in 1 763. Near the north end of Turkey hill.

DOCTOR'S ISLAND— From Doctor
Porter. Mentioned in 1739. At Hancox
meadow.

DOCTOR'S ORCHARD— Mentioned
in 1740, From the second Dr. Daniel
Porter. It was just below Newell's eight
acre lot, below Highland park. It was
afterward called Annis's Orchard, from
Annis Scovill, who received it from the
estate of her father — the third John Sco-
vill.

DOCTOR'S POLES— At the falls of
Hancox brook. A tract belonging to
Doctor Porter. Supposed to be hoop
pole land. It was on the east side of the
brook.

DRAGON'S POINT— New Haven and
other towns had places with the same
name. It is that rocky point that comes
to the river (on the west side) at the lower
end of Long meadow, where the river
turns abruptly to the west. It was the
southern limit of the land divisions of
1674, when every plan was laid for the
occupancy of Town Plot — and, later, was
the southern limit of the common fence.

DRUM HILL— The highest portion of
Cooke street passes over the crown of
the hill. It is separated by David's brook
from Manhan Meadow hill, while north-
ward it extends to the valley of Wigwam
Swamp brook, westward to the river.
Hancox brook enters the river at the
northwest comer of the hill.

EAST MOUNTAIN— East of Great
hill and of the Abrigador and between
Fulling Mill brook and Mad river. The
City reservoir and the Distributing res-
ervoir are upon it. It is 800 feet high
and extends into Prospect and Nauga-
tuck.

EAST FARMS: HOG POUND—
The section of country that was early

devoted to the pasturage or keeping of
live pork, the staple flesh food of our
forefathers from the days when they
hunted the wild boar in the wilderness
forests of Central Europe in mediaeval
times, through the days of their establish-
ment as a powerful nation in England,
and to the period of their becoming a
new nation in America.

The rough hills and swamps toward
Prospect and Cheshire were used for a
general feeding ground, while the
smoother hills to the northward were ap-
propriated to particular enclosures. This
occupation of the land prevented the
early settlement of the really excellent
lands within the region.

Joseph Beach was conspicuous among
the pioneers of this neighborhood, and
his son Joseph became an extensive land
owner. The Austins. Pierponts and
Hitchcocks were among the early set-
tlers; the names also of Benham, Mix,
Lewis, Merriman, Munson, Stephen Cul-
ver and Cornelius Johnson, appear at
Hog Pound or its vicinity.

EDMUND'S MOUNTAIN, ED-
MUND'S OLD MOUNTAIN — Named
from the second Edmund Scott, who had
a grant of land on it. It is the ridge that
lies between the valley of the Naugatuck
river and the valley of Steel's brook. The
locality first known by that name was the
southeast portion At a later date the
northwest part of the ridge was known
as Hopkins mountain. The same ridge
at a still later date, when in the owner-
ship of the Prindle family, was called
Prindle hill. As early as 1726 William
Hikcox had a farm on its eastern side,
and in that year gave his son Samuel a
house and orchard there. The Hikcox
family remained on the mountain for sev-
eral generations. Samuel had a grist-
mill on the river just below Mount Tay-
lor, and the old road that crossed the river
at the upper end of Hancock meadow
ran through the farm. Captain Abraham
Hikcox was born and '* brought up" in
this neighborhood.

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES O.

On the southeast corner of the same
ridge John Bronson, son of Isaac, gave
his son Joseph (the year after Joseph's
marriage with Anna Southmayd) a house
and farm. The Bronsons spread down
into the valley of the Naugatuck river
and became the possessors of a large part
of Steele's meadow and plain. Notable
among them was Seba, the son of Joseph,
who owned a 200-acre farm— on which
Waterbury's almshouses, both the old
and the new one, now stand. Seba Bron-
son's house stood either on the site of the
first *' pocf^ house," or on the opposite
side of the road that goes over Edmund's
mountain. At one date, Seba's house
was described as *• near the four comers
of two roads" — one was from Waterbury
to Watertown, the other from Bunker hill
to Waterville.

Jonathan Prindle, Jr., from whom the
ridge was also named, settled at Oakville
and spent his life there, while his descend-
ants ascended the mountain and owned
it largely.

EDMUND'S NEW MOUNTAIN —
The bound lines of Waterbury, Middle-
bury and Watertown meet on it. It was
also known as ** Ned's New Mountain."

EDMUND'S PASTURE — On Great
brook — a landmark in ancient days in the
layout of highways. Near Farm street.

ENGLISH GRASS MEADOW— See
page 244.

EPHRAIM'S MEADOW — On Great
brook above City Mills pond. Granted
about 1705 to Dr. Ephraim Warner. One
of the sweets offered to him by the town
to stay away from Woodbury. It was
not laid out until his return to Waterbury
about 1715.

EPHRAIM'S SWAMP — An earlier
name for Sol's swamp, in the Park.

FISHING ROCK— On the north side
of the West Branch, above Eagle rock.

FLAGGY SWAMP— The swamp the
west side of Cooke street. Robert Porter
in 1687 had land at this swamp. Thomas

Fitzsi)
"off I

FO]
Naugi
theM<
tance
so-call
above
later,
inn-1
Brown
orchar
recent]
cultiva
present
atuck
end, tb
em poi
which
valley.

Fo:

throug
beyonc
is an a
thePe
by a d<
may fa :
to note
Mohav
beacor
native; ,
many i
name, :
has ali I
the F( I
near i ,
Timot
**in g I
mill \
time c
in the ■
to the .

FR(
again;
Brons
who li
eratio
and t

I

* See page aao.

696

HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

FULLING MILL BROOK — Daniel
Warner's brook, Squantuck brook. At
Union City.

GASKINS ROCKS, THE GASKINS
— The precipitous eastern end of the
range lying between Pootatuck brook
and the West Branch, anciently known
as Pine mountain in the distribution of
1688. It is now called The Gaskins. The
cemetery of Thomaston is on the north-
eastern part of the range. The old hill
road west of the river is now in use as
far as the cemetery. It formerly con-
tinued over the range and on down over
the ancient Scott's mountain.

GAYLORD'S BROOK— Rises in the
swamp east of Long swamp, runs down
west of Gaylord's and Oronoke hills to
Hop brook. The portion of it that ran
through Hikcox meadow received his
name. At a later date the lower end of
it was known as W^ooster brook, from
Abraham Wooster, who settled there in
1752.

GAYLORD'S HILL.— It was named
from Joseph Gay lord, the planter. It is
oil the road to Middlebury. On its south-
ern end was the Nichols tavern of 1770
or earlier, until a year ago, when the
house was burned. It is opposite the
Peat swamp. See page 354.

GAYLORD'S MEADOW — See Sco-
vill's meadow.

GAYLORD'S PLAIN— The flat land
at and about where Silver street begins.
From John Gaylord. Also a school dis-
trict in the earlier half of the century.

GEORGE'S HORSE BROOK — A
small brook that comes into Beaver Pond
brook just west of Beaver pond.

GEORGE'S HORSE HILL— It ex-
tends from George's Horse brook on the
west, to Hog Pound brook on the east.
The famous Beach tavern, now a Pier-
pont place, was at the south end of the
hill. Named, it is thought, from a horse
belonging to George Scott, the son of
Edmund.

GILES' GARDEN— A piece of grav-
elly land on the river road to Waterville,
a little below the Waterbury Brass Com-
pany's dam— named from Giles Brown,
who tried to cultivate it.

GLEBE SWAMP— See* 'The Park."
When laid out, it was described as
** lying in the cattail swamp on the brook
which runs through Scovill's meadow."
In 1800, the southeast corner of it was a
chestnut tree, " dry and blown up by the
roots." The same chestnut tree bound
is mentioned in 1726.

GOLDEN'S MEADOW, GCjLDING'S
MEADOW — That swampy place next
below the City Mills pond. Origin of
the name is not known. It is now over-
flowed.

GRASSY HILL— Mentioned in 1726.
It lies between Lewis's or World's End
hill and Spindle hill. In 1738 it is
described as being about 100 rods north
from Benjamin Warner's house.

GREAT BROOK— Rises east of
Grassy hill, passes between Long and
Burnt hills, flows through the city and
enters the river between Bank and Bene-
dict streets.

A branch of Hancox brook is fre-
quently called Great brook and the name
is, in certain instances, given to Hancox
brook itself; also, to the north branch of
Hop brook.

GREAT BOGGY MEADOW— On
Buck's hill. In 1731 John Warner, son
of Ephraim, had a house west of it. A
white oak tree stood at the northwest
corner of his house lot, and a black oak
at the southwest.

GREAT BROOK BOGGY MEAD-
OW—The stone factory of the late
Henry C. Griggs is in this meadow, and
it is also to be the site of the new mill of
Rogers & Hamilton.

THE GREAT BOGGY MEADOW,
WEST OF TOWN PLOT— Tamarack
swamp.

GREAT BROOK PLAIN— St. Paul's
church stands on it.

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES 0.

THE GREAT HOLLOW. GEORGE'S
HOLLOW— That depression at the head
of Fulling Mill brook between East
mountain and Hopkins's hill. From
George Wei ton, 1726.

THE GREAT HILL, EAST OF
QUASSAPAUG— Referred to by name
in one of the Indian deeds. It is now
called "The Great hill."

GREAT HILL— The extensive eleva-
tion on the east side of the river extend-
ing from Fulling Mill brook at Union
City to ** Smug's " brook at Hopeville.

GREAT HILL— The Great hill north
of the town extended from the Nauga-
tuck valley to the valley of Little brook,
and from David's brook to the lower
lands near the Town Spot.

GREAT HILL— West of the village
of Naugatuck. The top of the hill was,
later, called Gunn hill from Isaiah Gunn.
The lower portion is now called the
Terraces. Gideon Scott was, perhaps,
the first man who lived on the hill. His
brother Edmund also lived there.

GUNNTOWN— The centre of Gunn-
town was situated in the heart of the
basin once known as Toantic meadow
and a little farther up the brook than
the present village of Millville, while
the homesteads of Nathaniel Gunn, Sr.,
his son Enos, and his grandson Enos, as
well as that of Samuel Gunn (also the
brick store built by him) all stood on the
present Middlebury side of the line.

The first land owned by any person
in that vicinity was six acres granted to
Timothy Standly in 1687, described as
"up Toantic brook." After Timothy
Standly and his nephew, Thomas Clark,
agreed to have all things in common and
dwell lovingly together (no doubt em-
ployed in weaving cloth for the Water-
bury people), they deeded this tract of
land to another cloth-weaver, Joseph
Lewis, who laid out about eight acres of
upland in a snug little nook near it, and
there built a house for his son Joseph,
deeding his possessions in that vicinity
to him after the young Joseph was mar-

ried.

progn

added

somes

Althoi

tic me

person

Warn*

bachel

Lewis'

he sole

immed

and bi

probah

neighb

in 1726

In 1
upon tl
house c
next-fa
a son o
extensi
stable ]
Abel (
Derby
proper!
son of J !

ToM:
of twer I
out al
Toanti'
ford ii
aniel's !
time w 1
of its g I
mah, tl (
both ii I
low. ] '

1733. it
adjoini 1
onwarc
spread 1
they hi :
round I
well b
joined :
believt I
lord a I
miller, ;
was nc
few ne !

HISTORT OP WATERS URT.

powerful and aristocratic after the fashion
of the locality and time — on whom they
encroached not, except so far as to carve
out a kingdom for themselves.

They owned the ground the Gunntowll
church stood on so long as it remained
and after the building was removed. Pos-
sessed of a round three hundred acres
almost at the start. Nathaniel Gunn added
over a hundred on Bedlam hill, which
continued in the family for several genera-
tions. Another hundred on the side of the
Twelve Mile hill was added a little later,
while the number of minor acquisitions
became too numerous to mention. Grad-
ually they gathered-in John Weed's
farm, the Hawkins farm, and. with the
acquisition of the Arah Ward lands, the
Gunns reached to Derby line, having
previously stepped beyond it and owned
a farm at Red Oak. Finally, the Great
hill near Naugatuck centre became Gunu
hill, and the Isaiah Gunn place became
au ancestral home of the Gunns, while
the possessions of Enoa Gunn extended
to the river.

Jobamah Gunn, it is said, aspiring to
become the largest land owner in Water-
bury, carried bis tax-list on a certain
year to the assessors, and, learning that
another man owned more acres than he
had returned, went straightway and
bought in haste the first land he could
find for sale. Tradition claims that he
at one lime possessed a thousand acres,
and he is said to have carried on all kinds
of business possible in his day at this
place; but at last he wavered and fell
financially, and the glorv of the Gunn
family from 1730 to about iSoo has be-
come but a tradition. In the year 1794
he was assessed on /s^y. He returned
603 acres of land. He ploughed 33
acres, had 320 of pasture and meadow,
2ZO of " bush pasture atid first-rate out-
land," 80 of second-rate and 50 of third-
rate. He also owned one of tlie fifteen
watches and one of the sin brass clocks
owned in Salem the same year. There
were also eight wooden clocks in that
parish the same year.

HANCOX BROOK, .HANCOCK
BROOK— Enters the river from the
east below Waterville. From Thomas
Hancox, or Hancock.

HANCOX BROOK MEADOWS-
Between "Mountobe" or Mount Toby
and Taylor's meditation; first mentioned
in 1688 as "the place where Timothy
Standly, Stephen Upson and Samuel
Scott should have their division up Han-
cock's brook, they to pitch where they
would, not exceeding three places, and
to have two acres for one," because they
went out of their way to accommodate.
They all had stackyards there.

HANCOX ISLANDS— See page z*;.

HIKCOX BOGGY MEADOW— See
page 347-

HIKCOX SWAMP— Named from Ser-
geant Samuel Hikcox. The second Sam-
uel Hikcox sold it to Deacon Judd. It is
on the Bucks Hill road about a half mile
above Griggs street and is that fine,
level tract of land l3ang between the road
and the east side of Burnt hill. Martin
ShugTue lives on it.

HIKCOX SWAMP— In Watertown,
It is now covered by the considerable
pond lying to the southeastward of the
village.

HIKCOX BROOK— First, the stream
that borders Westwood {the residence of
Mr. Israel Holmes) on the south. It was
named from Sergeant Samuel Hikcox,
who very early laid out five acres there.
His son William laid out much land at
the same place. Second, i
flowing between Hikcox i
Hikcox hill.

HIKCOX MEADOW BROOK— In
Middleburj-. From Samuel Hikcos, who
owned a boggy meadow along the brook.
In 16S7. in a grant to George Scott, it
was called the north branch of Hop brook.
It is the lower end of Gaylord's brook.
At its mouth it is called Wooster brook,
from Abraham Wooster, who settled
where the Bradleyville knife shop is-

HOG POUND— Sec page 221.

ENGLian PLAOE NAMES 01

HOG POUND BROOK-Flows into
Beaver Pond brook at the East Farms
school-house.

HOP BROOK— See p. 353.

HOP MEADOW— See p. 241.

HOP SWAMP— See p. 353.

HOPKINS MOUNTAIN— The north-
em end and the highest part of Ed-
mund's mountain.

HOPKINS HILL— The hill which
extended from near the Milford line to
Fulling Mill brook and on which Stephen
Hopkins, son of John, the miller, settled
in 1734. After the death of John, the
miller, in 1732, his sons, Timothy and
Stephen, sold the corn-mill here to Jona-
than Baldwin, and so far as has been
learned no member of the Hopkins
family was a miller after that date in
Waterbury. In 1734 we find his house
first mentioned. It has been said that
he was living there in 1730 when Joseph,
his son, was bom. Hopkins hill is two
miles easterly from Naugatuck. The
first house of Stephen stood on the sum-
mit of the hill a little southeast of the
present residence of Timothy Gibbud.
He built immediately (and perhaps be-
fore his house was built) a saw-mill on
the small stream that flows southward
through the ancient farm into Beacon
Hill brook. The farm itself was some-
thing more than an ordinary farm. It
consisted of a solid block of nearly a
thousand acres, beside out-lands. The
nucleus of the farm was a 200-acre tract
that had been Joseph Gaylord's. Gaylord
sold it to Timothy Hopkins, and this sale
has perhaps given rise to the erroneous
statement that Timothy Hopkins lived at
Judd's Meadows. Timothy sold this to
his brother Stephen. Other lands about
the sources of Fulling Mill brook were
given to Stephen's wife by her father,
John Peck of Wallingford.

Southeast from his own house (perhaps
a quarter of a mile) Mr. Hopkins gave to
bis son Stephen a house on the same
range, calling it his **good hill." His
son John was given a considerable farm

off the
with a
an east
ward j
throug
known
mately
has be
place,
east an
kins ro
given, ]
To Jo«
east pi
George
had bo
gave tl
remove
house ]
road th
down t«

Ontl
who re
at whi
house)
Stephe
it is sfi i
ful ma I
the St •
whose
once c '
and ca: (
and pi i
way of
mauyr 1
was ta I
delicat ,
late h ;
care. 1
then d !

Here
son Sa :
was a '
saw, h
tial an<
laboric 1
himse] ,
fering :
humai
towarc .

7QO

BISTORT OF WATBBBURT.

speculations are those which can be best
prosecuted in the midstof laborious occu-
pations, so he dwelt much upion them.
He had found time, however, to read
nearly all of value that had been written
on mental phil-mphy. He iraderetond
Locke, Hume, and EiUvLirds, could
rt-peat " Pope's Essay on Man," and had
read much of the old English divines.
His speculations, if reduced to writing,
would in my opinion have made some
clear additions to ali that has been here-
tofore written on some heads of meta-
physical inquiry. I have iiever heard him
on these subjects witliout being struck by
some idea that was new to me. and this
makes me apprehend that some very val-
uable thoughts have died with him. In
the practical concerns of life he had quick
and intuitive perceptions of truth (simi-
lar to those of hia brother Samuel). As
an instance, the following is given. " At
Uoshen. they were building a steeple to
the church, the spire of which was fin-
ished below, and was to be raised by
machinery and placed on the square part
of the tower. When raised nearly to its
place a gin gave way in such a manner
that the spire swung out of the right di-
rection and hung leaning over, while its
great weight and unequal pressure was
thrown upon some braces, which were
yielding and breaking gradually. It
seemed alike fatal to the workmen to fly
or stay, and consternation seized the
multitude, while the impending mass
threatened ruin, and the master builder
was without resource. There were sev-
eral men so placed that they could not be
extricated, and if the mass fell they must
fall with it At this moment of horror,
Mr. Hopkins saw where he could attach
a chain so as to secure the works from
further pressure in the wrong direction
and probably prevent the fall. He seized
an OS chain, wound it anmnd his neck and

shoulders and mounted rapidly to the
scene of danger, regardless of the calls
of his friends, whose attention was
engrossed by the awful danger of his
enterprise. He attached the chain in
such a manner as to secure the crushing
braces and all was safe."

On Hopkins bill also was bom "one
of the most distinguished physicians
of Connecticut " — Dr. Lemuel Hop-
kins, brother of Samuel, of whom a
notice will appear elsewhere, but not
the following estimate left of him by
one who kaew him well : ' His pecu-
liar faculty was the intuitive and almost
instantaneous perception of truth. The
whole cast of his mind, and therefore of
his conversation, was in the highest
degree tuld, strong, original ; and his
thoughts were very often uttered in ner-
vous and concise figures of speech en-
tirely peculiar to himself and full of
instruction and light. He was in many
respects the most extraordinary man I
ever knew, yet he has left nothing behind
him which will at all do him justice. He
will live a little longer in the love and
admiration of the good and \i\^e of his
acquaintance who survive him, and then
the memory will be lost to all human
view," His portrait,* painted by Trum-
bull in 1754, is said to "present a head
and face hardly excelled by the superla-
tive beauty of Milton."!

HORSE PASTURE— Of very early
date. It included lands sequestered for
the pasture of horses. It is now known
as Hopevilie,

HUBBARD'S HOLE — The place
where Nathan Hubbard settled in 1735
or earlier. On tlreat brook at the Chest-
nut Hill road, and on the north side of
City Mills pond.

INDIAN FARM; 1731— On the south-
erly aide of East mountain, or in that
vicinity.

1 of New

. □[ Dr. Hopkin*. Dc. Bro
Id uem. in ricw of the itn
t. Barber's " Conoectlciit

>' Kcudl'i

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES i

INDIAN FIELD. NEW INDIAN
FIELD — Mentioned in 1731.

INDIAN WELL— Near the highway
between Naugatuck and Prospect, within
sight of it, and a little east of the four
comers formed by the Hopkins road and
the road by the ancient Ford place in
Naugatuck. It is a depression in a
meadow, circular in form, about thirty
feet in depth, with a flat bottom, and
shaped as though formed by art.

ISAAC'S MEADOW BARS— At the
intersection of the upper road to Wood-
bury with the Litchfield road, which fol-
lowed the west fence of the common
field to where it crossed the valley of
Steele's brook.

ISAAC'S MEADOW — On Steele's
brook just above its junction with the
Naugatuck river, It lies "largely" on
the west side of the brook just north of
Hancox's eight acre lot.

ISRAEL'S MEADOW— The first land
recorded at Buck's hill. It lies near the
Buck's Hill school-house, and is low
meadow land,

ISRAEL'S SPRING — From Israel
Richardson, who was the first person
who had land recorded on Buck's hill.

JEDEDIAH'S BROOK-It rises in
Jedediah's swamp between Welton's
mountain and Warner's mountain, and
flows into Steele's brook at Ben's meadow.
Named, it is thought, from Jedediah
Turner.

JEREMIAH'S B R O O K — A large
branch of Steele's brook that originally
flowed from Long Boggy meadow in
present Watertown. The meadow was
recently overflowed with water and called
Wattle's pond. It is now known as "Win-
nimaug," an Indian name, constructed
for it by the Rev. Dr. Anderson. Jere-
miah's hill is the elevation 820 feet high
lying between the pond and Steele's
brook. Jeremiah's meadow lies between
and below the pond and the hill. The
road running across the hill was de-
scribed as going through the notch of
Jeremiah's hill. The brook, meadow and

hill 1
Peck

je;

brool

JE
miah

JE]
eastw
hills i

JE]
Deao<
the v:
theV/

JUl
east I
above
Branc
nolds

side oj
and p.'

JEF
east o

JEB
occup I
liff h£ :

JOI
eastei
from 1
scribe !
Cotto]
'*the I
and ^ !
bama
1780.

JO]
Ment: 1
seph .

ju :■

from '
marri
Thon ;
hill,
the s I
same .
Farir
as th<
bly r
from

SI8T0RT OF WATERS URT.

DEACON JUDD'S KILNS: 1716—
" On Spnice brook, as they go to Wooster
swamp." These kilns were perhaps for
drying grain. It is sometimes "Cills."

but n

"kill."

JUDD'S MEADOWS — The ancient

name of the region that is now Nauga-
tuck. The natne probably antedates the
settlement of Mattatuck, and the Judds
probably cultivated the meadows there
during the time that Farmington men
hod the right to improve lands beyond
their own boundaries.

KILL PLAIN, CILL PLAIN. KILN
PL AIN-It is mentioned very early as Kill
plain — certainly in 1715— and is the level
ground lying between Wigwam swamp
and Hikcox swamp on the road to Buck's
hill. It borders Wigwam swamp on the
southeast and the name suggests a san-
guinary Indian conflict on the plain be-
side the swamp. The little settlement,
sometimes called Pearsallville, now occu-
pies Kill plain. Obadiab Scott <son of
George) was living on it in 1724; Joseph
Judd in 1729.

LEAD MINE BROOK, THE EAST
BR ANCH— The East Branch of the Nau-
gatuck river, in distinction from the West
Branch. It enters the river at English
Grass meadow between Thomaston and
Flute ville.

■ LEWIS'S HILL -Named from the
first Joseph Lewis. He loaned the town
money to contest its boundary line with
Wallingford and was repaid by receiving
eighty acres on this hill, His son
lived for a time at the base of it. It
is northwest from the highest part of
Twelve-Mile bill. The railroad passes
over it at a point 6oo feet above the sea.
Also, that still higher land beyond where
William Tyler lives on Buck's hill was
known as Lewis hill. It was early
named from Joseph Lewis, who owned
it before he removed to Judd's meadows.
It gradually lost his name and became
known as " The World's End."

Mad river, and, in the same year, it was
given the name of Lily brook. It enters
from the eastward at a very sharp turn
of the river, where the river's channel
looks like a canal. It is near the north
end of Bald hill.

LINDLEY BROOK — Enters Mad
river from the east at Philip's meadow,
north of Woodtick. See p. 218.

LITTLE BROOK — Rises west of
Burnt hill and unites with Great brook
near the centre of the <:ity.

LITTLE MOUNT TOBE— East of
Mount Tobe.

LOG TOWN — In Prospect between
East mountain and Hopkins hill, near
George's hollow, and east of the Indian
well.

LONG HILL— East of the city ex-
tending from Mad river to Jeremy's

THE LONG LAND. THE SLIP 1700
— The land included in the westemcurve
made by the river at Piatt's mills, in
which lay nearly all of the Plattsville
School district of 1853.

LONG MEADOW— See p 240.

LONG MEADOW FALLS — In the
Naugatuck, opposite Hopeville.

LONG MEADOW BROOK-lt rises
in the Quassapaug region, runs through
Bedlam meadow and unites with Toantic
brook near the western foot of Twelve-
Mile hlU.

LONG SWAMP— On the old Straits
turnpike in the eastern part of Middle-
bury near the Waterbury line, and just
below Watertown line.

LOTHROP HILL— See page 35S.

MAD MEADOW — Below the Mad
river junction with the Naugatuck. The
name covered a long line of meadow
land, through which South Main street
extends.

MAD MEADOW HILL— East of Mad
meadow.

MALMALICK, MALMANICK— The
noble elevation southwest of Town Plot

A

EJ^QLISH PLACE NAMES 0

on which one of the Warners received a
grant of land at an early date, causing
the name ** Warner's Good Hill " to
appear on our records. It was later
settled by descendants of Deacon
Thomas Clark and was possessed by
them for several generations. Hans
Rasmussen is now the chief owner of
the lands on the hill. His brother, Ras-
mus Scott Rasmussen, also has extensive
greenhouses on Malmalick. They belong
to the first family of Danes that came to
Waterbury, consisting of James Peter
Rasmussen, his wife and their seven
children. They came from Copenhagen
in 1884.

MANHAN MEADOW — The island
meadow formed by the river and a line
of coves formerly extending from Lake
Hubbard to Hop meadow, and supposed
to have been the former bed of the river.

MANHAN NECK, OR MUNHAN-
NOCK — ^The southern extremity of Man-
han meadow where the first g^ardens
were. This name is spelled according to
the fancy of the recorder, "Munhan,
Minhan, Mahan," and soon became
simply "the Neck."

. MANHAN NECK HILL— The round
hill in Manhan meadow, around which
the first settlers had their gardens, after
the manner of the settlers of Plymouth
colony. It lies in the line of Hop Meadow
hill, divided from it by the stream and
coves which lay between them. The
name is supposed to have been Munhan-
nock hill.

MANTOE'S HOUSE, MANTOE'S
HOUSE ROCKS — Northwest of the
stone house where Charles Terrill lives —
formerly the Thomas Judd house on
the east side of Buck's hill. Elijah
and Philena Richards sold to Abraham
Prichard six acres between Chestnut hill
and Mantoe's House rock. In 1801 he
had a house there, which he sold in
1803.

MESHADDOCK MEADOW— In Mid-
dlebury. East of Bedlam hill, and north
of Sandy hill.

ME
mead<
swam
dock
Mequ4

Mil

MOI
way <

townl:
atuck
times
name

MO<

of the'

MUI

1705.
place c
and Be
also Rj

MUI

Naugal

NAG
name <
before

ne:

MUNI
Bunkei
tain.

NE\

and vi<
cott.

NE
Newell
hill.

NIC
THE
FENC
PARK
ony h£
keepin
eral C<
made
for th
them,
pertai]
side t]
alty f
wounc
any pj

704

HISTORY OF WATERS ITS r.

whereby they might escape, the penalty
was thirteen pounds, beside any damage
that might accrue thereby.

We find mention, in Waterbury, in
1750, of The Park, also of "The Park
fence "and "The Park gate "—leaving
no doubt regarding the fact that at that
date the region familiarly known as the
Park was used as a deer park.

It contained more than three hundred
acres, imd remains to this day a wild,
rugged region, almiist untouched by the
hand of man. It has had an interesting
histon,-. Much of it remains in the realm
of tradition, but numerous facts may be
gleaned from the records. There was an
ancient highway laid out througli it in
1716, known as the Stone path. It merits
its name, and can still be found without
difficulty. It began at the road west of
■■Westwooii" (which in 1729 formed a
part of the LitthfieUl road, and before
that period the course of the Common
fence) and ran to the Nichols' Farm road,
now the Bunker Hill road. The Park
road, surveyed in 1763, runs through a
section of it. There was also a ■■ way "
from the Stone path to the point where
the Park road eaters the enclosure near
Matthew Lilley's house. Here also was
the Park gate (the early Woodburj- road
passing twenty rods distant from the
gate). The Crank of the Park was the
bend or angle at its more Routhern point,
between the Stone path and the east
fence. Tradition tells of a club house.
The builcUng stood on the "way'' or
path between the Stone path and the
Park gate.

There is a tract of i', yi acres within it.
that has had but two OAVners— Jonathan
Scott (who was taken out of town by the
Indians), and the Episcopal Church,
Scott laid it out in 1720. He received it
"for services done for the proprietors."
In 1745, the year in -which he died,
he conveyed it (calling it woodland)
to the Professors of the Church of Eng-
land in Waterbury. It is still one of
the glebe lands held by St. John's
chiTch. Daniel Scott— the son who

lived with his father— also signed the

deed. At the layout of the land its nortli-
west comer was an oak tree: in 1745
it was a "roci-oak tree"; in 1780 or
a little later it had become a "large
rock-oak tree"; in 1S42 it was an '^old
rock-oak tree," and in iS!l4 the shell of
the slump of the tree could be seen, out
of which two saplings of considerable
size were growing. In 1724 a tract of
thirty-two acres was laid out to John
Richardson, the survey of which in-
cluded the easterly comer of Scott's land.
This overlapping of ancient surveys has
full iilustration, as found in the Park.
This layout of 1714 mentions Bryant's
hill. Who Bryant was. and why his
name was given to the hill, we have not
learned,

James Nichols — the founder and the
owner of the Park — in 1733. when bis
father, Joseph Nichols, died, was a stu-
dent at Vale college. Because of his
studies he resigned the executorship of
hia father's will. He early sold his right
in his father s farm to John Netlleton.
In 1742 he made his first purchase within
the territory which he later owned. In
1741) he laid out. bought, exchanged, and
bargained for lands all about that region,
and became the virtual owner or con-
troller of all the land in and surrounding
his future park- so that the string of his
purcha.ses extended all the way from the
summit of West Side hill to the extreme
northern part of Gaylord's hill, including
some of the Hopkins land — and this, not-
withstanding the title still held by others
to lands within the enclosure, probably
provided for by " bargains " not on re-
It would be interesting to learn why
James Nichols forsook his deer park.
We only know that on January- 1. 1756, he
sold to his " brother " EbenezerWatelee,
all the land in the Park that he then
owned, and that he was, at that dale,
living in Salisbury, In 1756 he sold also
to Wakelee "sundry pieces outside ol
the Park fence." The same year Eben-
ezer Wakelee sold to his brother James

ENGLISH PLAGE NAMES 0

Wakelee, for £i2S* *' one half of that the R

Land called ye park," and said that it the n

was the land he bought of James Nichols, other,

Fifty of the above acres (which ran up his ho

to the top of Welton*s mountain) Wakelee Robbi

sold to David Shelton of Ripton. This York.*

land remained in the Shelton family for to the

more than fifty years, and the name ad- situate

hered to the locality as late as 1865. John bury,

Clark (who removed to New Milford) Northc

bought most of the Shelton tract about dition,

1 8 12; he sold fifteen acres of uniform lean so

width, off the south end, to William K. of 181.

Lampson, who conveyed it to James **Sauri

Scovill, who sold it to E4ward Scovill. be Sol'j
When his estate was settled this land Lerat

was " distributed " to James C. Scovill. the Par

So far as the records reveal, or their traditio
estates make it to appear, William Thelj

Morgan and Miles Morris are still the it is beli
owners of five acres of this original lay- The

out of fifty acres. (son of

The Park field lay in the southeastern lived f<

portion of it. About 1760, George Nich- Hannal

ols began to cultivate the land there, in the F

giving it that name. The Nichols family to go W

owned lands in that region and all about and Clc 1

it, long after James sold out. Tradition Araasa '.

indicates at a later period perhaps, and sold the

probably in the time of John Nichols fat she \

(the author of a most remarkable convey- bought

ance of land) that a club of Waterbury*s the tr< ;

young men, built a club house in the Hannal ,

Park and filled the region with the Glebe

echoes of their festivities — but nothing near a 1

more substantial has reached us than the which 1 i
possible site of this club house, else were Rent \

referred to. George Nichols had an hun- Park, v :

dred-acre farm, said to be located at Sco- He also I

vill's meadow. It extended from the old — a par 1

Woodbury road northward, probably to which I

the southern limit of the Park, and along pippins

on the outside of the western side of it. brated 1

On it he seems to have built the famous still sta

tavern, referred to on page 422. rail fen >

Solomon Tompkins lived near the stands, 1

southwest comer of Welton's mountain so as tc i

in the Park. The remains of his two either s :
houses still appear, one within, one with- Orra '

out the fence. His first dwelling place, perhap

by tradition a famous Tory rendezvous in Nichoh ;

45

7o6

HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

The house at its RHte, in which she lived
until quite recently, was once a saw-mill.
It was moved there from Sleii Hall
brook, used as a blacksmith shop, by
Amasa Roberls^and still later, was
made a dwelling house. Orra bought it
and litigered there, until, in her old age,
the town took her and her poor habita-
tion into its care. And thus departed
from this rejjion the last representative
of the proud and prosperous Nichols
family.

NONNEW.\UG HILI North of

Watertown centre, and within the fork
of Steel's brook and Obadiah's brook.
The parsonage or ministry land of iso
acres lay between the south end of the
hill and Steel's brook. It was within the
limits of the Village, land having bean
taken upon it before the Village was laid
out. We finil the following description:
"That called Nonnewaug — northwest of
Jonathan Scott's mill at the falls of Steel's
brook. " A stream and plain of the same
name are in Watertown.

OBADIAH'S BROOK— A branch of
Steele's brook, north of Watertown cen-
tre, between the road to Robert's mill on
the West Branch and the Litchfield tum-

OBADIAH'S MEADOW —At the June
titin of Steele's with Obadiah's Meadow

OLD ETERNITY ROAD-The old
highway that nms southward from the
vicinity of the Rock house, see p sso,
and goes to the top of Buck's Meadow
moflntain. It crossed the mountain
lengthwise and came toward ^\'ftterbury.
It is so-called in 1773 in a deed given by
Richard Seymour to his sou Joai^h.

ORONOKE HILL, 1686— The ridge
between Gaylord's and Welton's brooks,
running down to near where they join
Hop brook. The Woodbury road of 1720
ran over its north end, and in the survey
it is called "a plain hill." It was first
mentioned in agrant to John Welton, then
called Worenog. Later it appears as
Orenaug, <')ronoke, Orinack, Orinoque.

It then became reduced to Onuck, now-
called Onmoke. The south end of it was
later called Blackraan's hill. The Derby-
road of 1740 ran over the middle ut it.
William Johnson now lives on the sum-
mit. Hi« place was formerly the Dudlev
place.

THE ORDINARY— A rock on the
ancient Farmington line, which formed
the northeast comer of the southern sec-
tion of the Waterbury purchase of ibe
Tunxis Indians in 1684.

OUSE BASS SWAMP— North of the
old Cheshire road, near Calvary ceme-
tery,-.

PATAROON HILL—See page 315.

PEPPERIDGE SWAMP, PEPRAGE
SWAMP— Judd's meadow near the Great
hill, west side of the river.

PIGEON BROOK— A branch of Hop
brook, not far from its mouth. The out-
let of Pigeon swamp — an adjunct of Cot-
ton Woo! meadow. Charles Wedge has

PINE HILI See p 240.

PINE HOLE— Water\-ille.

PINE ISLAND, PINE ISLAND
FALLS— In the Naugatnck river above
Piatt's mills,

PINE ISLAND MEADOW— The
small meadow west of the river near by
the falls.

PINE ISLAND SPRING— A noted
spring on the east side of the river at the
same place— sometimes called " The
widow's spring." Named for the widow
of Sergeant Samuel Hikcox.

PINE SWAM P— Between Upson's
and Richardson's meadows.

POLAND— !n Farmington and Water-
burj-. Grants to soldiers of the Pequot
war were made there by Farmington It
probably was named on account of the
hoop-poles that were found there, as
Southmayd, in one instance certainly,
wrote " Pole Land." A path to " Watter-
bury" is mentioned there in 1696 in the
Farmington records. The Poland river
is an easterly branch of the Pequabuck

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES 0,

river. The principal part of the region
once known as Poland is now in Bristol,
and the Tenyville station of the New
York and New England road is in the
midst of it.

POND HILL— In the eastern part of
Naugatuck, in the southern part of the
Fulling Mill brook system, giving the
name to the Pond Hill school district.
The hill was so named from a small nat-
ural pond on it.

POPPLE MEADOW— Above the falls
on the Naugatuck river — where Sutliff*s
mill was.

PATUCKO'S RING — Originally the
extensive hill east of Ash swamp. It is
slightly separated from the origfinal Spin-
dle hill on the northwest bv a small brook
and the depression through which it runs
into Ash swamp. It extended to the
Mad river. See page 53. Josiah Rog-
ers about 1724 laid out over a hundred
acres in one tract " on Patucko's Ring at
the Falls of the Mad River"; land was
laid out ** on the hill east of Ash Swamp
at a place called Patucko's Ring"; land
that lay on both sides of Ash Swamp, be-
low the swamp, was said to be " at Ches-
nut hill and Patucko's Ring" — so that the
name would seem to apply to all that ex-
tensive range of hill from Ash Swamp
brook northward so far as to lie between
Spindle hill and the Mad river.

POVERTY STREET, 1773 — The
western part of the Bunker Hill road in
Watertown.

PRINDLE HILL— Edmund's moun-
tain, also Hopkins* mountain. The same
name was at one time applied to the an-
cient Welton's hill between Grove and
Pine streets.

PUNDERSON'S HOLE— John Pun-
derson of New Haven bought in 1731 of
Jonathan Scott " three and one-half acres
west of the river against Mad meadow."
Punderson's hole was the peculiar de-
pression in the sand hills in this pur-

chase,
railroc

KM

east si
at an <
occupa
the In<
at chos
a favor

RAll
LANE

RICl
BROO)

who liv
ent resc

RICI

251.
RICK

Mount '
brook.

ROA]
Lewis's

ROAl
Mad riv

ROLi
plain w<

ROCl

GRE.
Buck's 1

Rou:

northea

ROU
propose
brook "\
water si

ROU
name s
branch

RUC

the nort

SCH(
school c
Neck,*
Farmin
Hop S^

* The Break Neck district had forty tax-payers on a sum total
BronsoDS, who paid very nearly one-half the taxes of that district

7o8

HISTOBT OF WATERS URT,

Southwest and Salem," •* Tompkins,"
Town Plot.

In 1790 two districts had been added
and the names changed to numbers — the
Thirteenth district having been formed in
part from the Buck's Hill district. The
East district became the Third, and
Tompkins the Fifth district.

Among the early school-houses away
from Waterbury centre that have been
noticed as of record before 1800 are: One
in Westbury in 1762; on Three-Mill hill
in 1784; on Bedlam hill in 1784; in Tomp-
kins district in 1794.

Of the early school teachers in the
" Judd's Meadow district," the following
names have been preserved in the records
of Deacon Samuel Lewis: In 1771 Abi-
gail Winters, Esther Cook. Daniel War-
ner, Olive Upson and Temperance Spen-
ser. In 1772 Esther Cook. In 1776 [Mrs.]
Ame Constant.

SANDY HOLLOW— At and about
the house of the late Dr. Alfred North
on North Main street. It is now occu-
pied by the Waterbury club.

SATAN'S MEDITATION—Origi-
nally a portion of the Miry swamp, be-
tween the branches of Hop brook. When
Solomon Tompkins bought land there of
the Howe family the land was described
as being " at the Miry swamp." When
Tompkins sold the land about ten years
later it is described as ** Sa. . . s Medi-
tation."

SAW-MILL HILL— Near Nathaniel
Gunn's saw-mill. North of the brook and
west of Millville.

SAW-MILL PLAIN, MILL PLAIN—
Where the earliest saw-mill of Water-
bury was. It is now simply Mill Plain.

SCOTT'S BROOK— A name once
applied to that portion of Long Meadow
brook which is below present Millville.

SCOTT'S GRAVE— About three-
fourths of a mile southwesterly from Rey-
nolds Bridge.

SCOTT'S MOUNTAIN — See page
325 — Named in 1703.

SCOTT'S SAW-MILL— On Hancock's
brook near the present Downs* grove.

SCOTT'S SUGAR WORKS— About
1750. In Middlebury, in the "Meshad-
dock" or "Meshatuck" region. From
John Scott, son of Edmund, 2d, who
settled there about 1733.

SCO VILL'S MEADOW— On the Mid-
dlebury road beyond the Boughton place.
See page 354.

•♦SCOWERING" GRASS SWAMP
AND BAD SWAMP — In the region
drained by Fort Swamp brook after leav-
ing Fort Swamp. Bad swamp probably
being the small miry swamp immedi-
ately west of Tame Buck hill.

SCRAG FIELD— Northeast of Buck's
hill. In 1730 Richard Welton had land
laid out at its north end.

SECOND MOUNT, 1740— It lay west
of Samuel Porter's house, the east side
of East mountain, at Turkey- hill.

SHARP'S MANOUVER— In 1793
land was sold to John Kingsbury, Esq.,
described as "in the northeast part of
the sequester a little south of Flaggj'
Swamp plain, adjoining Sharp's Manou-
ver, bounded southward on highway or
said Manouver." Laid out on Thomas
Richardson's right.

SHRUB PLAIN— On the West Branch
above Reynolds bridge.

SHUM'S ORCHARD — In Poland.
There was also Shum's Orchard hill.

SLED HALL— Traditionally, the spot
where the pioneer planters passed the
first winter. Sergt. Samuel Hikcox owned
land •' at Sled Hall." described as " west
of the river, south and west on the
hill." Seep. 590.

SLED HALL BROOK— Flows out of
Tamarack swamp and into the river
south of the Waterbury hospital. On
this stream an attempt to build a saw-
mill was probably made in 1674, in
order to furnish material for their
houses on Town Plot. It was the only
available brook near there and was

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK.

709

readily adapted to the style of mill nsed
at that date.

THE SLIP — See "THE LONG
LAND."

SOL'S SWAMP— In the Park, named
from Solomon Tompkins.

SPRUCE BROOK— There were three
Spruce brooks. One enters the Nauga-
tuck from the east, and flows between
Mount Taylor and Mount Tobe; another,
north of Watertown centre, flows from
the west into Steele's brook; still another
enters Steele's brook just above the Oak-
ville station.

SPRUCE SWAMP— In the northern
part of Watertown. East of the road
from Watertown centre to Robert's mill
on the West Branch.

STONE BRIDGE— On the old New
Haven road at the south end of the
Abrigador. It was over Horse Pasture
brook.

STONE HOUSE— At the southern
foot of Hopkins' hill.

STONE PITTS— Near Mantoe's
House rocks. Rights were reserved here
to get stone by the proprietors.

STONY PASTURE— On the western
side of Long hill.

SMUG'S BROOK— Origin of name
unknown. Possibly from an Indian.
The stream that enters the river at
Hopeville — sometimes written Smug
Swamp brook.

SMUG'S SWAMP— Now occupied by
the reservoir of the Smith & Griggs
company at Hopeville.

SOUTHMAYD'S PASTURE — On
Great brook above Grove street, border-
ing on Cooke street.

STEELE'S BROOK— Is first referred
to as the brook that comes into the river
at Steele's meadow; later it is called
Ben*s meadow brook, "Woster," brook,
and for a time the two names Steele
and Woster contended for the mastery.
Named from John or Samuel Steele of
Farmington, and possibly from Edward
Wooster of Derby.

THE STONE PATH, 1716-See the
Park.

TAILOR'S MEADOW OR JOHN
WARNER'S MEADOW— John, the son
of Thomas Warner, in 1717, laid out land
near where the small tributaries forming
the head waters of Beaver Pond brook
unite. Dr. Ephraim Warner laid it out
for him, but forgot to tell of it, and the
land became mingled with other layouts,
but continued for many years to bear his
name.

William Austin now owns land which
includes Tailor's meadow. The old
Goodyear house was near it. Austin
obliterated the cellar-place of the house
quite recently. The first settler in the
region of the meadow was Caleb Merri-
man, son of Eliasaph of Wallingford.
He was succeeded by Benjamin Benham
who "carved off some of the farm for
Lydia Mix." The Rev. John Reed (who
won Waterbury's heart about 1700) had
a farm near by, which James Benham
bought. Reuben, Shadrach, and perhaps
Ebenezer Benham, all lived in that
vicinity between 1750 and 1800.

THE TAYLOR LOT— The Cooper
lot (seven acres) lay at the northeast cor-
ner of East Main and Cherry streets and
extended to Walnut street. The Taylor
lot (five acres) adjoined it on the east
and extended from East Main to Walnut
street. "Stanley's Timber" adjoined
the Taylor lot on the east. It was a
seven acre tract and was bounded west
by Niagara street. Niagara street was
an ancient highway (mentioned in 1691).
Walnut street probably began where it
now does, and '* ran catering up the hill
to Niagara street."

TAMARACK SWAMP— It was called
by this name about 1754 when Mr. South-
mayd and others combined to drain the
swamp and make improved meadow of
it. This was perhaps the last real estate
transaction in which he was engaged,
and he seems to have accomplished his
purpose, as he and the other owners
sold to one of their number a portion of

710

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

the swamp in severalty, bounded on a
ditch. Sixty years ago the region was a
dense swamp. It is now cleared. The
Middlebury road now runs through it,
and also Sunnyside avenue. It was first
called " the great boggy meadow west of
Town Plot." At a later date both Rich-
ardson's azid Upson's Meadows lay in it.

T A Y L O R ' S M EDITATION— The
rough, high hill lying east of the east
branch of Hancock brook, around which
the New York and New England rail-
road curves, before reaching Tol lea's
station.

TAME BUCK HILL— The high,
extensive and prominent ridge between
Lily brook and Fort Swamp brook.

TAVERN BROOK— Now called East
Mountain brook. A branch of Beaver
Pond brook. Tlie distributing reservoir
of the first city water works is built in
the valley of it,

MOUNT TAYLOR— The rocky,
prominent ridge aliove WaterviUe and
between Naugatuck river and Hancox

It was quite natural, therefore, that it
should be used as one of the points of
demarkation or departure in the Indian
deeds of Waterbviry, and also that the
undiscovered Mr, Taylor whose name had
been given to the height before the first
Indian deed of Waterbury was drawn,
should have made use of it in viewing
and exploring the wilderness in the pre-
historic days of Mattatuck.

The most prominent and elevated ridge
of Mount Taylor was called Mount Tay-
lor rock. The weslem extremity of the
rock has its perpendicular face to the
southward, and, with its abrupt ending
at the river westward, it nearly cuts off
the valley at that point. The eastern
end has a greater altitude, but termi-
nates on the level summit of a wall of
rock which presents an abrupt face to the
brook below. At this point were located
the ■' Deer Stakes," where deer pursued
and driven from among the hills either
northward or southward of the place

would have to pass in close quarters — the
large and plentifol boulders thereabouts
affording hiding places for hunters.

About a century ago the most sonth-
erly ridge of Mount Taylor rock became
known as the Rattlesnake ledge.

Between Rattlesnake ledge and Mount
Taylor rock there is a depression that
was once in cultivation and has not alto-
gether gone back to its original wildness,
A house once stood there, the marks of
which, perhaps, may still be seen.
Apple trees are near by, and a little
brook not far off; w^here birds sing and
the sun shines in, just as it did when
Mr. Southroayd had there one of his sev-
eral farms. A steep road leads up to
the old house-site, which may have been
made by the planters — for this is the
place designated in the "old book" as
that where the rails were obtained to
build the west fence of their common
field.

From Mr. Southmayd the land passed
to one or more of his Bronson grand-
children, and the first person mentioned
on record as being in possession of a
house there was a widow named Roberts ;
the last ime, probably, was James Har-

The most southern pinnacle or ridge of
Mount Taylor, separated from Mount
Taylor rock by a deep depression, was
called at a later day Bull Plain rock or
rocks, fn)ni Deacon Samuel Bull of
Woodbury — who married the widow of
Deacon Thomas Hickcox— and the an-
cient Hantox plain adjoining became
Bull plain. Through the deep depression,
mentioned above, ran a highway from
Buck's hill to Waterlown. Where it
crossed Hancox brofik there was a mill
(Scott's), and to this mill ran the highway
from our North Willow street, following
the course of the common fence all the

The Mount Taylor rock range extends
to the northward along the western bor-
der of Hancock's brook to the old mil! at
Greystone, and its most northern peak
was called Pine hill. In some places it

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES 0

presents a declivitous front to the brook,
overhanging its own base. A portion of
this lofty ledge, seen from the valley of
the brook, presents the appearance of a
lion's face. This, it is thought, is what
was, in the records, called Anthony's
nose. There is also a clear profile
resembling that of Washington.

Marks of once existing highways, the
records, and the natural circumstances of
the case lead to the belief that this sec-
tion was formerly open to the outside
world. Mount Taylor, in its whole
length from its southern point of Bull
Plain rocks to Greystone, is about two
miles long.

TAYLOR'S MEDITATIO N— Is
thought to be the hill around which the
New England railroad curves so sharply
before reaching Tolles station.

THE THREE SISTERS, ALIAS
THE THREE BROTHERS— In 1673,
the ** three chestnut trees growing from
one root," represented on page 193,
formed a boundary comer of New Haven
and Milford townships. Later, Waterbury
and Wallingrford met at the same bound
with the former places At onetime and
another, the same tree has been the cor-
ner of nine different towns. The south-
west corner of Wallingford became the
southwest comer of Cheshire; the north
end of Milford became Woodbridge ;
eventually, the southwest part of Chesh-
ire (and the southeast part) became
Prospect ; the northwest corner of New
Haven became the town of Bethany, and
the southeast comer of Waterbury and
northern part of Woodbridge became
Naugatuck. Thus, this historic tree
(being three in one) has, during its life,
remained on its own root and yet lived in
nine townships. It is also distinguished
as the corner bound of two counties —
Hartford and New Haven — which it con-
tinued to be until Waterbury was trans-
ferred from Hartford county to New
Haven county.

TOANTIC BROOK— This brook an-
ciently ran out of the east side of Toantic

pond
hill in
Milel
with 1
After
name*
that o
the tw

TO^

that ri
souths
It is tl
Twelve
Woodr
applie<f
the poi

TOA
of and
ancient
of it.
hill on
south, ]

TOA
lake lyj
Long I
was th
bury (n ,
tic hill
It is si I
express
on a hi I
vation
was a]
ancient

TO^ :

basin < I
ing Ar !
in i:c4
a mill-
to StO|

line (tt
ing th
and b: i
Long '.
enlarg
Gunn
They 1
since
which
for th

712

HI8T0BT OF WATERBUBT.

land a part of the time. While Arah
Ward remained in the neighborhood and
retained a share of the mills, and had
begun to build for himself a second and a
larger house, the dam at the head of the
ditch which conveyed the water from
Toantic to the mills was undermined by
beavers, or in some way gave out and
produced great disaster, burying Arah
Ward's new frame for his second house,
and making wild gravel and boulderland
of deep muck. A great chasm was left
in the side hill where it started, carrying
away so much of the highway as to neces-
sitate the laying out of a new one and
changing materially the order of arrange-
ments in the vicinity. The above deduc-
tions are the result of a careful research
in existing records combined with tradi-
tion.

MOUNTOBE, MOUNT TOBE— This
mountain is separated from Mount Tay-
lor on the south by Spruce brook, and
extends upward about three miles to the
One Pine hill in Plymouth. On the west,
it is separated from Jericho rock by
George's brook, named from George
Scott, son of Edmund, the planter. On it,
the Gaylords and the Warners had lands
laid out at an early date. About 1785,
Victory Tomlinson, owner of a large pro-
portion of the stock of the Waterbury
River turnpike, lived on the mountain
only a few feet from its summit, which
is 893 feet high.

THE TIMBERED MOUNT TOBE
— The uppermost peak of Mount Tobe.
It is two feet higher than the main part
of the mountain.

LITTLE MOUNT TOBE— Thought
to be the hill at Greystone, between
which and the mill-pond the railroad
passes. It is just above the Plymouth
line.

TWELVE MILE HILL, SCOTT'S
HILL. OSBORN HILL, HUNTING-
TON HILL, ANDREWS HILL—
Twelve Mile hill is the most ancient
English place name that we can account
for within Mattatuck plantation.

The name is applied to that fine, beau-
tiful dome which lies directly west of
Naugatuck and rises to a height of 850
feet — forming the northwestern portion
of Strait mountain — the mountain reach-
ing down to Spruce brook which flows
through High Rock glen. The ancient
Toantic. or Woodruff's hill, is thirty feet
higher than it.

In 1671, before Woodbury was, and
when but twelve families were living
within the territory later known as Derby,
the Colonial government granted that
the northern limit of that plantation
should extend *' twelve miles from its
southern boundary." That measure-
ment led to the summit of this hill, on
which a stake was placed from which
surveys were made east and west for the
town line between Derby and Water-
bury. The stake stood for nearly a cen-
tury. The site of it was then faithfully
held for many years by an apple tree,
which, in turn, has disappeared, but the
point is still marked by a heap of stones.
The restoration of the ancient name of
this hill, and the replacing in enduring
and suitably inscribed stone, of the
Twelve Mile stake — presaged by the
order of 1671, and placed on the hill
probably soon after that time, certainly
before May 18, 1680 — is an honor which
Naugatuck might well confer upon her-
self, if, indeed, the ancient towns of
Derby and Waterbury neglect their op-
portunity of an anniversary meeting on
the same hill for the same purpose.

The first English land-owner on the
hill was John Standi}', who received a
grant of twelve acres •* at the stake set
down by Derby men." This grant was
made about 1687, and sold in 1721 to Mr.
Joseph Moss of Derby.

When Conquepatana, a chieftain of
the Derby Indians and an ancestor of
the distinguished Konkerpot family
among the Scatacook tribe of north-
western Connecticut, signed the deed of
the Derby Indians conveying to the set-
tlers of Mattatuck their tribal rights to the
lands adjoining to the northward, and

ENGLISH PLACE NAMES 0.

said it was good, and that he understood
it. he reserved, or thought he did, this
particular hill and its environment to
himself and family for individual pos-
session. He sold the Waterbury part of
it, in company with his son Tom, in 1711,
to Waterbury. A little later the Derby
side of it is referred to as having been
purchased from the native Indian pro-
prietors by Joseph Moss and his brother
Samuel. Joseph acted as agent for Water-
bury in the former purchase.

Of this hill. Mr. William Ward, the
appreciative and accurate historian of
the early settlers of Naugatuck, has
written: " Ascend in the early summer
any one of its surrounding hills and
sweep the horizon with your vision, and
your eyes will remain fixed upon this
beautiful hill. Its fine lines, graded by
nature, curve gracefully from its summit
in every direction to the valley below.
It was easy for man to convert it into a
beautiful lawn. A visit to this lovely
place on a bright summer's day, when
every inspiration of its pure air seems to
lift one above the strife and selfishness
of the world below, is a delight. Any
one who can inhale the bracing air and
gaze on the beautiful landscape, and not
be happy, should at once retire to his
lower plane and hide himself in the smoke
of the valley. Remain on this charming
spot until the forces of nature seem to be
hushed into silence, lest they disturb the
preparations making to wrap the earth
in its mantle of night; then turn your
eyes westward and see the glorious sun
gently sink in a dazzling fiood of beauty
and loveliness, until, with a final good-
night fiash, it hides behind the Catskills
— and your soul must be filled with won-
der and admiration."

After the above description one can
understand Chieftain Conquepatana's
love for his hill.

John Weed, hatter of Derby, came into
possession by purchase and layout of con-
siderable tracts of land upon the hill, in-
cluding some of the grants to Waterbury
men, and proceeded to set up his sons as

farmei
John
of the
ner, hi
of the
summi
the sa
where
the ju
mounti

Amo
Haven,
of the I
with h
Daniel
five yec
alone o:
nearest
having
from a
the top
line, in

Then
good sii
the tw(
and thi
Joseph i
of half :
that ttf
brother
patana.

Dani '.
arrive, i
after i: •

Durv <
his hou
having 1
to Nor I
living :
also bo I
in 1748 i
on the I

Duri :
Osbori
that he 1
very n i
line, a <
house i
From f
large 1
Water .

714

ni8T0RT OF WATERBUBT.

said to have built his second house across
the line in Derby— and, in his old age (he
lived to be 91), to have crossed the line
once more and lived with William, one
of his sons. His houses were, as it were,
in the same door-yard. His Waterbury
hoase, not being in service, was, it is said,
torn down to save the taxes paid to
Waterbury on it. every fire-place being
taxed, and taxes in Waterbury higher
than in Oxford. Tradition tells of the
lavish expenditure, the luxurious living
and the unbounded hospitality of Wil-
liam Osbom on this hill after the death
of his father. Deacon Thomas Osbom,
he having bought the rights of the other
heirs. He, at last, left it, and the hill-
top passed into the hands of the Hunting-
ton family — the first of the name there
being the Rev. Mr. Huntington of the
Congregational church in Oxford. Later,
the Andrews family came into the owner-
ship of it, and it has come to be called by
their family name. The summer resi-
dence of G, W. Andrews is now on it.
One of the Thomas Osbom houses was
standing as late as 1885, and the old well
is still in use. It is forty feet deep and
has never been cleaned because the flow
of water is too great to admit of it. The
Osbom houses on the apex of the hill
were, at different times, in the towns of
Derby, Waterbury, Oxford and Nauga-
tuck; in the societies of Oxford and
Salem; in the Probate districts of Wood-
bury, New Haven. Waterbury and
Naugatuck, and yet close neighbors.

TURKEY BROOK— At first known
as the north branch of Steele's brook.
An early grant was described as being
" up a small brook that falls into a small
brook that falls into Turkey Brook." It
enters Steele's brook at Oakville.

THE FALLS OF TURKEY BROOK
— Above the place where Samuel Judd
lived in 1730— between Scott's mountain
and Buck's Meadow mountain.

TURKEY MEADOW— Now a reser-
voir for Slade's saw -mill on Turkey
brook.

TWITCH GRASS BROOK— In
Thomaston. Now called Clay brook.

TWITCH GRASS MEADOW— See
page 315.

THE CITY. UNION CITY — As
early as 1770 Union City was known as
"The City." It was then what might
be called a little manufacturing centre,
consisting of a saw-mill, a grist-mill and
"potash works." In Deacon Gideon
Hotchkiss's account book are a number
of entries of ashes "delivered at The
City" in 1770 and in 1771.

The accompanying cut represents, per-
haps, the oldest house now standing
within the ancient township. The date
of its erection is not known, but it was
built either by Dr. Daniel Porter, or by
his son, Thomas Porter — ^therefore we
have a house yet with us that was built
either by a proprietor of Mattatuck, or
by the son of a proprietor. Long may
it be cherished by the townsmen of
Naugatuck ! In 1765 Thomas Porter
gave the house and sixty acres of land
to his son Thomas. At the same date
he gave gifts of houses and lands to
other sons. The old house is of special
interest, because within it were sheltered
and cared for many soldiers in the war
of the Revolution. It was kept as a
tavern in 1770 and for many years after
that date. See p. 456.

UPSON'S BRIDGE AND UPSON'S
MEADOW— Were on the Woodbury
road, now a portion of the Park road«
between where it leaves the Middlebury
road and the hill. It was an early grant,
without date, to Stephen Upson.

UPSON'S ISLAND ROCKS— A suc-
cession of semi-detached, rugged spurs of
rock, bordering the river between the
ridges of Mount Taylor and Mount Tobe
— so-called because lying against the an-
cient Upson's island— the tract of
meadow land on an island in the river
that was set apart in 1679 for a future
inhabitant, who proved to be Stephen
Upson.

ENOLISH PLACE NAMES 0

UPSON'S WOLF PIT— East of Long Wood

hill. rods ■

THE VILLAGE, GUERNSEY either

TOWN — The era of exact and corapre- fourn

hensive lay-outs begaD about 172S, and mile, <

was soon va full force. The newer part single

of Litchfield county and the newer parts cordin

of the older towns, then to be laid out, seated

were surveyed by the new system, sectioi

instead of the very early one of going the no

"as far as the good land lyeth." Afte

The northwestern part of Waterbury was fc

was so laid out, and named "TheVil- had be

lage." It began at. or on Bichards's re-sur

mountain (\y\a% south from the Taft was a

school buildings), and ran northerly, north

parallel with the east line of Woodbury The v

township, to the town line road of Litch- lends .

field, which formed the northern bound- sure, i

ary as far east as the West Branch. their 1

Within the above txjundaries were tiers differ)

of lots running north and south, sepa- tracts

rated every half mile by an eight-rod tain It

highway. An eight-rod highway bor- town

dered the village plot on the east, while land 1 1

on the west the town line highway with where

7i6

HIBTORT OF WATEBBURY.

are, the original hill being tbe t
southwest of the Fair grounds and north
of the Minortown road, but the name
spread to the adjoining lands of the same
owner; and Southmayd's meadow, now
covered by a pond (Big meadow) at the
head of a branch of Nonnewaug brook,
spoken of in Southmayd's lay-out as '■ a
sprain of Woodbury river."

There was considerable trouble first
and last in the lay-out of the Village.
A number of committees were appointed,
various sets of instructions g^iven, some
preremptory mandates and changes
made, some resignations tendered, and
perplexity seems to have attended almost
every stage of this endeavor to live " by
art." Waterbury evidently did not take
kindly to that style of lay-out, for her
people attempted and abandoned the
same system in the old sequester, and in
the southeast quarter; and some of the
astonishingly irregular and indefinite lay-
outs about the townships testify to their
aptness at living without " art " — but
nevertheless, the Village lines to a con-
siderable extent may be traced to-day.
Among the early settlers of the Village
there is some reason for thinking that
John Guernsey was the pioneer. He left
and went to Litchfield, and probably set-
tled on Guernsey hill. Jonathan Guern-
sey came to Waterbury in 1729. Joseph
came from Milford in 1734. and built a
house at the Village. Its frame of white
oak, it is said, was cut and hewn on the
ground so near that not a stick of the
timber was drawn by a team to the spot
The chimney was, at the base, fourteen
by twelve feet, the kitchen fire-place,
built of stone, was eight feet long and
four deep. This house was a little
west of Frederick Judd's present resi-
dence. Jonathan's house was on the
northern slope of the hill southeastward
of Southmayd's meadow, and tradition
declares it to have been the first house in
'■The Village." If so, he had a town
hou^e at Bast Main and Cole streets at the
same time, which he bought in 1729.
Tradition has many bright and stirring

events to tell concerning the Guernsey
family; it gave life and color to the
locality, and ultimately a name— for the
Village became Guernsey Town. The
sale and exchange of village lots was at
the height of its activity in the year
1734-

WALNUT TREE MEADOW-Above
Buck's meadow, below Jericho rock. It
is now called Bungtown, from the mano'
facture there of barrel-bungs.

WARNER'S GOOD HILL — Other-
wise Malmalicki^ Land on tt was re-
corded in 1703, to John Warner. He
caUed. it his good hill.

WARNER'S MOUNTAIN— West of
Welton's mountain. Mention is made of
it before 1700.

WELTON'S BROOK-Seep353.

WELTON'S MEADOW— The exten-
sive meadow west of the river above the
Tbomaston dam. Also the boggy meadow
granted to Welton between Malmaltck
and Oronoke hills.

WEST BRANCH ROCKS — These
rocks lie between the Naugatuck river on
the east and Purgatory river on the west,
and south of the West Branch, Eagle rock
is one of them. There, also ItesJosepb
Scott's grave, the oldest known one in
the township. The whole region seems
weird and uncanny. For some reason
Ebenezer Richards chose the place for a
house site. There is little now to indi-
cate that the locality was ever inhab-
ited. Nature has grown her trees all
over the clearing that Ebenezer must
have made, and has reared one in the
lonely cellar, the walls of which remain.
Richards was born in 1731 and died in
iSoi. He was a man of giant propor-
tions, and when he died itwas found that
the only way in which the body, when
prepared for burial, could be removed
from the house was by taking the casings
from the doors.

WEST SIDE BARS— At the point
where Highland avenue begins. Prom
this point to the Litchfield road, the

EJfOLISn PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCE.

717

Woodbury road was twenty rods wide;
from that poiot onward, ten rods.

WEST SIDE HILL— First mentioned
in 1733, in a re-survey of Jonathan Scott's
land which lay on the bill at the comer
of the Woodbury road and the Litchfield
road of 1729. This land is opposite to
Watson M. Hurlbut's residence.

THE LONG WIGWAM—" The path
that conies from the long wigwam " U
mentioned very early. The site of the

single stone of sufficient sire to form the
highway bridge. Said to have been
so named, because of the qnantity of
mm required to strengthen the bridge-
builders.

WOLF HILL— One of the eminences
in the wild region between Mad river and
Fort Swamp brook.

WOLF PIT HILL—" Next Woodbury
bounds." A continuation of the Great
hill east of Quassapaug.

wigwam is unknown, but the path from it
was west of the Hog Field hill in pres-
ent Wolcott. It probably ran right
through the valley between Hog Field
hill and Benson's bill on which Wolcott

WILD CAT ROCKS — In the rocky
region east of Mad river and above Saw-

WINKUM BRIDGE — Over Great
brook, between the Buck's Hill school-
house and Welton's ice pond. It is a

WOLF PIT MEADOW— The basin
of lowlands lying at the foot of East
mountain, between that and the Abri-
gador. The Prospect road is just north
of it. A small stream runs out of it into
Mad river.

WONGUM ROAD— North of Middle-
bury centre in the vicinity of the north
branch of Hop brook and east or north-
east of Break Neck bill.

THE WOODRUFF FARM — From
Samuel Woodruff. Described, when con-

HISTORY OF WATfCRBUKY.

fiscated from Noah Cande for complicity
in the crime of kidnapping Chauncey
Judd, as 134 acres, bounded west for 157
rods bv the highway between Waterbury
and Woodbory, north 011 Merwn's land,
and east in part on Locg Meadow swarap.
The same name was given to a farm
lying east of Union City on the Hopkins
road about 1750-

WOODRUFF HILL. TOANTIC
HILL— The fine elevation 8S0 feet high
on the southwest side of Long Meadow
pond. It is the highest hill sotithwest-
erly from Waterbury between the Naug-
atuck and Housatonic rivers. Abel Hol-
brook about 1730. and the descendants of
Lieut. Samuel Wheeler of Derby, had
lands on or near by it. A Wheeler house
stood at the south end of the hill. Its
name was derived from the Woodruff
who was the first settler on it,

WOODTICK — In Wolcott, It was
named in the days of the Revolution-

ary war. Judah Frisbie and Elnathan
Thrasher settled there, and a saw-mill
was mentioned there in 1776.

WO O S T E R SWAMP— This name
antedates the plantation. It is probably
the place where Edward Wooster of
Derby either found wild hops or culti-
vated them. It lies along Steele's brook
from above the village of Watertown
nearly to Rockdale station on the rail-
road. This swamp has been the puzzle
and despair of former investigators,
simply because it lay so wide spread
before the view that it was overlooked
by them.

WORLD'S END HILL— North of
Buck's hill. Formerly Lewis's hill, from

WORLD'S END ROCKS— Inthe
midst of the Park. They are first men-
tioned in 1749, by its founder. James
Nichols, when he was eitchanging lands
for the purpose of organizing his park.

APPENDi:

I.

FAMILY RECG

Introductory Statem

In 1640, **the Magestrate who solemnized Mariet
**to cause a record to be entered in Courte, of the
that time, there were but three towns in the Colon)
the " Town Clarke or Regester " in every town sho
of marriage of every person married, and of the 1
bom within the town." The law also required eve
to certify to the town clerk within three days afte
day," and every parent to certify in the same mai
shillings was the penalty for ever>' default.

In the Code of Laws of 1650, marriages, birthj
the requirement; but the time for rendering the o
month. The penalty for default was the same a
continued delay. The Register of every town was
annually, to the Secretary' of the Court a true trans
marriages, together with one-third part of the fee
recording. The fees were three pence for every b
every marriage.

Whether our State Archives contain — among the
— any of the above transcripts relating to vital st
know. In the following pages will be found every
of Waterbury relating to marriage, birth or death,
— the single entry of lOSg — to October in the year
include) the records of the present towns of Wat
1780; of Wolcott — that part of it lying west of the to^
of Oxford — that part of it which was in "Ancient "
bury — except the portion of it formerly in Woodbur
and of Naugatuck, to 1S44. The town records of
raented by those of Watertown and Plymouth to i

To the above have been added marriage, ba
the First Church of Waterbury, after 1795; and fro

4-^p HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

and the Roman Catholic Church of the Immaculate Conception; also from the
Churches of Oxford and Prospect. From the First Church of Naugatuck, mar-
riage and death records, but no baptisms; the baptismal record of that church does
not extend beyond iSiS.

Two manuscript volumes of town and family records, begun more than seventy
years ago by the late Judge Bennet Bronson, have been placed in the hands of the
compiler by Dr. Henry Bronson of New Haven. These have been fully used,
together with records furnished by a few interested persons, among whom special
mention is due to Mr. William Ward of Naugatuck, Mr. Rollin H. Cooke of Pitts-
field. Mass., Mr. Laurel Beebe of Ridgeville, Ohio, and Mr. Nathan G. Pond of
Milford. Very much valuable information has also been given by Miss Mary E.
Cook of Waterbury. To these, and to the unnamed persons who have responded
to the general invitation that was extended to all, to furnish data regarding their
respective families, the compiler hereby returns thanks.

While it is difficult to believe that Waterbury evaded the law requiring regis-
tration for more than twenty years, we must accept either that statement or the
highly probable theory that the original records were destroyed or missing soon
after 1700. About that date, a systematic effort was made to recover lost ground
by obtaining from the heads of families in the town, a list of their children. In
most cases, but not in all, the record began with the first child born in Waterbury.
In the entire list there is not given the family of a planter who died, or who left the
town, before 1700. The first volume in which family records are inscribed includes
land records. The only item in it that bears evidence of having been an original
record before 1700, was made in 16S9, when the recorder (Lieut. John Stanley) on
its fourth page announces the birth of his son Timothy. The suggestion is offered
that Lieut. Stanley, when he removed to Farmington in 1695, carried his records
with him, and that some accident befell them between that date and 1703.

Between 1790 and 1S20 very few marriages are recorded; from 1S20 to 1847 the
recording of births was greatly neglected. In 1847 Solomon B. Minor, the then
town clerk, made a canvass of the town in order to recover the deficiency of the
records. He recorded 424 families in that year. Between 1847 and 1S51 no births
were recorded, except those of Mr. Minor's children.

The absence of any approach to uniformity of usage in regard to "Old Style "
and "New Style," even by the same recorder, involves some dates in uncertainty.

The usual form of abbreviation adopted by genealogists has been followed in
this work. Where the place of birth is not mentioned, Waterbury is the supposed
place. All items, not numbered or otherwise indicated, have been taken from
town records. The numbers guide to the following sources of information:

1. Records of the First Church of Waterbury.

2. Records of the First Episcopal Church of Waterbury.

3. Watertown Town Records.

4. Plymouth Town Records.

5. Salem (now Naugatuck) Church Records.

6. Oxford Church Records.

7. Marriages by Deacon Samuel Lewis, Justice of the Peace, taken from his

record, now in the possession of ^Ir. William Ward of Naugatuck.

S. Records of the Church of the Immaculate Conception, Waterbury.

9. Columbia (now Prospect) Church Records.

All items from other sources are in brackets. Orcutt's History of Wolcott
has made it unnecessary to examine the records of that part of Ancient Water-
bury.

FAMILY RECOR:

Abhot. Adams.

Daniel Abbot, s. of Stephen, m. L. Smith,
d. of Joseph of Wallingford. Mch. i,
1763. Lois, wid. of Dan. m. I. Scott.

1. David, b. June 6, 1764 \m. Sarah Tyler],

2. Daniel, b. June 24, 17'S.

J. Lois, b. Oct. 31, 1771 [m. Ed, Perkins].

4. Stephen, b. Apr. z6, 1778; d. Feb. 15, 1780.

5. Hannah, b. Feb. 8, 1781) [m. A. Hine].

[Hannah, mother of Daniel, d. Dec. 25,
1S03, a. 103.]

Daniel Abbot, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. Lois
Terrill, d. of Benjamin, July 25, 17S7.

1. Polly, b. Aug. 12. 1702.
a. Daniel, b. Sept. i8, i7</i.

David Abbot [s. of David] m. Charlotte
E. Sperry, d. of Edwin, June 16, 1850.

Emma Abbott m. Henry Townsend, 1827.

Jane Abbott m. Harris Fenn, 1S39.

Justina Abbott m. William Ellis, 1845.

Abigail Adams m. Benjamin Judd. 173S.

Abraham Adams [from Newtown] m.
Hannah Warner, d. of Samuel, May
14. 1753. She d. Feb. 21, 1817.*

1. Ely, b. Jan. 2K, i75''i.

2. Mabel, n. Dec. 6, 1758; m. J. Woodruff.
Samuel, bap. June a, 1771.*

Andrew Adams, s. of EH, m. Comfort
Osborn. d. of Thomas of Oxford, May,
1797. He d. Sept. 14. 1830; she, Dec.
24, 1840.

1. Clarry Simons, b. F"eb. 14, 1800.

2. Hannah, b. [une i, ih<>s; ra. Ed. Warner?

3. Nabby, b. ^^ch. 6. 1607.

4. Constant lx>ck\vood, b. Dec. 14, 18 10.

5. Harriet, b. Oct. 17, 1814; m. Oliver Evans?

Augustus Adams m. Hannah E. John-
son, Aug. 20, 1S20. He d. Nov. 6, 1S24;
she, Aug. 27, 1S26.

I. Edward, b. Dec 2, 1820.

a. George Sylvester, b. June 10, 1823.

Chauncey C. Adams, s. of Wm., m. Dec,
1818. Maria Pope, b. Feb., 1797, d. of
Robert.

1. William Hopkins, b. Sept. 26, 1810.

a. Sarah Ann, b. Nov. 8, 1821; d. 1827.

3. Maria Sarah, b. Jan. 7, 1824.

4. Harriet Rebecca, b. Au^. 27, 1826.

5. Samuel H., b. Nov. 7. 1828,

6. James, b. Aug. 16, 1831.

7. Susan, b. Jan. 10, 18^4.

8. Nancy, b. Apr. 10, 183'".

9. George Augustus, b. Apr. ao, i8j8.
10. Jane Jennet, b. Nov. 30, 1840.

Adams.

Chester
A. Auj

She d.
ford." 1

Oct. TO

Constant

Aug. 5,

Eli Adan

d. of M
she, 18^

1. Nabby
a. .Andret

3. Truma

Emeritt I

Enos O.

of Naug

John Ada

son d. <

1. Esther,

2. Fanny,
J. Henoni

4. Sarah,

5. Hanna

6. Juliana

Sarah, <
Cvnthij
Jkfay 21

7. Luther
Luciun

[A mam
John.
( leorgt

John Adi

Granbj

Luke Ad

Lucy I
Mark L

I. Anne,

3. Susani
3. Betsy,

Luther j

Hotchli

Nancy A
Nancy J

[Reuben

Clark,
she, M

I. Sam;

a. .*^all>

3. Polh

4. Rutl

5. Davj

6. Seyn

7. Han

8. Lyra

9. Reul
10. (>ilb

6AP

HISTORY OF WATERS UE1\

Adams. Adams.

Reuben Adams, s. of Reuben, and Maria

Hine, b. Feb. 4. 1S14. d. of Jonas of

Old Milford m. Nov. 13. iS37-

1. Elizabeth Maria, b. Dec. 5, 1839.

2. Sarah Jane, b. luly 7. 1841.

3. Charles Treat, b. Nov. 19, 1843.
[4. Fannie J., b. Apr. 2, 1851.]

Samuel Adams, s. of Wm., m. Mar>'
Tompkins, d. of Edm., Mch. i, 1764.
He cf. Dec. 13. I773. and Mary m. A.
Prichard.

1. Prudence, b. Aug. lo. 17^5.

2. Reuben, b. Apr. 18, 1767.

3. Ruih. b. Apr. 8, i7eK; ; d. Oct. 28, 1701.

4. Samuel, b. July 10, 1771.

5. Mary, b. Aug. 18, 1773 Ira. Dan. Lpson].

Sarah C. Adams m. N. Payne. 1S33.
Seymour Adams, s. of Reuben, m. Roset-

ta Baldwin, d. of Eli of W'town, Mch.

15, 1831.

[i. Mar>', b, Oct. 9, 1832. , c a

2. John Baldwin, b. Sept. 11, 1835; d. 1S48.

3. Eli, b. Apr. 2, 1841.

4. Ruth Augusta, b. Dec. 19. 1843.

5. Rosetta, b. Mch. 17, 1849.]

Sylvanus Adams, s. of Wm., m. Sarah
Hopkins, d. of Deac. Tim.. Dec. 4. 17S3.

1. Mark, b. Sept. ifi, 1784.

2. Cloe, b. Feb. 4, 1786.

3. Mark, b. Oct. 18, 1787.

4. Timothy Hopkins, b. Sept. 29, 1789.

William Adams m. Susanna Bronson,
d. of Eben.. Feb. 14, 1739-40. He d.
Apr. 23, 1793 (a. 79), and she, Mar. 22,
1812.

1. Samuel, b. Aujif. 9, I7^o.

2. Prudeme, b. Mch. 31, 1742 ; d. Oct. 10, 1743.

3. William, b. July 11, 1744: d- Oct. la, 1747-

4. Prudence, b. .\pr. 24, 1746; d. Oct. 12, 1747-

5. William, b. June i, 1748.

6. Susanna, b. Nov 24, 1749; '"• R- Bronson,

7. John, b. Feb a, 1751-2-

8. James, b. Feb. 11, 1754 ; d- Feb. 22, 1789.

9. Luke, b. Mch. 8, 1756.

10. Silvanus, b. Jan. 22, 1759.

11. Ruth, b. Dec. 14, 1761 ; d. Nov. 26, 1767.

12. Asael, b. July 28, 1764.

William Adams, Jr., s. of Wm., m. Sarah
Goodwin of Lebanon, Feb. 2, 1775.

1. Merick. b. Aug. 30, 1776; d. Nov. 30, 1785.

2. Sena. b. Jure 5. 1778.

3. Sarah, b. Tan. 13, 1780; d. Apr. 18, 1784.

4. Jesse, b. Jan 4, 1782 ; d. Aug. 27, 1S25.

5. Slerick, b. Mch, 20. 1786; d. Jan. 27, 1794.

Sarah, d. Feb. 18. 1788; and Wm. m.
OrphaCossett.d. of John. Dec. 29, 178S.
He d. Jan. 25, 1S28.

6. Roxa, b. Oct. 3. 1791 ; m. H. Sa.xton.

7. Chauncey Cossett, b. Dec. 3, 1796.

8. Augustus, b. Feb. j8, I7C;cj.

9. William Hopkins, b. Feb, 12, 1802.

William H. Adams, s. of C. C, and

Rosetta A. Carring^ton, b. Aug. 20, 1S20,
d. of Solomon of North Haven, m. Feb.
12, 1843.

1. William Albro, b. Feb. 15, 1844.

2. Julius Cooke, b. Jan. 29 ; d. .May 28, 1845.

3. Ella Louisa, b. July 18, 1846.

Adkins. Alcott.

Adkins, sst^ Atkins.

Emily Albro ra. John Shepardson, 184,8.

Oliver Albro m. Amanda Hoyt — both of
Salem — Feb. 26, 1S29.

Daniel Allcoz, s. of John. m. Ellz. Dutton,

d. of Benj. of Wal., June 28, 1759.

1. Asa, b. Apr. 27, 17^.

2. Daniel, b. Apr. 7, 1762.

3. Samuel, b. May 7, tyf<4.

4. Joseph, b. Aug. 25, 1766.

David AlcosB. s. of John. ra. Abigail
Johnson o^K. H., July 2, 1767; d. Jan.
29, 1S21.

1. Anna, b. Sept. 16, 1768,

2. David, b. Apr. 16, 1774.

Eli Alcott of Wolcott m. Mrs. Harriet
Taylor. Sept. 25. 1S31.

James Alcoz, s. of John. m. Hannah
Barnes, d. of Caleb, Nov. 7, 1765.

1. Obedience, b. Sept. 22, 1766.

2. Rozina, b. Dec. 9, 1768.

Jesse Alcoz, s. of John. m. Patience
Blakeslee, d. of Aaron of N. H., Dec.

21. 1763.

1. Sarah, b. Jan. 12, 1765.

2, Lyman, b. Aug. 18. 1766.

John Alcock and Deborah [Blakeslee,
d. of Isaac of North Haven:

I. Lydia, b. Nov. 24. 1730; ra. Isaac Blakeslee.]
a. John, b. Dec. 28, 1731.

3. James, b. June i, 1734.

4. Jesse, b. Mch. 23. 1736.

5. Daniel, b. Mch. 25, 1738.

6. David, b. Jan. 12, 1730-40.

[7. Deborah; m. Isaac 1 witchell and A. Hotchkiss.

8. Mary, b. 1744 ; m. Obed. Bradley, of N. H.

9. Ihankful, b. 1748; m. Thad. Baldwin.

10. Hannah, b. 1751 ; ra. Joel Norton.

11. Anna; m. Abel Curtis.

12. Stephen ; d. in infancy.]

John d. Jan. 6, 1777.

John Alcoz, s. of John. m. Mary Chat-
field, d. of Sol. of Derby. Aug. 2S. 1755.

1. Liddia, b. Dec. 8, 1756 ; ra. C. Frbbie.

2. Solomon, b. May 8. 1759.

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 29, 1761.

4. John Blakeslee, b. June 24, 1764.

5. Mary, b. Sept. 8, 1766; d. Feb. 18, 1770.

6. Isaac, b. April 12, 1769.

7. Joseph Chatfield, b. May 7, 1771 [m. Anna

Hronson, d. of Amos].

8. Mark, b. May 11, 1773.

9. Thomas, b. Oct, 16, 1775; d. Apr. 27, 177S.

John B. Alcoz, s. of Capt. John, m. Lois
Gaylord, d. of Capt. Levi, Dec. 3,

1775 (17S5).

I. Reiley, b. June 25, 1786.

Riley Alcott, s. of John B. of Wolcott. m.
Olive Warner, d. of Mark. Oct. 7, iSio.

1. Isaac W., b. July 27, 181 1 ; d. Nov. 19, 1826.

Olive, d. Mch. 4, 1819, and Riley m.
Ruth Frisbie, d. of Reuben. Apr. 17,
1S20.

2. Jane. b. Sept. i, 1821; m. A. S. Beardslcy.

3. Gaylord, b. Jan. 27, 1825.

FAMILY RECORl

Alcox. Allin.

Samuel Alcox, s. of Capt. John, m. Lydia
Warner, d. of Ard., Dec. i8. 1783.

Solomon Alcox, s. of John, m. Premela
Roberts, d. of John of South. July 14,
17S4.

1. Lydia, b. Sept, 19, 1785.

2. Hannah, b. July 16, 1788 [m. Richard Wlthington

of Bucks Hill].

3. Seth Roberts, b. Jan. ir, 1792.

George B. Aldrich of Attleboro, Mass.,
m. Mary H. Brooks of Bethany, June

3. 1S39.

1, Lewis Franklin, b. and d. Mch. 1840.

2. George Franklin, b. Mch. 29, 1844.

Hannah Alford m, Thomas Welton, 1714.
Abigail Allin m. Amos Hamilton, 1771.
Abigail Ailing m. Constant Miller, 1776.
Alvira R. Ailing m. Almon Piatt, 18 19.
David Ailing and Ruth:

I. Miles, b. May ii, 1777.

David Ailing, s. of Isaac, m. S. D. Web-
ster of Harwinton, Mch. 12, 1839.

1. (ieorge Isaac, b. Apr. 25, 184a.

2. Eunice Jennet, b. Apr. 3, 1844.

3. Rhoda Sabrina, b. Jan. 31, 1846.

Ebenezer Allyn, s. of Gideon, m. Tabitha
Clark, d. of Joseph. Nov. 9, 1742.

1. Rachel, b. Sept. 20, 1744; m. S. Blakeslee.

2. Gideon, b. Mch. 15, 1746.

3. John, b. Mch. 17, 1747.

4. David, b. Apr. 26, 1749.

5. Abigail, b. May 29, 1751.

6. Abelj b. Apr. 22, 1753

7. Ashlil, b. May 21, 1755.

8. Tahitha^ l>. Mch. 22^ lysj.

Tabitha, d. Feb. 7 1756; and Ebenezer
m. Abigail Way, d. of David, June 24,
1756.

8. Tabitha, b. Mch. 27, 1757.

9. Sarah, b. Sept. 17, 1759.

10. Leucy, b. Aug. 6, d. May 9, 1761, (?)

11. Leucy, b. May 13, 1763.

Edward Allen m. Thankful Smith, Apr.
17, 1842.

Ephraim Allen and Elizabeth :

a. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 7, 1748-9.

3. Mary, b. June 20, 1751.

4. Hannah, b. July 31, 1753.

Ephraim m. Hannah Humiston, d. of
John. April 5. 1754.

5. Lidda, b. Sept. 19, 1756.

6. John, b. Jan. 13, 1759.

7. Russel, b. Apr. 30, 1762.

Gideon Allin:

Ebenezer; m. 174a.
Deborah; ro. Asahel Castle, 1745.
Mehitable; m. M. Blakeslee, 1746.
Mary; m. (Coben?) and S. How, 1750.

Gideon m. Naomy, rellicque of Josiah
Tuttle, Dec. 6, 175 1. [She was Naomi
Blakeslee, 1779, at the date of distribu-
tion of Gideon's estate.]

Solomon, b. Oct. 7, 1753.

Allen.

Gideon

Lettii

Hannai
Hannal

Harvey

1832.

Isaac h

Aug.

1. Will

2. Tan

3. Eli»

4. Sara

5. Isaa

6. Gilb

7. Sara

Isaac 9
Hine,

1835.

1. EIiz{

2, Wilh

Isaac E
C. Sc<

Johanns
John A]

Rho«
Willi
Rosv

Joseph

m. Lf
1847.

Lyman

1831.

Mary A

Melissa

Norman
Isaac,
Elias,

1. Saral

2. Emei

3. Corn

4. Jane

5. Willi

Rebekal

1812.

Solomon

24, 17:

I. Linus

William
Cower

1. Tame;

2. Edsoi

3. Mary

William

bridge
of Nau

1. Jane ]

2. Willii

3. Esthe

Axa Am

8AP

HISTORY OF WATERBURT,

Ames, Andrus.

Samuel Ames was m. to Axsa Beebe,
Dec. 1784, by Deac. Samuel Lewis, J. P.

Andrew Anderson m. Philena Jones, Dec.
28, ig35.

George Anderson m. Lucy Doolan, July
5, 1S49.

Henry P. Anderson, b. in North Brain-
tree. Mass., Nov. 28, 1800, m., May 27,
1825, Hannah W. Hodge, b. in Norton,
Mass., Dec. 28. 1S03.

1. Georjije W., b. in War«», Mass.. May 2, iSr'i.

2. Hannah S., b. in Barre, Mas»s., Julv u, i«:'8; in.

J. K. Swifi.

Johnson Anderson, s. of Joseph of Bos>
ton, m. Esther Prichard, d. of Benja-
min, Apr. 4, 1761.

1. Asa, b. July 25, i7r<>. (?)
Hannah, bap. Jan. 1 j, 17''//''
Benjamin, hap. Oct. u, 17'^.G.

John.son m. Lucy Hodge, Aug. 4. 1783.^

Abraham Andruss, Seno^* [and Rebec-
ca] ; record 0/ ye children:

May I. Rebeckah, b. Dec. 16, 1672; m. W. Hikcox.
25, 2. Mary, b. Mch. 10, 1074-5;

1703. m. Daniel Warner.

3. Hannah, b. Sept. 8. U-jh [m. Z. Northrop].

4. .Abraham, b. On. 14, if-.'-*).

5. Sarah. b. Mch. i(\ i''nj-4;

m. Josejih Lewis, and Isaac Bronson.

6. Kacheli, b. July 11, i<S.f [m. S. Orvicel.

7. John, b. July 16, I'.-S.

8. Thomas, b. Men. 6, 16114.

[He died between July 1st and Dec.
31st. 1729]
Abraham Andrus, Jr., s. of Abraham, m.
Hannah Stephens, d. of Thomas of
Middletown, Nov. 5, 1702.

1. A son, b. Sept. 6, i7'\;.

Abraham Anddruss s. of Jno [of Wethers-
field], m. Mabel Thomas, d. of Sam.,
June 6, 1744.

1. Hulda, b. Mch. 2, i74S-'>.

2. Eldad, b. Y^h. i, 1747-b.

3. Klihu, b. Jan. 10, 174J-50.

4. Loly, b. Nov. 3, 17^1.

5. A.senath, b. Mch. 15. 1754.

6. Ethan, b. May o, i7^''.

7. Oylive, b. May 30, 17^0.

8. Rhodah, b. July i.>. 1701.

9. Ephriam, b. May 18, i-')5.
10. Mabel, b. July :o, i7'i8.

Anna Andrews m. Nathan Scott, 1777.
Daniel Andrews:

7. A dau. Etathier, b. Apr. 6, 1785.

David and Margaret Andrus, children
born in Waterbury:

1. John, b. Feb. 17, 1749.

2. Marjfarct, b. Nov. 15, 1752.

3. David, b. Feb.; d. Aug. 17, 1754.

4. A dau. b. Sept. 30, 1755.

5. David, b. Apr. 16, 1757.

6. Achsah, b. Alch. 18, 1759.

7. Elijah, b. Dec. 18, i7^«j.

8. Reuben, b. Sept. 5, 1762; d. May 30, 1763.

Margaret, wife of David, d. Apr. 19,
1763. Their d. Mary, b. at Kensing-
ton [April. 1748]. d. Aug. 21, 1749.

Andrews. Andruss.

Elihu Andrews m. Sarah Brown [d. of
Dan.], Dec. 15. 1775.

1. Abijah, b. Oct. 13, 1776.

2. Asenath, b. Oct. 26, 1777.

3. Syrus, b. Mch. 17, 1780.

4. Elihu, b. Feb. 26, 1782.

Elizabeth Andrews m. Mcrrit Nichols,

1837.
Ethan Andrews m. Sarah Prichard, Dec.

8, 1 7 So.

Eunice Andrews m. Levi Mix, 17S9.

Geo. P. Andrews, b. Jan. 24, 1821, and
Roxana Coley, b. June 12. 1823— lx)th
from the State of New York — were m,
Dec. 3. 1S45.

I. Samuel Ffisbie, b. in Litchfield, May 15, 1845.

Harriet Andrews m. Hanford Isbell, 1S39.
Ira Andrews m. Martha Andrews, Mch.

1. Chester, b. July (\ 178S.

2. lohn.son. b. Aug. 7. i7<j«j.

3. Marsh.»ll, b. Aug. s, 1793.

Jesse Andrews m. Loly Brooks, May 8,
1791.

1. Miles, b. Feb. cj, 1702.

2. Ansel, b. Apr. 4, 171^4.

John Andruss [s. of Abr., Sr.] and Martha
[d. of Thomas Warner]:

7. Patience, b. Oct. 1726.

8. Ebcnczer, b. Apr. 2u, 17^0.

Leander Andrews m. Cornelia Easton —
both of Bristol — July 13, 1S51.

Lois Andrews m. Benj. Terrill. 175O.

Martha Andrews m. Eliah Parker, 1759.

Martha Andrews m. Ira Andrews, 1787.

Martha Andrews m. J. D. Perkins, 1844.

Mary Andruss m. John Rew, 1743-4.

Mary Andrews m. Francis Peck, 1835.

Mary Andrews m. Chas. Chatfield, 1850.

Melvina Andrews m. A. A. Perkins. 1843.

Moses R. Andrew m. Betsey Lounds-

bury, May 6, 1833.
Rhoda Andrews m. Titus Fenn, 1779.
Ruth Andrews m. Enoch Woodruff, 1S37.

Thomas Anddrus, s. of Abr., Sr., m. Mary
Turner, d. of John, Nov. 2, 1725.

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 12, 1727.

2. Mary, b, Sepi. 21, 172^: d. Aug. 22, 1731.

3. Mary. b. Mch. 2, 1734.

William Andruss, s. of John. m. Martha
Wilhams, d. of James. Feb 1736 7.

1. Sarah, b. Jan. 17. 17J7-S; »"• J- Doolittle.

2. Martha, b. June 3, 1740.

3. lames, b. Dec. 19, 1743.

4. NN'illianis (later William), b. Apr. 5, 1745.

5. John, b. Oct. 28, 1747.

6. Timothy, b. Dec. i, 1749.

[Dr. W. A. Alcott gives to William. Sr.,
Mehitable, Diadama. and by a second

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP9

Andrews. Arnst.

wife, James and Ruth; the first James
having been killed by the fall of a tree.
To William, Jr., he gives Cornelius,
Anna. b. Sept i, 1777, m. ObedAlcott,
and Laura (b. 1790. ace. to family
records) m. Seth Thomas.]

William Andrews, Junr., m. Submit
Frost, May 6. 1766.

1. Elizabeth, b. Feb. ii, 1767,

2. William, b. Jan. 13; d. Jan. 14, 1760.

3. Luther, b. July 2, 1770; d. Oct, 6, 1773.

4. Kilo, b. Feb. 3, 1773.

5. Luther, b. Apr. 13,' 1775.

Zina Andrews, s. of Simeon, m. Sarah
Hotchkiss. July 21, 18 14.

Frances [Boem], wid. of Richard An-
thony, m. Benjamin Wetmore. 1758.

David Arnold m. Hannah Prindle, d. of
Jonathan, July 6, 1763.

1. Jonathan, b. May i6, 1764.

2. Smith, b. Mch. 31, 1766,

Hannah d. July 21, 1766, and David m.
Mary Swain, relict of Walter, Sept. 20,
1769.

Joel R. Arnold [Rev.] and Julia:

Ambrose Henry, bap. July 31, 1831. ^
Charles Rockwell, bap. Mch. 10, 1833.
Luther Hart, bap. May, 1835.

Nathaniel Arnold:

Nathaniel [hap. Feb., 1703-4].

John, d. Nov. 18, 1736.

Sarah [bap. Mch. 3, 1703-4]; d. Nov. 22, 1736.

Susanna [bap. May 23, 170S]; m. James Hull,

(These bap. in Hart.)
Josiah, b. in Hartford, Sept. 12, 171J [d. before

'742].

Elizabeth Arnold, widow, and mother
to Nathaniel, d. in Wat. Feb. 3, 1740-1.
He d. Sept. 13. 1753.

See also John Richason.

Nathaniel Arnold, s. of Nathaniel, m.
Elizabeth Richason, d. of John, dec'd,
July 26, 1732. Capt. Nathaniel d. May
12, 1777, a. 76. Elizabeth d. Oct. 11,

1773.

1. Timothy, b. June 4, 1733.

2. Noah, b, June 5, 1735.

3. Sary, b. Dec. 5, 1738.

4. Susanna, b. Apr. 7, 1740; m. Titus Fulford.

Frederick D. Arnst m. Mrs. Martha
Smith. May 1, 1828. She m. Thomas
Warner, 1832.

Garry Arnst, s. of John of Salem, m.
Catharine J. Phelps from New Haven,
Nov. 17, 1826

John Arnst [from England] m. Margaret
Webb of Salem, Oct. 21, 1784.''

[He had 13 children: Daniel, John, Sheldon,
Harzilla and Polly drownedj Barzilla, Polly,
Harshall, Marshell, Frederick, Ruth, Mar-
garet, Garry.]

Polly Arnst m. Marcus Terril, 1822.

Arnst. Atwater.

Ruth Arnst m. Caleb Granniss, iSio.
Eunice Ashley m. Sam. Scott. 1763.
Sarah Ashley m. Obad. Richards, 1752.
Betsey Atkins m. Prosper Hull, 1825.

David Atkins m. Cornelia Cleavor, Feb.
12. 1784-'*

1. Nancy, Jan. i8, 178:;.

2. Randal, May 26, 17S6.

3. Mnason, Jan. 29, 1788.

Elizabeth Adkins m. Jon. Parker. 1766.
Elizabeth Atkins m. Joel Lane, 1776.
Esther Atkins m. A. H. Smith. 1S27.

Garry Atkins of Medina, Ohio, m. Luzina
Pnchard, Jan. 30. 1S37.

John and Elizabeth Adkins : children
born in Wat :

5. Timothy, b. Dec. 27, 1754.

6. Daniel, )

and Vb. Apr. 17, 1757,

7. Samuel, \

8. lohn, b. June 25, 1759.
y. Reuben, 1

and >b. Mch. 24, 1764.
10. Mary, \

Joseph Atkins, Jr., s. of Joseph, m.
Phebe Hall. d. of Heman of Farm.
July 30. 1767. [He moved in 1805, to
Smyrna, Ohio.]

1. Rosanna, b. Mch. 5. 1768.

2. Silva, b. Nov. 3. \^f~i•).

3. Asahel, b. P'eb. 20, 1772.

4. Samuel, b. Jan. i, 1774.

5. Xenia, b. June 30, 1776; d. Jan., 1777.

6. Adah, b. Jan. 9, 1778.

Josiah Atkins, s. of Josiah. m. Sarah
Rogers, d. of Deac. Tosiah. Jan. 31, 1779.
(He died 17S2, and his widow m. Amos
Culver.]

1. Sally, b. Nov. 20, 1780 [m. Asahel Lewis].

2. Josiah. b. Sept. 15, 1781 [d. a. 18] .

Levi Atkins, Jr. of Wolcott m. Eunice
A. Grilley, Feb. 6, 1S4S.

Mary Atkins m. Amos Morris, 1S16.

Samuel Atkins [s. of Samuel of Wolcott],
m. Belinda Bronson, d. of Philenor,
Feb.. 1S24.

1, Ellen, b. May 21, 1825; m. H. C. Munson.

2. Edwin, b. Aug. 16. 1833.

Amos Atwater of Columbia m. Julia M.
Hoadley, Dec. 28. 1820 — and d. June 8,
1834, a. 36 «

Clarissa Atwater m. S. H. Nichols, 1836.

Jane Atwater m. Ansel Spencer, Jr.,

1832.
Jonathan Atwater, and Eunice from

Woodbridge:'^

Polly, bap. Sept. 9, 1804.

Lemuel Atwater m. Polly Dudley, May

17, 1814
Lucinda Atwater m, Emery Mann, 1828.

lO^p

HISTORY OF WATERS URY,

Atwater. Austin.

Mehitable Atwater m. Eli Bronson, 1773.

Melinda Atwater m. Roswell Humiston.
1831.

Moses Atwater d. May 5, 1827.

Nancy Atwater m. Eldad Hotchkiss,
1823.

Timothy Atwater m. Lydia Humiston,
Nov. 14, 1781.'*

Ruth, b. July 30, 1782.
Elam.b. July i, 1785.

[Thomas Atwell m. Eunice Matthews, d.
of Phineas, and had, at least,

Lovina, b. Aug. 13, 1787, She m. Sept. 2, 1809.
in Whitestone. N. Y., Rev. Glezen Fillmore,
and is now (Feb., 1893) living in Clarence, N.
Y., at the age of lo^l'z yrs.J

Anna Atwood m. Uri. Bronson, 1799.

David M. Atwood of Watertown m. Mary
Maria Spellman of Norfolk, May 11,
i85i.-'

Gerry Atwood m. Eliza Ann Hyde, Feb.
4. 1834.

Jane Atwood m. J. R. Richardson, 1846.

Lucy Atwood m. Abel Woodward, 1765.

Mary L. Atwood m. H. Sandland, 1S28.

Abel Austin, s. of Abel. m. Abigail Par-
ker, d. of Wait—all of Wallingford—
Feb. 5, 1795.

1. Arden, b. Feb. 29, X796.

2. Aaron, b. Nov. 17, 1803.

David W. Austin, s. of Edmund, m.
Nancy Beecher, b. May 3, 18 16, d. of
Hezekiah of Prospect, Jan. 16, 1842.

William Edmund, b. June 10, 1844,

Edmund and Sarah Austin:

[He d. Mch. 1791, a. 52; she, Mch. 1812,
a. 70. J

Elizabeth and Eunice, bap. at St. James's church,
July, 1768.

Children bom in Wat.

♦1. Job, b. Jan. n, 1769
2. Ruth, b. Oct. 10, 175

. 770-

3. Edmund, b. May 19, 1773,

4. Lemuel, b. June 22, 1775; d. April 7, 1845, a. 7o.«

5. Sarah, b, Jan. 12, 1780; d. June 23, 1782.

6. Lois, b. Apr. 20, 1781.

7. Abner, b. Sept. 17, 1782.

8. Oren, b. Oct. 26, 1784.

Edmund Austin, s. of Edmund, m. Ana
Wheeler, d. of David, of Derby, May

5, 1795.

1. Nancy, b. Oct. 24, 1796; d, Dec. 5, 1S13.

2. Polly, b. Sept. 25, i7i>-^; m. Rev. Ransom War-

ner; d. Mch. 21, iS;:8.'

3. David W., b. Jan. 27, 1802.

4. Sally, b. June 26, 1S04; cl. Sept. g, 1S20.

5. Kunice A., b. Oct. 30. 1S07; m. C. Adams.

6. Eli/a, b. Sept. 12, i8ro; m. C. Adams.

7. Nancy Maria, b. Apr. 13, 1815; m. S. W. Hall.

Ana d. Feb. 7, 1S19, a. 43; and Ed-

AusTiN. Bailey.

mund m. Esther Porter, d. of Francis,
Jan. 5, 1820.

I. Ellen Minerva, b. Sept. 3, 1822.

Elizabeth Austin m. Shadrack Benham.

175S.

Lauren Austin m. Eliza Stebbins, Tan. i.
1S37.

Orrin Austin, s. of Edmund, and Sarah
Hall, b. Aug. 1790 d. of Jared of Ches-
hire, m 181 1.

Leverett C, b. Feb. n, 1812: d. Apr. 14, 1840.
Nancy Lcvina, b. Mch. 21, 1814; m. Luther Brad-
ley.
William Hobart, b. Dec. 25, 1816.
Sarah Emma, b. July 14.1810; ra. A. .S. Lyon.
George Willis, b. Oct. 29, 1822.
Caroline Maria, b. July '24, 1825.
Frances Augusta, b. Jan. 21, 1830.

William H. Austin, s. of Orrin, m. Jane
E. Richmond, b. Nov. 21, 1822, a. of
Bishop of Cheshire, Apr. 24, 1842.

1. Caroline Amret, b. Oct. 25, 1843.

2. Frederic Hooper, b. May 10, 1846.

Amos Averet:^

Eunice, b. Mch. i, 1780.
Augustus, b. Aug. 7, 1782.
Sarah, b. July 26, 1784.
Ransom, b. July 3, 1786.

Abel Bacheldor, s. of Reuben of New
Haven, was m. to Thankfull Cook, d.
of Henry, by Mr. Tod of Northbury,
May 7, 1747.

1. Lemuel, b. Sept. 14; d. Nov. 1748.

2. Abel, b. July; d. June (?) 1751.

3. Roze, b. N'ov. 3, 1752; m, Z. Curtis.

4. Buley (a dan.), b. July 7, 1755.

5. Abel, b. Apr. 24, 1758.

6. Content, b. Mch. 10, 1760.

7. Thankful, b. Sept. 24, 1763.

8. Lemuel, b. Feb. 14, 1768.

Philemon Bacheldor and Mary (from
Northfield, 1809):*

Linus, bap. July t, 1810.

bap. May 10, 1812.

Sall^-, bap. Dec. 5, 1813.
Connne, bap. Apr, 26, 1818.

Amzi D. Bacon of Woodbury, m. Mary
Leonard, Nov. 19, 1843.

Louisa A. Bacon m. Patrick Curtiss, 1839.

Sarah Bacon m. Wm. B. Frost, 1848.

John Bagshaw of Birmingham, Eng., m.
Ann Moshier of Baltimore, May 21,1838.

John Bahan m. Catharine Kenare in Ire-
land, Jan. II. 1S37.

1. Esther, b. in Ire., Nov. 27, 1837.

2. Margarett, b. in Ire.. Dec. 4, 1839.

3. Richard, b. in Ire., Feb. 2, 1845.

4. Mary Ann., b. Aug. 2, 1846.

Frederick A. Bailey of Thompson, m.
Salina Moses of Harwinton, Nov. 3,

1-^35.

♦ The compiler cannot explain this numbering.

FAMILY RECO

Bailey. Baldwin. Bale

Julius C. Bailey m. Rebeccah F. Judd, Ebec

May 9, 1847. for

William A. Bailey m . Amanda A. Porter, 26,

Feb. 17, 1S35. I. I

Hector W. Baird, b. May 31, 1787, s. of 3' p

Clark of Watertown. m. [Apr. 10, iSio] 4. ^

Sally Leavenworth, b. Jan. 25, 1789, d. 5- A

of Samuel. Eli E

1. Samuel, b. Jan. 25, 1812. to^

2. David, b. Oct. 1818; d. Oct. 20, 1845, toil

3. Joseph, b. Oct. 20, 1827. ttt-

See also Beard. „

I. R

Abigail Baldwin m. Sam. Lewis. 1776. '• ^

Abigail Baldwin d. July 11. 1812.^ 4! M

Adah Baldwin m. David Hikcox, 1794. Eliza

Alsop Baldwin, s. of Theophilus, m. Elizal

Elizabeth Sherman, d. of Amos of p.. .

Amity, Oct. 13, 1773. [He was b. in ^^Y**'

Amity, Feb. i. 1741-2. "®'

I. Amos, b. Mch. 26, 1775; m. Sarah Law, and had Df. I

Alsop, b. Nov. 17, 1800.] Nev

Elizabeth d. Aug. 7. 1775, a. 23, and d. c

Alsop m. Bathsheba Smith, d of Eben- Feb

ezerof Woodbury, Sept. 16, 1778. [She j ^

d. June 15, 1S15, a. 63; he, June 23, a! k.

1S24.] 3. El

Anna Baldwin m. Eli Adams, 1775. Isaac

Anne Baldwin m. Wm. McKay, 1797. ^^^

Anna Baldwin m. Earl Sperry, 1823.* \^

Benjamin Baldwin, s. of Col. Jonathan,

m. Elizabeth Cook [b. in Wal. Dec. 11, {' ci

1756], d. of Moses, dec'd, June 18, 1778. 3.' d

1. Cleora, b. Apr. 10, 1779; m. S. Judd. Tisaa*-

2. Malinda, b. Nov. 10, 1781. Isaac

Elizabeth, wife of the above-named "^' •

Benjamin, d. May 24. 1797. Benjamin, Jame;

husband of the above-named Elizabeth, in t

d. Mch. 19, 1801. of I

Comfort Baldwin m. John Bronson, 1728. Por

Daniel Baldwin [s. of Dan. of Wal.] and ^^

Temperance [Austin, m. Feb. 2, 1786]; \^^
record of children is as follows:

3. lietsey, b. Apr. 17, 1791. '• P

4. Levi. b. Sept. i, 1793. 2. S

5. Isaac, b. July 9. 1798.

6. Fanny, b. May 1, I'S*)!. 3- ^

David Baldwin m. Martha Perkins, Feb. "*'

25, 1778.=^ 5. P

1. Amos, b. Dec. 12, 1778. T'pj

2. Treat, b. June 13, 1780. \ y

3. Dav d, b. Apr. 25, 1782. \^'^

4. Anne, b. Feb. 29, 1784. dia

5. Martha, b. Jan. 25, 1786.

David Baldwin, s. of Maj. Noah, m. J^^"

Hannah Leavenworth [b. Oct. 3, 1779], ^^

d. of Sam. Jan. 30, i8ck3. He d. Mch. ^

14, 1S42. ^^3

1. Lovisa. b. Nov. i^, 1800; d. Nov. 1813. The

2. Melissa, b. June 17, 1803; m. (i. Hull. Ba

3. Julia, b. July s 1805; ni. S. I). Chipman, t,

4. I)enison, b. Apr. 30, i8ii;d. Nov. 1813, ^^ ^

5. Davis, b. Nov. 19", 18 15. 2^t

12 AP

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Baldwin. Baldwin.

born May 27. 1690. Her mother died
52 days after, and her father died the
second week of November, the vear
after, or 1691.

Mary, born ihe 8th of September, 1711, at 9

o'clock at night (m. Timothy Porter).
Martha, born the 23ci of March. 1713, about 3

o'clock at nitcht (m. Ed. Scovill).
Abigail, born February 17, i7if>-i7, about mid-

nij^ht (m. Stephen Wclton).
Rachel's birthday, March 17, 1720, at 6 o'clock

in the morning.
Jonathan, born September 15, 172^.
Kunice, born Mitrch 11, i7.»f', about noon.
Hannah, l>orn August 2d, 1728, at 7 o'clock in

the morning.
Esther was twin with Rachel, and died May oth

after.
Hann.ih died Dec. 10, 174-. ajjed t>j years,
Eunice deceased three wecksaficr, l.muary loth,

aged 21 years.

My wife died November 10th, 1759."
Jonathan d. Jan. 5. 1761.

Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., s of Jonathan,
m. Mary Bronscm, d. of Ebenezer, Nov.
12, 1747. He d. Apr. 2, 1^02; she d.
May 17. 1S21.

I. Eunice, b. Sept. u, 174S; d. Mch. '.». 1749-50.

.'. McUjscent, b. Nov. lO. 17:'); m. [Lsiiac Hooth]

Lewis, and Phinejis I'ortcr.
^ Bervainin. b. Nov. 24. 17?.? (d. Mch. ly, iSt<ij.

4. Noah. b. Jan. 2;. 17^3.

5. Jonathan, b. Feb. 27, 17^7 [d. in Marietta, Ohio,

Mch. 7, iSi'i|.
t'. Hannah, b. ( )ct. 11, 17-,) [m. Mile* Culver and

d. childless].
7. David, h. Dec. 30, i7'^2; d. Aukr. 20, i7''4.
h. Eunice, b. Aug. 2j, 17'is L'l. Jan, >■'■. if4'i).
<i. .Mary, b. Jan. i.j. i-;r\-; Id. Oct. i->|>'.

Jonathan Baldwin of Burlington m. Jane
Wooster of Nau., Mch. 25. i>^^)

Leonard Baldwin of Torrington m. Susan
M., relict of H. Hadley. Oct. 19, 1S29.

Lucius Baldwin, b. Nov. 1813, s. of Alan-
son, and Elvira Hotchkiss, b. Apr. 22,
1813. d. of Curtiss, m. Apr. 12, 1S35,

1. Eliza Lucretia. b. Feb. 20, i^3'>; d. Feb. 24, 1S41.

J. Ellen, b. .Sept. 15, iS;,7.

3. Lu/ane, b. Nov. 4, iS^i.

4. Wallace, b. N(»v. .t<i. 1841, d. Aug. 17, 1644.

5. .Agusta Lueza, b. Jan. 17, 1S43.

Maria L. Baldwin m. \Vm. Dick, 1845.

Marshall Baldwin, s. of Matthew, late of
Wood bridge, dec'd, m. Leva Maria
Potter, d of Samuel, Sept. 7, 1S20.

Martha Baldwin m. Ed. Scovill, 1739.

Mary F. Baldwin m. A. A. Scott, 1S51.

Mercy Baldwin m. Wooster Tuttle, 1S02.

Noah Baldwin, s. of Col. Jonathan, m.
Elizabeth Ives, Aug. 3, 1775. [He d.
Jan. 9, 1S13; she d. Sept. 3, 1826, a. 74.]

1. David, b. Dec. 29, 1775.

2. Lucina, b. Feb. 5, 1778; m. I. Prichard.

3. Leonard, b. Mch. 28. 1780.

4. Anna. b. July 12, 178J.

5. Isaac Lewis, b. Oct. 17, 1784.
[6. William, b. May 2. 1787.

7. Sally, b. Jan. 24, 1790.

8. Noah G., b. Apr. 19. 1792.]

Baldwin. Ba&ber.

Polly Baldwin m. Sam. Cowell, iSio.

Rebecca Baldwin m. J. C. Pratt. 184S.

Rosetta Baldwin m. H. Hotchkiss, iv^35.

Rowena Baldwin m. Wm. Chipman. 1S40.

Thaddeus Baldwin [s. of Eben.] m.
Thankful Alcox [d. of John and De-
borah], Jan. iS, 1770.

1. Mary, b. Apr. 27, 1771.

2. Thankful, b. Aug. »>, 1773.
^ Hannah, b. Jan. b, 177'..

4. Lydia, b. April 12, 177^.

5. Thaddeus, b. Jan. .i^, i^^-y,
(>. Lynuin. b. Sept. 24. 1764.2

7. Nice (dau.), b. Oct. 11, 17^^.

Theophilus Baldwin [b. in Amity, Xov.
27. 1735I ^- Sarah Strong, d. of Adino
of Woodbury, Apr. 24, 1776.

Theophilus Baldwin of Middlebury m.
Millecent Parde, July 13, iv'^2S.

Truman Baldwin of Salem m. Anne Hurl-
but of Roxbury, Jan. 19, 1797.*

Vienna £. Baldwin m. S. G. Hill. 1S25.

William Baldwin, s. of Major Noah. m.
Chloe Hotchkiss, d. of btephen, Feb.
27, 1S13.

1. Joseph Ives, b. Aug. 27, 1S14.

2. Tamer Eli/., b. June 27. XS19.
^ WiKi.im, h. May 15, i>:?4.

4. (»e<)r.w;c, b. Sept. 4, I^2'■.

5. ktbec^A, b. July 15, laao.

Hannah Ball m. Nath. Tompkins, 1762,
and Jesse Hickox, 17^1.

Moses Ball, s. of Caleb, m. Hannah San-
ford, d. of Ezekiel. June 3, 1756.

1, Mabel, b. Jan. 4, 1757.

t Moses d. 175S] and Hannah m. Joel
)utton, 1762.

Timothy Ball from Bethany, b. Xov. 3,
l7'^3, m. Oct. 6, 1S06, Betsey Biscoefrom
Bethany, b. Feb. 17, 17SS. She d. Jan.

2, 1846.

1. Betsey Finett, b. in Beth. Aug. 1, 1807.

2. Harriet, b. in Beth. Apr. 7, ibcjg.

3. Eliza Statira, b. in Beth. July i3, 1811.

4. Argus, b. in Beth. Mch. 26, 1815; d. at Tampa

Bay. Florida, Oct. J7, 1839,

5. Bcnnet, b. May 19, 1822.

Edward Bancroft [s. of Francis and Mi-
nerva (Prichard)] of East Windsor, m.
Mary E. Hayden [d. of Festus], Dec.
14, 1S42.

Henry Banks and Sarah E. Scovill — both
of Litchfield — were m. Mch. 9, 1851.

Bridget Bannon m. Wm. Coghlon, 1S49.

Patrick Banan m. Ann Reed in Ireland,
Jan. 6, 1837. She d. Oct. 7, 1S46, a. 42.

1. Christopher, b. Oct. x, 1842.

2. Rosann, b. Sept. 30, 1844.

Charity Barber m. Abel Sutliff, 1770-

FAMILY RECO

Barker. Barnes.

Eliasaph Barker:''

Esther b. Oct. 29, 177^.
Eliasaph, b. Jan. 1, 1770.
Ephraun, b. July 6, 17S2.
Danie), b. Jan. 17. \-j>i(\
Wright, b. June 23, 1789.

Nelson Barker of Harwinton m. Jane
Rowley of Winsted, Mch. 24, 1S45.

Peter Barker, s. of Usal, m. Ruth Curtis,
June 7, 1764.

1. Zenas, b, Jan. 26, 1765. .

2. Martha, b. May 23, 1767.

3. Cloe, b. July 17, X7<x^.

Rebecca Barker m. Ebenezer Foot, 1761.^

Solomon Barker, s. of Usal. m. Hannah
Richards, d. of Jonah of Hartford, May

9. 1759-

I. Solomon, b. Nov. 9, 1759.

Solomon Barker, a son of Sylvia Sanford,
b. Jan. 9, I7S4."'

Usal Barker and Martha:

Martha; m. F>ra Sanford. 1759.
9. Esther, b. Mch. jo, 1750; m. A. Blakeslee.
TO. Sarah, b. Feb. ^4, 17,2.

II. Jonathan, b. July 8. 175-.
12. Mary, b. May 9, 1757.

Uszal Barker, s. of Usal, m. Desire San
ford, d. of Ezekiel, May 5, 1757.

Elisha J. Barnard m. Augusta A. Brooks
of Prospect, June 19, 1S43.

Abby Barnes m. Philemon Holt, 1S06.

Abraham Barnes, s. of Sam., m. Phebe
Clark, d. of Caleb, Aug. 20, 1744.

1. Abraham, b. Mch. 25, 1745.

2. Zuba, b. June 21, 1746; m. Solomon Tompkins.

[Abraham died in the French War]
and Phebe m. Gideon Scott, 1755. (She
d. before 1762.)

Amanda Barnes m. Isaac Brown, 1S17.

Ye record of Benjamin Barnes, Sen.,

children,

I. first Benjamin was born ye beginning Sept:

Apr. i'>84.

o 2. John was hern Aug. 12 =■ 1686.

1706. 4. a soon Thomas was born May ye ■» 11 = i^^?,

3. a soon was born May -> 1^89.

5. a soon ebenezer was born March =■ 15th = 1693.

6. a daughter .Sarah was born August = 15 = i'v5.

7. a soon Samll born al)ought Mch = ifi — iC^t-j.

The third lx>rn of the above barns being a soon

dyed ye s;ime May it was born.
The first born son lienjamm Barns deyed in May.

Sarah I>arnes mother to the above named children
deyed decembcr the 21 in ye yer 171 2.

The 5 son Ebene/er dyed March 10, 1713.

The alxjve named Benjamin Barnes the Father
Dyed, Apr. 24, 1731, Accounted about Stj years
old.

[Benj. and John w^ere hap. in Farmington, Dec. i,
i6&y; Thomas, June 8, i69fj. Sarah m. ftenry
Day, Jr., of Colchester, 1723. J

Bar!

Benj

Ds

1. (

2. I

0. t

7. 1

Calel

Me
De<

r. J-
Danit

nah
San

1. H

2. T

4! B<

6. E(

[Est

Dimoi

Ebenc
\Va
4. z<

Edwfl
We

Eli E

Th<

I. G
Hanr

Isaac

tis,

1, L

2. I

3. c

5- >*
6. S

E!

Isaa<

SOI

I. ]

2. i

3. 1

John
Be
Sa

28,

2.

3-
4-

i!

5f

14 Ap

UI8T0RY OF WATERBUHr.

Barnes. Barrit.

Jonathan Barnes, s. of John. m. Sibbel
Bartholomew, d. of Seth, Nov. 22, 178 1.

1. Policy, b. Ausr. 23. 1782,

2. Stephen, b. Dec. .^a, 1783; d. Nov. 3, 1S06.

3. Sally, b. May 3, 178^1.

4. Merrit, b. Auji. 30, 1788.

5. Ransom, b. Oct. 5, i7i/j.

6. Garrey, b. Oct. 12, 1792.

7. Harriot, b. Aug. 2, 1794.

8. Charry, b. Mch. i, 1797.

9. Chloe, b. Mch 28, 1803; d. Mch. 24, 1804.

Lucy Barnes m. Noah Humiston, 176S.

Nathaniel Barnes, s. of Nathl., m. Lydia
Elvvel, d. of Ebenezer, Oct. 3, 1753.

1. Ambrose, b. Apr. 5, 1754.
a. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 28. 1756.

3. Philip, b. Dec. 26, 1757; d. July 16, 1758.

4. Philip, b. May to, 1759.

5. Nathaniel, b. May 30. 1761.

6. Lidda, b. Sept. 28, 1763.

Rebecca Barnes m. Joseph Payne, 1823.

Samuel Bernes, s. of Benj., m. Mary
Johnson, d, of John of Derby, June 4,
1722. She d. May 12, 1760.

X. Abraham, b. Aug. 5, 1723.

2. Mary, b. May 24, 1725; m. John S/atcrr£t\ 1755.

3. Benjamin, b. Nov. 27, 1726.

4. Martha, b. Sept. 4, 1728; m. John S/ofcr, 1750.

5. Hannah, b. May 39, 1730; m. Luke Fulford, and

Daniel Barnes.

6. Anne, b. Mch y, 1732-3; d. June 17, T733.

7. Ann, b. May 2§, 1734; m. John Scovill.

8. Samuel, b. Jan. 20, 1736-7.

9. David, b. May 29, 1739.

Sarah Barnes m. Stephen C. Frost, 1817.

Thomas Herns [cordwinder, 1724] s. of
Benj., m. Susanna, d. of Edward Scovill
of Haddam, Jan. 14, 1721, and d. Nov.
29. 1772.

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 7, 1722; d. Jan. i, 1775-6.

2. Susanna, b. Aug. 18, 1724; m. M. T errill.

3. Sarah, b. Julv 18, 1727; d. Aug. 3, 1750

4. Thomas, b. June 13, 1731; d. July 2. 1753.

5. Hulda, b. Mch. 19, 1734; d. June 22, 1753.

6. Daniel, b. Oct. 4, 1736.

Titus Barnes, s. of Daniel of New Haven,
m. Sarah Peck, d. of Sam., Apr. 11,

1759-

1. Asenath, b. Dec. 13, 1760.

(Loly); m. Eliakim Welton, 1788.

William B. Barnes (or Banes) of Bur-
lington, m. Irene Smith, in Bristol,
May 8, 1S42.

James and Esther Barrit, children born
in Wat.

1. Philip, b. Nov. 2, 1755.

2. Richard, b. Apr. i, 1758.

James Barrit d. Oct. 14, 1767. in the
8Sth year of his age. [Probate records
add Solomon, John, Joseph, James,
Robert, William, Sarah, Mary Wood-
ruff, Martha Bronson, Experience and
Esther.]

Barrows. Bassett.

William B. Barrows from Attleboro,
Mass., b. Sept 5, iSii. and Julia Doug-
lass from Paterson. N. J., b. Sept. 15,
1S12, were m. Sept. 1832.

1. .Augustus, b. July 29, 18 u-

2. Adeline Julia, b. Oct. 16, 1836.

Abiel Bartholomew, s. of Seth, m. Mary
Hungerford, d. of David, Apr. 14, 1785.

1. Ira, b. May 6, 1786.

2. William, b. Jan. i'^, 1788,

3. Polly, b. Mch. i, 1702.

Daniel -Bartholomew m. Hannah Sutliff,
July 4, 1771.

1. Isaac, b. Mch. 31, 1773.

2. Eunice, b. Aug. 7, 1775.

Hannah Bartholomew m. Elias Cook,

1S13.

Jane Bartholomew m. B. F. Leaven-
worth, 1S33.

Joseph Bartholomew and Phebe [cl. of
Nathl. Richason].'

Tamer, Bennet, Joseph, and Hannah, bap. Jan.

12, i8fxj.
Orson, bap. June 27, 1802.
Phebe, bap. June 24, 1804.

Osee Bartholomew, s. of Seth of New
Haven, m. Lydia Saxton, d. of Eben-
ezer, Nov. 16, 177S.

1. James, b. Aug. 7, 1779.

2. Gershom, b. Men. 12, 1781.

3. Cloe, b. Oct. 3, 1782.

4. Eben, b. June 29, 1785.

5. Isaac, b. Oct. 18. 1791.

6. Hepsy, b. Sept. 6, 1743.

Sarah Bartholomew m. Timothv Pond,
1764.

Seth Bartholomew, s. of William of Bran-
ford, m. Hepzibah Robbard, d. of Abiel,
Jan. 22, 1755.

1. Osee, b. Nov. 7, 1755.

2. Leve (dau.), b. Jan. 21, 1757.

3. Joseph, b. Mch.' 28, 1738.

4. J^ihil, b. Mch. 14, i75g; m. Jonathao Barnes.

5. Mary, b. May 24, \-jto.

6. Irene, b. July 25, 1761.

7. Seth, b. Nov. 14, 1762.

8. Abiel, b. Apr, 2, 1764.

9. Hepzibah, b. Tan. 24; d. Feb. 10, 1766.

10. Gershom, b. June 8, 1767.

11. Levi, b. Jan. 22, 1769.

Seth Bartholomew, s. of Seth, m. Eliza-
beth Hungerford, d. of David, Dec. 16.
17S4.

1. Anna, b. Sept. 7, 1785.

2. Rosanna, b. June 17, 1787.

3. Milly, b. July 15, 171/5.

4. Betsey, 1). Nov. 9, 1792.

5. Tared, b. Feb. 11, 1794.

6. David, b. Mch. 28, 1798; d. Jan. 10, 1801.

Sibel Bartholomew, m. Dan. Hikcox,

1766.

Charles B. Bassett of Milford, m. Julia
E. Hickox [d. of Leonard], Mav 19,
1851.

Eliza Bassett m. W. B. Riggs, 1S30.

FAMILY EECOB,

Beach. Beach

Bassett.
Levi Bassett:'

Esther, b. Nov. 13. 1773.
Lyman, b. Apr. 17, 1779.
Eathan, b. Oct. 10, 1781.
Sally, b. Jan. 13, 17S4.

Lois Bassett m. David Luddenton, 1755.
Martha Bassett m. John Sutliff, 1747.

Ruth Bassett m. David Hummerston,

1743-

Eliza Bassford m. Vincent Ibbertson,
1S49.

William Bassford of Eng. m. Mary J.
Wilcox of Litchfield, Mch. 23, 1845.'

William Bassford m. Alice Marshall, Jan.
16, 1848.

Ann W. Bateman m. Joseph Kane, 183S.

Stephen Bateman m. Mariah Benham, d.
of Elihu, Jr., Sept. 20, 1S26.

Susan Bateman m. Dr. J. D. Mears, 1S35.

Benjamin Bates m. ''Loruanda foott,"
Feb. 9, 1776.''

Jemima Catlin, l>ap. Aug. 5, 178 1.*

Lewis Bates of North Haven m. Emma
E. Hine, Nov. 29, 1849.

Betty Baxter m. D. B. Tompkins. 17S3.

Isaac Baxter m. Harriet Russel, Oct. 31,
1821.

Maria Baxter m. Ed. Robinson, 1S27.

Almira Beach m. H. S. Pardee, 1837.

Anson Beach of Cheshire m. Caroline
Cande, Apr. 28, 1S33.

Asa Beech, s. of Joseph, m. Elizabeth
Benham, d. of Shadrack, Feb. i, 1781.

1. Asa Austin, b. Nov. 15, 17S6.

2. Mehitabel. b. Dec. 10, 1788.

3. John, b. Dec. a, 1790.

4. Elizabeth Lane, b. June 3, 1794.

Asel Beach [s. of Moses] and Keziah
[Royce], chil. bom in Wat. :

1. Lois, b. Tuly 4, 1761.

2. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 14, 1763.

3. Asahel, b. Nov. g, 1766.

Desire Beach, wid., d. Nov. 20, 1S44, a.
66. «

Elihu Beach, first child that is born in
Wat. :

Elihu b. May 26, 1764.

Elizabeth Beach m. F. G. Northrop, 1S46.

Guy W. Beach m. Cornelia Sanford of
Naugatuck, Sept. 12, 1847.

James C. Beach of Cheshire m. Eliza
Hitchcock [d. of Truman B.]. Nov. 17,

1835.

James Beach d. Feb. 15, 1S41, a. 59.

Joel B

d. of

1. Nai

2. Am

John 1
Hoac

1. Luc

2. Poll

3. Am

4. Luc

Ham
son,

Joseph

perie:

(.M

8. Joi

9. An

10. .-Vn

11. Asi
Th

Joseph

nah I
June

1. Sail]

2. Dav

3- .Ios«
4. Cat)
s. Lau
6. Har
Am<

Lucius

field,
and '
1S36.

A sc

Ad

Juli

Luna I
Lydia
Maria
Miners

Moses

Bud

1845.

Thadd

June

Rach<
Lucre
Abiga

Abiga:

Mary

Natha
m. i:
Apr

1. Sa

2. Sa

3. Al

4. Nj

See

Abel<

Alc(

16 AP

HISTORY OF WATEHBURY,

Beardslee. Heebe.

Elizabeth Beardslee m. William Cooper,
1843.

Joseph Beardsley of Monroe, m. Althea
Hotchkiss of Prospect. Apr. iS, 1S51.

Levi Beardsley, s. of Jesse, m. Esther
Porter, d. of Col. Phineas, Jan. 15, 17S9.

1. Esther, b. Nov. 21, 1791; m. G. Graves.

2. Tallman, b. Dec. 13, 1794.

[Samuel Beardslee m. Eunice Brown of
Waterbury, May 17, 1737. He d. before
Jan. 14, 1761.]

William D. Beardsley, s. of Daniel of
Reading, m. Elvira Stevens, d. of David,
Nov. 7, 1S16.

1. James H., b. Feb. 4, 1810.

2. J Twin daughters, b. Mch. 8, 182^. One d. Mch.

3. ) 12, 1823; the other named Ksther Stevens.

William Beardsley m. Amanda Smith,
Apr. 28, 1S33.

Dr. Daniel Beckley m. Leva Lewis, d.
of Capt. John of Salem, in Wat.. Mch.
22, 17S7. She d. Feb. i6, 1797. [He d.
in Utica, N. Y., in 1842, a. 85.]

1. Gordon Lewis, 1). Oct. 17, 1788.

2. Flora, b. Apr. 27, 1701.

3. Leva, b. Feb. 28, 17 >s-

Amzi Beebe, s. of Reuben, m. Jerusha
Summers of Milford, Mch. 28, 1802.^

Lockey, b. May, i^^y, m. C. A. Russell.

David Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jonathan, dec'd,
m. Lydia Terrill, d. of Moses, Feb. i,
176S. [He d. in Ohio, Nov. 11, 1840, a.

93.J

1. Allace, b. Dec. 8, 1768.

2. Arah. b. Nov. 13, 1770; d. Nov. 14, 1773.

3. Electa, b. June 8, 177^.

4. Lydia, b. July 20, 1775 [d. Aug. 17, 1833, a.

86', yr-;.]

5. Ksther, b. June 27, 1777 [m. Xoah Terrel].

6. Eunice, 1). Sept. 17, 1779.

7. David, b. Sept. 2, 178 1.

8. Molly, b. Oct. is, 1783 [m. Wyllys Terrill, s.

of Joel|.
I). Chester, b. Nov. 5, 1785.

10. Augustus, b. Apr. 18, 1788.

11. Lonion Constant, I), [an. 11, i7';i [d. in Ohio,

Fcl). 4, 1827, unm.f.

Eli Beebe m. Elizabeth Baldwin, Apr. 6,

I77S.^

Eunice Beebe m. Sam. Lewis, 1763.

Ira Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jon. Beebe, m.
Jemima Hickox, d. of Gideon. Aug.
1758. [He d. Dec. 29, 1792, a. 59(57?;;
she d. Apr. i, 1S18, a. 77.]

1. Kli. b. Jan. v>, 17-^

2. Usley (Ursula!, I). Jan, 9, 1701 [m. Walter

\Voosicr|.

3. Ach«ia, '1. Mch. 9, i7f'3; m. Sam. Ames.

4. Armenia, b. July lo, \-;(<y, m. A. .Morgan.

5. Borden, b. Sept. 5, i7'>7.

Jane S. Beebe ra. Burr Benham, 1829.

Beebe. Beebe-

Lieut. Jonathan Beebe fb. May 2, 170^'
s. of Joseph and Menitable of New
London, m. at Lyme, Hannah Lewis
b. Nov. 26. 1716, d. of William, who
was s. of John (and Elizabeth Huntley)
b. about 1655. s. of John Lewis, w^ho
came to America in the Hercules, 1635.
According to town records, they were
m. Mch. 12, 1731-2; ace. to ch. rec,
Mch. 18, 1735,

1. Ira, b July 30, 1735.

2. Zeruah, b Feb. 4, 1737-8; m. \. Terrill.

3. Zcre, b July 2, 1740.

4. Borden, b. Aug. 3, 1742.]

"An account of ye children of Leut.
Jonathan Beebe Recorded in Wat.

Jonathan beebe was born Sept. 24, 1745.
David beebe born Aprill 12-1747.
Scba Beebe was l)orn Aprill 6-1749.
Reuben Beel)e was born Au^j. 28, 1751.
Si las Constant was born Jan. 15, 1750.

Lieut. Jonathan Beebe Dyed Jan. 20,

1759.
Borden Beebe Dyed In June, 1760."

Jonathan Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jon. dec'd,
m. Azubah Warner, d. of Abraham,
dec'd, Aug. 25, 1767.

1. Dorcas, b. Apr. 15, 176S (d in Canandai^a, N.

v., i3i4|.

2. William, b. June 23, 1770 [d. in Grafton, O.,

1840I.

3. Clarissa, b. July ig, 1772: d. Nov. 4, 1774.

4. Theodorus, b. Oct. 10, 1775.

Joseph Beebe, s of Ephraim of Say brook,
m. Tameson Terrill, d. of Moses, Apr.
15. 17:3.

1. Temperance, b. Oct. 14, 1773.

Levina Beebe m. Sylvester Clark, 1830.

Lockey Beebe m. C. A. Russell, 1825.

[Orellana Beebe, s. of Zera, m. about
17(^0. Sarah Hickox, b. Apr. 15, 1774.

1. Cokely, 1). Feb. 171^1.

2. Philena b. May 6, 1703.]

Reuben Beebe, s. of Jonathan and Xene
Matthews, d. of Jeoram of New Hart-
ford, in the Province of New York;
chil. b. in Wat.

2. Fanny, b. Aug. 20, 1775.

Reuben Beebe, s. of Ephraim, m. Han-
nah Scott, d. of Enoch, June 24. 1776.
He d. July 20, 1812.^ She d. Feb. 25,
1807.

Am/i. I). Feb. 2?, 1777.
Cloe, b. Aug. 13, 1778.
Isaac, 1). Jan. i, 17^).
Reuben, b. Aug. ^, 1781.
Hannah, b. Nov. 15, 1782.
6. Thankful, i). Aug. 17S4.

3-
4-

Reuben C. Beebe m. Abigail Wooster —
all ot Salem — Nov. 2S, 1S36.*

Russell Beebe from the State of New
York. m. Esther Bristol of Oxford, Oct.
9. I7S'^.«

FAMILY RBCO,

^^^^^- Beecher.

Sabria Beebe m. Isaac Chatfield. Jr.,

i8o6.« ^

Sarah Beebe m. Eben. Porter, 1774.

[Silas Beebe, s. of Zera, m. Sally Ellis,
b. Mch. 13, 1772, in Granby, Conn.
Feb. 8, 1790. .

X. Alanaon, b. Feb. 21, 1791.

Silas moved to Chenango Co. N. Y.
1793.]

Simeon Beebe [m. Anne "Terir' of
Lyme, Aug. i, 1750.

I Elisha, b. Feb. 3, X7S0.1.

Anna], m. Ebencrcr Tyler, 1771.

"Chil. bom in Wat."

1. Clarissa, b. Aug. 20, 1753.

2. Simeon, b Jan. 95, 1755.

3. Martain, b. Aug. ao, 1756.

4. Ephraim, b. Mch. 10, 1757.

5. Mehitable, b. Dec. 13, 1759.

6. Stephen, b. Oct. 11. Vjel.

7. Phylena, b. July n, 1763.

[Est. probated Sept. 2, 1777. Ashbel.
Artemus, Thaddeus and Polly are also
mentioned.]

[Temperance Beebe m. Abial Roberts
1773.J '

Zera Beebe, s of Lieut. Jon., m. Keziah
VVarner,d. of Abr., dec'd, Mch. 19, 1761.

Beec]

Dai

ter,
10. (

XX. <

12. Il

13. S!
M. (

'5. J

Dai:

Dec

David
Mar
cott
a. 3:

Eliza I

Emily

Esthe I

Expei

Hanm

Hezel

T«
H<i

Hezi

Al
W

1774.

2. Joseph, b. Ian. 9, 176^.

A^K "*' iT- 'Z^o. Lucy. Roderick, b.
Abraham, b. 1780. '

Benjamin, b. Apr. n, 1784.

Levi, b. Feb. 19, 1785.

Zera d. at Solon, N. Y. in 1803.]
Abel Beecher, s. of Joseph of West
Haven, m. Lydia Porter, d. of Eben
Aug. 31, 1762.

1. Abel, b. Feb. 21, 1765.

2. Sarah, b. Sept. 21, 1770.

Abraham Tolles Beecher of Woodbridee
m. Mary Anne Lewis, Oct. 19, 1831.

ffranklin K., b. 1832.
Herbert W., b. Feb. i, 1840.]

Amelia Beecher m. J. C. Fenton, 1851.
Betsey Beecher m. Ransom Steele, 1821.
[Daniel Beecher, s. of Daniel of Wood-
bndge, d. m Nau., April, 1848.

X. Sukey. died young.

3. Baldwin, b. 1786.

4. Anna, b. 1788; m. Calvin Thayer

5. Fanny; m. Ezra Porter.

6. Susan; m. Milo Lewis.

Daniel m. his second wife, Electa Beebe,
a. of David, about 1792.

'■ ""'&?: d'olA'moV.'^' ™- """"' '^'3. Susan

8. Abiah; m. Sam. Hoadley.

9. Julius.

2

John ]
cott,

Justus

Inl
In'

Lewis
Care

Melita

Nancy
1842

Polly ]
Polly ]

Polly,

Neal

Sally ]

Sarah

Sophia
Mrs. 1

Sai:

Benjac

Bet
Joe

Mary j

Amos

Pierj

Eunice
Smith

1834.

18 AP

BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

Bellamy.

Benham.

James Bellamy, s. of Matthew of Wal.,
m. Mary Osborn, d. of Ephraim of
Wood., July lo, 1740.

Lucy Bellamy m. Abijah Gamsey, 1772.

Aaron Benedict [s. of Daniel], and Esther
Trowbridge [b. Nov. 1748 J, m. Dec. 13,
1769. [He d. Dec. 16, 1841, a. 96.]

1. Rebekah, b. Aug. 31, 1772; m. Eli Clark.

2. Daniel, b. Jan. 17, 1774; d. Nov. 5, 1781.

3. Polly, b. Apr. 24, 1777.

4. Amos, b. July 6, 1780.

5. "Sarah or Sally," b. Aug. 22, 1782.

6. Aaron, b. Aug. 9, 1785.

7. A son, b. Mch. 10; d. Apr. 25, 1788.

8. Esther, b. Aug. zi, 1789.

Aaron Benedict, s. of Aaron of Middle-
bury m. Charlotte Porter, b. Oct. 29,
1789. d. of Abel, Sept. — , 1808.

1. Charlotte Ann, b. Mch. 27, i8zo; m. S. M. Buck-

ingham.

2. Frances Jennet, b. Nov. 22, 1812; d. Feb. 18, 1830.

3. George W., b. Nov. 26, 1814.

4. Charles, b. Sept. 23, 18 17.

5 Mary Lyman, b. Sept. 24, 1819; m. John S. Mit-
chell.

ApoUos Benedict of Danbury m. Amanda
Sanford, Oct. 18, 1820.

Charles Benedict, s. of Aaron, m. Cor-
nelia M. Johnson, d. of John D., Oct.
I, 1845.

I. Amelia Caroline, b. Apr. 4, 1847.

[2. Charlotte Buckingham, b. June x, 1850.]

Elizabeth Benedict m. Sam. Stow, 1780.'

George W. Benedict, s. of Aaron, m.
Caroline R. Steele, d. of Austin, Feb.
7, 1838.

1. Mary Caroline, b. July 29, 1839.

2. Frances Jennet, b. Jan. 2, 1S42.

3. George Henry, b. May 18, 1844.
[4. Aaron Austin, b. Oct 5, 1849.J

John Benedict m. Jane A. Yelverton of
Oxford, Oct. 20, 1850.

Abigail Benham m. Timothy Frost, 1764.

Adelia Benham m. George Grilley, 1834.

Benjamin Benham, s. of Joseph, m. Sarah
Hall, d. of John— all of Wallingford^
Apr. 19, 1756.

1. Daniel, b. Sept. 6, 1757.

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 23, 1760.

3. Elizabeth Roycc, b. Nov. 27, 1763.

4. Abi, b. May 25, 1769.

5. Benjamin, b. July 21, 1773.

Benjamin Benham, Jr. s. of Benj., m.
Rebekah Tuttle, d, of Reuben of North
Haven, Nov. 9, 1790.

1. Lovisa, b. Aug. 23, 1791.

2. Enos 1

and >-b. Jan. 15, 1793.

3. Jarvis )

Benham. Benham.

Charlotte Benham m. Shelton Smith,

1837.
Daniel Benham and Clarissa:'

Norman, bap. May 27, 1821.
Marda Ann, bap. May z8, 1823.

Ebenezer Benham and Desire:

1. Hannah, b. Jan. 15, 1757.

a. Martha, b. Aug. 24, 1758.

3. Isaac, b. Oct. 21, 1760.

4. Ester, b. Sept. 23, 176a.

5. Anar (dau.), b. July xx, 1764.

6. Ebenezer, b. July 2x, X766.

Edwin Benham of Nau. m. Patty Ann
Hotchkiss of Bethany, May 12, 1844.

Hannah Benham m. Henry Cook, 1745.

Isaac Benham and Lucy [Cook]. She
d. Feb. 17, 1796. ,

z. Catherine, b. July ao, 1761; d. Jan. 15, 1764.
a. Katharine, b. Oct. za, 1765; d. Apr. 6, 1770.

3. Samuel, b. July xz, X769 [m. Betsey Tuttle and

d. Jan. 33, x8ax.]

4. George Wyllys, b. June a3, d. Aug. a, 177X.

James Benham and Elizabeth:

X. Jesse, b. Apr. Z4, X768.
a. James, b. Dec [X769I .

Burr Benham, s. of Elihu, m Jane S.
Beebe, d. of Augustus, Mch. i, 1829.

_. . c 1x769] .

3. Samuel Curtis, b. July 19, Z77a.
Shadrack, bap. Sept. Z7, Z775.'

Joseph P. Benham from Middlebury m.
Martha Langdon from Sheffield, Eng^.,
June 28, 1845.

X. John, b. Jan. a, Z847.

Joseph R. Benham m. Hannah Bodine
of New Jersey, May 28, 1834. He d-
Mch. 18, 1838, a. 35.'

Lydia Benham m. Abel Bronson, 1768.

Maria Benham m. Stephen Bateman,i826.

Mehitable Benham m. Zebah Parrel, 1 796.
Reuben Benham' s

Reuben, bap. at St. James Ch. Dec. x, Z766.

Reuben Benham m. Lamont Merriman,
Oct. II, 1775.

'* ^a"nd*" \^' ^^^' 7» '77^; and bap. at St. James
a. Clarissa) ^**-

3. Joseph, b. Nov. 9, Z778.

4. Lucy, b. Mch. ao, Z78Z.

Samuel Benham, s. of Thomas, m. Han-
nah Johnson, d. of Jesse, Nov. 20, 1799.

X. Fredus Mindret, b. July 9, x8ox.
a. Thomas Miles, b. Mch. 4, 1803.

3. Polly, b. Jan. Z7, Z805.

4. Susan Maria, b. Jan. 3Z, Z807.

Sarah Benham m. A. H. Davis, 1850.

Shadrack Benham, s. of Joseph, dec'd,
m. Eliz. Austin, d. of Joshua, aU of
Walling^ord, Dec. 4, 1758.

x. Marcy, b. Apr. 9, X76Z.
a. Leucv, b. June za, Z763.

3. Elizabeth, b. Aug. az, Z765; m. Asa Beach.

4. Mary Curtis, b. Aug. 37, X767.

5. Catharine, b. Feb. X7, 1770; m. Wm. Rowley, Jr.

6. Lowly, b. Jan. aa, X773.

7. Harvy, b. Oct. 84, 1776.

8. Daniel, b. Apr. 6, Z783.
6. Marcy, b. July a6, X785.

FAMILY REQOi

Benham. Bissell.

Thomas Benham and Hester:

5. Thomas, b. Oct. 19, 1786.

Widow Benham d. 1831, a. 84.*

Mary Benet m. Benj. Stillwell, 1754.

Catharine Benton m. Th. Homer, 1832.

George Benton m. Jane Brown— both of
Hartford — May 6, 1850.

Norman A. Bidwell, b. Oct. 4, 1798, s. of
Jared of Watertown, m. Rebecca Steele,
d. of Daniel, Dec. 24, 1822.

I. George Austin, b. Nov. 96, 1825.
a. Frederic Sherman, b. July a6, 1829.
3. Mary Jane, b. July 4, 1832.

John W. Bigelow, s. of John, dec'd, m.
Electa Judd, d. of Walter, Jan. 31, 1825.

Egbert F. Bill of Monterey, Mass. m.
Angelina L. Frost, Oct. 11, 1847.

Louisa Bill m. Lamed Wilkinson, 1807.

Mary M. Bill m. Lamed Wilkinson, 1836.

Jane Binyon m. John Hodson.

Edwin M. Birge of Coventry, N. Y., m.
Myretta Porter [d. of Truman], May 6,

1833.
Elijah Birge m. Abigail P. Peck, Sept.

28, 1783 »

Elijah, b. April 14, 1785.
Fanny, b. Feb. 1787.
Horace, b. Jan. 31, 1789.

Augusta Briscoe m. Luke Pond, 1838.
Betsey Biscoe m. Tim. Ball, 1846.
Frances A. Biscoe m. Wm. Wattles, 1840.
[Betsey Bishop m. David Hay den, 1797.]

Catharine Bishop m. Leverett Stoddard,

1840.
David T. Bishop of North Haven, m.

Caroline Ives [d. of Giles]. Sept. 8, 1825.

Samuel Bishop d. Nov. 12, 1847, a. 45.'
Susanna Bishop m. David Norton, 1767.
Ephraim Bissel and Abigail [Curtis? from
Tolland]:

a. Thomas, b. Nov. 13, 1739.

Ephraim Bissell [b. 1736], s. of Eph.,
dec'd, m. Susanna Warner, d. of Sam..
Nov. 5, 1756. He d. Sept. 17, 1760, and
Susanna m. Abiel Roberts, 1771.

I. Eunice, b Oct. 26, 1757; m. R. Webb.
a. Daniel, b. Mch. 8, 1759.

Garry Bissell, s. of Hiram, m. Sarah
Maria Hull, d. of Elias, in Litchfield,
June 20, 1831.

1. Sarah Jane, b. Nov. 34, 1833; d. Mch. 21, 1834.
a. Mary Eliza, b. Jan. 29, 1835; d. June 12, 1837.

3. Lucy Maria, b. Oct. 26, 1836.

4. Augusta Louiza, b. Sept. 21, 1838; d. Oct. 4, 1839.

5. Elizabeth Ann, b. Oct. 29, 1840. (These b. in

Litchfield.)

6. Hiram Elias, b. Tulv 15, 1843.

7. Charles Henry, b. Apr. 95, 1846.

Blac]

Char

fon

Irena

Samu

Ne^
of I

Sarat

185]

Esthc
Josep

4. Fi

Seth

176c

ci

A

Abner

full

1. s
a. J'

4. C

5. M

6. Z

7. A

8. B

9. T

Tha
m. V

10. St

XI. Ji

Adna \

11, I

Amasf
Barl
d. Ji

I. Mi

a. Lyi

3. En

An

Amos

Amos !

m. Ji

Angeli

1839.

Asher

New
Hum
Oct.

1. Sab

2. Sail

3. Am

4. Gac

5. Ash

Bela B

1785.=

Lini
Ami

Betty ]

EI8T0RT OF WATBRBVBT.

Blacksleb. Blakslbb.

David Blackalee, s. of Capt. Thomas, m.

Phebe Todd, d. of Calebof New Haven,

Nov. 39, 1743.

1. Thomu, b. Sept. 17, 1744-

Phebe d. Oct, 4, 1744, and David m.

Abigail How, d. of John, May 18, 175a.

[Hed. 1781; she, 1799.]

I. Eli, b. Mch. 11, 17s].
3- Alt, b. May 13, .jsS.

4. Phtbe, b. Jane 14, '758.

5. Zit, b. Oct. ji, 1760; d. Anj. ji, 1771.
L Bede, b. Nov. 9, 1763.

7. AdnjL b. Jm. 31. 176s [d. Ang, 30, i8m).

Deborah Blackslee m, John Alcos.
Dennis Blalceslee m. Susan E. Cowel,
Sept. II. 1848.

[Ebenezer removed to New Haven
where were bom to him, 1734-1753,
Lydia, Jotham, Seth, Ebenezer, Je-
mima, Isaiah and Ichabod.]
Ebenezer Blakeslee and Martha:

7. Lydu. b. Stpt. 6, 1781.

Blakeslbe. Blakslbb.

John Blakeslee, s. of Moses, m. Olive

Curtiss, d. of Samuel, Mcb. 4, 1745.

.. John. b. Mch. J, ,j,s-6.

S. Obcd, b. AuE. 99, i7st.

«. OUve, b. Mcb. 39, 17^3 [m. ElDaOuu Ual.

J. LetlU, b. Apr. I, ijAo; i. June ji. 1761.

B. LcRii, b. Miy 37, 176] (in. In P(huI|.

9. Turd, h. July!, I7«s.

to. Sallo. b. Aug. 30, i7«S [a. Stephen Scymoiir].
It. CuitK h. fib. .6, 1J70.

Jotham Blakeslee, s. of Jottaam of North
Haven, m. Bede Gunn, d. of Nathaniel.
June 7, 1792.

Eli Blakeslee m. Lettice Curtis. Oct. 31.

■773-

.. Pme, b. JuM .s- '775.

I. Orph*. h. Nov. 3, 1776.
Emily A. Blakeslee m. Edward Nichols,

1850.
Enos Blakeslee d. Feb. 10, iSij, a. S4-*
Esther Blakslee, d. of Thomas, ha.*! ason,

i™, b. D«. 8, .7fi5.
Esther Blakeslee m. Philip Tompkins,

1787-*
Jacob Blackalee [m. Elisabeth Barnes.

1. Abntr.b.Msy 15,1731.

I. Aniie.li. Oct. 6. 1733; m. AmmBronion.

3. Cad. h. Dec. 11, .735; d Hay /, iiSj,

4, Aiher, b. May 13. i73a~->ll boni in M<» HaveD.]

J. Loiie, b. June 3, •7'>5-

Jude Blakeslee, s. of Abraham, dec'd. of
New Haven, m. Experience Blakslee,
d. of Thomas, Nov. 13, 1758.

I. Abl. h. Apr. ^B. 1759 [>n- Jese HumiBoo, and

d. May 9. .8,7].
a. Polley. fa. Jan. s, 1761.
3. Bela, b. Sept. n, i7«9 (d. July, i8ij].

Micah, b. Sept. 11, 17M.
Either, b. Oct. 15. lyM.

Levi, b. June !, 1J74; d. Apr. 6, 17
Bertha, b. Mch. 16. 177;.

6. Either.

Laura Blakeslee m. Philo Bronson, 1S31.
Lydia Blakslee m. Amos Prichard, 1768.
Lydia Blaksley m. Sol. Allin, 1773.
Maria Blaksley m. Pinton Delany. 1S49.
Mary Blackslee m, Benj. Upson, 1743.
Micah Blakeslee m. Rhoda Hopkias,

Dec. 17, 1789.*
Moses Btackstee, s. of Thomas, m. Mehit-

able AUyn, d. of Gideon, Nov. 17. 1746.

.. H«ekiah, h, Jan. J7. 174J-S.

i. Keiiah, b, Sept. ao, 1749; d. Feb., 1755.

3. Anio., t. Jan. 10, m,; I July. .jsj.

4. Maiy.b, Feb. 10,1754.

5. Keztah. b. Mcb. >t. 1736.

Z^rt'-F

"■ ''*^d F b

Tacobd. Mch. 25.1767. Hannah Blacks-
lee, the mother of Jacob, dyed in Water-
bur>-, at said Blackslee's house, July 23,
1749, in the 90th year of her age.
James Blakslee [b. Apr. 27, 1699], s. of
Sam. [and Sarah Kimberly] of West
Haven, m. Thankfull Upson, d. of Ser-
freant Stephen, Sept. 15. '724, and d.
June 12, 1734, a. 87. (?)

1. Rube,, b. Jan. .B, .7^5-6.
a. Tilly, h. June 10. 1718.

3. Mehilablc, h. Aug. ii, i?}!.

4. Jamea, b. Fab. j, ijji-*'

b. July 1.

Moses Blakslee, s. of Moses, m. Han-
nah Dunbar, d. of of Wallingford,

SepL 24, 1753.

9. Cateb, b. Oct. i>, 1756; d, Apr., 1757.
3. A dan., b. Apr. 1. 1758.

Nana Blakley of New Haven m. Mary

Dudley, June 16, 1829.
Noah Blakeslee m. wid. Annis Curtis,

Mch. 21, 1771.

Patience Blakslee m. Jesse Alcoz, 1763.

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP21

Blakslbe. Blakslee.

Phebe Blakslee m. Eben. Cook, 1744.

Phebe Blakeslee m. Dan. Harrison, 1774.

Phebe Blakeslee m. Jesse Fenn, 1782.'

Ruben Blackslee, s. of Capt. Thomas,
m. Mary Ford, d. of Barnabas, Sept.
19, 1748.

z. Ruthf b. Feb. 4, 1748-9.

2. Submit, b. Feb. 24, 1750-1.

3. Silas, b. Nov. 30, 1752.

4. Enos, b. May 11, 1755.

5. Lois, b. Oct. -xOy 1757.

6. Eunice, b. Feb. 14, 1760.

Reuben Blaksle [s. of James] and Rhodah
[Griswold. He d. Jan. 4, 1813.]

1. Reubin, b. June 7, 1763.

2. Mehitabell, b. June 29, 1765; m. Seldon Scovill.

3. Louisuanna, b. Jan. 36, 1768; m. Rich. Nichols.

4. Rhoda. b. Jan. xi, 1771.

5. Samuel], b. July 8, 1773.

6. James, b. May 6, 1775.

7. Griswold, b. Apr. 22, 1777.

Salmon Blakeslee m. Asenath Blakeslee,
Oct. ii, 1787.*

z. Chloe, b. May z8, 1789.

Samuel Blakeslee:^

Jacob, b. Mch. 17, 1780.

Betsey, b. Nov. 2, 1782.

Jesse, o. Jan. 22, X785; d. Mch. 22, 1789.

Austin, b. Oct. 22, 1787.

Olive, b. May z, 1789.

Sarah Blakeslee m. James Smith, 1789.*

Stephen Blakslee, s. of Abraham of New
Haven, m. Lida Blakslee, d. of Capt.
Thomas, Jan. 11, 1758.

X. Levi, b. Dec. 6, 1758.

Lydiad. Aug. 23, 1766, and Stephen m.
Rachel Allin, Nov. 25, 1766. He d.
Mch. 20, 1768.

Susanna Blakslee m. B. H. Doolittle,

1785.

Wid. Temperance Blakeslee m. Eliakim
Potter, 1777.'

Cynthia Blakeslee, b. Feb. X7, 1775.

Thomas Blakslee [s. of Ebenezer of
North Haven] and Mary:

[i. David, b. Nov. 7, Z722.

2. Reuben, b. Mch. 19, Z724-5.

3. ^foses, b. June 30, 1727.

4. Mary^ b. Sept. 7, 1729; d. Dec. 2, 1750.

5. Submit, b. X732; d. June Z7, Z750 — all bom in

New Haven.]

6. Experience, b. Jan. 3, 1734-5J m. Jude Blakeslee.

7. Lydea, b. July 6, 1737; m. Stephen Blakeslee.

8. Esther, b. Aug. 6, 1739.

9. Abigail, b. Dec. 22, 1741; m. Jacob Potter.

Thomas Blakslee, Jr., s. of David, m.
Lydia Bradley, Aug. 14, 1764.

1. Asenath, b. Mch. 8, 1765.

2. Bethiah, b. Mch. 30, Z767; m. Eli Barnes.

3. Cloe, b. Feb. Z3, X769.

4. Mabel, b. Mch. 30, Z77Z.

Blakslee. Boughton.

Tille Blakslee, s. of James, m. Hannah
AUyn, d. of Ebenezer, dec'd, of New
Haven, Apr. 24, 1751.

z. Archibald, b. Aug. Z4, Z752.
2. Thankfull, b. Sept. Z7, Z755.

Diantha Bliss m. David Thompson, 1828.

Lucinda Boak m. Bur. Chatfield, 1832.

Henry Book (Boaks) m. Hannah Wil-
liams, d. of Thomas of Watertown,
Aug. 18, 1789.

Henry Boax of Sheffield m. Maria Leo-
nard, Oct. 24, 1836.

Sarah Boardman m. James Williams,
1776.

Theodore Bocemsdes m. Emerit Adams,
July 20, 1835.

Thomas Bokamds m. Bridget Kelly,
Mch. 14, 1851.*

Hannah Bodine m. J. R. Benham, 1834.
Bethollomi Bolt [and Lois Porter].

Timothy, bap. Jan. 29, Z769.S

Levi Bolster from Bangor, Me., m.Mercia
Warner, d. of Ard., May 5, 1836.

z. Elwin Horatio, b. Nov. 8, Z836.

2. Edwin Levi, b. Aug. 20, 1838.

3. Juliette, b. Aug. 2, 1840.

4. Horatio Abram, b. Jan. 27, Z843.

5. Jane Elizabeth, b. Feb. 2z, Z845.

William C. Boon, b. at Norwich, Aug. 8,
1807, m. May 18, 1829, Lovisa Hanks,
b. at Mansfield, Jan. 6, 1806.

z. Julia M., b. at Windham, June 28, 1830.

2. Harriet E., b. at Windham, Apr. 34, 1832.

3. Dewitt H., b. at Windham, June Z3, Z834.

4. Allen Foster, )

and >b. at Meriden, Nov. z, Z838.

5. Edward Payson, )

John C. Booth, s. of Philo of Newtown,
m. Eunice Tucker of Ox., Feb. 19, 1840.

z. Sarah Henrietta, b. Apr. 22, Z846.

Julia Booth m. E. D. Houghton, 1836.

Abigail Bostwick m. Jas. Wright, 1781."*

Andrew Bostick m. Abigail Wei ton, d.
of Peter, Mch. 8, 1775.

z. Isaac, b. Mch. 6, Z776.
2. Andrew, b. Oct. 22, 1778.

Eliza J. Botsford m. J. S. Isbell, 1837.

Henry C. Botsford of Whitneyville m.
Caroline Warner, Aug. 17, 1851.

Clarissa Bouton m. Hershel Stevens, 182 1.

Cynthia Boughton m. S. S. Hartshorn,
1836.

Isaac Boughton, s. of Jonas, m. Caroline
Upson, d. of Obad., May 15, 1833.

z. George Arnold, b. Nov. 7, 1835.

2. Susan Maria, b. Mch. 23, Z837.

3. Henrv Isaac, b. Apr. iz, Z84Z.

4. Isabel, b. May 7, Z843.

5. Elizabeth C, b. Feb. 27, Z846.

HIBTOBT OF WATERBURT.

BOUGHTOH.

James Bough ton

as, i8ji.
/unes Bouebton,

Naugatuc, ra,
Bradley, b. in ib:
Wolcott, and d. Ji

JoDftB Bouebton from Norwalk. b. Oct.
7. 1779. and Lydia Hine from North
Milford, b. Nov., 1778, were m, Apr,

Bradlev.
a. Alvira Bunnell, Aug.

:S, d. of Heman of

I. Clurlcg. b. Sept.

::rFt

'. H. C

b. A^ I, 1806.
5. l«Mc, b. July ij, .808.
i. Subh, b/F«t. ,1, .8...

y. Smith M.,'b. iuM"!^ I'sto; d. Apr. i, if
10. Btuey J«ne,l). Jone .i, iBij; d. July i.

Lanra Bouton m. Lewis Stcblnns, i
Lettice Bouden (7) :

Lemuel, bap. Apr. J

Martin BouEhton m. Rosanah Curtis.

Oct. 1

Otive Bonton m. L. M. Judd, i8z6.
Silas Bouton m, Julia A. Hotchkiss — all

of Salem — Oct. 12, 1823,
John Bonrk m. Mary Cannon — both of

Humphreysville— Feb. 2, 1S51.
James Bowe m. Mary Kelly, July 4, xSji,
"Daniel Boice and Mary Heath, m. in

England.

J"

I. in Nov

No record and a poor memory by the

mother."*

Daniel d. Nov. 12, 1847, a. 69.'
Mrs. Thomas Boyce d. Mch. 7, 1843. a.

24.'
Thomas "Boys" m. Susanna Fairclough,

Feb. iS, 1S44.
David Boyden from Mass., b. Feb. 14,

171)1, m. Lucy Ann Scott, d. of Joel,

May - -"-

I. AIOOK

>. Mch

ei MuuL b. Ocl. 6, 18:3: m. F. A. Weliou.
r, b. tidi. ib. 1833.

Electa Brace m. Chas. Hotchkiss, 1S33.
Bracket, see Brocket.
Alatheah Bradley m. Abner Scott, 1783.
Anet Bradley m. Anna Guernsey, d. of

Joseph, May 12, 1778.'

., M.r™», b. Apr. 10, .779.

3:HuW;V^/i,yi%'7'4V

Bradley. BaocKET.

Aner Bradley, Jr. (grandson of above),

m. Harriet M. Pierpont, Oct. 9, 184.8.+

Ebeoezer Bradley, Jr., m. Mebitable

Castle, Aug. 12, 1765.

.. J«ed.b.J.U.,7,,jM.

Elizabeth Bradley m. Gad Smith. 176+.
Frederick Bradl^ of New Haven m.

[Lydia] Maria Bronson, Sept. 19, 1830.
Jane Bradley m. A. E. Blakesley, 184;.
John E. Bradley, s. of Enos, m. Caroline

Newton, d. of NathL.dec'd, Jan. 1,1824.
John L. Bradley m. Harriet Bunnell of

John L. Bradley m. Harriet 1

Woodbridge. Nov. 18, 1830.

Lnania Bradley m. L. S. Norton. 1S33.*
Luther Bradley, b. Aug. 14. 1811. s. of

Stephen of Prospect, m. Nancy Austin.

d.of Orrin. Oct, 23, 1833.

I. M»rgitell Augun*, h, Sept. 13, .8j,.
., Juli. .Maria, b. July ;6, .Stj.

Lydia Bradley m. Th. Blakeslee, Jr.,

1764.
Lym,
Enos, m. Hannah I
of Joseph. Jan. 30, 1820.

1. Samuel Eli.b. Aug. ^, 1833.

3. Frasklin Elliot, b. June 16. 1S30- d. Oct. i%,i&^o.

Miriam Bradley m. Abishai Castle, 1760.
Polly R, Bradley ra. C. E. Gaylord. 1831.
Salty Bradley, d, of Heraan of Wolcott,
b. in 1825.

t. A child by Robert Andren, Diune Aba Elin-
Sally m, James Bouton, 1842.

1. Joseph^ b, Jan.. ,843.

Sophia Bradley m. H. C. Welton. 1833.

Ann Brewster n
Beri S. Bristol i

31. 1847.

Dan. Welton, 1755.
. Ellen L, Hull. Aug.

Esther Bristol m. Russell Beebe. 17SS.*
Hiel Bristol ra. Chastina Potter [d. of

Aaron], Aug. 9, 1835.
Miranda Bristol d, Dec. 2S. 1809. a. 39.*

Alfred Bracket m. Mrs. Sally Cande,

Apr. 25. 1830.
Ann Brocket ra. Gideon Hotchkiss, 1737.

nude on the margin \>v S. B. Minor.

celebnutil in Ok new (EpiicspaU church.

FAMILY EEQOm

Brockbtt. Bronson.

Asahel Brockett, s. of Peter, m. Clarissa
Goodrich from near Hamden, Mch.,
1842.

X. Augusta, b. June, 1843.

2. Frances, b. May, 1845.

3. Elizabeth, b. Mch., 1847.

Benjamin Brocket, b. Nov. 22, 1763, was
m. to Rebeckah Matthews, b. May 2,
1765, by Rev. Mr. Beebe of Wood-
bridge, Aug. 9, 1791.

Harriet Brocket m. Sam. Peck, 1822.

Lydia Bracket m. Smith Miller, 1825.

Mary Bracket m. Isaac Bronson, 1755.

Peter Brockett, s. of Zenas, m. Oct. 6,
1812, Pamelia Brown, b. Sept. 22, 1794,
d. of Reuben.

1. Asahel, b. Aug. i9, 1813.

2. Mary, 1

and >b. Nov. 28, 1815.

3. Maria, )

4. Sallv, b. Oct. 28, 1817.

5. Rachel, b. July 26, 1820; d. Feb. 5, 1838.

6. Reuben, b. Apr. 5, 1823; d. Aug. 9, 1825.

7. Jesse, b. Feb. 19, 1825.

8. Kansom, b. July 3, 1827; d. Mch. 15, 1831.

9. Amelia, b. Nov. 12, 1829.

10. James Ransom, b. July 3, 1832.

XI. Lucretia, b. June zi, 1837; d. June 28, 184 1.

Polly Brocket m. Samuel Hill, 1807.
Sarah Brocket m. James Bronson, 1750.
Zenas Brackits [and Abigail Johnson] :

1. Cloe, b. July 15, 1781.

2. Anna, b. June 3, 1783; m. Benj. Farrel.

3. Peter, b. Sept. 17, 1784.

4. Abigail, b. Jan. 21; d. Sept. 16, 1787.

5. Abigail, b. July i, 1788.

6. Rebecka, b. Apr. 30, 1790; m. Loveland Judd,

Z8Z2.

7. Rhoda, b. Sept. 34, 1792; m. Jesse Wooster.

8. Zenas, b. Apr. 28; d. May 14, 1794.

Abel Bronson, s. of Lieut. Josiah, m.
Lydia Benham, Dec. 15, 1768.

z. Sarah, b. June 2, 1771.

2. Abel Blakeslee, b. Oct. i, Z775.

Lydia d. June 6, 1782, and Dr. Abel m.
Esther Itawkins, Oct. 24, 1784. He d.
Aug. 2, 1805; she, June, 1823.

3. A son, b. Feb. 2; d. Feb. 3, Z786.

4. Lvdia, b. Mch. 2z, Z787.

5. Elvira, b. Aug. 25, Z789.

6. Sarah, b. Apr. i, Z79Z.

7. Joseph Perrv, b. Sept. 25, Z794.

8. Homer, b. Mch. 20, Z796.

Abigail Bronson m. R. S. Seymour, 1828.

Amanda M. Bronson m. Thomas Towns-
end, 1835.

Amasa Bronson (or Amzi), s. of Ebenezer,
m. Sarah Frost, d. of Samuel, Jr., Mch.
31, 1789(8?).

X. Lucina, b. Dec. 21, 1789.

t. Billv Au^sta, b. Nov. Z4, X79Z; d. Jan. Z4, Z794.

). Philamelia, b. Jan. 21, 1794.

Bronso

[Amfl
Mch.

[Capt.]

Anna
1751.

z. Liu

2. Phc

3. Tai

4. Zer

5- SiN

6. Till

7. No«

8. Noi

9. Ami
zo. Ant
zz. San
12. Silv.

[Anna
Sarah
Sept.,

Amos V

s. of

1827, ".

1804, d

z. Mary

[Deac] .
m. Mi
Feb. I

z. Amas

2. Esthc

3. Amaa

4. Mary

5. Than :

6. Luce,

7. Samu !

8. Silve, I

[Mary
Silvia [

Anson 1 1
Philer :
Timot ]

z. Saral
bul .

2. Willi I

3. Nels. :

4. Mar]

i8i

Asa Bi I

Mch., I

1785.
d. Jul i

z. And :

Mini '

julti I
Mar;

Hen '
Sara

z8. ,

Free I

2.

3.
4.
5.
6.

2.

3-

4. Billy Augustus, b. June Z4, Z796.

5. Samuel Marshall, b. Jan. 2, 1800.

6. Julius Gustavus, b. Dec. 2Z, z8oz.

7. Sarah, b. Feb. 22, Z805.

Asahel

Esthc
dec'd
Esq.

z. Sail

a. Wii:

of

84 *p

BISTORT OF WATBRSURT.

Bronson. Bronson.

Aurelia Bronsoo m. Ransom Mix, 1819.

Belinda Bronson m. Sam. Atkins, 1824.

Benjamin Brooson, s. of John [of Isaac],
m. Lois Richards, d. of Thomas, dec'd,
Mch. 14, 1738. He d. Nov. 16, 1745,
and Loism. Silas Hotcbktss. 1748.
I. Hanoah. b. No». 16; d. Nuv. iS. .738.
I. Rulh, b, Sepc. 30, 1730; m. Samuel Scovill.

3. Cloe, b. D«, ., 1711; d, Jan. 16, ij4i-».

4. SiiBuel. b, D«. 10. 174>.

5. Benj«mio. b. May 8, 1746; d. Dte. «, 1765.

Robtrt Hotchliisi, Samuel Cook, and Gushths

Spencer, bap. Ftb. II. iSlD.
Suiao, bap. Scpl, 16, i8ia.

Benjamin and Pamela:

Nancy, bap. Feb. 11,1821.
Bennet Bronson, s, of Stephen, m. Anna
Smith, d. of Richard of Koxbury, May

Beonson.

David Bronson, _ ._ _. ..„

Porter, d. of Dr. Daniel, dec'd, Mch.

1772. He d. July 13. 1799, and she.

Nov. 16. 1814.

I. Hannah, b. Nov. 10. 1774 [m. Eiekiel Stow].

3. David, b. Feb.]. 177; rm.EliubethEsteibiuk.
and d. Mcb. 16, i83i[.

3. Anna, b. Nov. 3, 1775 {a. Zerah Biown],

Delight Bronson m. A. F. Woodin, 1941.

Ebenezer Brunsen, s. of Isaac. Sen'., m.
Mary Hull, d. of doctor Benjamin Hall
of Wallingford, ' " ...

1716.

BlONSON.

of Josiah, m. Anna

1 November the 7,

Adatler

™;'m.'j^. Bait
6, 1716; i. NnT. 1.

n. Wmum

1. Henrr, b. Jan. 30. iSoi.

3. lease, t. rib. 8, i9o6; d. Apr. 14. 1831.

4. Thomas.b. Jan. 4, 1808.

;. Elizabclh Anna, b. Mch. 3, 1811; d. Apr. 6, 181;.

J. HB'!ri*l%liifia. b.'stpl! is"*?';; m! Zinah Mui-

Anna, wife of Bennet, d. Mar. 4, i9iy
[about sunset], and he m. his second
wife, Elizabeth Maltby, d. of Benjamin
of Branford, May 6, iSzo.
8. Rebecca Taialec, b. Feb. id, 1813; m. D. F.
MaJtby.

Elicabeth d. June 12, 1840 [on Friday
morning, at 6.45 o'c, and Bennet m.
Nancy Daggett, d. of Jacob of New
Haven, May 87, 1841. He d. Dec. n,
1850, at 9 A. M. : she d. at New Haven,
Aug. 14, i867],»

Betsey D. Bronson m. Gains Hitchcock,
■833.

Charles Bronson, s. of Philenor, m. Falla
Roberts from Bristol, May 16, 1836,

I, Lncinda. b. Jul, " "

Ebenezer Bronson, s, of Ebenem

(above), m. Miriam Nichols, d. of
Richard. Apr. 7. 1763, and d. May 6,
iSoS. [She d. July 12, 1812, a. 71.]
1. Jo«ph, b. Mcb. 1, 17(1,

7. "769; d. Nov. 14^ .7

Uov. 14. I7JI [m. Hep
iBoD. and d, iSiol.

'. b. Feb. 91. 1774 [n>. Fanor M<m>ca|.
- ' ■■ •-- rj78.

;n Almi

. '83.).

ry W hi Ling.

[Deac] Daniel Bronson, s. of Thomas.
dec'd, m. Esther Bronson, d. of Dcac.
Andrew, July 19, 1770. He d. Nov. 2,
1824. and she, June 34, 1819,

3. Noa

IJan

Au, b. No
in the Gnat Brook].
4. Leva, b. Apr. lo, 177S: d. June 31, 1800.
Belinda, b. May 31. 1780; d. July >i. 17^8.
J Twins, died in one haul alier tnnh. Nov. 9,

K

- Apr. a,. 'jSj^l-n^Wn, Co^eji).

., Aaa.T). Sept. 8, 1788.

. Andrew, b. Dee. 14, 1791: d. Oct. 18. 1791.

4, Saiah-b Dec.

5. Suia, b. May 7, 1769; d. Nov. _,, _. __.
' " " ■''- - I7JI [m.Tiepsibah Hi

b. Apr.

[mlG^Smit*

(All IhcK, cicept Clarisu, lived over So yean.l

Eli Bronson, s, of Isaac, m. Mebitablc
Atwater, d. of Capt. Eneas of Walling-
ford, Mch. 4, 1773,
■■ En«,.'>

White

t Phitadel)
. b. Nov. i

'tU'

t-^..

S, Philo, b. May ij, 1781 (m. Chli
Elijah Bronson, s. of Lieut. Josiab.
Lois Bunnell, d. of Stephr" ' '
lingford, Mch. lo, 1778.

of WaJ-

1. Giles, b. Feb. 13, 1760,
[j. Irene, b. Mav 38. 17B3.
4. Sabra, b. Met. 9. 1784.
;. Helata, b. Feb. il, irB6.

6. Silath. Feb. .5. 1788.

7, ElijSi, h. Jan. 1, 1794.

9! Pd^b.'D«!*3?i79?f
Elizabeth Bronson m. Sam. Stanley, 17M.

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP25

Bronson. Brunson.

Elnathan Bronson, s. of Moses, was m.
to the widow Rachel Hill of New Fair-
field, by the Rev. Mr. Thomas Lewis,
Dec. 26, 1744.

1. Jesse, b. Sept. it, 1745.

2. Esther, b. Sept. 22, 1747.

3. Terusha, b. Jan. 15, 1749-50.

4. Hannah, b. Feb 29, 1751-2.

5. Joseph, b. Dec. 3, 1753.

Ellen Bronson m. Chas. Cowell, 1851.

Emily Bronson m. Divine Piatt, 1830.

Ethel Bronson, s. of Capt. Isaac, m.
Hepsibah Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Esq.,
Dec. 30, 1787 [and d. 1825J.

^' > Twins, b. and d. Sept. 11, 1790.

3. Alfred, b. Oct. 13, 1791: d. Apr. 6, 1792.

4. Erastus, b. Feb. 18, 1793.

5. Betsey, b. May 6, 1795.

6. Emma, b. Sept. 7, 1797.

7. Isaac, b. Aug. 19, d. Dec. 31, 1800.

Ezra Bronson, s. of John, dec'd, m. Su-
sanna Judd, d. of Thomas, dec'd, Sept.
6, 1753. [He d. Sept. i, 1795; and she,
Oct. 13. 1828.]

1. Michel, b. Mch, 25, 1754.

2. Hannah, b. Mch. 26, 1757; ra. William Leaven-

worth.

3 Mark, b. Aug. 4, 1762.

4. Susanna, b. Rich. 6, 1766 [m. Stephen Welton].

5. Anna, b. Dec. 26, 1770; m. Joseph Cook.

6. Meliscent, b. June 27, 1773 [m. Wm. Durand].

Harris and Hannah Bronson :

Charles Hopkins, bap. Apr. 28, 1817.I

Harry Bronson. s. of Joseph, 3d. of Pros-
pect, m. Charlotte Osborn, d of Daniel,
2d, of Middlebury, Dec. 15, 1839, who
d. July 24. 1S48, a. 34.

1. Henry Westly, b. Oct. 6, 1841.

2. AUtce Jennet, b. Mch. 25, 1846.

Henry Bronson [s. of Rennet, m Sarah
M. Lathrop, a. of Samuel, June 3,
1831].

I. Samuel Lathrop, b. Jan. 12, 1834.

4 George, b. Sept. 27, 1836; d. Jan. 30, 1837.

3. Nathan Smith, b. Nov. 20, 1837.

Henry Bronson m. Charlotte Thompson,
Sept. 2, 1849.

Huldah Bronson m. David Welton, 1833.

Isaac Brunson, Senior, and his wife,
Mary [d. of John Root] His children
that were born in Waterbury:

4. Mary, h. Oct. 15. 1680; m. Thomas Hikcox and

DcHC. Sam. Hull of Woodbury.

5. Joseph, b. ifiSj; d. May 10, 1707.

6. Thomas, b. Jan. 16, 1685-6.

7. F^henezcr, b, Dec, if)88.

8. Sarah, b. Nov. 15, 1691; ra. Stephen Upson.

9. Mercy, b. Sept. 29, 1694 [m. Richard Bronson].
[Isaac was b. 1670, John, 1673, and Samuel, 1676,

in Farmington]

3»

Bronson. Bronson.

Isaac Bronson (2), s. of Isaac, Sen^ m.
Mary Morgan, d. of Richard, Sen', of
New London, June 3, 1701.

1. Terusha, b. Nov. 8, 1703 [ra. Paul Welch).

2. Isaac, b. Mch. 27, 1707.

3. Anpe, b. Aug. 28, 1709; m. Dan. How.

4. Josiah, b. June, 1713.

5. Mary, b. May 29, 1716 [ra. T. Hine].

6. Nathan, b. Mch. 29, 1719; d. Dec. 4, 1722.

7. Tames, b. Nov. 6, 1721 [d. 1725].

8. Patience, b. Apr. 14, 1725; m. Stephen Hopkins.

9. James, b. Oct. 22, 1227.

Mary d. Sept. 23, 1749, and Isaac m.
Sarah, wid. of Deac. Joseph Lewis,
May 14, 1750. He d. June 13, 1751, a.
81. (Her death is recorded with that
of her first husband.)

Isaac Bronson (3), s. of Isaac, m. Eunice
Richards, d. of Thomas, dec'd, July 3,
1734.

1. Ix>ise, b. Jan. 26, 1734*5; m. Isaac Prichard.

2. Isaac, b. Oct. 2, 1736.

3. Hannah, d. Jan. 31, 1738-0; m. Timothy Clark.

4. Lydea, b. June 29, 1741; d. Sept. 10, 1749.

5. Eli, b. June 30, 1743.

6. Patience, b. De^. 12, 1746; d. Aug. 17, 1749.

7. Seth, b. Dec. 7, 1748.

Eunice d. Sept. 6, 1749, and Isaac m.
Abigail [Brocket], wid. of Caleb Mun-
son of Wallingford, Nov. 22, 1750. [He
d. Dec. 7, 1799. a. 93.]

8. Titus, b. Oct. 5, 175 1.

9. Abigail, b. Aug. 12, 1753.

Isaac Bronson (4), s. of Isaac, m. Mary
Bracket, d. of josiah of Wallingford,
Feb. 13. 1755. He died Apr. 15, 1826,
a. 90; she d. Aug. i, 1816, a. 76.

1. Eunice, b. Dec. 4, 1755 [H. 1775!.

2. Mary, b. Sept. 15, 1757.

3. Isaac, b. Mch. 10, 1760 [m. Anna Olcott, and d.

at Greenfield Hill, May zo, 1838).

4. Laban, b. Feb. 15, 1762; d. Nov. 28, 1801.

5. Ethel, b. July 22, 1765.

6. Chancey, b. the last day of 1767; d. May 16,

1768.

7. Hannah, b. May i, 1769; m. Eli Hine.

8. Sarah, b. Mch. 21, 1775.

9. Virtue, b. Mch. 92, 1778 [m. Nancy Carringtonj.

J air us Bronson, s. of Titus, m. Irena
Mallory, d. of David of Woodbury,
Jan. II, 1804.

I. Charles, b. July 5, 1804.

James Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. Sarah
Bracket, d. of Josiah of Wallingford,
Aug. 22, 1750.

z. Roswel. b. Sept. 9, 1751.

a. Sarah, b. Tan. 5. Z754; m. John Adams.

3. Levy, b. June Z2, 17^7 [m. Matte Slaughter].

4. Asael, b. Nov. 28, 1759.

5. Thankful, b. Mch. 5, Z762; m. Amos Hinman.

6. Jese, b. July z, 1763.

Jennet Bronson ra. Nelson Cowell, 1836.
Jerusha Bronson m. Wm. Hickox, 1830.

26 AP

BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

Bronson. Bronson.

Jesse Bronson, s. of James, m. Esther
Osborn, d. of Nathan of Woodbury,
Sept. 30, 1784.

1. Benoni, b. Mch. i, 1786.

2. Marshal, b. Nov. 2a, 1787.

3. Alviny, b. Aujf. 30, 1789.

4. Leman, b. Jan. 15, 1792.

John Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. Mary
Hikcox, d. of Samuel and Hanna, in
Waterbury, Nov. 9, 1697.

I. Mary, b. Apr. 9, 1698; m. Samuel Porter and

John Barnes,
a. John, b. Apr. 23, 1701.

3. Hanna, b. Oct. 31, 1704 [m. Nathan GaylordJ.

4. Jemima, b. Aug. 27, 1706; m. Stephen Hopkins.

5.
6.

^. jemima, d. Aug, 27, 1700;
}. Joseph, b. July 15, 1709.
3. Benjamin, b. Oct. 2, 171 1.

Mary d. Mch. 21, 1713, and John m.
Hannah Richards, wid. of Thomas,
dec'd. sometime in June, 1727. [He d.
Jan., 1746-7], and Hannah m. Ebenezer
Richason, 1749.

7. Tamer, b. Mch. 14, 1730; m. Jos. Nichols.

8. Ezra, b. Apr. 24, 1732.

9. Phebe, b. Mch. 23, 1734; m. Nathaniel Richa-

son.-

John Brounson, Jr., s. of John, m. Com-
fort Balding, d. of William of Strat-
ford, Mch. 28, 1728.

1. Rhode, b. Mch. 30, 1729; m. Joshua Graves.

2. Amoz, b. Feb. ^, 1 730-1.

3. Hannah, b. Men. 6, 1734, m. David Foot.

4. Thankful, b. Sept. 6, 1736 [m. Mose^ Foot].

5. Mary, b. Feb. 25, 1738-9 [m. Aaron Foot, 1760,

and d. Feb. 10, 1824].

6. John, b. Dec. 22, 1742.

7. Cloe, b. Dec. 29, 1745 [m. Col. Barker of Nine

Partners, N. V.].

John Bronson:'

William Bradley, bap. Oct. 28, 1821.

John Bronson's wife, Hannah, d. Sept.
15, 1842, a. 47.

Joseph Bronson, s. of John [of Isaac], m.
Anna Southmayd, d of John, June i,
1732.

1. A dau., still-bom, Aug. 28, 1733.

2. Millesent, b. Dec. 24, 1734; d. Mch. 8, 17^15,

3. Eldad, b. July i, 1736; d. Aur. 18, 1749.

4. Desire, b. July 9, 1738; m. Jon. Guernsey.

5. Seba, b. Sept. 23, 1740.

6. A dau., still-born.

7- j-Still-lwrn.

9. Still-lx>m.

10. StiIl-l>orn, and the mother died a few days

after, Aug. 18, 1749.

The above named Anna Southmayd,
the wife of Joseph Bn)n.son, d. Aug.
12. 1749 (still another record says Aug.
11); and Joseph m. Mary Fulford, d. of
Lieut. Gershom, May 2, 1750. [He d.
Sept. 19. 1771; she, Mch. 6, 1S12, a. 85.]

z. Anna, b. May 22, 1751; m. Heman Munson.
a. Bela, b. Mch. 7, 1757.

Bronson. Bronson.

Joseph Bronson, s. of Ebenezer, m. Han-
nah Porter, d. of Dr. Preserved, Dec.
23, 1784, who d. Sept. 18, 1839.

I. Sarah Gould, b. July ai, 1785 ; d. Feb. 11, 1794
a. Nancy Fluvia, b. Aug. 13, 1787; m. W. J. Per-
kins.

3. Lavinia Porter, b. Sept. 9, 1789.

4. Cloe, b. Jan. 28, 1791.

5. Preserved Porter, b. May i, 1794.

[Lieut.] Josiah Bronson, s. of Isaac, m.
Dinah Sutliff, d. of John, July 23, 1735.

I. Lucy, b. Sept. zo, 1736; m. James Porter.

Dinah d. Jan. 10, 1736-7, and Josiah m
Sarah Leavenworth, wid. of David of
Woodbury, May 15, 1740.

1. David, b. Tune 25, 1741.

2. Abel, b. May 30, 1743.

3. Zuba (Azubah), b. Apr. 28, 1745; m. Abner

Munson.

4. Ruben, b. June 5, 1747.

5. Thaddeus, b. July 22, 1749.

6. Josiah, b. Feb. i, 175 1-2.

7. Elijah, b. May 15, 1755.

Sarah d. Aug. 28, 1767, and Josiah was
m. Dec. 23, 1767, to Rebekah Hurlbut,
relick of Joseph of Woodbury, by
Thomas Can field, v. m. Rebekah d.
June 12, 1797, and Josiah m. June 12,
1798. Mrs. Huldah Williams (called
Mary on Oxford rec.) [wid. of Samuel?]
He d. Feb. 20, 1804, a. 90.

Josiah Bronson, Jr., s. of Josiah, m. Ta-
bitha Tuttle, d. of Ezekiel, Jan. 20,
1780.

1. Truman, b. Jan. 5, 1781.

2. Alvin, b. May 19, 1783.

3. Jpsiah, b. Sept. 19, 1786.

4. Edward, b. Sept. i, 1789.

5. Nancy, b. Feb. 27, 1793.

Judson Bronson, s. of Jo.seph, m. Emily
G. Terrill, d. of Alvin. Sept. 24. or Oct.
28, 1827. (Two entries.)

1. Mary Ellen, b. June 27, 1829.

2. Caroline Lavinia, b. Sept. 18, 1831.

3. Charlotte Ann, b. Dec. 24, 1834.

4. Edward Lampson, b. Nov. 24, 1840.

Emily d. June 7, 1842. and Judson m.
Sally Ann Perkins, [wid. of Jesse, and]
d. of Geo. Knowlton, Nov. 23, 1844.

Julius G. Bronson, s. of Amasa, m. Julia
Newton, d. of Nathan, Sept. 9, 1830.

z. Samuel Marshall, b. Apr. i, 1832.
2. Charles Henry, b. Oct. 5, 1835.

His first wife d. Dec. 15, 1841, a. 35.
His second wife, Minerva Newton, sis
ter to his P. wife, and was widow of
Joseph S. Leavenworth, b. July 11,
1804. They were mar. Feb. 27, 1845.

A child, b. Mch. 10, 1847.

Levi Bronson, s. of Seba, m. Sarah Prin-
dle, d. of Eleazer of Watertown, May

23. 1783

[His children were: Elea/er, Mary, m. Jared
Warner, 1803; Olive. Anner, Nancy, Lovisa,
Chauncey, Anna, Wnecler, and Lovimus.]

FAMILY RECOB

Bronson. Bronson.

I^ucy Bronson, d. of Deac. Andrew; Re-
cord of her child by Joseph Hopkins,
Jr., s. of Joseph, Esq.

Sally, b. June aa, 1784.

Maria Brooson m. Fred. Bradley, 1830.

Mark Bronson, s. of Ezra, m. Esther
Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Sept. 16, 1784
[and d. 1797. Esther d. 18 14].

1. Harry, b. Aug. 4, 1787.

2. Nancy, b. June 21, 1789; m. Cyrus Clark.

3. Esther, b. Jan. 28, 1794; d. Jan. 11, 1795.

4. Edward, bap. May 7, 1797 (his mother being a

widow).

Mary J. Bronson m. Caleb Grannis,i848.

Mehitable Bronson m Newton Hine, Jr.,
1830.

Mercy Bronson m. John Jtidd, 1731.

[Lieut.] Michael Bronson, s. of Capt.
Ezra, m Eunice Nichols, d. of Joseph,
dec'd, July 3, 1776, and d. July 25, 1822.

1. Clarissa, b. Sept. 30, 1776 [ra. A;ior Bronson],

2. Horatio Gates, b. Oct. a, 1777' d. ^^^' 23» ^825.

3. Hannah, b. Feb. 12, 1780; m. Joel Scott.

4. Ezra, b. Dec. 6, 1783.

Minerva Bronson in. C. L. English, 1840.

•

Moses Bronson, s. of John, dec*d, was
mar. at Stratford to Jane Wiat, Nov. 6,
1712, and d. Aug. 12, 1754.

1. Unice, b. Dec. 23, 1714; m. EH. Welton.

2. Sarah, b. Sept. 2, 1717: m. John Warner.

3. Nathan, b. Sept. 5, 1719.

4. Martha, b. June 14, 1721.

5. Elnathan, b. Oct. a, 1723.

6. Comfort,)

and ^b. Mch. 29, 1726.

7. Charity, )

8. Esther, b. Feb. 6, 1727-8.

9. Jerusha, b. Feb. 9, 1729-30; m. Thomas Will-

iams.

10. Jemima, b. May 25, 1732,

11. William, b. May 30, 1734.

12. Moses, b. Jane 19, 1736,

13. Naomi, b, Mch. 28, 1739 [m. Jonathan Hughes].

Nancy Bronson m. Shelden Mcrriam,
1821.

Nathan Bronson, s. of Moses, m. Obe-
dience Williams, d. of Thomas, dec'd,
Feb. 22, 1749-50.

1. Ruben, b. Nov. 28, 1750.

2. A dau., b. Feb. 17, 1753.

Obedience d. Mch. 13, I75[3], and Na-
than m. wid. Abigail Lewis, June 29,
1769. She d. Nov. 17, 1800, a. 90.

Noah Bronson, s. of Daniel, m. Huldah
Sperry, d. of Capt. Jacob, Dec. 28, 1795.

1. Sally, b^Aug. 11, 1796

">• J

1839]

a. Maria Balinda, b. June 17, 1800 [d. Oct. 18,

1

3J

Huldah d. Oct 3, 1829. and Noah m.
Chloe Peck [d. of Ward], Feb. 16,
1840.

Bronsi

Noah
m. I
Med

[En
Shi
Hii

Oliver

Clarl
b. S
Wall

1. He;

Philen*
inghi

Philo :
Blak(
Sept.

X. Ben

2. Wil

3. Luc

4. Mai

5. Hei

Pitkin
John
Merr
ter 0

1839.

1. Jol

2. Ed^

Polly ]

Ralph :

N. Ti

Reube: i

Tenii i
Nov.

1. Ed •

2. Sar t

Rosel

m. 5 I
Nov,

1. Bei :

2. Ro (

3. Mi )

Sally ]

Sally I

Capt. i
Ten^ :

Sen. ,

1. B •

2. Si I

3. C I
4.1 '

Ten ;
San: i
San- ]

6. S 1

7. I >

8. \ 1

9. J 1

10. 1 r

Tan I
3ci, I

28^

HISTORY OF WATBRBURT,

3-
4.

5.
6,

7-

Bronson. Bronson.

ted to the church. Same date, Isaac
and John were bap., also Phebe, one of
the household of Samuel Bronson.*

Samuel Bronson, Jr. [s. of Deacon An-
drew] :

1. Andrew Hull, b. Feb. 18, 1797.

Samuel Bronson (called Samuel the 3d),
s. of Major Samuel, m. Emily Hunt. d.
of James of New Haven, Mch., 1803.
She d. Jan. 5, 1828, a. 48.

X. Sarah, b. Jan., x8o6.

2. Emily, b. July, 1808,

3. Temperance, b. Jan. x8, 1810; m. Geo. Root.

Sarah Bronson m. Chas. English, 1844.

Seba Bronson, s. of Joseph, m. Mary
Hikcox, d. of Abraham, July 5, 1764.
[He d. Jan.; she, July, 1816.]

1. Levi, b. June 24, 1765.

2. Olive, b. luly 3^1766.
Azor, b. Jan. i, 1768.
Joseph, b. June 3, 1769.
Anna. b. Feb. 5, 1771.
Seba, b. Sept. 26, 1772.
Herman, b. Dec. 18, 1774.

8. Thomas Gage, b. Apr. 19. 1776.

9. Abraham, b. Apr. 11, 1778.

10. Mary, b. Mch. 13, 1780; m. Ard Warner.

XI. Bela, b. Apr. 3, 1782.

Selah Bronson* [and Ann Daily]:

John Wheton, bap. Oct. 4, 1816.
Ann; m. W. M. Drake, 1830.

[Deac] Seth Bronson, s. of Isaac, m.
Cloe Prichard, d. of George, Nov. 27,
1770. [He d. Jan. i6, 1S05, and she,
Oct. II, 1S28.]

1. Anna, b. June 19, 1773.

2. Cloe, b. Dec. 28, 1777 [ra. David Tyler].

3. Jonas, b. Sept. 25, 1779 [ra. Melinda Baldwin].

4. Markus, b. Sept. 8, 1781 [m. Rebecca Thomp-

son].

Sherman Bronson, b. Jan. 13, 1799, s. of
Joseph, m. Harriet Scott, d. of Joel,
1820.

Jennet Nancy, b. An^. i6, 1820.

Catharine A., b. Jan. 25, 1823; m. A. H. Martin.

Sophia Bronson m. W. S. Smith, 1837.

[Deac] Stephen Bronson, s. of Thomas,
Esq., m. Sarah Humaston, d. of Caleb,
Esq., May 17, 1764 He d. Dec. 15,
1809; she, July 27, 1822.

X. Mercy, b. Dec. 17, 1764; m. John KiriKsbury.

2. Jesse, b. June 9, i7^>6; d. Feb. 4, 178b [of small-

pox].

3. John, b. Aug. 14, 1768; d. Jan. 22, 1782.

4. Susanna, b. Dec. 26, 1770; d. Oct, ai, 1773.

5. Content Humaston, b. May 14, 1773; d. Mch.

28, 1806.

6. Bennct, b. Nov. 14, 1775.

7. Susanna, b. Apr. 6, 1780; m. Joseph Burton.

Susan Bronson m. A. E. Rice, 1832.

Bronson. Bronson.

Thaddeus Bronson, s. of Josiah, m. Abi-
gail Wilmot, Dec. 10, 1772.

X. Abigail, b. June xo, 1773 [m. D. Prichard].

2. Uri, b. May to, X778.

3. Olive, b. Men. 17, 1779.

4. Lucy, b. Mch. 21, 1781.

5. Jerusha, b. May 21, 1784.

6. Fared, b. Tune 18, 1791.

7. Ruth, b. May 17, 1793.

Abigail d. May 25, 1793, and Thaddeus
m. Anne Hitchcock, Jan. 5, 1794. He
d. Mch. 2, 1825.

[Lieut.] Thomas Brounson, s. of Isaac,
Sen'', m. Elizabeth Upson, d. of Stephen,
Sen', Dec. 21, 1709.

1. Thomas, b. Tan. 5, X710-X1.

2. Stephen, b. Nov, 25; d. Dec. 30, 1712.

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr, 18, 1714; d. May 24. 1715.

4. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 24, 1716; m. Eben. Warner.

The above-named Thomas Brounson,
husband to the said Elizabeth. d. May 26,
1777. The above-named Elizabeth, wife
to the said Thomas, dye^ Mch. 30, 1778.

Thomas Brounson [Esq.], s. of Thomas,
m. Susanna Southmayd, d. of John,
Sept. 25, 1734.

1. Stephen, b. Jime 30, 1735.

2. Su»anna, b. Dec. 7, 1736 [m. Rev. Elijah Sill].

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 8, 1738 9.

4. Samuel, b. June 21; d. June 30, X741.

Susanna d. Aug. 13, 1 741, and Thomas,
s. of Lieut. Thomas, m. Anna Hopkins,
d. of Stephen, Jan. 9, 1745-6. He d.
June 25, 1759 [of measles], and she m.
rhineas Royce.

5. David, b. Sept. 25, X748; d. Aug. lo, 1750.

6. Thomas, b. Mch. 10, 1751.

7. Anna, b. Sept. 28, 1752; m. Jos. Upson.

8. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 30, 1755; m. Dr. Roger Cooaot

[and Josiah Hatch].

9. Ruth, b. Feb. 23, 1759 [m. Dr. Jesse Upson].

Thomas Bronson, Jr. (3). s. of Thomas,
dec'd, m. Elizabeth Hickcox, d. of
Capt. Samuel, Aug*. 25, 1774. [She d.
Mch. 15, he, Mch. 16, 1813; and they
were buried in one grave ]

I. Molle, b. Mch. i8, 1775 [m. Dan. Hikcox].

[Thomas Bronson, s. of Bennct, m. Cyn
thia Elizabeth Bartlett, d. of Cyrus M
late of Hartford, dec'd, Feb. 13, 1839.
He d. Apr. 20, 185 1, at 11:45 a. m.

1. Harriet Anna, b. June 2, 1840.

2. Julius Hobart, b. Apr. 30, 1842.

3. Edward Bennet, b. June 13, 1843.]

Titus Bronson, s. of Isaac [3], m. Hannah
Cook, d. of Moses, deed, Feb. 11, 1779.
[He d. May 20, 1820; she, Apr. i, 1841.]

1. Jairus, b. Dec. 9, 1779.

2. Horade, b. Feb. 15, 1782.

3. Augustus, b. June 24, 1784.

4. Esther, b. Oct. 19, 1780 [m. John Hine].

5. Titus, b. Nov. 27, 1788,

6. Hannah, b. Apr. 18, 1791.

7. Sally, b. Sept. 13, 1794 [m. A. Benham].

8. Leonardj b. June 24, 1797 [ra. Nancy Richard-

son, wid. of Merrit Piatt].

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP29

Bronson. Brown.

Tyler Bronson, see L. S. Beach.

Uri Bronson, s. of Thaddeus, m. Anna
At wood, d. of Elijah. Dec. 5, 1799.

William S. Bronson, s of Anson, m.
Diadama Gaylord. b. July 8. iSii, d. of
Seth of Bristol, Mch. 24, 1841.

1. Franklin Gaylord, b. Dec. 20, 1844.

2. Ella Antoinetic, b. Jan. 16, 1847.

Zenas Bronson, b. 1800. s. of David, and
Anna M. Chatfield, b. June 25, 1804 d.
of Dan., were mar. Dec. 31, 182S. He
d. Oct. 26, 1 8 34.

I. Stiles A,, b. Feb. 25, 1830; d. Sept. 17, 1831.
?. Elizabeth A., b. Mch. 6, 1832.

3. Enos S., b. Aug. n, 1834.

Augusta A. Brooks m. E. J. Barnard, 1843.

David Brooks m. Amanda Jordon, Feb.
25, 1844.

Deborah Brooks m. Barnabas Lewis,

Elizabeth Brooks m. John MuUings 1S44.

Enos Andrew Brooks d. Mch. 3, 1814, a.

52.^
Hannah Brooks m. John Clark, 1747, and

Cornelius Graves, 1751.

Loly Brooks m. Jes.se Andrews, 1791.

Mary Brooks m. G. B. Aldrich, 1839.

Nancy Brooks m J. B. Pel ton, 1847.

Sarah Brooks m Eben Hoadlcy, 1843.

Mrs. Abner Brown d. Mch. 23, 1845, a. 53.*

Anne Brown m. W. R. Judd, 1821.

Aseph Brown, s. of Daniel, m Tamer
Hall, d. of Nathaniel, Aug. i, 17S2.

1. Ralph, b. Nov. 28, 1782.

2. Isula, b. Sept. 6, 1784.

3. Eunice, b. >ept. 11, 17B6.

4. I^choa, b. Sept. 2, 178S.

, Augustus Brown, s. of James, m. Fran-
ces Elizabeth Burton, d. of Joseph,
Mch. 6, 1844, who d. Apr. 10, 1851.

I. Charles Augustus, b. Jan. 11, 1845.
[2. Frances Elizabeth, b, Mch. 23, 1848. J

Candice Brown m. E. B. Leavenworth,
1S40.

Daniel Brown, s. of James, was mar. to
Sarah Turrill, wid. of John, and d. of
Nathl. Merrills, by Rev. Mr. Richard
Mansfield, May 20, 1750.

1. Daniel, b. Apr. 28, 1751 [went to Vermont].

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 27, 1753; m. E. Andrews.

3. David, b. Oct. 23, 1755.

4. Asaph, b, Sept. 4, 1757.

5. Silva, b. Feb. 13, ^^fK> [m. C. Clark and C.

GrilleyJ.
f). Salmon, b. May 9, 1762; d. Apr. 15, 1766.

7. Klias, b. July 11, i7'j5 [ni. Eunice Hal!]. He

d. July 20. 1844; she, Mch. 4, 1842, a 79.^

8. Salmon, b. Sept. 28, i7'^i7 fm. Lois Richards].
w. Lydia, b. F'eb. 24, 177" [m. Moses Hall].

10. Noah, b. May 24, 1773 [ra. Lois HallJ.

Brown. Brown

Daniel Brown, Jr.:^

Lovina and Denina (?), bap. Oct. 9, 1767.
Reuben, bap. Apr. 23, 1769.

Daniel Brown, b. June 27, 1802, s. of
Reuben, and Betsey Manchester from
Dover, N. Y., b. June 22, 1800, were
mar. in May .

X. Eliza Ann, |

and vb. Dec. 19, 1830.

2. Jane, j

3. Adelia, b. May 17, 1834.

4. William Henry, b. Mch. 15, 1835.

Daniel Brown m. Sarah Butler of New
Haven, Oct. 9, 1842.

Ebenezer Brown m. Rebeccah Luding-
ton, Feb. 28, 1781.

1. Willis, b. Mch. 17, T783.

2. Esther, b. Aujj. 18, 1785; d. Sept. 3, 1793.

3. Rosannah. b. Mch. 11, 1787.

4. Smith, b. May 13, 1788.

5. Levi, b. Jan, 27, 1791.

6. Sally, b. June 26, 1792.

7. Esther, b. Nov. 30, 1793.

Elam Brown, s. of James, m. Naomi
Frost, d. of Samuel, Dec. 27, 1753.

X. Elam, b. Jan. 17, 1755.

2. Elizabeth, b, Jan. 16; d. May 23, 1757.

3. Corneleous, b. Dec. 15, 1761.

Elizabeth Brown m. Chester Neal, 1823.

George W. Brown of Meriden m. Susan
M. Woodruff, Jan. 31, 1847.

Giles Brown d. Nov. 24. 1S37, a. 76.-

Hezekiah Brown, s. of Samuel, m. Rachel
Prindel, d. of Lieut. Jonathan, Apr. 16,

1758.

1. Zere, b, Sept. 18. 1759.

2. Hannah, b. Jan. 19, 1762; d. June 3, 1781.

3. Olive, b. Jan. 25, 1764; m. Bela Blakeslee.

4. Hezekiah, b. Dec. 16, 1765; d. Mch. 12, 1770

5. Jonah, b. Oct. 16, 1767.

6. Rachel, b. Jan. 14, 1770; m. Prcs. Hikcox.

7. Toannah, b. Apr. 23. 1774.

8. William Warner, b. Nov. 10, 1776.

Isaac Brown, s. of Elias, m. Amanda
Barnes, d. of Eliphalet of Plymouth,
Nov. 27, 1817. He d. Nov. 29, 1837, a.
55; she, Sept. 16, 1845, a. 48.'^

1, Mary Janeit, b. Nov. i, 1818.

2. David, b. Feb. 11, 1821.

James Brown (i) and Elizabeth [Kirby]
of New Haven formerly. An account
or record of their chil. b. in Wat. [He
d. May 15, 1760, in his 75tl>year.]

9. Daniell, b. Nov, 6, 1723.
10. Rebeckah, b. Sept. 13, 1726; m. J. Warner.
The 8th child and 4ih son, Asa, dyed July 14,

[Other children were: James, Joseph, Elam.
Sarah, Fli/.abeth, who m. Wm. Scovill, and
Eunice.]

James Brown (2), s. of James, m. Han-
nah Tompkins, d. of Edmund, Dec. 16,
1744. in the 18th year of King George
the Second's reign. [He d. 1760, during

BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT.

Brown. Broivn,

the French War, at Littlt Falls, on tht
Mohawk.]

Brown.

Joseph Brown, s. of Ji

I. Hannah
Johnson, d. of Timo'thy of Derby, Oct.

5. Hannah, b. Aug. U. 'K'-

6. Elxnizer. b.JiiV3o. i;;; [d, inlhePnrh. No

13. 1B.4I.

James Brown (3). s. of Tames, tn. Hai
nah Culver, d. of Davitlof Farmingtoi
Mch. 20. 1770.

J. Hinnah, b. July 34, i77>.

Hannah d. May 30. 17S3, and James m.

Oct. 31, 1783. Eunice Mallory. d, of

Thomas of Woodbury.

3. Levi, b. July 10, 178.; d. Apr. 17, 1785-

Eunice d. Apr, 15, 1793, and James m.

[his third wife] Rosanna Perkins, wid.

[of Edward of Bethany) and d. of Isaac

Judd, Sept. 13. 1792.

1. Tiniolhy, kbit. ..„ .

rP»r;

763.

Laura Brown m. Edward Wclton, 1.^25.
Mary Brown m. John Marcloud, 17S0.
Mary M. Brown m. Sam'l Warner, [S32.
Mary Brown ni. Thomas Juris, 1S37.
Pamelia Brown m, Peter Brockett, 1S12.
Pbilo Brown, s. <>( Deac. James, m.
Esther Ives, d. of Giles, Sept. 16, 1824.

1. William Htnty, b, Apr. 6. iBj?.

Polly Brown m. Harvey Alien, 1832.
Rachel Brown m. Harvey Patchen, 1S2S.
Mrs. Reuben Brown d. Apr. 18, 1S41. a.

.. Philo. b. Jan.
?. William, b. J
3. Maty Ann. b.

b, July =, .6.5.

Jftnc E. Brown m. Isaac Baldwi

Jane Brown m. Geo. Benton. 1^50.

Jesse Brown, s. of Reuben, m. Mary
Ann. wid. of David Wheeler, and d. of
Eliphalet Prichard, Sept. 11. i.Sss-

1. John D„ b. Oci. 8, 183..
3, Htnry William, b. Jan, 7. ,859.
1. CaTOline Kuih, b. Dec. 17, 1843.
5. Sarah JtnnM. b. June ,j. .8,6.

RuthE. Brown m. Fred. Goldsmith, i.
Sally Brown ra. Harvey Judd, 1S21.
Samuel and Johannab Brown:

[He d, before Apr.. 1745 ]

;:fct;-WSv«':;.

Samuel Brown, s. of Samuel, m. Sarah
Castle, d. of Isaac, Mch. 3S, 1750. [He

1. Mary, b. Ftb. .i, 17«^": d. May .7, 175a

1. Mary, b. Sepi. j, m' {>" J"l"> CloURh).

J. Ann«, b. 0«.n, .7SS l». /"I'n Fleming, and d,

,. Hlnna^' b.^O«. i, 1737; d. D« 15, -761.

Anne d. June 21. 1759, and John m.

Sarab D. Brown m. R. E. Perkins, iSji.

William Brown, s. of Deac. James, tn.

Sarah S. Kingsbury, d. of John, Esq.,

J; bJSidVb.lJyiS,'"'?^"''
8. Lydia bjul, ,, ,7^.

Sanh. bap. June 7, 1778.*

Sarah d. May 28, 1S41. and William n
Vienna Fenn. b. Jan. 31. :Sa5. d. 1
Asa of Middlebury, Mch. 35. 1S44.

FAMILY BECOB

Bruise. Bull.

George Bruise of New Haven m. Re
becca Sarah Forrest, Apr. 30, 1848.

Alfred Bryan of Watertown m. Betsey
Hungerford, Nov. 15, 1S26.

Andrew Bryan, s. of Thadeus of Water-
town, m. Roxana Peck, d. of Ward,
July 3, 1814.

1. Lucius P., b. Mar. 6, 1817.

2. George A., b. Dec. 15, 1819.

3. Charles, b. Nov. 10, X822.

4. Edward, b. Sept. 20, 1825.

5. William Henry, b. Feb. 7, 1828.

Benajah Bryan m. Lucy Davis, Jan. 20,
17S0.8

John, b. Oct. 8, X780.
Lucy, b. Oct. 20, 1785.

[Lucius P. Bryan m. Jennett White of
Durham, Aug. 25. 1836.]

Daniel Buck of Farmington m. Mary
Hikcox, Oct. 13, 1829.

Hannah Buck m. Obadiah Scott, 1716.

Sarah Buck m. John Welton, lyoT).

The age of William Buck, entered Jan.
2, 1753. William Buck, the son of
Elizabeth Chelson, ah'as Buck, born
about Oct, II, 1 75 1, and this day bound
out by the townsmen of Waterbury to
Mr. Samuel Peck, as appears by inden-
ture and with the consent of the au-
thorities. •

Chloe E. Buckingham m. M. S. Beach,

1845.
Ebenezer N. Buckingham of Oxford was

mar. to Betsey Sperry of Bethany, ai

Naugatuck, Sept. 15, 1834.

Hannah Buckingham m. Irijah Terrell.

1778.

Samuel Buckingham, s. of Nathan of
Derby, m. Ruth Fairchild, d. of Nathan
of Derby, June 28, 1785.

1. Cyrenius. b. May 30, 1786.

2. Ruth, b. Mch. I, 1788.

3. Lucy, b. May 15, 1790.

4. Lester, b: Aug. 16, 1794.

5. Auffustus, b. Aug. 22, 1797.

6. Esther, b. Oct. 11, \^^f).

7. Nathan Fairchild, b. June 10, iSuj.

Scovill M. Buckingham, s. of John, m.
Charlotte Ann Benedict, d. ot Aaron,
May 18, 1835.

1. John Aaron, b. Apr. x, 1B39.

Lester P. Buell of Plymouth m. Louisa
M. Tuttle, Sept. 29, 1851.

AnnBuggbe m. Roger Prichard, Jr., 1742.

Widow Mary Bull d. July 4. 1756. [She
was widow of Deac. Thomas Hikcox,
and of Deac. Samuel Bull of Woodbury,
whom she mar. Nov. 23, 1747-8 ]

Mary Bull m. Philip Tompkins, 1766.

BUNCE

Daniel

Sara
mar.
May^

Alvira

[Benja
Dert
and (

Cba
Reu

Elu

Eunice
Harriet
Hezeki

Orn

James ^

Ann

Jehiel 1
ance \

Lois Bu

Lois Bi

Luanna

Lydia E

Margar

Samuel

6, 182 ,

Samuel i
Mch.

Williar

m. Sj ]
1826.

Williar

bury,

Roxani I
Abigail

Elizab< :

1738.

Otis Bi [

na \^

30, l{ !

21, li ;

1. Car

2. Ed^ I

Julia E I
a. 10

James :

16, 1 i

Joseph I
Trur I
Deac

X. All •

2. Ma I

S !

3. SU! 1

82 AP

IIT8T0RT OF WATERS URT,

Burton. Byrnes.

Susanna d. July 14. iSii [and Joseph
m. Ann Eliza Clark, d. of Capt. Uzziel
of Sheffield, Mass., Jan. 2, 1815.

4. Frances Elizabeth, b. Aug. 26, i8ifi; m.# Augus-

tus Brown.

5. Charles U. C , b. June 14. 1818.

6. George W,, b. Mch. i. 1822.]

William H. Bush [from New London]
m. Eliza A. Clark [d. of John], Mch.
18, 1850.

Isaiah Butler [b. Sept 12, 1726] and Re-
becca; children born in Waterbury:

Tryphosa, b. May 15, 175^; m. M. Dunbar.
Solomon, b. Feb. 23, 1758.
Jonathan, b. Apr. 26, 1760.

Lydia Butler m. Phinehas Royce, Jr.,
1772.

Michael Butler m. Margaret Lynch, Nov.
I, 1849,

•Nathan Butler [b. June i, 1732, m. Dec.
8, 1755. Rebecca Rogers, d. of Deac.
Josiahof Branford, and d. Oct. 17, 18 11,
at Clinton, N. Y.

Asenath, Salmon, Elsie, Lorain, and Pamela, b.

I755-I770]-

6. Herva, b. July 17. 1771.

7. Calvin, b. Oct. 6, 1772.

Sarah Butler m. Daniel Brown, 1842.

William Butler of Plymouth m. Augusta
Merriman, Mch. 22, 1840.

Elizabeth Byington m. Miles Gaylord
1S45.

Isaac Byington, s. of Jared, Esq., m.
Esther Smith, d. of Anthony.

1. Edwin, b. Oct. 29, 1800.

2. Emeline, b. Oct. 4, 1802.

3. Frederick, b. Aug, 2, 1804.

4. Henrietta, b. Apr. 30, 1806.

5. Avis, b. Dec. 10, i8<>3.

6. Melissa, b. Feb. 4, 1810.

Jared Byington, s. of David, m. Rebecca
Porter, d. of Thomas, Apr. 22, 1779.

1. Isaac, b. Antj. 12, 1771).

2. Asahel. b. Feb. i, 17SJ.

3. Orren, b, Nov. 11, 17H3.

4. Jesse, b. Nov. 15, 178s.

5. Clarissa, b. .Vpr. i, 1788.

6. Rcl)ccca. b. Feb. ig. 17/).

7. Anne, b. Veh. 29, 1792

8. Stephen, b. Sept. 20, 1794.

Orrin Byington m. Rebecca M. Tuttle —
both of Wolcott — Apr. 11, 1832.

Widow Mehitable Byington d. Feb. 13,
1809, a. 81.

Rachel Byington m. Augustus Rose, 1836.

Sarah Byington m. Levi Norton, 1S42.

James Byrnes of Lower Canada m. [Julia
Gallagher, 1836. She d. and James m.]

J'

Oct. 7, 1837.
d. at birth.

Byrnes. Camp.

Caroline E. Grilley, d. of Jeremiah,
Sept. 14, 1843.

I. John,
and
[2. A dau.

^* >• Twins; died.
4- 1

5.j Margaret, b. Jan. 24, 1847.

John Byrnes m. Mary White—both from
Lower Canada — May 11, 1S37.

1. Henry, b. Apr, 4, 1838.

2. John, b. Nov. 5, 1840.

3. James, b. Jan. 10, l8^2.

4. Peter, b. Apr. 11, 1844.

5. Matthew David, b. .Mch. 18. 1846.

John Byrnes m. Mary Donnelly, Sept. 21,

1S51.'*

Michael Byrns m. Ellen Hanley, Aug. 4.

i85i.«

[Jesse Cady m. Eunice Ward, d. of
Arab]

Mary Cady m. Joseph Riggs, 1831.

Betsey Caldwell m. Sam. Munson, 1S40.

Lucretia Caldwell m. W. H. Stoddard,

1858.

Israel Calkin m. Sarah Hoadley, d. of
William and Sarah. Aug. 11. 1752; cer-
tified by the Rev. Mr. Mark Leaven-
worth.

X. Lucy, b. July 18, 1753; m. Joel Tuttle.

2. Appelina, b. July 8, 1755.

3. Sarah, b. Dec. 1, i757.«

4. Rozwell, b Oct. 6, 1761.

5. Ebenezcr, b. .Aug. 5; d. Aug. 7, 1765.

6. Ithiel, b. Jan. 14, 1767.

7. Mary, b. Oct. 26, 1770.

8. A son, b. Oct. 8, 177a.

[Roswell Calkins, and Eunice Hine, b.
in Derby, May 12, 1763, were m. Sept

8, 1782

Almira, b. Feb. 14, 1784; m. David Lewis.
Lovewell, b. Dec. 18. 1785- m. Jerusha Smith.
Lucy, b. Mch. 3, 1781); ra. EHsha Newell.
Marcia, b. Jan. 28, 1791; m. Chester Bcebe.
Julia, b. May 28, 1794; m. Christopher Ripley.
Chloe, b. A UK. 6, 1796; m. Josiah Sabea.
Nancy, b. July 1, i7()g; m. Amos Brign.
K!izalx:th, b. Aug. jo, 1801; ro. James Eaton.
Mary, b. Sept. 6, 1803; ra. John Storm.]

Abel Camp, s. of Samuel, m. Rachel
Welton, d. of John, Apr. 14, 1741.

1. Ame, b. Dec. 5, 174a; m. Samuel Warner,

2. Sarah, b. Oct. 17, 1744; d. Aug. 15, 1749.

3. Samuel, b. Oct. 6, 1746.

4. Able, b. July 11, 1748.

5. Sarah, b. Aug. 28, 1750.

6. Eunice, b. Sept. a6, 1753: dyed in Litchfield,

Sept. 12; and her dau. Sept. 8, 1772, in five ^
davs after she was born.

7. Rachel, b. Sept. 20, 1754; d. Sept. 26, i7i;7.

8. Rachel, b. Feb. 21, 17S8.

9. Eldad, b. June 25, 1760
10. Bethel, b. Feb. 25, 1763.

Adah Camp m. W. H. Savage, 1838.

* He had, at one time, four great-grandsons in Hamilton College.

FAMILY RECOB

Camp. Camp.

Benajah Camp (s. of Joab).'*

Orren, b. Aug. 29, 1786.
Chloe, b. June 9, 1788.

Comfort Camp m. Dr. Jesse Porter, 1808.

Emma Camp m. John Patterson, 1849.

Isaac Camp m. Rachel Meky, Nov. 22,
1770.

1. Isaac, b. Aug. ^, 1771; d. Jan. z, 1772.

2. Abner, b. Jan. 21, 1773.

Jeremiah Camp m. Elizabeth Downs,
Aug. 10, 1823.

I. Emma Ann, b. Aug. 7, 1829.

Joab and Thankful Camp:

5-

6.

7.
8.

9.
10.

II.

Thankful, b. July ix, 1750.

John, b. Apr. 14, 1753.

Ephraim, b. June 23. 1756.

Sarah, b. Apr. 3, 1758.

Phebc, b. Nlay 3, 1760; m. Daniel Ford.

Benajah, b. July 20, 176a.

Joab, b. July 5, 1764.

Julia Camp m. Jerome B. Strong, 1835.

Lyman Coe Camp, b. July 3, 1820, s. of
Lyman C. of Durham, m. Ulissa E.
Savage, b. Nov. i, 1820, d. of Seth of
Berlin, May 21, 1843

1. Harriet Pratt, b. Feb. 27, 1844.

2. Lyman Coe, b. Sept. 17, 1846.

Sally Camp m. Sherman Hickcox, 1824.

Samuel Camp [s. of Edward, m. Doro-
thy Whitmore (widow of Josiah of Mid-
dletown), July 17, 171 2, in Milford.

I. Mehitable, b. Aug., 1713.

i. Joel, b. May, 1715 (paid taxes here, 1739-42).

3. Abel, b. Dec. 1717; ra. Rachel Welton.

4. Stephen, b. Feb., 1720.

Samuel moved to Wat. about 1733] and
d. Apr. 22, 1 741. Dorothy d. Sept. 2,
1749. (Recorded with AbeVs family.)

Samuel and Betty Camp: Record of their
being mar. in Milford, Oct. 22, 1766.
[He d. Apr. 22, 1841.]

1. Belly, b. in Milford, May 2, 1767.

2. Abel, b. Feb. 11, 1769.

3. Samuell, b. Apr. 24, 1772.

4. Eunice Hall, b. May 2, 1774.

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 8, 1776.

Samuel Camp, s. of Joab, m. Mary Row(?)
d. of Daniel of Farmington, Dec. 7,
1769. She d. Dec. 27, 1777.

Samuel and Tryphena Camp:^

Mary, b. May 11, 1781.
Rhoda, b. Mch. 17, 1783.
Phineas Royce, b. July 14, 1785.
Samuel, b. Feb. 2, 1787.

Stephen S. Camp from Plymouth, b. July
II, 1804, m. Abijjfail Harrison from
North Branford, Nov. 14, 1832.

1. Marcus Harrison, b. Mch. 26, 1835.

2. Maria Mabel, b. Tune 3, 1841.

3. Sarah Smith, b. Aug. 19, 1846.

Cande
Abiga
CaroU
Comfo
Contei

Enos

Hat<

[He

Hanna

Harve^

daT?

Horace

Veru
May

[i. Ro

Joseph

Hant

Jan.
udd-
1824.

Julia C
and G

Levere

Chan

[Noah
Samu
Retui

Clar
Ri
to

Sally I

1831.

Timoth

1769.
June

J. lose

2. Mar

3. Con

James

Suttc

Mary i
Helen (
Cynthi

Rebecc

1807.

Rosett

1843.

Sarah

Edwar

Apr.

Jared

Russ

Patty <
Polly (

Preser

of [\

M**

BISTORT OF

Caster. Castle.

W. Humiston [widow of Samuel G.],
ami d, of Israel Holmes, June [lo]. 1S2S.

J. FranVlin. b. Dec, lo, 1810; d. Apr. 19. iBj(.

1. Fmnklii^ h. Stpl. 30. 'in-

i. Cnjlta Krederic. b. Sept. aj, .841.

Restore Carter of Philadelphia m. Emily

Sperry [d. of Anson), Nov. 20, 1838.
Sarah Case m. Rev, Abr. Fowier, 17S1.
Dennis Casey m. Mary Sheehan, Feb.

1851.
tohn Casey rn. Bridget McCabe, Apr. 1

1851.
James Cass m. Mary Boylan, Jan.

iflso.'
James CassJan m. Honora Delaaey, Nc

Abishai Castle, s. of Isaac, m. Merria
Bradley, d. of Ebeneier, Mch. 14. i;'
,. Bradiej, b, Dec. s, 1761; d- Julj '9. '777-
■.. A.h=r, b. M.y ..^ ijSj.
1. Surih, b. Apt. 19, 1765.

4. Filo, h. Feb. 16, 1715s.

5. MoM«, b. July .6, .770.

7. Saranel, b. Apr. n, 1777-
Asatael Castle, s. of Isaac, m. Deborah
Allen, d. of Gideon, May is, 1745-

1. T«pher, b. F»h. H. '74S-6.
1. Levi, b. Oct. !.3, 1717-

Castle. Chatfiei.

Marcia d, Apr. ii, 1.S21, and Isaac n

J, John, b, Apr. J4, .7SJ.
Asher Castle m. Phobe Merriman, Dec.

28, 17S4."
David E. Castle m, Marv Martin, Dec,

IS. '850.
Harriet Castle m. Philander Hiiie, 1836.
Isaac Castle, s. of Isaac of Woodbury,

ni. Tapher Warner, d. of John, Jan. 21,

s. Atiiba. b. J«.. «,. .737-s.
Tapher d. July 20. 1740, a.nd_Isaac_n

r-Jf-.

b.'^;p"

133a.

1. Ju»

Jehiel Castle m. Mary Johnson— both pf

Wooclbridge — Jan. 20, iSoj.*
Marcia Castle m. C. E. Moss, 1S42.
Polly Castle in. Woodward Hotchldis,

Samuel and Hannah | Hotchkiss] Castle:

EmelJnt; m. Edward Cbilicnden.
Li^iy; va. (ieorge Nanbrop.

Samuel A. Castle, s. of Samuel of IV>s-
pect, m, Mary Ann Steele, d. of EHsha.
May 7, iS4(j,

Sarah Castle m. Harvey Judd, 1782.'
Satab Castle m, Willis Johnson. 1S43,
Beth Castle m. Olive Stevens, Dec, 2S,

Tapher Castle m, William Tuttle, 176;.
Stephen M. Cate from Meredith, N, H.,

m. Adelia E. Ovitt. d. of Amus, Mch.

i3, 1839.

I, Siephen M,. b, Apr, 6. 1B40,

a, Imoeint AuElut^b, J»n, n. 18,4,

J, AdeT.S Ellen, b. Nov, jd, 1846,

William Cay of Cheshire m, Fanny Far-
rcU, d. of Zebah, Feb, 3. 1827.

Rev. Jabez Chadwick m. Miss Sarah
Stewart of Lee, Mass,. Jan, 8, 1801,

Mary Chambers m. Wni, Warner, 170s.
Hannah Chapman ni. Reuben Parker,

Maria Chapman ra. Wm, Dickinson, :S4o,
Annah Charles m. Ebenezer Judd, 176;.
John C. Chase ra, Marj' A, Beman of

Waiicii, Mch. 17, 1S51.
Lucy Chase m, Franklin Potter, iSjo,
Willis G. Chase of N'ew Preston m, Chloe

A, Potter [d, of Samuel], Mch, 17, iSji.
AnnaChatfield m. David Wooster. iSii.

Isaac B. Castle, s, of John of Watertown,
m. Marcia Chittenden. A. of Asahel,
Esq., of Prospect,

tfass., b. Apr, 15,

1! Ijion. EliMbiih!b! Mci

|: K^oJ M.ii h. Jm. 13. Va^,

filleph Ei»Brd,ij.Apt. 14, 1843.
enry Delisn, b. Fek iB, 1645.

,B3,,

FAMILY BECOM

Chatfield. Chatfield.

Charles T. Chatfield [s. of James], m
Mary E. Andrews [d. of Benjamin H.],
Oct. 15, 1850.

Cyrus Chatfield m. Philena Martin of
Prospect, Apr. 2, 1848.

Daniel Chatfield [s. of William, m. Pru-
dence Baldwin, d. of James. He d.
July II, 1818, a. 83; she, Mch., 1828, a.
92.

Daniel. Reuben.]
James, bap. Mch. 19, 1780.I

Daniel Chatfield [s. of Daniel, m. Esther
Lounsbury. She d. May 6, 1848, a. 76.

1. David, a. Leonard.] Enos, Esther, Polly, who

m. J. N. Morriss, and Anna Maria who ni.
Zenas Bronson, were bap. Apr. 28, 1817.1

David Chatfield, b. Sept. 9. 1794, s. of
Daniel, m. June 5, 1820, Polly Hitch-
cock, b. June 10, 1795, d. of Caleb of
Southington.

z. Jane E., b. Aug. 2a, 1822; m. M. £. Judd.

2. Polly Ann, b. Sept. 5, 1824.

3. Cvrus, b. May 16, 1826.

4. Fidelia, b. Feb. 16, 1828.

5. Emeline, b. Mch. 3, 1833.

Dennis Chatfield, s. of Joseph, ni. Mary
Jane Matthews, d. of Zeba, Dec. 18,

1. Charles D., b. May 29, 1840.

2. Frances Jane, b. July 2, 1842.

3. Lyman B., b. Jan. 28, 1845.

Henry Chatfield, s. of Joseph, and Re-
becca Merriman, b. Sept. 14, 1813, d. of
Samuel of Plymouth (and wid. of Henry
Terrill), m. Aug. 29, 1836.

1. Ellen, b. Oct. 3, 1838.

2. Emma. b. Aug. i, 1840.

3. John Henry, b. Sept. 15, 1843.

4. James Madison, b. Oct. 28, 1845.

Isaac Chatfield, Jr., m. Sabria Beebe,
Nov. I, i8o6.*

James Chatfield, s. of Daniel, m. Tamer
Nichols, d. of Simeon. Mch. 4, 1812.
She d. Apr. 30, 1822, and James m.
Huldah Iiikcox [d. of Timothy], June
16, 1824.

I. A son, b. and d. May 9, 1825.

[2. Charles Timothy, b. June 21, 1826.]

Joseph Chatfield [m. Polly, d. of David
and Submit (Hotchkiss) Payne.]

Joseph Edward.

Fanny, b. May 27, 1803; m. Ed. Russell.
Rebecca; m. R. M. Wheeler, 1828.
Mitty [b. July 13, 1806]; m. Albert Wooster.
Burrit, b. Feb. 27, 1808.
Mary [d. unmarried].
Dennis, b. July 3, 1812.
Henry, b. Sept. 10, 1816.
Samuel. All these bap. Apr. 11, 1821.I
Jane Bradley, bap. Oct. 14, 1821 [adopted by
Lyman Bradley, and m. Dr. Blakeslee].

Joseph Edward Chatfield [s. of Joseph]
m. Nancy Scovill, d. of William, Nov.
24, 1823.

Jane and George, bap. July 6, 1828.

Chatf

Nan
Phel
Dec.

[El

Jose]
Hun

Mary {

Samue
and

4. Joa

5. San

6. Jo9<

7. Josi

8. Rac

J cam
m. wi

(She

Samuel
Oct. s

Elizabe

1. Ruhi

Samuel

his w
in the

I. And

[Mahf
John
wid. (
She T
Josep

Harriet
John C

6. Sara

7. Simi

Elizabe

Hiram

beth
riage
mout
Sept.

Sabra (

Hunj :

Samuel

b. Ju
Ham I
Dec.

X. Sai .

2. Sh I

I: ^

5. Ge

6. To I

7. Ti

8. Ra I

9. Ds

TO, El' i

XX. M(

mSTORT OF WATERS URT.

CHiPMAN. CLAKK,

Samuel D. Chipnuui, s. of Samuel, m.
Julia Baldwin, d. of David, Apr. 21,

«lha A., b. tuiy )o.
ihn B.. b. Mch. iS. la

William Chipman, b. Aug. i6, iSii. 3. of
Samuel, m. May 6, 1S40, Roweaa Bald-
win, b. Apr. 11, i3i6, d. of Elias of
Humphreysville.
I. lane Eliiabelh. b. Sepl. 10. 7841.
1. 3u«i. Nancy, b. Nov. is, i8m-

[Asahel Chittenden, s. of Nathaniel and
Mehitable (Beebe). m. Anna Lewis, d.
of John, Jr., 1783. He d. May, 1813.

.. ClarilM.b. Mch.3. ,,84.
3, Amanda, b. D«., 17S7.

'"""'''iiE™""

>. Edna

9. Richard Handy, b. Dec,, 1B09.]

Edward Chittenden, s. of Asahel of Pros-
pect m. Bmeline Castle, d. of Samuel,
Apr. 3. 1823.

I. Emelinc. b. [n Proipect. May 91. i3l9.
a. Elltn A., b. in PfMptcI, JaM .j, 1831.

David Chriaee and Hannah [Wilmot
were mar. in Bethlehem Society, Nov.
15. 1753.

.. l«niioa| b. in Woodbuiy, Ma
a. Mary.b. in W« -

fHibury. May si,
buiy, Ucb. lo. t:

Abigail Church m. Erastus Welton, 1776.
George Watson Church, bap. June 22,

Cla«k. Clark.

Amos [3. of John] and Eunice Clark:

^i;«a EmdiK'p^f,;!^?"' S "'""'

Asahel Clark, b, Aug. g. 1739. son of
William, m. Dec. ig, iSis. Ruth A.
Selkrig. b. July sS, 1791. d. of Osee of
Litchfield.

Edirin. b. Occ. 14, iSij; d. Kov. 13.

'«3t-

:ph Hopblna,

^ Stpl. 4

'■£L....

k F^nMvik.'V.'lioy. nVsjs: 'i^E?'w"'l'i=n

7. Em.liiH! Eliza, b. Mch. 17, iBj8; d. Nov. ;

iStl.

8. Jad* Rebtcca, b. May 6,1831; d. Feb. n, iS,
o. tharie. Rodney, b. fuly ,. ,8jj.

10. Manha Jane. b. Met. ,,, 1836.
Betsey Clark m. Thomas Judd, iSoo.
Betsey Clark m. Russell Todd, 1S36.
Caleb Clarlc m. Lois [How, Jan. ig, 172

1. Mar^ry. b. Apr. 14. 1733; en. Slcpbca Jddc

I. Aitrahain Barnes ud

II that b. in Wallingford, arc ndi manuooed

in Caleb-. «ll,l

in Waterbury:

b, b. Dec. 14. 173a.

iet, b.Sep^,^^'I7^7^ ' "'""'''

Caleb m. Apr. jo, 1750, Rebecca, wid.
of Samuel Thomas, andd. July 29, 1768.
Caleb Clarlc, s. of Caleb, m. Elizabeth
How, d. of Daniel, Nov. 6. 1756.

Cyrus Clark, Esq., s. of Ebenezer of
Washington, m. Nancy Bronson. d. of
Mark, dec'd, Feb. 5. 1S07, and d. Jaa.

'lephtn Olin. b. Ocl. 14. 1843.

".i8.3;d.S
8ij;in. tValL

Zeba. Sept. 26, 1S42.

., flora Coidilia, b.Jnly 1. 1846.
Thomas Claffey m. Mary Phalan, Jan.,
1S40.

2. Frank," b! Sept. 1', 1844.
,. Thomoi, b. July 17. .346.

Alice Clark m. John Weed, 1735.
Allen Clark of Mitford m. Charlotte Guil-
ford, Nov. 2S, 1832.

James* Ed<«rd, bap. June i6, 1S14.
"Polly d. July 16, iSii] and Daniel t

FAMILY RECO,

Clark. Clark.

Daniel B. Clark m. Delia A. Welton of
Wolcott. Mch. 27, 1834.

David Clark, s. of Thomas, m. Hannah
Nichols, d. of Samuel of Lebanon, Oct.
27, 1772.

I. Hannah, b. June 5, 1774; m. Reuben Adams.

[Edward Clark, s. of Eli. m. Caroline
Smith, d. of Matthew, Aug. 26, 1823.
She d. Dec. 21, 1836, and Edward m.
Maria P. Stone, d. of Ezekiel, Dec. 6,
1837, and d. Feb. 5, 1849.

I. Edward Payaon, b. Apr. 10, 1845.]

Edward S. Clark from Westhampton,
Mass., m. Sophia D. Clark from Hat-
field. Mass., Oct. 16. 1844.

I. Catherine Sophia, b. Aug. xo, 1845.

Eli Clark, s. of Timothy, m. Rebeckah
Benedict, d. of Aaron, Dec. 28, 1792,
and d. Dec. 20, 1843.

1. Joseph, b. Nov. 3, 1793; d. Sept. 7, 1816.

2. Polly, b. July 31, 1796; m. Merlin Mead.

3. Maria, b. Mch. xa, 1799; m. Solomon M. Smith

of New York, May 13, iSao. He d. Apr. 10.
x82a, and she m. [Rev.] John T. Baldwin of
New Milford.

4. Harriet, b. Nov. 30, i8oa; m. Edward Scovill.

5. Edward, b. June 4, 1805.

6. Eli Benedict b. Feb. 22, 1808.

7. Charles, b. Nov. 22, 1810.

8. Mary Ann, b. July 20, 18x3.

9. Timothy Bronson, b. Nov. 10, 1815.
10. James, b. Sept. x8, 1818.

Elias Clark from Washingfton, b. Feb.
24, 1780. and Elizabeth B. Newton from
Roxbury, b. May 26, 1781, m. Oct. 8,
1 801.

1. Samuel Goodrich, b. July X9, 1802; d. Feb. x6,

1803, in Washington.

2. Elizabeth M., b. Dec. x6, 1803; m. R. Holmes.

3. Elias Newton, b. Oct. 7, 1806; d. July is, 1812.

4. Thomas Elmore, b, Jan. 3, 1808; d. Nov. 17,

18^0, in Arkansas.

5. Daniel Baker, b. Oct. 17, 18x1.

6. Elias Newton, b. Nov. 14, 1814.

7. Sarah Jane, b. July i, 1817; m. Henry Minor.

8. George Hobart, b. Mch. xs, i8ai; d. Aug. 24,

1840, in Arkansas.

Eliphalet Clark m. Abigail Garnsey [b.
in Milford, 1726], d. of Jonathan (ist).
She d. June 17, 1746.

1. Abigail, b. May 11, 1746; m. Jonas Hikcox.

Eliza Clark m. Edward Marks, 1S38.

Elon Clark from Milford, b. May 12, 1792,
and Lois Fenn from Middlebury, b.
Dec. 26, 1794, m. Feb. 4, 1813.

X. Benjamin Fenn, b. Oct. 31, 1815.

2. Charles D.. b. July 20, X822.

Lois d. May i, 1827, and Elon m. Sally
B. Hull. d. of Jo.seph, Oct. 18, 1827.

3. Sarah, b. Aug. 25, 1828; m. C. S. Vancleef.

4. Elizabeth M., b. Mch. 5, 1830; m. Joel Scott.

5. Frederic S., b. Mch. 22, 1832; d. Feb. 10, 1834,

6. Emily A., b. Sept. 17, 1836.

Emma Clark m. Charles Upson, 1823.

Clar;
Hani]

Henr

•

Rev.

ton,
Mai
Re^

X. M

Mai
mai
Cor
12,

John
Bro

intl

9» i:
nah

X. Jo

JohnC
s. of
man
hisf

X. H<

2. PO

3. R«

4. p

5. Jo

6. Ai

7. Je

8. Ai

9. A)

John
Fori

Tl

3r'
4tl

[Josei

T
D
D
L

Si

Josep

by^
to J
ing
and
I. ^

a. A

3. F

4. L

Merr
of:
Jai

1. \

2. I

3. I
Meri

88 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS URY,

Clark. Clark.

Phebe Clark m. Ephraim Roberts, 1770.

Polly Clark m. Elijah Hotchkiss, 1795.

Rebecca Clark m. Daniel Steele, 1790.

Sally Clark m. Bezaleel Scott, 1827.

Susan J. Clark m. G. B. Hazard, 1S41.

Sylvester Clark of Watertown m. Levina
Beebe, d. of Amzi, dec'd, of Salem,
Jan. 4, 1830.

Thomas Clark, s. of William of Lebanon,
m. Sarah Strong, d. of John of Wind-
sor, June 27, 1 71 7. (Cloth weaver, in
deed of 1724.)

1. Marah, b. Oct. 31, 1718; m. Timothy Judd (not

Benj. Harrison).

2. Timothy, b. Mch. 22, 1721-22; d. Nov. 23, 1727.

3. Sarah, b. Dec. 13, 1723; m. Stephen Upson, 3d.

4. Hannah, b. Jan. 31, 1726 [m. Rev. Solomon

Mead, Jan. 7, 1765; d. July 24, 1800I.

5. Hephztbah, b. Oct. 17, 1729; m. Jos. Hopkins.

6. Timothy, b. May 19, 1732.

7. Esther, b. June 22, 1735; m. Phineas Porter.

8. Thomas, b. Jan. 26, 1737-8.

9. David, b. Apr. 25, 1740.

Sarah d. Sept. iS, 1749, and Thomas
m. Mary Harrison, relict of Benjamin,
July 30, 1760. and d. Nov. 12. 1764.

Thomas Clark, s. of Thomas, Esq.,
dec'd, m. Mary Hine, d. of Daniel of
New Milford, Mch. 20, 1765.

1. Daniel, b. Dec. 31, 1765; d. July 26, 1766.

2. Rusha, b. July 13, 1767.

3. Sarah, b. June 15, 1770; m. Lemuel Harrison.

4. Daniel, b. Apr. xo, 1772.

5. Aurila (Aurelia), b. Feb. 3, 1779.

Her soa, Benjamin Upson, bap. Apr. 28, 1817.I

[Thomas d. suddenly Oct. 25, 1779] and
Mary m. Benjamin Upson, Jan. 24,
1780.

Timothy^ Clark, s. of Thomas, m. Sarah
Hopkms, d. of Timothy, dec'd, Nov. 4,
1756.

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 9, 1757*. d. May 6, 1770.

Sarah d. Oct. 21, 1757, and Timothy m.
Hannah Bronson, d. of Isaac. June 13,

1759.

2. Aaael, b. July i6, 1760 [d. Dec. 16, 1787J.

3. William, b. June ix, 1763.

4. Eli, b. Oct. 2, 1764.

5. Molle, b. Oct. 10, X766.

Hannah d. Sept. 15, 1783 [and Timothy
m. his third wife, Elizabeth Porter, d.
of Thomas. She d. Feb. i, 1815], and
he, Sept. 18, 1824, a. 92.

Walter Clark of Mobile m. Mary Ann
Clark [d. of Cyrus], Aug. 26, 1839.

William Clark, s. of Timothy, m. Sarah
Carrington of New Haven, Apr. 14,

1785.

Clarissa, Laura, Asahel, Almira, Elias, Sally

and William, bap. July z6, xSox.l
Fanny, bap. Apr. 29, 1804.
Margaret, bap. Mch. 18, 1809.

Clark. Cole.

William Clark m. Nancy J. Adams, Sept.
iS. 1828.

Mary Clauson (wid.) m. Timothy Judd,

1783.

John Cleary m. Mary Rutigan, Sept. 14,

1851.8

Cornelia Cleaver m. David Atkins, 1784.*

Martha Clemens m. Edmund Woodford,

1S47.

Janett Cleveland m. C. P. Welton, 1847.

Mary Cleveland m. Lucius Curtiss, 1S37.

William J. Cleveland m. Harriet A. Mer-
rill. Oct. II, 1849.

Dr. Daniel Clifford:

Hannah, bap. Apr. 3, 176S.9
Elizabeth; m. Zenas Hungerford, 1791.

James Harvy Cobborn m. Eunice Bun-
nell, Feb. 19, 1784.

1. Rebekah, b. Feb. i, 1785.

2. Chester, b. July 17, 1787.

Asahel Coe and Maria [Wetmore]:

Charles Wetmore, bap. Aug. 2, 1831.
Edward Baldwin, bap. Sept. i, 1833.

Flora Coe m. Anson Stocking, 1825.

Isaac Coe, s. of John A. Coe of Derby,
m. Augusta A. Hoadley, d. of Hiel,
Apr. 19, 1 841.

I. Catharine Grace, b. Nov. 6, 1842.
3. Irving Hiel, )

and Vb. May 12, 1847.

3. Isaac Harvey, 1

Israel Coe : '

Russell, bap. Sept. x, 1822.
Cornelia; m. Israel Holmes, 1848.

James M. Coe m. Bridget Breeman —
both of Wolcottville — Feb. 10, 1S49.

John Coe of Oxford m. Mary Hoadley,
Sept. 3. 1837.

Orril Coe m. Samuel J. Stocking, 1834.

Robert Coe of Bethany m. Emily J. Hor-
ton. May 18, 1842.

Mary Ann Colby m. Orange Gillet, 1834.

John Cole, s. of John, m. Sarah Page, d.
of Timothy — all of Wallingford— Aug.

24. 1754.

I. Sarah, b. Mch. 28, 1755.
a. Thankful, b. Oct. 16, 1757.

Sarah, wife of John, d. Nov. 27. 1757.

3. Timothy, by his second wi/e^ b. Oct. la, 1759.

4. John, b. July 18, 1761.

5. Luraine, D. Nov. 17, 1763.

6. Lucy, b. Aug. 26, 1766.

Mary A. Cole m. Edgar Hotchkiss, 1843.

Moses Cole [s. of Samuel of Wallingford]
and Mary:

3. Mary, b. Apr. 17, 1751.

4. Moses, b. Aug. 4, 1753.

FAMILY RECOl

Coles. Constant.

Sarah Coles d. Jan 30, 181 1, a. 80.'

Thomas Cole [s. of Thomas and Martha
(Judd), m. June 20, 1744, Mary Williams,
b. Sept. 25, 1 719, d. of James. He d.
Mch. I, 1805.

I. Eunice]; m. Samuel Doolittle.

a. Abigail, b. Nov. 24, 1747; d. July 6, 1749.

3. A son, b. Oct. 26, 1749.

4. Abi^rail, b. Nov, 26, 1751; d. Mch. 9, 1776.

5. Levy (son), b, June 8, 1753.

6. Mary, b. Jan. 28, 1755 [m. Gideon Leavenworth

of Woodbury, and d. 1836J.

7. Experience, | d. Jan. 14, 1788.

and Vb. Feb. 22, 1758-

8. Sarah, ) m. Woodruff.

i

9. Thomas, b. Nov. 20, 1760.

William and Esther Coal:

9. Benjamin, b. May 29, 1759.

10. Reuben, b. Sept. 9, 1761.

See also Cowles.

Rozana Coley m. G. P. Andrews, 1845.

Eunice Collins m. James Hickcox, 1777.'

John Collins m. Mary Thompson, Feb. 5,
1S51.

Sheldon Collins, b. May 14, 18 14, s. of
Ahira of Nau., m. Lucy Newton, b.
1822, d. of William of Albany, N. Y.,
May 14, 1845.

X. William Newton^ b. Mch. 14, 1846.

Letetia Combs m, Stephen C. Warner,
1841.

William Comes fb. 1781, s. of William
and Eunice (Weed), m. Esther Bron-
son, Sept. 21, 1802, in Waterbury.

William Dennis, b. May 7, 2808.]
Janette Belinda, bap. May 5, x8i6.l

[Dr.] Roger Conant, s. of Col. [Shubael]
of Mansfield, m. Elizabeth Bronson. d.
of Thomas, dec'd, July 14, 1774, and d.
Feb. 8, 1777 [in his 33d year, on Long
Island ; a surgeon in the Revolutionary
War. His widow m. Josiah Hatch].

1. Clarissa, b. Oct. 4, 1775; d. Apr. 1, 1777.

Jonathan Condar of New London m.
Mary Gillemore, Nov. 12, 1848.

Edward Condrum m. Maria Sullivan —
both of Naugatuck — Sept. 23, 1850.

Mrs. Abigail Conklin d. in Waterbury,
Apr. 5, 1765.

Catharine Conkling m. Culpepper Fris-
bie, and Jesse Leavenworth, 1761.

Patrick Conlon m. Catharine Reed, May

15. 1850-
John Connor m. Bridget McDonner

(McDonald), in Ireland, 1845.

X. Dennis, b. Nov. 30, 1845.

2. Ellen, b. May 28, 1847.

[Silas Constant m. Amy Lewis, d. of
John, and d. at Yorktown, N. Y., Mch.
22. 1825 — Pastor of the First Presby-
terian Church.]

Cook

{Sei

Carol

Dani(

d. o

1. M

2. Si
M

Ebem

Bla]
I. I

il

6. B

7. N

8. A

9. St
[10. E

Edwai
McL

Ellas \

thole
moui
Mch

Eunic<

Georg

26, I
Apr.
towi

1. Ge

2. EII

[Henr;

(s. o
and

1639
rien 1
Froj I

X. Sa I

2. El :

5. Jc

Henr^

172^
d. c

1. T

2. M I

St I
Z<

L I

s<

T I

[8. L
9. W I

Joel
Dui
d. i
a. ?

X. L

2. c

3. z I

4. r

5- t

6. I

3.
4-
5.
6.

a

40 Ap

HiarORT OF WATSRBUET,

Cook. Cook.

John Cook m. Martha Shipley, May 17,
1846.

Jonathan Cook, s. of Henry, m. Ruth
Lutington of New Haven, June 15,
1735-

1. Jonathan, b. Mch. 29, 1736.

2. jes»€, b Feb. i, 1739.

3. Titus, b. May 2, 1741.

4. Sarah, b. Oct. 21, 1744.

5. Abel, b. May 18, 1747.

Joseph Cook, s. of Moses, m. Anna Bron-
son, d. of Ezra, Aug. 18, 1792.

1. Edward Bronson, b. Mch, x8, 1793.

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 12, 1794.

3. Susanna Judd, b. Oct. 25, 1797; m. Mark Leav-

enworth.
4 Sally Leavenworth, b. Oct. 31, 1799; m. Solomon
Curtis.

5. Nancy, b. Nov. 16, rSoi; m. William Scovill.

6. Nathan, b. Jan. 8, 1804.

7. George, b. Apr. 8, x8o6 [d. Jan. 19, 1815].

8. George William, b. Feb. 28, 1811.

[Joseph Cook d. Mch. 26, 1855, and his
wife ten hours after, on the same day.]

Joseph Cook, formerly from Eng., m.
Rutha Granniss, wid. of Caleb, Jan. 3,

1827.

Lucian P. Cook of Barnwell, S. C, m.
Sarah B. Judd [d. of Hawkins], Oct.
15, 1838.

Lucy Cook m. Isaac Benham.

Martin Cook of Southington m. Jerusha
Frost [wid. of Alpheus], Mch. 19. 1S38.

Mary Cook m. J. W. Dermott, 1851.

Moses Cook [eldest s. of Samuel of
Wallingford m. Sarah Culver, June 18,
• 1740.

1. Charles, b. Tune 3, 1742; m. Sybel Munson.

2. Moses, b. >Iay 30, 1744.

3. Sarah, b. June 13, 1747; d. in Middlebury, Apr.

5, 1823, unmarnedj.

Children born in Waterbury:

4. Esther, b. Jan. 27, 1749-50 [m. Joseph Beebe].

5. Elizabeth, b. May 15, 1752; ra. Tienj. Baldwin.

6. Hannah, b. Jan. xo, 1755; m. Titus Bronson.

Sarah, d. Jan. 4, 1760, and Moses m.
Dinah, wid. of Benj. Harrison, Jr., June
7, 1762, who d. Oct. 4, 1792.

7. Lydia, b. Mch. 27, 1765; m. John Hickcox.

The above Moses Cook died by a wound
upon his head, which wound was occa-
sioned by a stroke from an Indian with
a flat-iron which weighed 4^ lbs., on
the 7th day of December, A. D. 1771,
at the house of Mr. Clarks, in Bethany,
and expired the 12th day of said De-
cember. Said Indian had his trial the
Feb. following, for murdering the above
s'd Cook, and sentence to be hang'd on
the 17th day of June following.

Cook. Corcoran.

Moses Cook, Jr., s. of Moses, m. Jemiah
Upson, d. of Joseph, dec*d. Nov. 4, 1766.
She d. Mch. 6, 1821 [he, Dec. 1831].

1. Joseph, b. Nov. 4, 1767.

2. Lucy, b. Sept. 27, 1769; d. 1835, mimarried.

3. Daniel b Jan. 5, 1773.

4. Hannah, b. Mch. 5, 1775.

5. Anna, b. Mch. 8, 1778; m. Mark Leavenworth.

6. Elias, b. Dec. 26, 1783.

Samuel Cook, s. of Joseph, m. Charity
Warner, b. June 15, 1796, d, of Enos,
Nov. 7, 1813.

1. Anna Maria, b. Sept. 28, 1815; m. L. E. Rice,

[Samuel, d. Jan. 22, 1835. and] Charity
m. Leveret Candee.

Samuel Cook of Winchester m. Sarah A.
Downs. Oct. 21, 1835.

Sarah Cook m. Ezekiel Sanford, 1765,

Sarah Cook m. Amos Seymour, 1787.

Sibble Cook m. Samuel Hills, 1791.

Sybel Cook m. Thomas Welton, 1797.

William Cook [s. of Zenas, and Mari-
etta Plumb, d. of Aaron, m. 1837.

Aaron Plumb, b. 1838: died 1830.

Carlos Wilcox, b. 1830; d. 1841.J

George Augustus ana Celestia Ashley, bap. Sep.

4» 1842.1
[Carlos Wilcox, b. about 1844.]

*Zenas Cook, s. of Joel of Plymouth, ra.
Polly Lewis [d. of Samuel. Jr. J Feb.
1800.

X. William, b. Apr. X7, 1802, in Plymouth.

2. Sarah Curtiss, b. Jan. 16. 1807, in Plymouth.

3. George L., b. June 6, 1809, in Salem; d. Not.

28, I 831.

Polly d. Aug. 24, 1809, and Zenas
m. Betsey Porter, d. of Col. Phineas,
May 20, TSio, and d. April 25. 1S51.

4. Lucien Porter, b. in Salem, Mch. 18, 18 n

5. Harriet M.. b. Dec. 9, 1812; m. H. H. Peck.

6. Catharine L., July 2. 1815; m. Augustus Smith.

7. Mary Elizabeth, b. Mch. 27, 1818.

Mary J. Cooley m. C. J. Godfrey, 1834.

Betsey J. Cooper m. E. E. Prichard, 1S27.

Desire Cooper m. Peter Welton, 1766.

Sary Cooper m. Samuel Frost, 1759.

William Cooper from Eng., b. Dec. i5»
1 8 19, m. in New Haven, Aug. 20, 1843.
Elizabeth Beardslee, b. Dec. 19, 1827,
d. of Eleazer of New Haven.

1. John Henry, b. in New Haven, July 3, 1844.

2. Sarah Elizabeth, b. June 8, 1846.

John Corcoran m. Elizabeth Neville, Jan.
28, 1841.

1. Margaret Elizabeth, b. Oct. 29, 1842.

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 31. 1844.

Margaret Corcoran m. Ed. Stanley, 1835.

* Zenas Cook had thirteen grandchildren, and bat two great-grandchildren : William Cook and Edward
Elliot, sons of Celestia Cook and Ezra Haskill of New York.

FAMILY RECOR

CORCX)RAN. COWELL.

Timothy Corcoran of Ireland and Sarah
Glover of Birm., Eng., m. Jan. 7, 1831.
Children bom in Waterbury:

1. Tames, b. Jan. 7, 1833.
3. Mary, b. Mch. 29, 1835.

3. Rosetta, b. Jan. 7, 1839.

4. Sarah Ann, b. Dec. 3, 1841.

5. Timothy, b. Dec. 29, 1846. *

William Corcoran, d. May 9, 1841, a. 34.'

Mercy Gillett Coshier m. Henry Wooster,
1773.

John Cossit, s. of Ranne of Simsbury, m.
Mary Hopkins, d. of Capt. Timothy,
dec'd, May 13, 1760.

1. Orpha b. June 28, 1761; m. William Adams.

Mary, d. Tan. 11, 1765, and John m. Su-
sanna Kiflum, relict of Dan., Sept. 23,
1767.

2. John, b. Oct. 28, 1768.

3. Susanna, b. Oct. 26, 1770.

4. Chauncey, b. July 2a, 177a; d. Sept. 35, 1776.

John Cossett, Jr., s. of John, m. Rebecca
Hine, d. of Ebenezer, June 17, 1799.

X. Isabinda, b. Nov. 15, 1799.
a. Almedia, b. Feb. 23, 1801.

3. Ranney, b. May 14, i8oa.

4. Alma, b. Nov. 28, 1803.

5. Susanna, b. May 12, 1806.

6. Rinaldo, b. June 29, 1808.

[Lydia Cosset d. June 26, 1821, a. 95.]

Mary Cosset m. Thomas Welton, 1742.

Thomas Costly (Costello ?) m. Catherine
. McMahon, Feb. 18, iSsi.*

William Coughlan m. Bridget Bannon,
July 3, 1849.

Elizabeth Cowd m. Thomas Jones.

William Cowd from Eng. m. LeveAnn
Grilley, d. of Henry, Feb. 6, 1837.

I. Sarah Jane, b. Mch. 7, 1838.

a. Leve Ann, b. Jan. 8, 1844.

3. Harriet Elizaliieth, b. Aug. ao, 1846.

Amasa Cowel, s. of James, m. Susanna
Sperry, d. of Jesse, Nov. 22, 1790.

X. Stephen Upson, b. May 29, 1791.

Frances, wife of James, from Milford
Church, 1811.^

Betsey Cowel m. Lyman Allen, 1831.

Charles Cowell m. Ellen Bronson, June
29, 1851.

Nelson Cowell, s. of Samuel, m. Jennet
Bronson, b. Dec. 2, 1817, d. of Joseph
and Polly of Prospect, Sept. 20, 1836.

1. George. Hubert, b. Mch. 25, 1840.

2. Julia Annett, b. Aug. 20, 1843.

Samuel Cowell, b. Oct. 4, 1786 [s. of
James of Milford], m. Polly Baldwin,

5»

Co WEI

b. Ji
brid

«

1. Bet

2. Ne

3. Ma

4. M«

5. Ge«

6. Jol

7. Ch4

8. Ma

9. Jul

Stephc
mera
Osee

I. Alb

a. Em

3. Hal

4. Mai

5. Sus)

6. Nao

7. Io«

8. Mar

9. EUe

Ira Co*

ingto

Thoma
Jan.,

Crissy,

James
d. of
and (

1. Ed^

2. Ma ;

Timot)

4. Mo I

es I

h >

l^

[Amos
Johr

Sat .
La I
An
Ms :

Sara 1
Salb .
1845

Su I

Hanm ;

Merc3 •

Steph I
Tho

Tl

Al \
St I

El

Al I

Steph I
Fra !

BISTORT OF WATERBURT.

Culver. Cuhtiss.

Nov. 7, 1793. [He d. SepL 7, 1S49, a.
76: and she. 1844.]

6. SMpbcn Hopkins, b. Dec. 'xi, iSio.

7. Mikl. b. Sept. 19,1816.

Sylvia Culver : '

Jane Cumminga m, W. B. Gregory, 1S4S.
M*ry A. Cammiogs m. H. B. Wolt. 1*50.
Daniel CniuiuiEliam m. Bridget Do1a.n,

July, 1846.

,. John. b. Mcb, ,, .3,,.

m. Mary Glynn.

Cu BTISS. CUKTIS.

Eli Curtisa m. Mary Hopkins [d. of John].

Feb. 24, 1783.'
Enoch [s. of Samuel] and Rachel Curtiss:

\. EliMbilh'.VMch'. s^'fj^a.
Esther M. Curtis m. Bennet Scott, iSzg.
[Esther Merriam Hull Curtis m. Nathan-

iel Barnes, 1798, Elisha Wilcox, 1799,

andd. 1839.]
Gideon Cnrtisa m. Zerviah (Sutliflf), wii

of Benjamin HikcoK, Apr. 3, 1810.

y; m. A» Dan

Abel and Frcelove Curtice:

3. David, b.jM).8, ,744-i.

4. Oliver, b. Del. 10, I7.fi-

5. Free Love, b. Jan. lu.

6. Eiiiabelh, b. Apr. ..'
J. Rchectiih, b. Sept. 15. nil-
g. Hannuh, b. Apr. to, 17S5.
9. AhLKail, b. Apr. aj, 1761.

Ad«h Curtis m. Reuben Matthews, 1772.
Ambrose Curtisa m. Sarah Hungerford,

^fay 14. 1850-
[Lieut.] Daniel Curtice, s. of Isaac of

Wallingford, and Letlice [Ward] his

wife. [She d. Oct. i, 1749, a, 39; he.

Dec. 1750. a. 43.]

>■ JA"

1. LUK (Lucyl b, AuV. 2,,

1 J.CI

Sarah
., Rutli,

[1, b. Nov

,. Nov. 6,

». D-nW, b. Jul,

[Daniel Cnrtisa of Southbury m. Tryel

Ward, Nov. 16, 1768.]
Daniel Curtiss of Goshen m, Phebc

Pritfhard, Nov. 25, 1S39, and d. Jan.

11. 1844, a. 31.
David Curtis ni. Elizabeth Hill, Apr. ao,

1769.

Ebenezer Curtiss, [eldest] s. of Daniel,
dec'd, m. Annis. d. of Ensign John
Warner, Jan. 23, 1751-2.

4. Mary, b. Feb. 33. 'J^h
s. Marl(.b.Sep<. ;, 17^1.

6. Phebe, b, Web. ij, i?^.

7. Tbomaa, b. Feb. 18. 17*1
». Levi. b. SepL 10, ijae.

1. Leva, I

[Isaac Curtiss, s. of Daniel of Isaac, m.
Lydia Foot. d. of Moses, Nire. 30. 1763.
Shed. Sept. 6, 17SS.

.. Jo;ilham, b, Jan, ,S, ,765.]

James Curtis, s. of Stephen, m. Jndah
Elwell, d. of Eben. Sept. 4, 1751.
1, Sar.h b. M.j- ,, 1,;..
a. Hile. b. July ;fi, .754: m. Oliver Curtii.

James Curtias m. Thankful Weed, May

20, 1779.

Jesse Curtice, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. Sa-
rah Yale. d. of Elibu of Wallingford,
Dec. IS, (754-

>, I.yman. h. May .5, 175c..

3. Nfary. b. J.n. j6, „bv- i. Dec. .76).

John F. and Esther Curtis:

Jotham Curtiss, s, of Daniel, dec'd. r

Jotham m. Esther, wid. of Dr. Benja-
min Hull. 1770.

I. Linus Fenn, 1. •>( liaac.

iMbeih, b
Leph.1

™. Gecsl

Lucius Curtisa, 3. of Gideon, m. Mai
Cleveland from Goshen, Sept. 12, 183'

J. Henry L., b. Nov. o, iSiB.
1. FranCiin, b. Feb. 14. iS'i-
f Uwi'.C.'.b.-ijSy=V,"4i.

L^ia Curtiss m. C. J. Merriam, 1846.
Maria Curtis m. Bennett Scott, 1829.
Olive Curtis m. Juhn Blakeslee, 1745.

FAMILY RECOR

Curtis. Curtis.

Oliver Curtis m. Hila Curtis, Nov. 14,
1774*

X Chloe, b. June 3, 1775.

a. F'rcclovc, d. June 24, 1777.

3. Clarissa, b. Aug. 22, 1779.

4. Hilas, b. Feb. 28, 1782

5. Cyrene, b. Nov. 27, 1784.

6. Alartha, b, Aug. 3, 1787.

7. Oliver, b. June 25, 1789.

Patrick Curtiss from Wolcott, b. Mch.,
1S17, m. Louisa A. Bacon from Bur-
lington, Nov., 1839.

1. George William, b. July 30, 1840.

2. Emerett Louisa, b. Apr. 9, 1843.

Phebe Curtis m. John Porter, 1770.
Phinehas and Mary Curtis:

1. Abigail, b. Nov. lo, 1769.

2. Hannah, b. Jan. 28, 1772.

3. Rebcckah, b. Dec. 23, 1774.

4. Zenas, b. Aug. za, 1779.

Rosanah Curtis m. Martin Boughton»
1830.

Samuel Curtice, s. of Stephen, was m. to
Dinah Clark, d. of Joseph, by the Rev.
Mr. Samuel Todd, as he certifies, May

8. 1740.

I. Joseph, b. Feb. 3, 1740-1.

a. Alice, b. Jan. 5, 1743; ra. Isaac Barnes.

3. Joseph, b. Mch. 19, 1745.

4. Samuel, b. Feb. x, 1747.

5. Eli, b. Feb. 10, 1748-9.

6. Lois, b. Sept. 10, 1750; m. John Stitliff, Jr.

7. Titus, b. Nov. 13, 1752.

8 Benjamin, b. July 6, 1755.

9. Dinah, b. Nov. a, 1757.

10. Istai, b. Mch. 25, 1760.

11. Lydia, b. Apr. 12, 1764.

Sarah Curtis:'

Leavee Smith, bap. June 6, 1779.

Sarah Curtis m. Marshal L. Terril, 1830.

Simeon Curtis, Jr., of Southbury m.
Hannah Bronson, May 18, 1831.

Solomon Curtis of Southington m. Sally
L. Cook, d. of Joseph and Anna, Jan.
I. 1827.

X. Sarah Emily, b. Feb. 15, 1828.

Stephen Curtis, Jr., s. of Stephen m.
ThankfuU Royce, d. of Josiah of Wal-
lingford, Oct. 2, 1752.*

X, Stephen, b, July 20, X752.

2. Mary, b. Apr. 20, 1754.

3. Caleb, b. Nov. 24, 1756.

4. Josiah, b. Sept. 25, 1758.

5. Felix, b. Dec. 9, 1761.

6. ThankfuU, b. May 27, 1763.

William E. Curtis of New York m Mary
A. Scovill [d. of William H.], Sept. 2,
1851.-

I. Williiim Edmund, b. in New York City, June 2,

1855.

CURTK

Zadoc

25. 1

X. An

Josepb

nath

X. Sop
2. Ma

L email

Hole

Young]

16, I'

X. Am

James

setts

Nancy
1 841.

Justice
m. L
July

I. Elij

2. Elie

3. Joh

t h

6. Joh

7. San

Amelia

Ue

I.
3.

3-
4.

5.
6.

7-

Julia A
Asa Dj

Jur

Asa Di

1772.

Asa as

Ma
Ly<
Lu(
A»
Ani I

RO! I

Fre

Eunice

third

Jemial

1766.

John I
abet

Mary ,

Titus ]
She

X. An I

2. En I

3. Pl> I

4. Hi

WUlia

Es

Samu(

3. Ar I

4 s.

5. Lc

'*' This was the year, it will be remcml)ered, when the chan
the new year began Jan. xst.

44 Ap

BISTORT OF WATBRBURT.

Daverin. Dayton.

John and Jane Daverin:

John, b. Jan. 19, 1741-3.

Eunice R. Davies m. W. H. Scovill, 1827.

Lemuel Sanford Davies of New Haven
m. Stella Maria Scovill [d. of Edward],
Sept. 14, 1847.

Abel H. Davis m. Sarah Benhamof Mid-
dlebury, May i, 1850.

Ann Davis m. W. Davis Luckn(?). 1844.

Edward Davis m. Ann Farrell— both of
Naugatuck— Apr. 29, 1851.

Emerett Davis m. Harrison Tomlinson,
1841.

Emily Davis m. Constant L. Adams,
1830.

Hannah Davis m. Richard Welton, 177a

Louisa Davis m. Noble Leavenworth,
1824.

Lucy Davis m. Benajah Bryan, 1780.*

Lucy Davis m. Hart E. Hubbell, 1848.

Marietta Davis m. N. W. Morgan, 1838.

Morris Davis was m. to Hannah Doolit-
tle, d. of Thomas, by Rev. Mr. Richard
Mansfield, June 3. 1753.

I. Mary, b. Apr. i, 1754.

a. Margaret, b. Sept. 20, 1756.

3. Hannah, b. May 7, 1759.

4. Cattern, b. Sept. 3, 1751 (1761).

5. Ann, b. Aug. z8, 1764.

6. Thomas, b. Sept. 131 1767.

Rhoda Davis m. Charles Demorest, 1846.

Sarah M. Davis m. Asa A. Yale, 1850.

Thomas Benedict Davis, b. Jan. 5, 1819.
from Dutchess Co., N. Y., and Emeline
H. Gunn, b. Jan. i, 1822, from Water-
town, m. Apr. 12, 1840.

z. Edward Franklin, b. Dec. 24, 1845.

Henry Mills Day, s. of Rev. Henry N.,
was b. Oct. 20, 1838.

John Daye m. Margaret Smyth— both of
Terryville— Jan. 7. 1850.

Charles Dayton, s. of Capt. Michael, m.
Sene (Asenath) Gernsey. d. of David,
Sept. 30, 1773-

1. Pliment, b. Oct. 17, 1774-
a. Charles, b. Sept. 17, 1776,

3. PoUc, b. Nov. IX, 1778.

4. Roxana, b. Mch. 17, 1781.*

5. Chauncey, b. Mch. i, 1783.

6. Matthew, b. Apr. 17, 1785.

7. John Guernsey, b. Apr. 4, 1787.

David Dayton, s. of Michael, m. Eliza
beth Welton, d. of Peter, Mch. 25, 1773.

t. Betty, b. Nov. 3, 1774.

2. David, b. Feb. 29; d. Dec. 30, 1777 (1776?).
3 Sal, b. Dec. 2, 1778.

4. David, b. Dec. 3, 1781.*

5. Daniel, b. June i, 1784.

6. Olive, b. Jan. 9, 1787.

7. Abigail, b. Oct. 15, 1789.

Dayton. Dennby.

Justus Dayton m. Hannah Titus, July

10, 1777.8

I. spencer, b. Oct. ai, 1778.
3. Russell, b. Sept. 9, 1780.

3. Rhoda, b. June 19, 178a,

4. Jonah, b. July 31, 1783,

5. Mehitable, b. Sept. 33, 1785.

6. Beulah, b. Feb. 30, 1787.

Lyman Dayton m. Abiah Matthews, July
26, 1787.'

I. William, b. Feb. 34, 1788.

Michael Dayton, s. of Isaac of New
Haven, m. Mehitable Doolittle, d. of
Samuel of Wallingford, Jan. 29, 1746-7.

X. Charles, b. Nov. 3, 1747.
3. David, b. July 23, 1749.

3. Mirriam, b. Jan. 26, 1751.

4. Michael, b. Sept. 11, 1752.

5. Justice, b. June 9, 1754.

6. MehitUble, b. Sept. zz, Z756; m. Samuel Sey-

mour.

7. Lowlv, b. Mch. 31, Z758.

8. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 16, Z759; m. Amasa Mattoon.

9. Isaac, b. May 30, 1761.
zo. Samuel, b. Sept. 27, 1762.
ZZ. Lyman, b. Aug. 27, Z764.
Z3. Olive, b. Feb. 6, Z766.

James Dean m, Mary Biroy, Sept. i, 1851.

Samuel S. DeForest m. Huldah Hitch-
cock, May 18, 1835. .

Finton Delany m. Maria Blakesley, Feb.
20, 1849.

James Delaney m. Eliza Bowe, June 4,
1851.*

John Delaney m. Bridget Doolan, July

11, 1851.®

Matthew Delany m. Bridget Parker. Oct.
23, 1844.

z. Catharine, b. Aug. 4, 1845.
3. Martin, b. Apr. z8, Z847.

Patrick Delany and Mary Delany were
m. in New Haven, Apr. 8, 1837.

z. John Thomas, b. Feb. zz, Z838.

Patrick Delaney m. Mary Finch (?), Nov.
26, 1849.

Thomas Delany from Ireland m. Char-
lotte Denny from New Preston, Aug..

1839.

X. Mary, b. Sept. 6, Z840.

William Delaney m. Julia Doolen, May
23, 1848.

Tryphena Delano m. Silas Grilley, 1800.

Horace Deming of Woodbury m. Almira
Amanda Stoddard, Nov. 23, 1831.

Charles Demorest m. Rhoda S. Davis,
Nov. I, 1846.

William Denair m. Catharine Connor,
June 21, 1848.

George W. Denney m. Mary Smith, Feb.
14, 1847.

FAMILY RECORl

Dermott. Doolittle.

James W. Dermott m. Mary Cook— both
of Plymouth — Feb. i6, 1851.

Michael Devrick m. Alice Denair, Feb.
20, 1848.

William Dick of Bytown, Canada West,
m. Maria L. Baldwin of Naugatuck,
May II, 1845.

Charlotte Dickerman m. Nathan Piatt,
1829.

William Dickinson of Say brook m. Maria
A. Chapman of Berlin, Mch. 17, 1840.

James Dillon m. Ann Garvey in Ireland.

I. Francis, b. in Ireland, Aug., 1841.

Charity Dixson m. Samuel Hikcox. 1768.

Phebe Dodd d. Feb. 27, i8i5.»

Patrick Doherty m. Margaret Cassian —
both of Watertown — July 15, 1849.

Michael Donahue m. Bridget Co3'le in
New Haven, July 7, 1839.

I. Thomas, b. May ao, 1840.

W

2. Michael, b. in Wisconsin, Sept. 16, 1844.

3. Ellen, b. Dec. 16, 1846.

Thomas Donahue m. Christiana Riley in
Ireland, Oct, 1844.

1. Barney, b. Nov. t, 1845.

2. Rosetta, b. Mch. 8, 1847.

Cornelius Donnelly m. Rachel Elizabeth
Lowry in Ireland, 1826.

Tames, b. Feb. 8, 1834.
Mary Ellen, b. Feb. z6, 1837.

Cornelius d. July, 1840, and his wid. m.
Tcrrence McCaffrey, May, 1841.

Michael Donnelly m. Ann Donnelly,
Sept. 23, 1 85 1.

John Doolan m. Maria Fitzsimmons, July
22, 1851.

Abel Doolittle, s. of Samuel, m. Thank-
full Moss, d. of John— all of Walling-
ford—Mch. 19, 1744-5. [He d. 1765.]

1. Mary, b. Tan. 28, 1746-7; m. Jon. Scott.

2. Thankful!, b. June x, 1749; m. Lot Osbom.

3. John, b. fan. 31, 1750.

4. Jenisha, b. Dec. 13, 1752.

5. Melees, b. Jan. 22, 1755.

6. Abel, b. Dec. 2, 1757.

7. Abi, b. Mch. 9, 1760.

8. Uri, b. Sept, 13, 1762.

Mary, mother of Abel d. Dec. 20, 1760.

Abraham Doolittle's three children d.
1 800-1 807.*

Alfred Doolittle of Prospect m. Elizabeth
T. Baldwin at Prospect, Dec. 24. 1843.

Benajah Hall Doolittle m. Susanna
Blakeslee, d. of Eben., Nov. 17, 1785.

X. Nancy, b. Aug. i, 1786.

2. Amzi, D. Aug. 18, 1788.

3. Alford, b. Dec 12, 1791.

DOOLIT

Eliasa]

8, 17:

X. Mil<

Poa

San

Ami

Elizabi

1776.
Enos ai

3. Eno

4. Obe

Esther

Eunice

Hannal

James 1
Welt<
Dec. J

Jamei
une

1. Dini

2. Tho

3. Sam

Jerushi

1752.

Jesse i

Ann '

Jesse J

m. El
1830.

1. Mar

2. Elm '

3. Sara i

4. Dan .

5. Emi I

Lyman I

Eno

Mehita^ .

1746.

MehiUI

1766.

Samuel

Euni( !

1. Dav i

2. Ben; i

3. Ben 1

4. Mar ,

5 JoM

Selim ] I
Tuttl

1. Luzi '

2. Cha •

Seymoi [

E. Pi i

Thank 1
Thoma

6. San; 1

7. Dai I
Am
Cat

Ham ;
m. S :
Apr.

46 ^p

BISTORT OF WATERS UBT.

DoRAN. Downs.

Michael Doran m. Bridget Brophy, June
17, 1848.

Leonard L. Dougal (?) of New Haven m.
Emerett A. Scovill, Nov. 24. 1831.

Abigail Douglass m. David Hotchkiss,

1763-
Alexander Douglass m. Anne Scott, Jan.

29. 1767-
Julia Douglass m. W. B. Barrows, 1S32.

Elizabeth Dowd ra. Daniel Clark, 1759.

Honor Dowd m. Nathaniel Merrills, 1781.

Jacob and Mary Dowd:

12. Elizabeth, b, Nov. ^, 1761.

Their 6th child, Elirabeth, d. Oct. 10, 1761.

Mary Dowd m. Ambrose Hikcox, 1762.

Rebecca Dowd m. Thomas Foot, Jr., 1762.

James S. Downey d. Mch. 4, 1835. a. 37.*

Martin Downey m. Jane Wheelan, Apr.
10, 1849.

Michael Downey m. Catharine Lynch
from Ireland, Jan., 1845.

X. James, b. Jan, 24, 1846,

Ann Downs m. David Sprague, 1828.

Anson Downs, b. Sept. 1798, s. of David,
m. Oct. 26, 1823, Eveline Welton, b.
Jan. 23, 1800, d. of Thomas.

1. Thomas L., b. July 9, 1824J

2. Elmore Lucius, b. Oct. xB, 1826.

3. Mary Ellen, b. Nov. 30, 1829.

4. William Wallace, b. Jan. 25, 1835.

5. John Frederic, b. June a6, 1837.

6. Dwight Mortimer, b. July 23, 1839.

David Edson Downs, s. of John, m. Jen-
net Morehouse from Wash., Nov., 1837.

I. John Benjamin, b. June i, 1845.

Elizabeth Downs m. Nathaniel Gunn,
Jr., 1763.

Elizabeth Downs m. Jeremiah Camp,
1823,

Elmira Downs m. John Woodruff, 1832.

Franklin Downs of Bristol m. Emeline
M. Upson Nov. 4, 1844.

Harley Downs m. Leonora Welton — both
of Wolcott— Apr. 2, 1826.

John Downs, b. July 28, 1783, s. of Da-
vid, m. 1805, Harriet Tolles from Wood-
bridge, b. Dec, 1785.

1. Caroline, b. June i, iSf/; m. Joseph Webb.

2. Willard, b. Dec. 28, i8n8.

3. Julia Abigail, b. May 6, 181 x; m. Dennis Prich-

ard.

4. David Edson, b. July 14, 1813.

5. Polly Hubbard, b. July 6, 1816; m. Berlin

Thomas.

6. Ann Eliza, b. Nov. 24, 1818.

7. Harriet Cornelia, b. Sept, 17, 1821; m, (J. H.

Newel.

8. Mary Amelia, b, Feb. 10, 1824.

9. John, b. Dec. 31, 1826; d. Nov. 16, 1828.
10. Marvin John, b. Oct. 12, 1830; d. 1831.

Downs. Dunbar.

Millc Downs m. Shelden Smith. 1825.

Sarah Downs m. Samuel Cook, 1835.

Susan Downs m. Jesse Scott, 181 1.

Willis Downs m Martha Sperry — both
of Westville— Apr. i, 1845.

William M. Drake from Bridge water.
Mass , b. Jan. 9, 180S, m. Ann Bronson,
d. of Selah, Aug. 22, 1830.

1. Emily E., b. June 27, 1831.

2. Cornelia A., b. Feb. 6, 1833.

3. Martha M., b. July 30, 1834.

4. William Franklin, b. Sept. i, 1840.

The wife of William above-named, d.
Oct. 24. 1840. The second wife, Laura,
d. Mch. 1847. When they were m.,
Mch. 31, 1845, she was the widow of
George Guilford. Her original name
was Laura Rice.

John Dudley m. Welthy E. Post, Dec. 25,
1839.

Mary Dudley m. Nans Blakley, 1829.

Polly Dudley m. Lemuel Atwater, 18 14.

John Duff m. Bridget Farman, 1850.

Aaron Dunbar m. Mary Potter [d. of Dan-
iel], Mch. 26, 1773.

I Daniel, b, Mch. 28, 1774.

2. Mary, b. May 26, 1776.

3. Aaron, b, Mch. 2, 1779.

4. Asaph, b. Sept. i, 1780.

5. Keturah, b. Nov. 4, 1782.

6. Lyman, b. Jan. 18, 1785.

7. Hall, b. Nov. 15, 1786.

Clarissa Dunbar m. G. E. Ellis, 1840.
Dinah Dunbar m. Joel Cook, 1768.
Edward Dunbar, record of chil. :

1. Mary, b. Sept. 21, 1754.

2. Sarah b. June 9, 1756; m. Lent Parker.

3. Jilcs Curtis, b. Apr. 26, 1758.

4. Avis, b. May 7. 1760.

5. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 4, 1761.

6. Content, b. Oct. 15, 1763.

7. Eunice, b. Oct. 14, 1765.

Emily Dunbar m. C. P. Lindsley, 1843.

Eunice Dunbar m. Victory Tomlinson,

1785."

Frederick Dunbar m. Axa Ames, Oct. i,
1824.

Hannah Dunbar m. Moses Blakeslee,i753.

John Dunbar and Temperance [Hall, m.
in Wallingford, 1743, where they had
ten children]:
Children that were b. in Wat.

1. John, b. Oct. 28, 1760.

2. Charity, b. Feb. 20, 1763.

3. Ade, b. Fel). 28, 1765.

4. Molly, b. Jan. 5, 1767.

5. David, I

and >b. May 26, 1770.

6. Jonathan, )

and their mother d. the same day. John
Dunbar d. Oct. 4, 1786.^

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP47

Dunbar. Dutton.

Lucina Dunbar m. Thomas Painter, 1787.*

Mary Dunbar m. Ebenezer Elwell, 1745,
and Stephen Seymour, 1767.

Miles Dunbar m. Tryphosa Butler, May
3. 1779.

1. Isaiah, b. June 4, 1781.

2. John, b. Feb. 23, 1784.

3. Miles, b. Feb. 26, 1786.

Olive Dunbar m. Thomas Fancher, 1765.

William B. Dunbar from Bristol, b. June
28. 181 1, m. Jan. 4, 1838, Mary Merrill,
b. Feb. 5, 1820, d. of Jared.

1. Hannah E., b. in Bristol, Apr. 28, 1836.

2. Emely Henrietta, b. Nov. 26, 1839.

3. Lucy Ann, b. July 10, 1841.

4. Leontine Genevra, b. Oct, 12, 1843.

5. Charles, b. June 27, 1847.

Esther Dunk m. Nathan Saunders, 1777.'

Patrick Dunn m. Johanna Clery, July
14, 1850.

Jared D. Durand of Meriden m. Lucy E.
Roberts, Oct. 13, 1849.

John G. Duryee d. Aug. 7, 1840, a. 46.

[Aaron Dutton, s. of Thomas, m. Dorcas
Southmayd, d. of Samuel, Apr., 1806.
He d. June, 1849; she, Sept. 17, 1841.

Mary, b. Nov., 1807; Founder of "Grove Hall

Seminary," New Haven.
Dorcas S., b. Jan., 1810.
Samuel, b. Mch., 1812.
Samuel W. S„ b. Mch. 14, 1814: Rev. S. W. S.

Dutton of the North Church, New Haven.
Aaron, b. July, 1816.
John Southmayd, b. July, 1818; d. 1834.
Anna, b. 1820; d. 1831.
Matthew Henry, b. 1822: d. 1841.]

Ambros Dutton, s. of David, m. Eliza-
beth Peck, d. of Samuel, Feb. 27, 1754.

Amos Dutton, s. of David, m. Thankful
Humastone, Oct. 25, 1764.

A son, b. Feb. 8; d. Feb. i6, 1768.

Thankful d. Feb. 22, 1768, and Amos
m. Sarah Turner, Nov. 3, 1769.

2. Enos. b. July 31, 1770.

3. Jesse, b. Apr. 27, 1772.

4. Lucy, b. Nov. 2, 1774.

5. Ransom, b. Feb. 22, 1778.

Dameris Dutton m. Daniel How, 1763.
David and Judith Dutton:

14. Titus, b. Dec. 21, 1749.

Elizabeth Dutton m. Daniel Allcox, 1759.

Eunice Dutton m James Warner, 1761.

Joel Dutton, s. of David, m. the wid.
Hannah Bull, d. of Ezekiel Sanford,
Feb. 16, 1762.

I. Moses, b. Oct. i6, 1762.

Dr. Osee Dutton m. Elizabeth Trow-
bridge, Jan. 19, I7S3.«
Huldah, bap. Oct. 11, 1786.

Polly Dutton m. Chauncey Root, 1823.

Dutton. Eggleston.

Thomas Dutton: Chil. b. in Wat.

Reuben, b. in Wal. Feb. 21, 1757.
Reuben, b. Mch. 28, 1758.
Thomas, b. Mch. 31, 1760.
Matthew, b. May 14, 1762.
[Hannah, Keziah, and Rice d. youne.

Hannah, b. Sept. 13, 1776.
Aaron, b. May 26, 1780.J

Thomas Dutton, 3d, m. Tenty Punder-
son, Sept. 5, 1782.'

1. Matthew Roycc, b. June 30, 1783.

2. Chester, b. July 2, 1785.

Samuel Earls, s. of John of East Hamp-
ton on Long Island, m. Mary Welton,
d. of John.

1. Samuel, b. June 38, 1738.

2. Rhoda, b. Oct. 16, 1740.

Cornelia Easton m. Leander Andrews.

1851.

Lieut. Eaton d. May lo, 1828, a. 24.

William Eaves, Jr., m. Melissa Payne of
Hartford, Nov. 23, 1835.

Samuel Edmonds d. Jan. 6, 1836. a. 36.*

Isaac Edwards m. Esther Foot Tune 26
1786.3 "^

X. Betsey, b. Apr. 23, 1789.

Julia Edwards m. Isaac B. Castle, 1823.
Nathaniel and Margit Edwards:

X. John, b.

5, 1750; d. Oct. 31, X770.

5. Isaac, b. Sept. 30; d. Dec. 27, 1761.

Nathaniel d. Mch. 20. 1768:
[Probate rec. gives also, Nathaniel.
Margaret Scott (w. of Woolsey), Abi-
gail Blake, Eunice and Asahel.J

Nathaniel Edwards, Jr., s. of Nathaniel,
m. Abiah Strickland, d. of David, Mch
II, 1762.

1. Lois Beadles, b. June 27, X762; d. June 22, 1775.

2. Isaac, b. June 29, 1764.

3. Sarah, b. June 28, 1766.

4. David, b. Mch. i, 1769.

^' m"!7' \^^\}^* '771.

6. Millea, b. Mch. 21, 1774.

7. Lois, b. Dec. 19, 1777.

John, b. Dec. 7, 1783; d. Feb. 16, 1784.3

Esther Eelles m. Jared Terrell, 1781.

Mary Elles m. Absolom Tinker, 1780.

Stephen A gen (Egan) m. Margaret Grales
in Ireland, 18.37.

1. Bridget, b. Dec. i6, 1840.

2. Catharine, b. Dec. 24, 1844.

3. Ellen, b. Mch. 16, 1847.

James and Ruth Eggleston:

1. Lydia, b. Nov. 16, 1773.

2. Anna, b. Sept. 5, 1775.

3. James, b. Oct. 13. 1777.8

4. Koswell, b. Oct. i8, 1779.

5. Prosper, b. Sept. 30, 1781.

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Egleston. Elton.

John and Sarah Egleston:

John Eggleston of New Mi! ford m.

Sarah Softly, Mch. 2, 1851.
Lydia Eldeikin m. George A, Russell,

Rev. Henry B. Elliot, Pastor of the Ctm-

1. Kcnry Aujjuuui, b. Mch. ij. 1^45.
Mra. Darwin Ellis d. Oct. 25, 1S46, a. 40,'
Frederick A. Ellis m. July Martin of

Woodbrirtge. Feb. 11, 1S2S.
George O. Ellis from Attleborough.

Mass., ni. Clarissa Dunbar from Ply-
)uth, Apr. :, 1S40.

.. J<*

b.jM

Susan Ellis m. Ephraim Roberts, i3ii.

William EUia from Attleborough, Mass.
b, June a, iSoS, m, Mch. 30, 1S4;, Juf
tina Abbott from Middlebury, b. Apr
2S, 183S [d. of David and Hannah].

,. Apr.

1846.

Ebenezer Elton [b, i7>3, s. of Ebene:ier
of Branford, m. Hannah Ward of Mid-
dletown, where he resided.

S- Dr. ,

t;S8-7,1.

, 1746 (paid una

7. RjcbanL b, Sepl. t^, I75°^ ^- J^^^K-

i. Eliubcth; d. in ialux^.
Hannah d. 1754. and Btienezer m. Han-
nah B«con of Middletown. Jan. 23, 1755.

9. Dr. John, b. Qa. i. 1755: m. I.ucy Prince, and
d. iB™, Hil .un, Dr. Saimwl, b. Sept. 6. i;^.
ro, Eiiabelh. b. IlK., I75«.
II. Richard; d.jaiarancy.
tl. Rtaodi, b. Sav. 16. 175,).
II. BcnjuniD, b. Apr. i, 1761.
.4. Huuuhid. Inlnlincy.

ig. Eilher, b. Dec. g, i;7i.l
w. Muhin Noib. b. July ii. nSi.'
John P. Elton, s. of Dr. Samuel of Water-
town, m. Olive Hall, d. of Capt. Moses,
May -" ---

°' Stab' i. bt^'^sJ'l^l3. '
Catharine d. Jan. g. 1743, and Ebcneier
m. Hannah Scott, d. of Edmnnd, July
17, 1744. He d. Dec. 34, 1753. and Han-
nah m, John How, 1754. [Other chil-
dren were: Ebenezer, Jonathan, Catha.
rine, ni. A. Ludington, Judith, m. James
Curtis, and Lydia, m. Nathaniel
Barnes.)

Ebenezer Elwell, s. of Ebcn., tn. Ruth
Moss, d. of Solomon of Wal.. Nov. so.
1741. She d. Apr. 13, 1743. and
Ebenezer m, Marj- Dunbar, d. of John oi
Wallingford, SepL 24. 1745. He d. Jan.
14, 1767; his wid. m. Stephen Seymour.

Samuel Elwell, s. of Ebenezer. dec'd. m.
Hannah Francber, d. of William, jane
14, 1755-

4. 0,iM, b. Mch, 7, 1763.
John Enderton of Litchfield m. Nancy

Warner, d. of Ard, May 2. 1S30.
Charles L. English of New Haven m.

Minerva Broasoa, July 15, 1S40.

Charles m. his second wife. Sarah Bron.

son. Apr. 3, 1S44.
Maria English m. George Gillsert. i*3'J
Lucy Essex ni.'Edward J, Fuller, iB?i,
Mercy Evans m. Samuel Todd, i73g.
Oliver Evans of Sherman in. Harrist

Adams of Salem Bridge. Jan. 15. lJj3-
Randal and Phebe Evans:

3. Arjid. b. Apr. i. 1757; d. Scpi, i^, 17*^.

3. thlTlM P

:.. Apr.

,837-

4. Jobn^MnKi, b. Mch. 14. 1S4;.
Lemuel W. Elton m. SUtira Gibburd,
Sepi 8. i8?o

t Mary, h. Tun* a, 17(5..
5, Clot, b. Dec. .. 17*3.

[Capt. Randol d. Mch. 24. 177S. a. 50-

his wife, Jan, 19, 177S, a. just 46 yrs.]

George Faber m. Sarah Frisbie, Jen. 1.

James Pagan m. Margaret KeUy, i'^^f

Abiel Fairchild, Jr., m. Hannah Chal

field. Feb 23, 1757.'
Edmund B. Fairchild of Watertown m

Martha J. Leavenworth, May 7, iSu.
Joseph Fairchild, s. of Abial of Derby,

m, Huldah Porter.d. of James, Feb.:-,

1757. Hed. Dec. 1, 1757, and Huldab

m. D. Taylor.

,, j™pb, b. Dec, ,, ,757.

Joseph Fairchild of Oxford ra. Haniul
Wheeler of Derby, Nov, 9. 17S0.'

FAMILY RECORDS,

AP49

Fairchild. Farrell.

Ruth Fairchild m. S. Buckingham, 1785.

John Fairclough, s. of Joseph, m. La-
vinia Osborn. d. of Daniel of Nauga-
tuck, Feb. 17, 1843.

I. Elizabeth Susanna, b. May 24, 1845.

Joseph Fairclough m. Elizabeth Mills—
both from Birm., Eng. — Oct. i, 181 7.

I. John, b. Apr. lo, 1818.

a. Mary, b. Jan. 28, i8ax [m. D. Boyce and] L. L.
Russell.

3. Susanna, b. Jan. 24, 1823; d. Aug. 4, 1847— all

bom in Birmingham.

4. Charles, b. in New York, Feb. 17, i8a8.

5. Thomas, b. Feb. 11, 1831.

6. Joseph, b. Sept. 6, 1833.

7. Matthew, b. Mch., 1835; d. Sept. 25, 1836.

8. James, b. Mch. xi, 1837.

Susanna Fairclough m. Thomas Boys,
1844.

Hannah Francher m. &am. Elwell, 1755.

Ithiel Fauncher m. Mary Hull, Nov. 24,

1774.
James Fancher, originally of Stratford,

m. Mary Scott, d. of Obadiah, Mch. 18,

1762.

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 11; d. Oct. 30, 1763.

2. David, b. Oct. 7, 1765.

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 11, 1767; d. Apr. 24, 1783.

4. Salvenus, b. July 14, 1770.

5. Mary, b. May 23, 1773.

6. James, b. Jan. 17, 1776.

7. Cloe, b. Mch. 26, 1778.
Sarah, b. Tulv 8, 1783.8
William, b. Aug. 18, 1785.

Lemuel Fancher m. Sarah Loomis, June

I, 1779.' ♦

Thomas Fancher m. Olive Dunbar, July
30, 1765.

z. Adin, b. June 22, 1766.

3. Thomas, b. May 15. 1768 [killed by the fall of a
tree, X70X, at iCinland, N. Y.].

3. Olive, b. May 10, 1770.

4. Eneas, b. May 2, 1772.

William and Thankful Francher:

II. Ithiel, b. Mch. 29, 1748.

12. Veal, b. Sept. 2t, 1751; d. May 11, 1754.
Samuel, d. Tan. 8, 1753.
Ebenezer, a. Aug. 18, 1758.

Thankful, wife of William, d. Aug. 19,
1759, and William d. the next day.

William Fancher, s. of William, m. Eliza-
beth Luddenton, d. of William, Apr. 5,

1755.

1. Reufus, b. Aug. 25, 1757.

2. Deborah, b. Mch. 15, 1759.

3. Samuel, b. Jan. 9, 1762.

Almon Farrel, s. of Zebah, and Emma
Warner, b. Aug. 30, 1808, d. of Mark,
m. May i, 1826.

1. Franklin, b. Feb. 17, 1828.

2. Juliette, b. Mch. x8, 1830.

3. Margarett, b. Sept. 20, 1834.

4. Malvina^ b. Feb. 15. 1837.

5. Elizabeth, b. May 20, 1839.

6. Frances Elinor, b. July 10, 1844.

Ann Farrell m. Edward Davis. 1851.
6*

Farrell. Fenn.

Asa Farrell of Prospect m. Ann Seely,
Sept. 8, 1 841.

[Benjamin Farrel, b. 1753. and Lois
Williams, b. 1755, were m. Dec. 15,
1775. Shed. Jan. 11, 1802.

1. Zebah. b. Oct. 7, 1776.

2. Lucy, b. Feb. 17, 1778; m. Joseph Nichols.

3. Lowly, b. Mch. 16, 1783.

4. Lois, b. July 20, 1785; m. Silas Payne.

5. Benjamin, b. Dec, 5, 1788.

6. Polly, b. Jan. xi, 1797.J

Benjamin Farrell, s. of Benjamin, m.
Levee Frost, d. of Rev. Jesse, and d.
Oct. 26. 1838.

1. Chloe Ursula, b. Jan. 4, 1812; m. M. C. Wedge.

2. Polly Selina, b. Mch. 4, x8i^.

3. James, b. Sept. 21, 1817; d. June 7, 1830.

4. Amos Miles, b. Mch. 4. i8ao.

5. Levee Jennet, b. Apr. 8, 1825; m. M. E. Terrell.

6. Julia Henrietta, b. Apr. 27, 1828.

7. James Benjamin, b. Nov. lo, 1831.

Benjamin Farrel of Prospect m. Anna
Brockett [d. of Zenas], Sept. 19, 1831.

George Farrel, s. of Zebah, m. Nancy
Perkins, d. of Jesse of Bethany, Jan.
22, 1837.

1. Catharine Emma, b. Nov. 6, 18^8.

2. Georgiana, b. Oct. 18, 1840; d. Nov. 28, 1842.

John Farrell m. Jane Conray, July 28,
1850.

Zebah Farrel, s. of Benjamin, m. Mehit-
able Benham, d. of Elihu, May 16, 1798.,

X. Lucreiia Smith, b. May 13, 1799; d. Sept., 1812.

2. Almon, b. Oct. 12. 1800.

3. Sally Benham, b. Nov. 12, i8o2j m. S. Tyler

4. Fanny, b. Sept. 17, 1804; m. William Cay.

5. Esther, b. Aug. 25, 1806; ra. Hubbard Smith.

Mary Fay m. Martin Marshall, 1842.

Thomas Feeney m. Catharine O'Brien,
June 17, 1848.

Aaron Fenn:^

Lyman, b. Aug. 26, 1770.
Sally, b. Dec. 9, 1771.
Aaron, b. Dec. 20, 1773.
Erastus, b. Dec. 29, 1781.
Polly, b. Aug. 13, 1785.
David, b. Nov. 12, 1787.

Abijah Fenn, s. of Isaac of Watertown,
m. Nancy Rexford, d. of Rev. Elisha of
Huntington, May 19, 1793.

1. Elisha Rexford, b. Feb. 24, 1794.

2. Lydia Maria, b. Mch. 25, 1796.

Adelia Fenn m. Asahel Watrous, 1839.

Amos Fenn [s. of John] m. Eunice Doo-
little, Nov. 18, 1766.

I. Frederick Doolittle, b. Dec. 23, 1767; d. 1769.

Eber [s. of Thomas] and Lydia Fenn:^

Lydia, b. May 15, 1786.

Gamaliel Fenn [s. of Jpbn of Milford] m.
Ruth Porter, d. of Tim., Oct. 12, 1774.

1. Gamaliel, b. Feb. 16, 1775.

2. Lydia, b. Apr. 27^ 1777.

3. Sarah, b. Mch. ao, 1782.

4. John, b. Apr. 15, 1788.

5. Ruth, b. Jan, 10, 1792,

BISTORT OF WATERS VRT.

Pnw.

Harris Fenn m. Jane
Davidl. Oct, 6, 1839.

Abbott [d. of

Isaac Penn, 3. of Thomait, dec'd, ro.
Mehitable Humaston, d. of Caleb, May
7. 1770. [He d. Hch, iS; and she, Nov,
23. iSaS-l

L, Lfniu, bp Auc, «, 1770.
U. Atdj^ b. Jun. », ,77,; d. J.11. ., .836.]

3. Mehiuble, b. J»n. ji, 1776.

4. Babra. b. Apr. 9, 1770.
RoHLU (Marthu?), b. D«. i. t7St.

Fenk. Fwca.

Thomas Fena [s. of Edward and Abigail

Williams] and Christian:

5. Sanh, b. Aug. », 17;}: m. Jew Saoford ?

Christian d. Hay i, 1768; Thomas. Apr.

35, 1769, (a. 62. leaving

Lydia; m. Bcujih Peek,

Hanrul

,d Efcr.]

Jesse Fenn m. Chloe Thompsiin, July 5.
I73r.'

Chloe d. June 21, 1782. and Jesse
Phebe Blakeslee, Dec. 3, 17S1.

I. Horiuxs b. Oct. ij, 1783.
3. Lyman, b. Nov. », 1785.
[John Fenn from Wallingtord, 1753:

Mary b. .730. John, b. .;

ciel^

IS.]

Irene San ford,

1 347.

^^%'^:,

t Rkw; b; nSv. it; '.7

1. Rboda Andrews, Mch. 16,

1. Rboda, b. Jniy 7, 1783.

(. Consu

, '78s-

John Femi, s. of John, m. Hepzibab Will-
iams, d. of James, Jan. 26, 1757.

I. lahn, b, Oct. =6, .7S7.

a. Olive, b. Mch. =7. '760; ">■ Hiekiel Sruil.

J. Mary, b. Dec. 4, r703.
John Fenn m. Eunice Scott, d. of Anus,

May 34, 1780.'
Loia Fennm. Elon Clark, 1813.
Nathan Fenn of New Haven m, Caroline

Lane [wid. of Edwin], Dec. 39. 1S44.

Sbcd. Ju]y 3. [.'^46, a. 24.'
Samuel Fenn m, Sarah Scott, Juno 24,

1762.*

Samuel Fenn, Jr.,
Nov. 3, 1767.
I. Irsnia, b. May 13, i;»B.

;ii, b. Auk. "8. ■77'.
Tianlilul, b. Apr, a, 1776.

Samnel Fenn, s. of John, ra. Rachi
bom, d. of Daniel, SepL 8, i7(iS.

j! Either, b. Sept, ='>. iTy's-

4. Samuel, b. Jan. 4, 1779.

5. Asa, fa, Aut tg. .783-

6. Kacbd, b, Oct, 14, 17S6.

Samuel Fenn, b. May 23, 1813. s. of Asa
of Middlebury, m, Maria Cowel, A. of
Samuel, June 17, 1S34. who d. Aug, 11,

Vienna Fenn m. William Brown, iPj-j
Anna Fenton m, Richard Welton, 1714.
John C. Fenton of Ashtabula, O,, m.

Amelia Beecher of Prospect, June aj

■ S51.
Mary Fenton ni. Gcrshom Scott, 172^.
[Dr. Edward Field of Enfield, b. July 1.

1777, m, Sally Hhldwin, d. of Dr. Isaac,

Apr. 30, 1S07.

,. Juni„. L„ b. Feb. ., .BoS.

Sally d. Aug. 8, i8o3, and Edward m.
Esther Baldwin, d. of Dr, Isaac, Jan.,
i3io. He d. Nov. 17. 1E40; she. May

-y BildwiD, b. Jan. 11
<'Miirga«t,b, SFch.'l

Siw. 9, iE^:-
n. t. B. Mtt-

Abigail Finch m. Daniel Hall.
Hannah Finch m, J, B. Candee, 1795.
Harriet Finch m. Gilbert Thomas, 1S3S.
James W. Finch, b. of Ashael, m. Polly

Lowry, d. of Richard of Southingion,

Apr. 3, 1S32.

.. Cornelia E„ b. Feb. .4. 'SjS-

J. Alice M., b, Feb. «S, i8j7.

i. Caroline J., b. Oct. .7, -M'-

Joel Finch m. Sally Saaford of Prospect,

Julia Finch m, Horace P. Welton, lin-
Lydia Finch m. Eli Osbom, i793-
Maria Finch m. Seth Higby, 1338.

FAMILY RBC0RD8.

AP61

Pinch. Foot.

Mary A. Finch m. Willis Johnson, 1837.
Timothy Finch m. Bridget Doolan, June

17, 1848.

Samuel C. Fisk, b. in Heath, Mass., Dec.

1, 18 14, m. Feb, 5, 1839. Abigail B.
Wait, b. in West Boylston, Mass., Mch.

2, 1820.

1. Jane A., b. in Oxford, Mass., Jan. 5, 1840.

2. Charlotte A., b. in Worcester, Dec. a6, 1843.

3. Andrew Fayette, b. Dec. 9, 1846.

Cynthia Fitch m. John Adams, 1794.

James Fitzpatrick m. Ann Rennan, Sept.

18, 1851.8

John Fitzpatrick m. Mary Inglesby, Sept.
21, 1851.*

Owen Flanigan m. Catharine Coughlan,
Mch. 3, 1851.

Annis Flinn m. AAtipas Woodward, 1788.

Timothy Flinn m. Catharine McAlister,
May 25, 185 1.

Lewis B. FoUett m. Ann P. Steele, [d. of
Norman of Derby], Sept. 18, 1836.

Abigail Foot m. Joel Roberts, 1766.

Active Foot m. Israel Frisbie, 1783.

Amos and Abigail Foot:'

Sallv, b. Aug. 30, 1775.
Hicl, b. July 30, 1777.

iesse, b. Nov. a6, 1780.
[artha, b. Nov. 38, 1784.
Ebenezer, b. Aug^. 35, 1786.

David Foot [b. Nov. ii, i73ol, s. of Mo-
ses, now of Waterbury, m. Hannah
Bronnson. d. of John, Feb. 28, 1752
[and was killed in the attack upon Fair-
neld, 1779. She d. 1795].

I. Tryphena, b. Feb. 13, 1754.

3. Ruth, b. Oct. 8, 1756; [m. Ancr Woodin].

3. A dau., b. Apr. 15; d. May 13, 1760.

4. Mary, b. Sept. 4, 1761.

5. Hannah, b. iDec. x6, 1763.

6. Mary, b. Sept. 3, 1763. {})

7. Hannah, b. Dec. 16, 1764. (?)

8. Comfort, b. June 33, 1769.

9. Rebeckah, b. Nov. 3, 1773.

David Foot, s. of Samuel, m. Mary Sco-
vill, d. of Ezekiel, Apr. 11, 1776.

X. Abraham, b. May 8, 1778.
3. David, b. Jan. 30, 1780.

3. Olive, b. tcb. 33, 1783.'

4. Mercy, b. Dec. 9, 1783.

5. Russel, b. May 7, 1786.

6. Elijah, b. May 10, 1788.

Ebenezer Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Mar-
tha Moss, d. of John of Wallingford,
June 17, 1752, and d. Dec. 23. 1763.
[Martham. John Hart,and John Thomp-
son, and d. in Goshen, 1804, a. 71.

X. Martha, b. Auff. 85, 1753.
3. Hannah, b. Feb. 36, 1756.

3. Olive, b. Mch. 6, X758; d. July 31, 1750.

4. Olive, b. July xa, 1760; d. Apr. 34, 17M.

5. Olive, b. July 24, 1763.

Foot. Foot.

Ebenezer Foot, s. of Moses, m. Rebecca *
Barker, d. of Uzal, July i, 1761, and d.
at Horseneck, June i, 1778; Rebecca m.
Ezekiel Sanford.

Elizabeth Foot m. Noah Griggs, 1765.

Esther Foot m. Isaac Edwards, 1788.*

Isaac Foot, s. of Dr. Thomas, m. Sarah
Selkrigg, [d. of William,] Aug. 21, 1770.

x. Allin, b. Jan. 22, 1771.
3. Anna, b. July 30, 1773.

3. Isaac, b. Jan. 16, 1774.

4. Sarah, b. June 30, 1779.
[5. Titus, b. Aug. 35, 1781.]

Jacob Foot, s. of Dr. Thomas, m. Esther
Doolittle, Dec. 25, 1766.

T. Abiah, (dau.) b. Aug. 31, 1767; d. Jan. X3, X774.
3. Reuben, b. July x6; d. Nov, 14, 1769.

3. Reuben, b. Dec. 4, 1770.

4. Lucy, b. Sept. X7, X773.

5. Miles, b. Sept. 13, X77A.

6. Jacob, b. June 14; d. June 32, 1776.

7. Abi, b. Auff. 33, 1777; d. Jan. 1797.

8. Eunice, b. Mav 3, 1779.

9. Betsey, b. Men. 9, i783.»

10. Sylvia, b. Tune 18, X783.

11. Jacob, b. Apr. 31, 1789.

Esther d. Aug. 30, 1790; and Jacob m.
Rhoda Saxton, w^id. of Jehiel, May 26,
1 791.

Joel B. Foot of New Haven m. Sarah
Scovill, May 22, 1826.

John Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Esther Mat-
toon [d. of David], July 25, 1764.

X. Ebenezer, b. Apr. x6, X765; d. Feb. x6, X768.
3. John, b. Dec. X7, 1766; d. Aug. 13, 1773.

Esther d. Mch. 10, 1769, and John m.
Mary Peck, July 20, 1769.

3. Esther Matoon, b. July 30, 1770.

4. Ruth, b. Aug. 39, 177X.

5. Ebenezer, b. July 6, 1775.

6. John, b. Apr. 35, X775 [a. unmarried, x8o6].

7. Mary, b. Jan. 34, X778.

8. Sabrea, b. June 39, 1779 [d. X780].

Jonathan Foot m. Lydia [Sutliff, d. of
John, June 14, 1727. He d. June 26,
1754; sne, Sept. 27, 1768.

X. Jerusha, b. in Branford, Oct. x, I7a8- d, X741.
3. Eunice, b. in Branford, July a6, 173X]: m. Timo-
thy Williams.

2. Aaron, b. Dec. 8, X734.
[4. Lydia, d. Dec. x, 1748.]

Joseph Foot m. Thankful Ives [d. of Ste-
phen of Wal.], Nov. 6, 1768. [He d.
June 29, 1789; she, Feb. 3, 1792, a. 48.]

X. Mary. b. Aug. xa, X769; d. Sept. 7, X77X.

3. Joseph, b. Sept. 4, X773.
3. Stephen, b. Jan. 34, 1774.

Lorinda Foot m. Benjamin Bates, 1776.

Mary Foot m. Isaac Morgan, 1786.

Moses Foot, b. Tan. 13, 1701-2 fm. Mary
Byington, d. of John of Branford, June
22, 1726. She d. J&n-t 1740, a. 30], and
Moses m. Ruth Butler, Nov. 5, 1740.

62 AP

HI8T0RT OF WATERBURT.

Foot. Foot.

He d. Feb., 1770; she, Aug. 7, 1792,
a. 85.

[His heirs were David, Moses. Aaron— who m.
Mary Bronson, d. of John, Nov. i^, 1760 — Eb-
eoezer, Obed, Rebecca, and Lydia Curtis].
Mary had d. Feb. 31, 1758.

[Moses Foot, Jr., b. 1735, m. Thankful
Bronson, d. ot John, Jr., Aug. 12, 1756.
She d. Sept. 5, 1757, and Moses m. Amy
Richards, d. of Jonas of East Hartford,
May 17, 1759-

I. Bronson, b. Sept. 5, 1757.I

Nathan Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Merriam
Selkrigg, d. of William, dec*d, June 12,

1759.

X. Daniel, b. Apr. 3, 1760.

a. Nathan, b. Nov. i6, 1761.

3. Millecent, b. Nov. 6, 1763.

4. Abijah, b. Mch. 23, 1766.

5. Uri, b. July 12, X768.

6. Jesse, b. Sept. 17, 1770.

Obed Foot [b. Nov. 25, 1741], s. of Moses,
m. Mary Todd, d. of Samuel, Dec. 3,
1761.

z. A dau., Asenah, b. Sept. 19, 1763.

Samuel Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Mary Ly-
on, d. of John of Hadam, June 5, 1750,
and d. June 9, 1776.

1. Mary, b. Jan. 10, 1750-1: d. Apr. 9, 1768.

2. David, b. Jan. 24, 1753.

3. Elizabeth, b. July i, 1755.

4. Anne, b. Oct. 16, 1757.

5. Samuel, b. May 2, x76o«

6. Huldah, b. Feb, 13, 1762.

7. Luce, b. Oct. 8, 1764; d. May 7, 1767.

Dr. Thomas Foot and Elizabeth [Sutliff.
He d. Dec. 19, 1776, a. 77.

Samuel, b. 1723. Jemima, b. 1725; m. Abraham

Htckox.
Elizabeth, b. 1728. Ebenezer, b. 1730.
Timothy, b. 1735] •

Children b. in Waterbury:

8. Nathan, b. Jan. 25, 1737-8.

9. Thomas, b. May 10, 1740.
xo. John, b. Aug. ax, X742.
IX. Jacob, b. Oct. 30, 1744.

12. Joseph, b. Apr. 3, X747.

13. Isaac, b. Mch. 25, X750.

Thomas Foot, Jr., s. of Thomas, m. Re-
becka Dowd, d. of Mr. [John J Dowd of
Middleton, May 17, 1762.

I. Amos, b. Jan. xs, 1763.
a. Rachel, b. June 18, 1764.

Timothy Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Sarah
Garnsey, d. of Jonathan, June 5, 1755.

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 29, 1756.

2. Timothy, b. Nov. 4, 1757; d. Tune X5, X762.

3. Jemima, b. Nov. 9, X759; m. K. T. Reynolds.

4. Levy (a son), b. Oct. 5, 1761.

5. Abigail, b. Oct. 15, 1764.

6. Timothy, b. Apr. 5, X768,

7. Jonathan Northrop, b. May 17, X774; d. 1776.

Sarah, d. Oct. 22, 1777, and Timothy m.
Lucy [Parks], wid. of Preserved Wheeler
of Woodbury, Mch. 11, 1778. [He d.
May 8, 1799; she, Mch. 9, 1815.

I. Lucy Roxanna, b. Apr. 29, X779].

Forbes. Forrest.

Clarissa A. Forbes m. Ruel Potter, 1S25.

Abel Ford m. Susanna Painter, Sept. 25,
1771.

X. Huldah, b. Dec. x6, 1772.
2. Joel, b. Nov. IX, X774.

Amos Ford, a stranger, d. Dec. 6, 1837,
a. 71.*

Barnabas and Mary Ford:

6. Zilla, b. July 12, 1734; m. Thomas Way.

7. Abel, b. Jan. 29, 1737-8.

Barnabas d. Mch. lo, 1746 7.
[Prob. rec. add Ebenezer. Cephas, Enos,
Sarah, who m. Abel Sutliff, and Mary,
who m. Reuben Blakeslee.]

Cephas Ford, s. of Barnabas, m. Sarah
How, d. of John, May 18, 1752, and d.
Nov. 4, 1758. Sarah m. A. Luddington.

X. Mary, b. Nov. 19, 1752. ♦

2. Daniel, b. Nov. 16, 1754.

3. Cephas, b. Sept. 21, X758.

Daniel Ford [s. of Cephas?] m. Phebe
Camp, Mch. 6, 1780.^

X. Nancy, b. Feb. 9, X78X.

2. Aaron, b. June 24, 1782.

3. Betsey, b. June 17, 1784.

4. Isaac, b. June 18, 1786.

5. Phebe, b. Mch. 2, X789.

Ebenezer Ford, s. of Barnabas, m. Mar-
tha How, d. of John, July 8, 1752.

X. Barnabas, b. May 7, 1753; d. Oct. 2, 1754.

2. Amos, b. June 24, X754.

3. Anise, b. Oct. X2, X756.

4. Barnabas, b. Jan. 29, X759.

5. Eunice, b. Sept. 27, X760.

6. Mary, b. Feb. 22, X768.

Elias Ford, Esq., s. of Nath'l of Cheshire,
m. Eunice Cook, d, of Samuel of Wal.,
Oct. 14, 1798, and d. Sept. 9, 1836.

1. Tared K., b. May 23, x8oo.

2. William Y., b. Aug. 27, 1802.

4. Samuel C, b. Mch. X5, i3o6.

6. Harriet C.,b. Feb. X2, x8i6; m. Samuel Hoplcios.
The third and fifth d. in infancy.

Enos Ford was m. to Rebecca Jenkins of
Litchfield by Judah Champion, Nov.

5. 1772.

X. Keziah, b. Aug. 4, X773,
2. Lucy, b. July 30, X775.

Miles B. Ford of Prospect m. Betsey
Moses, July 19, 1840.

Zerab Ford, s. of Thaddeus of Cornwall,
m. Semantha Payne, d. of Thomas,
Apr. 5, 1 801.

1. Elevia, b. Jan. 14, x8o2.

2. Chauncey, b. Jan. 8, 1804.

George Forgue of Newtown m. Emily A.
Scovill of Naugatuck, May 23, 1841.

Alfred Forrest m. Melissa Wright — both
from England — Jan. 15, 1846.

x. A son, b. July 7, X847.

Jane E. Forrest m. Miles Morris, 1847.

FAMILY RECORDS,

^P53

Forrest. Francis.

John M. Forrest, s. of Samuel, b. Oct.
23, 1805, in Birmingham, Eng., m.
Tamer Allen, d. of Isaac, Mch. 6, 1829.

X. Rebecca S,, b. Nov. la, 1829; in. G. BruL<<e.

2. Mary Jane, b. Mch. 19, 1831.

3. Harriet M., b. Aug. 27, 1832.
4.. Samuel A., b. Sept. 8, 1838.

5. Annetta L., b. Nov. 26, 184T.

6. John Earnest, b. Feb. 6, 1844.

7. Bellmont G., b. June i, 1846.

Phebe Forrest m. William Stanley, 1850.
Sarah Forrest m. Reuben Brown, 1828.
Susan Forrest m. Thomas Warner, 1848.

Fortune, servant of Dr. Preserved Por-
ter, and entered by Dr. Porter. Record
of Fortune, a Negroe's children:

Tacob, b. May 27, 1786.
Mira, b. Dec. 29, 1788.
Roxa, b. Apr. 30, 1792.

(Added in a different hand:)
Africa, b. Sept. 16, 1772.

George Foster d. Jan. 25, 1848, a. 33.*

Rev. Abraham Fowler m. Sarah Case of
Simsbury, May 14, 1781.

1. Abraham C, b. May 29, 1785.

Sarah d. Jan. 26, 1795, and Abraham
m. Rebeckah Judson [d. of Daniel and
Sarah] of Stratford, Sept. 7, 1795. [He
d. Nov., 1815, a. 70.]

Abraham Fowler, s. of Rev. Abraham
[m. Fanny Porter, d. of Nathan, and d.
at sea, Apr. 30, 1834].

Sarah Rebecca, Henry Porter, Stern Humphrev,
Fanny Prudentia, and Julia Ann, bap. Mcfi.
5, 1818.

Ambrose Baldwin Fowler, s. of Thad-
deus, m. Lowla Sophronia Fowler, d.
of Maltby — all of Guilford— Apr. 13,

1828.

1. Lowla Todd, b. Feb. a8, 1829.

2. Lois, b. Nov. 23, 1832; ra. C. [. Tyler.

3. Apollos, b. Nov. 15, 1842— all b. in Northford.

Miner Fowler m. [Mrs.] Charity Linsley
[d. of Giles Ives], Aug. 6, 1827.

Dr. Remus Fowler m. Mary Miller, June
II, 1827.

William M. Fowler of Northford m.
Bethia Hopson of Wells, Vt., Feb. 6,
1842.

Augustus Fox m. Hannah Warner—both
of Naugatuck — Nov. 24, 1839.

Richard Fox of New Haven m. Elizabeth
Wilson, Apr. 9, 1842.

Anner Francis m. Stephen Culver, 1793.

Mary Francis, d. of Nancy, b. Apr. 19,
1814.

Mary Francis m. Edward Sandland.

Freeman. Frisbie.

Caleb Freeman, b. Mch. 20, 1816, m. in*

Kng. [May 7], 1835, Jane Gardner, b.

Oct. 10, 1816.

1. Mary Jane, b. in Wolcottville, Feb. 25, 1838.

2. Julia Emma, b. in Bristol, May 10, 1839.

3. Martha Maria, b. Sept. 23, 1843.

4. Sarah H., b. Sept. 2, 1845.

5. Esther Elirjibeth, b, Jan. 8, 1847.

Henry Freeman of Watertown m. Au-
gusta Jackson of Woodbury, Oct. 9,
1850 (col.).

PoUand Freeman of Watertown m. Esther
Siephevens, Apr. 17, 1825 (col.).

Richard Freeman of Wat. m. Hannah

Souare of Oxford, Jan. 9, 1792.* (Dick?)

Sarah Freeman m. Deac. Th. Judd, 1687.

Andrew B. French m. Mary J. Richards
of Woodbury, Sept. 21, 1851.

Henrietta French m. Luman Hall, 1850.

Electa Frery m. John Singleton, 1850.

Abigail Frisbie m. Dan Tuttle, 1769.

Almira Frisbie m. David Somers, 1830.

Anna Frisbie m. Isaac Scott, 1753.

Catharine (Conkling), relict of Culpepper
Frisbie, m. Jesse Leavenworth, 1761.

Charles Frisbie was m. to Lydia Alcox
by Alexander Gillett, Jan. 4, 1781.

Daniel Frisbie, s. of Reuben, m. Eunice
Hall, d. of Jared, Sept. 29, 1794, and d.
Nov. 15, 1850, a. 80.*

1. Julia, b. Nov, 2, 1795; m. B. T. Hitchcock.

2. Alma^ b. Sept. 7, 1798; m. Artemus Hoedley.

3. Lorram (Lauren), k.Vi%. 2, x8oo.

4. Lucius D., b. June 15, 1804.

5. Caroline E,, b. May i, 1809; m. Edward Scott.

6. FMary] Chloe, b. Oct. i, 181 1.

[AH these died in the order of their birth, be-
tween the ages of 80 and 84.]

Ebenezer Frisbie, s. of Reuben, m. De-
borah Twitchel, d. of Isaac, dec'd, Nov.
23, 1 791, and d. in New Haven, O.,
May 14, 1835.

1. Hannah, b. July 2, 1792; m. Horace Porter, Jr.

2. Clarry, b. Aug. 21, 1794; m. Timothy Porter.

3. Richard, b. June 26, 1796.

4. Ame, b. July 21, 1798.

5. Eben Wakelce, b. Apr. 7, 1800.

6. Polly, b. Apr. 29, 1802.

7. Reuben, b. July 3, 1810.

8. Emeline. b. Mch. 7, 1812; d. in Ohio, Oct. 27,

1833, sne ha\'ing been m. to John Skinner, left
one dau., Emily, b. June 7, 1831.

Edward L. Frisbie m. Hannah A. Wel-
ton [d. of Hershell], Feb. 11, 1850.

Elijah Frisbie and Abigail [Culver]. She
d. Apr. 19, 1771; he, Feb. 15, 1800, a. 81.

Jolyi, b. Apr. 8, 1762.

Hannah Frisbie m. Elnathan Thrasher,
1778.

Israel Frisbie of Branford m. Active
Foot, d. of Capt. Abr., Sept. 22, 1783.

54 Ap

BISTORT OF WATERBURT,

Frisby. Frost.

Lauren Frisby m. Artimetia Weltoii [d.
of Richard], 1821.

1. Sarah Mariend, b. Sept. aa, i8a2.
a. Edward Laurens, b. Aug. 32, 1824.
3. Felicia Ann, b. July 31, 1837.

Lucius Daniel Frisbie m. Nancy Warner,
Apr. 17, 1831.

Reuben Frisbie, s. of Elijah, m. Hannah
Waklee, d. of Ebenezer, May 25, 1769.

z. Elizabeth, b. Aug. ao, 2769; m. Mark Warner.

2. Daniel, b. Ian. 16, 1771.

3. Ebenezer, 8. Nov. 30, 1773.

4. Abigail, b. Dec. 9, 1775.

Hannah d. Nov. 22, 1778, and Reuben
m. Ruth Seward, d. of Amos, June 3,
1779. He d. Sept. 10, 1824, a. 78.

Samuel, Polly, and Sally, bap. Aug. lo, 1798.'

Ruth Frisbie m. Riley Alcott, 1810.

Samira Frisbie m. Joel Johnson, 1827.

Samuel Frisbie, Esq., s. of Reuben, m.
Mrs. Isabella Barnes, Feb. 3, 1813.

Sarah Frisbie m. Ichabod Merrills, 1780.

Sarah Frisbie m. George Faber, 1851.

Alpheus Frost, s. of Jesse, m. Jerusha
Williams, d. of Timothy, June 19, 1816.

1. Mark Augustus, b. Apr. i6, 1818.

2. Lydia Maria, b. Feb. i, i8ao- m. H. Williams.

3. Melissa, b. Jan. 6, 1822; m. T. H. Patten.

4. Electa Ann, b. Feb. 28, 1824.

5. Charles, b. June z6, 1826.

6. George, b. June 10, 1829.

7. Styles, b. Nov. 7, 1831.

[Alpheus d. in 1834 and] Jerusha m.
Martin Cook of Southington, 1838.

Charles Frost [s. of Alpheus] m. Mary
U. Sperry [d. of Luther], July 13, 1851.

David Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Mary
Beach, d. of Joseph, Nov. 5, 1761. He
d. Dec. 15, 1812; she, Feb. 6, 1819.

1. Jesse, b. Oct. i8, 1762.

2. Enoch, b. Jan. 8, 1765.

Enoch Frost, s. of David, m. Anna Cul-
ver, d. of Stephen, Sept. 26, 1792, and
d. May 27, 1822.

1. Anna, b. July i; d. July 2, 1793.

2. Stephen Culver, b. July 18, 1795.

3. Selah, b. Feb. 2, 1798.

4. Nancy, b. Mch. 31, 1801; ra. T. J. Payne.

5. Enoch William, b. May 7, 1803.

6. Eunice, b. Apr. 2, 1811; m. J. J, Doolittlc.

Enoch W. Frost, s. of Enoch, m. June
24, 1823, Lydia Hall, b. June 21, 1804,
d. of. Heraan of Wolcott.

1. Angeline L., b. July a6, 1824; m. E. T, Bill.

2. Eli/a Ann, b. Mch. 23, 1827; ^- }^^•^ 1831.

3. Franklin Hall. b. Nov. 24, 1828.

4. William Dana, b. Feb. 23, 1831.

5. Ann, b. May 5; d. May 20, 1833.

6. Henry, b. Mch. 5, 1836.

7. Jane Elizabeth, b. Jan. 30, 1842.

George J. Frost, b. Aug. 17, 18 13, s. of
Daniel, m. 1833, Martha B. Merriam, b.

Frost. Frost.

Nov. 6, 1816, d. of Chester of Water-
town.

1. Charles A., b. May 24, 1834.

2. William A., b. Aug. 25, 1836.

3. Fanny J., b. Nov. 12, 1838.

4. Martha J., b. June 28, 1841.

5. Sarah L., b. Feb. 21, 1844; d. May, 1846.

Horace Frost [s. of WillardJ from North
Haven m. Elvira Hoadley, d. of Arte-
mus, Oct. 7, 1835.

1. Eveline, b. July 31, 1837.

2. Lucy, b. Sept. n, 1843.

Jared Frost, s. of Willard of North
Haven, m. Susan Eliza Lambert, d. of
Jesse, formerly of Wat, May 15, 1842.

X. Charles N., b. July 15, 1843.

Jason Frost, s. of Samuel, Jr., m. Lj^dia
Prichard, d. of Isaac, Feb. 5, 1784.

X. Polly, b. June 24, 1785.

2. Ancel, b. Feb. a8, 1790.

Jesse Frost, s. of David of Southington,
m. Abigail Culver, d. of Lieut. Stephen,
Nov. 13, 1783, and d. Oct. 12, 1827.

X. James, b. Mch. ax, 1784.

a. Esther, b. Aug. 29, 1786; m. John Smith.

3. Leva, b. Apr. 14, 1789; ra. Benjamin Farrell.

4. Alpheus, b. Oct. 3, 179X.

5. Jesse Beecher, b. Mch. 3, 1704.

6. Electa, b. Nov. 16, 1796; d. Oct. 16, 1803.

7. Van Julius, b. Mch. 3, 1798.

8. Sylvester, b. Nov. 19, 1801; d. Sept., 1803.

9. Electa, b. Jan. 9, 1805; m. Edmond Tonipkins.
10. Abigail, b. Mch. 9, 1808; m. John Mitchell.

Mary Frost m. Ezekiel Smith, 1806.

Moses Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Phebe
Prindle, d. of Jon. of Wal., Jan. 29,

1755.

I. Jarus, b. Jan. 31, X737', d. Sept. ao, 1758.
a. Anne, b. Aug. 12, 1759.

Moses m. Els Selkrigg, d. of William,
Aug. 13. 1762. [He d. Mch. 10, 1814;
she, Jan. 11, 1826, a. 81.]

X. Phcbc^ b. Sept. 13, X763.
a. Bela Fenn, b. Dec. xo, X765.

3. Naomi, b. Sept. x8, X767.

Polly Frost m. M. B. Smith, 1846.

Rebecca Frost m. Jonathan Scott, 1729.

Samuel Frost and Naomi [Fenn, d. of
Edward of Wal., m. Mch. 21, 1733.

I. Moses, b. Jan. 6, 1734, in Wallingford.
a. Naomi, b. Mch. 31, 1735, in Wallingford], m.
Elam Brown.

3. Samuel, b. Feb. 15, 1736-7.

4. Patience, b. Dec. 31, 1738; m. John Hopkins.

5. Joel, b, Sept. 15, 1741.

6. David, b. Sept. 16, X743.

7. Timothy, b. July X9, 1744.

8. Submit, b. Nlch. 24, 1745-6; m. W. Andrews.

Naomi, d. Apr. 7, 1746, and Samuel m.
Hannah Wei ton, d. of George, Jan. 29,
1751-2. She d. Jan. 27, 1753, and Sam-
uel m. Bettee Newton, d. of Thomas
of Milford, May i, 1755. [He d. Dec.
21, 1803, a. 97].

9. Bette, b. Aug. 27, X7s8, m. Theo. Taylor.

FAMILY RECOJi

Frost. Fulford.

Samuel Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Sary
Cooper, d. of Caleb of New Haven,
Mch. 15, 1759.

I. Isaac, b. Nov. 34, 1759.
a. John, b. Oct. 19, 1761.

3. aarah, b Dec. a, 1763; m. Amaaa Bronaon.

4. Samuel, b. Oct. 15, 1766.
3. Rachel, b. Mch. 37, 177a.

6. Olive, b. Jan. 16, 1776.

7. Eli, b. Feb. 7, 1780.

8. David, b, Oct. 18, 1783.

Samuel Frost the third:

I. Elisha, b. Feb. 36. 1^62.

3. Lucy, the second b. in Wat., b. May 31, 1766. .

4. Samuel, b. May x8, 1769.

5. Arae, b. Aug. 3, 1777.

Samuel Frost, Jr. m. Clymena Porter,
Apr. 24, 1788.

I. Silas, b. June 19, 1789.

Stephen C. Frost, s. of Enoch, and Sa-
rah Barnes, b. Sept. i8, 1788, d. of Jo-
siah of Wolcott, m. Mch,, 1817. She d.
1845.

X. Lampaon Josiah, b. Mch., 18x8.

s. Sarah Ann, b. Nov. xo, 18x9; m. A. G. Stocking.

3. William Butler, b. Nov, 11, i8ax.

4. Julia M., b. Jan. 3, x834; m. W. H. Kirk.

Timothy Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Abigail
Benham, d. of Joseph of Wallingford,
Mch. 17, 1764.

X. Hannah Miles, b. Nov 17, 1764; d. July, X807.
3. Anne Dale, b. Feb. 23, X767.

Abi^il, bap. June 18, X769.*

Lucmda, bap. July 38, 1771.

William Butler Frost, s. of Stephen C,
m. Amelia Daines of Litch. , Oct. 5,1841.

X. Frederic Mortimer, b. Apr. 17, 1846.

Amelia d. Sept. 24, 1846, and William*
m. Sarah Bacon of N. Y., Aug. 28, 1848.

Gersbom Fulford, s. of Abr., m. Abigail
Wei ton, d. of Stephen, dec'd Mch. 29,
1727. [He d. 1791, a. 90; she, 1790].

X. Mary, b. Feb. 16, x7a7-8; m. Joseph Bronson.

The second lying in 3 children at a birth. All
boys Dyed.

5. Luke, b. Apr. x, X730.

6. James, b. Mch. 14, X732* d. May xo, X753. Dyed

by beine drowned at Derby Falls.

7. Titus, b. Nov. 35, 1733.

8. John, b. Oct. ^o, 1735.

9. Jonathan, b. Dec. 3, X737.

10. Dorcas, b. Oct. x, X739; her child, Allen, b.
Nov. 22, d. Nov. 34, 1763.

II. IxjLS, b. Sept. 6, d. Sept. xo, 1741.
X3. Unice, b. May 19, 1743.

13. David, b. Jan. 19, 1747-8; d, Aug. aj, X749.

Jonathan Fulford, s. of Gershom, m.
Thankful Doolittle, d. of Phinehas of
Wallingford, Dec. 12, 1764.

Ix>is, bap. Apr. 13, 1766.*

Luke, b. May 9, 1767 (called 1st child).

Luke Fulford, s. of Gershom, m. Hannah
Barnes, d. of Samuel, Dec. 20, 1752.

A son, b. Sept. 23; d. Oct. 6, 1753.

Luke, d, 1756, [leaving a dau., Sarah],
and Hannah m. Daniel Barnes, 1758.

FULFCJ

Titua
Susi
July

I. N

3. A

5. 0

6. S^

7. Rl

8. PI

9. N!
10. U

WUIitt

elin0

Cynthi

1845.

Edwar
Corn

Jane F

Wildnii

Mitel

Bernari
Irelai

z. Ann

James

land,

I. Toh;
3. Ben

Tboma

1851.^

John C

Wooc
land- •

7. i83i

X. Joh I
3. Cat

3. Mai i

4. The 1

John G I

Mary (

Jane G i

Garnsc i

Charle
Brad i

Diadai

Eliza
Line .

Elizab

m. y f

[John <
Heic

Josept) I
rved
Woo

Apr. X.
ao,

1703. a. \
3. >

56 ^p

HI8T0R T OF WA TERB UR F.

Gaylord. Goldsmith.

Livinia Gaylord m. Marvin Sperry, 1832.
Lois Gaylord m. John B. Alcox, 1785.
Luther Gaylord m. Laura Judd, Aug. 3,

1833.
Mary Gaylord m. Stephen Welton, 1701.

Marah Gaylord, d. of Joseph of Durham,
m. John Hikcox, 1719.

Miles Gaylord from Hamden, b. June 22,
1824, and Elizabeth Byington, b. Jan.
28, 1820, d. of Theo., m. Sept. i, 1845.

I. Aurelia Gertrude, b. Aug. 7, 1846.

Millicent Gaylord m. John Southmayd,
Jr., 1739, and Timothy Judd, 1749.

Sarah Gaylord m. Thomas Judd, 1688.

Michael Geoghan m. Catharine Kilduif,
May 4, 1851.

Jane Gerard m. F. L. Potter, 1850.

Martin Gibbins m. Hannah Hennessy,
Sept. 6, 1851.

Dayid Gibbs. s. of Obed, m. Nancy Prich-
ard, d. of Isaac, Jan. 28, 1822.

I. George Franklin, b. Nov. 9, 182a.
3. Nancy Eliza, b. Oct. 9, 1824.

Obed Gibbs, s. of Eliakim of Litch., m.
Hannah Scovil, d. of Tim., Mch. 17,

1793. .

1. David, b. Aug. 26, 1794.

2. Ransom, b. Aug. 16, 1796.

3. Sarah, b. Sept. 2a, 1798; m. M. Clark.

Statira Gibburd m. L. W. Elton, 1839.

Abigail Gilbert m. Giles Ives, 1799.

George Gilbert, s. of Samuel of New
Haven, m. Maria English, d. of Judson
of Oxford, July 4, 1839.

1. Cornelia Maria, b. June 14, 1841.

2. Charles Judson, b. June 24, 1843.

William B. Gilbert m. Mary Ann Root
of Litchfield, Mch. 14, 1847.

Orange Gillet of Goshen m. Mary Ann
Colby in Norfolk, Aug. 26, 1834, and d.
in Goshen, Aug. 18, 1841.

1. Albert, b. in Goshen, Feb. 17, 1836.

2. Alexander, b. in Canaan, July 19, 1838.

3. Mary Mayretta, b. in Goshen, June 16, 1841.

Dolly Gleason m. Rev. Ed. Porter, 1789.

Sarah Glover m. Timothy Corcoran, 183 1.

Eliza Goddard m. J. W. Worden, 185 1.

Clement J. Godfrey from Walpole, N.
H., m. Mary J. Cooley from Amherst,
Mass., May 13, 1834.

I. William Henry Kellogg, b. in Coventry, May
14, 1839.

Frederic Goldsmith from Plymouth, b.
Jan. 22, 1804, n^- J^i^e 13, 1S24, Ruth E.
Brown, d. of Reuben, b. July 21, 1806.

1. Ransom Hurlbut, b. A\x^. 23, 1825.

2. William, b. Tune 12, 1827.

3. Daniel, b. May 15, 1829.

4. Francis Edward, b. June 15, 1831.

Goldsmith.

5. Lyman, b. July 7, 1833.

6. Ann Eliza, b. Aug. 37, 1836.
Eveline, b. June 15, 1838.

Graves.

Mary Jane, b. Mav 29, 1840.
9. Harriet Maria, b. May 28, 1842.

10. Nancy, b. July 15, 1844.

11. Ellen, b. Apr. 1847.

Clarissa Goodrich m. A. Brockett, 1842.

Amy Goodwin m. S. Stoddard, 1780.

Betsey Goodwin m. Jesse Hopkins, 1794.

James P. Goodwin m. Emily Grilley,
Oct. 23, 1845.

Henry W. Goodwin of Cabotville, Mass.,
m. Caroline A. Hinman [d. of Joel],
May 6, 1846.

Sarah Goodwin m. William Adams, 1775.

Charles Goodyear m. Clarissa Beecher,
Aug. 25, 1824.

Cynthia [Bateman, w. of Amasa] Good-
year d. Oct. 1 8 16.*

Harriet Goodyear m. J. S. Tomlinson,

1830.
Maria Goodyear m. St. Hotchkiss, 1827.
James and Sarah Gordan (Gordon):

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 19, 1745-6; m. J. Lewis.

2. Ame, b. in Wat., Mch, 5, 1747-8 [d. young].

3. Phebe, b. in Wat., Oct. 14, 1751; m. Obad. Win-

ters.

fjames d. 1752] and Sarah m. William
Rowley, 1753.

Joseph Gould of Da\^on, O., m. Rachel
Turner of Northfield, Nov. 20, 1842.

Sarah Gould m. Dr. Pres. Porter, 1764.

Alonzo Granniss, s. of Caleb, m. Esther
' Adelia Payne, d. of Silas, Oct. 3, 1837.

T. Margaret Louisa, b. Oct. 6, 1840 [d. 1850.
2. Frederick, b. Oct. 18, 1851.]

Caleb Granniss of Cheshire m. Ruth
Arnst, d. of John, Nov. 29, 1810.

[Edward, b. 1813.
Marshall, b. 1815.
James, b. Aug. i, 1818.
Alonzo, b. Mch, 27, 1820.]

Caleb A. Granniss [s. of Simeon] m.
Mary J. Bronson, Aug. 13, 1848.

James M. Granniss, s. of Caleb, m. Irena
A. Welton, d. of James of Watertown,
Oct. 7, 1838.

X. Henrietta, b. Jan. 2, 1845.

Lydia Granniss m. Darius Scovill, 1771.'

Cornelius Graves, s. of Joseph, m. Han-
nah (Brooks), wid. of John Clark, May

1. 1751-

X. Stephen, b. Feb. 2, 1752.

2. Benjamin, b. Mch. 12, 1754.

3. Cornelius, b. Mch. 9, 1756.

4. Jacob, b. Sept. i, 1758.

Hannah d. Nov. 14. 1759, and Cornelius
m. Phebe Prindle, d. of Nathan, dec'd,
Aug. 13, 1761.

5. Jacob, b. July 12, X762.

FAMILY BE00BD8.

Ap57

Graves. Griggs.

George Graves, s. of Elijah of Hebron,
m. Esther Beardsley, d. of Levi, June
6, 1807.

1. Tallman, b. Mcb. 30; d. Apr. xx, 1808.

Hannah (or Heloise) Graves m. Adna
Blakeslee, 1786.*

Joseph Graves — his wife, Sarah, d. Mcb.
16, 1751.

Joshua Graves, s. of Joseph, m. Rhoda
Bronson, d. of Lieut. John, Apr. 5, 1750.

X. Manerva, b. Nov. 26, 1750.

2. Simmeon, b. Sept. 30, 1753.

3. Jesse, b. JTan. 30, X755.

4. Asa, D. Feb. 19, X757.

5. Sarah, b. Mch. 5, 1759.

6. Chansey, b. Sept. 9, 1761.

Christopher Gray, s. of Jonathan, m.
Harriet Phelps — both tTom Mass. —
Mch. 31, 1842. •

1. Joseph C, b. Mch. 27, 1843.

2. Harriet E., b. Sept. 26, 1844.

Elizabeth Gray m. J. L. Darrow, 1848.

James M. Gray from Salisbury, b. July

7. 1820, and Henrietta Thomas, d. of
Bradley P., b. July 18, 1826, m. July

8. 1843.

X. Mary Adeline, b. Apr. 7, X845.
2. Franklin, b. May 10, 1847.

William Green, b. Nov. 15, 1820, and
Mary Ann Perkins, b. Feb. 5, 1821 —
both in England— were m. June, 1843.

X. Ann Elizabeth, b. May 8, X844.

Sally Gregory m. NathU Hikcox, 1800.

William B. Gregory of Ridgefield m.
Jane E. Cummings, Mch. 28, 1848.

Elizabeth Gridley m. Sol. Griggs, 1778.*
Martha Gridley m. Nathan Seward, 1779.
Rev. Urial Gridley m. Susanna Norton,
May 23, 1785'

X. Urial, b. May 15, 1786.

Barsheba Grififen m. David Osborn, 1774.

Eunice Griffin m. John Scott, 1730.

Ruth Griffin m. John Osborn, 1789.

Isaac Griegs d. Jan. 27, 1768. [He left
Jacob of Walhngford, Noah, Samuel,
Solomon, Paul, Sarah, w. of William
Munson, and Rachel Spencer.]

Noah Griggs and Hannah:

X. Isaac, b. Apr. xi, 1760.

2. Mary, b. Apr. 8, 1762; d. Mch. 10, X763.

Hannah d. Jan. 23, and Noah m. Eliza-
beth Foot, May 26, 1765.

3. Jacob, b. Oct. 26, 1766.

4. Noah, b. Apr. 28, X769.

5. Amos, b. Jan. 28, 177X.

Solomon Griggs m. Elizabeth Gridley,
Feb. 19, 1778.'

X. Mary, b. Dec. 8, X778.
I. Joel, b. Tulv 3i» 1780.
). Elizabeth, b. Sept. xx, X782.

2.

3.

Griggs. Grilley.

4. Solomon, b. Apr. 20, X787.

5. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 26, 1789.

Caroline Grilley m. James Byrnes, 1844.

Cyrus Grilley, s. of Tehulah, m, Lorain
Strickland, d. of John, Oct. 10, 1776.

X. John, b. Feb. 4, X777.

2. Frcclove, b. Sept. 4, 1779.

3. Lois, b.

4. David Strickland, b. Dec. 8, 1782.

Dayis Grilley, s. of Silas, m. Jane C.
Scovill, d. of Aaron, Apr., 1832.

X. Helen M., b. May 6, 1833.
2. Dwight, b. Sept. 3, 1834.

Eunice Grilley m. L. Atkins, Jr., 1848.

George Grilley, s. of Henry, and Adelia
Benham from Burlington, b. Apr. 17,
18 16, m. Apr. 24, 1834.

1. George Marcellus, b. May 9, 1835.

2. Sophia Adelia, b. Feb. 13, 1840.

3. William Cowd, b. June 29, X842.

Henery Grilley, s. of Hew, m. Mercy
Temll, d. of Gamaliel, July 10, 1763.

Easter, bap. June 22, 1766.S

Henry Grilley m. Mercy Culver, d. of
David of Southington, Feb. 24, 1772.
[He d. Aug. 18, 1822] and she, Sept.
16, 1833, a. 91.*

X. Henry, b. Dec. 20, X772.

2. Samuel, b. Oct. 3X, X774.

3. Silas, b. Jan. 15, 1777.

4. James, b. Dec. 24, 1778; d. Sept. x6, 1779.

5. Ruth, b. Aug. 3x, X780.

6. John, b. Jan. 13, X784.

7. David Clark, b. Jan. 6, 1786.

Henry Grilley, s, of Henry, m. 1797, Ro-
sanna Leva Perkins, d. of Edward of
Bethany, b. Jan. 14, 1780.

X. Edward Perkins, b. Nov. X798.

2. Julius, b. June, x8oo.

3. Harriet, b. June 16, 1803.

4. George, b. Aug. x8, 1807.

5. William, b. May a6, x8xi; d. Oct. 3, 1837.

6. Henry, b. Feb. 7, 1813.

7. Leve Ann, b. May 5, x8is; m. Wra. Cowd.

8. Emily, b. July 22, 1819; m. J. P. Goodwin.

Henry Grilley, Jr., s. of Henry, m. Emily
Gunn, d. of Jarvi^ of Watertown, May
3, 1840.

X. Julia, b. June 30, X844.
a. George, b. Nov. 24, 1846.

Hew Grely (Grilley).

7. Daniel, b. July 5, i7«. ^

Elizabeth, m. Amos Temll, 1764.

Ira F. Grilley of East Florence, N. Y.,
m. Marcia C. Castle, Mch. i6, 1851.

Jehulah Grilley, s. of Hew, m. Martha
Wei ton, d. of Stephen, Apr. 9, 1754.

X. Cyrus, b. Mch. 24, X755.
2. John, b. Oct. 22, X756.

Ede, bap. Sept. X5, X765.»

Annathe, (?) bap. Jan. 27, 1771.

Jeremiah Grilley, s. of Daniel, ra. Anna
Kellogg, d. of Jos., June, 1812.

X. Levi, b. Mch. xx, 1814.

a. Alma, b. May x, x8x6; m. Ed. Nichols.

58^

HIS TOBY OF WATERBUBT,

Grilley.

Garnsey.

Jeremiah m. Sarah Ann Langdon of
Cheshire, Apr. 21, 1844.

Julia Grilley m. L. Neal, Dec. 17, 1821.

Manly Grilley, s. of Cyrus, m. Betsey
Mariah Olds, d. of David of Wash., May
5, 1 82 1. (Another entry gives 1822).

X. Marshall, b. Nov. 33, 1821.

2. GeoTj^e, b. Aug. 29, 1833; d. Nov. 1843.

3. Joseph, b. Sept. s, 1835.

4. Albert, b. Feb. 6, 1828, in Wa.shing:ton.

5. Frederic, b. Sept. 38, 1831, in Torrington.

6. William, b. Men. 3, 1836, in Torrington.

Orrin Grilley, s. of Silas, m. Grace Jacobs
from North Haven, Dec. 5, 1831.

X. Orville^ b. Oct. 3, 1832.

3. Catharine, b. Nov. 32, X834; d. May 17, 1837.

3. Edwin, b. Oct. x6, X836.

4. Thomas Mortimer, b. Aug. 3, X845.

Silas Grilley, s. of Henry, m. May 22,
1800, Triphena Delano, d. of Thomas
of Sharon, b. May 21, 1778.

X. Orville, b. Feb. x8oi; d. x8o6.
3. Orrin, b. Aug. X803.

3. Clorinda, b. Feb. 1806; m. B. Perkins.

4. Minerva, b. July, x8o8; m. B. Stevens.

5. Davis, b. Jan. 181 1.

6. Charles, b. July, 18x3; d. 18x5.

7. Marietta, b. Feb. x8i6.

8. Elixa, b. Sept. x8i8.

9. Charles, b. Sept. 18 19.
10. Frederick, b. Sept. 1823.

William Grilly m. Eunice A. Scott, Dec.

9. 1833.
John Grimsel m. Julia Merrel, Dec. 8,

1850.

Benjamin Grinnels of Litch. m. Harriet
Johnson of Middlebury, Nov. 24, 1825.

William L. Grennell of Penn., m. Ann
E. Lloyd, Oct. 10, 1847.

Abijah Garnsey (Guernsey), m. Lucy
Bellamy, [d. of Joseph, D.U.] of Wooa-
bury, Aug. 19, 1772.

Frances, b. Mch. 35, 1778.*

Silence, b. July 14, 1781.

William, b. Jan. 25, 1784.

Cambriage, a servant, b. May 16, 1777.

Lydia, a servant, b. Mch. 14, 1781.

Amos Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Esther
Blake, d. of Joseph, Feb. 15, 1756.

X. Abigail, b. Nov. 9, 1756.

2. Amos, b. Oct. 33, X758.

3. Esther, b. June 9, 1760.

4. Joel, b. Jan. xx, 1763.

5. Eldad, b. Sept 5, 1764.

6. Annis, b. Jan. 30; d. July x6, 1766.
7.- Annis, b. June 24, 1767.

8. Ruth, b. Mch. 3. 1769.

9. Parthena, b. Men. 6, 1771.

David Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Han-
nah Judd, d. of Samuel, June 6, 1754.
[She d. Feb. 28, 1776].

1. Hannah, b. June 21, X75[5].

2. Senc, b. bept. 19, X756; m. C. Dayton.

3. David, b. Mch. 3, 1758.

4. Rebecca, b. May 23, X760; m. Christ. Merriam.

5. OUve, b. May 4, X762; m. Jas. Merriam.

Garnsey. Guilford.

John Garnsey, s. of Joseph of Milford,
m. Anna Peck, d. of [Deac] Jeremiah,
Nov. 28, 1733.

X. John, b. Oct. 28, 1734.

2. Anna, b. Oct. 6, 1736.

3. Peter, b. Nov. 13, 1738.

4. Nathan, b. May X4, 174X.

Jonathan Garnsey m. Abigail [Northrop,
d. of Samuel of Milford, Jan. 6, 1724-5.

X. Abigail, b. Oct., 1^36; ro. Eliphalet Clark.

2. Jonathan, b. in Milford, Feb., 1729].

3. Amoz. b. July 13, X731.

4. David, b. Apr. 12, 1734.

5. Sarah, b. July 7, 1736; m. Timothy Foot.

6. Samuel, b. Feb. 8, 1738-9.

7. Isaac, b. Dec. xx, X74x; [d. 1767 at Northampton].

Abigail, d. Oct. i8, 1756, and Jonathan
m. Desire Scovill, wid. [of Lieut. Will-
iam], Mch. 10, 1757, who d. 1796, a. 87.

Jonathan Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m.
Desire Bronson, d. of Jos., June 5, 1755.

X. Millesent, b. Mch. 24; d. Aug. 5, 1756.

2. Millesent, b. May 21, X757 [m. Titus Hotchkiss].

3. Daniel, b. July x8, X760 [m. Huldah Seymour].

4. Southmayd, b. Apr. 10, X763 [m. Sabra Scott].

5. Tames, b. Mch. 27, 1767 fm. Annah Blakesley].
[Sidney, b. May 7, 1772].

. Joseph Garnsey, s. of Joseph, m. Mary
Brown, d. of Samuel, Apr. 30, 1754.

X. Mary, b. June 14, 1755.

2. Ann, b. Dec. 10, 1757; m. Aner Bradley.

3. Chansey, b. Mch. 25, X760.

Joseph H. Guernsey, b. June 6, 1804, s. of
Joseph of WatertoT^m, and Elizabeth
fc. Turner, b. Nov. 26, 1 812, d. of Jacob
of Litchfield, m. Nov. 26, 1829.

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. xo; d. Sept. 7, X834.

2. Caroline, b. Nov. 9, 1836.

3. Sheldon, b. Feb. X7; d. Apr. X9, X839.

4. Anthony, b. Apr. 19, X840.

5. Finctt, b. Oct. 4, 1042.

6. Jennet, b. Oct. X4, 1843.

7. Joseph, b. Dec. 16, 1844; d. at Wol., 1845.

8. sarah P., b. Apr. x, 1847.

Rhoda Garnsey m. David Hubbard, 1782.'

Samuel Gernsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Ra-
chel Lattimore of Middletown, May 10.
1764.

X. Samuel, b. Apr. X765.

Rachel, d. July 9, 1765, and Samuel, m.
Concurrance Smedlcy, Nov. 13, 1766.

7. Rachel, b. Aug. X3, 1767.

3. Rene, b. May 22, X770.

4. Concurrance, b. May 98, X772.

Samuel Gamsey's wid. Naomi, d. Jan.

17, 1822, [a. 86].

Charles Guilford, s. of Joshua, m. Helen
Carr, d. of 'Lymoxi of New Hartford,
June 13, 1839.

1. Nancy Maria, b. May 17, 1840.

2. (ieorjiji' S., b. Apr. 5, 1842.

3. Mary Emeline, b. Dec. 9, 1845.

George W. Guilford m. Lora Rice, Oct.

18, 1827.

FAMILY BB00BD8,

AP69

Guilford. Gunn.

Joshua Guilford, b. Feb. 15, 1792, s. of
Simeon of Williamsburgti, Mass., and
Elizabeth Smith, b. Nov. 22, 1803, d. of
Allen of Plainfield, Mass., m. June,
1824.

X. Mary, b. in Cummington Mass., June x8, 1825.
a. Simeon B., b. in Manchester, Mass., July ai; d.
Nov. rSa^.

3. Anson Bolivar, b. at Auburn, N. Y., Apr. az,

1830.

4. Simeon Dudley, b. at Pittsfield, Feb. 6, 183a; d.

5. Delany (?) Jane, b. at Pittsfield, Nov. 7. 1833.

6. Joshua, b. at Pittsfield, Nov. x6, 1835; d. 1836.

7. Esther, b. at Pittsfield, Mch. ax, X838.

8. William Henry Harrison, b. Feb. 3, X840.

9. Elizabeth Smith, b. Jan. a4, 1842.

10. Electa Gay, b. Nov. aa, 1844; d. X846.

11. Charles, (?) b. June 4, 1847.

Michael Guilford, s. of Timothy of Will-
iamsburgh, Mass., m. Anna Hall, d. of
Moses R., Nov. 27, 1811.

I. Jane Ann, b. in Hardwick, Sept. a3, 1812.
harlotte, b. in F
m. Allen Clark

1^ — y — _ -— — — , -_ — ^p — .

2. Charlotte, b. in Hardwick, Mass

. aj, ifl
., Apr.

10, 1815;

3. Sarah, b. in Hardwitk, Feb. 8, 1818.

4. Ralph Hall, b. in Cum., Jan. ii, 1820.

5. Betsey £Uz., b. in Plain., Men. 15, i8aa; d.

1825.

6. Lydia Brown, b. in Plain., Jan. i, 1824; d. i8a6.

7. Rebecca Eliz., b. July a6, 1826; d. Feb. 26, 1836.

8. Timothy, b. Aug. 30, 1828.

9. Moses Edgar, b, Oct. 17, 1830; d. Mch. 18, 1836.
10. William Oscar, b. in Wolcott, Oct. 20, 1833.

Ruhamah Guilford m. J. S. Hay den, 1819.

[Abel Gunn, s. of Nathl. , m. Abigail Da-
vis of Derby, Dec. 2, 1756.

I. Sarah, b. Sept. 25, 1759].

Abel Gunn, s. of Nathl. (2d), m. Joanna
Chatfield, d. of Sam., Jan. 19, 1784.

I. Silas, b. Dec. 20, 1784.

a. Ransom, b. June 9, 1787 [m. Mary Nichols}.

3. Abel Festus, b. Aug. 7, 1793 [m. Ranny Hine].

4. Ame, b. Mch. 14, 1799 [m. Caleb Main] .

Emeline H. Gunn m. T. B. Davis, 1840.

Emily Gunn m. Henry Grilley, Jr., 1840.

Enos Gunn, s. of Nathaniel, m. Abigail
Candee, d. of Gideon, Jan. 13, 1763.

1. Samuel, b. Oct. 25, 1763.

2. Abigail, b. July 8, 1765 [m. Noah Scovill],

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 14, 1767 [m. Lem. WeltonJ.

4. Hannah,
and

m. Larmon Townsend.
Nov. 3, 1770.

5. Enos. ) m. Hannah Burrill.

6. Asa, b. Apr. 30, 1773.

V-

7. Daniel, b. Mch. 26, 1777.

Jobamah Gunn [s. of Nathaniel], m.
Hannah Candee, Feb. 6, 1772.

1. Isaiah, b. Feb. 20, 1773 [ra. Eliz. Hull],

2. John, b. Dec. 24, 1775 [m. Amelia Hull].

3. Mehitabel, b. Mch. 22, 1777 [m. Joel Hull].

4. Hannah, b. Aug. 19, 1779 [m. Moses Wood].

5. Jobamah, b. Nov. 23, 1781.

6. Esther b. Feb. 25, 1784.

7. Isaac, b. June 5, 1786 |m. Polly Riggs, (b. Feb.

22, 1786; d. Oct. 7, 1813), and Huldah Riggs,
(b. July 10, 1796), dau's of John Riggs. He
d. Sept. 26, 1846] .

GuNN. Hagadon.

Nathaniel Gunn, s. of Abel and Agnes
(Hawkins) m. Sarah Wheeler — all of
Derby — Dec. 10, 1728.

r. Mary, b. in Derby, Jan. 12, 1730; m. D. Woos-

ter.
a. Sarah, b. in Derby, Feb. 15, 173a; m. Capt. Ja-
bez Thompson of Derby, Oct. as, 1748] .

3. Abel, b. Aug. xa, 1734.

4. Nathaniel, b. Sept. 16, 1736.

5. Enos, b. Aug. 30, 1738.

6. Abigail, b. Jan. 13, 1740 Fm. John Smith].
• 7. Hannah, b. Aug. 2, 1743 [m. . Miles].

8. Anne, b. Mch 11, 1745-0.

9. Jobamah, b. Aug. 20, 1748.

10. Samuel, b. July 13, 1751; d. Sept. 15, 1753.

Sarah d. Mch. 8, 1756, and Nathaniel
m. Sarah [Smith] Cambe (Candee), wid.
of Gideon of W. Haven, June 30, 1757.
He d. Oct. 25, 1769.

11. Loes, b. Mch. 7, 1758 [m. Sim. Beebe of Kent].

12. Mehitable, b. June 6, 1/59 [d. X776J.

13. Agnis, b. May 26, 1762 [m. Benjamin Welton ?].

Nathaniel Gunn, Jr., s. of Nathaniel, m.
Elizabeth Downs, d. of Nathl., of New
Haven, Apr. 7, 1763.

I. Abel, b. Jan. a6, 1764.

a. Nathaniel, b. Sept. 26, 1766.

3. Hannah, b. Nov. 11, 1768.

4. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 3, 1771; m. Dan. Osbom.

5. Bede, b. July x6, 1773; m. J. Blakeslee.

6. Sarah, b. Oct. 25, 1775; m. R. Welton, Jr.

7. Ame, b. Apr. a3, 1779.

[8. Charlotte, b. 1781; m. Sher. Leavenworth].

Nathaniel Gunn. Jr., s. of Nathaniel
(above), m. Deliverance Harrison, d.
of Samuel, March 31, 1793. She d.
Mch. I, 1825.

1. Vinson, b. May 4, 1794.

2. Jarvis, b. Nov. 29, 1798; d. Aug. 1839.

3. Sally, b. Oct. 29, 1804.

[Rev. Samuel Gunn, s. of Enos, m.
Joanna Warner, d. of Ard, Apr. 4, 1785.

1. Haviia, b. Apr. 19, 1786.

2. Leveret, b. Jan. 11, 1788.

3. Zena, b. Apr. 15, 1790.

4. Garry, b. Apr. 7, 179a.

5. Amanda, b. July 30, 1793.

6. Samuel, b. Aug. d, 1795.

7. Apama, b. Dec. 16, 1797.

8. Enos, b. Mch. 8, 1800.

9. Hannah, b. Apr. 2, 1802; killed by falling from

the wagon, while the family was crossing the
AUeghanies, en route for Ohio, Nov. xi, 1805.
xo. Bela, b. Sept. 6, 1804. ,

•* This account taken from his own well
worn pocket-book." Rev. Sam. Gunn
d. at Portsmouth, O., Aug. 25, 1832].

Silas Gunn from Oxford m. Theodosia
Johnson of Salem, Nov. 26, 1826.

Vinson Gunn, s. of Nathaniel, m. Julia
Welton, May 13, 18 12.

1. Lucia Diana, b. Apr. 20, 181 3.

2. Olive Semantha, b. Mch. 11, 1824.

3. Delia Amanda, b. Apr. 6, 1825.

4. Lent Eells, b. May 6, 1832.

5. Mary Ellen, b. Apr. 26, 1834.

Jacob Hagadon m. Jane Reynolds, June
23, 1830.

60 Ap

HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

Hale. Hall.

Elizabeth Hale m. Dan. Hawkins, 1748.
Reuben Hail m. Diantha Ward, Aug. 29,
1759- (To Hartland in l^^2^)

Tamer Hale m. Elisha Lewis, 1750.
Abigail Hall m. Ozias Langdon, 1832.
Anna Hall m. Philo Mix. 1797.
Anna Hall m. Michael Guilford, 181 1.
Benjamin Hall:'

Lyman, b, Auj^. 7, 1784.
Uenjamin, b. Men. 29, 1787.
Orison, b. Dec. 4, 1789.

Clerana Hall m. Seabury Pierpont, 1813.

Daniel Hall, b. Jan. 11, 1778, s. of Jonah,
m. Abigail Finch, d. of Gideon of Wol-
cott, who d. Jan. 2, 1841.

i.(?) Sarah, b. Oct. 30, 1809.

2. Leonard, b. Sept. 97. x8o6.

3. Joel, b. Oct., 1813; d. Oct. 29, X838.

4. Edward, b. Dec, 1815.

5. Isaac, b. Apr. 2. 1817.

6. Minerva, b. Men., x8ao; m. W. N. Russell, 1836.

Eliazer Hall, s. of Nathaniel, m. Lidia
Prichard, d. of Amos, June lo, 1789.

I. Irenia, b. Nov. xf, 1789.

Emeline Hall m. C. Richardson, 1829.

George A. Hall of Cheshire m. Harriet
Nichols, Apr. 25, 1836.

Harvey C. Hall m. Jannette L. Scarrett,
Oct. 7, 1850.

Jennet C. Hall m. S. H. Prichard, 1837.

Jared Seely Hall, s. of Jared of Cheshire,
m. Rowena Parker, d. of Zephna of
Wolcott, Mch. 2, 1817.

1. Almira, b. Sept. 6, 18x9; m. Ives Lewis.?

2. Salina, b. Jan. 4, 1823.

3. Esther, b. June, 1825.

Rowena d. Nov. 2, 1832, and Jared m.
Polly Welton, d. of Erastus, May 15,
1834.

z. William, b. Oct. 25, 1841; d. June 2, 1846.

John C. Hall m. JaneMerterof Norwich,
Feb. 27, 1848.

Leonard Hall, s. of Daniel, m. Elizabeth
Hungerford, Mch. 22, 1832.

X. Nelson, b. July 22, 1834.
2. Henry, b. May x, 1837.

Luman Hall of Plymouth m. Henrietta
French, Apr. 21, 1850.

Luther Hall, b. Aug. 26, 1807, s. of Au-
gustus, and Maria H. Ives, b. July 12,
1813, d. of Titus— all of Meriden— m.
Sept. 16, 1833.

1. Susan Lodima, b. in Meriden, Feb. 21, 1837.

2. Ellen Maria, b. Feb. 21, 1840.

3. Luther Ives, b. July 2, X842; d. Nov. 19, X846.

Lydia Hall m. Enoch W. Frost, 1823.
Mabel Hall m. J. M. Daggett, 1831.
Margaret Hall m. Jon. Prindle, 1768.

Hall. Hammond.

Maria L. Hall m. C. L. Hurd, 1843.

Mary Hall m. W. M. Pemberton, 1821.

Mary Hall m. Garry Lewis, 1823.

Mary Ann Hall m. J. A. Bunnell, 1839.

Moses Hall, s. of Curtiss, late of Wol-
cott, dec'd, m. Olive Porter, d. of Doct.
Timothy, dec'd, Feb. 26, 1803.

X. Nelson, b. Jan. 90, 1804.

2. Hopkins Porter, b. Dec. 27, x8o8.

3. Samuel Wm. Southmayd, b. July 5, x8x4.

4. Olive Margaret, b. June 25, x8i6; m. J. P. Elton.

Nathaniel and Margery Hall:
He d. Jan. 16, 1803.

2. Tamer, b. Dec. 28, X760; m. Aseph Brown.

3. Eunice, b. Apr. 28, X763.

4. Esther Humberviie, b. Aug. 11, 1765.

5. Moses Royc, b. Nov. 3, X768.

6. Eliezer, b. Mch. 26, 1771.

«. Hannah Royce, b. July 31, X777.

9. Toses, b. June 6, X781; d. Mch. 8, 1835, a. 54.^
xo. Harmon, b. Aug. x8, X783.
XX. Rhoda, b. Oct. 8, X787; m. Titus Scott, x8o8.

Nelson Hall and Lorinda Marshall were
joined in holy matrimony in Saint
John's Church, Apr. 27, 1828.

Phebe Hall m. Joseph Atkins, 1767.

Preston Hall m. Lucy Webster, Apr. 14,

1839.
Rebecca Hall m. W. H. Payne, 1829.

Roxana Hall m. L. S. Stevens, 1838.

Sally B. Hall m. Elon Clark, 1827.

Samuel W. [S.] Hall m. Nancy M. Aus-
tin [d. of Edmund], Oct. 10, 1836.

Sarah Hall m. Benjamin Benham, 1756.

Sarah Hall m. Orrin Austin, 181 1.

Sidney Hall m. Abigail Potter, Sept. 19,
1830.

William Hall m. Rebecca Piatt Root in
England.

I. William Henry, b. Oct. 7, 1846.

Christopher Halpin m. Catharine Early,
Feb. 5, 1851.

John and Abigail Hamalton:

X. Mary, b. May 22, X735.

William Hammill of Little Falls, N. Y.,
m. Dorcas F. Sanford, d. of Asa, July

8, 1828.

Thomas Hammond, s. of Caleb, m.
Thankful Warner, d. of Samuel, dec*d,
Dec. 20, 1752.

X. Patience, b. Apr. 20, 1755; m. Isaac Judd, X775.
2. Thankful, and one still-born. May xo. 1757.
4. Orrange, b. Jan. X4, X760; m. Thaade Scott,

1781.

Thankful d. July 26, 1760, and Thomas,
s. of Caleb, dec'd, m. Sarah, wid. of
Edm. Scott, Oct. 21, 1761, who d. Jan.
I, 1777.

FAMILY REOORL

Hammond. Harrison.

5. Thomas, b. Aug. 14, 1^62.

6. Sarah, b. June a6; d. Sept. 15, 1764.

7. Joseph, b. June xa; d. July 3. 1765.

8. Samuel, b. Feb. 15, 1707; d. Aug. 24, 1773.

Nov. a6, 1768; twin child d. Jan.
10, X769.

XX. Anna, b. Apr. x6, 1771; d. Aug. 36, 1773.

«3, X773-

Nov. 10, 1776^ with the

9. josep

and

10. Mary

XX. Anna, b. Apr. x6, X77x;
xa. Sarah Jemima, b. Dec.
X3. James, b. Dec. 16, X77S.

[Thomas Hammond of Watertown had,
Aug., 1782, wife Sarah, wid. of James
Doolittle.]

Thomas Hammond, Jr. m. Lydia Ives,
Nov. 12, 1783.*

X. Hannah, b. May 13, 1784.

Lovisa Hanks m. W. C. Boon, 1829.

Aron Harrison, s. of Benj., m. Jerusha
Warner, d. of Obad., Oct. 26, 1748.

I. Tared, b. Oct. 13, 1749.
a. Mark, b. Apr. o, X75T.

3. Samuel, b. Men. 15, 1753.

4. David, b. Mch. X4, 1756.

5. John, b. Dec. 3, X758 [d. ]

army.]

6. Lucy, b. Mch. i, X762.

Abigail Harrison m. David Warner, 1753.

Abigail Harrison m. S. S. Camp, 1832.

Benjamin Harrison, s. of Benjamin, m.
Dinah Warner, d. of Benj., Dec. 24,
1 741, and d. Mch. 13, 1760, in his 39th
year. Dinah m. Moses Cook.

X. James, b. Oct. 38, 1743; d. Oct. 35, 1760.
3. labez, b. Oct. xx, 1744.

3. Lydia, b. Sept. 24, 1747; d. Aug. 6, 1750.

4. Samuel, b. and d. Sept. 4, X750.

5. Rosel, b. Dec. 20, X75X; d. Dec. X3, X764.

6. Daniel, b. July 15, 1754.

Benjamin [s. of Thomas of Branford],
father of the above Benj., d. Mch. 6,
1760, a. 61. [Their wills, dated same
day.] Mary [Sutliff], wid. of Benja-
min, m. Thomas Clark.

Caroline Harrison m. G. F. Hitchcock,
1849.

Daniel Harrison m. Phebe Blakeslee,
Jan. 13, 1774.

Deliver ence Harrison m. Nathl. Gunn,

Jr., 1793.
Frances Harrison m. Ely Piatt, 1851.

Jabez Harrison m. Deborah Johnson,
Oct 15, 1772.

X. Cloe, b. Jan. 33, 1776.

Jared Harrison and Hannah:*

1. Daniel, b. May 6, X77X.
a. Rozel, b. May 3, 1773.

3. Benjamin, b. May 15, X775.

4. John, b. Dec. 10, X777.

5. Ruth, b. May 15, X780.

Thtae/bur preceding ones b. in Southington.

6. Tared, b. Nov. 8, X783.

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 36, X787.

Lemuel Harrison [b. Nov. 17, 1765, at
Litchfield], s. of Lemuel, m. Sarah

Harrisc

Clark^
1790. i

X. Jam4

3. bophj
[3. Mac!

4. Garn

5. Step!

6. Edwl

Rosanai

Sarab
Soa

Stephen
Cathai
II, 184

Alva C.
Cathar

1841.

Rev. Ira

John, 1

X. David
3. Charte
3. Haxrie

Eliphalet

Wordei

X. Eubu
3. Phebt

3. Dani<

4. Alith

5. Elizal

6. Eliph

7. Reb«<

8. Harv*

9. Lois,
xo. Henr

Mary Ha

Sheldon : i
thia Be

Voadice 1 1

John and

Adelin

Cyrus H

16, 181:

Daniel li 1

Hale, !
Oct. 9,

z. Dorca
3. Elizab I

3. Ann* 1

4. Saran,

5. Mary, 1

6. Apani'

7. Danie

8. Noah, :

Esther I ;

1784.

Mary Hi ;

Miriam I
1734. a

Hanna ¥ 1

m. Jon

Abigail !
Mary Hi 1

62 Ap

HI8T0BT OF WATERBUBT,

Hayden. Hennessy.

Daniel Hayden, b. Mch. 25, 1780, s. of
Josiah of Willi am sburgh, Mass., and
Abigail Shepard, b. Apr. i, 1775, d. of
Joseph of Foxbury, Mass., m. Aug. Jo,
1801.

z. Joseph Shepard, b. July 31, x8ca.
9. Abby Hewes, b. Nov. 37, 1804; m. J. S. Kings-
bury.

elia

3. Ardelia Crodef b. Dec. 35, 1806; m. Israel Holmes.

4. Sylvia Shepard, b. Nov. 25, 1809; d. Feb. x, 18x9.

5. Harriet Hodges, b. Nov. 3, z8z3.

[David Hayden b. 1778, m. Betsey Bish-
op of Attleborough, Mass., 1797.

X. Willard Boyd, b. 1799.
3. David, b. x8oi.

3. Eliza Maria, b. 1803: in. T. Loveland.

4. Harriet Sopnia, b. 1807.

5. Lorenzo Bishop, b. 1810.

6. Betsey, b. Feb. zi. 18x3.

7. Jane, b. z8z6 (all tnese bap. 1816.I)

8. Charles Sylvester, b. xSaoJ .

Festus Hayden, b. Feb. 19, 1793, s. of
Cotton [and Sally Miller] of Williams-
burgh, m. Sophia Harrison, d. of Lem-
uel, Feb. 10, 1816.

z. Maria L., b. Aug. z6, z8x8.

2. Henry H.. b. Apr. 2, xSao.

3. Mary E., b. Men. 13, 1823; m. Ed. Bancroft.

4. James A., b. Mch. 8, 1825.

Joseph Shepard Havden, s. of Dan., m.
Ruhamah Guilford, d. of Simeon, Jan.
10, 1819, who d. Nov. 27, 1841.

z. Hiram Washington, b. Feb. 10, 1820.
2. Edward Simeon, b. Oct. x, 1835.

Willard Hayden and Sarah:

I. Willard Williams, bap. July 6, X833.

George B. Hazard of Canterbury m.
Susan Jane Clark, Aug. 22, 1841.

Reuben S. Hazen of Springfield m. Ma-
ria A. Wood, d. of Rev. Luke, July
26, 1821.

John Healy m. Catharine Lannan, Feb.
20, 1848.

William Healy m. Cath. Devricks, May

20, 1848.
Martha Heath m. J. Robinson, 1829.
Mary Heath m. Dan. Boice.
Abraham Heaton and Mabel:

1. Sarah, b. Apr. 23, 1773.

2. I^vi, b. Jan. 14, X774.

3. Abrdm, b.' July 14, 1776.*

4. Mabel, b. Nov. 2, 1778; d. Feb. 2, 1780.

5. Mabel, b. Dec. 19, X780.

6. Ira, b. June 5, 1783.

7. Joel, b. Nov. 10, 1787.

Jacob Heming^way and Abigail:-^

I.ucretia, b. in Branford, May zi, 1785.
Nancy, b. Oct. 21, 1788.

Elizabeth Hendrick m. John Walton.

1738.
John Hendrick and Martha [Barret ?]

John Barrit, b. Aug. 3, 1778.

Ambrose P. Hennessy m. Betsey Whit-
lock, June 5, 1836.

Hennessy. Hikcox.

James Hennessy m. Bridget , —

both of Wolcottville — Apr. 20, 1849.

Abraham Hikcox, s. of Samuel, m. Jem-
ima Foot, d. of Thomas, Apr. 19, 1748,
who d. May 20, 1779. [He died in the
British army].

X. Mary, b. July 3, X748; m. Seba Bronson.

3. Lucy, b. Feb. X3, 1749-50; m. Simeon Scott.

3. Jesse, b. Apr. 13, X7sa.

4. Jered. b. Jan. xs, 1756.

5. Joel, b. Apr. 8, 1758 [d. in Pcnn., x8x7].

6. Timothy, b. Jan. 5, 176X.

7. Abraham, b. June 3, X765.

8. Samuel, b. Jan. x, 1767.

9. Preserve, b. Nov. 6, X768.

Abraham Hikcox, s. of Capt. Abr. , dec'd,
m. Tamar Tuttle, d. of Jabez, dec'd,
Feb. 24, 1784.

X. Ruth, b. Nov. 9, 1785.
3. Oracena, b. Nov. ix, X788.

Amarilla Hickcox m. Isaac Porter, 1799.

Ambrose Hikcox, s. of Ebenezer, m.
Eunice Clark, d. of Caleb, Dec. 11,
1740 [d. June I, 1792].

1. Ambrose, b. Au^. 28, X741.

2. Ruth, b. Dec. x8, 1743; ra. Abijah Wilraot.

3. Gideon, b. Apr. 19, 1746; d. Dec. X3, 1763.

4. Margerum. b. Oct. 6, 1748.

5. Marcy, b. Sept. 36, 1752 [m. Joel Judd].

6. Ebenezer, b. May 39, 1754.

7. Benjamin, b. Apr. X9, 1756; d. Nov. xx, 1769.

Ambrose Hikcox, s. of Ambrose, m.
Mary Dowd, d. of John of Middle-
town, June 10, 1762. [She d. Mch. 17,

1793].

X. Eunice, b. Dec. i', X763.
3. Gideon, b. July x8, X764.

Amos Hikcox, s. of Thomas, dec'd, m.
Mary Richards, wid. of Benj., May 15,
1740. [She d. July 19, 1787, he d. Mch.
I, 1805J.

X. Freelove, b. Apr. 38, 1741; m. Stephen 5>cott.
3. Amos, b. Mch. x8, X743-3; d. July 3X, X749.

3. Elisha, b. Mch. 3, 1744-5.

4. Marcy, b. Jan. 25, 1746-7; d. July 7, X753.

5. Amos. b. Nov. X3, 1749.

6. Joseph, b. Mch. X2, X7S2.

Benjamin Hickox, s. of John [and
Eunice], m. Sarah Warner, d. of Reu-
ben, June 10, 1783.

X. Darius, b. June 30, 1783.
3. Sarah, b. May 6, 1785.

3. Laura, b. Sept. 17, 1786.

4. Israel, b. Mch. 9, 1788.

5. Phebe, b. Apr. 5, xtqx.

6. Benjamin Warner, b. Dec. 36, X794.

7. John, b. Jan. 2, X797.

Sarah d. Jan. 19, 1797, and Benj. m.
Zerviah Sutliff, d. of Joseph of Wol-
cott, Dec. 3, 1797.

8. Leveret, | d. Dec. xa, X798.

and Vb. July 31, 1798.

9. Lydia, )

xo. Polly Zerviah, b. Oct. 23, x8o3.

Daniel Hikcox, s. of Deac. Thomas (2d),
ra. Sibel Bartholemu, Jan. 15, 1766.

FAMILY BECOBi^

HiKCOX. HiCKOX.

I. Caleb, b. Oct. x8, 1766.
a. DanieU b. Feb. 11, 1769.

3. Mary, b. May 5, 1771; d. Feb. 7, 177a.

4. Chancy, b. July ax, 1773.

Sibel d. Apr. 2, 1774, and Daniel m.
Phebe Orton, July 5, 1775.*

5. Eliazer, b. July 95, 1776.

6. Mary, b. Jan. 33, X778.

7. Uri, b. Aug. 8, 1779.

8. Merriam, b. Aug. x, 178X.

9. Sybbel, b. Oct. 13, 1783.

David Hikcox, s. of John of Great Bar-
rinffton, m. Adah Baldwin, d. of
Ri(3iard of Woodbridge, Nov. 13, 1794.

X. Horace, b. Oct. x8, 1795.
a. Addiaon, b. May aa, X798.
3. Abiah, b. Apr. 3, x8oo.

Ebenezer Hikcox, s. of Samuel, m. Es-
ther Hine, d. of Thomas, Dec, 1714.

X. Esther, b. June xo, 17x5; m. Stephen Kelsey.
a. Samuel, b. Dec. ao, 17x6.

3. Arobrus, b. Sept. a, X718.

4. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 3, 1730; m. Rich. Nichols.

5. Abigail, b. Aug. 8, 173a: m. James Prichard.

Ebenezer m. [Abigail] Stevens, d«of
Samuel of West Haven, Aug. 28, 1729.
(Was he in Danbury, 1736-41?)

6. Ebenezer, b. July ai, 1730.

7. David, b. Jan. ao, 1 731-3.

8. John, b. Apr. 17, 1734.
la. Seth. b. Dec. 5, 174X.

Elisha Hikcox, s. of Lieut. Amos, m.
Thankful Willard, Oct, 18, 1764.

Elizabeth Hikcox:

Anna Lewis, her dau., b. Feb. 5, X776.

Gideon Hikcox, s. of Sam. (2d), dec'd, m.
Sarah Upson, d. of Stephen, Aug. 15,
1734, who d. Jan. 19, 1809, a. 94.*

1. James, b. Feb. xx, 1734-5; drowned Feb., X744-5.
a. Jemima, b. Nov. 34, 1736; m. Ira Beebe.

3. Samuel, b. Sept. ix, 1739.

4. Sarah, b. June 3, X744; m. Austin Smith.

5. Tames, b. Nov. a8, 1746.

6. Lucy, b. June ao, 1749.

7. Gideon, b. May 4, 1753.

8. Elizabeth, b. Nov. a8, X764.

Gideon Hickcox, Jr., s. of Gideon, m.
Philena Smith, d. of Austin, Aug. 29,

1771.

X. David, b. Dec. 3, 1773.
3. Sarah, b. Apr. xc, X774.

3. Polly, b. Mch. 4, X777.

4. Hannah Smith, b. July 3, X78X.

Hannah Hikcox of Woodbury m. O.
Richards, 1732.

James Hikcox, s. of Gideon, m. Hannah
Smith, d. of Austin, Nov. 28, 1766.

I. Olive, b. May 7, 1774.

James Hickox m. Eunice Collins, Nov.
12, 1777.*

I. Collins, b. Oct. 15, 1778.
a. James, b. Nov. a6, 1780.
3. Sally, b.

James M. Hickox of New Haven m.
Hannah Culver, Feb. 2, 1845.

HlCKCd

Jared I
Racb

1777.

X. LtH

3. Nal
3. J«a

4. ^^

5. H*j

6. A»|

i. e2

9. Ux{
10. Ra4

Jesse 1
nah S

X. Zen«
3. MoU]

Hanni
Rhodi
Feb. n
d. Fel
kins, r

John Hi

bethf
Joseph

[Sept.
Hil
Hik
and
Th<

John Hi

Eunic<
first cl

X. Deriu
3. Reub I

3. Cloe, ;

4. Benj<

5. Lucy

6. Davit ,

ton

7. John I

John
Newoi I
m. Th 1

John H I

Mary
Dr. B

X. Asa,
a. Joan (

3. Sabn

4. Aner

5. Leuc 1

6. John

7. Marj

8. Willi I

9. Sara!

Hi !

Cook, :

X. CarU

3. Alon :

3. Sidn \

4. Sidn I

5. Aa* '

6. Carl.

Jonas !

Abigj '.
May I
Sept. :

John

HISTOBT OF WATBBSUBT.

HfKtOX. HIKCOX.

[Joseph Hikcox d. in Woodbury, 1687,
leaving

Wph, b. about 1673.
Dr. Bcnjimm, b. ibbut 167;.
Mary, b. about 167B; m. Jowph G»ylonl, Jr.
Elinbclb, b. ibout i6Et: m. Jobn Givloid.
S.mu,l, b. ,ta7.1

Joseph Hikcaz, a. of Serg. Samuel, m.

Elizabeth Gaylord, d. to Joseph, Sr.,

this Sd ot Feb., 1(109 of l7oo-
Julia E. Hikcox ra. C. B. Bassett, 1S51.
Lewis A. Hickcox [s. of Rev. Jonas] tn.

Lydia Hickcox, Sept. 57. :S26.

I. ^!a^y Sophronia, bap. IJcc. 19, i&i^^

Lucimn E. Hikcox m. Elizabeth L. Sher-
man of Oxford. June ii, 1835.

Lucius F. Hikcox m. Eliza Sherman,
Mch. 3, 1S37.

Maria Hickox m. Treat Peck, 1846.

Mary Hickox m. Daniel Buck, 1S29.

Nnthauiel Hickox, s. of Jared, ni. Sally
Gregory, d. of Stephen of Kent, Oct.

Polly Hickox m. Avery Hotchkiss, i3io.
Preserved Hikcox, s. of Ca'pt. Abraham,

m. Rachel Brown, d. of Capt. Heze-

kiah, dec'd, Oct. 3, 1786.

1, SaninFl, b, Mch, 8, 1787.

1. Salla MktHh. b. Mir 'T. ITS?.

[Serg. Sftmuel Hikcox m. Hanna .

His inventory was taken Feb. 28,
1694-S, at which date the ages of his
children were, as follows:

Samuel. >6. Hinnab. 14; n>. John Judd, 1696.

i(:T."jo'hn B.-Sl^"."EbWih;Vi: m"?!

NortoD at Fannin>;tQn. Stephen, 11. Benia-

miD, ^ Meter. "■ Ebeneur, i.]

Sunuel Hikcox, s. of Serg. Samuel, ra.

Elizabeth Plumb [b. 1N.9], d. of John

of Miiford, Apr. 16, 1690. He d. June

3, I7i3;she, Oct 17, 1749.

T. A dau.. b. and d. May, 1691.

HiK

I. Ebeoe- ,-.

I. Samuel, b. FIov. 1. i6u: d. July 7, 1711.
^ John, b. Nor. iS (bap. Id >1ilrord, DfC. 30]
.696.

S. Hantia, b. Apr. a. [bap. m Miiford], 1690].
i. Eliiabclh, b. Apr. 6[bap. inMllfon],Junei4
ijat', [m, Samuel Smith.]

i'. Ci

,. __.»h,"l.. Duel's, ■'7^i'i>i. J. PUll of Ni
ID. Stlaot, b. Sept. 19, 171] [m, Ahr. ]
■7J7l-

•alk].

Capt. Sfunuel Hikcox, a. of William, m,
Mary Hopkins, d. of John, Mch. 8,
1731. He d. May 13, 1765; she, Aug.
19. 1768.
I. Mar^. b. O^t- M. tTJt; m. R. Seyniout.

4, Abraham, b. Jan. 11, 17=7^.

b. Tidy ,.

7. Don*, b, Jo^ „, ,7jfi; ,n. John Wdton.

Capt. Samuel Hickcox [and Deac.l. & of
Ueac. Thomas, m. Elizabeth WelWn.
d. of George, Nov. a6, 1741.

;: S;--

i. Maiy,' b. Sept, ilJ, i74«; aTkuf. t6. ij

J". EUmbeib; 6. Aja. «^75a; a. Th. B,
b. May 14, 1754; m. John N,
;ne „. ,7J7> ■'- " ■

i, Jm

'"'" '7. I7S7 [m. Muy Buckiuhu].
... Apt. 50, ijSi
I. h. Sept. a, 17(0 [m. Phebc Sloddud, i.
lohn of U'oodbury, Dtc. i, 177^ and 4.

Eleanor d. Nov. 14, 1767. and Samuel
m. Charity Dixon, Nov. 10, 1768.

f Silva, b. Ian. », 1770.

6. Charity, (>. July .s, W73,

7. Samuel Jnhii»n, b. Oct. 31, 1775.

8. Saphya, b. Juiy ifi, 177S.

Samuel Hikcox, 3d [s. of Samuel of
Thomas], ni. Sarah Scovill, Dec 5.
and d. Sept. tj. 1778. Sarah d.

Oct. J

1776.

I, Selden, b. Sept. 11, i&j,- d. Oct. iBo..

1. Siilly, b. Age, ], tRh; m. E. M. Payne.

]. Samuel Hupkins, b, Apr. .6, lEio.
Sarah M. Hickcock m. J. W. Smith,

1349-
Sherman Hickcox [s. of Timothy], m.

Sally Camp, Apr. 22. 1824.
Deac. Thomas Hikcox, s. of Serg. Sam-

uell. dec'd, m. Mary Brunson, d. of

Serg. Isaac, Mch. 27, 1700. He dyed

iine 28, 1728; and Mary m. Deac. Sam.
ull [Nov. 23. 1748]. She d. July 4.
1756.
I. Tboma!, b. Oci. as, 1701-

'; Mary; b. Me£.'o,' i'^^: m. f 'l^arnei. 'i 718.
4. Satah, b. Jan. a, 1700-10 (m. Dm. Benedict].
;. [Meicyl.m. lu>c%pkiD>.i73i.

6. Amoi, B. May 19, iTij.

7. Jooaa,b.Oct3o, 1717.

,: Su.™1uC h. M'ctl's',??^; m. G. Nkhols, 1741.
.0. J.,ne>. b,Jnnerf,t7.«.

[Deac] Thomas Hikcox, s. of Thomu
(above), dec'd, m. Miriam Richards.
wid. of Samuel, Apr. 19, 173(1. [He
d. Dec. 28, 1787; she, Mch. :3. t7So].

,. Jama, t, *Un, ;,, ,7.
s. Jamei, b. May B, .75;

FAMILY BECOBli

HiKCOX. HiGGINS.

Thomas Hikcox, Jr., s. of [2(31 Deac,
Thomas, m. Lois Richards, d. of Thom-
as, July 17, 1760.

X. Sarah, b. May la, 1762.

Lois, d. May ii, 1764, and Thomas m.
Thankful Seymer, d. of Stephen, May
12, 1765.

3. I^is Richards, b. Mch. 39; d. Dec. 19, 1766.

3. Thomas, b. Oct. lo, 1767.

4. Lois Richards, b. Oct. 29, 1769.

5. Mark, b. May 23, 1773,

6. Ire, b. Mch. 24, 1775.

7. Isaac, b. July 5, 1778.

Timothy Hikcox, s. of Capt. Abr., m.
Sarah Nichols, d. of Richard, May 3,
1 781. She d. Jan. 24, 1813; he, Dec. 8,

1835.*

z. Sarah, b. June 27, 1782.

2. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 11, 1783.

3. Poila, b, Nov, 13, 1784,

4. Abram, b. May 23, 1786.

5. Huldah. b. Aug. 4, 1787: in. Jas. Chatfield.

6. Leoaara, b. Sept. 15, 1788.

7. Laura, b. Oct. i, 1790; m. Anson Rronson, 1816.

8. Palmira, b. Jan. i, 179a. *

9. Nancy, o. Feb. 23, 1793; d. May 4, 1801.
xo. Lvdia, b. Dec. 17, 1794; m. L. A. Hickox.

11. Cnloe, b. June 13, 1797; m. J. Talmage.

12. Sherman, b. Sept. 29, 1798.

13. Viana, b. June 30, 1800.

14. Nancy, b. Feb. 8, 1802; m. P. Stoddard, 1827.

15. William, b. Sept. 12, 1803.

William Hikcox [s. of Serg. Samuel],
and Rebeckah [Andrews, d. of Abra-
ham, Sr.].

2. William, b. Feb. 14, 1699; deyed Apr. 12, 1713.

3. Samuel, b. May 26, 1702.

4. Abraham, b. Apr. 5, 1704; deyed Mch. 16, 17x3.

5. John, b. .May 8, 1706; deyed Apr. 26, 17 13.

6. Rebeckah, b. Mch. 29, 1708; m. C. Thompson.

7. Rachel, b. May i6, 1710; m. J. Prindle.

8. Hannan, b. June 7, 1714; m. D. Scott.

William d. Nov. 4, 1737, and was buried
the 5th of Nov.

William Hikcox, s. of Samuel [and
Mary], m. Lydia Saymore, d. of Eben-
ezer, dec'd, Apr. 4, 1745.

1. William, b. Jan. 14, 1746.

2. Consider, b, June ai, 1748.

3. Abigail, b. July 28, 1751", m. Thomas Welion.

4. Lidia, b. July 29, 1757.

t Rebeckah, b. Oct. 14, 1759.
ydia d. June 19, 1762, and William m.
Abigail Scott, d. of Edmund, Jan. 12,

1763.

6. Cloe, b. Feb. 7, 1764.

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 31, 1765; m. Eleazer Tompkins.

8. Asahel, b. Nov. 22, 1767,

William Hikcox, s. of Tim., m. Jerusha
Bronson, d. of Horatio Gates, Oct. i,
1830.

1. Mary Emelinc, b. Nov. 5, 1831.

2. Margareit Ann, b. Sept. 17, 1H34.

3. Sarah Vienna, b. June 28, 183"^; d. Dec. 1844.

4. Sarah Maria, b. June 13, X844; d. Jan., 1845.

Seth H. Higby of Port Bryon, N. Y., m.
Maria Finch, Nov. ii, 1838.

Emeline Higgins m. R. Tuttle, 1832.
8*

HiGGINSi

Eunice I

Levo

Luther !
cott, n
Jesse,

29, 18^

X. Maryi

2. Maitl

3. Manp

4. Timol

5. Henn

6. Stepli

7. Hanoi

Michael

July 13

Andrew
II. iSa
Feb. 23

I. Cornel

Anna HU
Betty HU
Elizabeth
Eunice H

Harvey . J

McUoni
1809.

1. Lucius

2. Susan ,

3. Richar

4. Augusi

Jared an(

Lydia

Jerusha 1
Jonathan

Lemuc
Rosan

Obadiah

Harvc

6, 17

PoUy Hi]

Samuel I

m. Sibl
1791.

X. Harri<

3. Elijah

4. Polly,

5. .Samu(

6. Caroli

SybiU
Charh

Samuel I
ett, d.
Apr. 21

1. Henn

2. Juniu

3. Sarah

4. Eunic

Stanley
bethE

Suza M

Betsey J

W^p

BISTORT OF WATERS URT,

HiLLMAN. HlNE.

William Hillman of Black River m. Re-
becca Stevens, Nov. i8, 1810."

Alexander Hine of Naugatuck m. Eliza
A. Williams, June 24, 1849.

Betsey Hine m. Isaac M. Allen, 1835.

Eli Hine, s. of David, m. Hannah Bron-
son. d. of Capt. Isaac, Oct. 30, 1792.

1. Laban Bronson, b. Sept. 25, 1793.

2. Alvin, b. Sept 24, 1795.

3. Josiah. b, Sept. 13, 1797.

4. Enos. D. May 5, 1800.

5. Elizabeth Susan Maria, b. Aug. 38, 1802.

Emma Hine m. Lewis Bates, 1849.

Esther Hine m. Eben. Hickcox, 17 14.

Hezekiah Hine d. Sept. 13, 1807; Eunice,
his wife, Feb. i, 1813.'

Hiram Hine of Middlebury m. Maria
Adams, Oct. 8, 1835.

Isaac Hine m. Eunice Wilmot of Amity,
Nov. 6, 1768. He d. Dec. 3, 1807, a.
64; she, Dec. 29, 1806, a. 60. •

1. Cloe^ b. Dec. 8, 1769.

2. Eunice, b. Apr. 10, 1771.

3. Isaac Willara, b. July 24, 1774.

4. Milliscent, b. May 9, 1777.

Isaac Hine, s. of Newton, m. Anna An-
drews of Woodbridge (before 181 7).

Isaac Hine, s. of Benjamin of Middle-
bury, m. Polly Rowley of Winsted,
1836.

1. James K., b. Nov. 27. 1837.

2. Mary Jane, b. July 26, 1840.

(A deaf and dumb family except Mary.)

S. B. M.

John Hine:

Charles Edward, bap. July 6, 1823. >

Joseph Hine of Hudson, O., m. Eliza-
beth Welton, July 21, 1836.

Lewis Hine of Cairo, Green Co., N. Y.,
m. Nancy (Sarah?) Hull, d. of Dr. Nim-
rod, dec'd, Nov. 19, 1827.

Lucius Hine m. Sarah Strong of Derby,
June 8, 1835.

Lydia Hine m. Jonas Boughton, 1798.

Maria Hine m. Reuben Adams, 1837.

Mary Hine m. Th. Clark, 1765, and Benj.
Upson, 1780.

Mehitable Hine m. Thomas Porter, 1758.

Milo Hine m. Mary C. Smith, Jan. i,

1849.
Newton Hine and Lois [Prichard]:

Elizabeth S. and Newton, bap, Apr. 28, 1817.9

Newton Hine, Jr., b. Apr. 2, 1811, s. of
Newton, and Mehitable E. Bronson, b.
Aug. 31, 1813, d, of Southmayd, m.
June 3, 1S30.

X. I. Southmayd, b. May i, 1833.
2. William Henry, b. Oct. 19, 1840.

Hine. Hitchcock.

Philander Hine, s. of Daniel of Walling-
ford, m. Harriet C. Castle, d, of Samuel
D. of Camden, N. Y., Oct. 24, 1836.

1. Estella Cordelia, b. Feb. x8, 1840.

Rebecca Hine m. John Cossett, 1799.

Spencer Hine m. Sally Gunn in Salem,
Apr. 25, 1821.

Thaddeus Hine d. Nov., i8i6.«

A.mos Hinman, s. of Elijah of Southbury,
. m. Thankful Bronson, d. of James,
May, 1786.

z. Ruthe Matilda, b. Nov. 96, 1786.

2. Lecta Parmela, b. May 8, 1789.

3. Orlando, b. Apr. x8, 1792.

4. Elijah Porter, b. Apr. 19, 1805.

David Hinman m. Frances Reynolds —
both of New Haven — Dec. 4, 1850.

Joel Hinman, Esq., m. Mariah Scovil [d.
of James], Oct. 9, 1825.

[i. Caroline A., b. July 9, 1827; m. H. W. Good-
win.

2. William L., b. Mch. 12, 1833.

3. Eunice S., b. Sept. 27, 1830.

4. Mary C, b. Aug;. 29, 1839.]

Nelson Hinman m. Laury Judd, Jan. 24.

1837.
Aaron Hitchcock m. Sarah H. Scovill«

Dec. 30, 1 83 1 [and d. Dec. 23, 1834].

Anne Hitchcock m. Thad. Bronson, 1794.

Benjamin Hitchcock [b. Nov. 24, 1752, s.
of Benj. and Rhoda (Cook) of Walling-
ford, m. Eunice Hotchkiss (prob. b.
Tan. 8, 1755), d. of Daniel. She d. 1799;
he, 1809.

X. Anna, b. in Cheshire, Apr. 19, 1775; m. David
Prichard, Jr.

2. Loly, b. X778; m. T. G. Tyrrel.

3. Reuben; m. Plant.

4. Jared; m. Loly Bunnel of Cheshire].

Children b. in Wat. :

5. Manley, b. Dec. 23, 1783 [m. Chloe Adams].

6. Samuel, b. Mch. 31, X787 [m. Amelia OsbornJ.

7. George, b. June 27, 1789 [lived at Watertown,

N.Y.J.

8. Benjamin Truman, b. Aug. 19, 1791.

9. Eunice, b Feb. X9, 1793 [m. Heman Tyrrell].

Benjamin Truman Hitchcock, s. of Benj. ,
m. Julia Frisbie, d. of Dan. [Feb. 27,
1815].

X. Eliza Finette, b. July 18, x8i6; m. J. C. Beach.

2. Edward Milton, b. July 28, x8x8.

3. Shelton Truman, b. Dec. ii, 1822.

4. Juliett, b. July 4, X828; d. June 10, X831.

4. Elmore William, b. May X3, X833.

5. George Benjamin, b. Sept. 16, 1838.

Chester Hitchcock of New Haven m.
Julia Nettleton, June 24, 1835.

Daniel Hitchcock, s. of Peter of Walling-
ford, m. Mary Pecjc, d. of Ward, Dec-

7, 1833.

X. Edwin Sherman, \

and >b. Apr. X7, 1834.

a. Irving Lyman, ) d. May x2, X839.

FAMILY BEG0BD8.

AP67

Hitchcock. Hoadley.

3. Frederick, b. Apr. 18, 1837.

4. Mary Peck, b. Apr. 13, 1839.

Maiy d. Dec. 4, 1840, and Daniel m.
Desiah B. Tolls of Bethlem, Apr. 11,
1842. He d. July 31, 1846.

5. Harriet Eunice, b. Mch. 28, 1843.

6. George Gaius, b. Aug. 6, 1844.

Eunice Hitchcock, wid., d. Nov. 23, 1809,
a. 72.'

Gaius Hitchcock of Wallingford m.
Betsey D. Bronson, Apr. 18, 1833.

X. Aimer BronsoD, bap. Aug. 30, X835.1
a. James Newton, bap. July a, 1837.

Harriet Hitchcock m. Lewis Russell,
1824.

Huldah Hitchcock m. S. S. Deforest,

1835.
Jesse Hitchcock m. Celesta Russell —

both of Prospect— Sept. 22, 1828.

Mary Hitchcock m. V. Tuttle, 1824.

Mary Hitchcock m. Stephen Sherwood,

1834.

Polly Hitchcock m. D. Chatfield, 1820.

Susan Hitchcock m. L. F. Lewis, 1837.

Susan Hitchcock m. H. P. Welton, 1823.

Alvy Hoadley (s. of Asa?) m. Aurelia
Phelps, Dec. 4, 1821.

Amy Hoadley m. £. M. Stevens, 1824.

Andrew Hoadley m. Sarah Lewis, June
14, 1770.

Artemus Hoadley, s. of Asa, m. Alma
Frisbie, d. of Daniel, Nov. 16, 1817, and
d. Sept. 18, 1830.

X. Esther Elvira, b. Feb. ai, 1818; m. H. Frost.

2. Daniel Frisbie, b. Sept. 13, 1819.

3. Eunice Almira, b. Jan. 4, 1822.

Asa Hoadley, s. of Nathaniel, m. Esther
Tyler, d. of Abraham, Apr. 7, 1785.
He d. Feb. 6, 1834, a. 71; she. May i,
1837, a. 76.»

I. Clarinda, b. Jan. 28, 1786.
a. Mary, b. Sept. 7, 1788.

3. Arteraas, b. Men. 24, 1791.

4. Abram, b Jan. 13. 1794.

5. Julia, b. Feb, 17, 1797; m. Amos Atwatcr?

6. Alvah, b. Feb. 19, 1800.

Augusta Hoadley m. Isaac Coe, 1841.

Benjamin Hoadley, s. of Jude, and Esther
Merwin, b. Apr. 19, 1777, d. of Joseph
of Woodbridge, m. Jan. 12, 1796.

1. Lawson Miles, b. Oct. 20, 1796.

2. Elvira, b. Sept. 24, 1798.

3. Sabrina, b. Oct. 9, x8oo.

Eunice d. at Winchester, Apr. 27, 1809,
and Benjamin m. Sally Judd, Aug. 19,
1 8 10.

4. Abigail, b. Apr. 28, 1814.

Hoadley. Hoadley.

CaMn Hoadley [b. Jan. 7, 1805J, s. of
William of Salem, m. Betsey Pierce of
Southington, Sept. 25, 1828.

[Culpepper Hoadley m. Molly Lewis, d.
of Samuel, Esq., Feb. 5, 1786.''

1. Roxana, b. July 15, 1787; m. Richard Ward.

2. Samuel, b. June 14, 1790; d. unm.

3. Leonard, b. July 20, 1792; m. Betsey Dunham.

4. Larmon, b. Oct. 12, 1795; d. 1826 unm.

5. Alvin, b. Apr. 24, 1798; m. Clara Vose.]

David Hoadley [s. of Elemuel, m. Jane
Hull, d. of Ezra, who d. 1799, leaving
a dau., Jane. He m. Rachel Beecher,
d. of Jonathan, and d. 1840]:

Jane, David, and Mary Ann, bap. Aug. x6, x8xa.l

*Eben Hoadley of Salem m. Sarah Brooks
of Bethany [Sunday], May 28, 1843.

Ebenezer Hoadley, s. of William [3d], m.
Sarah Lewis, d. of John, Jan. 6, 1763.
He d. Sept. 23, 1814; she, June 22,
1809.*

1. Philo, b. Oct. 12, 1763.

2. Chester, b. Sept. 23, 177X [m. Betsey Hine].

Elemuel Hoadley, s. of William [3d], m.
Urane Mallory , d. of Peter of Strat. ,
Jan. 5, 1767.

X. Molle, b. Nov. x, 1767; m. Asahel Osbom.

2. Calvin, b. Jan. 2, 1769.

3. David, b. Aor. 29, X774.

4. Samuel, b. Nov. 25, X776.

5. Lemuel, b. Apr. 20, 1779.

6. Luther, b. Mch. 30, 1781.

7. Sarah, b. Sept. 22, X786.

8. Urania, b. May 5, 1788.

9. Marshall, b. Nlay 3, X79X; d. Apr. 20, 1796.

Erastus W. Hoadley m. Abigail Porter,
Oct. 13, 1823.

George Hoadley of Naugatuck m. Fanny
Twitchel of Oxford, Iday 16, 1841.

Hannah Hoadley m. John Beach, 1772,
and Jesse Johnson, 1780.

Harriet Hoadley m. G. S. Johnson, 1834.
Jude Hoadley and Naomi:

Benjamin, b. Apr. 25, X77X.
[Asa, b. 1772.]

Jude d. May 7, 1811, a. 68 y. 2 m. 17 d. ;
Naomi d. at Winchester, Aug. 11, 181 5,
a. 65.

Laura A. Hoadley m. J. W. Allen, 1847.

Lewis M. Hoadley [s. of Chester] m.
Emily Horton, Dec. 5, 1821.

Marshall Hoadley [b. 1801, s. of Will-
iam and NancvJ m. Nancy Judd [d. of
Harvey] in Salem, Jan. 18, 1821.

Mary Hoadley m. Lyman Johnson, 1780.

Mary Hoadley m. John Coe, 1837.

Nathaniel Hoadley [s. of Nathaniel ?] m.
Eunice Tyler, May 11, 1780.

* Their golden wedding was celebrated at the First Church, Sunday, May 28, 1893, at the evening service.

68 *P

BISTORT OF WATERBURY.

HitADLEV. Holmes.

I. A dull., b. Md d. Au^. 14. '7S1.
1. RoiMU. b, Stpi, IJ, 1783.

Philo Hoadlej m. Esther Hine, d. of

Hezekiah, Apr. 10. 17S3,'
Sarah Hoadlej m. Leon. Spencer, iSst,
Sarah Hoadley, wid., d. June 23, 1817.'
Sarah A. Hoadlej m. J. Thornton, 1838,
[William Hoadley [3d}, b. about 1707, s.
of Wm. of Bi-aaford, in. Sarah, d. of
Eben, Frisbie, and d. before 1785,

Holmes. Homei.

Israel Holmes, s. of Israel dec'd, m. Ar-

delia C. Hayden. d of Daniel. June ;,

^^t%

.^. Apr. .7. -Srf

4. C)uirl« Ed. LitJm

;. Hannah MaifiarEl. b. May ia, li-fi-'A, 1B44.

6. lsr..fl. b. M»yi, .S,i;d. Oci.. 18.3.

J. Reuben, b. Jan. .4, d. Stpi. lo, 11,3.

a. Margirelt. b. bcpl. aO, ti^,.

Hannah Ardclia and Olive Marine peritbed id

e; ni. J«i

■ '"*• ..

WillMun Hoadley s. of William, m. Es-
Iher Porter, d. of Joshua, dec'd, Ott.
27, 1761.

Lucy HodEC m. John Anderson, 1783.'
Abraham and Abigail Hodges:

ber sil- yar; and ■
lohn Nel«™ TuHl,
Ul in atteinpling t(

by Rev ""™"

These will certify that Mr. Israel
Holmes 2d, of Waterburj-, Con., and
Miss Cornelia Coe of Detroit. Mich.,
were united in the bonds of matnraonv
in the City of Detroit 00 the S3d of
May, 1843, in the presence of the wit-
nesses herein named, and asreeably to
the laws of the State of Micnigan. and
the usages of the Presbyterian" Church.

Hannah Hodges 1

1825.
James Hodson, s. of John, and Rosetta
Smith from Middlebury. b. Aug., 1823.
m. Nov, 8, 1846.

,. John J™h Fnnlllin, b, June ,6. .8,,.

John Hodson m. Jane Binyon in Birming-
ham, Eng.

Pastor of ist Pres. Church of Detroit.
H- P. Anderson, S- S. Baknahd.) „,._„„„
A. E. B.ssELL. f Witnesses.
Hiles Holmes, s. of Israel, m. Eliza Jen
net [Bradleyof Cheshire]. Shed. ^pt.

b. Sepi.

,. Ian

b- July 3,

„ Apr. t

7. William, b. Dec. 17. i8j7-

Lorinda Holcomb m. H. Howe, 1835.

Mary Holcomb m. L. W. Cutler, 1S31.

Joseph J, Hollister of Farmington m.
Cleora Wooster. Aug. 13, 184a.

Andrew B. Holmes of Cornwall m, Mrs.
Nancy Merriman. Nov. 30, 1S43.

Frederick G. Holmes [s, of Reuben], m.
Esther Nichols, Dec. 3, 1849-

Israel Holmes, s. of Reuben of Green-
wich, m. Sally Judd, d. of Capt, Sam.,

y. Adrli'nei h Sept. xx, iBij; IB. U, Smilh-

Thomas Homer, b. July, 1804. and CtUfa
arine Bt-nton. b. May, iSoa, m. 1831.

1, Cilliarine Benlon, b. in Eng., Mch. 5. iSjj.

7b. I
,. Jan

Lieut. Reuben Holmes, s. of Israel, m.
Elisabeth M. Clark, d. of Elias. Nov.
29 1826. He d. at Jefferson Barracks.
Nov. 4, 1833, and she m. Leonard

1. Fiederick Guion, b. Sepi, 6, 1817.

Samnel J. Holmes, s. of Israel, m. Lncina
Todd, b. Mch. 7, 1796, d. of Hezekiah
of Cheshire, May 2, 1822.

.. Liael. b. Aua. .0. ,a,3.
,. Samuel, b. rTov. 30, .8,4-

j. William bualiiili, b. in Soulhinglon. Dec, if.
litb: d. May ,. iS,8.

4. Saub, b. July 6. iS>9, in SoulhinElon.

5. William rf., b. Jul, .s, .8,,, in SoulhinKi^,.

6. Hnnnab Atdelia, b. Nov.t, .834; d, .8jj.

Mercy Holt m. Timothy Upson, 1833.
Philemon Holt, b. Oct., 1781. s.of Eben.

of East Havenfor Harwintiin). m. Aug.

17, 1806, Abby Barnes, b. Feb. 15, i;9d.

d. of Ambrose fmm Cheshire.

FAMILY BECOt

Hopkins. Hopkins.

Asa Hopkins, eldest s. of Joseph. Esq.,
m. Rebecca Knowles Payne, third d. of
Benj., Esq., and Rebecca, dec'd, Dec.
I, 1784.

1. Catharine Payne, b. Oct. 34, 1785.

2. Amelia, b. June 94, 1787.

3. Maria, b. Oct. 16, 1790.

Rebecca d. Saturday, Sept. 17, 1791, a.
29, and Asa m. Abigail Burnham. d. of
the late Peter and Hannah, dec'd, of
Weathersfield, Oct. 16, 1793 [and d.
Dec. 4, 1805].

4. Henry, b. Sept. 3, 1794,

Consider Hopkins was maryed to Eliza-
beth Grayhara, Relict of Gorg of Hart-
ford, Nov. 4, 1 7 13 [and d. in Hartford,
1726.

T. John, b. Sept. 5, 171 4.

3. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 28, 1715-16.

3. Asa, b. Aug. 8, 1719.

4. Consider, b. June 9, 1723.

5. Elias, b. July 5, 1726.]

David Hopkins, s. of John, m. Mary
Thompson, d. of Jon., dec*d, of West
Haven, July 4, 1791. He d. Apr. 21,
1 8 14; she, Aug., 1829.*

[i. John, b. July 13, i793' m. Abiah Woodruff, d.
of Jonah, 18 15, and had Samuel, b. 1816, Ed-
ward, b. 1817, Henry, b. 1819, Emily M., b.
1822, David T., b. 1825, George, b. 1826 (Yale),
Amelia, b. 1828, Willard, b, i8jo, John, b. 1833.

2. Polly, b. Nov. 13, X794; m. W, H. Hinc. ^

3. David, b. Apr. 7, 1707; m. Clarissa Adams, d. of

Andrew, and had Charles, Enos, Andrew,
Dwight, and Jane.

4. Mabel, b. Sept. x6, 1799; m. Alfred Stevens.

5. Laura, b. Mch. 2, 1802; d. May 23, 1811.

6. Truman, b. Jan. 23, 1805.

7. Edwin, b. Dec. 20, 1808.]

[Enos Hopkins, b. Mch. 28, 1821, s. of
David, m. Clarissa D. Morris at Wood-
bury, June 15, 1 841.

X. Henry B., b. Oct. 31, 1842.]

Harriet Hopkins m. Rev. Holland Weeks,
1799.

Isaac Hopkins [b. Nov. 25, 1708I, s. of
Eben. of Hartford, m. Mercy Hikcox,
d. of Thomas, Sept. 21, 1732. She d.
May 27, 1790; he; Jan. 13, 1805, a. 96.

1. Obedience, b. Sept. 1, 1733; d. Dec. i, 1736.

2. Symeon, b. Aujf. 30, 1735; d. Dec. 25, X736.

3. Bede, b. Nov. 2X, 1737; m. Samuel Judd.
4 Simeon, b. Nov. 19, 1740.

5. Irene, b. Dec. 27, 1742-3; m. John Selkrij?, and

Nathaniel Sutliif .

6. Ruth, b. Dec. 26, 1745: d. Sept. 22, 1752.

7. Osec, b. June i8, 1748; d. Aug. 26, 1749.

8. Mitte, b. Dec. 14, 1750 [d. Nov. 4, 1806].

9. Mary, b. Dec. 4, 1753.

10. Welthe, b. Tune 2, 1756; m. Charles Upson and

Thomas Welton.

11. Ruth, b. Dec. 10, 1759; m. Ziba Norton.

Mary [Butler], mother of Isaac, d. May
17. 1744.

Jesse Hopkins, s. of Joseph, Esq., m.
Betsey Goodwin, d. of Nathl. of Hart-

HOPKI

ford

14. 1

1. B«

2. Sal

Johni

fii

{

2. J«

3

3. o

4. St

5.11

6. Sa

10. D«
Hani
John
[leavi

John H

Johni
13. 17

X. San

2. Sui

3. Ma

4. Mai

5. Loi

6. Da^

Sarah
Patie:
1767.
1802.

7. Rh >

8. Pat

9. Jol [

10. Pat <

11. Suj I

12. Jol r

Joseph I
Heps 1
28, 17 ;

27, li :

1. Livi ,

2. Asa 1

3. Jos€ I
Dar (
EstI :
Jess .
Hez i

8. Har 1

9. Sail ,

Joseph ;

m. to I
of Sa 1
son,

I. Anr ,

Gill I

Bcc> 1
Sop

Jess ,

JoS" (

Eliz

Rhoda :

1789.

[Samui

28, I ;

4.

5.
6.

7-

2.

3.
4.

5.

6.
7.

70 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS UR7.

Hopkins. Hopkins.

Timothy of East Windsor, and d. at
West Springfield, Oct. 6, 1755, in the
5 2d yr. of his age, and 36th of his min-
istry.

I., Timothy, b. June, i/aS; d. 1807.
2.' Samuel, b. Oct. 31, 1739 (Rev, S. of Hadley,
1755-1821),

3. Hannah, b. Jan., 1731; ra. J. Worthingcon.

4. Esther, b, 1733; d. 1740.]

Samuel Hopkins, s. of Stephen, m, Molly
Miles, d. of David of Wallingford,
dec'd, June 27, 1771.

I. Samuel Miles, b. May 9, 1772.

Samuel Hopkins m, Harriet C. Ford —
both of Salem— Apr. 5, 1837.

Sarah Hopkins, her child:

Isabela Warner, b. Jan. 2, 1786.

Simeon Hopkins, s. of Isaac, m. Lois
Richards, d. of Obad., Nov. 15, 1764.

1. Hannah, b. Aug. 5, 1765.

2. Sarah, b. June 2, 1767.

3. Electe, b. July 8, 1770.

Hopkins.

HOTCHKISS.

4. Isaac, b. Jan. ix, 1773.

5. Lois, b. July ai, 1775.

6. Richards Obadiah, b. Jan. 11, 1

7. Polly, b. Sept. 19, 1779.

8. Harvey, b. June 9, 1782.

778.

[Stephen Hopkins, s. of Stephen of Hart-
ford, m. Sarah, d. of Lieut. Th. Judd,
Nov. 17, 1686. She d. May ii, 1693.
Her death is recorded in Hart. , also in
Wat., with her father's family.]

Stephen Hopkins, s. of John, marid Su-
sannah Peck, d. of John of Wal., Aug.
20, 1718.

1. John, b. July 28, 1719.

2. Stephen, b. June 12, 1721.

3. Anna, b. Sept, 25, 1723; m. Thomas Bronson,

and Phineas Koyce.

4. Susanna, b. Nov. lo, 1725; d, Sept. 26, 1748.

5. Mary; b. June 4, 1728; d. June 7, 1735.

6. Joseph, b. June 6, 1730.

7. Jesse, b. Feb. 12. 1733; d. Dec. 3, 1754

8. Mary, b. Nov. 26, 1735- d. Sept. 27, 1748.

9. Lois, b. June 22, 1738 [m. Lsaac John.son, s. of

Benajah, and d. Oct. 16, 1814.]
10, David, b. Oct. 14, 1741; d. Sept, 23, 1748.

Susanna d. Dec. last, 1755, and Stephen
m. Abial Webster, Rellick of John of
Farmington, May 25, 1756. He d. Jan.
4, 1769.
Stephen Hopkins, s. of Eben., dec'd, of
Hart., m. Jemima Brounson, d. of John,
Feb. 26, 1729-30.

1. Noah, b. Tan. 24, 1 730-1.

2. Roswell. b. May 18, 1733.

3. Micah, b. Mch. 9, 1734.

Stephen Hopkins, Jr., s. of Stephen, m.
Patience Brounson, d. of Isaac (2d),
Oct. II, 1744-

I. Anna, b. Oct. 1, 1745.

Patience d. June 3, 1746, and Stephen
m. Dorothy Talmage, d. of James of
New Haven, Dec. 16, 1747.

1. Saratiel, b, Nov, 21, 1748.

2. Lemuel, b. June 19, 1750.

3. Stephen, b. Apr. 22, 1754 [d. 1782, with small-

pox].

4. Hannah, b. Sept. 23, i7S7.

5. Esther, b. Aug. 29; d. Nov. 4, and the mother

Oct. 22, 1 761.

•

Timothy Hopkins, s. of John, m. Mary
Judd, d. of Deac. Th., June 25, 1719.
and d. Feb. 5, 1748-9. [She d. Dec. 5,
1744, and a son of three weeks, four
days later.]

1. Samuell, b. Sept. it, 1721 [d, at Newport, 1803].

2. Timothy, b. Sept. 8, 1723,

3. Huldah, b. Dec. 22, 1725; m. Abijah Richards.

4. Hannah, b. Apr, 11, 1728; m. Th. Upson.

5. Sarah, b. May 25, 1730; m, Tim, Clark.

6. James, b. June 26, 1732; d. July 14, 1754 [at New

Haven; a student at Yale].

7. Daniel, b. Oct. 16, 1734 [d. at Salem, Mass., Dec.

14, 1814, having preached there nearly fifty
years].

8. Marv, b. June 27, 1737; m. John Cossett.

9. Mark, b. Sept. 18, 1739 [d.at Great Barrington].

Timothy Hopkins, Jr., s. of Timothy, m.
Jemima Sowrill (or Towrill), d. of Ab-
raham of Simsbury, Jan. 14, 1741-2.

1. Ehud, b. Feb. x, 1742-3.

2. Ichabod, b. Dec. 7, 1744.
[Dorcas, b. May 26, 1747.
Timothy, b. Nov. 25, 1750.

Esther, b. Feb. 8, 1752; m, David Porter.
James, b. Aug. 14, 1754.
Jemima, b. May 17, 1757; m. Stephen Sibley.
Sarah, b. June 5, 1760; m. Sylvanus Adams.
Mary, b. 1762. Benjamin.

Timothy removed to Great Barrington,
Mass., before 1747, was chosen deacon,
1753, and d. about 1773.]

Truman Hopkins m. Julia Martin, Aug.
26, 1824.

Abner Hopen's inf., d. Jan. 16, i8io.*

Albon Hoppen, s. of Benj., m. Charlotte
Terril, d. of Enoch, Oct. 13, 1808.

1. Andrew H., b. Oct. 26, 181 1.

2. Esther, b. Jan. 3, 1813.

3. Reuben, b. July i8, 1814.

4. Sally, b. Nov. 24, 18x9.

Bethia Hopson m. W. M. Fowler, 1842.

Francis Horan m. Susan Nolan, June 13,
1851.

Emily Horton m. L. M. Hoadley, 1821.

Emily Horton m. Robert Coe, 1842.

Harriet Horton m. A. H. Lewis, 1841.

John Horton d. Feb. 4, 1787 (wife, Su-
sanna).*

John Horton d. May 14, 1799; Mary, his
w., Dec. 20, 1804.*

Mary Horton m. S. A. Bunnell, 1823.

Nancy Horton m. R. F. Wei ton, 1830.

Clarissa Hosmer m. Leonard Piatt, 1826.

Abraham Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon,
m. Hannah Weed, d. of John, Dec. 28.
1767, and d. Oct. 29, 1806.

FAMILY BECO,

HOTCHKISS.

HOTCHKISS.

1. John, b. Nov, 16, 1768.

2. Ezra, b. Mch. a, 1772.

3. Lois, b. June 2. 1773; m. los. Payne, 1795.

4. Hannah, b. July 5, 1775 [ra. Amos Tinker],

5. loci, b. Nov. 29, 1781.

6. Benjamin, b. June 15, 1786.

Abraham Hotchkiss d. Nov. 24, 1802;
had wife Rosetta from Bethany,*

Amos Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon, m.
Abigail Scott, d. of Gershom, Dec. 24,
1772.

1. Woodward, b, Oct. 19, 1773,

2. Sabria, b. July 19, 1777.

3. Avera, b, Apr. 5, 1779.

4. Molly, b. Feb. 9, X783.

5. Orel, b. Apr. n, 1785; d. Apr. 5, 1789.

6. Amos Harlow, b. Feb. x8, 1788.

7. Orrcn, b. Apr. i, 179a.

8. Abij^il Orel, b. Sept. zo, 1799; d. 1804.

Amos Harlow Hotchkiss and Lucretia
A.:»

Manila, bap. 1812; m. I. G. Smith.
Alathea, bap. Aug. 5, z8az; m. J. Bfeardsley.
Sylvia, bap. Nov. 17, 1822.

Amos H. Hotchkiss m. Sarah M. Scott —
both of Salem — [Aug. 29, 1837].

Asahel Hotchkiss, s. of Deac. Gideon,
m. Sarah Williams, Mch. 22, 1781.

1. Sally^ b. Oct. 27, 1781.

2. Curtiss, b. May 4, 1783.

3. Dyer, b. June 24, 1785.

4. Esther, b. May 21, 1788.

Sarah d. Mch. 28, 1794, and Asahel m.
Phebe Merriman of Cheshire, June 7,
1794.

5. Tempy, b. Feb. 27, 1797.

6. Asahel Augusta, b. June 30, 1799.

7. Marcus, b. Sept. i, 1801.

8. Phebe Maria, b. Aug. 5, 1805.

Avery Hotchkiss of Columbia m. Polly
Hikcox, Oct. 22, 1 810.

Benjamin Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., dec*d, m.
Hannah Beecher of Cheshire, July 26,
1807.

[i. Horace, b. Sept. 29, 1809.

2. Lyman, b. June 4, 18x2.

3. Harriet, b. Nov. 19, 18 15.

4. Emeline, b. Dec. 14, z8i8.

5. Rosannah, b. Jan. 10, 1820.

6. Benjamin Gilbert, b. Aug. i, 1833].

Bronson Hotchkiss m. Abigail M. Orton
of Sheffield, Mass., Dec. 15, 1825.

Calvin Hotchkiss, s. of Joel, m. Asenath
Sanford, d. of Jared of Cheshire, Dec.
23, 1S25'.

Charles Hotchkiss m. Electa Brace of
Torrington, Jan. 3, 1833.

Curtiss Hotchkiss:^

Frances, bap. Apr. 30, 1801.

Betsey^., l>ap. Dec. 29, 181 1.

Susan, Dap. Mch. 19, 1820; m. J. A. Pierpont.

Alonzo, bap. Dec. 23, 18^1.

Thompson Clark, bap. Aug. 18, 1824.

Elvira, m. Lucius Baldwin, 1835.

HOTCJ

DavM

Abi

17^

1. A

3 f

* a

6. O

Ab|

vid

7. C

8. J
zo. 1

David

Max

El

La

David
July
Sepi
X. Ml

2. w1

3. Ml

4. He

5. Da

Day

Rob

Eben
m.
Chei

1. Ai

2. Gil

»

Edga]
Cor I

Eldad

SI !

E ]

Eldad

No^ .

N 1

Elijal

Eli \
Da i

1. c I

2. ¥ .

3. »
Pol ;

Lu I
180 ,

4. t '■

Eliza I

174 .

Eliza I
175

Eno< I
Lo .

Esth I

18^

72 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

HOTCHKISS. HOTCHKISS.

Ezra Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., m. Melita
Beecher, d. of John of Cheshire, Oct.
31, 1796, and d. Oct. 10, 1820.

I. Lowis, b. Dec. 19, 1797; d. Aug. 5, 1804.
3. Sukey, b. Dec. 19, i799*

3. Tempe. b. Sept. 8, 1003.

4. Ansel, b. June 20, 1806.

5. Samuel, b. Nov. ao, i8zo.

6. Lois, b. Apr. 8, 18 13.

7. A dau,, b. Feb. 2; d. Feb. 9, i8x6.

Frederick Hotchkiss, Esq., s. of David,
m. Rhoda Hopkins, d. of John, Mch.
9» 1790.

1. Manilla, b. Mch. 11, 1791.

2. Chloe, b. Apr. 16, 1794; d. Apr. 22, 1812.

3. Julia, b. Feb. 7, 1796 [ra. Jonah Woodruff].

4. David Miles, b. Nov. 27, 1797.

5. Laura, b. Sept. 4, 1800 [d. 1813].

6. Clarissa, b. Jan. 6, x8o6 [m. Ebsha Hall] .
Two inf., d. 1806 and i8o8.i

Rhoda d. Mch. 12, 18 14 [and Fred. m.

Tabitha, wid. of Barrett, and d. of

Phineas Castle].

George F. Hotchkiss m. Caroline E.
Harrison of Bristol, Nov. 12, 1849.

Gideon Hotchkiss [b. Dec. 5, 1716], s. of
Stephen, m. Anne Brocket, d. of John
—all of Wallingford— June 16, 1737.

1. Jesse, b. Oct. 9, 1738.

2. David, b. Apr. 5, 1740.

3. Abraham, b. and d. May 3, 1742.

4. Abraham, b. Mch. 25, 1743.

5. Gideon, b. Dec. 31, 1744 [m. Mary Scott and d.

Jan. 6, 1819].

6. Hulda, b. June 37, 1747; m. J. Payne.

7. Anna, b. Oct. 22, 1749; m. R. Williams.

8. AmoSj b. Nov. 24, 1751.

9. Submit, b. June 2, 1753 [m. David Payne] .'

10. Titus, b. June 26, 1755.

11. Eben, b. Dec. 13, 1757.
[12. Asahel, b. Feb. 15, 1760].

12. Still-bom, July 27, 1762.

Anne d. Aug. i, 1762 [a. 46], and Gid-
eon m. Mabel Stiles [d. of Isaac] of
Woodbury, Feb. 22, 1763, and d. Sept.
3, 1807, a. 91. »

Mabel, b. May 33, 1764; m. C. Judd.
Phcbe, b. Aug. 29, 1765.
Hannah, b. Oct. 14; d. Nov. 26, 1766.
Stiles, b. Tan. 30, 1768.

17. Ohve, b. Nov. 31, 1769.

18. Millicent, b. May 6, 1771.
[20. Amzi, b. July 3, 1774J.

(These are numbered as on the record).

Gideon M. Hotchkiss:

Inf., d. Feb. 1, i8ii.»

Gideon O. Hotchkiss m. Nancy Smith,
Sept. 5, 1830.

Harris Hotchkiss m. Ann J. Martin of
Woodbridge, Nov. 20, 1830.

Henry Hotchkiss m. Rosetta Baldwin,
May 23, 1835.

Isaac and Rhoda Hotchkiss:*

Nelson and Sheldon, bap. Nov. 3, 1821.
Milo, bap. July 7, 1822.

Jesse Hotchkiss, s. of Gid., m. Charity
Mallory, d. of Peter of Strat, Oct. 2,

Hotchkiss. Hotchkiss.

1759, and d. Sept. 29, 1776 [with the
army].

1. Asael, b. Feb. 15, 1760.

2. Charrity, b. Men. 24, 1761.

3. Bulah, b. Mch. 13, 1762; d. Oct. 24, 1776.

4. Gabril. b. Aug. 13, 176^; d. Jan. 22, 1765.

5. Rebecka, b. Jan. 7, 1765.

6. Temperance, b. Dec. 3, 1767.

7. Apalina, b. Jan. 3, 17^8.

8. Cloe, b. Jan. 5, 1771.

9. Anna, b. May 19, 177^.

10. Huldah, b. Mch. 9, 1774.

11. Jesse, b. Aug. 3, 1776.

Joel Hotchkiss, s. of Wait, m. Mary
Rogers, d. of Deac. Josiah, Feb. 6,

1785.

1, Asenath, b. Mch. 33, 1787.

Joel Hotchkiss. s. of Abr., m. Esther
Beecher, d. of Benjamin of Cheshire,
June 16, 1803.

1. Calvin, b. July 19, 1804.

3. Horace, b. June 14, 1806; d. Mch. 14, 1807.

Abraham, bap. June 2, 1809.*

James Gilbert, bap. Sept. 11, 1822.

John Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., m. Susanna
Williams, d. of Dan., May 3, 1790 [and
d. 1837].

1. Levi, b. Jan. 18, 1791.

2. Ransom, b. Feb. 11, 1793.

3. Hannah, b. July 5, 1797.

4. Fanny, b. Nov. 29, x8oi.

5. Bronson, b. May 25, 1805.

Jonah Hotchkiss, Jr. :'

Hannah and Sarah, bap. Mch. 3, 1799.
Hiram, bap. Apr. 12, 1801.

Julia Hotchkiss m. G. Bouton, 1823.

Julius Hotchkiss, s. of Woodward of
Prospect, m. Apr. 29, 1832, Melissa
Perkms of Oxford, b. Apr. 21, 1810.

1. Cornelia Augusta, b. in Oxford, July 6. 1835.

3. Melissa Amelia, b. Mch. i, 1842.

3. Mary Ann, b. Dec. 13, 1844.

4. Julia Frances, b. Feb. 7, 1847,

Julius L. Hotchkiss of Bethany m. So-
phronia M. Hotchkiss, June 2, 1846.

Laura Hotchkiss m. Miles Todd, 1830.

Laura Hotchkiss m. G. Lounsbury, 1844.

Lauren and Nancy Hotchkiss:'

Lucy Emeline, Bela Edwin, and John Benham,

bap. May 27, 1821.
Giles Gilbert, bap. Apr. 13, 1823.

Lewis Hotchkiss of Woodbridge m.
Sarah Ann Porter [d. of Dr. Jesse],
Dec. II, 1831.

Lorana Hotchkiss m. Amos. Osborn,
Lyman Hotchkiss:

Matilda, bap. July 14, 1799.*
Polly, bap. June 30, 18 11.

Lyman Hotchkiss of Prospect m. Sarah
Ann Scott, Apr. 2, 1837.

Martha Hotchkiss m. S. Nichols, 1775.

Mary Hotchkiss m. Sam. Mix, 1781.

Mary Hotchkiss m. I. Nichols, 1840.

FAMILY RECOR

HOTCHKISS. HOTCHKISS.

M*|y A. Hotchkiss m. W. Lounsburyj
^*jy^J- Hotchkiss m. D. M. Phillips,

Medad Hotchkiss m. Rebeckah Spencer
^eb. 7, 1787.' '^

Oliver Hotchkiss and Esther:

Diman (?) and Elizabeth, bap. Dec. 5, 1811;

Patty A. Hotchkiss m. Ed. Benham.
1844.

Rosette Hotchkiss m. Luther Adams
1846. '

Sally Hotchkiss m. Sam. Osborn, 1797.

Sarah E. Hotchkiss m. H. Payne, 1843.

Silas Hotchkiss [b. Nov. 22, 1719]. s. of
Stephen of Wallingford, m. Lois Bron-
son, wid. of Benj., May 12, 1748.
I' Sr*:' **•>"• '9i 1748-9.

a. nester, b Jan. 2, 1750-1; m. Joseph Payne.

3. Stephen, b. Aug. 34, 1753.

4. / ™»n*nt. b. June 18, 1760 [d. May, 1838].

5. Lois, b. Mch. ai; d. Aug. 23, 1763.

Lois d. Feb. 7, 1776, and Silas m. Abi-

?au . who d. Aug. 31, 1794. [He

a. Jan.. 1783.] ^ ^

Stephen Hotchkiss, s. of Silas, m.Tamar
Richason, d. of Nathl., Dec. 31, 1778.
and d. Sept. 9. 1826. . -^ ' -^^ •

1. Joseph, b Feb. 13, 1781; d. Mch. 12, 1786.

2. Clarissa, b. July h, 1784. '

?' rS. J' \ f'^Pi- "' '787; m. H. Nichols.
t 1 i^ • u- £*^- '?? '790; m. Wra. Baldwin.
5. Lois, b Nov. 28, 1795.

, pifr**' T- '^PV9^t'798; d. Sept. 8, 1800.

and Humphrey Nichols. '

Stephen Hotchkiss m. Maria Goodyear

Inf., d. May 18, i8o5.»

Truman Hotchkiss :*

Leonard Richards, bap. Sept. 28, 18 17.

Wait Hotchkiss [and Lydia Webster of
Bolton]:

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 27, 1765.

4. Abncr, b. May 24, 1771.

Lydia d. Apr. 26. 1776, and Wait m.
Deborah, Relick of Isaac Twitchell.
Oct. 10, 1776.

5- J[iHfher,b Dec. 19, 1778.

6. Miles, b. July 27, 1783.

7. Isaac, b. Oct. 16, 1787.

William Robert Hotchkiss m. Rebecca
Leavenworth, Nov. 24, 1830. She d.
Apr. II, 1838.

Woodward Hotchkiss, s. of Amos, m.
Polly (Mary) Castle, d. of Capt. Phineas.
Apr. 2, 1797.

'• wn-*' ^'v^^y '°' '798.

2. Wilham. b. Aug., 1800.

3. Roday, b. Jan. 25, 1803.

4. Polly, b. July 3, 1805.

HOTCH

5. Jul

6. AH

7. Sar

Benon:
19. I
Isaac

John

E. D. :

bury

Aaron

1773.

z. Ma;

2. Cal

Anna I

Daniel

m. A

1734.

z. Aar

2. Ann

3. Hul

4. Dan

5. Eliz

(Thei
not c
to his

Daniel ]
ton, <3

I. Eli2i

2. Aarc

Elizabe

Clark

Ephraix
Mch.

Heman

rinda
from i

1. Caro

2. Hem

3- Jane

4- John
5. Char

John H<

liff]:

Samu
m.
tha

5. Han

6. Johi

7. Klizi

8. Mar
Tir
2 ]

9. Lydi

10. ZacL

11. Eph

Abiga
Hann£

1754.

Samuel

ben, d

I and 2,

, 3. Ephrs

4. Abiga

5. Mary,

74 Ap

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

How. Hull.

6. Eunis,-b. Nov. 24, 1756.

7. John, b. Oct, 22, 1762.

8. Abigail, b. Sept. 13, 1764.

Samuel How:^

Cloe, b. Jan. 29, 1779.

Sarah E. Howe m. W. Pickett, 1846.

Zacchaus How m. Esther Thompson,
Dec. 7, 1772.

1. John, b. Nov. 8, 1773.

Amanda Hoyt m. O. Albro, 1829.

Abigail Hubbard m. Ephraim How,
1781.*

Daniel Hubbard of Middletown m. Han-
nah Warner, Nov. 20, 1842.

David Hubbard m. Rhoda Guernsey,
Jan. 10, 1782."

X. Betsey, b. Mch. 28, 1782.

2. Jared, b, Jan, 9, 1785.

Josiah and Abigail Hubbard:

6, Eunice, b. Oct, 29, 1760.

7, David, b. Aug. 20, 1762,

8. Amos, b, Aug. 28, 1764; d, Aug. 1773.

9. Hezekiah, b, Sept. 21, 1766.

10. Joseph, b, July 10, 1768,

11. Lydia, b. Feb. 10, 1770.

12. Jacob, b. Dec. 10, 1771; d. Aug. 7, 1773,

13. Anna, b. Aug. a, 1773.

14. Rachel, b, Nov. 7, 1774.

Nathan Hubbard, s. of John, deed, of
Middletown, m. Lydia Judd, d. of
Nathl. of Wallingford, Jan. i, 1735-6.

1. John, b. Dec, 22, 1736,

2. Immer, b July 30, 1741; d. Jan. 13, 1744-5.

3. Eli, b. May 28, 1745.

4. Nathan, b. at Wal., Feb, 29, 1747-8.

5. Lydia, b June 23, 1750,

6. Tudd Immer, b. Aug. 19 1753.

7. Mary, b. July 2P, 1756.

8. Nathanl., b, Nov, 17, 1758,

Hart E. Hubbell m. Lucy Davis — both of
Naugatuck — Nov. 22, 1848.

Nehemiah Hubbel m. Lucinda Welton,
Nov. 9. 1774.*

Frederick Hudson m. Margaret Lally,
Oct. 6, 1851.8

John Hulbert m. Margaret Lannan, June

15. 1851.
Abigail Hull m. Joshua Moss. 1764.

Amos G. Hull [s. of Dr. Nimrodl, m.
Emily M. Porter [d, of ThomasJ— all
of Salem — Nov, 24, 1836.

Dr. Benjamin Hull dyed at Wat'town,
Jan. 16, 1767, and left two chil. — Benj.
and Esther, who m. Noah Warner.
His wid. m. Jotham Curtis.

Betsey Hull ra, S. Thompson, 1801.

Clarissa Hull m. B. S. Judd, 1839.

David Hull of New Town m. Rebecca A.

Tuttle [d. of Daniel], Feb. 28, 1838.

Eli Hull of Derby m. Philene Beebe,*
Sept. II, 1783.''

Hull. Humaston.

Elizabeth V. Hull m. D. A. Minor, 1830.

Esther Hull m. Horace Porter, 1845.

Ezra Hull m. Annis Johnson, July 18,
1771.

1. John, b. Feb. 21, 1772,

2. Jane, b. Feb. 8, 1774 [m, David Hoadley] .

Garry Hull, b. Tan. lo, 1803, s. of John,
m. Melissa Baldwin, d. of David, Feb.

15. 1825.

I, Ellen L.. b. Apr, 30, 1826; m. B. S. Bristol.
2 Harriet Kf,. b. May 7, 1828.

3. Stiles, b. Nov. 10, 1830; d. Mch. aa, 1833.

4. David B., b. Feb. 21, 1833.

5. John L., b, Jan. aa, 1838.

Hannah Hull m. Obad. Scovill, 1752.

Hannah Hull, wid., d. Aug. 7, 1807.*

Hannah Hull m. Chas. Nichols, 1821.

Henry A. Hull of Litchfield m. Sarah A.
Sandland, Sept. 23, 1838.

James Hull, s. of John of New Haven,

m. Susanna Arnold, d. of Nathl., Au£^.
22, 1733.

I, James, b. July 25, 1734; d. Dec. 4, 1736.

Susanna d. Dec. 9, 1736, and James m.
Jane Johnson, d. of John, dec'd, June

8, 1738.

Joel Hull and his wife [Mehitable Gunn,
d. of Jobanlah and Hannah]:

Orren, b. Feb. lo, 1794.
[Alma, b. and d. 1796.]
Alma, b. Aug. 29, 1797.
Henry, b, Jan. 12, 1804.
Daniel, b. May aS, 1806.

Mary Hull m. Eben. Bronson, 1716.

Mary Hull m. Ithiel Fancher, 1774.

Mercy Hull m. Eben. Porter, 1739.

Nancy Hull m. L. S. Lewis, 1835.

[Dr. Nimrod Hull m. Amy Lewis, and d.
Jan. 26, 1824.

1. Elizabeth; m. Ransom Culver.

2. Sarah (Nancy })• m. Lewis Hine.

3. Horace F.; m. Elizabeth Twitchell.

4. Lawrence Spencer; m. Lacetia Porter.

5. Emma, d. young.

^' ^°^ard°"^'*'U?'^P*l Minister; educated at

7. Amos Gift, j ^ale. d. a. 30 yrs.

Nimrod m. Amelia Seely.

8. Mary C; m, Lewis Curtiss.

9. George W,; m. Nichols.]

Priscilla Hull m. Samuel Scott, 1727.

Prosper Hull of Colebrook m. Betsey
Atkins of Wolcott, Aug. 28, 1825.

Sarah Hull m. Rev. M. Leavenworth,

1750-
Sarah M. Hull m. Garry Bissell, 1831.
Amos Humaston m, Abigail Allin, Nov.

5, 1771.

1. Enos, b. Mch. ii, 1772.

2. Thankful, b. June 26, 1773; d. Feb., 1774.

FAMILY RECORl

Hu

Hl?

Caleb Hummastoii [b. Feb, 20, 1715-16],
s. of John, m. Susanna Todd, A. of
Sara,— both oE No. H.— Nov. 14, 1738,
and d. Mch. 6, 1776. [His wife d.
Sept. 24, 1806.]
I. i.Mt, b. D«. ,

a. S«nih, h, Dec. -

-0^5;

Jiznt 2

D. Sitphen

E-};;:i

51 j™ b fa™

6. Mthiiable, b.' ,^_. _ _

S. Conlenl, b. Aug, 3, 1754; d, Feb. j, 1773.
. Phtb=, b. Dec 5. .756; -n. J«« TLroer.
9. AnniK. b. July 14, i;s9; m. S. Sulliff.
■o. Manh^ b.t^. », 1^; m. D. Poller.

Danuria Humaston m. A. Seymour, 1767,
David Humerston [s. of John] m. Ruth

Bassett, d. of Joseph — all of North

Haven— Nov. 1, 1743.

Joel Hi

Hadd.

3 !,;";.;;>

.i, .7)6:ni.TiinDihyAiw

t. A.h4!,V7n

M 8. '."fe.

Esther Hunuiston d. Sept, 17, 1788,'
HttDDah HniniBtoo m, Ephraim Allen.

1754-
[John Humiston and Abigails

M«7. b. Msy M, ,7351 ; m, A. BlaliMlce ;
Noah Humaston m. Lucy Barnes, Nov,
17, 1768,

I, Tempe, b. Aug. )i, 1769,

Roswel Hnmistoa of Stratford m. Me-

linda Atwater, Aug, i, 1831.
[Sunuel G. Humiston rn. Ruth Holmes,

d of Israel. .]

EitberS.. bip. lun. iS, tSiT.

Mary [ubell^x, bap. May 19; d. Dee. 16, iSii.

Thankful Humaston m. A. Dutton. 1764.
Timothy Humaston:

E«her, b. AtiK. IS, 1/36.

Ann Hungerford m. Jas. Tyler, 1763,
[David Hungerford d. 1758. Sarah, his
wid,. m. Thomas Doolittk, 1761,

Heirt: r«vid. Surah Andrewi, Umes d, before

DkTid Hungerford, s. of David, m. Ro-
sannah Williams, d, of Mr. Williams of
Narrowganset, June 5. 1760. and d.
Jan, 29. 1777.

1. Ume^ b. M-F 3, 1761.

I. Eliubelh, b, Aug. s, 1761; m. Selh Banbol-

3. MiTjr, I m. Abiel Bartbolomew, t7Ss.

S. Grab .

A. Ml ;
Clara L

of Ply I
David )

ner, d

i. Mi.r

Wixn J
St., I ■

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Hue

J"

Jeremiah Hurley m. Margaret Hourigan
—both of Plymouth— Feb. 3, 1850.
Abigail Hyde m. H. Munson, 1840.
Eliza Ann Hyde in. Garry Atwood, :834.
Vincent Ibbeitsoo m. Eliza Bossford.

May 27. iS4g.
Alonzo Isbell m. Fanny B. Smith, Mch.

9, 1842.
Cynthia H. Isbell m. G. L. Smith, 1840.
Hanford label from Nau. m, Harriet An-
drews of Prospect, d. of Samuel. Oct.,

1839.

I. Mtry Elii., b. in Naa., Sf pi., 1840.

I. Elhcna, b. Apr,; d, Juiy, 184,,
Harriet A. IsbcU m. A. C. Sperry, 1842.
John L. Isbel m. Eliza J. Botsford of

Derby, Aug. 27, 1837.
Sarah A. UbcU m. G. A. Johnson, 1345.
[Abram Ives, s. of Dr. Ambrose, m.

Mary Buckingham, d. of John, Feb. 25.

1839.]
Anne Ives m, John SutlifF, 1741.
Elizabeth Ives m. N. Baldwin, 1775.
Giles Ives from North Haven, b, Apr.

25, 1774, and Abigail Gilbert from

Haraden, b. Mch. 29, 1778, m. Oct. 9.

3. Ciroline, b, 6ci. 4, iSoi; ro. D, T. Bishu'p.

4. George Mcrwin, b. May i3, 1817.
Lydia Ives m. Timothy Jones. 1779.*
Lydia Ives m. T. Hammond, Jr., 1783.'
Haria Ives m. Luther Hall, 1833.
Olive Ives m. Merrit Lane, 1845.

1. John Ed., b. to En... Auk. i,, ,838.
I. Henry LuMme, b.Tlleh. 11, 1846.

Mrs. Joseph Jeffrey d. Oct. 37, 1837, a

60.'
Joseph P. Jeffrey and Mary Ann Lillias
Millwood— botn from Birm., Eng.— m.
Sept. 9. 1S33

I, C«h»riM Msria, b. July ,, 1819.
1. Eoin.. j™. bTFeb. .7. .8,., ■"

Rebeccah Jenkins m. Enos Ford, 177:.
Abigail Johnson m. David Alcox, 1767.
Abner Johnson, s, of Abner, merchant of

Wal , m. Lvdia Runnel, d. of Eben.

ezer of Chesliiro, June 30, 1773.

.n Jul;

1 Apr. ;

Annis Johnson m. Ezra Hnll, 1771.
Betsey Johnson m. David Warner, 1S19,
Charles M. Johnson of Woodbury m.

Ann Eliza Kinkham, Apr, 3. 1S47.
Cornelia H. Johnson m. Chas. Benedict.
'S4S.

;:teW

. ijsS; d. Jonc, n6z.

Deborah Johnson m. Jabei HarrisoD,

1772.
Ebenezer Johnson s. of Ebenezer of Der-
by, dec'd [m, Mrs. Lucy Barnes, Mch.

10. 1754]-

Stepheo and Mary Ives:

Thankful Ives m. Joseph Foot, 1768.
Augusta Jackson m. H. Freeman. 1S50.

(col.)
Bartholomew Jacobs m. Abigail Curliss,

d. of Daniel, dec'd, Apr. 22, 1751.

3. I>anid,'b.*Oci. 10, '1756. '

h Shiplei

Lorinda Janes m. C. A. Blackman, 1S3::.

Edvrard Jeffrey, b. July 8. iSij, and
Emma Moore, b. Dec. 18, 1816— both
from Binn., Eng.^ro. Dvc. 27, 1835.

Elizabeth Johnson m. James Prichard,
1721. ana Stephen Upson, 1750.

Elizabeth Johnson m. Hiram Chtpmu,
1842.

Emily Johnson m. G. W. Cook. 1837-

Esther Johnson m. Frederic Treadffay,
1836.

Eunice Johnson m. Abr. Osbom, i;fii.

Eunice Johnson m, Isaac Towner, iSia'

Eunice Johnson, wid., d. Apr. 5. 1639. »■

Franklin Johnson of Wallingford m.

Salome Holt. Oct. ai, 1S33.
Gideon A, Johnson of Oxford m. S«r«t

A. Isbell of Nau., Dec. 11, 1S45.
Hannah Johnson m. Joseph Broivn, t;50

FAMILY BECORR

Johnson.

Th. Osbom, 1777.

Sam. Benham, 1799.

m. A. Adams, 1820.

Benj. Grinnels, 1825.

Harriet Hoadley [d.
of Nau. — Nov. 30,

Johnson.

Hannah Johnson m.
Hannah Johnson m.
Hannah E. Johnson
Harriet Johnson m.

Isaac S. Johnson m.

of Chester] — both

1834.
James Johnson and Abigail:

X. Abigail, b. June lo, 1727.
a. Eunice, b. June 31, 1739.
3. Mehittable, b. May 37, 1731.

James B. Johnson m. Mary Law, Dec.
26, 1850.

Jarvis Johnson, b. Jan. 31, 1805, s. of
Gideon, and Maria Strong, b. Sept. 15,
1 815, d. of Noah— all of Southbury —
m. Aug., 1832.

1. Mary Jane, b. June x6, 1834.

2. Emily Maria, b. Dec. 9, 1836.

3. Martha Elisabeth, b. Dec. 9, 1840; d. 2846.

4. Franklin Edward, b. Aug. zo, 1845.

Jesse Johnson, s. of Cornelius, m. wid.
Hannah Beach, relict of John, Aug. 23,
1780.

z. Sarah, b. Dec. 6, 1780.
3. Hannah, b. Mch. 39, 1782.

Joel Johnson, s. of Joseph of Derby, m.
Samira Frisbie, d. of David of Wolcott,
Apr. II, 1827.

z. David Franklin, b. Feb. xo, 1828.

3. Henry Carlos, b. Nov. 8, 1830.

3. William E., b. July 25, 1843; drowned 1845,

[John Johnson d. 1739. Had wife, Mercjr;
chil.: Jane (w. of James Hull) and Si-
lence.

Larmon Johnson of Oxford m. Anna
Mix, d. of Philo, Mch. 13, 1826.

Laura A. Johnson m. Isaac Hough, 1835.

Lorana Johnson m. Dennis Trian, 1823.

Lydia A. Johnston m. C. B. Lawrence,
1847.

Lyman Johnson, s. of Cornelius, m.
Mary Hoadley, d. of Nathaniel, Mch. 6,
1780.

I. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 9, 1780.
3. Truman, o. June 18, 1783.
3, Ana, b. Jan. 9, 1787.

Mary Johnson m. Samuel Barnes, 1722.
Mary Johnson m. Jehiel Castle, 1802.*
Mary Johnson m. D. W. Lee, 1823.
Mary Johnson m. Wright Parks, 1834.
Mille Johnson m. J. £. Thompson, 1829.
Robert Johnson and Sarah:

1. Hannah, b. [1729]; d. Apr. 27, 1733.

2. Benjamin, b. Apr. 18, 1731; d. Jan., 1744-5.

3. Hannah, b. Apr. 2a, 1733.

4. George, b. Jan. 8, 1734-5'

5. Robert, b. Feb. 9, 1736-7.

6. Sarah, b. Apr. 7, 1739.

7. Ruth, b. Mch. 26, 1743.

8. Samuel, b. Sept. 2, 1744.

Johnson

9. RacI
xo. A da

Sabra J<

Sarah Jc

Silence
Moses,

1733.

z. Sarah,
3. John,

3. Lemui

4. Mary,

5. Jane, I

6. Elihu,

Theodosi

Thomas

28, 185J

William
sey Kn
Jan. 31,

WUlis Jc
1843.

WUson J

12, 183:

Caroline
Jane Joni

Joseph J<

garett '
m. Sep

z. Eliza,
3. Charle

3. John,

4. Sarah,

5. Henry

Maria Jo
Olive Jox

Philen

Philena

Thomas
beth C<
Birm.,

J. WiUia

2. Elizat

Timothy

1779.*

1. Philer

3. Belosi

William
Mary

phreys
Attleb

z. Sarah
3. Norm

3. Caroli

4. WiUia

5. John

William
May I'

Amanda

Chaunce

Allyn S

mSTORT OF WATERBXrar.

J"

Jllli

, 1785.'

Ebeneier, late of Wat . now residing
ill Goshen, m. Betty Hill, d, of Nathan
of Chfsbire. Oct. 3. 1782-

. .735-

[Dr.] BenjanuD Judd, s. of John, m. Ab-
igail Adams. A. of (IiUet of Symsbury,
Jan. S, 1738-9, who d. Nov. 7, 1755.

10. Esihcr.

Electa Judd m. J. W. Bigelow, 1825.
Elnatban Judd, s. of Win., m. Miriam

Richards, d. of Sam., dec'd, Dec. 2S,

i7Sa.

1. Richnrdi Samuel, b. Ori. t6. 17s;.

\. bholh».'b. Feb.'Js.'i'^; ra. }at. Cnlln.

5. Consider, b. Juoe .,; d. June 1,. xj^.

6. H,l],«m.b. July,, ,769.

Esther Judd m. Sam. Peck, i3o3.
Harvej Jndd m. Sarah Castle, Aug;. S,

1761,

. 178^.

6. BeJiiiuorn. r'jun"a,i7ss.
Burrit S. Judd, s. of Harvey (and Jemi-
ma H1IH.-0X), m. Clarissa Hull, d. of
Omn, Dec. 34, 1839.

Chauncey Judd, s. of Isaac, m. Mabel
Hotchkiss, d. of CapL Gideon, Sept. 15,
178s. [He d. Feb. 24, 1823, a. 58).

Chauucey Judd m. Esther Todd, Sept. 3,
I Sag.

Clarinda Judd:

Harvey Judd [s. o£ Stephen, Jr.] m.

Sally D. BrowQ, Dec. 31, iSii.
Harvey Judd m, Jane E. Jones. June 33,

Henry C. Judd [s. of Thomas] m. Har-
riet Tompkins, Nov, 3, 1S34.

An account of the children of Hepzibata
Judd, the dau. of Thomas of Simsbnry
[and Hepsibah Williams. Thomas was
gr. son of Lieut. Thomas].

Isaac Judd, s. of Joseph, dec'd. m. Anna
Williams, d. of Daniel, Jan. 23, 1751—2
[andd. June 9. 1S08].

1. Roswcll. b. Nov. 6, 17

j.<i

n. [Ed.P

II)]

Daniel Judd [s. of Thomas] m. Maria E

Jones. Apr. 21, 1S51.
Ebenezer Judd, s. of John, dec'd, m.

Mary Hawkins, d. of Joseph, dec'd, of

Derby, Nov. 17, 1742-

I. Bnwslcr, b. Jul. 13, 1741-4.

3. Ebenenr.li. UajriS, i;47-

4. Kanh b. Jan, a, 1748-9; d. May 7. '7SS.
J. David, b, (>cl. 11, t7si>.

6. Iknaiah. b. Srpi. ij. 17)1,

'■ H^l'ini. lap.* Apr!'"' i7«..»

Ebeaezer Judd, s. of Jos., dec'd, m. An-
nah Charles of New Haven, Feb. 7,
17(35, who d. Aug. 10, 1782, and her
child still-born.

, .js6.

Isaac Judd, Jr,, 3, of Isaac, vn. Patience
Hammond, d. of Thomas, July 21, 1775.

John Judd, s. of Left Thomas, m. Han-
nah, d. of Serg. Sam. Hikcox, Apr. 16,
1696. [He d. about 171S; she. 1750].

1, Hannah, b. Fcbrary 1, 1696 [bap. in WoodburT.
Nov.9,,6<i,|,.ndd.Mch..,,,7i3.
rjDhanna, bap. in Wood., .May >i. 1699).
1. John, b. in Lhc iS day ol May, i£|».

3. ^muall, b. in Nov. £, 1703.

4. Thonia^ b. ia Januan to, 170;; deled In UarcJi

John Judd, s. of John, dec'd, ra. Marcy
Brouason, d. of^Sam., dec'd, of Ken-
sington, Jan 6, 1731-2, who d. Nov. 13,

FAMILY RECOR

JUDD. JUDD.

a. Samuelf b. Dec. 26, 1734.
3, Noah, b. Oct. 13, 1737.

John Judd, s. of Sam., m. Elizabeth Rich-
ards, d. of Eben, Apr. lo, 1755.

X. Levi, b. Mch 16; d. July 29, 1756.
a. Levi, b. Oct. 22, 17S7.

3. Abigail, b. July 3; d. July 10, 1760.

4. John, b. June 27, 1761.

5. Chandler, b. Apr, 3, 1763.

6. Abigail, b. Apr. 7, 1765.

7. Luanny, b. Mch. 19, 1769; m. B. Tuttle,

8. Annah, b. Sept. 26, 1772; m. S. Tuttle.

9. Esther, b. Feb. xi, 1775.

Joseph Judd, s. of Thomas of Hart. , dec'd,
m. Elizabeth Royse [b. Aug., 1709], d.
of Robert of Wal., Nov. 10, 1726. He
d. Feb. 16, 1750; she. May 14, 1770.

X. Isaac, b. Nov. 18, 1727 [in West Hartford].

2. Phebe, b. May 10, 1729.

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 7, 1732.

4. Lois, b. June 9, 1735; d. Mch. 4, 1750.

5. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 23, 1737.

6. Ruth, b. May 23, X740; ra. Abr. I.ewis.

7. Abigail, b. Jan. 23, 1742-3; d. Mch. 23, X750.

Julia £. Judd m. J. P. Merriman, 1840.

Larmon N. Judd, s. of Chauncey, dec^d,
m. Olive Bouton, d. of John, Oct. 29,
1826.

Laura Judd m.Luther Gaylord, 1833.

Laura Judd m. Nelson Hinman, 1837.

Loveland Judd, b. May 23, 1788, s. of
Walter, and Rebecca Brockett, d. of
Zenas, m. Apr. 6, 1S12.

X. Harriet, b. Apr. 23, 1813.

9. Amanda, b. June 8; d. Oct. x6, 18x5.

3. Franklin Lauren, b. Aug. 8, 1816,

4. Abigail, b. Feb. 18. X8T9; d. Oct. 8, 1838.

5. Amanda sd, b. Men. 13, X821.

6. Rebecca, b. Jan. 8, 1823.

7. l^va, b. Jan. 25, 1826.

8. Electa, b. June 7, 1829; d. Oct. 6, X845.

9. Edson L.,D. Apr. 9, X835.

Lucian Judd, s. of Walter, m. Rachel
Potter, d. of Lemuel, Oct. 23, 1820.

Lucy C. Judd m. H. E. Mann, 1837.

Lydia Judd m. Nathan Hubbard, 1735.

Mabel Judd m. Sam. Kidney, 1S23.

Michael Judd [s. of Noah] ra. Mary Wel-
ton [d. of Peter], Apr. 24, 1785.*

X. Rebecah, b. Mch. 28, 1786.
2. Michael 2d, b. Mch. 17, 1789.

Minerva Judd m. Lyman Welton, 1822.

Myron £. Judd of Winsted m. Jane E.
Chatfield, Apr. 20, 1846.

Nancy Judd m. Marshall Hoadley, 1821.

Noah Judd, s. of Lieut. John, m. Re-
beckah Prindle, d. of Jon., July 10,
1760. [He d. Sept. 3, 1822; she, 1838,
a. 99].

X. Jemima, b, Aug. lo, X76X [m. S. Woodward].

2. Harvey, b. May 5, 1763.

3. Michael, b. Feb. 19, 1765 (christened at St. James

Ch., Apr. 14, 1765. The first, recorded).

Rebeccah F. Judd m. J. C. Bailey, 1847,

Judd.

Reubei

ben
ton,
Apr.
a. 40.

1. EUe

2. Cha

Rossel

June

1. Estl

2. Lea>

3. Ann

4. Tam

5. Ch*

6. Rust

7. l^ia,

8. Laur

9. Asah

Sally Ji
Sally M

Samuel

beth \

1 730- J

1. Han

2. Johi

3. Asa,

4. Estl

Samuel
Hop!
tie c
Mch.

X. Me
2. Oli

^,

Ha

Sar

3-
4-
S-
6,

Samuc

Bald

1798

X. Eli
2. So

1

Clec
Poll
Apr
she,

Samu

riet
Jur

1. E

2. T

Saral

Stepl
Cla

X.
2.

Me
m.
W

3-

M;
of

mSTORT OF WATERS URT.

Jm.D. JUDD.

Woomer, d. of Doct. Ebenezer of
Wood., Mch. 13, 1751.

,. D>nlel, b. J«. y. .75.-,; d, u O-'b"; -ilh
IheinaJl-poi. Feb. J. t;76.

JlDD. Jmso,.

Thomks Judd, s. of John, dec'd, m. Ann
Porter, d. of Dan., dec'd. May 11, 1732,
(Hed. i74o]and Ann m. James Nichols.

Lydia d. June 2, 176.S, and Stephen m
his fouitn wife, viz.. Else Matthews
Relick of Phiueas, Nov. 10, 1768. Hi
d. Oct. 12, 1777 [she, Aug. a, 1799].

He d.

ford, Jan. iS.

iSso; she, Mch. 16, 184

I. ThoDiu. b. Oct. 18, 1776.

3. ElSlKiii, b. F«h?»!' jBj; m. J.
d., Miry Moiuoa. m. V. Petti
,. Hepdbih, b. May ij. i;84.

5. j««, b. 6«. „, 1,3*.

6. NabbyCuniB, b. Apr. to, 1791.

7. Sally Ru»cl b. Nov. I, 1793; d.

y-" ^

Thomas Judd, s of Stepher

Clark from Wallingford. Oct. 34. iSoa
1. Heory Clark, b. Oti. «, .fe...

J. Lydia Ann^ b. June a, 1S05. ia WaJ., m. Onoa

4. Sally. b.'Aug.' 1;. iSd7, in N. Haven.

5. Hepsa EJii., b. May iS, iSiu-. n. C. Sanfod.

6. Samuel Milci, b. May I, iSi j.

Timothyludd, s. of Wm.. m. Mary Clark.

d, of Tbomas, Meh. 29, 1744. She d,
Nov. 8, 1744, and Timothy m. Millicent
Southriayd, wid. of John. Jr., Oct 9.
1749.

9. Harvey, b. Aug. ij, .70*.
IS. Williun RUB»I, b. May g, t8«.

Left. Thomas Judd's dau.. Sarah [w. of
Step. Hopkins, Jr., of Hart. J. d. May
II. 1693. a. 27. His wife d. May 22,
1695, a. 56- Left. Judd d. Jan. 10.
1702-3, a. 64.

Deacon Thomas judd, ye soon of Will-
iam of farming town was married to
Sarah freeman, ye daughter of Stephen
freeman of New worck in east larsy
february ye 9, 1687.

May 1. William, b. May 7. i6Sc.

t. Manha, b. Sept. 11, tb)t [m. T. CcmlM).

; }, Kachell, b. Nov, 13, i{94: id. Thomas L'pson.

4. Sarah, b. Apr. 13, 1697 |d. Nov. 1. 17J6].

''"'" 6. Ma™b."jim.V,"70';m'-Tm.''Hopiiini!''
Ijoj. 7. Eliiabelb, b. fuly 13, .704: m. J. L'jHOn.
1709. S. Ruth, b. May 9. 1707 Im. lu. Smiihl.

Thomas Jndd, soon of left. Thomas was
married to Sarah Gaylard [b, in Wind-
sor. July II, 1671I, dau. of Joseph
Senor, ye iitta of Aprill i5SS; married
by Mr. Zac': Walker. [He d. in West
Hartford. 1724.]

,:J"

.69,-3 [-. Jauie. WiUiani.]; J,«ph

4. Ci

Pa^enia, b. Aug.'"'.'?'

Allyn Soulhmayd, b. Tucwmv. u>:i. 5. it^.

6. Timothy, b. Friday, Jan. ji; d. May A 17*3-

Millicentd. Mch. 26, 1763. and Timothy

m. Ann Sedgwick [wid. of Benj.] Aug.

S. 1764. Timothy m. [his fourth wife,

widow] Mary CIas.son, July 4, 17S3.'
Walter Judd, s. of Isaac, ra. Margaret

Tirrell, d. of Josiah, May 30, 1782.
William Jndd, s. of Deac, Thoma.s, and

Mary [Root, d. of Stephen of Fann..

m. Jan. 21, 1712-13. She d. Dec 11.

1751. He m. wid. Hope Lee. andd.

Jan. 29, 1772]:

S. Ad'aS. tb!iuKlVi7Ji'j. ' '
J. Ma>y, b. Vfov. "f," '7"7'[m- Thomu Rkhird.].
9! Sarab.l,^ No^»'";73V;^'b. Richaidi,
William Judd, s. of Capt. Wm., ra. Maiy
Castle, d. o£ Isaac, Nov. 2, 1752.

1. Demaa. b. May !|6. 1753.
a. Balineryha |Bal marine f). b. Sepl. k, 17SS.
3. William, b. Apr. 1, 1758.
l. Mary Rool, b. Dec, 91, 1750 [at. D, Ganuty].
r«a<:G«rnKy|.

J, Luce, b. July a. 1764 [n..
't 6. Sheldon, I1. July .8, 1767

8, Panhen*, b. Dm:. 3. 1771.
William R. Judd, s. of Stephen, m. De<
2, 1S21, Anna Browa, d. of Curtis, 1
Aug. 8, 1804.

FAMILY BECOR

[Harlow Judsoo,

Sally Prentiss,
Sept. 8, 1825.

Venn. d. of Nathan of New
ed child of B. Judsoiu b. Mch.

b. Dec. iz. 1797, a
b. Feb. 19, 1798,

Hu'ttiB. Judson m. Ashley Scott, 1787.
Rebeckah Jndson m. Rev. Abr. Fowler,

1795-
Simeon Judson:'

Patly. b. al Wood., Sepl. i], 177S.

Thomas Juris m, Mary Brown, Mch. 12,

1837.
Joseph Kaia m. Ann W. Bateman, Sept

3. 1838.
William Kaoah m. Bridget Gold. Aug.

9. 1851-
Peter Kavenaugli m. Margaret Cumford

in Ireland.

I. Allii (Alice), b. Mch., 1S33.

J. Mar, Jane,

, '837.
-. 1838.

Martha Keeler m. David Scott, 1800.
Anna Kellogg ra. Jer. GriUey. 1813.
Edmund Kellogg of Wolcott m. Betsey

Pond, Sept. 23, 1821.
Martin Kellogg:* [^nd Olive];

I., Vt

. ifM.

. 1778-

James Kelly m. Alice Egan, Apr. 29,

1851.'
John Kelly m. Julia Butler (?), May 4,

1851.'
John Kellj m. Aoastasia Murphy, Aug.

18, 1B51."
Patrick Kelly m. Mary Moore, Apr. 29,

1851.'
Jonathan Kelcy, s. of Stephen of Weth.

s. Oa
6. Re

[ax A

3. Maj

Samuel

judd,

Rach.

1. Davi
Laura I
James 1

I, 184
Thomai

ill'

Timoth

Sept.
Daniell

Have

Herritt \

a2 [If :
Charitj

1788.

.. Ch. .

Charlei

Eliza
Rebe

Plair

mSTORT OF WATKRBURT.

K[N

D.l m. Alathea R. Scovill [d. of Will- '■ J«i.h b Mt*. 5. rm-

iam H,l, Apr. ag, 1851. '■ "'^' ''■ ■'''°" '• '"'■

John Kingsbury [b. Dec. 30. 176.]. s. of ^"tJ-*" ^"'' ^"^^^ [Hotchkiss]:'

Nathl.. dec-d. of Norwich, ra. Marcia ,. EdwinSh..r™,. i-p ;»««, ,8.,.

Bronson. d. of Stephen, Nov. 6, 1794- Merrit L«ne [s. of Levi] ra. Olive Ives

She d. Mch. 21, i8i3- ["■ °^ Talcoit of No. Haven), Jane 9.

t. Ch»rl« D«inison, b. Nov. 7, ,7,5, '^45-

1. Julius JesM Bronson, b. Oci. iS, 1797. Joseph LftDg from Sandbointon, N. H,,

5'^^s',^™''b'Nov°!l6'.«4^m Wn, Brown ^"'^ E'i" McLallan from Lancaster.

John S. Kingsbury, s. of John, Esq., m. "jj^f^r b^D^ U.',8,7'

Abby H. Haydeo. d, of Daniel, Jan. ,: cb.rWb. r=b.6. .Si^iiAog.a. .a.6.

25. 1827. 3. Suan M., b. Api. a, t»is.

r l.™« n I, V ,a„ 4- Eli" J., b. Sep. n. 1817; m. I. A. Miitooa.

i' SytvU E ,'b Stp? 7' 1814' '* *^*^"" "■■ •>■ ^'■T 3'. '8*3-

s. J«m« d',', b. Stpi". 7. .gjiS; d. j»n. 19, <3}t. Robert Lang m. Charlotte E. Sperry fd.

Abb's.\V«"*K"U'*,''" of Anson], Feb. 9. 1851.

l'. JobD s. b.', b. July 37, 1345. Abigkil Landon m. Samne Nichols, ■ 7S3.

Ann Elizft Kinkham m. C. M, Johnson. Abigail Luigdon m. Andrew Keale. 1S44.

'^••7' David Landen, s. of David of Goshen,

Reuben Kinney of N, H, d, Aug. i. 1S06, m. Abigail Judd, d. of Ebenezer, Feb.

a. 27.' 4, ij&<).

Sophia Kinney m. Horace Stevens, 1S36. ■■ Fmny. b. juiy i, i;^,.

WiUiam H. Kirk, b. in Paisley, Scot. Martha Langdon m. J. P. Benham. 1847.

July 27. iSiS, and Julia M. Frost, d. of Ozios Langdon m. Abigail Hall, Mav 13,

S. C., m. Sept. I, 1845- 1832.

,. William Kerdinand, b. M.jr ,9, ,846. g^^j, j^ Langdon m. Jere. Grilley. 1S44.

Eliza Kirtland ra. N. B. Piatt, 1840. Suaanna Laugton m. Eben. Bronson,

Betsey Knowltoa m. Wm. Johnson, 1S41. ,-36.

Sarah Knowlton m. Jesse Perkins, and WiUiam Langdon ra. Mary Thompson

J. Bronson. in England.

Martin Lacy ni. Margaret White. May i- There™, b. jnne n, iSij.

,„ ,a^, ' f ' J, Elia.b. Apr., .Sji; m. J. Redfeni.
Ijiry Ann, b. Apr. j, iSjj.
irah Ann, b. Sept 93, 1838.
'illiam Henrv. b. May ii, 1B40.

. 1841. (All ibe

13. 1820, and Mary Ann Kittridge Tay-
lor, b. in Groton, Aug. la, 1S21, m.
Mch. 24. 1S43.

6. Chula. b. Mch. >
J. Elmore, b. Jan. .,

Thomas Lannen c

,1845.

Mary Reiley, May

Michael Lally m. Bridget Horan, A;>r. 8,

1851.'
PaUick Lally m. Mary Kelly. Sept. 15,

1851.*
Jesse Lambert of New Haven m. Susan

Judd, Jan. 7. "" '

m, L. Higgins

Rachel Lattimore m. S. Guernsey, i
Michael Laughlin of Kings Co.. Ire.

r64.

He d. and Sus

... Jar.

Althea Lampson ra. James Scovill, 178S.
Edward R. Lampsoa m. Esther Strong,

June 30, 1851.
Anson E. Lane of Wolcott m. Lydia A.

Edwin S. Lane m. Caroline U\.rniT.

Nov. :;4. L-3-,. [lied. i&4^] and Ciiro-

Irnera, Natb:in Fc-nn, 1S44,
Joel Lane, s of Daniel, m. Elizabeth

Atkins, d. of Jose, h, May 21. 1776-

Mary Down, in Ire., July, 1837.
1. Edward, b. Sepl. 9. 1838.
1. Kill, b. Sept. q, 1844.

J. Ann, b. Mar », 'M^- (All boni in Amenea.)
David S. Law from Windham, Green
Co.. N. Y. (or Barnwell, & C). m,
Adelia Porter, d. of Dr. Jesse, July 9,
1837.
I. Jesse Leonadas, b. Oct. 6. 1840.

Mary Law m. J. B. Johnson, 1850.
Charles B. Lawrence m. Lydia A. John

George Lawrence ni. Mary Allen of

Nrtu., May 14, iS4,S.
William C. Lawrence oi Canaan m

Muria T, Odle of Litch., Apr, i3. iSj6.
Lucinda Leach m. George Nichols. 1S46.

FAMILY RECOl

Lkavenworth. Leavenworth.

Benjamin F. Leavenworth [s. of Mark]
m. Jane Bartholomew [d. of Andrew]
of New Haven, Nov. 12, 1833.

Hoardman H. Leavenworth, b. Jan. 16,
X826, s. of Russell of Woodbury, and
Antoinette Merriam, b. in 1828, d. of
Rufus of Prospect, m. Sept. 25, 1846.

I. Ellen Antoinette, b. June 27, 1847,

Hdward B. Leavenworth, s. of Philo of
Roxbury, m. Candice C. Brown, d. of
Abner [Sept. 28, 1S40].

1. Mary Maria, b. July 26, 1846.

Hlisha Leavenworth [s. of Dr. Fred-
enck] m. Cynthia Fuller, Sept. 17
1845.

Dr. Frederick Leavenworth, s. of Jesse,
Esq of Vermont, m. Fanny Johnson,
d. of Abner, A.M., May 19, 1796.

I. Lucia, b.Mch. 24, 1797; m. Asa Train.

3. Lwa, b. Dec. 17, 1798; m. C. D. KinRsbury.

3. J redenck Augustus, b. June 13, 1801 [d. 1800]

4. Abner Johnson, b. July 2, 1803 ^ ^^-'•

6. Ehsha, b. Mch. 15, 1814.]

Hannah Leavenworth m. David Bald-
wm, 1800.

Jesse Leavenworth s. of Rev. Mr. Mark
m. Cathanne Frisbie, relict of Mr Cul^
pepper, late of Branford. and d. o*f Mr
John Conkling of South Hampton oii
Long Island. July i, 1761. fehe d.
June 29, 1824, a. 87.]

1. Melines Conkling, b. May 4, 1762,

2. Ruth, b. Feb. 25, 1764.

3. Fredenck. b. Sept. 14, 1766.
L4. Catharine, b. 1769.

5. Jesse, b. Aug., 1771.

6. Mark, b. in New Haven, Aug. 30, 1774.1

Joseph Leavenworth, b. Sept. i6. 1773,
s. of Samuel, and Tamar Prichard b
Feb. 9, 1778, d. of Benjamin, m. Jan*
12, 1797. » J** .

\' H^nnnh \ ^°''- '^i '^98 [m. Wm. Lockwood].
a. Hannah b. Sept i6 1800; m. Lyman Bradley

5. Rebecca, b. Feb. 9, 1811; ni. W. R. Hotchkils
7. i>arah Ann, b. Aug. 9, 1817; m. J. Wheeler.

Joseph S. Leavenworth m. Minerva
Newton, Apr 29, 1824, and d. Dec. 30.
1841. a. 39. Mmerva m. J. G. Bronson.

"• ■'"cifild '■'^*'' ^' ^*^ ''7. 18^7; m. E. B. Fair-
3. Frederic C, b. July 14, 1835.

(*• Baldwin Genealogy " gives

^Tu^v'J'.l^"^' ^y P^'!??' '^30; Frederick Eli,
July 21, 1833, and F. C. as above.)

Mr. Mark Leavenworth, s. of Thomas

Leav

of S

Mr.

I.J,

Rui

Sar

Dei

179:
58tl:

180J:

a. M

3. Jo

4. Sa

5. >v

6. Ni

Mark

naC

I. M:

s. All

.1

3. Ml

4. Bet

5. H.

7. Ca:

Anni
san

1844

Noble
May
E. J I
wan

Sally :

1 8 10.

Sarah

rous

Willia [

m. I

h 17

z. Sal I
a. Wi i
o

David i

John (

Mary ]
Lucret !
Charle
Maria .
Mary 1 i
Agnes .
t[Abne

1741. !
Azut

1. Asa :

Abrahi 1

* For more extended notices of these families see " I eavi-n
+ The record says "Jacob and Azubah,'";hicVfs'ma^nif:^^^^^

HISTORY OF WATEBBURT.

Judd, d. of Joseph, Nov. 9, 1767, who

,. Bbodji, b, Jun^ 6. ,T>^ [A. unm. Mch., .8,i|.

,. An«l.b.July,E. .77'.

3. Pl..^b..b. July ,,,.775.

,. Pnll*,b, Aug. 30,1778.

Ansel Lewis, s. of Abraham, m. Lylia
Merrills, d. of Caleb, May iS, 1.S02.

i. Phebc b, AuK.^.

4.' SiuDuel b. Sept. t. 18.16.'

;, AnMl SprnCET. b. (Xi. «. 1^07.

«. Ruchcl, b. Scpi. JO. 1B119; m. E. A. Smitb.

7. PoU*, b. Miv.5, 18"-

t. Culeli Merrill, b. Ktb. ij, 1813; d. Ocl.. 1B18.

Archibald P. Lewie of Antwerp, N. V.,

m. Elizabeth L. Potter [d. of Erastus].

Sept. 37, iH46.
Asahel H. Lewis ra. Harriet N. Horton.

Nov. 3, 1S4'.
Barnabas Lewis, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin of

Wallingford, m Jerusha Doolittle, d. of

Ebenezer, Mch, 10, 1752.

9. Bedom, b. Apr. 3n, 1754'-

Jerusha d. May 24, 1754, and Barnabas
m. Deborah llrooks, d. of Thomas of
Wal., Dec. 15, 1756. She d. Feb. II,
1759-

). Davie

>. Apr. :

Bela Lewis, s. of Benjamin, m. Damaras
Prindle. d. of Jonathan— all of Wal-
lingford — May 15, 1760. He d. May
15. i7ti3; and May 15, 17(14, Daniuras
m. Oliver Terrill.

[HU hein wert Sarah, Ab^ail, who chest Dr.

henj. Ut.B rw gtii^diJiii, RuOl and N,^.m.].

[Caleb Lewis, s. of Caleb of Wal., m.

Eunice Welton, d. of Stephen, Jan. 10,

1736. J

Caleb Lues [s. of Caleb]:'

Abigail, b»p, June ,, .77,, I -'™'P{' =„"i^, ""5'
^""■'"^ I Abigail L,;^..

[DaTid Lewis s. of John:

"m. Jan,' 1, 1800, Amta Wliilney'. David,' cLsl

Tamer Hale, d, 1
ven. June 14, 1750.

I, l»bol, b. Srpt. 10. I7i
fc Tamtr, b. D«- rf. .j;
3. Buiilla. b, Mch. aS, i

Erastns Lewis and Salome:'

Edward. Marj-,AdiJiM,Juli»n.ErMliHBogl
Ge.irj;e and Ehra Salome, bap. Oct. 5, 1817.

[Ezra Lewis and Anne Hine. b, Nov.
1769, d. of Hezekiah, m. Nov. II. 17'

Henrietta Lewis m. O. M. Stevens, i?26.

[Isaac Booth Lewis, s. of Rev. Thomas
of Deac. Joseph, ra. Miliscent Baldwin,
d. of Jonathan, May aS. 1770.

I. Polly, b. Mai 93, 1771: m. Daniel Clirk.
». Mibactnl. b. Oct. a^, 1773; m. David Tajlor,

Isaac Booth d. Apr. jg, 1777], and Mil-
iscent m. Phineas Porter.
Ives Lewis m. Almira Hall, Nov. 20,

Jacob Lewis sti Caleb Lewis.

John Lewis, s. of Joseph, m. Marv

ilunii. d. of Samuel of 'Woodbury, Dea

4- 1734.

I. David b Apr, ,, .J36: d. Mch. .j. 'lit-

3. sjirali, h, Apr. i), 1743; m. Ebeneier Hoodlcr.

Mary d. Sept. 30, 1741), and John m.
Ame Smith, d. of Capt. Samuel of New-
Haven, May 39, 1750. [He d. Feb. 24.
1799; she, Sept. 36, 1796, a. 76.]

4. Anw. b. Mi)iu, it;! [m. Silu Consuat).
;. Samuel Snilb, b. Scpl. 7, 17S3.

6. David, b. Apr. 11, 1756.
John Lenris, s. of John, m. Sarah Gor-
den, d. of James, dec'd, Nov. 17, 1763.
Esq. John d. Mch. 5, iSij.'

b. Jan

el Chi It

3. Leava, b. July Ij, .770: m. Dr. Dan. B«Her. I

4. jDho, b, July 16, 1771 [m. Eliubetb Tbompiai.
;. Sarah, b. Aug. iB, 177;; a. it. Shenrocd.

6. Chauncey, b. Jan. ,6, 1770; m. HaonaJl TfmIL

7. Alanson, b. Dec. B, .78S; i 1813, unm,|

Joseph Levris [s. of Joseph of Simsbory . |

(who ni. Eliiabeth Case. Apr. 30, 1674). j

s. of John and Sarah of Sandwich.
Eng., who came in the ship Hercules,
163s] m, Sarah Andrus, d. of Abraham,
Sr., Apr. 7, 1703.
I. A dau., b. Aug. ij; d. Sept. 7, in*.

3: ^E^^A■'p''r'' " """

. b. Apr. 19, ,708; m. Ohadiah Waroe

;. Mary, b.juae 10, 1711; m. Daniel WiHiaiB

1. (Me.--1 ■fhomaa, b. Aug. 6, .7,6 [m. Jc

Booth; d. ID Meadbam, K, J., Aug. " '

iml.

7. Samoellb. Julys, ijiB.

8. Ahram, b. Feb. 1, 17J0 [d. Dec, 1741.
Joseph Lewis the first dyed Nov. »?-
1749. Sarah ni. Isaac Bronson, 175a
who d. 1751, and she, Mch. 6. 1773-
(Her death, as Sarah, wife of Josroli
Lewis, is recorded with this, of Josejwu}

FAMILY RECO.

Lewis.

Lewis.

Joseph Lewis, s. of Joseph, m. Mary
Slaughter, d. of John of Simsbury,
Nov. 12, 1727.

X. Elisha, b. Jan. 30, 1728-9.

2. Elemuel, b. Feb. 18, 1730-1.

3. Damaras, b. Aug. 22, 1734; m. Sam. Scott.

4. Joseph, b. Oct. 16, 1736.
[5. Abraham; m. Ruth Judd.

6. Rodah, bap. Mch. 22, 1749;* d. May a, 1767.

Mary d. Apr. 4, 1738, and Joseph m.

Nov., 1738, Elizabeth , who, in

1754, was wife of Roger Terr ill of
Woodbury.] Joseph Lewis the first
d. Oct. 22, 1749.

Laura Lewis m. Selden Russell, 1821.

Lawrence Sterne Lewis m. Nancy L.
Hull fadopted dau. of Selden and Sla
tira Woodruff], Feb. 12, 1835.

Lucian F. Lewis of Salem m. Susan
Hitchcock of Southington, Apr. 17,
1837-

[Mile Lewis m. Susan Beecher, d. of
Daniel, 18 10.

1. Mary, b. 1811; m. Abr. T. Beecher.

2. Thomas, b. ; m. Eliza Warner.

3. Samuel J., b. June xi, 1817.

4. William B., b. Aug. 19. 18x9.

5. Caroline, b. Sept. 17, 1821; m. John Merriraan.

6. (leorge, b. Sept. x, 1823.

7. Jane Elizabeth, b. Jan. 9, 1826.]

Molly Lewis m. Josiah Terrill, 1791.
Moses Lewis and Betsey:'

Charlotte Ann, bap. Apr. 5, 1833.

Rachel Lewis m. £. A. Smith, 1835.
Reuben Lewis d. Mch. 29, 1836, a 64.
Samuel Lewis and Reliance:

6. John, b. July 26, 1737.

[Samuel Lewis, b. in Barnstable in
1700, and his wife. Reliance, had Su-
sanna, Nehemiah, Samuel, Leonard,
Solomon and Barnabas, b. in Barn-
stable, 1722 1734.]

Samuel Lewis, s. of Deac. Joseph, m.
Hannah Rew, d. of Hezekiah, May 19,

1743-

1. Abraham, b. Oct. 21, X744; d. Dec. 6, X749.

2. Amzi, b. Oct. 9, 1746.

3. Olive, b. Dec. 10, 1749.

4. Luce, b. Mch. x8, 1753 [m. Simeon Porter].

5. Mary, b. May 31, X755; d. Sept. 26, 1759.

6. Prew, b. Jan. 16, X759; ra. Nathan Porter.

Hannah d. July i, 1759, and Deac.
Samuel m. Eunice Beebe, d. of Eph-
raim of Say brook, Nov. 7, 1763. He d.
Apr. II, 1788; she. May, 1809.*

7. Hester, b. May 3, 1765 [m. Calvin Spencerl.

8. Molle, b. Mch. 9, 1768 [m. Culpepper Hoadley.]

9. Samuel, b. June 4, 1770; d. Sept. 19, 1790 [while

at YaleJ .

zo. Asahel, b. Aug. 3, X772 [m. Sarah, d. of Josiah
Atkins and Sarah Rogers] .

XX. Eunice, b. Dec. 12, X775; m. Ebenezer Fair-
child, and Klias Scott.

Samuel Lewis, Jr., b. June i, 1748,* m.

Lewi
Sat

177

X. 1

2. P

3. c

Samt

wii

X. T

2. Si

3. w

Samu

E. ]

E.,

[I. C

Sarat

Saral]

[Capt
Hot

X. Ai

2. Al

3. Bi

Am
m. 1
Mel

[4. A

5. J«

6. Jc

Willi)

I, I

I. A
a. h

Thon

28,

Harri
Lydic

Benja

cen
184

Char
Em

184

Anna
Eben

Josef

Ly

Josei
Bel

an(

1. i

2. F

Susa

Abig

177

Ann

£dm

No

Sara

I

86 Ap

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Lord. Luddenton.

[Daniel Lord, s. of Daniel of Lyme, m.
Hannah Humiston, d. of Caleb, Dec.
25, 1766.]

Joseph Lothrop, s. of Joseph, m. Mary
Hartshorn, d. of Jonathan— all of Nor-
wich—Apr. 17, 1735.

1. Jonathan John Scudder, b. May 25, 1736.

2. Barnabas, b. Apr. 19, 1738.

3. Joseph, b. June 9, 1740.

4. Zebediah, b. Dec. 32, 1742.

5. Mercy, b. May 5, 1745.

Margaret Lothrop m. Joseph Seymour,
1764.

Betsey Lounsbury m. M. R. Andrew,

1833.
George Lounsbury of Bethany m. Laura

Hotchkiss, Nov. 28, 1844.

Letson Lounsbury from Bethany m. Su-
san Lines from Oxford, Apr. 15, 1830.

I. Mary, b. in Humphreysville, June i, 1830.
a. Hannah Maria, b. in Bethany, Aug. 13, 1833.

3. David Andrew, b. in Bethany, Jan. 14, 1836.

4. Betsey Jane, b. Oct. z, 1840.

Maria Lounsbury m. N. H. Perkins,
1839.

Mary Loundsbury m. J. S. Wilson, 1840.

Mary Lounsbury m. J. W. Sanford, 1849.

Wales B. Lounsbury m. Mary A. Hotch-
kiss, Mch. 22, 1846.

Truman Loveland of Watertown m.
Eliza Hayden [d. of David], Sept. 7,
1826.

Mary Lowere m. Samuel Porter, 1830.

Nathaniel Lowree, s. of Thomas, m.
Jerusha Newell, d. of James— all of
Farmington — July 3, 1760.

z. Chancey, b. Apr. 14, 1761.

William Davis Luckn (?) of Simsbury m.
Ann Davis, Jan. 28, 1844.

Aaron Luddinton, s. of Moses, dec*d, m.
Sarah Ford, relick of Cephas, and d. of
John How, Feb. 19, 1761.

1. Polly, b. Apr. 19, 1762.
a. Content, b. Apr. 9, 1769.

Abraham Ludington, s. of William, m.
Catharine El well. d. of Ebenezer, July
23, 1747, and d. Oct. 20, 1758.

I. Ann, b. July 2, 1748.

a. Asa, b. Mch. 6, 1749-50.

3. Ruth, b. Feb. 2^, 1752.

4. Mehittable, b. Sept. 27, 1754; d. Oct. 17, 1756.

5. Mehittable, b. Nov, 33, 1657.

Catharine Luddenton m. Jon. Preston,
1761.

David Luddenton, s. of Moses, m. Lois
Basset, d. of Samuel, dec'd, of New
Haven, Dec. 4, 1755.

1. Susannah, b. Jan. 22, 1757.

2. Lois, b. Nov. II, 1759.

3. Jotham, b. July 11, 1763.

Luddenton. Mallerv.

4. Zera, b. Aug. 11, 1768.

5. Patience, b. Mch. 27, 1770.

Elizabeth Luddenton m. Wm. Francher,

1755.
James Ludington and Elinor:

3. Anna, b. Mch. 19, X744.

Joseph Luddington, s. of Matthew, dec'd,
m. Mercy Peck, wid. of Jeremiah, Jr.,
Mch. 3 1754.

X. Rachel, b. Feb. 8, 1759.

Moses Ludington and Sarah:

5. Mary b. Mav 27, 1744.

6. Jerusha, b. Oct. 4, 1746,

7. Sarah, b. June 27, 1748.

8. Moses, b. Aug. 4, 1750.

9. Lucy, b. Jan. 15, 1753.

10. Luman, b. Mch. ao, 1757.

11. Eunice, b. Keb. aa, 1759.

Naomi Ludington m. Josiah Tuttle, 1740,
and Gideon Allin, 1751,

Rebecca Ludington m. Eben. Brown,
1781.

Ruth Lutington m. Jon. Cook, 1735.

Sarah Ludington:

z. Molle, b. Apr. i6, 1766.

Mary £. Lum m. Henry Spencer, 1850.

Michael Lynch m. Mary McGinnis in
New Haven, June, 1843.

1. Catharine, b. in New Haven, May, 1844.
a. Mary Ann, b. Mch. a, 1846.

Aaron S. Lyon of Reading m. Sarah E.
Austin, Nov. 4, 1845.

Mary Lyon m. Samuel Foot, 1750, and
Timotny Judd, 1780.

Charity Mallery m. Jesse Hotchkiss, 1759.

Eunice Mallory m. James Brown, 17S3.

Harriet Mallory m. E. Robinson, 1828.

Hester Mallery m. Joseph Osbom, 1742.

Ira Mallery of Middlebury, s. of David,
m. Susan Morris, d. of Shelden, Nov.
29, 1821.

Irena Mallery m. Jairus Bronson, 1804.

Jonah Mallery and his wife [Hannah]:

2. Hannah, b. May 5, 1767.

3. Allen, b, Apr. 18, 1769 (Jonathan A.?)

4. Abii^ail, b. Nov. ao, 1771.

5. Jonah, b. Sept. 20, 1773.

6. Peter, b. Oct. 9, 1775.

7. Silva, b. Feb, 7, 1778.
* Lydia, )

Levi, y Twins / b. Aug. 20, 1781.
Lucy, )

Phebe Mallery m. John Thomas, 1750.
Sarah Mallary m. G. C. Scarritt, 1850.
Thomas Mallery:

a. David, b. Mch. 6, 1756.

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. n, 1758.

4. Sarah, b, June 25, 176').

5. Esther, b. Feb. 20, 17^2.

• It will be noticed that the recorder used an exclamation point instead of numbers in this entry.

FAMILY RECOl

Mallery. Martin.

6. Anne, b. Nov. 5, 1763.

7. Thomas, b. July 37, 1765.

8. Enos, b. May 24, 1768.

Urane Mallery m. Elemuel Hoadley,
1767.

Douglass F. Maltby of North Branford
m. Rebecca T. Bronson [d. of Bennetl
June 19, 1844. She d. Aug. 8, 1845, ana
Douglass m. Mary Ann Somers [d. of
James], Feb. 26, 1851.

Elizabeth Maltby m. Bennet Bronson,
1820.

Betsey Manchester m. Daniel Brown.

Jerusha Manchester m. Bela Warner,

1833.

Naomi Manchester m. R. F. Upson, 1842.

Emery Mann m. Lucinda Atwater, d. of
Bela, Apr. 28, 1828.

Hiram E. Mann m. Lucy C. [d. of Har-
vey Judd and Jeraina Hikcox], May 18,

1837.

Elisha D. Mansfield and Caroline B.
Yale — both of South Canaan — m. Nov.
28, 1850.

George Mansfield, s. of Richard of Ox-
ford, m. Esther Pardee, d. of Rosvvell,
Dec. 25, 1834.

1. Sarah Jane, b. Oct. zi, 1838.

2. Hobart, b. May 23, 1841.

Louisa Mardenbrough m. E. C. Peck,

1839.
Edward Marks of Wolcotville m Eliza

Clark, Oct. lo, 1838.

Zachariah Marks m. Ame Twichel, d. of
Joseph, Dec. i, 1783.'*

Sally Markum m. Levi Scott, 1804.

Louisa Marr m. Joshua Swan, 1850.

Alice Marshall m. Wm. Bassford, 1848.

Lorinda Marshall m. Nelson Hall, 1828.

Martin Marshall from Eng.. and Mary
Fay from Ire., m. in Brooklyn, N. Y.,
Apr., 1842.

Alice, b. Dec. 14, 1842.
Ann, b. June 27, 1844.
Amelia, b. Nov. 23, 1846.

Albert H. Martin, b. Oct. 14, 18 19, s. of
Granville, m. Catharine A. Bronson,
d. of Sherman, Dec. 6, 1840.

X. Stella Caroline, b. Sept. 29, 1841.
2. [Cornelia], b. May 14, 1845.

Ann Martin m. Harris Hotchkiss, 1830.

James Martin, b. May. 1806, and Mary
McDougal, b. Jan., 1800, m. in N. H.,
Nov. 25, 1833.

I. Mary, b. 1834.

Juley Martin m. F. A. Ellis, 1828.
Julia Martin m. Truman Hopkins, 1824.

Marti

Patrii

Mar
Aug

I. Ai
3. Ca

3. Ja

Philen

Philip
a sq

1. Gr

2. Ar

3. La

4. Sil

5. Bri

6. Ha

7. Bet

[Philif

Jose
eth:
m. ii

Celia J

Anna ]

Benjai

Jose

1. Gi(

2. Eu

3. Lu

4. Ab

John ]

min

I. An
3. Sih

3. J<?'

4. Li(

5. Ro

6. Ra

7. At

Josepl

chil(

I. Nfi

Josep]

a. 7.1

Phine

Else
1747
m. i

1. El

2. Tl

3. Ai

4. El

Rebec

1791

Reub<

ling
off

2. Li

3. Si

4. Si

Stept
Ha
linj

1. i

2. :

3. '

88 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS URT.

Matthews.

McCORMACK.

4. Stephen, b. Dec. 22, 1756; d. May 15, 1758.

5. Sarah, b. Oct. 30, 1758.

6. Mildred, b. Aug. 2, 1760.

7. Daniel, b. Apr. x8, 1762; d. Mch. x6, 1766.

8. Phinehas, b. Apr. 19, 1765.

9. Daniel, b. Jan. 7, 1767.
10. William, b. Dec. 35, 1768.

XX. Hannah, b. Dec. 13; a. Dec. 31, 1770.
12. Abiah, b. Dec. xx, X771; m. L. Dayton?

Thomas Matthews' children:

Gideon, his son, d. May 29, X740.

Thomas Matthews, Esq., m. Mrs. Han-
nah Scott, Mch. 26, 1784' [and d. Sept.
6, 1798, a. 98].

William Matthews m. Charity Kimber-
ly. May 11, 1788.

Stephen, b. Jan. x8, X789.S

Zeba Matthews, b. in Danbury, Mch.
16, 1785, and Johannah Allyn, b. in
Groton, Aug. 19, 1787, m. Aug. 24,
1806.

X. Thomas B., b. Nov. x, 1807.
a. William A., b. Feb. 28, X809; d. in Wolcotville,
Oct. 23, x8«.

3. Lyman B., b. Nov. 5, x8xo; d. in Baltimore,

Dec. ao, 1834.

4. John F., b. Sept. 6, 18x2.

5. Abby Ann, b. Sept. xi, X814.

6. Marv Jane, b. Nov. 10, x8i6; m. Dennis Chat-

field.

7. Rachel, b. Dec. 21, x8i8; d. Mch. 6, iBa^.

8. Anna, b. Sept. xx, X821; m. Silas Tyrrell.

9. Hannah Urena, b. July 29, X823; "». Henry

Churchill,
xo. Henry A., b. Nov. 24, X825.
XX. George W., b. Sept. xa, 1828; d. in Plymouth,

Mav 7, 1838.
All these were bom in Goshen.

Zene Matthews m. Reuben Beebe.

Amasa Mattoon m. Elizabeth Dayton,
May 25, 1780.*

X. William, b. Dec. 23, X780.
a. Curtiss, b. Mch. 9, 1782.

3. Betsey, b. June 18, X783.

4. Bethel, b. Oct. 9, 1784.

5. David, b. May 29, X787.

Esther Matoon m. John Foot, 1764.

Isaac A. Mattoon, b. in New Haven.
Aug. 23, 1825, m. Eliza Jane Lang, d.
of Joseph, Dec. 24, 1846.

Mrs. Abigail McAlpin, d. Dec. 6, 1845,
a. 76.*

Bernard McAvoy m. Mary Gaffney, July
10, 1851.*

John McAvoy m. Julia Bergen, June 19,
i85i.«

Terrence McCaffrey m. Mrs. Cornelius
Donnelly, May, 1841.

Patrick Mackan (McCann) of Belvill,
County of Westmaid, Ireland, m. Lucy
Low, Jan., 1840.

X. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 29, 1842.
2. Eliza Jane, b. Jan. 7, X845.

Michael McCormack m. Mary Finnegan,
J uly 31, 1849.

McDermot. Merriman.

James McDermot of Plymouth m. Mar-
garet McGuire of Watertow^n, Jan. 7,

1848.

William McDermott m. Bridget Reed,
Nov. I, 1845.

X. Ellen, b. Feb. 28, X847.

James McDonald m. Julia Karen, 1843.

X. Mary Ann, b. Mch. 29, X844.

2. Ellen, b. Sept. 29, X845.

3. Martin, b. May 27, X847.

John W. [Mc] Donald m. Mary Sheeran,
Mch. 4, 1851.

Patrick McDonnald m. iVi^^ Loughman,
Sept. 10, 1848.

Sally McDonald m. Harvey Hill, 1809.

Ann McDougall m. James Walker, 1843.

James McEwen of Oxford m. Sally
Delia Candee of Salem, Apr. 3, 1831.

Samuel H. McKee m. Celista Prichard,
d. of John, June 12, 1828.

William McKey, s. of William, m. Anne
Baldwin, d. of Samuel of Milford, May
3. 1797.

X. Harriet, b. Feb. x. X798.

John Marcloud (McLaud?) was mar. to
Mary Brown, Dec. 21, 1780, by Rev.
Mark Leavenworth.

Agnes McLean m. Andrew Walker.

Dolly McLellan m. Edward B. Cook,
1831.

Eliza McLallan m. Joseph Lang, 1819.

Patrick McMahon m. Bridget McGinn,
Aug. 9, i85i.«

Bernard McManey m. Mary McNally in
Hartford, May, 1845.

X. John, b. Apr. xo, X846.

Alexander McNeal m. Sarah M. North-
rop, Apr. 13, 1845.

William McNeil from Scotland m. Mary-
ette Neville from Ireland, in New
York, Feb. 7, 1840.

X. John Alexander, b. Sept. 25, 1841 ; d. X844.

2. William Timothy, b. Sept. 7, X843.

3. Mary Elizabeth, b. Jan. 2, X846.

Merlin Mead of South Salem, N. Y., m.
Polly Clark, d. of Eli, Nov. 14, 1820.

Dr. John D. Meres m. Susan Bateman —
both of Naugatuck — Aug. 17, 1835.

Laura Mecan m. Samuel Sperry, 1832.

Rachel Meky m. Isaac Camp, 1770.

Abigail Merriam m. J. H. Sandland,
1835.^

Antoinette Merriam m. B. H. Leaven-
worth, 1S46.

Charles J. Merriam m. Lydia A. Curtiss
of Litchfield, Mch. 30, 1846.

FAMILY RECOl

Merriam. Merrill.

Christopher Merriam m. Rebecah Gam-
sey, Mch. 23, 1778.

I. Allen, b. July i, 1779.1
Rebecca, b. Apr. 8, 1787.

Elizabeth Merriam m. S. H. Welton,
1844.

[Esther Merriam m. Dr. Benj. Hull, Joth-
am Curtiss, 1770, Nathaniel Barnes,
1798, and Elisha Wilcox, 1699. Shed,
a wid* in 1829, a. 75.]

Isaac Merriam, s. of Joseph of Walling-
ford, m. Sarah Scovill, d. of Edward,
Feb. 21, 1760.

I. Joseph ScovilM). May 5, 1761.
a James, b. Aug. 35, 1763.

3. David, b. Aug. 30, 1766; d. Tan. 3, 1774.

4. Elijah, b. July 13, 1769; d, Jan. 8, 1774.

5. Isaac, b. Feb. 29, 1772.

6. David, b. Tune 8, 1774.

7. Elijah, b. Mch. 3, 1777.

James Merriam m. Olive Guernsey, May
18, I786.»

John Merriam (Merriman on prob. rec),
m. Hannah Fenn [d. of Thomas], July
12, 1764.

I. Asal, b. June 26; d. Oct. 13, 1765.

Hannah,

Rachel, ; d. Aug. 25, 1771.

Joseph S. Merriam m. Susanna Kimber-
ly, Feb. 6, 1783.

Edward Scovill, b. July 16, 1784.
Sally, b. Oct. 4, 1785.
Harvey, b. Sept. 14, 1785 (?).
Anna, b. Aug. 17, 1788.

Levi Merriam, b. June 28, 1787.*
Lucy Merriam m. Caleb Barnes, Jr., 1776.
Lucy Merriam m. Jos. Pennell, 1846.
Martha B. Merriam m. G. J. Frost, 1833.
Rufus Merriam's wife d. Feb. 6, 1809.*
Rufus Merriam and Sarah:*

Rufus, Lucius, Lucy, Rebecca, b. July 24, 18x1;
m. Joseph Moss, 1835, and Saran, bap. Aug.,

1821.

Sarah S. Merriam m. Pitkin Brouson,
1839.

Shelden Merriam of Watertown m. Nan-
cy Bronson, d. of Philenor, Dec. 2, 1821.

Thomas Merriam, s. of William, m. Ann
Moss, d. of John— all of Wallingford —
Jan. 22, 1756.

1. Joel, b. Feb. xo, 1759.

2. Ruth, b. luly 19, 1762.

3. Thomas, b. Apr. 17, 1766.

4. Ame, b. June 6, 1768.

5. Reuben, b. Oct. 19, 1771.8

6. Asahel, b. Nov. 25, 1773.

7. Eliiabeth, b. Mch. 2, 1778, •

8. Levi Moses, b. May 9, 1782.

Ann d. Jan. 15, 1782, and Thomas m.
Sarah Parker, July 10, 1783.

See also Merriman.

Caleb Merrill, s. of Nathl., m. Susanna

Merrj

Toij
[He
i8i^

2.

3-

4.

5.
6.

8.' Si
9. Q

zo. L]

[Ebeiu
of C
1819.

Elijah
Ann^
Woo

2! h1

3. Sa

4. At

[5. N
6. CI
[7. H

8. G<

9. Fr
xo. Jo
IX. El

Elijah
m. C

1784.

I. M€

2. Ar

3. An ;
[Es

Ephra

sha [

1753

1. Ell :

2. Je; I

3. Nc I

4. Ep I

5. Sa I

6. Aa <

Garry I

2, I^ !

Harri< I

Ichab< I

by.,
and :
1842

I. Pi i

2. El i

3. Sa i

Julia : I
Lydia I

M

Mary \

Nathi :
Joh

a. .

Oct :

X. S^

i I

10

90 Ap

HISTOBT Ot WATERS UBT.

Mkrils.

Merwin.

2. Ephraim, b. Oct. 9, 1733.

3. Caleb, b. Oct. 26, 1735.

4. David, b. Mch. 30, 1738.

5. Daniel, b. last of Feb., 1741 a.

6. John, b. Aug. 14, 1744.

Nathaniel Merrils, s. of Caleb, m. Onner
(Honor) Dowd, d. of Jacob, Oct. 4,
1781.

«. Cloe b. Jan. 25, 1782; ra. Obadiah Richards.

2. Caleb, b. Nov. 7, 1783.

3. Chester, b. Mch. 15, 1786.

4. Mary, b. Feb. 29 ; d. Dec. i, 1788.

5. Scth, b. Dec. 25, 1789 [m. Mabel Sanfordl.
[6. Jared. 7. Erastus. 8. J. Mark.

Honor d. June, 1796, and Nathaniel m.
Mary Pardee, b. Aug. lo, 1795

9. Ebenezer Pardee, b. Oct. 6, 1797.
10. John, b. Apr. 2a, 1800.J

Mrs. Merrill d. Apr. i, 1842, a. 87.*

Amanda Merriman m. Sam. Chatfield,
1838.

Augustine Merriman m. Wm. Butler,
1840.

Caleb Merriman and Margret:

3. Rebcckah, b. Nov. 7, 1750.

4. Jesse, b. Dec. 25, 1752.

5. Caleb, b. Apr. 4, 1754.

Charles Merriman [s. of Amasa] m.
Anna Punderson [d. of David and
ThankfulJ, May 16, 1784.

1. Betsey, b. Sept. 16, 1786.

2. William Henry, b. Sept. 27, 1788.3

Charles Buckingham Merriman, b. in
Watertown, Oct. 9, 1809, s. of William
H., and Mary Margaret Field, d. of
Dr. Edward, were m. June 30, 1841, by
Rev. David Root. '

X. Charlotte Buckingham, b. Auj;. 21, 1843.
. 2. Sarah Morton, b. Aug. 7, 1845.

Joel Merriman:*

Joel Sanford, bap. June 3, 1804.
Caroline, bap. Oct. 6, 1805.

John Merriman of New Haven ra. Caro-
line Lewis [d. of Milo], Feb. 11, 1844.

Joseph P. Merriman m. Julia E. Judd [d.
of Hawkins], Aug. 23, 1840.

Lamont Merriman m. Reuben Benham,

1775.
Phebe Merriman m. Asher Castle, 1784.*

Phebe Merriman m. Asahel Hotchkiss,
1794.

Rebeckah Merriman m. Henry Terrel,
1828, and Henry Chatfield, 1^36.

Sarah Merriman m. Simeon Peck, 1781.
Thankful Merriman m. Phin. Royce,

1743.
Jane Merter(?) m. J. C. Hall, 1848.

Eunice Merwin m. Benj. Hoadley, 1796.
Joseph Merwin:^

Alvira, b. Jan. 4, 1786.
Willard, b. May 6, 1788.

Milan. Minor.

Richard Milan m. Julia Delany, July 14,
1851.8

Eunice Miles ra. Stephen Culver.

Hannah Miles m. Joseph Beach, 1782.

Mary Miles m. Edwin Sperry, 1831.

MoUe Miles m. Sam. Hopkins, 1771.

Stephen Miles and Rebecca [Umber-
ville ?] :

1. Abigail, b. May 5, 1755.

2. John, b. Mch. i, 1757.

3. Timon, b. Apr. 22, 1759.

4. Sarah, b. Apr. 22, 1761.

5. Isaac, b. July 11, 1763.

Timon Miles, s. of Stefhen, m. Mercy
Judd, d. of Capt. Sam., Apr. 5, 1785,
and d. May 21, 1833.

1. Phila, b. Nov. 14, 1791 [m. Anson Stocking].

2. Caroline, b. July 10, 1805; m. ^Leonard Warner.

Zalmon Millard of Cornwall m. Elizabeth
Terrel, d. of Josiah of Salem, Nov. 6,
1826.

Constant Miller m. Abigail Ailing, Dec.
25. 1776.

1. Hannah, b. 1777.

2. David, b. 1779.

3. Daniel, b. 1781.

4. Abigail, b. 1783.

5. Samuel, b. 1785.

Mary Miller ra. Dr. Remus Fowler, 1827.

Smith Miller of Amisvill (?) Onida Co. , N.
Y., m. Lydia Bracket, Oct. 5, 1825.

Elizabeth Mills m. John Fairclough,

1817.

Mary Millward m. J. P. Jeffrey, 1838.

Orlando W. Minard, b. in Colchester,
Nov. 12, 1816, s. of Alexander, m. Har-
riet Stetson, d. of Stephen of Preston,
May 3, 1837.

1. Orlando, b. June 15, 1838; d. Oct., 1839.

2. Charles, b. Feb. 15, 1840.

Harriet d. Jan. 21, 1842, a. 25; and Or-
lando m. Caroline E. Mix, d. of Ran-
som, Aug. 20, 1843.

3. Harriet, b. May 15, 1844.

4. Ellen, b. Nov. 14, 1846.

David A. Minor m. Elizabeth V. Hull,
July 25, 1830.

Harriet Minor m. G. W. Welton, 1837.

Henry Minor of Wolcott m. Sarah Jane
Clark, June 21, 1837.

Solomon B. Minor, b. at Woodbury, Jan.
20, 1785, s. of Solomon and Mary, was
mar. to Cynthia A. Carrington, b. at
Plymouth, Sept. 2, 1817, d. of Solomon
and Cynthia, in Wat., by Rev. H, B.
Elliot, Feb. 18, 1849.

1. Solomon Carrington, b. June 4, i8jo.

2. AnKtline Mary, b. Dec. 23, 185 1; d. Apr., 1855.

3. Julia Antoinette, b. June i, 1854.

FAMILY RECOM

Minor. Mix.

4. Emily Terry, b. June ig, 1857.

5. Mary Root, b. Feb. 11, 1859.*

Hdward Mitchell m. Ellen Reenan — both
of Plymouth — Aufr. 22, 1849.

George W. Mitchell m. Sarah Jane Web-
ster of Harwinton, Jan. 3, 1849.

John Mitchel of New Haven, s. of Pat-
rick from Ireland, m. Abigail Frost, d.
of Rev. Jesse, Apr. 7, 1833.

T. Lucy Adeline, b. Feb. 14, 1834.

2. Marm Antoinette, b. Sept. 17, 1836.

3. George William, b. Feb. x8, 1842.

John S. Mitchell, Jr. of New York, m.
Mary L. Beiflklict, d. of Aaron, Jan. 3,

1838.

I. Charles Benedict, b. Sept. 16, 1840.

Nancy Mitchell m. \V. Fuller, 1844.
Thomas Mitchell, b. Feb. 8, 1779.^

Eldad Mix, s. of Josiah of Wallingford.
m. Lidea Beach, d. of Joseph, June 25,
1756.

1. Titus, b. Feb. 14, 1757, and killed in the Battle

of Harlem, Sept. 18, 1776.

2. Amos, b. Feb. 2, 1759.

3. Samuel, b. Jan. 17, 1761.
Levi, b. Sept. 15, 1763.
Sibel. b. Apr. 13, 1767; m. Gershom Olds.
Urij b. July 23, 1769.
Philo, b. Oct. 28, 1773.
Lydia, b. Apr. 13, 1777.

9. Sarah, b. Jan. 2, 1782.

John Mix [s. of Philo], and Anna Lines
of Oxford, b. Feb. 21, 1804, m. at Hum-
phreysville, Apr. 15, 1834, by Rev. Sam-
uel R. Hikcox.

X. David, b. Feb. 16, 1835; bap. by Rev. S. Wash-
burn.

2. Philo, b. Mch. ao, 1838; bap. by Rev. Fitch
Read.

Levi Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Eunice An-
drews, d of Asael of Cheshire, Sept. 7,

1789.

Philo Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Anna Hall,
d. of Prindle of Wallingford, Nov. 30,
1797.

■

1. Seth, b. May 14, 1799.

2. John, b. Nov. 24, 1800.

3. David, b. Aufif. z8, 1802.

4. Amos, b. Mch. 15, 1804.

5. Anna, b. May 7, z8o6; m. Larmon Johnson.

6. Eunice, b. Apr. zo, 1809.

7. Delight, b. Sept. 28, 1810; m. Sam. Rose.

Ransom Mix, b. Mch. 28, 1792, s. of Uri
of North Haven, m. Sept. 15, 1819,
Aurelia Bronson, b. June 13, 1799, d. of
Philenor.

1. Caroline Eliz., b. Apr. 22, 1821; m. O. .Minard.

2. Emma Almira, b. Feb. 10, 1828.

3. Harriet A., b. 1833; d. a. 10 months.

Samuel Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Mary Hotch-
kiss, d. of Henry of Cheshire, Dec, 13,

1781. .

Mix.

I. Al

3^ T?

4. CI

5. Mi

6. SftI

7. Ea

Franci

1849.

Hanni

Betsey

Emma

Andre
New

I. Jot

Henry
18, li

James

1850.

Williai

both

I. Cat
a. Mai

Jennet

1837.

Asahel
Beet

I. Asc

a. Ira

3. Syl

4. Ma

5. Mil

6. Eli

Isaac

1786.

1. Asi

2. Da

3- Sal
4. Fai

Mary

Natha

m. ^

Roset

Sophii

Eug^ec
Sept

Amos

kins

1. El

2. Mj

(M

i

El
El
El

3
4
5

Mar
Am'
Isaa

* This is the only family of children recorded from 1847

93 AP

BISTORT OF WATERS UB7.

MoRRiss. Moss.

John N. Morriss, s. of Sheldon, m. Polly
Chatfield, d. of Daniel, Feb. i6, 1825.

I. Leonard A., b. Feb. 16, i8a6.
3. William H., b. Feb. 32, 1828.

3. George M., b. Oct. 7, 1833.

4. Catharine E., b. Nov. i, 1837.

Julius Morris, b. May i8, 1796, s. of
David, m. Hannah Scovill, d. of Oba-
diah, Apr. 15, 18 18.

I. Fanny Jennets b. Oct. 23, i8ao; d. 1835.

a. Tulia Ann, b. Sept. 14, 1823.

3. William Augiistus, b. Apr. 5, 1825.

Leonard A. Morris m. Priscilla H. Sand-
land, May 9, 1847.

[Major Morris of Woodbridge m. Eliza-
beth, d. of John and Sarah (Sanford)
Hine of Milford. He d. Sept. 5, 1811.]

Miles Morri^ [b. Apr. 27, 1785, twin to
Newton], s. of Major, m. Caty Scott,
d. of Ashley, Escj., in 1815. She d.
July, 1837, and Miles m. Mary, wid. of
Toseph Riggs, and d. of Arah Cady of
Middlebury, Aug.. 1845.

I. Miles, b. Oct. 30, 1846.

Miles Morris of Canaan m. Jane E. For-
rest, Jan. 27, 1847.

[Newton Morris, b. Apr. 27, 1785, m.
Apr. 27, 1809, Molly Hotchkiss, b. Feb.
I, 1789, d. of Thelus.]

Merit Noyes, Henry Newton (b. x8io), Isaac
Amos (b. lUzi), and Sarah Ann (b. 18x3), bap.
May 26, 1817.1

Edwin, bap. May 10, x8i8.

Eunice Atwacer, bap. July 39, iSsi.

Harriet, bap. July so, 1833.

Jane Elizabeth, bap. May x, 1831.

Samuel W. Morris, b. Jan. 29, 1808, and
Eunice Upson, b. Oct. 17, 1810, d. of
Obed, m. Oct. 12, 1831.

X. Marietta, b. Jan. 35, 1833.
3. Cornelia, b. Feb. 17, 1838.
3. Herbert, b, Nov. 37, 1845.

Sheldon Morris:^

Polly Ann, bap. July 8, 1828.
Susan; m. Ira Mallery, 1821.

Theodore Morris m. Charlotte Yale, Feb.
27, 1848.

William A. Morris m. Mary Ann Car-
bury, May 30, 1848.

Richard Morrow m. Lucy Jane Smith,
June 3, 1839.

Betsey Moses m. Mills B. Ford, 1840.

Deborah Moses m. Joseph Weed, 1740.

Salina Moses m. F. A. Bailey, 1835.

Sarah Moses m. Silas Johnson, 1733.

Ann Moshier m. John Bagshaw, 1838.

Ann Moss m. Thomas Merriam, 1756.

Ann Moss m. Enos A. Pierpont, 1837.

Charles E. Moss from Litchfield m.
Marcia Castle from Harwinton, Dec.
35, 1842,

Moss. MUNSON.

1. Charles Eugene, b. Nov. X7, X843.

2. Marcia Eugene, b. July 23, 1845.

Emeline Moss m. F. H. Pratt, 1832.

Harmon C. Moss m. Roxanna Morse of
Litchfield, Oct. 18, 1840.

Joseph Moss and Esther:

I. Esther, )

and vb. June xg, 1768.

3. Elixabeth, )

3. Jared, b. Jan. xo, X771.

Joseph Moss, b. Aug. 25, 1807, s. of
Moses of Cheshire, m. Rebecca Mer-
riam, d. of Rufus of Prospect, June 4,
1835. ^

X. Levi Joseph, b, Aug. 2x, x%§S\ d. 1839.
3. Rufus Franklin, b. Jan. 17, 1838; d. 1839.

3. Levi, b. June 22, 1840.

4. Franklin, b. June 11, 1843.

Joshua Moss m. Abigail Hull of Wal-
lingford, Feb. 8, 1764.

X. Abigail Russell, b. Dec. 30, 1764.

Lent Moss and Charlotte:^

Lydia, Lent, Luther, Levi, Harry, and Amy
Ann, bap. June 24, X821.

Martha Moss m. Eben. Foot, 1752.

Ruth Moss m. Eben. El well, 1741.

Thankful Moss m. Abel Doolittlc. 1744.

William Moss of Litchfield m. Mariette
Walden of Norwich, Oct. 3, 1847.

Thomas Mullig:an m. in Ireland Martha
Mulligan, b. in May, 1823.

X. Semira, b. Jan. 7, X847.

John Mullings from England ra. Eliza-
beth Brooks from Bethany, Mch. 30,
1844.

X. Georgiana Elixabeth, b. Apr. 10, 1845.
2. [Mary CllaJ, b. Apr. 8, X847.

John Mulvahill m. Annaugh Mackan
(Anna McCan?) in Ire., Dec, 1841.

1. John, b. in Ireland, Dec. 12, 1842.

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 12, 1844.

3. Elinor, b. Sept. 6, 1846.

Timothy Mulvany m. Bridget Kelly, Feb.
10, 1851.

Daniel T. Munger m. Eliza A. Russell
of Brandford, Mch. 17, 1839.

X. Caroline ETIiza, b. May 11, 1843.

2. Adelaide Ulissa, b. Aug. 26, 1847.

3. Mary Frances, b. Dec. x6, 1849.

Mary Munn m. John Lewis, 1734.

Abner Munson m. Azubah Bronson, d. of
Josiah, Sept. 24, 1764.

1. Caleb, b. Jan. 27, 1765.

2. Sarah, b. Apr. 24, 1767.

3. Ashbel, b. Tunc 6, 1770.

4. Aaron, b. fune 2, 1772.

5. Zeba, b. Nov. 16, 1774.

6. Lucy, b. May 25, 1777.

7. Hermon, b. Oct. 13, 1781.

8. Lambert on, b. Men. 12, 1784.

9. Abner, b. Mch. 8, 1788.

Ashbel Munson, s. of Abner, m. Candis

FAMILY RECOa

MUNSON. MONSON.

Spencer, d. of Thomas of Winchester,
Mch. 15, 1798.

I. Horatio Lucius, b. Mch. x6, 1799.

Benjamin Munson m. Roxanna Burges,
June 6, 1775.

1. Ezra^ b. Mch. 31, 1776.

3. Hannah, b. Oct. 30, 1777.

3. Milicent, b. Tune x, 1780.

4. Loues, b. July 3, 1781.

5. Justus, b. Apr. 15, 1784.

6. Laura, b. Feb. 34, 1786.

7. Chary, b. Sept. 14, 1787.

8. Harvey, b. Sept. 20, 1789; d. Oct. 21, 1790.

9. Harvey, b. Oct. 30, 1791; d. Sept. 14, 1793.

Caleb Munson, s. of Caleb of WaJling-
ford, dec'd, m. Lucy Roberts, d. of
Gideon, dec'd, May 10, 1781 [and d.
1826, a, 80].

X. Caleb, b. May 38, 1782.

2. Cornelius, b. Sept. 12, 1783.

3. Jose, b. Feb. 16, 1786.

4. John^ b. Nov. 30, 1787.

5. Hams, b. May X7, 1791.

6. Polly, b. Sept. 26, 1794.

7. Lccte, b. May 5, 1797.

Calvin Munson, s. of Samuel, m. Sally
Hungerford, Nov. 27, 1794.

1. Randal, b. Nov. 19, X795.

2. Kilmar, b. June 25, 1799.

3. Lucy, b. Feb. 28, x8ox.

4. Diedamia, b. Apr. 30, 1804.

Cornelius Munson from Oxford m. Polly
Welton, d. of Jabez, Sept. 12, 1844, and
d. Apr. 16, 1846, a. 25.

X. Cornelius Welton, b. Sept. 14, 1846.

Dennis H. Monson of Bethany m. Abby
A. Thomas, June 14, 1846.

Elisha Munson, s. of William, m. Mabel
Homeston, d. of Joy, Sept. 3, 1783 [and
d. Nov. 22, 1835, a. 79].

X. Aaron, Jb. Oct. 24, X783.
~ aura
viU.

■Xt

2. Laura Elenore, b. June 6, 1786; ro. Daniel Sco-

3. Hannah Mariah, b. June 3, 1789.

4. Cloe, b. Apr. 9, X793.

Emily Munson m. O. H. Bronson, 1840.

E. M. Munson of New Haven d. Oct. 5,
1841, a. 28.*

George N. Munson m. Betsey C. Per-
kins, Apr. 14, 1847.

Henry Munson, b. May 21, 18 17, s. of
Daniel, and Abigail N. Hyde, b. Jan.
9, 1 81 7, d. of Obad. of Huntington, m.
Apr. 20, 1840.

1. Emily A^ b. Aug. 17, X840.

2. William Henry, b. Dec. 14, 1842.

3. Eliza Ann, b. Aug. 22, 1844.

4. I pair of twins.

Henry C. Munson of Wallingford m.
Ellen M. Atkins, Oct, 15, 1844.

Hermon Monson [s. of Caleb, dec'd] m.
Ann Bronson, d. of Capt. Joseph, July
21, 1769.

X. Molle, b. Apr. 22, 1770; m. J. Clark, Jr.
Anna, bap. A(ch. x6, X783.S

MUNSO

Jesse

Hill,

1. Ettj

2. Ly^

Mary ]

Mary]

cease

Sitl

Samuei
Ann
O., P

1. Min

2. Elb

3. Hen

4. Har

Stepha

I. Dan

Willian
Grigfl
-Fel
a. 74.*

1. Isaw

2. Elisl

3. Pete

4. Hem

Willian

Seba

Zina R

[d. of

John N

kenn^

1. Tohi

2. Mar

3. Ricl i

Thoma i
Dec. !

Alonzo :

of wi

Amos I

m. c:
21, i:

1. Po

2. M(

3. Gi!

4. Er

5. Hi I

6. Mi

7. H<

8. Mj

9. Cli
lo. Hi

Andrei

6, la I

Cheste

28, i; i

Julia ^ I

Leonai I

. 1821.

Nancy

Ambro i
Sara

04 ^p

HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

NeTTLETON. * Nl?\VTON.

Chandler J. Nettleton m. Emily S. Reed
of Torringford, Mch. 22, 1840.

Eli Nettleton and Mary:*

Zealous Hotchkiss, bap. Feb. 3, 1822.
Mary Ano, bap. June 29, 1823.

Elijah Nettleton and Mary:*

Naomi, bap. Sept. 34, 1797.
Elijah Edward, bap. Oct. 23, 1803.

Elijah d. May 17, 1839, a. 77.*
Garry Nettleton:*

Ann and Wilford Hopkins, bap. July 6, 1828.

John Nettleton, s. of John of Milford, m.
Susanah Richards, d. of Lieut. Thom-
as, Apr. 2, 1750, and d. Nov. 12, 1787,
a. 60.

1. John, b. Jmi. 18, 1751; d. Sept. 17, 1808.

2. Sarah, b. ^ly 24, 1753 [m. Sara,
s. of Thomas, and d. 1840] .

Leavenworth,

3. Suiianah, b. Jan. 37, 1756.

4. Freelove, b. Dec. 19, 1757

5. Elizabeth, b. May 27, X760.

6. Mary, b. Jan. 30, 1764.

7. Joseph, b. Nov. u, 1766.

John Nettleton, Jr. m. Hannah Hickox
[d. of Capt. Samuel], June 12, 1777,
[She d. Aug. 8, 1784].

X. Samuel Hickox, b. Mch. 24, 1780.

Hannah — by second wife— b. Mch. 6, 1788.

Julia Nettleton m. Chester Hitchcock,
1835.

Mary Nettleton m. Eli Baldwin.

Samuel Nettleton m. Harriet M. Sher-
man— both of Derby — Oct. 30, 1842.

Michael Neville m. Ann Delany — both
from Ireland — in New York, Apr. 16,
1836.

X. Timothy, b. June X5, 1837.

2. Margarett, b. May 24, 1841.

3. Michael, b. Jan. 24, 1843.

4. John. b. Jan. 12, 1845.

5. Mattnf w, b. Dec. 12, 1846.

Emeline Newell m. John M. Stocking,
1834.

George H. Newel of Southington m.
Harriet C. Downs, Nov. 12, 1844.

Jerusha Newell m. Nathl. Lowree, 1760.

Bettee Newton m. Samuel Frost, 1755.

Caroline Newton m. J. E. Bradley, 1824.

Charles N. Newton, b. May 9, 181 1, s. of
Nathan, and Caroline Root, b. Mch. 11,
1815, d. of Chauncey, m. Dec. 25, 183C.

I. Sarah C;)tharine, b. June 4, 1838; d. 1844.

Elizabeth Newton m. Elias Clark, iSoi.

Isaac E. Newton, b. Sept. 14, 1808, s. of
Nathan, m. Polly Warner, d. of Oba-
diah, Oct., 1830.

1. Mary E., b. July 6, 1832. '

2. Julia Melinda, b. Sept., 1840.

3. Nathan Herbert, b. Sept. 2J, 1843.

4. Lewis Byron, b. June, 1845.

Julia Newton m. J. G. Bronson, 1830.

Newton. Nichols.

Keziah Newton m. Joseph Wads worth,
1 841.

Lucy Newton m. Sheldon Collins, 1845.

Miles Newton and Hannah:'

Miles, John Fowler, and Harriet — the children —
and Comfort, one of the household of Miles
Newton, bap. June 28, j8oi.

Miles Newton, b. in Oct., 1783, s. of
Miles, m. Prudence Scott, d. of Simeon,
Sept. 5, 1B05.

1. Nathan Fowler, b. July 30, 1806.

2. lister Miles, b. Aug. 8, 1809.

3. Lucius Solindar, b. Au/?. 12, 1812; d. Apr. 4, 1816.

4. Lucius Myron, b. lune 17, 1817; d. June 8, 1825.

5. Lusett Maria, b. Nov. 27, 1819; d. Aug. 17, 1825.

6. Jerome, b. June 9, 1822.

7. Edward Linsley, b. Jan. 24, 1826: d. Mch., 1831.

Minerva Newton m. J. S. Leavenworth,
1824, and J. G. Bronson, 1845.

William Newton was m. to Mary Gaines
Leavenworth [d. of Joseph], by Mr.
Barlow, 1832.*

Michael Knee (Ney) m. Sarah Killduff,
Sept. 3, 1849.

Albert Nichols m. Lavinia Kimball of
Woodbridge, Sept. 11, 1833.

Benjamin Nichols, s. of Joseph, dec'd, m.
Elizabeth Prichard, d. of James, dec*d,
Aug. 28, 1751.

1. Mary, b. May 16, 1752; m. Araasa Wclton.

2. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 3, 1754.

Elizabeth d. Oct. 4, 1754, and Benjamin
m. Rachel Tompkins, d. of Edmund,
Aug. II, 1760, and d. Dec, 1822.

3. Diene, b. May 3, 1761; d. Jan. x^^ 1824.

4. Milly, b. Sept. 23, 1767: m. Obadiah Scovill.

5. Benjamin, b. July 31, 1770.

Betsey Ann Nichols m. Edwnn Smith,
1847.

Charles Nichols m. Hannah Hull. Aug.
9, 1821.

Clarry Nichols m. Lewis Smith, 1829.

Clement Nichols, s. of Elijah, m. Molly
Scovill, d. of Daniel, Feb. i, 18 16.

Edward Nichols, s. of James, b. Aug.
19, 1808: m. Aug. II, 1833, Alma E
Grilley, d. of Jeremiah.

1. Mary Ann, b. Jan 13, 1834.

2. William H., b. Dec. 8. 1836; d.

3. Charlotte Ann, b. Nov. i, 1838.

4. Mary E., b. Feb. 13, 1841.

5. William H., b. Jan. 8, 1844.

6. James E., b. June ii, 1845.

Edward Nichols m. Emily A. Blakesley
June 30, 1 8 50.

Elijah Nichols [and Hannah Skeels]:*

Reuben, bap. 1772.
Hiram, bap. Aug. 29, 1773.

Gecrge Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Susan-
na Hikcox, d. of Deac. Thomas, Dec.
15, 1 741. He d. Oct. 23, 1788; she,
Jan. 28, 1790.

FAMILY RECOBi

Nichols.

Nichols.

I. Ame, b. Aug; a, 1752 (174a); m. Jas. Scovill.
3. William, b. Fcd. 8, 1744 [m. Sarah Richards, and
d. in Nova Scotia] .

3. Lemuel, b. Apr. 13, 1746.

4. Prue, b. Nov. 8, 1748; d. Aug. 21, 1753.

5. John, b. Apr. 12, 1751 [grad. at Yale* d. i8tj].

6. I>aniel, b. Apr. 20, 1754. [Went to the British.

7. Susanna (Prue); m. L)r. Dan. Southmayd.

8. Mary.]

George Nichols, s. of Philo, m. Lucinda
Leach, d. of Alvah of Woodbury, Sept.
6, 1846.

I. Charlotte Elizabeth, b. May 25, 1847.

Hannah Nichols m. David Clark, 1772.

Humphrey Nichols, s. of Simeon, m.
Esther Hotchkiss, d. of Stephen, Feb.
16, 1807.

1. Harriet, b. Feb. 3, x8io; ra G. A. Hall.

2. Emeline, b. May 30, i8ti; ra. David Terrill.

3. Stephen H-, b. Apr. 25, iSiq.

4. Isaac, b. Sept. 29, 1814 [m. Lydia Frisbiel.

5. William, b. Jan. 27, 1817 \m. M, Atwaterj.

6. Ann, b. Feb. 8, 18 19; d. May 12, 1835.

7. Nancy, b. June 15, 182 1 [m. Marvin Hills].

8. Eli, b. Sept. 15, 1822 [m. Jane Mann].

9. Joseph N., b. Dec. 17, 1824 [™- Lucena Clark] .
10. Esther, b. Jan. 4, xSay; m. Fred. Holmes.

II. David H., b. Oct. 14, 1828 [m. H. Williams].

Esther d. Oct. 29, 1837, and Humphrey
m. Phebe I., wid. of Joseph E. Chat-
field, and d. of Stephen Hotchkiss,
May 23. 1838.

X3. Franklin, b. Aug. 8, 1842 [d. Sept., 2848].

Isaac Nichols, Jr., m. Mary Hotchkiss of
Prospect, Oct. 19, 1840.

James Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Anna
[wid of Thomas Judd, s. of John], d.
of Doct. Daniel Porter, dec'd, June 12,
1740.

1. Sarah, b. Feb. a, 1741.

2. James, b. Dec, 1748.

James Nichols, s. of Richard, m. Mary
Selkrig, d. of Nath'l, Oct. 22, 1796.
[He a. Dec. 18, 1846: she, Feb. 26,
1847.]

I. IViphena, b. Aug. 10, 1797.

John Nichols of Middlebury m. Content
Cande of Salem, Apr. 9, 1827.

Joseph Nichols [s. of Isaac, Jr., of Strat-
ford] and Elizabeth [Wood] :

1. James, b. on Lon^ Island, June 27, 1712.

2. George, b. on Long Island, July 14, 1714.
[3. Elizabeth* m. Ebenezer Waiclee, 1740.

4. Richard, b. 1720 [chose his uncle, Richard of

Stratford, guardian].

5. Joseph, b. 1724.

6. Marah. These four probably b. in Derby.]

8. Isaac, b. May 4, 1729 [wcrnt to the British, and

d. in N. Y., 1776].

9. Benjamin, b. May 14, 1731.

[All are mentioned in Probate records.]

Joseph Nichols dyed Mch. 10, 1733
(" in the 47 year of his age," says his
grave-stone, which, if correct, would
make the year of his birth 1686, in-
stead of 1680 as recorded in Strat-
ford).

NiCHOl

Joseph

Broil
6, 17'^

1. Syfl

2. EuD

TanM
Ann«
ton,

1773-

3. L€«

Joseph

Mary

NaM
Isaw

Joseph

Farre!

1. Milei

2. Matig

net

3. Milet

4. Marc

5. Merri

6. Marii

7. Mile,

8. Miles

9. Mary

ton

Josepl
Joseph

I, l82c

Lemuel

Ursu
Fann

Mahala

Merrit

bethi
tol, A

1. Cath

2. Hem

Miles }

Limb

i«39-

1. Fran

2. Han

Minerv)

PhUoN
Parke
Oct.,

1. Edw

2. Gcoi

Richar(

beth
1744.
21, 18

I. Me

a. Eli

3. Hu

4. Ta

5. Jos

6. Li(

7. R'u

8. Eli

9. Isa
xo. Sai

96 AP

EI8T0BT OF WATERS URT.

Nichols. Norton.

XI. Samme, b. Apr. 8, 1761.
12. James, b. Aug. 6, 1764.

Robert C. Nichols of Woodbury m.
Phebe Ann Wilkinson of Goshen, Mch.
16, 1845.

Samme Nichols, s. of Richard, m. Abi-
gail Landon of Litchfield, 1783.

T. Erastus, b. Apr. 14, 1784.

2. Charley, b. Aug. xa, 1786.

3. Polly, b. Oct. 24, X78B.

4. Alinira, b. Oct. 14, 1790.

5. Nabbe, b. Feb. ai, 1793,

6. Tulcy, b. July x, 1795.

7. Erastus, b. June 8, 1798.

8. Rboda, b. fune 30. x8oo.

9. Richard Olmsted, b. Aug. 8, 1802.

10. Tesse Landon, b, Oct. 23, X804.

11. Harriet, b. Aug. i, 1808.

12. Harriet, b. Apr. 2, 18 10.

[Samuel liichols formerly of Wat. d. in
Cheshire, July 8, 1856, a. 95].

Samuel Nichols of Wolcott m. Charlotte
M. Wells of Cleveland, Jan. 5, 1851.

Simeon Nichols [s. of Joseph, 2d], m.
Martha Hotchkiss [of New Haven],
June 15, 1775.

I. Joseph, b. Apr. 21, 1776.
a. famar, b. Dec. 25, 1778; m. James Chatfield.
3. Humphrey, b. Nov. 23, 1781.
[4. Abigail, b. Mch. 2, 1784.

5. Chloe, b. July 30, 1786.

6. Amy, b. Nov. 25, 1788.

7. William, b. Au|(., 1791.

8. Chaunccy, b. Feb., 1794.

9. Simeon, b. 1796].
xo. Philo, b. June, 1798.

Stephen H. Nichols m. Clarissa Atwater.,
at Naugatuck, Mch. 28, 1836. [She d.
Dec. 29, 1 841, a. 26], and Stephen (of
Middlebury) m. Emily Payne of Pros-
pect, Apr. 10, 1842.

William Nichols:

George, bap. Apr. 3, 1768.*

Arthur Nicholson d. Jan. 29. 183^, a. 39.*
John Noble:

4. Isaac, b. July 39, 1807.

Thomas Nolan m. Catharine Maloy, July

7. 1851-*
Hannah Norris m. Ashbel Porter, 1762.

Augusta Northrop m. Marshall Parks,
1846.

Frederick J. Northrop of Watertown m.
Elizabeth M. Beach, Sept. 20, 1846.

George Northrop m. Lowly Castle [d. of
Samuel], Oct. 14, 1840.

Mercy Northrup m. Jeremiah Peck, 1739,
and Joseph Luddington, 1754.

Rhoda Northrop m. David M. Prichard,

1848.
Sarah Northrop m. Alex. McNeal, 1845.
Abraham Norton m. Mehitable Doolittle,

May 14, 1766.

I. Abraham, b. Nov. i, 1767; d. Apr. 10, 1768.

Norton. Orton.

Cyrus Norton d. Dec. 7, i8o4.»

David Norton [s. of Joseph] — Submit
[Benton], his wife, d. Nov. 17, 1766, in
ner 38th year; and David m. Susanna
Bishop of Bolton, Apr. i, 1767.

David Norton and Polly Norton — both
from Killing worth — m. in K.

X. Celia, b. Oct. 12, 1836.
a. Herman, b. Jan. xx, 1839.

Janette Norton m. Lyman Smith, ^824.

Leonora Norton m. Harley Downs, 1826.

Levi Norton of Southington m. Sarah
Bj'ington, Oct. 24, 1842.

Lucina Norton m. J. T. Vanduzer, 1846.

Ludenton S. Norton of Plymouth m.
Luania Bradley, Jan. 13, 1833.'

Ruth Norton m. Edward Scovill, 1770.

Susanna Norton m. Rev. Urial Gridley.

1785.
Zebul Norton, s. of David, m. Rhoda

Norton, d. of Beriah of Guilford, June

12, 1782.

I. Friend Congress, b. Sept. xa, X783.
9. Augustus, b. June 29, X785.
3. Osmyn, b. Aug, 5, 1787.

Ziba Norton, s. of David, m. Ruth Hop-
kins, d. of Capt. Isaac, Nov. 26, 1778.
He d. Feb. 22, 1781, a. 23, and Ruth m.
Thomas Wei ton, 1792.

X. Philomena, b. Aug. i, 1779 [m. Jared Welton].

Moses Noyes m. Mary Prince, Apr. 2,
1778.2

I. Mary, b. Mch. 23, 1779.
a. A dau., b. Feb. 13, 178X.
3. Scldeo, b. Apr. 36, 1784.

John O'Brien m. Mary Power — both of
Wolcottville — Nov. 27, 1849.

Lucius Odle (Odell), s. of Stephen of
South Farms, m. Fidelia D. Upson, d.
of Freeman of Southington, Oct. r, 1837.

X. Emma Jane, b. Mch. 97, 1840.

Gershom Olds m. Sibel Mix, d. of Eldad,
Dec. 15, 1783.

I. David, b. Jan, 37, 1786.

3. Eldad, b. Feb. 29, 1788.

3. Joel, b. June 13, 1790; d. Mch. 6, 1794.

4. Allen Swain, b Apr. 30, 1793.

5. Orrel Hannah, b. June x6, 1797.

Maria Olds m. Manly Grilley, 1821.

Montgomery Olmstead m. Esther Mix of
New Haven, Sept. 14, 1823.

John O'Ncil m. Mary Horan, July 6,
1849.

Patrick O'Neill m. Catharine Gorman.
May 23, 1848.

Abigail Orton m. Bronson Hotchkiss,

1825.

Caroline Orton m. W. S. Piatt, 1844.

FAMILY RECOBl

Orton, Osborn.

Hliada Orton:'

iohn, b. Aug. 6, 1784.
rurina, b. Nov. 8, 1786.

Phebe Orton m. Daniel Hikcox, 1775.*

William H. Orton, b. in Litchfield, Mch.
23, iSoi, m. Louisa Bouehton, d. of
Jonas, Apr. 12, 1826, and a. in Seneca
Co., O., Nov. 20, 1 841.

X. Mary Jane, b. Apr. 19, 1837; m. W. Tompkins.

Abraham Osborn, s. of Daniel, m. Eunice
Johnson, d. of Peter of Derby, Oct. 21,
1762.

X. Abraham, b. Aug. 25, 1763.

2. Andrew, b. June 25, 1765 [m. Sarah, d. Samuel

Chatfield].

3. Ezra, b. Aug. 23, 1767.

4. Peter, b. May 18, 1769.

5. Tohn, b. Apr. 28, 1771.

6. Moses, b. Feb. x6, 1774.

7. Eunice, b Dec, 3, 1777; m. John White.

8. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 8, 1780.

Amos Osborn and Joanna [Weed, d. of
John of Derby]:

2. Amos,

3. Lucy, b. July 6, 1746.

4. Amos, b. Sept. 13, 1750.

5. Elijah, b. Sept. 15, 1752.

6. Reuben, b. Apr. 8, 1755.

Amos, s. of Joseph of N. H., dec'd, m.
Elizabeth Benham, d. of Joshua Hotch-
kiss of Wallingford, Mch. 25, 1758, and
d. Nov. I, 1790.*

7. Joshua, b. Feb. 18, 1759.

8. Thaddeus, b. Jan. 28, 1761.

9. Asahel, b. Apr., 1763.
10. Ame, b. Jan. 3, 1765.

XI. Samuell, b. Feb. 4, X768.

Amos Osborn, Jr., s. of Lieut. Amos. m.
Lorana Hotcnkiss, d. of Isaac of New
Haven, May 14, 1776.

1. Phebe, b. Apr. 14, 1777.

2. Isaac, b. Jan. 12, 1781.

Asahel Osborn, s. of Amos, m. Molla
Hoadley, d. of Elemuel, Feb. i, 1787.

1. Molla, b. Dec. 13, 1787.
a. Hershall, b. July zo, 1791.

Ashbel Osborn, s. of Daniel, m. Ruth
Richardson, d. of Nathaniel, June 9,

1785.

1. Catcy, b. Sept. 26, 1785.

2. Fanny, b. Apr. 9, 1787.

3. Joseph Richardson, b. June 28, 1790.

4. Garret, b. May 22, 1792.

5. Statira, b. May 25, 1794.

6. Ruth, b. Aug. 8, 1796.

7. Ashbil, b. July 8, z8oo.

Charlotte Osborn m. Harr^r Bronson,
1839 (who m. for second wife, in 1849,
Charlotte Thompson).

Daniel Osborn [s. of Joseph of New
Haven] :

I. Abraham. 2. Daniel. 3. Ebenezer. 4. Obe-
dience, s. Mary; m. Elijah Wooster. 6.
David. 7. Martha; m. Jonah Loomis. 8.
Kachcl; m. Samuel Fenn.]

9. Abigail, d. in Oxford, 1768, a. 16.*

OSBORH

Child

». (to.)
a. (IX J

• 3- (Ja.)

4- (13-)

5- (X4.)

Thett
m. wi
Feb. I

15. Ashl
x6. Rutl
17. Phil*

Daniel C

Picket!

1. Abnei

2. Danie

Daniel G

bethG

1. Danie

2. Garry.

3. Elizab

4. Mary,

5. Lotty,

6. Lemai

David Oi

Griffen
May 26

1. Barsh<

2. David

3. Lymai

Ebeneze:
12, 176' I

Eli Osbo

d. of E

1. Merit, '

2. Zina,

3. Alma, I

Elijah O

4. Eliph. I

Enos Osl

Addan !

I. Garre

Esther C !

[Ezra O: I

1. Pbarc ,

2. Lever I

3. Larm< '

4. Elizal :

183:

Jared 0

lory, J

John Os I

Griffin
14, 178

1. John I

2. Abne '.

3. Ruth

Joseph < I

ven. I .
of Ne^

I. Hest .
hai .

II

08 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS UBT,

OSBORN.

2. Jared, b. Sept. 24, 1745.

3. Joseph, b. Dec. 7, 1747.
Samuel, bap. May 27, 1750.8
Samuel, bap. Dec. 3, 1752.
Naboih, bap. July 27, 1755.

Esther, w. of Capt. Joseph, d. Mch. 21,
1769, a. 50.* Capt. Joseph m. Mrs.
Abigail Lyman, Oct. 26, 1769. Capt.
Joseph m. Mrs. Elizabeth Tomlinson,
Feb. 13, 1793.

Joseph Osborn, 3d, m. Sarah Smith,
Mch. 10, 1783.*

Lavinia Osborn m. John Fairclough,
1843.

Lemuel Smith Osborn, s. of Sarah, b.
Jan. 26, 1779.

We certify that Lemuel Osborn Smith's
name was entered upon the records of
the town of Waterbury by mistake
Lemuel Smith Osborn. Whereas it
was to have been entered Lemuel
Osborn Smith, by which last name he
intends, as he has a good right to do,
to write his name in future.
March 8, 1817.

Richard Pitts,
Sarah Pitts,
Lemuel O. Smith.

Lot Osborn m. Thankful Doolittle, d. of
Abel, dec'd, Jan 24, 1765.

Mary Osborn m. James Bellamy, 1740.

Mercy Osborn m. Daniel Tyler, 1778.

Moses Osborn of Salem m. Comfort
Cande of Oxford, Apr. 25. 1796.*

Obedience Osborn d. Feb. 15, 18 13, a.

72.^

Samuel Osborn, s. of Amos, m. Sally
Hotchkiss, d. of Benjamin of Woocf-
bridge, Jan. 25, 1797. She d. Oct.,
i8i7.'»

Thomas Osborn [s. of Joseph of New
Haven] d. 1S07, a. 91.

5, Thomas, b. Aug. i, 1757.

Thomas Osborn, s. of Deac. Thomas, m.
Hannah Johnson, d. of Israel of Derby,
May 7, 1777.

1. Enos, b. Aug. 2, 1777.

2. Comfort, b. Slay 2, 1780; m. Andrew Adams.

3. Anson, b. Nov. 25, 1787.

4. Thoma.s Lctsuin, b. Sept. 2, 1790.

5. Hilly, b. Dec, 8, 1793.

Adelia E. Oviatt m. S. M. Cate, 1839.

Sarah Page m. John Cole, 1754.

Sarah Page m. Simeon Peck, 17S8.

Aurelia Painter m. Norman Terry, 1842.

Austin Painter, s. of John of Plymouth,
m. Betsey Maria Rigby, d. of John,
Nov. 7, 1830.

Painter. P-\intkr.

Parker.

I. Thomas Frederic, b. Nov. i8, 1832,
a. .Mary Jane, b. May iq, 1837.
3. Kmma Jane, b. June 26, 1842.

George Painter of Watertown m. Mary
Perkins, June 26, 1845.

John Painter and Deborah:

7. (?) I-ot, b. Feb. 9, 1755; d. Feb. at, 1757.

5. Plunice, b. at Middletown, Mch. 16, 1751-2; m.

Nathan Woodward.

6. Flizabeth, b. Sept. 7, 1757.

7. Thomas Welcher, b. Sept. 25, 1760.

8. John, b. Dec. z5, 1763.

John Painter m. Sally Watrous, Aug. 13.
1786.*

1. Betsey, b. Sept. 19, 1787.

2. Rocsey, b. Feb. 11, 1789.

Philo Painter of Watertown m. Nancy
Pardee, July 8, 1844.

Sarah Painter m. Benjamin Williams.
1762.

Susanna Painter m. Abel Ford, 1771.

Thomas W. Painter m. Lucina Dunbar,
Mch. 28, 1787.*

1. Chester, b. Monday, Nov. 19, 1787.

2. Sarah, b. Tuesday, Oct. 22, 1789.

George Palmer from New Haven m.
Hannah O. Ailing of Salem, Dec. 10,
1826.

Samuel Palmer and Jerusha [d. of Abr.
Foot]:

1. Molly, b. Dec. xo, 1774; d. Sept. 8, 1777.

2. Ahram Fool, b. Auk. 8, 1777.

3. Ozias, b. July 4, 1780.

4. Fanny, b. June 3, 1783.

Silas W. Palmer of Centerville, N. Y.
m. Mary Ann Porter [d. of Timothy],
Aug. 22, 1841. (His name has been
changed to Arvtne.)

Bolara Pardy m. Henry Smith, 1822.
Elizabeth Pardy m. Jonas Hungerford,

1773.
Esther Pardee m. George Mansfield,

1834.

Henry S. Pardee m. Almira Beach of
Litchfield, July 3, 1837, who d. Apr. 7,
1 841, a. 20.

Jane Pardee m. Alonzo Thompson, 1845.

Millecent Pardee m. Theodore Baldwin,

1828.

Nancy Pardee m. Philo Painter, 1844.

Royal B. Pardee of Harwinton m. Eliza
J. Stevens, Mch. 24. 1851.

Aaron Parker [s. of Elisha of Walling-
fordj and Sarah [Martin]:

8. Lyman, b. Feb. 20, 1776.

Abigail Parker m. Abel Austin, 1795.

Charlotte Parker m. Philo Nichols, 18 19

Eliab Parker m. Martha Andrews, Feb.
7. 1759-

FAMILY RECORa

Parker. Patterson.

1. Andrews, b. Nov. 8, 1759.
a. Eliab, b. June 20, 1761.

3. Abigail, b. June 28, 1763.

4. Martha Williams, b. Dec. 20, 1765.

5. Amariah (sun), b. May xi, 1768.

Eri Parker and Joanna:'

John, b. Aug. 12, 1788.

Hannah Parker m. Stephen Matthews,

1750.
Isaac Parker and Anna:

Anna, b. Dec. 26, 1781.
Timothy, b. Dec. 6, 1783.

John Parker, s. of Elisha, dec'd, of Mans-
field, m. Lydia Castle, d. of Isaac,
Aug. 13, 1752.

1. Mary, b. Tan. 11, 1753; m. Matthew Terril.?

2. Irene, b. r'eb. 23, 1755; m. Scth Warner.

3. Elisha. b. July 22, 1757.

4. John, b. Aug. 29, 1759.

5. Asel. b. Apr. 5, 1762.

6. Eri, D. Sept. 15, 1764.

7. Salmon, b. Dec 11, 1767.

8. Lydia, b. Mch. 16, 1769.

9. Lusenday (Lucinda), b. Apr. 8, 1771.

Jonathan Parker m. Elizabeth Adkins,
Oct. 23, 1766.

Lent Parker m. Sarah Dunbar, Nov. 9,
1774.'

1. Solomon, b. Tune 25, 1775.

2. Samuel, b. Nov. 11, 1777.

3. Edward Dunbar, b. Dec. 27, 1783.

4. William, b. Nov. 23, 1788.

Lois Parker m. Samuel Smith, 1770.

Reuben Parker, s. of John [of Walling-
fordj, m. Hannah Cfhapman, Dec. 10,
1764.

Rowena Parker m. J. S. Hall, 1817.

Samuel Parker d. Dec. 14, 1785, a. 78.*

Sarah Parker m. Thomas Merriam, 1783.

Sarah Parker d. May iS, 1838, a. 83.'

Marshall Parks of Amboy, N. Y. m.
Augusta Northrop of Watertown, Nov.
26, 1846.

Wright Parks from Amboy, N. Y., m
Mary Johnson from Watertown, Nov.
I, 1834.

1. William Wright, b. Apr. i6, 1841.

2. Frederick Johnson, b. Mch. 17, 1845.

Hannah Parrott m. Isaac Scott, 1834.

Harvey A. Parsons of Bristol m. Han-
nah Scott, June 15. 1828.

Lewis Parsons of Plymouth m. Lydia
Streetef, Mch. 26, 1851.

Charles Partrick of Stamford m. Mrs.
Samantha Hall, Dec. 30, 1832.

Harvey Patchen of Derby m. Rachel
Brown of Southbury, Nov. 9, 182S.

Thomas H. Patten of Boston, Mass., m.
Melissa Frost, Mch. 6, 1845.

Henry Patterson of Fairfield m. Milinna
Potter, d. of Aaron, Sept. 9, 1831.

Paitej

John I

Emn
1849.

Betsey

Ciariss

David ]

mit K

15. 17

Dav^

Edwarc

d. of

19. 18;

Emily F

Esther 1

Harmon
both (

Wylli
and
180
moi

Willii

Suke]
Roc

Huldi
tha

Lois
Pri.

Samu

Harmon

Prospe
Dyer]
1843.

Joseph

dah I
Apr. S

I. Har

Hulda
m. Es

a. Jose

3. Pete

H

Esthei
Abiga

4. KstI

5. Susi

6. Hul

Abiga
Tosepl
nam,
1S05;

7. Si la

8. Olc.

9. Her
10. Edv

Joseph ]

Beech
of Ch<

iulia
lari
Jose
Slop
Edw
Geoi
Edw

I.
2.

3-

4-

5-
6.

7-

mSTORT OF WATERBT7RT.

Payne. Pbck.

S. Hwrnqn, b. F«b. ai. iSto.

9. Ruth Ehubeth. b. June 13, iBia.

Ruth d. Aug. 3, iSai, and] Joseph m.

Rebecca Barnes, Nov. 23, 1833.
Heliss* Pajae m. Wm. Eaves, Jr., 1835.
Nelson Payne of Bainbridge, N. Y.. m.

Sarah C. Adams. May 6, 1833.
Olcutt Payae and SalV [d. of Benjamin

Beecher of Cheshire]:

Loii Amelia and Alfoid, bap. J.o. jo, 1811.
AUEU9IU> Merit, bap. Dec. i3, 1813.

Philemon Payne and Roxy;*

Siephen Tohn»n, b.p. Jure ... ,E».

Rebecca Payne m. Asa Hopkins, 1784,
Sftmantha Payne m, Zerah Ford, 1801.
Thomas Payne:*

Heulilah. Raie, Solomon, and Raphel, bap.

June 6, .Tgg.
TfiomM Jfiferaon, bap. May 1. Itel.
Eliiabeih. bap. May 13, ttk■^.
Thomas J. Payne, s, of Thomas, ro.
Nancy Frost, d. of Enoch, dec'd, June

3, CbarJo, b. Apr. 10. 183a.

4. Alonco, b. Apr ;, 1634.

;. Maria eiinbclh, V Oct. B, iBjq.
6. , b. Mch. 30, .a,7.

William H. Payne, s. of Hermon, ra.
May 31. 'flag. Rebecca F. Hall. b. Aug.
aa, 1808, d. of Heman of Wolcott.

■ 'J*"-

t, b. Jun.

Deborah Peck m. Reuel Upson, 1766.

Eleozer C. Peck m. Louisa Marden-
brough — both of Derby — Mch. 4. 1839.

Elizabeth Peck m. Ambrose Dutton,
1754-

Fanny Peck m. Edward Root, 1843.

Francis Peck, b. Sept, 3, 1807. s. of Ben-
jamin of Haniden, m. Mch,, 1835, Mary
Andrus, b. Sept. 8, 1816, d. of Jona-
than of Simsbury.

1. Elkn, b. In Wallingford, Auk. >6, '8,6.
I. AuguiU, b. In WailiDgtord. Aug. 14, iS,o.
3. Ann ElJza. b, in Hamaen, Mlf 13, 1841.

Gideon Peck and Esther:

bV?™

epl. .7, '7S3.

h. M,

I. i^n

i:i:i

Henry H. Peck of Bertiti [s. of Deac.
Samuel of Kensington] m. Harriet M.
Cook ^d. of Zenas], Aug. 14, 1839.

Horace B. Peck n
Sept. ag, 1851.

Huldah Peck m. Anson Sperry. iSii.

Mr. Jeremiah Peck, Sear.:
The Revd Mr. Jeremiah Peck, paster
of the Church of Christ in Waterbtirr
dyed 7th June in ye year 1699.

Jeremiah Peck, son to (he above nanied
peck m, Rachel Richards, d. of Oba
diah and Hannah, June 14. 1704. [Her
was app. deacon in Northbury. 17M
retired, 1746; received to the Church :^
Oxford, Apr. 27, 1747, and d. in Derbv
175*].

I. lohMM b. Am. .1, .70s [m. Joseph Galpi:.:
3! RaiClb. kt.y\a'\'T^ [m. EbencKT Rico]-

t. Mary, b. Od.'lI'lTls'fd.'anni'! 1751?™"'

6. Phebe, b. Jan. >6, 1716-17 [m. Dr. Jua» We-<f .

7. Rutb;b. Peb. le, 171^-19; m.R».KlarkLunTi-

Jeremiah Peck, s. of (theabove) Jeremiali,
m. June 14, 1739-40, Mercy Northrnp
[b. Sept. 7, 171S], d. of Samuel of Mil
ford. [Nov. 2, 1750, his will was disal-
lowed, as it gave his wife almost nolh-
•ng]-

■7f«J. _

l. RacheLh.Jiin. 4.
^. Lemuel, b. Nev. t

1754-

She m. Joseph Luddingtor

Jeremiah Peck (*)[b.Jan. 12, 1720-1:3. of

{eremiah,(») b. 1687 (and Hannah, d. of
)r. John Fisk);s of Joseph. ('J bap. 1653
(and Mary. d. of Nicholas Canip); s. 01

Joseph.C) the settler of Milford (and
Alice, wid. of John Burwell); m. Oct
26, 1743, Frances Piatt, d. of Josiah.
Jr., of Milford, and d. Mch. 17, 17&..
Feb. 13, 1717. and d. Oct

1794,

'\jty,'tia^u.. Aug. ,

FAMILY REOC

Peck. Peck

other bom the first day of January, 1769, and
the mother died the same day. The last of the
twins died Jan. 15, 1769; the first died Aug. 21,

1773-

Jeremiah m. Lois Bunnell of Oxford,
Aug. 17, 1769 [and d. Aug. lo, 1835.
She was b. Oct. 18, 1740, and d. Feb.
24, 1813].

4. Lois Ann. b. Aug. 14, 1772.

5. Content, b. May 29, 1774; m. Benoni Barnes.

Jeremiah Peck [b. Oct. 17, 1793, in Beth-
any; s. of Samuel, b. 1753; s. of Tim-
othy, b. 171 1 ; s. of Samuel, b. 1677; s.
of Joseph, bap. 1647; s. of Henry of
New Haven], was mar. to Julia Rob-
erts [d. of Amasa], Jan. 16, 1822, by
Samuel Potter, Pastor of the Baptist
Church in Woodbridge and Salem.

Joshua Peck, youngest son of Rey. Mr.
Peck, dyed Feb. 14, 1735-6.

Laura Peck m. George N. Prichard,
1843.

Mary Peck m. John Foot, 1769,

Mary M. Peck m. Lucius Roberts, 1846.

Otis T. Peck from Rehoboth, Mass. m.
Laura Kilborn from New Hartford,
June, 1830.

I. Fidelia, b. in Barkharasted, Jan. i8, 1831.
a. Wellington, b. in Winsied, Mch. 18, 1832.

3. Holliston, b. in New Hart., Sept. 26, 1833.

4. Louisa, b. in Winsted, Aug. 8, 1835.

5. Carlton, b. in New Hart., Dec. 27, 1837.

6. Huntington, |

and >b. in N. H., Nov. 27, 1839.

7. Livingston, S

8. Thomas Jefferson, b Apr. 27, 1843.

9. Emogene, b. June 27, 1846.
10. Mary Jane, b.

Samuel Peck's wife, Elizabeth, d. Sept.
27, 1774, a. 68.

Samuel Peck of Woodbridge m. Esther
Judd, Jan. 3, i8o2.«

Samuel Peck, Esq. of Cheshire m. Har-
riet Brocket, d. of Giles, Nov. 13, 1822.

Frederick Brocket, bap. Mch. 14, 1824.*

Sarah Peck m. Titus Barnes, 1759.

Simeon Peck, s. of Jeremiah (4), m. Sa-
rah Merriman, Nov. i, 1781.'

1. * Isaac, b. Nov., 1782.

2. Abigail, b. Tan. 24, 1784.

3. Benjamin Merriman, b. Dec. 27, 1785 [m. Salina

At wood] .

Sarah d. Dec. 21, 1787, and Simeon m.
Sarah Page, Apr. 23, 1788.

Susanna Peck m. Stephen Hopkins, 1718.

Sylvia Peck m. Andrew Hills, 1841.

Thankful Peck m. Abner Blakeslee, 1755.

Treat Peck of Milford m. Marcia S.
Hickox [d. of Leonard], Nov. 10, 1846.

Peci

Wai

m.

[ai

i

I.

2.

3.
4.
5.

6.

7-
8. i

9- !

10. .

11. 1

Willi

Lu(
Ha

X. G

2. M

3E

4. c

5. SI

6. N

7. J'

Jame

Nai

Willi

anc
froi

I.
2.

3-
4-

i: '

7-

8. \

9. ;
10.
II.

Dani

c

Pete

28, I

Jose] I

No '

M€

wa I

I. I i

Alan I

af

Ame :
Anni ;

KtcI I

dn '

18^

Burr

an ,
Dc

I. ] I
2. ( I

* He was father of Jeremiah, b. Oct. 4, 1805, who was fa

102 ^p

HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

Perkins. Peters.

3. Frances Augusta, b. Sept. 6, 1834.

4. Thomas Herbert, b. Sept. 12, 1841.

5. Julia Antomctte, b. June 16, 1846.

Charles Perkins, s. of Benoni of Beth-
any, m. Angelina Blakeslee, d. of Pier-
pont of North Haven, Dec. i, 1839.

I. Edward, b. July 12, 1845.

Edward Perkins and Betsey [d. of Roger
Peck] from Bethany, 1806:^

Edward, bap. Sept. jo, i8oa [m. DcliKht Smith
of Prospect, and lives in Weymouth, Ohio] .

Elias Perkins:'

Aaron Anson, bap. Apr. 11, 1821.
Emcline Sally, bap. Sept. 26, 1822.
Lucy, m. H. W. lomlinson, 1845,

Elizabeth Perkins m. Ephia Warner,

1774-
Jesse Perkins m. Sarah A. Knowlton,

Dec. 25, 1842.

Jesse D. Perkins, b. Nov. 17, 1812, s. of
Jesse of Bethany, m. Martha Andrews,
d. of Chauncey of Bristol, Sept. 13,
1844.

I. Jessie Charlotte, b. Mch. 24, 1846.

Martha Perkins m. David Baldwin, 1778.

Mary A. Perkins m. William Green,
1843.

Mary Perkins m. Geo. Painter, 1845.

Melissa Perkins m. Julius Hotchkiss,
1832.

Nancy Perkins m. Geo. Farrell, 1837.

Noah H. Perkins from Bethany m. Mana
Lounsbury, d. of Jesse, June 26, 1839,
and d. Mch. lo, 1845.

1. James Wilson, b. Aug. 3, 1841; d. Apr., 1843.

2. Mary Maria, b. June 13, 1843.

Reuben E. Perkins m. Sarah D. Brown,
Mch. 27, 1851.

Rosanna Perkins m. Henry Grilley, 1797.
Sarah Perkins m. Jacob Sperry, 1773.
William Perkins and Ruth:

3. Elias, b. Aug. 4, 1780.

William J. Perkins, s. of Samuel, ra.
Nancy Bronson, d. of Joseph, June 9,

1808.

I. Lodema, b. May ix, 1810.

William Perkins, s. of Benoni of Beth-
any, m. Mary Monson, Aug. 11, 1833.

I. Elizabeth, b. Dec. 6, 1834.

Julius Perry and Patty Miranda Carter
—both of Cornwall— m. Nov. 13, 1836.

I. Sarah Maria, b. Mch. 20, 1844.

Seth Perry d. Oct. 7, 1845, a. 38.*

Oilman W. Persha (?) of Groton, Mass.,
m. Lucinda Talmadge of Oxford, Sept.
26, 1849.

Lemuel Peters, a negro, m. Margaret
Peter, Sept. 5, 1782.

Peters. Pierpont.

1. Annis, b. Mch. 11, 1783.

2. liynda, b. Oct. 19, 1786.

Rev. Amos Pettingill and Hannah:

Samuel Martin, b. Mch. 8, 1823.
Hannah Elizabeth, b. June 2, 1826.

John Phelan m. Bridget Moran, Feb. 28,
1851.

Martin Phelan m. Mary Ann McMahon,
Sept. 15, 1851.

Aurelia Phelps m. Alvy Hoadley, 1821.

Catharine J. Phelps m. Garry Arnst,

1826.
Harriet Phelps m. Christopher Gray,

1842.

David M. Phillips of Bridgeport m. Mary
Jane Hotchkiss, Oct. 9, 1850.

Jane M. Phillips m. J. M. Seeley, 1846.

Mary Pickets m. Daniel Osborn, 1764.

William Pickett from Litchfield m. Sarah
Howe, d. of Heman from Canaan, Mch.

8, 1846.

Stanley, b. May 17, 1846.

Betsey Pierce m. Calvin Hoadley, 1828.

Erastus Wheeler Fierce, b. in Wood-
bury, Sept. 21, 1825, m. Sept. 28, 1845.
Flora Maria Clark, d. of Asahel.

I. Erastus Eujjene, b. Jan. 25, 1846.

Austin Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Sally
Bcecher, d. of Enos, Feb. 20, 1S12.

1. Enos Austin, b. Mch. 24, 1813; d. Jan. 9, 1814.

2. Enos Augustus, b. Jan. 8, 1815.

3. Ezra Alonzo, b. Dec. z, 1817.

4. Sarah Minerva, b. Mch. a, 1820; d. Sept. 24,

1840.

5. Nancy Jennet, b. Mch. 24, 1822; d. Dec. 28, 1825.

6. Charles Joscpn, b. Mch. 11, 1825.

7. Emily Jennett, b. June 15, 1830; m. A. J. Beers.

8. William Seabury, b. June 23, 1833.

9. Ellen Maria, b. June 10, 1840.

Sally d. Dec. 20, 1846, and Austin m.
[Mrs.] Emily Sperry of Bethany. May

19, 1847. He was killed by lightning,
June 25, 1848.

Charles J. Pierpont, s. of Austin, m.
Mary Anna Warner, d. of Jared, Apr.

20, 1846.

I. Jared (C. J.), b. Feb. 9, 1847.

Enos A. Pierpont, s. of Austin, ra. Ann
Moss, d. of Moses of Cheshire, Oct.,

1837.

1. David Watson, b. Jan. 3, 1838.

2. Sarah Ann Jennet, b. Apr. 8, 1842.

3. Eunice Abiah, b. July 22, 1845.

Ezra Pierpont and Mar^^ [d. of Isaac
Blakeslee— both from North Haven].
She d. Sept. 28, 1827; he, Jan. 7, 1842,
a. 84.*

I. Cloe, b. Aujs'. 15, 1783.
a. Luiher, b. Feb, 8, 1785.

3. Seabury. b. Mch. 13, 1787.

4. Austin, o. May 19, 1791.

5. Lucy, b. July 26, 1793 [d. unm.].

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP103

PlERPONT. PlATT.

Luther Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Delia
Maria Waugh, d. of Thadeus of Litch-
field, June 6, 1814.

1. William Henry, b. Apr. 23, 1815.

2. James Edward, b. Feb. 18, 1817.

3. Chloe Maria, b. Mch. 13, 1819.

4. Emily Cordelia, b. Feb. 3, 1821; d. 1828.

5. Henry Stiles, b. Mch. 8, 1827.

6. Emily Jane, b. Jan. 25, 1832.

Rufus Pierpont of New Haven m. Har-
riet Richards [d. of Luther Abijah of
Vermont], Sept. 14, 1847.*

Seabury Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Clorana
Hall, d. of Jared of Cheshire, dec'd,
Dec. 16, 1 8 13, and d. Mch. i, 1829.

1. Harriet Loisa. b. Sept. 25, 1814.

2. Mary Selina, d. May 15, 18x7; ""• Jos. Welton.

3. Lucy Sabrina, b. Mch. i, 1820; m. (), Shcpard-

son.

4. Harriet Maria, b. June 19, 1827; m. A. Bradley,

Jr.

Benjamin Pitcher m. Jerusha Welton,
Oct. 29, 1777.*

1. Lois, b. Oct. 14, 1778.

2. Truman, b. June 19, 1780.

3. Leveret, b. Mch. 23, 1782.

4. Rusha Hill, b. Oct. 15, 1785.

Minerva E. Pitkin m. Seymour Doolittle,
1846.

Richard Pitts m. Sarah Osbom, d. of
Daniel, Dec. 2, 1784.

1. Betsy, b. July 17, 1785.

2. Nancy, b. Sept. 17, 1790.

3. Sally, b. Oct. 24, 1792.

Abbyrilla Piatt m. H. A. Porter, 1831.
Alfred Piatt, s. of Nathan, m. Irena

Blackman, d. of Niram of Brookfield,

June 8, 1814(1816?).

X. Niram B., b. Sept. i, 1818.

2. Charles S., b, July 30, 1820.

3. William Smith, b. Jan. 27, 1822.

4. Clark Murray, b. Jan. i, 1824.

5. Alfred LcRrand, b. June i, 1825.

6. Seabury Blackman, b. Oct. 5, 1828.

Almon Piatt, s. of Nathan, m. Alvira R.
Ailing, Mch. 5, 181 7 [who d. Mch. 12,

1837].

1. Albert, b. Dec. 2.1, 1819.

2. Martha S., b. Men. 6, 1822.

3. Mary J., b. June 25, 1824 [m. Junius Brown].

4. Sarah Elizal)eth, b. Aug. 24, 1827.

5. Ely, b, Mch. 4, 1830.

Benjamin Platt^ [s. of Isaac of Milford,
and Nancy Bristol, d. of Nathan, m.
1802]:

Mary Ann, Benjamin, Nancy, Henry Peck, and

Adelia, bap. Dec. 29, 1816.
Jane Eliza, bap. May 12, 1822.

Daniel Platt^ [s. of Isaac of Milford, and
Betsey Higby, d. of Samuel, m. 1804]:

Charles Harvey, Hannah, Daniel. Martha Ann,
Elizabeth, Abigail Gunn, and Isaac Riley,
bap. Oct. 28, .1821.

Willis, bap. Apr. 6, 1823.

Divine Piatt [s. of Enoch] m. Emily
Bronson, Oct. 25, 1830.

Platt. Plumb.

Elisha Platt' [s. of Isaac of Milford] and
Marcia:

George, and Robert Hotchkiss, bap. Dec. 2,

1821.
Julia Ann, bap. May 18, 1823.

Ely Platt [s. of Almon] m. Frances E.
Harrison, Sept. S, 1851.

Enoch Platt, Jr., s. of Enoch [who was
b. Nov., 1769], m. Sally Bronson, d. of
Joseph, 3d, of Prospect, Sept. 24, 1826.

1. Sophia, b. July 11, 1827; d. Sept. 30, 1845.

. 2. Sylvester, b. Aujj. 20, 1829.

3. Sephrona, b. July 25, 1831.

4. Susan Maria, b. Feb. 3, 1834; d. Apr., 1836.

5. Deloss, b. Feb. 26, 18^6.

6. Susan F., b. Mav 9, 1838; d. Feb. 20, 1840.

7. Kldrid)(e B., b. Nov. 23, 1842.

8. Adelah Emogene, b. June 4, 1846.

George C. Platt of Prospect m. Frances
A. Smith, May 13, 1S40.

Gideon Platt, s. of Gideon, m. Hannah
Clark, d. of Joseph— all of Milford —
Mch. 17, 1783.

1. Gideon, b. Dec. 19, 1784.

2. Joseph, b. Oct. 5, 1786; d. Nov. 25, 1792.

3. Merrit, b. Sept. 12, 1790.

Deacon Gideon of Middlebury m. Mrs.
Hannah Newton, Nov. 22, 1825.

Gideon Platt, Jr., s. of Gideon (above),
m. Lydia Sperr\', d. of Capt. Jacob,
Nov. 8, 1807.

Joseph Platt' [s. of Capt. Joseph of Mil-
ford, m. Martha Miles, d. of David,
ivSoi]:

David Miles, Elizabeth Martha, Joseph, and

Charlotte, bap. Apr. 3, 1808.
Nathan, bap. Oct. 22, 1&09.
Catharine, bap. Apr. 5, 1812.
Nancy Spencer, bap. Nov. 28, 1819.

Leonard Platt, s. of Nathan, m. Clarissa
Hosmer from Middleton, N. H., Mch.,
1826.

1. Clarissa Relief, b. in Mid., Nov. 9; d. Dec, 1828.

2. Henry Bellows, b. in Dansville, Vt., Apr. 13,

1830.

3. Ann Maria, b. Dec. 18, 1833.

4. Richard Josiah, b, Nov. 15, 1842.

5. George Leonard, b. June 14, 1846.

Nancy Platt m. Israel W. Ru.s.sell, 1818.

Nathan Platt [b. Mch. i, 1761, eldest s.
of Josiah of Newtown] m. Charlotte
Dickerman of Woodbridge, July 27,
1829.

Niram B. Platt, s. of Alfred, m. Eliza
Kirtland, d. of Wheeler of Woodbury,
Sept. 17, 1840.

1. Frances Eugenia^ b. Mch. 28, 1842,

2. Margarett Phebe, b. Sept. 5, 1843.

3. Charles Kirtland, b. Oct. i, 1846.

Sybel Platt m. Mansfield Thomas, 1823.

William S. Platt [s. of Alfred] m. Caro
line Orton [d. of William], Oct. i, 1844.

Elizabeth Plumb m. Samuel Hikcox,
1690.

104 Ap

BISTORT OF WATEBBURT.

PoMEROY. Porter.

Jerusha Pomeroy m. Dr. W. W. Rod-
man, 1844.

Bartholomew Pond, s. of Philip of Bran-
ford, m. Luse Curtis, d. of Daniel,
Sept. 9, 1755.

1. Beriah, b. Aug:, xo, 1757.

2. Ire, b. Nov. 27, 1759.

3. Content, b. Nov. 23, 1761.

4. Zera, b. Nov. 24, 1763.

5. Sala, b. Mch. 20, 1766.

6. Rebeckah, b. June 5, 1768.

7. Lucy, b. May xo, 1770.

8. Jesse, b. July 17, X772.

9. Samuel, b. Jan 24, 1775.

Betsy Pond m. Edmund Kellogg, 1821.

Luke Pond m. Augusta Briscoe, Sept. 5,

1838.

Maria Pond m. David Beecher, 1S25.
[Phineas Pond d. 1750, leaving,

Phineas, Jonathan, Abig^ail and Martha].

Timothy Pond, s. of Philip of Branford,
m. Mary Munson, d. of Abel of Wal-
lingford, June 19, 1751.

X. Bartholomew, b. June 7, 1754.

2. Barnabas, b. Oct. 29, 1755.

3. Thankful!, b. Feb. 16, 1757 [m. Bronson Foot,

May 7, 1782].

4. Timothy, b. Aujf. 3, 1758.

5. Sary, b. Feb. 21, 1760.

6. Mary, b. June 8, X761.

7. Munson, b. Dec. 17, 1762.

Mary d. Jan. 16, 1763, and Timothy m.
Sarah Bartholomew, Aug. 30, 1764.

8. Terusha, b. June 24, 1765.

9. Lydia, b. Apr. 29, 1767.
xo. Adc, b. Apr. 7, 1770.
XI. Isaac, b. Apr. 2, 1772.

12. Lowly, b. Oct. 20, 1774.

13. Dill, b. Sept. I, 1778.

X4. Munson, b. Nov. 26, 1780.8

Maria Pope m. C. C. Adams, 18 18.

Abigail Porter m. Peter Welton, 1739.

Abigail Porter m. E. W. Hoadley, 1823.

Agnes Porter m. Robert Swan, 1842.

Amanda A. Porter m. Wm. Baily, 1835.

Ansel Porter, s. of Col. Phineas. dec'd,
m. Lucy Peck, d. of Ward, Apr. 13,
1807.

X. Phineas, b. Jan. 18, 1808 [d. 1808J.
2. Ansel Charles, b. Nov. 16, 181 1.

Ansel d. Oct. 9, 18 13, and Lucy m. John
Clark.

Arbi Porter [s. of Joseph of Ezra, m.
Atlanta Scott].

Julia A. B., bap. Oct. 6, 1822.

Asa Porter, s. of Ebenezer (of Daniel)
m. Deborah Tuller, Oct. 22, 1765.

1. Asa, b. June 6, 1767.

2. Climena, b. Jan. 8, 1770; m. Sam. Frost.

Ashbel Poiter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m.
Hannah Morris, d. of John of Staten
Island (Branford ^rrtj^^), Nov. 24, 1762.

1. Sibbel, b. Aug. 21, X764.

2. Ashbel, b. Nov. 16, X766,

Porter. Porter.

3. Lynas, b. Jan. x6« 1769.

4. Hepzibeth, b. Jan. 8, 1771.

Benjamin Porter's wid. Sarah m. Ed-
mund Scott, 1689.

Bildad Porter:*

Liva, bap. July 26, x8ox.

Charlotte Porter m. Aaron Benedict,
1808.

Daniel Porter (2) [b. Feb. 2. 1652. s. of
Dr. Daniel (i), m. Deborah Holcomb].
He d. Jan. 18, 1726; she, May 4, 1765
[a. 93].

Apr. x. Daniell. b. Mch. 5, X699 (d. a. 76).
14, a. James, d. Aprill 20, X700 (d. a. 86).
1703. 3. Thomas, b. Aprill i, 1702 (d. a. 05).

4. deborah, b. Mch. 6, X70J-4; m. James Bald-

win [and d. in Wat., Jan., i8ox, a. 97].

5. ebenezer, b. Dec. 24, 1708 (d. a. 95).

6. Ann, b. Apr. 28, 1712; m. Thomas Judd and

James Nichols [was living in 1801J.

Daniel Porter (3), s. of Doct. Daniel, dec'd,
m. Hanna Hopkins, d. of John, June
13. 1728.

X. Preserved, b. Nov. 23, 1729.

2. [Dr.] Daniel (4), b Mch. 8, 1731 [d. of small-pox

at Crown Point, 1759, unm.J.

3. Hannah, b. June 16, 1733; ra. Obadiah Scovill.

4. [Dr.] Timothy, b. June 19, 1735.,

5. Susanna, b. July 7, X737; m. Daniel Killum, and

John Cosset.

6. Anna, b. Dec. 6, 1738; m. David Bronson.

Hanna d. Dec. 31, 1739 [and Daniel m.
Joanna , and d. Nov. 14, 1772.

7. Elizabeth; m. Ard Warner, X764,

8. Jemima; m. Timothy Scovill, X762].

[Daniel Porter, s. of Dr. Timothy of Dan-
iel, m. Ana Ingham, grand dau. of Is-
rael Clark of Southington, June 9, 1789.

1. Horace, b. Sept. 30, X790.

2. Timothy, b. Jan. 30, 1792.

3. Elias, b. May 14, 1795.

4. Alma Anna, b. Apr. 12, 1800; m. Wm. Orton.

5. Dr. Daniel, b. May 20, 1805.

6. Joseph, b. July 11, 1807; d. 1812].

Daniel m. Mrs. Leve J. Johnson, Feb.
I, 1834.

David Porter, s. of James, m. Esther
Hopkins, d. of Deac. Timothy, Dec. 7,
1775. [He d. Apr. 4, 1826; she, Sept
27, 1831, a. 78].

X. Silas, b, Oct. 21, 1776.

2. William, b. Mch. 18, 1782.

3. David, b. June 22, 1783.

Denman C. Porter [s. of Jessel m. Han-
nah C. Porter [d. of HoraceJ, Dec. 11,
1831.

Ebenezer Porter, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m.
Marcy Hull, d. of John of New Haven,
Nov. 14, 1739. [He d. Apr. 5, 1804, a.

9/]-

X. Lydia, b. Apr. 9, 1741; m. Abel Beecher.

2. Asa, b. Aug. 7, 1743.

3. A son, b. in 1745 and lived dne hour.

4. Marcy, b. June 14, 1749; d. Dec. 2, 1772.

Ebenezer Porter, s. of Capt. Samuel, was

FAMILY EWOI

IPoRTER. Porter.

mar. to Sarah Beebe, d. of Ephraim,
"by Samuel Lewis, Jus. of Peace, Aug.
31, 1774— and d. Aug. 22, 1810.*

z. Daniel, b. Aug. 36, 1775.
3. Asa, b. Jan. 26, 1778.

3. Samuel Ebenezcr, b. July ao, 1783; d. Aug. x8xo.B

4. Ezra, b. May 27, 1785.

5. Oliver, b. Apr. 6; d. May 13, 1787.

6. Aaron, b. and d. Feb. 23, 1790.

Rev. Edward Porter, s. of Deac Noah,
m. Dolly Gleason, d. of Isaac — all of
Farmington— Nov. 26, 1789 [and d.
1828].

z. Maria Belinda, b. Mch. 4, 1795.
a. Edward Lewis, b. Feb. 10, 1797.

3. Isaac Gleason, b. June 29, i8oiS.

4. William Robert, b. July 26, 1808.

[Edward Jones Porter, b. July 23, 1807,
s. of Samuel, b. 1784, s. of Levi Good-
win and Catharine (Jones), m. 1829, in
Plymouth, Eliza S. Ball, d. of Timothy.

I. Helen Finette, b. in Bristol, June 23, 1831.
a. Franklin Edward, b. June 13, 1833.
3. Harriet Eliza, b. July 29, 1838.]

Hlias Porter, s. of Daniel, m. Jan. 22,
1 81 7, Alma Tyler, b. Dec. 17, 1792, d. of
Lyman of Prospect.

I. James, b. Mch. 26, x8i8.

Esther Porter m. Edmund Austin, 1820.

Hzekiel Porter [s. of Ezra] m. Eliza-
beth Horton, Oct. 25, 1786.''

Francis Porter [s. of Ezral m. Rosanna
Warner, d. of Stephen, June 25, 1777.''

Harriet A. Porter m. Daniel Sackett,
1826.

Henry A. Porter m. Abbyrilla Piatt,
Aug. 7, 1 83 1.

Horace Porter, Jr., s. of Daniel, m. Han-
nah Frisbie, d. of Eben., May 20. 181 1.

1. Horace Clark, b. Mch. 9, 18x2; d. Aug., 1831.

2. Hannah Charlotte, b. Sept. x, X813; m. D. C.

Porter.

3. Hamlet Chauncey, b. July xx, x8x5; d. Aug.,

1834.

4. Hobart Charles, b. Feb. 2, x8x9 [m. Jerusha

Bronson, d. of Benjamin].

5. Henry Clinton, b. Apr. 20, X835 [m. Eliza Betts] .

Hannah d. Apr. ii, 1844, and Horace
m. Esther Merriam Wetmore Hull, d.
of Benjamin and Elizabeth, Nov. 23,
1845.

Isaac Porter, s. of Dr. Preserved, m.
Amarilla Hikcox, d. of Joel, Nov. 13,
1799.

1. Sarah Gould, b. Apr. 26, x8oo.

2. Preserve Hikcox, b. Sept. 9, X803.

[Dr.] Tames Porter, s. of Daniel, dec*d,
m. Dorcas Hopkins, d. of John, dec'd,
Aug. 22, 1733. She d. June 26, 1750;
he, Mch. 20, 1785.

I. Hulda^ b. Dec. 8, X733; m. Joseph Fairchild and
David Taylor.

3. James, b. Nov. 19, X737.
3. David, b. May xx, X746.

i. c

Porte

James
cy B

I: a

3. A

4. Jt
Lucj
Marj

5. Ml

6. R<

7. M«

t

8. Ch

9. Jo»
xo. Sai

James
Beecl
June

X. Emi

[Dr.]
m.
Wash

X. Den:

2. Sail}

3. Add
[4. Prea

John P

Phelx
1770.

Joseph

Jan. i
of Fl(
mout]

X. Celi

2. Elin

3. Lan I

Joseph I

Joshua I

m. E i
Hart

I. [Est
a. [He I

3. [A;

Joshi

__^^__ '

Lemue
d. of
chun
Aug. !
Apr.

Eli2 I

x{
Luc I
Em I
San

Marah

Mark I i

1771.
Mary]
Nathai

12

106 Ap

HI8T0BT OF WATERBURT,

Porter. Porter.

Lewis, Apr. 12, 1776. *» [She d. July,
1806; he, July, 1 814.

1. Clarissa, b. 1777; m. Daniel Bccchcr.

2. Lucretia, b. 1779; m. Reuben Warner.

3. Henry H., b. 1780; m. Sally Lewis.

4. Fanny, b. 1788; m. Abr. Fowler, U. S. A.]

[Philander Porter, s. of Levi Goodwin,
m. Orra Bronson, d. of Deac. Daniel.

Esther, b. June 26. 1812.
Daniel Augustus, b. Feb., 1814.
Maria, b. Sept., i8z6.
Charles, b. 1823. Mary, b. 1825.]

Phinehas Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m.
Esther Clark, d. of Thomas, dec'd, July
12, 1770.*

1. Esther, b. Mch., 1772; m. Levi Beardsley.

Esther d. Mch. i8, 1772, and Major
Phineas m. Milliscent Lewis, wid. of
Isaac Booth and d. of Jonathan Bald-
win], Dec. 23, 1778. He d. Mch. 9,
1804.

2. Orrisina, b. Nov. i, 1779; d. July 8, 1781.

3. Sally, b. Feb. 20, 1782.

4. Ansel, b. Aug. 2, 1784.

5. Orlando, b. May ^, 1787 [in. Olive, d. of Samuel

Frost], and d. Jan. i, 1836.

6. Betsey, b. Apr. 14, 1790; ni. Zenas Cook.

Polly Porter m. Lewis Williams, 1801.*

[Dr.] Preserved Porter, s. of Daniel, m.
Sarah Gould, d. of Job of New Milford,
Apr. 8, 1764.

I. Hannah, b. Nov. lo, i766- m._Jos._ Bronson.

a. I^vinia,

3. Isaac,

A. Isaac

5. Jesscj b. Oct. 31I 1777.' (All bap. at St. James.)

Sarah d. Nov. 25, 1779, and Preserved
m. Lydia (wid. of Thomas) Welton,
Dec. 9, 1781. He d. Oct. 23, 1803; she,
Oct., 1 82 1, a. 92.
[Dr.] Richard Porter [b. Mch. 24, 1658,

s. of Dr. Daniel] m. Ruth , who

d. Jan. 9, 1709-10.

Porter.

Porter.

nah, b. Nov. lo, 1766- m. Jos. Bronson.
nia, b. July 21, 1767 [m. l5r. Jos. Porter],
:, b. July 3, 1770; d. June 25, 1772.
c, b. Mch. 97, 1774.

[I.
2.

3-
4.

5-
6.

7.

Daniel, of Simsbury, 1721-26.]

Joshua, b. Aug. 7, 1688; d. Nov. 19, 1709.

lary, b. Jan. 14, i6go-i [m. Northrop].

Ruth, b. Oct., 1692 [m. Cossett].

Samuel, b. Mch. 30, 1695.
Hezekiah* b. Jan. 29, 1096-7; d, Aug., 1702.
John, b. lune 11, 1700 [went to live with Deac.
Clark, Nov. 30, 1730].
8. Timothy b. Dec. 21, 1701.
Q. Hezekiah, b. July 27, 1704 [was of Woodbury,

~ -I

[Joshua. Richard, and Lydia who m. Dan. Par-
dec of New Haven, are ment. in his will of
1740, also wife Sarah.]

Samuel Porter (i), s. of Richard, m.
Mary Bronson, d. of John, May 9, 1722.
[He d. 1727], and Mar>' m. John
Barnes.

1. Samuel, b. Dec. 24, 1723.

2. Lusc (Lucy), b. Oct. 12, 1725.

Samuel Porter (2), s. of Samuel, dec'd,
m. Marv Upson, d. of Stephen, Dec. 9,
1747. She d. Mch. 23, 1780; he, Jan. 8,

1793.

z. Ebenezer. b. Jan. 24, 1749-50.

a. Jemima, b. Nov. 13, 1752; m. Reuben Bronson.

3. Samuel, b. Oct. 7, 1755.

Samuel Porter, Jr. (3), s. of Capt. Samuel,
m. Sibbel Munson, d. of Obadiah, Jan.

28, 1778.

1. Lucy, b. Nov. 14, 1778.

2. Eunice, b. Mch. 23; d. May i, 1780.

3. Stephen, b. Sept. 22, 1781 [grad. at Dartmouth,

1808; preached at Geneva, N. Y.].

4. Obadiah, b. July 24, 1783.

5. Azubah, b. July 6, 1785.

6. Marshall, b. June 4, 1788.

7. Samuel Munson, b. May 16, 1790.

8. Sheldon, b. Mch. 31, 1792.

Sybbel d. Feb. 5, 1794, and Samuel m.
Lucy Bronson, d. of Deac. Andrew,
Nov. 22, 1795.

9. Lorrain Bronson, b. Sept. 8, 1799.
10. Leonard, b. July 23, 1802.

Samuel Porter was m. to Mary Lowere,
Sept. 13, 1830, by William A. Curtiss,
Presbyter of the Prot. Epis. Ch. in the
United States.

Samuel Porter from Milford m. Minerva
Beach, d. of James of Litchfield, Jan.
16, 1842.

1. Wales, b. May 30, 1844.

2. Frances Laduska, b. Jan. 26, 1847.

Silas Porter, s. of David, m. Polly
Strong, d. of Benjamin of Southbury,
Dec. 21, 1802.

X. Edwin, b. Feb. 25, 1804.
2. Esther, b. June 8, 1806.

Simeon Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m.
Lucy Lewis, d. of Deac. Samuel, June
28, 1770.

I. Hannah, b. Mch. 28, 1771.

Thomas Porter, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m.
Mary Welton, d. of Stephen, dec*d.
D^c. 7, 1727 [and d. Jan. 28, 1797, a.

95].

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 24, 1728; m. Enoch Scott.

2. Ashbel, b. Feb. 2, 1729-30.

3. Mary, b. Jan. 5, 1731-2; m. Joel Sanford.

4. Eunice, b. Apr. 19, 1734 [d. unm.].

5. Thomas, b. May 9, 1736.

6. Phineas, b. Dec. i, 1739.

7. Elizabeth, b. May 9, 1742; m. Timothy Clark.

8. Symeon, b. June 18, 1744.

9. Sybel, b. Aug. 28, 1747 |d. young].

xo. Dorcas, b. Aug. 2, 1751 [m. Erastus Bradley].

Thomas Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m.
Mehitable Hine, d. of Daniel of New
Milford, Dec. 12, 1758. He d. Jan. 31,
iSi7» [she, June i, 1837, a. 98].

1. Sibil, b. Nov. 10, 1759.

2. Rebecca, b. June 5, 1761; m. Jared Byington.

3. Truman, b. Sept. 8, 1763.

[4. Ethel, b. 1765; d Mch. 2, 1797.

5. Polly; m. Marshall Lewis.

6. Stephen; m. Manvill.J

[Thomas Porter, s. of Truman, m. Sally
Warner, d. of Stephen, July 12, 18 15.

1. Emily M., b. Aug. 12, 1816; m. A. G. Hull.

2. Esther, b. 1819; d. 1820, a. 3 m.

3. Esther M., b. Apr. 22, 1822; d. 1841.

FAMILY RECORDS,

AP107

Porter. Post.

4. Tames £., b. June 22, 1824.

5. Martha H., b. Ian. 7, 1828; d. 1831.

6. George E., b. Sept. 14, 1830.

7. Thomas E., )

and >b. Nov. 17, 183a.]

8. Truman E., )

Timothy Porter [carpenterl, s. of
Richard, m. Mary Balawin, d. of Jona-
than, Dec. 18, 1735.

I. Sybel, b. Mch. 23, 1737.

a. Joho, b. Feb. 22, 1738-0.

3. Lois, b. Feb. 6, 1742-3 [m. Bartholomew Bolt] .

4. Marv, b. May 28, 1745 [m. Eli Scott].

5. Mark, b. Mch. 27, 1748.

6. Ruth, b. old stile. May 17, 1750; m. Gamaliel Fenn.

7. Timothy, )

and vb. June 8, 1753.

8. Lucy, ) [ra. Aug. Peck.]

Timothy m. his second wife, Hannah
Winters, Aug. 27, 1767. [He was Deac.
Timothy in 1770.]

IDr. Timothy Porter, s. of Daniel, m.
Margaret Skinner, d. of Gideon of Bol-
ton. She was b. 1739, and d. 18 13.
He d. Jan. 24, 1792.

1. Daniel, b. Sept. 23, 1768.

2. Sylvia C, b. Feb. 24, 1771.

3. Dr. Joseph, b. Sept. 3, 1772; m. Levinia Porter,

d. of Preserved, and d. May 6, 1841.

4. Olive, b. July 26, 1775; m. Moses Hall.

5. Anna, b. Apr. 5, 1777; m. R. F. Welton.

6. Chauncey, b. Apr. 24, 1779.

7. Timothy Hopkins, b. Nov. 28, 1785.]

Timothy Porter, s. of Daniel, m. Claris-
sa Frisbie, d. of Ebenezer, May 17,
1812.

I. Joseph, b. June 5, 1812.

a. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 21, 1815; m. S. E. Palmer.

3. Jane E., b. Feb. 3, 1818; m. J. C. Welton.

Clarissa d. Nov. 18, 1821. and Timothy
m. Dec. 30. 1824, Polly Ann Todd, b.
May 12, 1800, d. of Hezekiah of
Cheshire.

4. Timothy Hopkins, b. Feb. 16, i8a6.

5. Nathan T., b. Dec. 10, 1828,

6. Thomas, b. Feb. 9, 183 1.

7. David G., b. Mch. 8, 1833.

8. Samuel, b. May 17, 1835.

Truman Porter, s. of Thomas, m. Sarah
Thompson, d. of Jonathan of New
Haven, Jan. i, 1784. [He d. Sept. 27,
1838; she, Oct. 26, 1837, in Coventry,
N. Y.].

1. Margaret, b. Nov. 23, 1784 [m. Parson Bcccher].

2. Minerva, b. Oct. 24, 1788 [m. Truman Adams] .

3. Julius, b. Aug. 26, 1790; d. 1831.

4. Thomas, b. Jan. 7, 1703.

5. Alma, b. Feb. 9, 1795 [m. Simeon Miles].

6. Sally, b. Sept. 25, 1801.

7. Myretta. b. June 24, 1803* m. Edwin Birge.

8. Hector, d. Aug. 11, 1805 [m. Isabella Upson].

9. William, b. Oct. 20, 1807; d. Mch. 30, 18^09.

Qabriel Post from Bellville, N. J., m.
Elizabeth Allen, d. of Isaac, Apr. 11,
1830.

1. John H., b. Mch. 22, 1832.

2. William R., b. Mch. 22, 1834.

George W. Tucker, an adopted child, b. Feb. 24,
1841.

Post. Potter.

Welthy E. Post m. John Dudley, 1839.
Abigail Potter m. Sidney Hall, 1830.
Ann Potter m. Hubbard Smith, 1835.
Chastina Potter m. Hiel Bristol, 1825.

Daniel Potter [b. in New Haven, June 9,
1 718, s. of Daniel, m. Martha Ives of
North Haven, Mch. 11, 1741]. She'd,
July 13, 1770, a. 34; he, Oct. 19, 1773.

1. Elam, b. Feb. i, 1741-2. (Yale Col.)

2. Ambros, b. Apr. 28, 1743 [d. Apr., 1822].

3. Eliakim, b. Jan. 6, 1744-5.

4. Isaiah, b. July 23. 1746 (Vale, 1767). ^ [He was

grandfather of Longfellow's first wife.]

5. Lyman, b. Mch. 14, 1747-8. (Yale Col.)

6. Mary, b. Dec. 20, 1749; d. Aug. 31, 17S0.

7. Mary, b. Mch. 9, 1751; ra. Aaron Dunbar.

8. Mabel, b. Nov. 5, 1752; m. Eliasaph Doolittle.

9. Martha, b. Mch. 16, 1754; m. Jason Fenn.
10 and II. Sons- d. young.

12. Daniel, b. Feb. 15, 1758. (Yale, 1780.)
[13. Lake, b. Aug. 13, 1759; m. Lois Royce.]

Daniel Potter, s. of Daniel, m. Martha
Humiston, d. of Caleb, Jan. 25, 1781.*

z. Horace, b. Dec. 10, 1781.4
2. Anselm, b. Nov. 20, 1786.

D. Gano Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m.
Mary E. Ward [d. of Richard], Feb.
17, I 841.

Eliakim Potter m. Feb. 18, 1777, wid.
Temperance Blakeslee, b. Oct. 21, 1756.*

1. Esther, b. Apr. 29, 1779.

2. Phebe, b. June 22, 1781.

3. Esther, b.*N«v. 11, 1783.

4. Eliakim, b. July 14, 1785.

Erastus P. Potter, b. Dec. 28, 1805, s. of
Lemuel, m. Oct. 3, 1826, Elizabeth
Roberts, b. Sept, 7, 1801, d. of Amasa.

1. Elizabeth, b. May 17, 1827; m. A. P. Lewis.

2. Franklin Drake, s. of Wm. M., an adopted child,

Jb. Sept. I, 1840.

Franklin Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m.
Lucy Chase of New Preston, Men. 2,
1850.

Franklin S. Potter [s, of Ruel] m. Jane
M. Gerard of Birmingham, May 30,
1850.

Jacob Potter, s. of Samuel, dec'd, m.
Abigail Blakeslee, d. of Capt. Thomas,
July 2, 1762.

1. Demas, b. Jan. 29, 1763.

2. Zenas, b. Mch. 5, 1765.

3. Thomas, b. Mch. 14, 1767.

4. Mabel, b. Apr. 3, 1769.

5. Dolly, b. Mch. 21, 1772.

6. Arza, b. Apr. 9, 1774.
Chester, b. Oct. 23, 1787.*

[Dr. John Potter m. Lydia Harrison —
both of Farmingbury, Sept. 3, 1783.]

Joseph Potter [b. in East Haven, Oct,
6, 1691, eldest s. of John, 3d, and Eliza-
beth (Holt), m. Thankful Bradley].

6. Desire, b. Dec. 28, 1748.

7. Enos, b. May 31, 1751.

8. Desire, b. Oct. i, 1755.

BISTORT OF WATBRBUR7.

Milinna Potter m. Htjnrj- Palterwin,

Nancy Potter m. Samuel ChipmaQ. iSnj.

Oliver N. Potter [s. of Samuel] m,
Louisa Potter [d. of Tbomas] of Chen-
ango Co., N, v., Apr. i6, 1S46.

Rachel Potter m. Lucian Judd, iSjo.

Ruel Potter [s. of Lemuel] m. Clarissa
A. Korbos, Jan. 7, 1B25.

Samuel Potter [b. 170S, s. of Jobn. jd,
m. 173B. Dorotny Moulthrop, d. of Na-
than, and] d. Nov. 23, 1756.

Eunin, d. Nor. n. i7;6.
Lucy. A. Nov. ,, ,756.

Jonathan C. Pratt of Westbrook r

becca Baldwin, July 2, 1843,
Caleb Preston:

(Sunuc

,:,""■

r. Unice, b. Srpi. 6, 17^5.
». Lu«,b. Nov. 1,. i7'*.
3. Mmry. b. Junt 15. i;'a.

jliamtiil.b. Jiilyi-''77i-
£ BelU,b.ru]y,;, .77*.

■ I. DuoieLb. Feb.''i3"?79.
Polly, b.>n. JO,. jg..i
Alhcr, b. Sepl. in, 17^4^ d. i7Sq.

[Rev. Samnel Potter, b. Sept. 23, 1779, s.
of Lemuel and Rachel (Perkins) of
Bethany, m. May 9. 1791), Leva Judd,
d. of RoswcU.

I. Samuel Dario), b. Dec. 15, 1799; d. June. 1803.
9. Leve Marin, b. July 15, iSai; in. M. Baldoio.

X RoT^'b'juBi jst^'i'^s; m. M

5. Samurl, b. Api. 55, 1607.

6. Ztniu, b. Aug. S, iSoy.

7. Tbumai Perkioi, b. Nov. 11, iSi

;:&y;'ni.v"4,...

EBi";

'i"*.c

1>.D«. s.

t&-x,

b.rf™.^ji"J

6. Amaia, b. Apr. 3:

?. Sarah, b, May ,, .755.

8. ioii»Ih«n, b. <JcI. I, 175a.

Sarah d. Mch. 17. 1761, and Jucalhao
m. Catharine Luddenton, July iS. 17^1-

10. Mr4c?. b. M<tv 19, 176-1.
,.. Abraham, b, Sep.. ,.,765.

WitlUm PrcBton of Pittsburgh, Penn .
m. Caroline M. Scovill, Oct. 31, ib4j.

Harriet H. Price m. Samael Tavl'jr.
'S33.

Abraham Prichard, s, of Roger, dec'd.
m. Abigail Smith, d. of Thomas 01 Der-
by, dec'd. Mch. 13, 1766.

I. Rtpben,b.Scpi.ii,i7«t«iim>Pean;.

3. AblEul. b. Jan. li. I7«a [m. in Harwist<4i, m^

„«jci.«Ldi..^^__^

■^diT^ii-r-a.

4. J^", S"'>'

b. Oc-t. ;

■77SJ.

[Abraham, b. May 25, 1785; m. Sylvia Clark,!
Amofl Prichard, s. of Roeer. dec'd. was
ni. to Lydia Blakeslee, May 36, i7b3. by
Rev. Mark Leavenworth, v. m.
r. Lydia, b. Apr. i», 17^9; ni. Eleazcr H^L

), Roser, b. May 17, 177B; d. Ai>e. 11, 1779.

,. Sabra. b. Ian. S, .780 (m. I»ac AflenJ.

i. Roger. b.Wch. 7, 1761.

5. Ona. b. Ocl. •«, 1783 [m. Dyrr Holchfcjj^ |a»

la. 1B04, and had Charlci. Kinry, Muy, Ab»

and Santa].

Zenas Potter m. Betty Blakeslee, Nov.

15. 1759.'
Zenas Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m.

Mary Hotchkiss, Oct, 27. '832.
John Powers m. Huldah Hall, d. of

Zebulon Scutt, Sept. 27, 17^5. He d.

Oct., 1S22, and she, Aug. 28. 1E33, a.

81.'
Francis H. Pratt, 1>. May 11. 1S05, s. of

Roswell, m. Sept. 10, 1832, Emeline

Moss, b, Aug. 28. 1811, d. of Amos of

Litchfield.

dec'd, Oct. 23, 1782.

b, Oci. ■

FAMILY RECOh

Prichard. Prichard.

Benjamin m. Hannah Marks, July 4,
1733, and d. June, 1760.

Desire, b. Tuly 7, 1734; d. unm.
Esther, b. Nov., 1735; m. Johnson Anderson.
Elnathan, b. June 12, 1737— all in Milford].
Jonathan, b. Oct. 19, Z739.

[Benjamin Prichard, s. of Benjamin
(above) m. Martha Lambert, d. of Jesse,
Aug. 25, 1753. He d. Mch. 30, 1782;
she, 1804.

Martha, bap. July, 1754; d. 1812, unm.
Benjamin, bap. July, 1756; m. Hannah Tuttle,

d. of Jabez, and d. of small-pox in Wat., 1801.
Jesse, b. 1759; ™* Eunice Oviatt, d, of Samuel,

and d. 1837. ^ Mary.
All lived in Milford except Benjamin.]

Bennett Pritchard m. Amy Wilmot, June
6, 1825; and Laura Russell, Mch. 21,
1830.

I>avid Prichard [s. of James, m. Ruth
Smith, d. of Joseph, Dec. 20, 1757].

1. Archibel, b. June 25, 1756.

2. Ruth, b. Oct. x6, 1760 [m. 1797, Justus P.Spen-

cer of Benton, N. Y.; had two dau's, Almira
and Ruth, and d. x8i6].

3. Mariana, b. May 5, 1763 [ra. Abbe].

4. Philoe. b. Aug. 5, 1765.

5. Silva, D. Feb. 17, 1768 [m. Francis French].

6. MoUe, b. Tune aa, 1770; d. Jan. 24, 1779.

7. Molle, b. Feb. 28, 1773 ["*• Jacob Hall, 1795].

8. David, b. Oct. 24, 1775.

9. Djimon, b. Nov. 5, 1777.

10. Sally, b. June 28, 1780 [m. Ira Hotchkiss].

David Prichard, Jr., s. of David, m. An-
na Hitchcock, d. of Benjamin, Nov. 9,
1797.

1. Minerva, b. June 22, 1798 [m. Francis Bancroft

of East Wmdsor].

2. William, b. Mch. 20, 1800 fm. Eliza Hall, d. of

Amos of Cheshire, June x6, 1825J.

3. Julius Smith, b. Feb. 14, 1809 [m. Maria, d. of

J. Gtx>dwin Tyrrell].

4. Elizur Edwin, b. Sept. 19, 1804.

5. [Mary]^ Anna, b. Sept. 9, 1806; d. Nov. 24, 1822.

6. Sally Hotchkiss, b. Auj<. 29, 1808; d. Feb. 4, 1827.

7. [Dr.j David, b. Oct. 24, 1810 [m. Wealthy Hill

Wilcox of Madison, Dec. 31, 1833].

8. Samuel Holland, b. May 27, 1813

9. Charlotte Lucy, b. June 27, 1816.

David M. Prichard m. Rhoda S. North-
rop of Watertown, Aug. 6. 1S4S.

Dennis Prichard m. Julia Abigail Downs,
Jan. 20, 1 83 1.

Elias Pritchard and Hannah [Payne, d.
of David and Submit].

1. Lumon, b. Feb. j6. 1805.

2. Aaron, b. Jan. 5; a. Mch. 27, 1807.

3. Minerva, b. Oct. 2, i8<>8.

4. Emeline, b. Dec. 29, 1810; m. Wm. Fulford and

Bennett Scott.

5. Rebecca, b. July 2, 1814; m. Norman Ailing.

6. Clarissa, b. fuly 27, 18 16; ra. M. W. Welton.

7. Koxana, b. Jan. 15, 1818.

8. A twin with Roxana; d. 6 hours old.

9. George Nelson, b. Aug. 17, 1819.

10. David Miles, b. Mch. 2, 1825.

XX. William Harry, b. June 21, 1826.

Elizur E. Prichard, s. of David [Jr.] ra.
Betsey J. Cooper [d. of Asa of Caleb]
from Derby, Mch. 11, 1827.

Prich

X. El
a. Sa

3. [A

4. C«

5. Fli

Emily

Georg

beth
Hav
1820

1. c
a. G

3?

4. Pi

5. J<

6. Ii

\. H

9. El

xo. R<

t

Georg^i

Han:

X. Die
a. Jau

3. Clo

4. Ezi

Georg(

Frar

Georg

Laui
Nov"

X. Eli

Gilber

A.,

1845

I. Mt

Isaac

Lois
[He
1824

1. Ja;

2. Li(

[3.>

4. Exi

5. Th

{

6. Isj

7. Lo

Isaac
Bale

2. >

3. E

5- i

6. C

9. A
10. C

Isaial

Ups

Jamei

(s.
Rel
Roj
fielc

IIOAP

HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

Prichard. Pritchard.

at which date he m. wid. Elizabeth
Slough, d. of James Prudden, and d.
in New Haven, Jan. 26, 1670-71); and
Elizabeth Johnson, b. Aug. 28, 1701, d.
of George and Hannah (Dorman) of
Stratford, were m. Dec. 25, 1721.

X. James, b. Jan. 31, 1722-3.
a. George, b. Oct. <, 1724.

3. Elizabeth, b. Men. 12, 1726-7; m. Benj. Nichols.

4. Isaac, b. Sept. ao, 1729 — all b. in MilfordJ.

5. John, b. July 25, 1734; d. Aug. 6, 1749.

6. David, b. Apr. 7, 1737.

7. Anna (Hannah), b. Apr. 4, 1740; m. John Strick-

land and Nathl. Sutliff.

Mr. James Prichard d. Sept. 3, 1749,
and Elizabeth m. Capt. Stephen Up-
son.
James Prichard, s. of James, m. Abigail
Hickcox, d. of Ebenezer, Aug. 7, 1740.

X. Jabez, b. Feb. i8, 1740-x [m. Eunice Botsford,

K64, and was Lieut. Jabez of Rev. War. Set
erby His., pp. 638 and 647].
s. Jerehiah, b. Apr. 13, 1743.

3. £lisha, b. Oct. i, 1745; d. Aug. xx, 1749.

4. James the less, b. Apr., 1748; d. Aug. 16, 1749.

5. James, b. June 4, 1750 [m. Rachel "Warren of

Derby, 177^].

6. Abigail, b. May 14, 1752.

[7. Lydia, b. in Derby, Aug. 11, 1757: m. J. Lum.

8. Sarah, b. in Derby, Nov. xs, 1759.J

[James Prichard, s. of Isaac, m. Sarah
Cook, d. of Charles (and Sibyl Mun-
son) of Moses, Jan. 22, 1789, and d. Apr.
16, 1813.

ieremiah, b, Feb. 17, X79X.
lonson, d. young.
Alma, b. Mch. X5, 1796; d. unra.
Louisa, b. Sept. 2, 1798; d. unm.
Isaac James (ace. to bap. rec.), b. Nov. ix, 1802;

d. Aug. 4, 1827, unm.
Sibyl Monson, b. Aug. 25, 1800; m. Ezra Ham-
ilton of Hartford, Feb. 10, 1824.
Maria Ann, b. June 24, 1805; m. Solomon Parker
of Westville.
Sarah Cook, b. May 22, x8xi; m. Albert Downs.]

John Pritchard, s. of Abraham, m. Anna
Hotchkiss, d. of Eben of Prospect,
Mch. 25, 1806.

1. Eben, b. Nov. 6, 1806.

a. Beza Smith, b. Apr. 22, x8o8.

3. Celestia, b. June 5, 1810; m. S. H. McKey.

4. Buel, b. Jan. 26, 1812.

5. Luther, b. Sept. X4, 1813.

6. Abigail, b. Nov. ^, 1815.

7. Mary Ann, b. Feb. 17, 18 18; m. David Wheeler

and Jesse Brown.

8. Phebe, b. Mch. 4, X822; m. Dan. Curtiss.

Joseph Prichard, s. of Joseph of Milford,
m. Rebecah Smith, d. of James, Aug.

2, 1761. He d. at Saybrook, Oct. 23,
1775. a. 34.

X. Sarah, b. Sept. 5, 1763.

2. Mary, b. Aug. 19, 1765.

3. Thomas Gains, b. Oct. 3, X768.

4. William, b. Jan. 4, 1771.

5. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 14, 1774.

Leonard Pritchard, s. of Isaac, m. Feb.
1825, Elizabeth Pritchard, b. Oct. 26,
1805, d. of Asher.

1. Eliza, b. Oct. 6, 1827; m. W. A. Welton.

9« Sarah, b. June i, 1829.

Pritchard. Pritchard.

3. Mary, b. Ian 23, 1835.

4. FranceSf b. Dec. 29, 1838.

5. Julia, b. Dec. 2, 1844.

Luzina Prichard m. Garry Atkins, 1837.

Mary Prichard, d. of Joseph of Milford,
m. Benj. Richards, 1736, and 'Amos
Hikcox, 1740.

Mary Prichard, wid. of Joseph of Mil-
ford, m. James Welton, 1763.

Philo Prichard, s. of David, m. [Sabra]
Johnson, Dec. 17, 1783.

I. Sukey, b. Tuly 26, X784.

[Nathaniel, b. Aug. 25, 1787.]

Rebeckah Prichard m. Sam. Root, 1803.

Roger Prichard [s. of Benjamin of Rog-
er m. in Milford, Mch. 8, 171 5- 16, Han-
nah Northrop, d. of William.

1. Roger, b. Dec. 25, X716.

2. Hannah, b. Oct. 2, X718; d. 1738.

3. Mary, bap. Mch. 4, X722.

4. Ann, b. Feb. 14, 1724.

5. Ephraim, b. 1726; d.

Hannah d. Nov. 28, 1726, and Roger
m. Sarah . He d. May i8, 1760.

7. Phebe, b. Apr. x6, X73X; m. Warner.

8. Abigail, b. Mch. 15, z733-4>

9. Sibella, b. Jan. 9, 1736; d. X737.

xo. Abraham b. Oct. 12, 1737 — all b. in Milford].

Chil. of Roger and Sarah b. in Water-
bury:

5 ^11). Amos, b. Aug. 27, X739.

6 (12). Elihue, b. Oct. 27, 1741.

[His heirs were Roger, Sarah, w. of Jo-
seph Fenn, Jr., Ann, w. of Stephen
Bradley, Phebe Warner, Amos add
Abraham.]

Roger Prichard, Jr., s. of Roger, m.
Ann Buggbe of Derby, Feb. 16, 1742-3.
[He d. Sept. 19, 1792. J

X. Philene, b. May 18, 1744; m. Elijah Richards.

2. Sybyl, b. Oct. 25, 1745; d. Sept. 23. 1749.

3. Elihue, b. Sept. 19, 1747; d. Sept. 19, 1749.

4. Elihue, b. July 19, 1749: d. Aug., 1751.

5. Ann, b. Apr. 24, 1752; m. Josiah Warner.

6. Thomas, b. Nov. 29, 1754.

7. Eliphalet, b. Dec. 2, 1756.

8. Elihue, b. May 23, 1759.

Roger Prichard, s. of Amos, d. July 25 ^
1843, a. 61. • Chloe [Nichols], his wife,
d. Aug. 17, 1839, a. 53." [Children:

Gilbert. Dennis. Amy, m. Chas. Seely.]

Samuel H. Pritchard, s. of David, rjr.l
m. Jennet C. Hall, d. of Lemuel of
Cheshire, Oct. 31, 1837.

X. Henry Hall, b. Apr. x, 1838.

a. Frederick Elizur, b. Nov. 13, 1844.

Sarah Prichard m. Ethan Andrews,
1780.

Sarah Pritchard m. Isaac Baldwin, 1831.

Spencer Pritchard, b. Feb. 19, 1807, s.
of Isaiah, m. Nov. 13, 1829, Mary E.
Wilmott. b. Sept. 4. 1809, d, of Daniel
of Prospect.

FAMILY REOO

Raymond. Redi

I. Eliia Rebecca, b. Feb. ii, 18.11. lailM

Tajnar Prichard m. Joseph Leaven- Chat

worth, 1797, ni-

Mary Prince m. Moses Noyes, 177S.* .

Damaras Prindle m. Beta Lewis, 1760, g] 5

and Oliver Terrell, 1764. 3- \
Eleazer Prindle, s. ofTonathan. m. Pi
Scovill. d. of William, Oct.

Emil;

175a. [Shed. 1789.] ' Pram

iry. b. Dec, 6. 1763;' m. Lerl Bi

n. '774-

a. Din»h Lu«, b. jtme «. .7,8.
i. Bilk. b. Sept. ij, i78o.>

Sarah Punderson m. Zach. Thompson,

1771.
Tentj Punderson m. Thos. Dutton, 3d,

178a.
Jeremiab Quintan ni. Margaret Regan,

Sept. 4, 1851.
Susan M. Ray m. Richard Steele, 1S31.
William Rarmood and Mary:'

.84.
John

Elizabeth Prindle m. Sam. Root, 1740. Salj

Jonathan Prindle, s. of Eleazer of Mil- 1. '*

ford, dec'd, m. Rachel Hikcojt, d. of '■ g

Wm., dec'd, May 4, 173a. [He d. 1783; ^ u

she, 1798.] s. T

1. Eleazer, b. Mch. 20, 1733, Patru

». JonMhii. b. July «, \%: d. Feb. .7, m*'!- ,^

}. Rachel, b. Mch. iq, 1738- n. Hei. Brown. H.

4. Rebel<ah, b. Feb. 7. 1740; m. Noab Judd. Hantt

5. Hannah, b. Dec. ii. iiii; m. DaviiTAtnold. "ann-

6. Jomthim, b. June 31, iiA. Tohn ]

7. i>..Ld.b. Julie. ,75. fi.HopeW..n«r..] ^"^^
Jonathan Prindle, s. of Lieut. Jonathan, u

m. Margaret Hall, Oct. 13, 1768 [d. .! j,

before 1782]. Nanc

1. Ele.b. r«n.-i,.77o. _

>. Micbael. t>. Dec. 16. 1771. Fran<

Nathan Prindle, s. of Ebenezer of New- '^S'

town, m. Mary Richason, d. of John. Jane
dft'fl, M.iy .}. 1728, and d. July 8, 1746.

;: ru;';i::.',i;, '.'K^r-.t^^t "■ '"'■'^ ■ fo!

3. n.-i.,,, !...>... .4. .7«; .n.. Cor. Crave..

Nathan Prindle and Hannah: children
b. in Wat.

1. Mary, b. Aug. i, 1769.

Phebe Prindle m. Moses Ford, 1755.
Rnth Prindle m. Asa Bronson, 178J.
Anna Punderson in. Chas. Me

1784.'

Arch

112 AP

BISTORT OF WATBRBURT.

Rick. Richards.

Anna Maria Cook, d. of Samuel, Dec.
6, 1832.

See also Royce.

Rev. Samuel Rich and Angeline:*

Abigail, bap. Oct. 17, 18x9.
Eroeline, bap. Apr. 27, 1823.

Abijah Richards, s. of Thomas, dec'd. m.
Huldah Hopkins, d. of Capt. Timothy,
dec'd, Dec. 15, 1749, and d. Oct. 4,

1773.

z. Streat, b. Dec. 12, 1750.

2. Giles, b. Feb. 17, 1754 [in. Sarah Adams, d. of

Rev. Thomas of Koxbury, Mass.].

3. Axhsah, b. Jan. 22, Z756 [m. Luther Hyde].

4. Hannah, b. May 9, 1758; d. June 30, 1760.

5. Mark, b. July 15, 1760 [m. Ann Kugj^les Dow].

6. Huldah, b. Sept. x6, 1762 [m. Abel Sherman].

7. Hannah, b. May 5, 1765; d. Sept. 17, 1760.

8. Sarah, b. May 8, 1767; ro. Dr. Isaac Baldwin.

Benjamin Richards, s. of John, dec'd, m.
Mary Prichard, d. of Joseph of Milford,
in Wat., July 29, 1736. He d. Nov. 22,
1736, and Mary m. Amos Hikcox.

1. Benjamin, b. May 23, 1737.

Benjamin Richards, s. of Benjamin, m.
Sarah Judd, d. of Capt. Wilham, Mch.
16, 1758. She d. Apr. 27, 1777.

z. Lewther, b. Jan. 2; d. Aug. z6, Z759.

2. Mercy, b. Jan. 25, X761.

3. Lewther, b. Feb. 23, Z764.

4. William, b. Nov. 13, 1766,

5. Sarah, b. Oct. Z2, Z772.

6. Silence, b. June 9, X775.

Ebenezer Richards, s. of John, m. Eliza-
beth Saymore, d. of Ebenezer of Ken-
sington, Feb. 20, 1734-5. He d. Oct.
20. 1758 [she, Dec. 18, 1800, a. 87].

z. Elizabeth, b. May 25, Z734; m. John Judd.

2. Samuel, b. Apr. Z4, Z736; d. Aug. 28, 1758.

3. Abigail, b. Sept. 21, 1738; d. Oct. 27, Z74Z.

4. Gideon, b. Oct. 10, Z740; d. Oct. 22, Z741.

5. Gideon, b. Nov. 2x, Z742; d. Feb. 2Z, Z77Z.

6. Noah, b. Sept. Z4, Z745 [of Yates Co., N. Y.

«79oJ.

7. Timothy, b. Dec. 27, J747.

8. Asa, h. Apr. 21, Z750; d. reb. 20, Z758.

9. Obadiah, b. May 18, Z752.

10. Abrahain, b. Aug. 5, Z754 fm. Sarah Skilton,
and d. in Rhode Island. She d. in Vaies Co.
in Z7Q3, having been for several years asso-
ciatea with Jemima Wilkinson.]

Elijah Richards, s. of Lieut. Obadiah,
m. Philene Prichard, d. of lioger, Apr.

28, 1774.

z. Sarah, b. Apr. zi, 1775; d. Jan. Z5, 1779.

2. Ame, b. Sept. z, Z776; d. June 6, 1798.

3. Obadiah, b. Nov. iz, 1778.

4. Sarah Ann, b. Feb. Z2, Z781.

5. Elijah Davis, b. Apr. 5, 1784.

6. Roger Hawkms, b. Apr. 14, Z786.

Harriet Richards m. Rufus Pierpont,
1847.

John Richards, soon of Obadiah, m.
Mary Welton, d. of John. Sr., Aug. 17,
1692. She d. July 21, 1733 [he, in 1735]-

z. A soon, b. May aboiight 29, and dyed sometime

in June, i^j2.
2. John, b. July 29, i5p4; d. Nov. 29, 17Z9.

Richards.

Richards.

3. Mary, b. Mch. aa, 1696-7 [bap. in Woodbury,

iune 97. Z607] and m. Samuel Scott,
omas, b. Oct. 17, Z699 [in Newark, at the
house of Deac. Thomas Richards, who was his
grandfather's brother].

5. Hannah, b. June 26, Z702; m. Wm. Scovill.

6. Obadiah, b. Apr. 20, Z705.

7. Samuel, b. Jan. 3Z, Z708.

8. Lois, b. Nov. z6, Z7Z0; d. Dec. 23, X7X8.

9. Ebenezer, b. May Z2, Z7Z3.
zo. Benjamin, b. Oct. Z5, Z7Z7.

Luther Richards, s. of Benjamin, m.
Anna Saxton, Nov. 28, 1785.*

z. Orris, b. Feb. 7, X787.

Mary A. Richards m. H. V. Welton,
1834.

Mary J. Richards m. A. B. French, 1851.

Obadiah Richards [s. of Thomas of Hart-
ford, m. Hannah Barnes.

z. John, b. Z667.

2. Mary, b. Jan., Z669; m. George Scott.

3. Hannah, b. Nov., 1671; m. John Scovill.

4. Esther, b. Tune, Z673; m. Dr. Eph. Warner.

5. Elizabeth, D. July, Z675; m. John Richasonand

Nathl. Arnold.

6. Sarah, b. Apr., Z677; m. David Scott.

7. Obadiah, b. Oct. z, Z679; d. at Lyme before

Z720.

8. Rachel, bap. May 6, Z683; m. Jeremiah Peck.

9. Thomas, b. Aug. 9, Z685.

zo. Benjamin, b. Apr. 5, 169Z] d. June 2, 17x4.

Obadiah d. Nov. 11, 1702 [leaving
widow Hannah, whose estate was pro-
bated, June 4, 1725.]

Obadiah Richards, s. of John, m. Han-
nah Hikcox, d. of Benjamin of Wood-
bury, Mch. 22, 1732.

z. Mary, b. luly 26, 1733; m. Benjamin Scott.

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 30, Z736.

3. A dau., b. and d. June Z5, Z739.

Hannah d. June 27, 1739, and Obadiah
m. Hannah [Davis], wid. of John
Hawkins of Derby, Nov. 8, 1739.

z. Lois. b. Aug. 7, Z740; m. Simeon Hopkins.

2. Saran, b. Sept. 3, 1742; d. Sept. Z9, Z749.

3. Marcy, b. Mch. 29, Z744; d. Aug. 30, Z749.

4. Obadiah, b. Mch. 27, Z746; d, Aug. 24, Z749.

5. Elijah, b. Apr. 9, Z748.

6. Sarah, b. May 9, z75o^ d. July Z2, Z75Z.

Hannah d. Nov. 17, 175 1. and Obadiah
m. Sarah Ashley of Hartford, July 23,
1752. He d. July 19, 1775.

Obadiah Richards, s. of Elijah, m. Chloe
Merrills, d. of Nathl., Aug. i, 1798.

Samuel Richards, s. of John, m. Miriam
Hawkins, d. of Jose h of Derby, dec'd,
Apr. 18, 1734. He d. Apr. 18, 1735,
and Miriam m. Thomas Hikcox.

z. Miriam, b. Apr. X2, Z735; m. Elnathan Judd.

Streat Richards, s. of Abijah, dec*d, m.
Eunice Culver, d. of Stephen, Dec. 28,

1775.

X. Polly, b. June 20, Z778; d. Mch., 1780.
9. Miles Hopkins, b. June z, Z780.
Sally; m. Daniel Steele, Jr., Z8Z3.

Thomas Richards's wife, Marah Porter

FAMILY BWOB

I

l^ICHARDS. RiCHASON.

of the East Jazise in new wark, d. July
17, 1 714. [Wife of Deac. Thomas, bro-
tlierof Obadiah?]

"Plioinas Richards, s. of Obadiah, Sr., m.
Hannah Upson, d. of Stephen, Sr.,
r>ec. 24, 1 714. [He d. 1726] and Han-
nah m. John Bronson, 1727.

z. Uniss. b. May 7, 17x6; m. Isaac Bronson, 3d.

2. Abijan, b. Jan. 24, 17x7-18.

3. Lois, b. Nov. X, X719; m. Benjamin Bronson and

Silas Hotchkiss.

4. Joseph, b. Apr. 6, 1722.

5. Benjamin, b. July 16, 1724.

'Fhomas Richards, Jr., s. of John, m.
fwid.] Susanna Rennolds, d. of John
Turner of Hartford, Nov. 19, 1723.
[Lieut. Thomas d. July, 1760.]

X. John, b. July 26; d. July 28. 1724.

John, b. June 23, 1726 [settlea in Guilford] .
Thomas b. Sept. 18, 1727.

Susanna, b. July 3, 1729; m. John Nettlcton.

her father's will, his slave,

2.
3-
4-

I

5-
6.

7-
8.

[She rec'd, by

Jack.]
ESenczer, b. Mch. 16, X73X [d. i8ox].
Ix)is, b. Mch. 4; d. Au|f. 95. 1734.
Lois, b. May 31. 1735; m. Th. Hikcox, 3d.
Benjamin, b. Aujf, '3, 1737.
Sarah, b. Aug. 28, 1739.

Charles Richardson m. Emelinc Hall of
Wolcott, Aug. 19, 1827.

£benezer Richason of Thomas marid
Margit Warner, d. of Thomas, Apr. 21,

1715.

1. Febc, b. Apr. 22; d. Jan. 9, 1716-X7.

2. Febe, b. Dec. 15, 17x7; d. Mch. 23, 1733.

3. Thoma.s. b. Dec. 7, 1720.

4. Toseph, b. Sept. 24, 1725.

5. Nathaniel, b. Apr. 8, 1729.

6. Sarah, b. I)cc. 23, 173X.

Margaret d. June 27, 1749, and Eben-
ezer m. Hannah Bronson, wid. [of
John], Oct. 18, 1749. She d. June 29;
ne, June 30, 1772.

Israel Richason, s. of Thomas and Ma-
ry, m. Hannah Woodruff, d. of John
and Mary of Farmington, Dec. 5, 1697.
He d. Dec. 18, 1712; she, Apr. 12, 1713.

X. Mary, b. Apr. 6, 1699; d. Jan. 13, 1712-13.

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 2, 1705 [m. John Scott of Sun-

derland, Mass.].

3. Joseph, b. June 11, X708.

4. issraell, b. Aug. 28, 1711 [lived with Deac. Clark

in X712; was of Sunderland, 1735.
Ruth, bap. at Woodbury, July 4, X703.]

James H. Richardson of Middlebury m.
Jane S. Atwood, Sept. 9, 1846.

John Richason, s. of Thomas, m. Ruth
Wheeler, d. of John of Woodbury,
Apr. 22, 1 701.

I. Ruth, b. Feb. xo, 1701 [m. Moses Doolittle].

John m. his second wife, Elizabeth
Richards, d. of Obadiah. Jan. 13, 1702-3.

d. Sept. II, X703.
Sept. 4, 1703.

d. Sept. 12, 170^.

A soon,
and
A dau

RiCHAi

3. EU

4. Ma

5. Sar

6. Jol)

Yea
dyed
son {
name
Nath
dyed

Nathai
Pheb
Apr.

X. JOM

2. Tan

3. Rutl

4. Phel

an

5. Ebei

6. Han

7. Natl

8. Han

Sarah I

Thomai

childr

6. •R4

an<

7. Rut

8. Joh

9. Nat
10. EIk

Thom
1712.
ton, V

X. Mar;

2. Sara

W
Hi

3. Johi

4. l*ho

Thoma

Abigj

1. Sara
a. Iren

3. Clo<

4. Isra

5. Abii

6. Anr

Abig
m. E
and
1776.

7. Th<

8. Ma

9. Eui

Thorns

m. I
cott,

X. Ira

2. Jul

3. Gai

4. Go

Jane 1
1822

Betsei

1830

♦ Probably the first white child born in Wat.

114 Ap

HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

RiGBY. Roberts.

Josiah D. Rigby m. Hannah Moody of
Burlington, May 23, 1824.

William Rigby d. i83i.«

Abner Riggs of Oxford m. Phebe Row-
land, Aug. 22, 1 780.*

Hannah Riggs m. Calvin Spencer, Jr.,
1829.

Joseph Riggs m. Mary Cady [d. of Arah]
of Oxford, Jan. 30, 1831.

William B. Riggs m. Eliza Bassett, Feb.

14, 1830.

Bernard Rigney m. Catharine Doolan,
Mch. 5, 1848.

John Riley m. Alice^Riley in Ireland.

X. Michael, b. in Ire., Aug. i, 1845.

John Reilly m. Rose Sheriden, Jan. 7,
1850.

Patrick Riley m. Catharine Delany, in
New Haven, July, 1840.

z. Jane, b. June a, 1841.

a. Ann, b. Dec. 28, 1842; d. Dec. X4, 1844.

3. Frances, b. July 16, 1845.

Alonzo M. Robe of Canistota, N. Y., m.
Harriet Limbumer [d. of John], Jan.

15, 1851.

Abial Roberts, Jr., and Martha:

4. Martha, b. July 30, 1757; m. Enos Root.

5. Hester, b. July 27, 1759; m. Uri Scott.

6. Mary, d. Dec. 31, 1761; ra. Scle Scovill.

7. Sarah, b. Apr. 12, 1764.

8. Josepn, b. Nov. 21, 1766.

9. Elizabeth, b. June 4, 1769.
Moses; d. June 16, 1777.

Martha d. June 14, 1769, and Abial (s.
of Abial of Derby) m. Susanna Bissel,
consort of Ephraira, Feb. n, 1771.

2a Ruth, b. Apr. 22, 177a.
XX. Phebe, b. Apr. 9, 1779.

[Abial Roberts m. Temperance Beebe,
Apr. 15, 1773.]

Abigail Roberts m. Willis Thomas, 1830.

Amos Roberts:

George Foot, Garry Hotchkiss, Sally Maria,
Mary Ann, and Lucy Elizabeth, l>ap. Sept. 26,
1822.

Elias Robert:

4. Phebe, b. Apr. 27, 1755.

Elizabeth Robberts m. Eben. Saxton,

1758.
Elizabeth Roberts m. E. C. Potter, 1826.

Ephraim Robbards m. Phebe Clark, Dec.
28, 1770.

X. Daniel, b. Dec. 7, 1771.

Ephraim Robards of Meriden m. Susan
Ellis. Dec. 6, 1821.

Falla Roberts m. Charles Bronson, 1836.

George H. Roberts, b. Mch. 14, 1808, s. of
Amos, m. Jan. 3, 1835, Emily Pritch-
ard, b. July i8,'i7i3, d. of Isaiah.

Roberts.

Robinson.

1. George Homer, b. Apr. 12, 1836.

2. Catharine, b. Nov. 15, 1841.

3. Lucy Ann, b. Dec. 15, 1843.

4. Harry, b. Mch. 2, 1847.

[Gideon Roberts d. 1759, leaving wid.

Mary; Gideon, and Lucy, m. Mun-

son.J

Hepsibah Robbard m. Seth Bartholomew,

1755-
Jane E. Roberts m. H. M. Smith, 1845.

Joel Roberts [s. of Abial] m. Abigail
Foot [of Newtown], July 10, 1766. She
d. Jan. 15, 1807.

X. Abial, b. Feb. 19, 1768.

a. Amasa, b. Aug. 4, 1769.

3. Joel, b. Dec. 2a, 1771.

4. §arah, b. Jan. 27, 1774; m. Isaac AUyn.

5. Lois, b. Feb. 4, 1776.

6. Abigail, b. Apr. 4, 1781 [m. Benj. Hine].

7. Amos, b. Sept. 17, 1782.

8. Terusha, b. Oct. 24, 1784.

9. Hepsibah, b. June 26, 1786.

xo. Elizabeth, b. Aug. X3, 1788; d. June 6, 1807.

Jonathan Robards and Marcy:

Chil. b. in Middletown and Waterbury :

z. Esther, b. Sept. x8, 1752.

2. Benjamin, b. Jan. 13, 1754.

3. Amc, b. May 12, X755.

4. A son, b. in Wat., Nov. 4, 1756.

5. Elihu, b. Tune 22, 1758.

6. Deborah, b. Mch. 24, 1760.

7. Seth, b. Mch. 27, X763.

Mary d. May 18, 1765; Jonathan m.
Catem Doolittle, d. of Thomas, July
II, 1765, [and d. 1788.]

Julia Roberts m. Jer. Peck, 1822.

Lucius Roberts m. Mary M. Peck from
Bethany, Jan. 11, 1846.

Lucy Roberts:

Zerah, b. Aug. 23, 1778.

Lucy Roberts m. Caleb Munson, 1781.
Lucy G. Roberts m. J. D. Durand, 1849.
Maria Roberts m. Tim. Church, 1836.
Mary Roberts m. Samuel Sperry, 1761.
Mary Robbards m. Benj. Terrill, 1763.
Nathaniel Roberts of Middletown m.

Huldah Payne, July 14, 1824.
Premela Roberts m. Sol. Alcox, 1784.
Sarah Roberts:

Alvira, b. June 29, X796; bap. June 28, 1801.

Ann Robinson m. J. T. Rollason, 1829.

Edward Robinson, b. Tune 6, 1807, and
Maria Baxter, b. July 13, 1806— both
from Birmingham— m. in Eng., Mays,

1827.

I. Maria Elira, b. in Eng., May 2, 1828; d. 1835.
a. Samuel, b. in Eng., June 6, i8to; d. 1833.

3. Martha, b. and d. in London, July, 1832.

4. Edward, b. in London, Sent, o, 1833.

5. William Napoleon, b. in Middletown, Nov. 28,

18^5; d. 1837.

6. Horace Baxter, b. in Middletown, bept. 21, 1837.

7. Ann Maria, b. Mch. 21, 1840.

8. Rosetta, b. Apr. 16, 1843.

9. George Lampson, b. Jan. 16, 184$.

FAMILY RECOE

Robinson. Root,

Everett Robinson of Wrentham, Mass.,
m. Harriet Mallory of Middlebury, Jan.
lo, 1828.

Dr. William W. Rodman and Jemsha
Pomeroy — both from Stonington — m.
Nov. 26, 1844.

X. Charles Shepard, b. Aug. 24, 1845.

Abijah H. Rogers of Branford m Har-
riet Chidsey of East Haven, May 17,

1825.

Hezekiah Rogers m. Martha Scott, Jan.
29. 1763.

1. Martha, b. May 9, 1764.

2. John, b. Sept. 4, 1765.

3. Abigail, b. Mch. 11, 1767.

4. Freelove, b. Mch. 5, 1769.

Josiah Roggers: chil. b. in Wat.

X. Sarah, b. Nov. 22, 1756; m. Josiah Atkins and
Amos Culver.

2. Marv, b. Oct. 24, 1758; m. Joel Hotchkiss.

3. Adan, b. Sept. 5, 1762.

4. Josiab, b. Apr. 2, 1765.

5. Enoch, b. Sept. 28, 1769.

6. Joseph, b. Nov. 26, 177X.

7. Jacob, b. July 3, 1774.

8. Lydia, b. Nov. 19, 1777.

Sarah d. Sept. 17, 1779, and Deac. Jo-
siah m. wid. Mary Smith of New Ha-
ven, Apr. 12, 1780.

9. Samuel, b. Apr. xx, X781.
xo. Ruth, b. Jan. i, 1783.

Martha Rogers m. Aaron How,. 1773.

John Roiinson m. Martha Heath, Sept.
13. 1829.

James T. Roliason m. Ann Robinson,
Oct. 28, 1829.

Patrick Roody m. Mary Quigley, May

25, 1851.®
Caroline Root m. C. N. Newton, 1836.

Chauncey Root m. Polly Dutton, Jan. i,
1823.

Edward Root of Watertown m. Fanny
Peck of Woodbury, Aug. 27, 1843.

Enos Root, s. of Samuel, m. Martha
Robberts, d. of Abial, Feb. 4, 1778.

X. Moses, b. Nov. xi, 1778.

2. Samuel, b. Feb. 18, 1781.

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 23, 1783.

4. Levy, b. May 19, 1785.

5. Chancv, b. Sept. 22, 1787.

6. Elias, b. Aug. 14, 1789.

7. Enos Pnndle, b. Nov. 30, 1792.

8. Benjamin, b. Aug. 2, 1795.

9. Martha Delia, b. May 20, 1797.

George Root, b. in New York, Nov. 7,
1797, m. Elizabeth S. Payne, d. of Har-
mon, July 29, 1824.

X. Reuben H., b. June 6, X828.
2. George W., b. Dec. xo, 1832.

Elizabeth d. Sept. 3, 1833, and George
m. Temperance Bronson, d. of Sam.,
Oct 28, 1835.

Root.

5. He
JosepI

Russ

2. St

3. Lj

4. Lt

6. Hi

7. Ri

8. Po

9. Sa:
10. Wi

Mary I
Mary I
Mary i

Matthe
Josep
ter, a
1829.

X. Eli»
9. Jan<

3. Jose

4. Ko»

5. Man

6. Ran*

7. Mati

Rebecc

Samuel

leb, {
Prind
May :
she, \

X. Still 1

2. Mai ;

3. San- 1

4. Enc

5. JoM :

6. EI12 k

7. Sail '

8. £li2 i

Samue

1778.

1. We I

Samue

Pricl ;
1803.

X. Ma :

2. Pht :

3. Ha I

4. Sai .

5. Eli I

6. Sal '

7. Be ;

8. Ms I

Wiliia :
Clar i
II, 1

Augus I
Dec. ;

Belal :

Jun< :

Samu(

116 AP

HISTORY OF WATEBBURT.

Rose. Royce.

Dec. 8, 1812, m. Delight Mix, d. of
Philo, May 7, 1837.

X. Franklin Munson, b. Nov. 26, 1843.

John Rouse and Allace:

2. Elijah, b. Mch. 15, 1742-3.

3. AUis, b. July 6, 1745.

Mary Row (?) m. Samuel Camp, 1769.
Jane Rowley m. Nelson Barker, 1845.
Polly Rowley m. Isaac Hine, 1836.

William Rowley, s. of Jabez of Kent, m.
Sarah Gordien, wid. o^ James, Feb. i,
1753.

1. Chaunsey, b. Apr. 5, 1756 [d. Jan., 1779].*

2. Eli Smith, b. Apr. 25, 1764.

3. William, b. June 26, 1766.

William Rowley Jr., s. of Wm., m. Ca-
tharine Benham, d. of Shadrack, July
8, 1789, (or) July 9, 1788.

2. r** first" erased) Lois Minerva, b. Nov. 27, 1790.
5. William Henry, b. Dec. 31, 1798.

Elizabeth Royse m. Joseph Judd, 1726.

Lois Royce m. Luke Potter, 1786-

Martha Royse m. Edmund Scott, 1730.

Phineas Royce: Sarah, his wife, d. Apr.
30, 1742, a. 22. He m. Thankful Mer-
riman, d. of Nathl. of Wallingford,
Nov. 15, 1743.

z. Sarah, b. Apr. 8, 1745.

2. Keziah, b. July 5, 1747.

3. Mehitable, d. May 29, 1749; ™' Tim. Tultle.

Thankfull d. Oct. 9, 1749, and Phineas
m. Elizabeth Lord, wid. of Daniel of
Lyme, July 2, 1751.

4. Phineas, b. Apr. 3, 1752.

5. Nehemiah, b. Sept. i, 1753.

6. Thankful, b. Feb. 11, 1755; m. Noah Tuttle.

7. Samuel, b. Apr. 20, 1757.

8. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 5, 1759.

Elizabeth d. Feb. 15. 1759 [a. 41], and
Phineas m. Anna Hopkins, wid. of
Thomas Bronson, Esq., Aur. 22, 1761.

IHe d. May 11, 1787, a. '71; and she,
an. 2, 1804, a. So.]

9. Sarah, b. Oct. 19, 176a.

Phineas Royce, Jr., m. Lydia Butler,
June 25, 1772.

I. David; b. July x8, 1773.

Samuel Royce [s. of Ezekiel of Wal.]:

3. Ebenezcr; d. Apr. 24, 1764 [a. 4 yrs.J.

4. Lucy, b. Feb. 17, 1763.

5. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 10, 1765,

Samuel Royce m. Abigail Hawley, June

10. 1780.3

Polly, b. Nov. II, 1780.
Phinehas, b. Jan. 9, 1783.

Thankfull Royce m. Stephen Curtiss.

Willard A. Royce of Bristol m. Mary M.
Hurd, Apr. 8, 1849.

Russell. Ryan.

Aaron Russell from Boston m. Esther
Spencer, d. of Deac. Calvin, Dec. 7,
1826.

Celesta Russell m. Jesse Hitchcock, 1828.

Charles A. Russell, b. Mch. 16, 1803, s.
of Enoch of Prospect, m. Lockey
Beebe, d. of Amzi, Jan. i, 1825.

X. Henry A., b. in Prospect, Aug. 14, 1826.

2. Charles M., b. in Prospect, Feb. x6, 1828.

3. Caroline, b. Feb. xi, 1830.

4. Steam, b. Feb. 25, 183a.

Edward Russell, b. Feb. 20, 1799, s. of
Stephen D., m. Fanny Chatfield, d. of
Jos., Nov. 24, 1823.

X. Emma, b. Feb. 25, 1826; d. Oct. 16, 1828.
2. Harry L., b. Mch. 6, 1828.

Eliza A. Russell m. D. T. Munger, 1839.

Emma E. Russell m. R. B. Sanford,
1847.

George A. Russell of Hamilton, N. Y.,
m. Lydia A. Elderkin, Feb. 27, 1843.

Harriet Russel m. Isaac Baxter, 1821.

Israel W. Russell, s. of Stephen D., m.
Nancy Piatt, d. of Enocn, Jan. 26,

1818.

X. Israel LeGrand, b. Dec. 7, 181 8.

2. Woodward Jerome, b. Sept. 15, i8ao.

Laura Russell m. Bennet Prichard, 1830.

Lauren L. Russell, s. of Enoch, m. Mary
. Fairclough, d. of Joseph [and wid. of
Daniel Boyce], Men. 17, 1842.

X. Her first, by Daniel Boyce, named Daniel
James, b. July 15, 1840.

2. Laura Eli-iiabeth. b. Tan. 7, 1844.

3. Emily Rebecca, d. Nov. 2, 1845.

Lewis Russell, s. of Enoch, m. Harriet
Hitchcock, d. of Daniel, Nov. i, 1824.

Lydia M. Russell m. J. W. Lines, 1825.

Mary Russell m. Joseph Root, 1777.

Nancy E. Russell ra. Jared Carter, 1840.

Ransom R. Russell m. Loly Terrell.

Nov. 27, 1820.
Sarah Russell m. Stephen Judd, 1776.
Selden Russell m. Laura Lewis, Dec, 6,

1821.
William Russel of Glasgow, Scotland,

m. Ursula Wood, d. of Rev. Luke,

Aug. 22, 1821.

William Nelson Russell, s. of Enoch, m.
Minerva Hall, d. of Daniel, Apr. 10,
1836.

I. Sarah Jane, b. Oct. lo, 1838.
a. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 3, 1842.

3. Emerilla, b. Aug. o, 1844-

4. Adeline, b. Nov. 6, 1846.

Edward Ryan m. Maria O'Brien, May 5,
1849.

♦ Abraham Truck made his coffin; Nathaniel Selkrig and Moses Frost dug his grave.

FAMILY BECOR

Ryan. Sanford.

John Ryan ra. Mary Smith— both of Ter-
ry ville^ Aug. I, 1849.

Daniel Sackett of Milford m. Harriet A.
Porter, d. of Widow Sally, Feb. 23,
1826.

Mile Sackett, b. Apr. 14, 1806, s. of Eli
of North Haven, m. Rhoda Ann Hun-
gerford, d. of David, June 10, 1832.

X. Rhoda Ann, b. Sept. xa, 1833; d. Apr. 26, 1835.

Rhoda d. Oct. 14, 1833, and Milo m.
Lydia Hungerford, d. of David, Oct.
23. 1834.

a. Eunetia Ann, b. June x, 1835.

3. George David, b. Apr. 38, 1838; d. May, 1840.

4. Ellen Eugene, b. Dec. 30, 1845; d. July xx, 1847.

AUin Sage and Abigail:

X. AUin, b. June 9, X751.

3. Selah, b. Dec. 18, 1753.

3. Abigail, b. Aug. 4, X754.

4. Daniel, b. June 30, X756.

5. Caroline, b. Tune 15, 1758.

6. Molly, b. FcD. 34, X760.

7. Matte, b. Apr. a8, 1763.

John Salt of England m. Mary Ann
Hennessy of New York, July 6, 1845.

Edward Sandland and Mary Francis —
both from Birmingham — m. in England.

X. William, b. in Eng., Jan. 34, 1834.

a. Priscilla, b. Sept. ai, X826; m. L. A. Morris.

3. Frances, b. July 17, 1839; m. Willard Tompkins.

4. Edward, b. Apr. 3, X831.

5. James, b. Feb. 36, 1833.

6. Joseph, b. Jan. 36, 1835.

7. Emma, b. Oct. a6, 1837.

Henry Sandland of Birm., Eng., m. Mary
L. Atwood of Watertown, Apr. 3, 1828.

John H. Sandland, s. of John, m. Abi-
gail Merriam, d. of Edward S. of
Watertown, Mch. 8, 1835.

X. Julia Maria, b. Jan. 19, 1836; d. Aug. 14, 1839.
3. Elizabeth Mollis, b. June 15, X839.
3. Frederick Augustus, b. Aug. 30, 1841.

Sarah A. Sandland m. H. A. Hull, 1838.

Thomas Sandland m. Jennet Saxton,
Dec. 25, 1832.

William Sandland m. Sarah Hodson,
Oct. 18, 1846.

Abel Curtiss Sanford, b. May 10, 1809, s.
of Truman, m. Hepsa Elizabeth Judd,
d. of Thomas, Nov. 8, 1829.

Emily Jane, b. Dec. xa, 183 x.
Betsey Ann, b. Nov. 13, 1834.
Eveline Eliza, b. Aug. 4, X841.

Amanda Sanford m. Apollos Benedict,
1820.

Asenath Sanford m. Calvin Hotchkiss,

1825.

Cornelia Sanford m. G. W. Beach, 1847.

Daniel Sanford, s. of Ezekiel, m. Thank-
ful Toles, d. of Daniel of New Haven,
Jan. 31, 1753.

I. Ireniah, b. Nov. 7, 1753; m. Sam. Fenn, Jr.
a. Thankful, b. Nov. 6, X75S; d. May, 1759.

Sanfoi

3. E»

4. IXM

5. Ph.

6. Eli

7. EU

Dorcai

[Ezeki
Benj
1728-

Dai
J

Ezekic

1765.

I. Sen
3. Del

3. Dai

4. Sab

5. Lio<

Ezekie

Foot,

Ezra S

Bark'

X. Des
9. Mai
3. Josi

Gideon
Jared<

Am
Am
Jos

Jesse

1780.

Sus
Sar

Joel Si

m. ^
24, r

X. Lai

3. Mil !

3. Sue

4. Eri

5. Syl i

6. An ,

Joel S. I

An

John £ i

John '
Lou: i

Libeui

Mt i
La I
Ju

LolyS \
Mary I
Miles i

9. Ai ,

Reuel

Nai
ingi

X. H I
3. "^ I

Rufui

Mc"

118 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS UBT,

Sanford. Scar RETT.

Sally Sanford m. Joel Finch, 1828.
Sarah Sanford m. Oliver Stoughton,

1787.*
Sena Sanford m. Allen Umberfield, 18 12.

Sylvia Sanford:

I. Solomon Barker, b. Jan. 9, 1784.

Zachariah Sanford and Sarah:
[He d. Jan. 11, 1774, a. 62].

1. Philemon, b. Feb. 3, 1739-40.
a. Stephen, b. Feb. 2a, 1740-41.

3. Enos, b. Mch. 3, 1743-4; d. Oct. 17, 1749.

4. Sarah, b. Oct. 36, 1744; d. Oct. 15, 1749.

5. Zacheous, b. Nov. 24, 1746; d. Oct. 16, 1749.

6. Enos, b. Sept. 7, X749.

7. Zacheus, b. Oct. 31, 1751.

8. Elias, b. July 7, 1753.

9. Sarah, b. June 8, 1755.

Nathan Saunders m. Esther Dunk, Sept.
10, 1777.'

z. Martin Dunk, b. Aug. 29, 1778.

2. Esther, b. Aug. 25, 1780.

3. Amanda, b. June 30, 1783.

4. Harvey, b. Apr. 4, 1786.

Ulissa Savage m. Lyman C. Camp, 1843.

William H. Savage m. Adah A. Camp
— both of Middletovvn — June 6, 1838.

Anna Saxton m. Luther Richards, 1785.^
Ebenezer Saxton and Eunice:

6. Jerusba, b. Mch. 7, 1751.

7. Sarah, b. May 13, 1754.

8. Liddea, b. Mch. 7, 1756; m. O. Bartholomew.

Eimice d. June 2, 1758, and Ebenezer
was mar. to Elizabeth Robberts by
Thomas Matthews, Justice of Peace,
Sept. 5, 1758.

1. Joseph, b. Sept. 25, 1759.

2. John, b. Mch. 7, 1761.

3. Hannah, b. Mch. 8, 1764.

4. Mamre, b. Mch. 14, 1766.

5. Mary, b. Dec. 23, 1767; d. Mch. 26, 1772.

6. Dan, b. Nov. 4, 1769.

7. Sibbel, b. Aug. 3, 1771.

Henry Saxton of New York m. Roxa
Adams, d. of William, June 14, 1823.
She d. Dec. 29, 1829.

Mary E., b. Apr. 18, 1824.
Two chil.. b. and d. in Ohio.
Jane A., d. Mch. i, X828.
Charles, b. Dec. 12, x8a8 (1829 ?).

Jehiel Saxton and Rhoda:

z. Anna, b. Sept. 15, 1768.
a. Lucy, b. Oct. 9, 1770.

[Jehiel was post- rider. He also had
land interests in East Haddam, 1778.]

Jennet Saxton m. Thomas Sandland,
1832.

George C. Scarrett of Branford, m. Sa-
rah S. Mallory of Middlebury, Aug. 5,
1850.

janette L. Scarrett m. H. C. Hall, 1850.

Scott. Scott.

Abel Scott, s. of Jonathan, m, Lois Clark,
d. of Caleb, Jan. 8. 1750-51.

Abel Scott, s. of John, dec'd, m. Ame
Perkins of New Haven, Jan. 30, 1776.

I. Ame, b. June 6, 1777.

Abner Scott, s. of Isaac, m. Alitheah
Bradley, d. of John of New Haven,
dec'd, Feb. 5, 1783. Hed. Mch. 13, 1812.

1. Lucy, b. Aug. 39, 1785.

2. Clary, b. Feb. 14, 1788.

3. Eldad, b. Apr. 35, 1791.

4. Deborah, b. Nov. i, 1793.

5. Alathea, b. Apr. 2, 1796.

6. Wealthy, b. Oct. 7, 1798.

7. Phebe, d. Apr. 6, 1801; d. Oct. 4, 1805.

8. Phebe Elmina, b. Aug. 15, 1805.

9. Marcus Bradley, b. June z8, 1807.

Abner Scott of Watertown m. Nancy
Adams, Sept. 23, 1821.

Amos Scott, s. of John, dec*d, m. Dor-
cas Lewis (•* Warner" erased,) d. of
Ebenezer Warner, Apr. 4, 1759.

1. Eunice, b. Feb. 23, 1760; m. John Fenn.

2. Diane, b. Mch. 14, 1762; d. Mch. la, 1763.

Dorcas d. May 14, 1763; and Amos m.
Lois Scott, relict of Ezekiel, Sept. 12,
1763.

3. Amos, b. May 3, 1764.

4. John, b. Apr. 4, 1766.

5. Edmund, b. June 7, 1768.

6. Lois, b. Dec. 31, 1770.

7. Dorcas, b. Nov. 5, 1773; d. July xi, 1774.

8. Levi, b. July 3, 1775.

Asa Scott m. Chloe Smith, d. of John,
Nov. II, 1789.

I. Harvey, b. Aug. 16, 1790.

2. Betsey, b. July 16, 1792.

3. Ruth, b. ^lay 27, 1794.

4. A son, still-bom, ^5ov. 23, 1796.

5. Elias,
and J-b. Nov. 4, 1799.

6. Lewis,

7. Thomas Jefferson, b. Aug. 29, 1802.

Asahel A. Scott m. Mary F. Baldwin of
Orange, Oct. 6, 1851.

Ashley Scott, s. of Sam., m. Martha
Judson, d. of Benj. of Stratford, Apr.
25, 1787.

1. Betsey, b. Dec. 29, 1787 [m. James Street].

2. Catey, b. Jan. 15, 1793; m. Miles Morris.

3. Lewis, b. Dec. 14, 1796; d. July 21, 1827.

4. Edmund, b. Apr. 13, 1799.

5. Emma, b. June 28, 1801; d. Oct. 8, 1815.

Barnabas Scott, s. of Obadiah, m. Re-
becca Warner, d. of Doct. Ephraim,
Nov. 15, 1764.*

1. Sabra, b. Jan. 14, 1766.

2. Orpha, b. Nov. 10, 1767 [m. Perley Gates and d.

a. 97J.

3. Mar.i^aret, b. Dec. 5, 1769; d. Sept. 32, 1773.

4. MarKaret, b. Nov. 5, 1772 [m. Elijah Botsford,

and lived more than 95 years].

Bcde Scott m. William Wilcox, 1780.

Benjamin Scott, s. of William, m. Mary
Richards, d. of Obad., Jan. 13, 1757.

Society

• Rebecca Scott, widow with daughters, Orpha and Margaret, was in 1790, " a
icty m Yates Co., N. Y. She was a woman of rare energy and virtue of character."

member of the Friends*

FAMILY BBCOBl

Scott. Scott.

I. Hannah, b. May la, 1758.
a. Mercy, b. Jan. ai, 1762.

3. Cloe, b. Feb. x8, 1767; m. Elijah Merrill.

Mary d. Sept. 15, 1770; and Benjamin
m. Mary Whealer, Jan. 27, 1771.

4. Mary, b. Apr. 25, 1773.

Bennett Scott, s. of Joel, m. Sept. 3,
1829, Esther Maria Curtis, b. Jan. 19,
1 8 12, d. of Orrin of Wolcot.

1. William, b. June ai, 1830.

2. Franklin, b. in Wolcott, Aug. 6, 1832.

3. John, b. luly 11, 1834.

4. Charles, L. Oct. 15, 1840.

Bennett L. Scott m. Elizabeth J. Hurd,
Nov. 17, 1850.

Bezaleel Scott, s. of Deac. Thadda, m.
Sally, d. of wid. Clark, Apr. 11, 1827.

Charles Scott [s. of Daniel] m. Thcodo-
cia Holt, Oct. 7, 1838.

[Dr.] Daniel Scott, s. of Jonathan, dec'd,
m. Hannah Way, d. of David of Litch-
field, May 30, 1750 (?) and d. Apr. 27,
1762.

1. Esther, b. May 23, 1750.

2. Jonathan, b. Sept. 29, 1751.

3. John, b, Apr. 30, 1753.

4. Martha, b. Tan. 19, 1755; d. Aug. 31, 1759.

5. Elcazer, b. May 24, 1756.

6. Elizabeth, b. Sept. ai, 1757; d. Sept. 15, 1759.

7. Hannah, b. Jan. 16, 1759.

8. Daniel, b. Oct. i, 1760.

[Deborah. Martha, a. 5 wks. ace. to Probate].

David Scott, s. of Edmun, m. Sarah Rich-
ards, d. of Obadiah, dec'd, June 10,
1698. [He d. 1727; she, Aujf. 27, 1747.]

1. Hannah, b. Mch. ai, 1698-9 [bap. in Woodbury,

Sept. 24, 1 699 J.

2. Hester, b. Aug., 1700; ra. John Warner.

3. David, b. May 10, 1701.

4. Ruth, b. Sept. 29, 1704; m. Jon. Kelsey.

5. Martha, i

and Vb. sometime in Jan., z 706-7;

6. Mary, \ d. Apr.. 1707.

7. Elizabeth, b. May 7, 1709; m. Samuel Judd.

8. Stephen, b. Mch. 12, 1711.

9. Obadiah, b. Dec. 4, 1734 (1714.)

David Scott, s. of David, dec'd, m. Han-
nah Hikcox, d. of William, Jan. 25,

1732-3.

1. Zadock, b. Oct. 15, 1733 [d. Apr., 1746].

2. Nathan, b. Aug. 23, 1735 [d. Mch 4, 1748].

3. David, b. June 22, 1738 [d. Apr. 5, 1749].

a. of Thomas of

4. Submit, _b. Dec. 22, 1746 [m. Asa Leavenworth,

Wood., Tune 6, 1768] .

5. Sarah, b. Jan. 8, 1749; m. Wait Smitn.

David Scott, s. of Ebenezer, m. Martha
Keeler, d. of Joseph of Woodbury,
Apr. 14, 1800. He d. Dec. 5, 1827, a.
62; she, Aug. 27, 182S.

X. Rhoda, b. Dec. x, x8oo.

Ebenezer Scott, s. of Samuel, Jr., m.
Mary Weed, d. of John, Jan. 26, 1757.
She d. Dec, 1801.

I. Anne, b. Oct. 16, 1757.
a. Samuel, b. Nov. 3, 1750.

3. Ebenezer, b. Dec. 2; a. Dec. 16, 1761.

4. Nehemiah, b. Dec. la, 1763; d. Sept. 17, 1779.

ScOTT.

5. D«

6. Aa<

7. Eb.

8. Pol

9. Isii

10. Sib

11. Me

Eber S

1769.

x. Aarc
a. Abig
3. Abij

Sarah

Edmun
wid. c

June,
an. I

X. A sot
a. Sarab

3. Sami;

4. Eliza

Oci

5. Hanr

Tol

6. Edmi

7. John,

8. Jonat

Edmund

Marth
1730.
m. Eb

1. Jemi;

2. Comi

Edmund
Royce
Mch.

1. Mar)

2. Rob<

3. Noal ,

4. Eber

5. Mart I

6. AbiR

7. Com :

8. Noal ,

9. Lydi I

Edmun(

Scott,
[He f
Hami I

Edwar(
line
1830.

I. Mei
a. Mai
3. Orri

Edwar

line ' I

Eldad ;
Dec. I

Eleaze

SuUi

Eleaze

1780.

I. Sal ,
a. Isa
3. Ma

130 Ap

HISTOET OF WATBRBURT.

Scott. Scott.

Eliphas Scott, s. of Obadiah, m. Han-
nah Scott, d. of Gershom, Feb. 4, 1757.

z. Nancy, b. Dec. 4, 1759.

9. Jesse, b. Sept. 6, 1762.

3. Irene, b. Nov. 16, 1767.

4. Jared, b. Mch. 2a, 1771; d. Feb. 13, 1773.

Hannah d. May 18, 1774, and Eliphas
m. Mary Porter, Feb. 22, 1776.

5. Tared, b. Dec. 4, 1776.

6. Lois, D. Oct. II, X776 (1778).
Mary, b. Mch. 17, 1781.*
David, b. Nov. 5, 1782.
Hannah, b. Aug. 27, 1784.

Enoch Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m.
Sarah Porter, d. of Lieut. Thomas,
May 4, 1750.

X. Hannah, b. May xg, 1751; m. Reuben Beebe.

2. Eunice, D. Oct. 15, 175a; d. May 14, 1758.

3. Enoch, b. Nov. 6, 1754.

4. Sarah, b. Sept. 2, 1757 [m. Philologus Webster] .

5. Uri, b. Aug. 22, X759.

6. Prew, b. Apr. 6, 1761 [ra. Linus Lounsbury].

7. Esther, b. Sept. 2a, 1763.

8. Mille, b. Mch. 21, 1766 [m. Daniel Scovill].

9. Mark, b. Oct. 8, 1768.

Enoch Scott m. Appelina Calkins, Feb.
16, 1776.'' She d. 1830.*

Eric Scott, s. of Joel, m. May i, 1831,
Jennet Welton, b. Mch. 27, 18 10, d. of
fezekiel of Watertown.

I. Hannah Jennet, b. Dec. 4, 1834.
a. Marshall Eric, b. Apr. 29, 1843 — ^^ i" Water-
town.

Ezebeson Scott (Zebulon ?):*

Justus, bap. at St. James, June 9, 1765.

Ezekiel Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m.
Lois Fenn, d. of John, Apr. 13, 1758.
He d. Jan. 20, 1759, and Lois m. Amos
Scott.

I. Ezekiel, b. Jan. 3, 1759.

Ezekiel Scott, s. of Amos, m. Olive
Fenn, d. of John of Watertown, Nov.
22. 1781.

I. Ezekiel, b. July 26, 1783.
a. Dorcas, b. June 26, 1785.
3. Lucy, b. Oct. 30, X789.

Frances J. Scott m. Get)rge Prichard,

1838.

George Scot, s. of Edmun of Farming-
ton, m. Mary Richards, d. of Obadiah,
sometime in August, 1691. He d. Sept.
26, 1724; she, Apr. 24, 1754.

I. Obadiah. b. Apr. 5, 1692,

a. George, b. Mch. 20, 1694; d. May 9, 1725.

3. William, b. Mch. 3, 1696.

4. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 4, 1698; m. Gamaliel Tcrrill.

5. Zebulon, b. June 10, 1700; d. May, 1701.

6. Samuel, b. Apr. 26, 1702.

7. Edmun, b. Sept. 24, 1704.

8. Benjamin, b. Apr. 30, 1707; d. Dec, 1725.

9. Ephraim, b. June 16, 1710; d. Feb. 37, 1744-5.

George Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m.
Abigail Warner, d. of Samuel of
Daniel, Oct. 24, 1751.

1. Elijah, b. Aug. i8, 1752.

2. Reuben, b. May 2, 1755.

3. Enos, b. Dec. 9, X757.

Scott.

Scott.

\. Amzi, b. July xi, X750.
>. Ethiel, b. luly 24, X762.
>. Ephraim, o. 5fov. ao, 1766.

Gershom Scott, s. of Jonathan, m. Mary
Fen ton, d. of Jonathan of Fairfield,.
Nov. 17, 1728 [and d. June 24, 1780].

T. Wait, b. Aug. 17, 1729.

2. Hannah, b. Sept. 9, X731; m. Elip. Scott.

3. Sarah, b. Sept., 1735; m. Sam. Fenn.

4. Mary, b. May, X739; m. Amos Hotchkiss.

5. Gershom, \ _ d. Jan. 39, 1778.

and >b. June 9, 1744.
6. Ann, ) m. Alex. Douglass.

Gideon Scott, s. of Samuel, m. Phebe.
wid. of Abraham Barnes and d. of
Caleb Clark, Apr. 15, 1755.

I. Lois, b. Oct. X7, 1756; m. Roswell Judd?
a. Caleb, b. July xx, 1758.

Phebe d. Apr. 25, 1760, and Gideon m.
Hannah, wid. of James Brown, Oct. 4^
1762. She d. Sept. 12, 1766.

3. Mary, b. June 25, 1763.

4. Elathea, b. Mch. x8, X765.

Hannah Scott m. H. A. Parsons, 1828.
Heman Scott and Susan:*

David Adams, Mary Elizabeth, and Martha
Abigail, bap. Apr. ax, 1834.

Isaac Scott, s. of Sam., m. AnnaFrisbie,
d. of Eben. of Sharon, Oct. 31, 1753.

X. David, b. Jan. 35, X755; drownded May lo, 1773.
a. Moses, b. Feb. x6, 1756; d. Dec. ax, X773.

3. Thadde, b. Apr. as, 1757.

4. Levy, b. Sept. 27, X758; d. Jan, 15, X77S.

5. Menbah, b. Aug. xo, 1760; d. Sept. 23, 1782.

6. Abner, b. May xo, 176a.

7. Wealthy, b. July aa, 1764.

8. Abraham, b. Aug. 2, X766.

Anna d. Dec. 3, 1766, and Isaac m.
Sarah Smith of Oxford, Mch. 4, 1767.

9. Elizabeth Ahn, b. Nov. 28, 1767; d. Sept., X769.

Sarah d. Feb. 12, 1783, and Isaac m.
Lois, Relict of Dan. Abbot, Feb. 15,
1785, and d. May 31, 1797.

xo. Easther, b. Dec. 26, 1785.

Isaac Scott, s. of Thaddeus, m. Luna
Beach, d, of Simeon of Litchfield, May
23, 1824.

X. Mary Ann, b. Apr. X9, x8a5.

a. William Ira, b. June X4, x8a8; d. Dec, 1829.

Luna d. Mch. i, 1833, and Isaac m.
Hannah, d. of Squire Parrott of Fair-
field, June, 1834.

3. John, b. Sept. a7, 1837.

4. Harriet, b. Dec. X9, 1839.

Jesse Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Susan
Downs, d. of David, Aug. 7, 181 1.

I. Ira, b. Mch. X5, 1812.
a. Ursula, b. May x6, 1814.
3. Spencer, b. July 9, x8x7.

Joel Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Hannah
Bronson, d. of Lieut. Michael, Feb. 15^
1796.

x. Selina, b. Apr. 6, X798.

a. Lucy Anna, b. Aug. 27, x8oo- m. D. Boyden.

3. Harriet, b. Sept. x, xSoa; m. Shennan BronBon.

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP121

Scott.

Scott.

4. Eric, b. Sept. a, 1804.

5. Bennet. b. Aug. 23, 1806.

6. Edward, b. Sept. 2a, z8oS.

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 17, 18 10.

8. Eunice Amy, b. July 6, 1813; m. W. Grilly.

9. Mary Eliz., b. Dec. 27, 1817; m. G. S. Stevens.

Joel W. Scott m. Mary E. Clark, May

19. 1851.
John Scott, s. of Edmund, m. in Wat. ,

Eunice Grifl&n, d. of Thomas [and

Elizabeth] of Simsbury, Oct. 29, 1730,

and d. Mch. 14, 1756.

I. Amos, b. Feb. 19, X73z-a.

a. John, b. Jan. 30, 1733-4; d. Mch. 5, 1766.

3. Edmund, b. Jan. 9, 1735-6.

4. Abraham, b. Mch. x8, 1739; killed with thun-

der, Apr. 7, 1750.

5, Eunice, b. Jan. 4, X740-X: a. Aug. X2, 1755

6. Abigail, b. Oct. 25, X743 [m. Moses] .

X740-X: d. Aug. X2, X759.

7. Jonathan, b. Oct. 5, 1745; d. Apr. 29, 1749.

8. Ruben, b. Aug. 15, 1747.

9. Abraham, b. May iz, 1750; d. Mch. X9, 1753.
10. Abel, b. Nov. 19, X7S5.

Jonathan Scot, s. of Edmun of Farming-
ton, m. Hanna Hawks, d. of John of
Deerfield, sometime in November in
the year 1694. He dyed May 15, 1745;
and she, Apr. 7, 1744.

The first child, b. and d. sometime in Aug., X695.
a. Jonathan, b. Sept. 29, X696.

3. John^ b. J une 5, 1699 [did not return from cap-

tivity] .

4. Martha, b. July 9, X70X; m. Jos. Hurlburt.

5. Gershom, b. Sept. 6, 1703.

6. Eleazer, b. Dec. 31, 1705.

7. Daniel, b. Sept. 20, X707.

[Hannah and her two sons, Jonathan
and John, were baptised in Woodbury,
Nov. 12, 1699.]

Jonathan Scott, s. of Jonathan (above),
m. Mary Hulburt of Woodbury, July
14, 1725.

1. John, b. May 6, X726.

Mary d. Jan., 1727, and Jonathan m.
Rebecca Frost, d. of Samuel of Bran-
ford, July 29, 1729.

2. Abel, b. Aug. 3, 1730.

3. Thankfull, b. Slay 19, X73a.

4. Phebe, b. May a4, X734.

5. Rebeckah, b. Oct. 3, X736.

6. Rachel, b. Nov. 3, 1739.

7. Eben, b. July, X747.

Jonathan Scott, Jr., s. of Edmun (and
Sarah), m. Abigail Sperry, d. of Moses
of New Haven, Sept. 6, 1736, and d.
July 2, 1741.

1. Abigail, b. Sept. 15, 1737; d. Apr. 29, X741.

^Jonathan Scott, s. of Jonathan, Jr.,
dec'd, m. Mary Doolittle, d. of Abel,
Feb. 23, 1764.

Levi Scott, s. of Thade, m. Sally Mark-
um, d. of Jeremiah of Plymouth, Sept.
5, 1804. She d. Nov. 11, 1808.

Rhyley, b. July 3, x8o6.
Markum, b. Apr. 23, z8o8.

Scott. Scott.

Linus W. Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Miner-
va Nichols, d. of James, Feb. 8, 181 8.

X. Esther Elizabeth, b. Feb. 13, 1819.

2. Tames Sherman, b. Aug. 29, 1820.

3. Mara Maria, b. Mch. 2, 182a.

Lydia Scott m. Isaac Castle, 1740.

Marshall Scott d. Oct. 5, 1842, a. 23.«

Martha Scott m. Hez. Rogers, 1763.

Nathan Scott, s. of Wait, m. Anna An-
drews, d. of Ebenezer of the State of
New York, Mch. 17, 1777. She d. Aug.
21, 1795.

X. Joel, b. Jan. 26, X785.

2. Sally, b. May 29, 1787.

3. Ransly, b. July 19, 1789.

Obadiah Scott, s. of George, Sr., m. Han-
nah Buck, d. of Ezekiel, Sr., of
Wethersfield, Oct. 10, 1716. He d.
1735; and she died suddenly, June 12,
1749.

1. Still-born, June 20, X717.

2. Zebulon, b. June 16, X718.

3. Mary, b. May 20, 1720; d. Sept., X722.

4. Enoch, b. Oct., 1722.

5. Comfort- b. Jan, 31, 1723-4; m. Jos. Upson.

6. George, b. Nov. xo, 1725.

7. Obadian. b. Jan. 6, X726-7.

8. Ezekiel, d. Apr. 20, 1730.

Obadiah Scott, s. of David, dec'd, m.
Mary Andrus, d. of John, May 30,
1733 [and d. Sept. 29, 1784].

X. and 2. Still-born, Dec. xo, 1733.

3. Eliphas, b. Jan. 31, X734-5.

4. Obadiah, b. Apr. 12, 1737.

5. Jesse, b. May jo. 1739; d. June 30, 1744.

6. Barnabas, b. Mch. 7, X741.

7. Mary, b. May 19, 1743; m. James Fancher.

7. Abigail, b. July 3, 1746.

8. Margaret, b. July 30, 1748.

8. Mary, b. Sept. X4, 1750.

9. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 15, 1753.
10. Ruth, b. Nov. 7, 1756.

(There is error in numbering these children,
and probably in naming the second Mary.)

Obadiah Scott, s. of Obadiah (of George),
dec'd, m. Comfort Scott, d. of Edmund,
dec'd, Apr. 8, 1751. She d. Apr. i,
1798 [he, Sept., 1 8 10].

X. Annis, b. Apr. 2, 1753.

2. Marcy, b. July 2, 1755.

3. Lydia, b. Nov. 28, 1757.

4. Martha, b. Jan. 29, 1761.

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 23, 1763; d. Oct. 30, X765.

6. Patience, b. June 21, 1766.

7. Edmund Andrews, b. Oct. 17, 1771.

Obadiah Scott, s. of Obadiah of David,
dec'd, m. Hannah How, d. of John,
Mch. 10, 1755.

X. Hannah, b. Sept. 28, 1755.

2. Olive, b. Sept. 23, 1757.

3. Lewce (Lucy), b. July 26, 1760.

4. Jesse, b. May 2, 1763.

5. David, b. June 22, 1765.

6. Rosamond, b. Nov. 6, 1768.

Patience Scott m. Wm. Lewis, 1765.

* Probably son of Jonathan and Rebecca, bom after Rachel.
13*

RI8T0RT OF WATEBBUR7.

Scott. Scott.

Robbord Scott, s. of Edmund, m. Eliz-
abeth Terrill, d. o( Gamaliel. D«c. 39,

Samuel Scott, s. of Edmund, m. Mary
Richards, d. of John. Jan. 13. 1724-3-
Hed. Apr. 30, 1768; and she, Sept. 5,

Stephen Scott, a

of David, A^-

Long Island, Apr. ■).
[and d. 1744].

.. S«™h, h. ttb. 14, 1T35-S [d. Sep.. .1. i7*il
1. Slephtn, b. Sepi. 14, ijj*.
J. Wool«y, b. Apr. ij, 174. W- -T^l-
Stephen Scott, s. of Stephen, dec'd.
Freelove Hikcox, d. of Amos, r»ov.

-a:-

6. Mary, b, Sept. 7, 173}.

7. Sanli, b. Apr. 4. 'Jii; °>. Edmi

1'homu Himmund.
B. Samud, b. f>b. 14. IfjjB.

U.l

Samuel Scott [Jr., on land rec.], s of
George, m. Priscilla Hull. d. of John of
Derby. Sept. 36, 1737.
1. Sybil, b. July 6. t^^p■, A. Mch. >i, rj^S.
9. Qiubcth, h, Feb, 17, 1731; d. Sept., 1B14.

i: |""i'"'h. jji-r.'! .'jjafd. Stp.. 8. .807-

Priscilla d. Sept. 23. 17SS, and Samuel
m. Lois, wid. of David Stricklin, May
4, 1756. Lois d. Nov. ay, 1761, and
Samuel m. Eunice Ashley, d. of Jona-
than (Ehenezer?) r)f Hartford, Mch. 17.
1763, She d. Jan, 12, 1774; he d. Sept.
15. 1790.
6, A.hl.,, b. Junt .7. .764-

Samnel Scott, s, of Samuel (of Edmund)
m. Dameras Lewis, d. of Jos., dec'd,

I, Thankful, b. M;iy 4. i/fj; d. Ocl. J, 1765.

% Haney, b. tidn. isi 1771; d. Sep!. 15, 1773
Sarah Scott m. Samuel Fcnn, 1763.

Sarah A, Scott m. Lvman Hotchkiw.

1837.
Sarah M. Scott m. Amos H. Hotchkiss

[1S37].
Simeon Scott, s. of Zebulon. m. Lucy

Hikcox, d. of Capt, Abr., Mch. 9, 1775

J. Juel, b. .May ij, 1777-

3. Prue. b, Oct. 4, i779; d. Sept. la

J.'l)«nttl,b.'Mch, 7,178..
S. Maik, b. Sepl. 30, 1783.
7. Tiliu, b, Sept. 7, 17BS.
S. I™, b. June ■=, tjS,.
5. Wiidf nee, b. Mch. s, 17B9; m. M

3, .Slephen b. Apt. 13, 176}.

Thadde Scott, s. of Isaac, m. Oranc^
Hammond, d. of Thomas of 'Wairf'
town. May 23. 1781. She d. Mciu =1.
1836 [be, Sept. 35, 1S33].

I. Levi, b. Oct. 17, 1781.

J. MojM Fri^bic, b. Ftb. iB; d. Mch. ,1, ir?=-

3-^JKob,b.Feh.».^^S6.^

t. Philo, b.' Ocl."6j'.'^o \m. HuriM TutUt d_ --

Ephraim «nd meot Id Olfotd. N. Y., rtn -
6. MaUl, b. July S, 1793; d. Oct. i*. t«uj.

S. Ttuddcui, b. Ocl, ly; d. Oct. a^ 17^7.
9. Truman, b. Nov. 4, 179B; d. Oct. i^ ■«..}_

Timothy Scott, s. of William, m. Sarai

Sutliif, d. of Joseph, Nov. 9. 1757.

I. Bede. b. Nov. s. 175a.
I. Uuce, b. Feb. 18, 1764.

Titua Scott, a. of Simeiin, m. "Rhoi^
Hull, d. of Nathi.. dec'd. Dec.. i*<x^.
1. Junius De Lm. b, Apr. 6, i8oa.
J. Al.ta Mylo, b, Apr. ,0, .8,,; d. June. .Siz.

3. WUliam tdMn, b. July i., 18.3.

Uri Scott, s. of Enoch, m. Esther Roh-
bards. d. of Abial. Dec. z6. 1780.

b July«

I.. Sepc. 3

, i7e3.„

>?8s.

Judd, d. of Thomas, dec'd, of i

Nov. 30, 1737. She d. Jan. 35, 1771.

I. Benjamin, h. Sept. fi, lyit.

I7&2-

Tbeir fiiU, b. in Wat., Abigail Milla, b. Jn« i.

,, Aaael, b, Sepl, 13. 1768; d. June 36, I7iij.
3. Sarah, b. May 4, 177°; d. Feb. 6, .771.
Zebulon Scott, s. of Obadiah. dec'd. ni.
Elizabeth Warner, d. of Samuel. Apr.
iS, 1748. [He d. May 31; she, Jtineji.
179S-]

I. SincnD, b. Mch. i, i74B-g.
,. Hnldah b. Nov 7. 17S3 [m. Halt? ud)

FAMILY REOOBl

.'t

\t-

SCOVILI.. ' SCOVILL.

A.sa. Scovill, s. of Lieut. John, m. Lois
'Warner, d. of Serg. Obadiah, Dec. lo,
1755.

X. Sela, b. June 20, 1757.

a. Amasa, b. Dec. 22, 1758 [m. Esther Merrill, d.
of Caleb].

3. Selden, b. July 6, 1761.

4. Sarah, b. Nov. i, 1766.
^Obadiah, b. before 1770.]

Daniel Scovill, s. of Timothy, m. Laura
Mu.nson, d. of Elisha, Dec. 25, 1816.
He d. Oct. 3, 1833, a. 58. (Did he mar-
ry Miliscent Scott before 1799?)

X. Melisse M., b. Oct. 22, 181 7; m. Wm. Sixer.

a. Luzerne, b. Sept. 3, 1819.

3. Lucius Daniel, b. Oct. 2, 182X.

4. George Nelson, b. Oct. 9, 1827.

Daniel Scovill [s. of Rev. James]; his
wife Hannah of St. Johns, N. B., d in
Wat., Aug. 19, 1839, a. 53.'

Darius Scovill fs. of Lieut. William] m.
July 4, 1 77 1, Lydia Granniss, b. Dec.
16, 1750.'

I. Sclah, b. July 4, 1776.
a. Asenath, b. tan. 26, 1779.
7,. Isaac, b. Men. 4, 1781.

SCOVILI

z. Jai
2. Wi

4.

5.

Seabury, b. Jan. 26, 1784.
Stephen, b. June 26, 1786.

EdT^ard Scovill, s. of John, dec'd, m.
Martha Baldwin, d of Jonathan, Jan.
31, 1739. [He d. Sept. 5, 1779; she,
Nov. 29, 1798.]

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 25, 1740-t; m. Isaac Merriam.

2. Edward, b. Feb. 5, X744-S.

Edward ScoVill, s. of Capt. Edward, m.
Ruth Norton, Nov. 26, 1770 [and d.
Mch. 21, 1778, leaving

Martha, Rath, and Sarah] .

Edward Scovill, s. of James, Esq., m.
Harriet Clark, d. of Eli, Aug. 21, 1823.

z. Stella Maria, b. June 11, 1824; m. L. S. Davies.

2. Tames Clark, b. Sept. 4, 1826.

3. Thomas Lamsoa« b. Apr. 26, 1830.

4. Julia Lyman, b. Jan. 16, 1835.

Elizabeth C. Scovill m. I. E. Ailing,

1848.

Emeritt A. Scovill m. L. S. Dougal (?),

1831.

Emily A. Scovill m. George Forgue, 1841.

[Ezekiel Scovill, s. of Stephen of East
Haddam, m. Mindwell Barber of Wind-
sor, Oct. 23, 1740. He d. Aug. 5, 1791,
a. 79; she, Sept. i, 1800, a. 85.

Mindwell, b. Sept. 26, 174a.

Kcziah. b. Feb. 28, 1746.

Sarah, b. July 6, 1754.

Mary, b. May i, 1757; m. David Foot.

Hannah, b. Oct. 7, 1761; m. Elijah Steele.]

[Rev.] James Scovill, s. of Lieut. Will-
iam, m. Ame Nichols, d. of Capt.
George, Nov. 7, 1762. [He d. Dec. 19,
1808, at Kingston. N. B., in the 50th
year of his mmistry; she d. June, 1835.]

I

lam
^iU
ch

3. Han

4. Rev.
ch

5. Sami
ch

6. Dani

. SaraJ
Edwi
Ml
Q. Hem
Cu
cei:
rie(

James £

thea ]
bury,

1825; 5

1. Jam

2. Bets

Se

3. Sara

co«

4. Will

5. Edw

6. Amc

7. Care

8. AUt

mi

9. Mar
10. Stell

James I

[wid.
Aferrii

Jane C.

John Sc I

and s I
hanna ;
febra=
[he, J

1. John

2. Obac i

Fe .

3. Saral ,

W( )

4. Willi I

5. Hani I

s (

6. Edw

[Lieut.]
Tabit

1723-4
[Tabi I

X. Oba( (

2. Mar;

3. Johi

4. Asa, I

5. Han i

6. Johi

7. Sstep I

8. Tim

9. Ann s

John S I

Barn< ;

I Trun
2. Reu
Foh
>h

5. Ant

6. Claj

3: lol
4. Jol

U'

124 AP

HISTORY OF WATERBUBT.

SCOVILL. SCOVILL.

John m. Elizabeth Baldwin, June 4,
1778 [and d. Sept. 15, 1807].

Marcus Scovill m. Ann Todd of Litch-
field, Jan. 8, 1828.

Molly Scovil m. Clement Nichols, 18 16.

Nancy Scovill m. Ed. Chatfield, 1823.

[Noah Scovill ni. Abigail Gunn, d. of
Enos, 1783. He d. Aug. 30, 1829, a. 56;
she, Oct. 1839.

X. Barzilla, b. Feb. 4, 1784.

2. Aaron, b. Oct. 10, 1785; d. 1826.

3. Enos, b. Apr. 2, 1788; d. 1799.

4. Maria, b. July 8; d, July a6, 1790.

5. Bill Harry, b. May 9, 1794.

6. Elias, b. Jujie 23, 1798; d. 1801.

7. Hannah T." b. Nov. 12, i8oi.

8. Harriet, b. May 5, 1804.]

Obadiah Scovill, s. of John, m. Hannah
Hull, d. of Josiah of Norvvalk, July 14,
1752.

r. Sarah, b. Nov. q, 1752; ra. Sam. Hikcox, 3d.

2. David, b. Jan. 26, 1755.

Hannah d. Aug. 22, 1756, and Obadiah
m. Hannah Porter, d. of Daniel, Tune
II, i7rx). She d. June 25, 1766, and he,
Mch. 19, 1768.

3. Anne, b. Feb. 4, 1761; d. Apr. 9, 178 1.

4. Daniel, b. June 5, 1762; d. Feb. 23, 1766.

Obadiah Scovil, s. of Asa, m. Mille Nich-
ols, d. of Benj., Mch. 30, 1790.

I. Asa, b. Dec. 6, 1790.
[2. Miranda, b. Dec. 14, 1792.

3. Joseph, b. Sept. 3, 1704.

4. Hannah, b. Oct. 15, 1796; m. Julius Morris.

5. Benjamin Nichols, b. June 11, 1799.

6. Emma, ]

and Vb. Mch. 5, 1802.

7. Alma, )

8. Marcus, b. Jan. 16, 1804.

9. Milley, b. July 27, iS<>/i.

Mille d. Aug. 7, 1806, and Obadiah m.
Mrs. Philomela Glazier.

10. Malvina, b. Nov. 22, 1807.

11. Burritt, b. Apr. 3, x8io.
xa. Philomela, b. Oct. 11, 1811.

13. Smith, b. Jan. 22, 1814.

14. Samuel, b. July 5, 1817.

15. Jcjhn, b. Sept. 25, 1820.J

Samuel Scovill, s. of William, m. Ruth
Bronson, d. of Benjamin, late of Wat.,
Dec. 19, 1756.

1. .Annah, b. May 13, 1759.

2. Ruth, b. Aug. 12, 1761.

Ruth d. Aug. iS, 1 761, and Samuel m.
Vodice Hartshorn, d. of Eliphalet, May

3. I7f'4-

3. Uri, b. July 28, 1765,

Sarah Scovill m. Joel B. Foot, 1826.
Sarah E. Scovill m. Henr>' Banks, 1S51.

Sele Scovill, s. of Asa, m. Mary Roberts,
d. of Abial, dec'd, Apr. 29, 1784.

1. David, 1>. Sept. 6, 1787.

2. Mark, b. July 24, ijS.;.

3. Ebcnczer Robard, b. Nov. 25, 1791.

Scovil. Scovill.

Seldon Scovil, s. of Asa, m. Mehitable
Blakeslee. d. of Reuben, Nov. 30, 1784.

1. Susanna, b. July 15, 1785.

2. Sarah, b. Nov. 9, 1788.

3. Seldon, b. July 18, 1791.

4. Ix)uisa Anne, b. Dec. 9, 1792.

5. Reuben B., b. June it, 1795.

6. Leveret, b. Men. 31, 1799.

Stephen Scovill:'

Silva, bap. Oct. 12, 1773.

Susanna Scovill m. Thoma.s Barnes,
1721.

Timothy Scovill, s. of Lieut. John, dec'd.
m. Jemima Porter, d. of Dr. Dan ,
Apr. 7, 1762, and d. June 22, 1824.
[She d. Aug. 22, 1812, a. 67.]

I. Timothy, b. Nov. 28, 1762.
a. Noah, b. Jan. 27, 1765.

3. Daniel, b. Dec. 12, 1766; d. Apr. 8, 1767.

4. lemima, b. Jan. 3, 1768; d. Mch. 31, 1783.

5. Hannah, b. Dec. '23, 1770; m. Obed Gibbs.

6. Sylva, b. Aug. 28, 1773.

7. Daniel, b. Nov. 6, 1775.

8. David Killum, b. Jan. 4, 1780 [d. May 25, 181 1.]

Uri Scovill, s. of Sam., m. Miliscent
Southmayd, d. of Sam., Oct., 1784.*

1. Vodice, b. Au^^. 15, 1785.

2. Chester, b. and d. 1787.

3. Southmayd, b. May, 1789.

William Scovill, s. of John, dec'd, m.
Hannah Richards, d. of John, Apr. 17,
1729.

1. Anna, b. Mch. 35, 1731; m. Eleazer Prindle.

2. James, b. Jan. 27, 1732-3.

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 4, 1735.

4. .Abijah, b. Dec. 27, 1738.

Hannah d. Apr. i, 1741, and William
m. Elizabeth Brown, d. of James, June
16, 1742. [She d. May 6, 1752, and
William m. Desire Sanford, wid. of
Caleb Cooper of New Haven (s. of
John). He d. Mch. 5, 1755, and] Desire
m. Deac. Jonathan Gamsey,

5. William, b. Feb. 9, 1744-5.

6. [Darius], b. May 15, 1746.

William Scovill (s. of William above) m.
Sarah Brown, Dec. 24, 1767 [and d.
Aug. 13, 1827].

1. Bethel, b. June 6, 1769; d. June 6, 1775.

2. Elizabeth, b. July 31, 1771; d. Jan. 14, 1774.

3. William, b. Sept. 29, 1775.

William Henry Scovill, s. of James,
Esq., m. Eunice Ruth Davies [d. of
Hon. Thomas J.] of Ogdensburgh, N.
Y., July 2, 1S27.

1. Alathea Ruth, b. Mch. 21, 1828; m. F. J. Kings-

bury.

2. Mary Ann, b. May 30, 1831; m. W. E. Curtis.

3. Thomas John, b. June 9, 1833; d. May, 1839.

4. Sarah Hannah, b. July 13, 1835; d. Nov., 1839.

Eunice d. Nov. 25, 1S39. a. 32, and
William m. Rebeccah H. Smith, d. of
Nathan of New Haven. Mch. 23, 1841.

5. William Henry, b. Jan. 7, 1842.

6. lames Mitchell Liimson, b. June t8, 1843; d. Feb.
' ^ 3, 184^.

7. Nathan Smith, b. Apr. 3, 1847.

FAMILY REOC

ScoviLL. Seymer.

^Villiam Scovill of Middletown m. Nancy
Cook [dau. of Joseph], Nov. 20, 1828.

Ann Sedgwick m. Timothy Judd, 1764.

Ann Seely [d. of William] m. Asa Par-
rel, 1 84 1.

Charles Seeley, s. of William, m. Amy
Prichard, d. of Roger, Dec. 25, 1843.

1. Chloe Jane, b. Nov. i^, 1844.

2. George Simeon, b. Feb. a, 1846.

James M. Seeley m. Jane M. Phillips of
Canton, June 7, 1846.

Mary A. Seeley m. W. W. Webster, 1851.

Sally Seley m. William Bunnel, 1826.

Almera Selkrigg (or Selkirk) m. S. U.
Cowel, 1814.

John Selkrigg, s. of William, dec'd, m.
Irene Hopkins, d. of Isaac, Nov. 29,
1764. Irene m. Nathl. Sutliff, 1791.

1. Silva, b. Sept. 30, 1765.
"ch. 5, 1767.

•b. Oct. 17, 1768.

,:f'

3. Osee,

and

4. Jesse, .

5. Irene, b. Tune 6, 1771.

6. John, b. Jan. 30, 1775.

7. Orpha, b. Feb. 21, 1777.

8. Mark, b. June 5, 1780.

Nathaniel Selkrigg [s. of William ?] and
Marv;

1. Jeremiah, b. May 25, 1756.
a. Folly Gillec, b. Apr. 13, 1758.

3. Lucy, b. Jan. 7, 1762.

4. Hannah, D. Apr. 12, 1764,

5. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 17, 1766.

6. Jonathan Gillet, b. Dec. 17, 1768.

Mary d. Apr. 30, 1769, and Nathaniel
m. Anis Scovill, d. of Lieut. John, May
25, 1770. [He d. in 1797; she, Mch. 4,
1804.]

7. Mary, b. Jan. i, 1771 ; ra. James Nichols.

8. Triphene, |

and Vb. Aug. 2, 1773;

9. Lucene, ) d. Oct. 22, 1773.

ID. Lucene, b. Dec. 5, 1776 [m. Daniel Weltonf and

d. July 12, i8?6J.
II. Freelovc, b. Feb. 20, 1779.

Ruth A. Selkrig m. Asahel Clark, 18 12.
William Silkrigg and Judith:

1. John, b. in Middletown, June 14, 1734.

2. Nathaniel, b. in Mid., Apr. 3, 1736.

3. Allyn, b. Sept. 11, d. Nov. 3, 1738.

4. Merrian, b. Jan, 8, 1739-40; m. !?at. Foot.

5. Millecent. b. Dec. 6, 1742; m. Asa Judd.

6. Else, b. Nov. 11, 1744; m. Moses Frost.

7. William, b. Feb. 15, 1746-7; d. Jan. 9, 1749-50.

8. Sarah, b. Mch. 12, 1750-1; m. Lsaac Foot.

9. William, b. Apr. 24, 1753.

Nathan Seward, s. of Amos, was mar. to
Martha Gridley by Alexander Gillet,
clerk, June 3, 1779.

I. Asahel, b. Aug. 19, 1781.

Ruth Seward m. Reuben Frisbie, 1779.

Abel Seymer, s. of Lieut. Stephen, m.
Damaras Humaston, Nov. 19, 1767.

Seyi

z.

2.

3-
4.
5-
6.

7-
8.

9.
10.

II.

Alex
Soi

Amoi

178

1. A

2. A

Boad

Danic
Mel

I. Jc

3. M

3. SI
A

Eliza

173-
Gideo

Prii
176

I. i

r

2.

■3 ^
3. .

4.
5.
6.

5. ^1

7. ]

8. I •

9. 5;

10. i !

Josep :

grit
tia, i

1. A I

2. K

3. \ I

4. E

Josia

De.

h

S i

J '
V ;

Lydii

Rich/ :

(wl )

Hil :

174 .

X.

2.

sh<

126 Ap

HISTORY OF WATEBBUET,

Saymore.

3. Stainuel, b. June 5, 1748.

4. Luce, b. Apr. 6, 1751.

Shepardson.

5. J^nna, b. May 19, 1753 [d. Oct., 1756I.

., 1756J,

, ^ . ^ , _,^,: m. Alb

8. Josiah, b. Oct. n, 1759.

6. Huldah, b. Oct. 4, 1755 [d. Sept., 171

7. Joanna, b.^ept. i, 1757; m. Allyn jud'd

9. Huldah, b. Dec. 23, 1761.
xo. Ann, b. Feb , last day, 1764.

11. Vodice. b. Mch., 1766.

12. Miles, b. July, 1769.

Robert S. Seymour, b. Sept. 23, 1802, s.
of Richard of Watertown, m. Nov. 30,
1828, Abigail Bronson, b. Sept. 14, 1803,
d. of Philenor.

X. Henry Augustus, b. Sept. 99, 1829.
^' irfei " * -

6. Franklin, b. Sept. 26, 1844.

7. Ellen Louise, b. Apr. 15, 1847.

Samuel Seymour m. Mehi table Dayton,
May 18, 1780.'

Samuel, b. Mch. 25, X781; d. June 22, 1785.
Isaac, b. July 7, 1784.
" '■ r, b. M

Sally, b. May 24, 1786.
Samuel, b. May 24, 1788.

Stephen Saymore, s. of Bbenezer, dec'd,
ra. Mehitable, d. of Capt. Sam. Hikcox,
Mch. 18, 1 740- 1.

1. Gideon, b. Sept. 24, 1741.

2. Thankful, b. Nov. 6, 1743; m.Thoraas Hickcox,

3. Abel, b. July 9, 1745.

4. Daniel, b. Oct. 30, 1748.

5. David, b. May 5, 1750.

6. Amos, b. July 9, 1752; d. Dec. 11, 1759.

7. Lydia. b. June 17, X754; d. Oct. 2, 1772.

8. Zadock, b. Apr. 30, 1757.

9. Mehitable, )

and Vb. July 21, 1759.
ID. Stephen, )

11. Ame, b. June 7, 1761.

12. Amos, b. Sept. 5, 1766.

Mehitable d. May 9, 1767, and Stephen
m. Oct. 12, 1767, Mary, wid. of Eben.
Elwell.

Enoch E. Shaw m. Ann Donnelly, Apr.

15. 1851.
Dennis Shea of Hartford m. Catharine

Galvin, May 14, 1849.

Robert Sheehan m. Alice Black, July 4,
1851.8

David Shelton and Elizabeth:

1. Abigail, b. July 20, i772>

2. Samuel Masters, b. Oct. 28, 1774.

3. Ransom, b. Aug. 31, 1776.

4. Cloe, b. July 9, 1778.

Abigail Sbepard m. Daniel Hay den,
1 801.

Ruth Sheppard m. Elihu Spencer. 1793.

Samuel Shepherd:'

Anna, bap. Jan. 18, 1801.

John Shepardson m. Emily Albro— both
of Attleborough, Mass. — Oct. 12, 1848.

Shepardson. Smith.

Otis Shepardson of New Haven m. Lucy
S. Pierpont, Oct. 20, 1846.

Farrell Sheridan m. Winifred Wiscon,
Jan. 7, 1848.*

Eliza Sherman m. L. F. Hikcox, 1837.
Elizabeth Sherman m. Alsop Baldwin,

1773.
Elizabeth L. Sherman m. L. E. Hikcox,

1835.

Harriet M. Sherman m. Sam. Nettleton,
1842.

Maria Sherman m. Rev. Ira Hart, 1798.

Stephen Sherwood of Salem m. Mary
Hitchcock of Bethany, July 13, 1834.

Joseph Shipley m. Sarah, wid. of Will-
iam Stanley, Mch. 11, 1839.

I. Alfred, b. Jan. i, 1840.
3. Ralph, b. May 4, 1845.

Sarah Shipley m. W. H. Jones, 1846.

John Simpson m. Sarah M. Blackman—

both of Plymouth — Jan. 5, 185 1.

John Singleton of Philadelphia m. Electa
Frer}'^ of Southampton, Mass., Nov. 25,
1850.

Timothy Sizer, s. of Abel of Middletown,
m. the widow Rebecca Savage, Sept.
10, 1795.

Their first two chil. d. soon after birth.

3. Olive, b. Dec. 27, 1798.

4. Rebecca, b. Jan. 12, 1801.

William Sizer m. Melissa Scovill, Jan.
13. 1768.

Dorcas Skinner m. Samuel Southmayd,
1768.

John Skinner m. Emeline Frisbie, d. of
Ebenezer. She d. in Ohio, Oct. 27,

1833.;

X. Emily, b. June 7, 1831.

Maltha A. Skinner m. Rev. H. B. Elliot,

1843.

tjohn Slater m. Martha Barnes, d. of
Samuel, Apr. 19, 1750.

tJohn Slaterree (Slaughtree on First
Church records) m. Mary Barnes, d. of
Samuel, Nov. 11, 1755 [and d. 1789].

X. Svnthia, b. June x8, 1759 [d. Oct. 17, 1830].

2. Niartha, b. Nov. 4, 1761 [m. Tx:vi Bron<ionJ.

3. Mary, b. Jan. 27, 1765 [d. Mch. 30, 181 1].

Mary Slaughter m. Joseph Lewis, 1727.

Concurrance Smedley m. Samuel Guern-
sey, 1766.

Abigail Smith m. Abr. Prichard, 1766.

♦ First marriage recorded by M. O'Neill.

+ These names appear side by side <ni the rale books, down to 1781 — John Slater appearing in 1749; John
Slateree, in 1753. One is rated from £26 to ^58; the other from jQ^ to .1^30.

Na
I. c

FAMILY REGi

Smith. Smith. Smf

Amanda Smith m. Wm. Beardsley, 1833. >•

Ame Smith m. John Lewis, 1750. 3'.

Andrew Smith and Rachel:* ♦•

Harris, bap. Jan. i6, 1820. 5*

Lucretia, bap. Nov. a, 1821. j]

Ira Tutlle, bap. Aug. 13, 1824. g!

Anna Smith m. Bennet Bronson. 1801. 9- 1

Anson H. Smith m. Esther Atkins— both P*^

of Wolcott— May 12, 1827. Faai

Asahel Smith, s. of Anson, dec'd, m. Frai

Elizabeth Thomas, Nov. 12, 1829. Qad

Augustus Smith of Plymouth [s. of James i,

of Northfield] m. Catharine L. Cook i. 1

[d. of Zenas], Dec. 6, 1837. Geof

Austin Smith d. Feb. 8, 1797, a. 83. Mar- Jai

garet, his wife. d. Mch. 26, 1803.* Ham

Austin Smith [Jr.] m. Sarah Hikcox, d. Harr
of Gideon, Mch. 20, 1765.

1. Ame, b. Oct. 12, 1765. Hettf

2. Levi, b. June xo, 1770; d. Feb. 5, 1781. Pai

3. Sally, b. Sept. 12, 1779.

4. Harvy, b. Dec. 23, 1783. Iienr

Bathsheba Smith m. Alsop Baldwin, ^^^

1778. Jai

Betsey Smith m. Joseph Nichols, 1824.

Catharine S. Smith m A. C. Hart, 1841.

Cloe Smith m. Asa Scott, 1789. ul

David Smith and Ruth> „ . .

1. Aaron, b. Apr. 19, 1771.

2. David, b. Dec. 2, 1776. 20,

3. Junius, b. Oct. 2, 1780. Sc' 1

4. Lucius, b. Apr. 9, 1784. .

David Seely Smith, s. of John, m. Jane ™ j

M. Fuller, d. of Nelson of Middlebury, ^j^ .

Apr. 25, 1846. j^^ I

I. A child, b. Apr. 7, 1847. ^

Edward A. Smith m. Rachel Lewis, Nov. 2! i :

19, 1835. 3. j I

Edwin Smith of New Haven m. Betsey w

Ann Nichols, Feb. 22, 1847. tjj \

Elinor Smith m. Eph. Warner, 1739.

Eliza Ann Smith d. Aug. 16, 1836, a. 61.* ^ ^J '

Eliza R. Smith m. E. O. Adams, 185 1. ja

Elizabeth Smith m. Joshua Guilford, i
1824.

Elmoye Eben. Smith, s. of Leveret of 4

Prospect, m. Marietta Woodruff, d. of 5
Stephen of Southington, Apr. 4, 1841.

1. Emma Jane, b. June 20, 1842. 8. !

2. George Lcvcrett, b. Jan. 18, 1844. _

3. Samuel Stephen, b. Feb. 15, 1846. Jam'

Ephraim Smith d. Oct. 15, 1806, a. 75.' St

Widow of Ephraim d. Sept. i, 1808, ^<
a. 76.

Esther Smith m. Isaac Byington.

Ezekiel Smith, s. of Ezekiel of Wood- J*^
bridge, dec'd, m. Mary Frost, d. of
David, Sept. 11, 1806, and d. Dec. 9,

1825.

I

2. . I
3. : i

)

6. : 1

I.

2. I

I.
2. 1

V

128 AP

HISTORY OF WATEBBUB7,

Smith. Smith.

James Smith m. Sarah Blakeslee, Jan.
29, 1789.*

John Smith of Derby m. Abigail Gunn,
Mch. 15, 1759.*

John Smith, s. of James, m. Ruhamah
Thompson, d. of Caleb of Harwinton,
Nov. 17, 1768.

1. Thomas, b. Oct. 4, 1769.

2, John, b. Apr. 4, 1771.

John Smith, s, of Ezekiel of Woodbridge,
dec'd, m. Esther Frost, d. of Rev.
Jesse, Feb. 22, 1808.

1. Clarissa, b. Dec. 93, 1808; m. Luther Todd.

2. Sylvester, b. June 13, 181 1.

3. Lydia Ann, b. Feb. i, 1813; m. M. Kimball.

4. Polly Amanda, b. July ri, 1816 [m. Ed.Welton].

5. David Scely, b. Apr. 7, 1819.

6. Charles Junius, b. June xi, 1821; d. 1833.

7. Irena, b. Aug. 10, 1823; m. W. B. Barnes.

8. James Frost, b. Mch. 22, 1827.

John A. Smith of Vernon m. Melisse E.
Tuttle, Mch. 20, 1842.

J. Edward Smyth m. Lucy A. Clark [d.
of John], Jan. i, 1849.

John W. Smith of Conway, Mass., m.
Sarah M. Hickok [d. of Alanson R.],
Apr. 23, 1849.

Joseph Smith [m. Oct. ii, 1722, Martha
Beeman, b. July 16, 1695, d. of George
of Derby].

3. Mary, b. Apr. 21, 1728.

4. Susanna, b. Dec. 23, 1730.

5. Ame, b. Mch. 29, 1734.

6. Ruth, b. Sept. 13, 1740 [m. David Prichard].

Joseph Smith m. Hannah Mallory, Aug.
21, 1753.*

Landon Smith m. Martha Osborn, d. of
Daniel, July 19, 1777.'

Lawrence O. S. Smith of Naugatuck m.
Eunice E. Sperry of Huraphreysville,
Sept. 2, 1845.

Lemuel O. Smith, see L. S. Osborn.

Lewis Smith m. Clarry Nichols, Feb. 22,
1829.

Lois Smith m. Daniel Abbot, 1763.

Lucy J. Smith m. Richard Morrow, 1S39.

Lyman Smith m. Rebeckah Wooster,
Dec. 17, 1S21.

Lyman Smith of Woodbury m. Jenett
Norton, July 23, 1824.

Lyman P. Smith m. Marilla Sanford [d.
of Lebeus], Nov. 20, 183S.

Margaret Smyth m. John Daye, 1850.
Marshall Smith and Lucina:

I. Phila Charlotte, b. Sept. 3, 18 10; m. G. S. Wel-
ton.

Martin B. Smith m. Polly C. Frost, June
3, 1846.

Mary Smith m. G. W. Denny, 1847.

Smith. Somers.

Mary C. Smith m. Milo Hine, 1849.

Nancy Smith m. Gideon O. Hotchkiss,
1830.

Orson Smith, s. of Lemuel, m. Lydia
Ann Judd, d. of Thomas, Aug. 28.
1826.

Philena Smith m. Gideon Hickcox, 1770.

Ralph Smith of Washington m. Maria
Ward of Nau., Nov. 23, 1842.

Rebeccah H. Smith m. W. H. Scovill,
1 841.

Richard L. Smith of Milford m. Lydia
Ann Boughton. Oct. 9. 1839.

Rosetta Smith' m. James Hodson, 1846.

Samuel Smith, s. of James, m. Agnes
Leveston, d. of James of Wallingiord,
Aug. 2, 1769.

1. Samuel Leveston, b. Apr. 27, 1770.

Agnes d. May 7, 1770, and Samuel m.
Lois Parker, Nov. 15, 1770.

2. Lois, b. Dec. 27, 1771.

3. James Woolsey, b. Nov. 9, 1773.

Sarah Smith m. Nathan Beard, 1728.
Sarah Smith m. Isaac Terrell, 1762.
Sarah Smith m. Isaac Scott, 1767.
Sarah Smith m. Stephen Warner, Jr.,

1792.
Sheldon Smith m. Mille Downs — both of

Wolcott — May 30, 1825.

Shelton Smith of Plymouth m. Charlotte
Benham.'Jan. i, 1837.

Solomon M. Smith of New York m.
Maria Clark, d. of Eli, May 13, 1820.

Sybbel Smith m. Archibald Prichard,

1782.

Thankful Smith m. Edward Allen, 1842.

Wait Smith m. Sarah Scott, d. of David,
Jan. 5. 1775. [He d. Sept. 15, 1805;
she, Dec, 1828. J

1. Garrit, b. Feb. 3, 1776 [d. Nov. 9, 1830].

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 22, 1778.

William S. Smith of Steuben Co., N. Y.,
m. Sophia Bronson, Aug. 9, 1837.

Sarah Softly m. John Eggleston, 1851.

David Somers formerly from Milford m.
Almira Frisbie, d. of David of Wolcott,
Oct. 17, 1S30.

1. Dwight L., b. May 28, 1832.

2. Aug^usta A., b. in M'bury, Apr. 15, 1834.

3. Joseph Hill, b. in Wol., June 24, 1836.

4. Amelia R , b. in Wol., Sept. 2, 1840.

5. Christine £., b. in Mil., June 5, 1844.

6. Frederic, b. Apr. 15, 1847.

David Somers of Woodbury m. Sarah
Maria Upson [d. of Daniel], July 16,

1836.

Willii

m.

Jemin

174:

FAMILY BECOi

SOMERS. SOUTHMAYD. SoUTi

James P, Somers from Milford m. Re- P»

becca Harrison, d. of Michael, dec'd, jj

of Wolcott, Dec. 14, 1826. iJ

I. Catharine, b. Oct. 29, 1827; m. Stephen Har- H

rison. J;

3. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 30, 1829; m. Douglass Malt- ^

by. . 5;

3. Pulaski, b. June 29, 1831. *•'

4. Elliott, b. Jan. 23, 1833. ^ SamU

Jerusha Summers m. Amzi Beebe, 1802.'' ' Dor

Daniel Southmayd, s. of [Rev.l John, m. Auj

Hannah Brown, d. of Samuel, Mch. 24, x. M

t748 9. I ^

1. Anna, b. Aug. 8, 1749 [m. after 1784, Esq. Good- 4. Dt

rich of Chatham, and d. childless, 1809] . 5. Al

2. John, b. Aug. 8, 1751. 6. W

3. Daniel, b. Oct. 23, 1753.

Mr. Daniel Southmayd d. Jan. 12, 1754,

about II o'clock at night [and HannaJi ind^

m. in 1756, Joseph Spencer of Haddam, j^g^

Major-General in Rev. War]. j^^

Dr. Daniel Southmayd, s. of Daniel, m. j^ j^

Prue Nichols, d. of Capt. George, Oct. 2! Al

31, 1773. [He probably lived in Had- 3- ^

dam.] ^ *• ^^

Susat

Mr. John Southmayd [s. of William (jf ^^^2^

Middletown, m. Susanna Ward, d. of

William, 1700.]

His first child was Esther, and born ye : 12th of

Septembe in ye yeir 1701. Mary

His ad, a daughter Susannah, b. Jenuary 5 — TAnc*

1703-4 (m. Thomas Bronson). t""®*

Ye 3d, a daughter annah, b. Oct » 27 — 1706 — Hic

(ra. Joseph Bronson). j^ j

The 4th, A son, John, b. Tan. ai, 1710. . '

The 5th, A son, Daniell, b. Apnll 19, ■= 1717. Ans

The above named Susanna d. Aug. 13, ^- ^

1741. X 1

The above named John d. Feb. 28, 5. ,

1742-3. ^•

The above named Anna Southmayd d. g] j

Aug. II, 1749. in the 43d year of her 9! :

age. '®- j

Susannah Southmavd, wife of Mr. John , ""

Southmayd, died i'eb. 8th, between Anse

ten and Eleven of the clock at night, Ap

Anno Dom. 1751 2. [Dea(

The above named Daniell, son of John, d. (

deyed about 11 o'clock at night Jan. 12, i. i

1754. (All these, recorded by Mr. »• I
Southmayd. The next year another's J- J
pen records) 5] i
Mr. John Southmayd died Nov. 14, 6. I

1755, in the Eighty eth year of his age. J* [

John Southmayd, s. of [Rev.] John, m. Cal^

Millecent Gaylord, d. of Samuel of Mid- jai

die town, Apr. 25, 1739, and d. Feb. 28, ranc
1742-3, about twelve of the clock, in

the 33d year of his age. His widow m. '

Timothy Judd, 1749. E"hi

1. William, b. June 27, 1740. R

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 10, 1742. >^ O

[John Southmayd, s. of Daniel, removed Hen]

to Comptou, New Hampshire. H.

14 •

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Sfkncer. Sperrv.

Henry Spencer m, Mary E. Lum— both
of Osford— Sept. 19. 1850.

Selden ); s. of Samuel (andHannan

Blacbford or Blachfield); sixth child of
Serg. Jared of Cambridge, Mass., 1634;
m. Temperance Goodspeed of East
Haddam about 1750. and d. 17^7.

Children b. in Waterbury:

S.ni«I, A. I.n. .<; .7&.
A«bel d Jan, u, ,760. ^

Isaac Spencer m. >[rs. Ama Tyler — both

of Cheshire— Oct. 15, iSa6.
Lawreoce [SterneJ Spencer, s. of Elihu.

m. Maria, Beectier, d, of Daniel, Apr.

II. .S27.
Leonard Spencer m. Sarah L. Hoadley,

d. of Chester, Mch. 7, 1821.
Samuel Spencer:*

Sarab Spencer m, James Smith, 1736.
Wlllard Spencer (s. of Ansel] m. Marcia
Burton, June 27, iSso,

1, SuMn, b, Sept. 11. 1831.

». Kredtriek Albert, b, Nov. j, .833.

3. ^ouph Burlon, b, Mch. 31, 1836.

5! Mary Eliiabcl'h. b. Oct. i3. 1E47.

Abel Sperry m. Miliscent Warner, d. of
Stephen. Feb. :o, 1773-

AbUcail Sperry m. Jonathan Scott, 1736.

Alfred C. Sperry of Bethanv m. Harriet
A. Isbell. Sept. 6. 1841.

Allen Sperry and Abigail from North-
field:'

Polly, bnp. Ma

>. Jul;

, ito,.

SpERRV. St-ERRT.

Corydon S. Sperry [s. of Hezekiafa (and
Luanna Stillraan); s. of Timothj
Sperry and Hannah Pardee] m. Catha-
rine E. Leavenworth [d. of Mark],
June 10. 1S35.

Earl Sperry m. Anna Baldwin of Wood-
bridge, irfay 23, 1823.

Edwin Sperry, s. of Marcus, m. Hart
Miles, d. of Samuel formerly of Mil.
ford. May 1. 1831.
I. Cliirlolir E., E. in New Hsven, Jonc m, i!;;;

i. Samuc

b. Dk. ij.

:». b. Oct.

J. Henry Tht
Elijah Sperry's record of the birth of his
Mildren by his wife. Anne;
I. Anne, b, in Woodbridgc, Jan. B. '777.

Elijah's record, by his wife Mary:

3. Mary, b. A*ug."iJ iVsi.
*. Kn«. b, Aug 25, .7S3.

5. Rachel, b. ^av. ■,,:,%-,.

EmiJy Sperry m. Austin Pierpont. im;.
Eunice Sperry m. L. O. Smith, 1S45.
Jacob Sperry, s. of Jacob, dec'd. m.

Sarah Perkins, d. of David— all of New

Haven— Sept. i, 1773.

1. Huldnh. b. May 3. t?7Si "<- Nuab Bconwo.
1. Marcus, b. Id P.u., Mch. n,)

J.Sarah, b, i K.H.. Mch, i;. 1 m. Dan. CouL

4. Lydifl. b. Oct. ,j. ijSi; m. Gideon Plait, Jr.

6. Charr^. b Sept, 11'. 1791 [m, ClarL Spefrrl.

Jesse Sperry, s. of Samuel of New
Haven, m. Hannah Upson, d. of CapL
Stephen. May 8, 1759. [He d. Apr. ij,
1823, a. 90; she. Feb. 8, 1S18, a. ii-]

X Su^na.EI'cfel' 3.'i76,;ra,A.naMCoweI.
«. Lcava, b. June jo, r76S [m. Sam. Jabnm].

Jesse Sperry and Hannah:*

jiBon Sperry, s. of Jacob, m, Lois Up-
son, d. of John of Southington, Apr,
23. iHio.

.. Emily, b. Aue. 6, sin: m. Re5tore Carter,
I. Charfa Anson, b, July .4, .8.9.

6. Charloiii Eliia, b, Apr. 4. iBij; m. Robert Lai

7. Sarah lane. bTVcb, >;. .8^5 |m. A. Fisher] .
I. Mary Cornelia, h, Mch. », <9.S; d. .833.

9. Ana Ophelia, b. Mch. ;, 1830.

Betsey Sperry m, E. N. Buckinghai
1834.

Luther Sperry, s. of Benjamin from
Cheshire, m. Mary Verona Holt. d. of
Philemon.

rman Sperry:*

Phebe Nono '

. bap. Feb. 16, iSoi.
Anna. bap. Oct. 5, i8a«.
[Lyman's wife d. Oct. 10, 1807. »■ W]:
wile Lydia from Bethany, 1S09.

Lyman, bap. May », e8io.
Lydia,hap. Oct. .3,18.1.

FAMILY RECORDS.

AP181

Sperry.

Standly.

Betsey, bap. Feb. 4, 1813.
Levinus, bap. Sept. 18, 1814.
Ira Peck, bap. Mch. 18, 1818.

Marcus Sperry, s. of Capt. Jacob, m.
Rebecca Carrington, d. of Sam. of
Woodbridge, Mch. 25, 1807, and d.
Aug. 31, 1811.

X. Edwin, b. Mch. 8, 1808.
2. Hosnier, b. Feb. 7, 1810.

Martha Sperry m. Willis Downs, 1845.

Marvin Sperry of Woodbridge m. Lavin-
ia Gay lord of Hamden, Feb. 24, 1832.

Ruth Sperry, wid., d. Mch. 15, 1803, a.

Samuel Sperry, s. of Samuel of New
Haven, m. Mary Robard, d. of Abial,
Apr. 30, 1761.

1. Abi, b. Feb. xo, 176a.

2. Mary, b. July 20, 1764.

Samuel Sperry, b. May 6, 1807, s. of
Jesse, m. Apr. 28, 1832, Laura Mecam,
b. Nov. 20, i8og, d. of James of Wash-
ington.

1. Cornelia, b. June 15, 1833.

2. Sarah, b. Apr. 28. 1835.

3. Augusta, b. Oct. 20, 1838.

4. Franklin, b. Apr. 2, 1844.

David A. Sprague from Pittsfield, Mass.,
b. Dec, 1S03, ra. Oct. 26, 1828, Ann
Downs, b. Mch. 5, 1802, d. of David.

X. Mary Ann, b. Dec. 28, 1830.

2. David Elias, b. Feb. 8, 1833.

3. Aurelia Maria, b. Oct. 3, 1835.

Edwin Stanley m. Margaret Corcoran,
July 12, 1835, and d. Jan. 31, 1838, a.

The record of Samuel Standly. Samuel
Standly, s. of Left. John of Farming-
ton was mar. to Elizabeth, d. of Abra-
ham Bronson of Lime, July 15, 1702.

Their first child, Samuel, b. Mch. 22, 1703.
Their second child, A Braham, b. Apr. 18, 1705.
Their third child, John, b. Jan. 4, 1707.
Their fourth child, Esther, o. Nov. 9, 1709.
The fifth was twins, Ebenezer and Annah, Mch.

8, 1713-

The seventh, a dafter, Elizabeth, b. at Farming-
ton [Mch. 13], 1715.

The eighth, Asa, b. at Farmington, Aug. 10,
17x7.

The fifth, Ebenezer, dyed Mch. ax, X713.

[Samuel Standly, Jr., m. Ame Bronson,
Sept. 22, 1727, and, in 1766, Widow
Prudence Pomeroy. He d. 1793.]

[Thomas Standly, s. of Capt. John of
Farmington m. Anne Peck, d. of Rev.
Jeremiah, 1690. He d. April, 1713;
she. May, 1718.]

Timothy Standly [s. of Lieut. John] was
borne June the 6, 1689.

Timothy Standly, s. of Capt. John of
Farmington, d. Nov. 12, 1728. Mary

Standly. Steele.

[Strong of Windsor], his wife, d. Sept,
30, 1722.

William Stanley, b. Feb. 17, 1808. m.
Sarah James in Birmingham, England
[in 1823].

X. Ann, b. Sept., x8a6; m. F. A. Warner.
3. Wilham, b. Mch., 1839.
3. James, b. Jan. 2, 183a.

William d. [in Bloomfield. N. J., 1836]
and Sarah m. Joseph Shipley.

William Stanley's wife, Maria, d. Aug.
7, 1834, a. 24.*

William Stanley m. Phebe Forrest, June
9. 1850.

Bernard Stapleton m. Bridget Cunning-
ham, Aug. 3, 1851.*

Mrs. Olive Starks, bap. Aug. i6, 1778.*

Eliza Stebbins m. Lauren Austin, 1837.

Lewis Stebbins, s. of Medad of Long-
meadow, Mass., m. Laura Bouton, d.
of John, 18 16.

X. Mary Minerva, b. Feb. xo, 1817.

2. Georj^e Washington, b. Aug. xx, xSxq.

3. Eliza Olive, b. Nov. x, x8ai.

4. Sarah Maria, b. June ao, X823.

Ann P. Steele m. L. B. Follett. 1836.

Austin Steele, s. of Daniel and Rebecca,
ra. Polly Beecher, b. Aug. 2, 1793, d. of
Jonathan and Anna of Brookfield, in
Wat., Aug. [31], 1 8 10.

X. Henry Baldwin, b. Tan. sa, 1812.

2. Caroline R., b. Men. 13, 1820; ra. G. W. Bene-

dict.

3. Frederic Austin, b. Aug. 29; d. Oct. 4, 1828.

4. Edward, b. July 17, 1835; d. Mch. 29, X839.

Daniel Steele [b. in Derby, July, 1768, s.
of Capt. Bradford] m. Keoecca Clark,
1790 (Derby History says ** 1789").

1. Austin, b. Sept. 17, X790.

2. Daniel, b. Nov. ix, 1792.

3. Ashbel, b. Jan. 31, X796.

Rebecca d. [Mch. 8, 1796], and Daniel
m. Margaret Welton, d. of Richard,
Sept. 20, 1797. [He d. June 24, 1835,
a. 67.]

4. Random, b. Sept. 2, 1798.

5. Rebecca, b. Aujf. 15, 1800; m. N. A. Bidweii.

6. Richard, b. July 6, 1802.

7. Clark M., b. Sept. 2x, 1805; d. May, x8xx.

8. Sherman, b. Jan. 5, 1808.

9. Betsey C, b. July 13, 18 10; m. Lewis Beecher.
xo. Davis C, b. Sept. 8, 1813.

XX. George H., b. Mch. X5, 1820; d. at Libcrtyvillc,
111., Sept., 1847.

Daniel Steele, Jr., s. of Daniel, Esq., m.
S^ly Richards, d. of Col. Street of
Wolcott, Nov. 13, 1 8 13.

X. William A., b. Aug. X3, 1814.

Mary Steele m. W. H. Jones, 1825.
Mary Ann Steele m. S. A. Castle, 1S46.
Ransom Steele m. Betsey Beecher, Oct.
4, 1821.

BISTORT OF WATERBUR7.

Steele. ^"^"^^ '

Richard Steele [s. of Daniel! ™- S"san

Maria Ray, Apr. 3. 1831.
Sherman Steele ni. Catharine M. Clark

[d. of John], June 19. 1850.
William S. Steele m, Catoline Jones ol

Cheshire, Nov. 8, 1837.
Harriet Stetson m. O. W. Minard 1837.
Abigail Stevens m. Eben. 1-iikcox, i7«9.
Alfred Ste-fens m. JuHa Paya---. Nov. 17.

Alfred Stevens m. Eliza Gaylord. d. of
Alien of Hamden.

EUm Jane b. Fib. 16, 18^; m. R. H. PanJt=.

Alfred d..'aad Eliza m. Joseph Lines.

Bennet Stevens m. Minerva Grilli;y. Sept.

14. '834.
Eiisha Stevens d. Mch. S. i3i3.
Elisha M. Steve-s m. Amy C- Hoadley.

Aug, 19. 1824. [^lie ^- 'S30.1
EliMbeth Steven- m. Jm.ts Weed 1734-
Elvira Stevea. m. W. D. Beardsky.
Esther Stephens m. P- Freeman. .825.

(Col.)
Fanny Stevens m. Wm. BaK^nian. 1.31-

Oct. 15. 1845-
Hai^h "s^phins *m.'' Abr. Andrews,

Hershell Stevens o£ New Haven m. Cla-
rissa Bouton. May J4. 1831.

1836.

johD Stevens:

Abij.h. EmiJT. 1^^ J=™«' ^"l"- ■>""' ' _ ■

Sept. 3". '""''

of New Fairfield. Oct. 9. ''54-

A^sorStock^E m. Flora Coe [d 01 AU.-
iah]of TorriuKton, May 15. ' -:=-

Anson G. Stocking, b^ «ch^3-^AL^ ^
of Anson of TomnRton m ^^."^
Frost, d. of Stephen C. Noii- 10. i-.-*

lohn M. Stocking, b May ^- ""• %_f

Anson of Torrington. m. Sept. 3. > >»■
ESe Newell from Southingtoa. b.
Oct. 3, 1804-

Hamsl Ne«ll. b. M»y 13. iSjS.

V™^nMn«,b.D«.«, .838.

. Fanny

Linus Stevens of Cheshire

Smith. Dec. s, i8ai.
Olive Stevens m. Seth Castle, iSoo.

o Maria Stevens m, S. W. Upson 1B20,
L."si.««n,.R.v.J.b=>Cto4w>ck.

„Lb°dSUk.m. C.P.. Gid. Ho.c1.ki»,

1763.

ton— Mch, 20, 1S34-

ElizB Ann b in Tomngio". Jane «. "O??-
,: Chi.rLmle.'b. Nov. 17, ■839.

Almira A. Stoddard m. H. Demiag. .551-
Damaris Stoddard m. Jas. Smith. .76*
Leverett Stoddard of Litchfield m. Cath.

arine IJishop. Sept 6, 154<J-
Maria Stoddard m. W. W. Allen. -M*-
PhUo Stoddard from .Middlcbnry m.

Nancy Hickos.d.of Timothy. Nov- 14.

1857-

,. David Sherman, b. J«. >». .8^

■■ &trib,'V™o™n.'b.^il. M.ddl=b=ry. Jan. ., H^

Sampson Stoddard and Susanna.

Pn.de..«, b. July .■. >77S.

Sn^nna d. Apr. .n. >779. and S«np-
sonm Amy Goodmg (Goodwin ().«'>'■

a3, 1780.

Cond«ii. b. rf»y B. .783-

[Truman] Stoddard:

Clara, b. 5=pi. Ti, iSm.

wmu» H°"sttitoa »_ ^Sjf " "■

Crf.'.ll of Avon, sept. IJ. 'S*'"
Dothe. Sto»= ~. Voung Love C.On.

/Jmtl'siorrs of P"'?, t'lSf"'"'
„11 of N.og.tnck, FA «. .ilS-

d1.S saw i™a raj«i»=tb Atwl^

fStchMl>-l"W.»rbory:

SwanL b. SepL u. ■7.9-

FAMILY REVORl

Stow. Sutliff.

Daniel Stow d. Mch. 22, 1750.

[Heirs: Daniel, d. Sept. 16, 1758, Ebenezer,
Samuel, Elizabeth, Luce, and Mary. J

Josiah stow, s. of Daniel, m. Esther
Judd, d. of Samuel, Apr. 24, 1760.

1. Esther, b. Jan. aa; d. Feb. 6, 1761.

2. Esther, b. Sept. 18, 176a.

3. David, b. Apr. 6, 1764.

Samuel Stow m. Elizabeth Benedict,
Nov. 14, 1780.'

1. ,\bel, b. Nov. aa, 1781.

2. Philemon, b. Sept. 5, 1783.

Thomas Stow of Middletown m. Harriet
Warner of Salem, Nov. 8, 1835.

William Stow of Ohio m. Lucene Upson,
d. of Mark, Mch. i, 1824.

Lydia Streeter m. Lewis Parsons, 1851.

David Strickland [d. 1754]. His widow,
Lois, m. Samuel Scott, 1756.

[Heirs: Mary Doolittlc, Elizabeth, John, Abiah.
w. of Nathaniel Edwards, Jr., Samuel, and
Persis.J

John Stricklin, s. of David, m. Hannah
Prichard, d. of James, dec'd, July 15,
1757. [He d. Oct., 1 761, and] Hannah
m. Nath'l SuUiff.

I. David, b. Jan. 13, 1759.

a. I^urain, m. Cyrus Gnlley, 1776.

Adinah Strong of Southbury m. Anne
Scott of Salem, May 17, I779.'

Esther Strong m. E. R. Lampson, 1851.

Hannah Strong m. Jesse Hickcox, 1775.

Hiel B. Strong of Derby m. Susan E.
Trowbridge of New Haven, July 6,
1840.

Jerome B. Strong of Bethlem m. Julia
Camp of Middlebury, Mch. 17, 1835.

Johanna Strong m. Benj. Warner, 1720.

Maria Strong m. Jarvis Johnson, 1832.

Polly Strong m. Silas Porter, 1802.

Sarah Strong m. Thomas Clark, 1717.

Sarah Strong m. Theoph. Baldwin, 1776.

Sarah Strong m. Lucius Hine, 1835.

Abel Sutliff, s. of John, m. Sarah Ford,
d. of Barnabas, Oct. 23, 1745. She d.
Sept. 14, 1777.

1. Dinah, b. Dec. 4, 1746.

2. Abel, b. AuR. 23, 1751.

3. Darius, b. Mch. 18, 1756; d. Sept. 26, 1776.

4. Lucas, b. Nov. 4, 1768 (1758?)

Abel Sutliff, s. of Abel, m. Charity Bar-
ber, Nov. 15, 1770.

1. Harna (?), b. Jan. 16, 177a.
a. Miles, b. July aQ, 1773.

3. Sarah, b. Men. a7, 1776; d. July 26, 1777.

4. Sarah, b. Feb. ai, 1778.

John Sutliff d. Oct. 14, 1752, a. 77. Han-
nah, his wife, d. Nov., 1761.

[John, b. in Durham, Mch. 8, 1713-14.
Abel. Hannah, m. Thomas Harrison.

SUTLIFJ

Mar
Lydi

Abifi
Elifl
Debt

St<

in
Man

So
Dina

Br

John St

Ives,
July a

I. John

Anne
m. Mc
Havei
1790,

a. Hani
on

3. Sami

4. Anni

5. Man

John Si
m. L<
1770.

1. The

2. Jose

3. Ann

4. Lois

Di

5. Ann

6. Johi

Joseph

viah I
1771.

I. Zer

G

a. Tow

3. Mic

4. Lvc

5. Abi

6. Nat

Nathai

nah v^
of Ja

1. Tit

2. Hai

3. Am

4. Nat

6. Tit

7. Ruf

s<

8. Sar

9. Eli:

Han
m. I:

3. 17

Samuc
Hun

1. Be

2. Ms

3. Ro

4. Gi)

5. Co

6. As

7. Hi

Sarah

\

184 AP

HISTORY OF WATBRBURT.

SunoN. Taylor.

Abraham Sutton d. Oct. 20, 1758, and
hear his things— is written upon a slip
of paper, pasted upon the Record.

Ann Sutton m. James Carberry, 1824.

Isaac Sutton d. Mch. 22, 1840, a. 86.*
Ann, his wife, d. Apr. 25, 1836, a. 78.

Richard Sutton, s. of Isaac, m. Sally
Bronson, July 27. 1828. [She d. Mch.
20, 1834, and] Richard m. Julia A.
Candee, d. of Moses of Oxford, Mch.
29» 1835.

I. James Carberry, b. Apr. lo, 1836.

Richard d. Tan. 22, 1842, and Julia m.
Gilbert Prichard.

[Walter Swain d. 1767, and] Mary, his
widow, m. David Arnold.

Joshua H. Swan m. Louisa A. Marr,
Feb. I, 1850.

Robert Swan and Agnes Porter — both
from Scotland — m. Jan., 1842.

William, b. June 9, 1845.

James F. Swift m. Hannah S. Anderson,
Dec. 22, 1847.

Charlotte Taft m. John Adams, 1850.

Dorothy Talmage m. Stephen Hopkins,

1747-
[Ichabod Talmage m. Hannah Minor,

Mch. 9, 1774]
Jacob Talmage, b. July 28, 1800, s. of

Jacob of Plymouth, m. Chloe Hickcox,

d. of Timothy. She d. Nov. 24, 1848.

Nancy Maria, b. May 22, 1832; d. Dec. ix, 1844.

Josiah Tatmag (Talmage) and Hannah:

XI. Margara, b. June ai, 1760.

Lucinda Talmadge m. G. W. Pusha,
1849.

Charles Taylor of Newtown m. Mary
Ann Tomlinson, May 5, 1834.*

David Taylor, s. of John of Wethers-
field, m. Jemima Judd [d. of John],
July 14, 1760.

1. John, b. Mch. 29, 1761 [m. Elizabeth Hale, wid.

of Dr. Samuel Rose.]

Jemima d. May 12, 1761, and David m.
Huldah, relict of Joseph Fairchild,
June 24, 1762. "He d. Aug. 19, 1801 [a.
63; she, Mch. i, 1823, a. 90].

2. Cloe, b. Mch. 27, 1763; d. July 6, 1780.

3. David, b. Oct. 8, 1771.

David Taylor, Jr., s. of David, m. Mil-
liscent Lewis, d of Isaac [Booth],
dec'd, June 13, 1791.

1. Lewis, b. Nov. 3, 1791.

2. Chloc, b. Feb. 17, 1796.

3. Sophia, b. in Canaan, Apr. 13, 1800.

Elnathan Taylor and Desire [Blaksley,
d. of Ebenezer, Jr.; she was b. in New

Taylor. Terrell.

Haven, Nov., 1708, and m. there, Dec.
26, 1727.]

1. Marv, b. in North Haven, Jan. 9, 1728-9.

2. Nathan, b. in North Haven, Nov. n, 1730.

3. Desire, b. Sept. 6, 1732.

4. John, b. Apr. 5, 1735.

(This entry marked •• Removed.")

Mary D. F. Taylor m. Rev. J. L. Clark,^

1848.

Samuel Taylor from Birmingham, Eng.^
b. Aug. 24, 1811, m. Dec. i, 1833, Har-
riet M. Price from Attleborough, Mass.^
b. Aug. 21, 1812.

I. Harriet Jane, b. Aug. 23, 1834.
a. Ann Maria, b. Mch. 13, 1838.
3. Samuel Slater, b. Sept. 5, 1841.

Theodor Tavlor, s. of John of Glaston-
bury, m. Bette Frost, d. of SamueU
Mch. I, 1781.

1. Theodore, b. June 12, 1782.

2. William, b. June 30, 1785.

3. Timothy Newton, b. Oct. 28, 1788.

Wealthy Taylor d. Dec. 19, 1841, a. 49.*

Aaron Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Sarah
Warner, d. of Obadiah, Jan. 23, 1760.

1. Tryphena, b. Jan. 23, 1761.

2. Esther, b. July 28, 1762.

3. Orpha, b. Oct. 9, 1764.

4. Elias, b. Sept. 20, 1766.

Alvin Terrell's wife d. Jan. 31, 1845, a>
71.*

Amos Terrell, s. of Gamaliel, m. Eliza-
beth Greele. d. of Heu, Mch. 7, 1764.

X. Amos, b. Nov. 24, 1764.
2. Philena, b. Jan. 28, 1766.

Benjamin Terrell, s. of Gamaliel, m.
Lois Andrews, Dec. 29, 1756.

1. Lucy, b. Nov. 4, 1757.

2. Sarah, b. Aug. 13, 1759.

Lois d.- July 30, 1761, and Benjamin m.
Mary Robbards, Dec. 14, 1763. He d.
June 20, 1796.

3. Ame, b. Sept. 17, 1764.

4. Lois, b. Feb. 14, 1767; ra. Daniel Abbot.

5. Joseph, b. July i^, 1769.
Elizabeth, bap. Feb. 28, 1773.*

Benjamin Terrell m. Electa Cook, d. of
Jonathan.

Charles Cook, bap. Oct. 13, z8x6.

Charlotte Terrel m. Albon Hoppen,i8o8.

Clarissa S. Terrel m. William A. Root,
1826.

David Terrell m. Emeline Nichols, Sept.
19, 1830. [He d. June 12, 1831; she,
Nov. 4, 1834.]

Elihu Terrel [s. of Josiah] m. Elizabeth
Hickox, d. of Gideon, Apr. 20, 1783.'

Elisha Terrel m. Lucinda Terrel, Jan.

II, 1784.'^
Emily G. Terrell m. Judson Bronson,.

1S27.

FAMILY BECOB

'^^'^'^ELL. Terrell.

Enoch Terrell, a Baptist, d. Mch. o. 1804,
a. 62.*

Eunice Terrell m. G. P. Warner, 1831.

Experience Terrell d. Mch. 12, 1820. a.
80.'

[Gamaliel Terrell of New Milford m.
Elizabeth Scott. May 17, 1725, and d.
1769. Chil. b. in New Milford:

1. Joshua, b. Dec. i8, 1725.

2. Benjarnin, b. Apr. 17, 1728.

3. EliMbeth, b. Jan. 14, 1729; m. Robert Scott.

4. Amos, b. May 11, 1732.

5. Mercy, b. Dec. 22, 173,; d. June 23, 1737.

6. Mercy, b. Apr. 4, 1738J ra. Henry Grilley.

Hannah E. Terrel m. M. Wooster, 1822.
Hannah Terrel m. S. P. Treat, 1842.
Harriet Terrell m. Ashbel Storrs, 1845.
Henry Terrell of Watertown m. Mrs. (?)
Rebeckah Merriman, Aug. 24, 1828.

Horatio Terrel m. wid. Sarah B. Hay-
den, Dec. 28, 1826.

Ichabod Terrell m. Mch. i, 1784, Rhoda
Williams.' [He was the grandfather
of 92 children.

X. Tillotson, b. May i, 1785; ra. in 1804, Electa
Wilmot, b. 1^86, d. of Elisha and Hannah
(Gladdin). They were the first white pair to
settle in Ridj^eville, Ohio, reaching that place
with their children, Horatio, Eliza and Alonzo,
July 6. 18 10, after a journey of seven weeks
from Waierbury. Their d. Lucinda, b. Dec.
19, 1812, m. Laurel Beebe, s. of Chester, who
has furnished much Beebe and Terrel informa-
tion.

a. Lydia, b. Nov. i, 1787; m. James Emmons.

3. Philander, b. 1789; m. Lora Beebe, d. of Bor-

den.

4. Oliver, b. Sept. 2, 1791; m. Anna Bunnel.

5. Lucinda. b. Nov. 6, 1795.

6. Orpha, b. May 2, 1798.

7. Ichabod, b. Oct. i, 1800.

8. Elihu Franklin, b. Jan. 3, 1802.

9. Horace, b. Aug. 10, 1803.
xo. Henry, b. Apr. 7, 1806.]

Irijah Terrell, s. of Moses, m. Hannah
Buckingham, d. of Abijah of Milford,
Tune 4, 1778. [She d. Jan., 1813; he,
May, 1824.]

1. Hannah Buckingham, b. Feb. 10, 1779 [m.
Chauncey Lewis]. //v l •

(Lately found at Salem in Irijah Ter-
rell's old well, a quantity of fourpenny
cut nails not headed. The owner may
have them on proving property and
paying the cost and trouble.
For particulars inquire of

James Frisbie.
Wat., Salem, Sept. 6, 1799.
Rec'd to record Sept. 7, 1799.)
Isaac Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Sarah
Smith, d. of Jonathan of Lime, Feb.
25, 1762.

1. Jane, b. July 22, 1764.

Isaac Smith Terrell:

Child d. June 5, 1802, a. 4.'

Tyrre

Israel

Beet

X. Aai

2. Abi

3. Hai

4. Rej

5. Ma

6. Tir

7. Jos

c;

8. Isni

Zerui
Lois

[9. He I

Jared

ther
rec.) I

1. Est

2. Noi

3. Let!

Joel Ti

1778. '

Joel Ti I

1832.

Joshua

Merr

X. Mat I

Josiah

1655;
— Jai

1. Mo) !

2. Aai I

3. Eui

4. Oli^ I

5. Jos I

6. Isai :

7. Isrs I

8. Ma; ,

9. Abi

Josiah

nice
1756.

X. Joe

2. Eli!

3. Mai ;

4. Am

5. Alb I

Josiah :
Lewi ,

1. Alfi I

2. Rac I
3- Eut

4. Jen

5. Eliz

la :

6. Poll

Julia 1 !
and ]

Laura I

1822.

Loly T I

Louisa I

1850.

Major

19, i^

UfsrORY OF WATERBVRY.

Thomas. Thomfsiiv

John Thomas, s. of Sanmel, deed, n

Marshal L. Terrel m. Ann J. Martin of

, WiHxi bridge, Nov. 20, 1S30.

Matthew Terrel m. Mary Parker, Aug.

1769.
'■ 1a'.1U b. ,"jt.\' "'"■

John, hap. Apr, j(S, .77B.'

Moses Terrel, s. of Josiah. m.
Barnes, d. of Thomas, Sept. 3,
IHe d. Apr. 1, 1783; she. Apr. 3.
from small pox.]

Myron E. Terrell of New York. s. of
Alfred, ra. Leva J. Farrell. d, of Benj.,
Apr, 21, 1844.

ck, Feb.

.18*5.

OIlTcr Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Lidda,
Relick of Eli Lewis of Lime, Dec. 2,
1760. [He d. in Ohio in 181&, a. 86.]
1. Liacindy, b, Feb. S, i7(«; "n. F.lisha TtrrtlL.
■, Icabcxl. b. Dec. jo, 1764 (17^3 i)^
Lidda d. ^n. 25. 1764, and Oliver m.
Damarai!, Rellick of Bela Lewis, May
15, 1764. She d. Oct. 24, 1808, a. 71.*

Rebecca Terrell m. Henry Chatfield.

,. Zeni, b, J.n, «. ,7&j.
3. Rulh, b. .Miy.l. .7*3-

Lucy Thomas m. Stephen "Welton, 1764.
Mansfield Thomas, li. May, 179'' *. of

Elijah of Woodbridge. m. J«n. 31. ifi3.

Sybei Piatt, b. Mch., 1797. d. of En.jch.

I. I»cph E.. b. Jan. 36, tii,.

1. CarDliile SvhcC b. Fib. i, iBzg.

3. Ihu Manifitld. b. Apr. >a, 1S19.

4. Marv line, b. Sepl S, Igil.

;. junathao Frantlin. b. June g, .8jj.

Maty Ann Thomas m. C. A. Warner,

Rhoda Thomas m. Jesse Hickcon. itSo-
Samuel Tommus (Thomasil, s. of John of
Wtwdbury, ra. Rebecca Warner, i of
John, Apr, S. 1725- He d. at Cape
Britton, Jan. a, 17456, and Rebecca iB.
Caleb Clark.

1. Mubcl, b. Adz. 14, 1713; in. Abr. Aadrna.
Kcbeglch. b.TJ»y 1^ i7>«-

WilliS

1 P. Terrell d. Apr. 16, 1845,

Norman Terry of Plymouth m. Orrelia

Painter. Sept. 4, 1.^42,
Calvin Thayer, s. of Joshua of Williams.

burgh, Mass., m. Anna Beecher. d. of

Daniel, Apr. ;2, i3o8.

J. Churl

Elizabeth Thomas 1

I. lial

?■ Kt

Toiiher,

b. Ort, I

i Sin.uel.k IulyA>7J7:
7. Keubcn.b.l<ov. 5,1739.

[3. Snsin, 4. Aoluinelte.J

Abby A. Thomas m. D. H. Moi

1846.

Berlin Thomas m. Polly H. Downs, Dec.
6, 1837.

Asahel Smith,

Gilbert Thomas of Haddam r

Fmch, Jan. 1,1^32.
Harriet Thomas m. Horace Cande, 1827.
Henrietta Thomas in. J. M, Gray, 1843.

WilUs Thomas m. Abigail Roberts, Jan.

6, 1S30.
Alonzo Thompson, s. of John, m, Jan
13. 1845, Jane E. Pardee, b. May 7,
iSig, d. of Roswel.

1. Hfnry A.,b. Julyi, 1845.
1. Gilberi Nelson, b. Mch. 19, 1S4J.
Caleb Thompson, s. of William, deed,
of New Haven, m. Rebeckah Hikcox.
d. of William, Aug. 16, 1731.
■. Syhtl. b. Apr. 8. 173'-
a. William, b. Feb, 5. '73S-«.
3. Rachel, b. Dec. «. T737-

Charlotte Thompson m. Henry Bronson,

Chloe Thompson m, Jesse Fenn, i;?'
David Thompson from North Haven o,
■ mtha Bliss from Litchfield. May:;.

laiy Eliiabelh, b. July i. 18)9; d. iB^i.
1, nlary Ann, b, Feb, =6. 183'-

Esther Thompson m. Zaccbaus Ho«,

Harriet Thompson m. J. S. Welton, i-'j"
John Thompson, jr.:'

A^'igail, bap. Apr, Jl, 1783,

FAMILY BECO,

Thompson. Titus. Tituj

John Thompson and Mary: Olive

I. Edward, b. in Hamden, Aug. 15, 1809. 24>

a. Nelson, b. Aug. 21, i8n; d. Aug. x6, 1830. rfc«w«

3. Mary, b. Sept., i8n. UAYU

4. Alonzo, b. in Hamden, Nov. 34, 1815. JamCi

John E. Thompson m. Mille Johnson, Jan

Oct. 2, 1829. J. H

Mary Thompson m. David Hopkins, '• JJ

i7yi. 4^ ji

Mary Thompson m. Wm. Langdon Ann '

[^^'^1 Chris

Mary E. Thompson m. Harvey Wells, jj^jj

'^^'^' 5. H

Patrick Thompson m. Rosanna McAn- £sthc

tee, May 5, 1851.8 HezG\

Peter Thomson m. Bridget Medlar, Sept. _

6. 1849. ^""°

Ruhamah Thompson m. John Smith, ^"I?**

1768. CJai

182c

Samuel Thompson m. Betsey Hull, Nov. jg •

I, 1801.* f-

I. M

William Thompson d. 1760. 2. P(

Heirs: Sybcl Williams, and Rachel, w. of Jed. 3- g

Turner.] 4- g

William S. Thompson from North Haven 6". c

m. Charlotte H. Warner, d. of Amos, Mary

Nov. 2, 1834. i^ii^g

1. William Henry, b. Jan. 2, 1835. .•,

2. Thomas James, b. Nov. 17, 1841. , .

3. Frederic Homer, b. Sept. 33, 1845. klSS

Zachariah Thompson, s. of Hezekiah. m. ^°y

Sarah Punderson, d. of David of New i- ^'

Haven, Nov. 26, 1771. ^'

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 28, 177a. Noah

2. Betsey, b. Feb. 14, 1774. C

3. Hezelciah, b. Dec. 2, 1776. ^

4. Zachariah, b. July 10, 1779. renil

Joshua Thornton of Hudinsfield, Eng., Pheb

m. Sarah Alma Hoadley (Scovill*), June pheij
23, 1838.

Eli Thrall and Lucy:*

Candice, b. Dec. 9, 1789.

Elnathan Thrasher, s. of Bezalion of ^^
Middletown, m. Hannah Frisbie, d. of

Elijah, Mch. 26, 1778. l\ i

X. John, b. Mch. 19, 1779.

2. Abigail, b. Dec. 15, 1781. gj^

Absolom Tinker, s. of Benjamin, m. sel

Mar>^ Eelles, d. of Lent of Milford, Ju

May 26, 1780. Hf

1. Mary, b. Apr. 24, 1781. fRe^

2. Sarah, b. July 26, 1782. "•

2

3. Phineas, b. Dec. 3, 1783.

1779.'

Pollj

[18

s.
31

X.

Benjamin Tinker and Elizabeth:

5. Amos, b. Aug. 4, 1761.

6. Louise, b. Mch. i, 1763.

John Tinker m. Thenia Beebe, Mch. 24, 2.

3.

4-

Wealthy Tinker m. E. S. Barnes, 1826. 5

Hannah Titus m. Justus Dayton, 1777. 7!

138 Ap

HISTORY OF WATEBBUBT,

:e, )
d U.

5, )

Tompkins.

Todd.

9. Luce,

and Vb. Aug. 7, 1756.
xo. Cloc, )

Susanna Todd m. Caleb Humaston, 1738.

Harriet Tolles m. John Downs, 1805.

Thankful Toles m. Dan. Sanford, 1753.

Harrison Tomlinson of Derby m. Eme-
rett Davis [d. of Truman], Jan. 10,
1841.

Henry W. Tomlinson of New Haven m.
Lucy Perkins [d. of EliasJ, Nov. 2,
1845.

Josiah S. Tomlinson m. Harriet Good-
year, Dec. 12. 1830.

Mary A. Tomlinson ra. Chas. Taylor,
1834.

Nancy F. Tomlinson m. Wooster War-
ner, 1832.

Victory Tomlinson m. Eunice Dunbar,
Apr. 27, 1785."*

Zachariah, b. July 4, 1786.

Eunice, b. Apr. 27, 1788 fm. May 11, 1808, Rev.
Joseph D. Welton, s. of Richard].

David Ball Tompkins, s. of Nathaniel,
m. Betty Baxter, Nov. 5, 1783.

Nathaniel, b. Jan. 24, 1785.

Edmund Tompkins [probably s. of Na-
thaniel of Eastchester, N. Y., d. 1732;
only s. of Nathaniel, d. 1684; s. of John
of Concord, Mass. 1640, and Fairheld,

1644;] m. Hannah , who d. Apr.

9, 1780. He d. June 30, 1783, in the
82d year of his age.*

Edmund, ra. Bethiah Wetmore.

Else, m. Phineas Matthews, 1747, and Stephen

Judd, 1768.
Hannah, m. James Brown, X744, and Gideon

Scott, 1762.
Jerusha, m. Ephraim Merrill, 1753.
Susanna [b. 1734] m. Caleb Merrill, 1753.

6. Elizabeth [b. at Woodbury, Dec. 4, 1835], d.

Oct. 8, 1749.

7. Nathaniel [b. at Woodbury, Mch. 22, 1738].

Children b. at Waterbury:

8. Rachel, b. Jan. 23, 1 740-1; m. Ben. Nichols.

9. Mary, d. Nfch. 11, 1742-3; m. Samuel Adams,

and Amos Pri chard,
xo. Philips, b. May 6, 1748.

Edmund Tompkins, s. of Edmund
(above), m. Bethiah Wetmore, d. of
Benjamin, July 10, 1754.

1. (2.) Edmund, b. May 21, 1757 [m. Aug. 29, 1783,

Lucinda Wildraan].

2. fs.^ Ira, b. Oct. 18, 1758.

3. h.) , b. Jan. 19, d. Tan. ai, 1756.

4. Mercy, b. Feb. 24, 1760 [a. Aug. xi, 1771].

5. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 18, 1761.

6. Joseph, b. Oct. 10, 1763.

7. Philip, b. Mch. 25, 1765.

8. Benjamin, b. Jan" 30, 1767.

9. Frances, b. Feb. 14, 1769.

Edmund Tompkins [s. of Ira] m. Electa
Frost, Sept. 7, 1828.

Tompkins. Tompkins.

Eleazer Tompkins, s. of Nathaniel, m.
Hannah Hikcox, d. of William of
Watertown, June 10, 1784. [She d.
1822; he, 1824, in Paris, N. Y., they
having removed there in 1800.]

1. Gilbert, b. Oct. 20, 1786 [m. 1813, Dorothy Stan-

ton, and had Edward (of Oakland, Cal., who
m. Mary E. Cooke of Bridgeport), Sarah E.,
Frederick W., and Daniel S.l.

2. Maranda, b. June 2, 1789 [m. LJri Doolittle.

3. Abigail, b. Dec. 14, 1794; m. Anson Hubbard.

4. Isaac, b. June 5, 1797.

5. Nathaniel W., b. Oct. 27, 1799.]

George Tompkins fs. of Merrit] m. Fran-
ces Ann Sandland, Oct. 6, 1845.

Harriet Tompkins m. H. C. Judd, 1824.

Merritt Tompkins, b. June 10, 1799, s. of
Ira of Northfield, m. Jan. 27, 1822.
Laura Terrell, b. May 17, 1802, d. of

Albin.

ft

1. George, b. May 10, 1823.

2. Mary, b. Feb. 10, 1825: d. June 25, 1829.

3. Willard, b. Apr. 4, 1828.

4. Mary Ann, b. Apr. 6, 1831; d. July 2, 1832.

5. John, b. May 10; d. June 2, 1833.

6. Frederick, b. Mch. 14, 1835.

7. Franklin, b. Dec. 12, 1830.

Nathaniel Tompkins, s. of Edmund, m.
Oct. 14, 1762, Hannah Ball [b. i745]-
He d. Mch. 9, 1778, and Hannah m.
Jesse Hikcox.

X. David Ball, b. Dec. 13, 1763.

2. Eleazer, b. Oct. 17, 1766.

3. Gilbert, b. Oct. 3; d. Oct. 8, 1768.

Philip Tompkins, s. of Edmund, m.
Mary Bull, Dec. 25, 1766.

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 20; d. June 2, 1767.

2. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 24, 1768.

3. Hannah, b. Apr. 8, 1770.

4. Mary, b. June 8, 1772.

5. John, b. May i, 1774 [m. Polly Benedict].

6. Sarah, i

and >-b. July 22, 1777.

7. A dau., ) d. same day.

8. Rusha, b. Tuly 22, 1780.

9. Lucy, b. Nlay 7, 1783.

10. Chancy, b. May xo, 1785.

11. Daniel, b. June 27, 1787; d. July, 1790.

Philip Tompkins m. Esther Blakeslee,
Nov. 15, 1787.

Sabra, b. Aug. 8, 1788.

Solomon Tompkins m. Zuba Barnes,
Mch. 10, 1765.

1. Abraham Barnes, b. Feb. 7, 1766.

2. Martha, b. Nov. 2, 1767.

3. Phebc, b. Mch. 15, 1770.

4. Abigail, b. Apr. 15, 1772.

5. Obadiah, b. June 2, 1774.

6. Charlotte, b. Jan. z6, 1777.

7. S>amuel, b. Mch. 16, 1779.

8. Vashti, b. Nov. 19, 1781.

9. Edmond, b. Mch. 28, 1784.
10. Sylvea, b. Feb. 18, 1787.

[Solomon Tompkins, said to have been
born in, or near, Waterbury, Conn.,
Aug. 4, 1740, m. in 1792, at South East,

* The place of Edmund's marriage is unknown, also, place and dates of birth of the first five children.

FAMILY BECO

Tompkins. Turner. Turi

N. Y., Mrs. Deborah Dan Brown, and ^

had four children. He d. at Reading, }

N. Y., June 23, 1823; she, in Mch., 1

1830, a. 89. Relationship with Solomon j^^^

(above) has not been proven.] ^^^^

Willard Tompkins m. Mary J. Orton, W<

Jan. 14, 1849. J

Samuel Towner and Ame [Ward]: Jesse

3. Lciticc, b. July 25, 1733. Hu

Henry Townsend m. Emma Abbott — i. B

both of Middlebury-:— Nov. 21, 1827. '• ^

Thomas Townsend of New Haven m. Marj

Amanda Maria Bronson of Middlebury, Rach

Nov. 26, 1835. Saral

Asa Train of Enfield, Mass., m. Lucia Susai

Leavenworth, [d. of Dr. Frederick], fht

Nov. 2, 1826. j^^^

Frederic Tread way, b. Mch. 12,1812, s. _,

of Harvey, m. July 5, 1836, Esther °^^^

Johnson, d. Jan. 31, 1816, d. of Robert "» '

— both of Middletown. ^

X. Emma Jones, b. Apr. 13, 1840. MrS.

2. Robert Frederic, b. June 8, 1845. 33.'

3. [Louise] b. Apr. 25, 1847. Dan '

Samuel P. Treat m. Hannah Terrel, j^h

Aug. 27, 1842. , L

Dennis Trian (Tryon ?) of Middletown m. 2. s

Lorana Johnson, Apr. 23, 1S23. Jabes

Esther Trowbridge m. Aaron Benedict, Lie

1769. 177

Lydia Trowbridge m. John Woodward,

I786.»

Susan E. Trowbridge m. H. B. Strong, 4-

1840. i:

[Rev.] John Trumble, s. of Jon the first

of Suffield. was mar. to Sarah, d. of \'

Mr. Samuel Whitman of Farmington, 9!

July 3, 1744 [and d. Dec. 13, 1787, a. 72]. »o-

1. Sarah, b. June 20, 1745 [m. Dr. Caleb Perkins of t^— :

HartfordJ. J®™>

2. A son, b. Feb. 27, 1746-7 [d. same month]. 1 7.'

3. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 17, 1747-8 fd. youn^. T*»««i

4. John, b. Apr. ij. 1750; d. at Detroit, 1831. J CSS'

5. Lucy, m. Rev. Air. Langdon of Danbury.]

Lyman L. Trumbull from Milford m. •

Sarah J. Bronson, d. of Anson, Jan. 24, J^®*

1842. 17

X. Jane Sophrona, b. Feb. X4, 1844; d. 1845. Johl

2. Jane Grace, b. Sept. 28, 1846. St

Mrs. Charlotte Tucker, a. 28, d. Mch. 3, Josl

1840.' ve

Eunice Tucker m. John C. Booth, 1840. ia:

17

Deborah Tuller m. Asa Porter, 1765. '

Elizabeth Turner m. J. H. Guernsey, 2!

1829. 3-

Jediah Turner m. his second wife Rachel 5!

Thomson, Apr. 5, 1760. loi

William, b. Apr. 6, 1761. _ - ,

Thomas, b. Dec. 6, 1762. Ma

I.
2.

3.

140 AP

niSTORT OF WATERBURT,

TUTTLE. TWITCHELL.

Martha Tuttle m. Nathl. Welton, 1764.

Mary Tuttle m. John Brown, 1760.

Melisse Tuttle m. John A. Smith, 1842.

Noah Tuttle m. Thankful Royce, d. of
Capt. Phineas, June 6, 1771.

1. Andrew, b. Nov. 19, 1772.
3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 5, 1775.

3. Sar>', b. Mch. 3, 1777.

4. Phineas, b. Sept. 8, 1779.
Orrimon (?), b. Jan. 31, 178a.*
Noah Pangman, b. July 16, 1787.
Cloc, b. Mch. 13, 1789.

Obed Tuttle and Liicretia:

Lauren, Eben Clark, Leonard, and Philemon,
bap. July 8, i8ax.*

Polly Ann Tuttle, d. of Daniel, dec'd,
was b. Mch. 6, 1800. The above, re-
corded at the request of Mr. David
Hungerford.

Polly Tuttle m. Henry D. Upson, 1838.

Rebekah Tuttle m. Benj. Benham, 1790.

Rebecca M. Tuttle m. Orrin Byington,

1832.

Rebecca A. Tuttle m. David Hull, 1838.

Rollin Tuttle m. Emeline Higgins— both
of Wolcott— July iS, 1832.

Stephen Tuttle, s. of Jabez, m. Anner
Judd, d. of John of Watertown, Apr.
19, 1796.

1. Amanda, b. Mch. 30, 1797.

2. John Nelson, b. Aug. 8, 1801 [burned to death

in the Tudd house] .

3. Pamela, b. Mch. 6, 1804.

4. Sarah, b. Mch. 29, 1806.

5. Mary Anner, b. Mch. 16, 1808.

Tabitha Tuttle m. Josiah Bronson, 1780.

Timothy Tuttle m. Mehitable Royce,
July 7, 1768.

1. Amos, b. Scot. 13, 1770.

2. Miriam, b. June 20, 177a.

3. Truman, b. May 21, 1774.

4. Nancy, b. May 11, 1780.

5. Jared, b. May 15, 1782.3

6. Content, b. July 3, 1784.

Vincent Tuttle, s. of Wooster, m. Mary
Hitchcock, d. of Joash of Hartland,
Oct. 25, 1824,

William Tuttle m. Taphar Castle, Aug.

8, I7f>5.
I. Arad, b. Apr. 30, 1766.

Wooster Tuttle m. Mercy Baldwin, Oct.
3, 1802.

1. St. Vincent, b. Jan. 15, 1804.

2. Zophar, b. Jan. 6, 1806.

3. Damaris L., b. Mch. 19, 1808.

4. Julia, I

and Vb. Aug. 26, z8jo;

5. Julius, 1 d. Nov., 1810.

Fanny Twitchell m. Geo. Hoadley, 1841.

Isaac Twitchell m. Deborah Alcox,
Mch. 27, 176S.

1, Joseph, b. July 15, 1769 [m. Electa Hopkins,
and Phebe Atkins].

Twitchell.

Upson.

a. Mary, b. June 29, 1773 [m. John Norton]^

3. Deborah, b. Aug. 14, 1775; m. Ebenezer Frisbie.

Isaac d. Feb. 12, 1776, and Deborah m.
Wait Hotchkiss.

Alma Tyler m. Elias Porter, 1792.

Charles Reuben Tyler from Cheshire m.
Betsey Warner, d. of David, Oct. 2,

1843.

X. David, b. May 14, 1847.

Corydon J. Tyler from New York m.
Lois Fowler, May 3, 1851.

Daniel Tyler d. May 21, 1794.

Daniel Tyler [s. of Daniel, above] m.
Mehitable Tyler, Dec. 17," 1770.

1. Joseph, b. Apr. 12, 1773; d. Dec. 14, 1776.

2. Mehitable, b. Dec. 24, 1774; d. Dec. 14, 1776.

Mehitable d. Feb. 9, 1776, and Daniel,
Jr., m. Mercy Osborn, July 2, 1778.

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 23, 1779.

4. Mehitable, b. Nov. 22, 1780.

5. Phebe, b. Jan. 16; d. Feb. 23, 1783.

6. Joseph, b. and d. June 3, 1785.

7. Joseph, b. July 24, 1786; d. Sept., 1790.

8. Eli, b. Aujr. IX, 1789.

9. Phebe, b. Apr. 19, 1793.

Ebenezer Tyler m. Anna Beebe, d. of
Simeon, Jan. 16, 1771.

Enos Tyler d. June 2, 1804, a. 69. •

Esther Tyler m. Asa Hoadley, 1785.

Eunice Tyler m. Nathl. Hoadley, 1780.

Hannah Tyler m. Elijah Welton, 1769.

James Tyler, s. of Daniel, m. Anne Hun-
gerford, d. of David, Nov. 21, 1763.

I. Rossel, b. Sept. 3, 1764.

Lyman Tyler d. Oct. 4, 1836, a. 70.

Mary Tyler, wid., d. Nov. 20, 1806, a.
72.»

Phineas Tyler:*

Rufus, and Eldad Simons, bap. June 8, x8oo.
Lucy, bap. June 3, 1804.

Richard Tvler m. Flora Tylor (Taylor?)
— both of Prospect — Apr. 18, 1830^

Sarah Tyler m. Jesse Welton, 1770.

Spencer Tyler, s. of Ichabod, m. Sarah
Farrel, d. of Zebah— both of Prospect
— Nov. 7, 1827.

Allen Umberfield, b. in Woodbridge,
Mch. II, 1788, m. in 1812, Sena San-
ford, b. in Milford, Apr. 23, 1791.

1. Norris, b. Tuly 11, 1813.

2. Willis, b. Apr. 26, 1815.

3. William, b. Apr. 18, 1821.

William Umberfield, s. of Allen, m.
Mary Ann Morris, Feb. 8, 1842.

I. Franklin, b. Oct. lo, 1843.

Benjamin Upson, s. of Stephen, m. Nov.
17, 1743, Mary Blakeslee [b. in New
Haven, Jan. 29, 1726-7], d. of Moses.

X. Ruel, b. June 12, 1744.

2. Susanna, b. Jan. 22, 1745-'' F"™- '^cn. Gaylord],

FAMILY EEOK

Upson. Upson. Ups

3. Lois, b. May la, 1748; in. Israel Tyrrell. H

4. Joseph, b. May s, 1750. -e

5. BeDjamin, b. July 3, 1752.

6. Tesc, b. Nov. a8, 1754; d. Mch. 28, 1755. i.

7. Jesse, b. May 25, 1756 [m. Ruth Bronson]. 2.

8. Noah, b. Sept. 26, 1758. 3,

9. Ashbel, b. Apr. 25, 176a. Tohl
10. Mary, b. June 22, 1765. J^"'
IX. Sarah, b. July 23, 1768. J^^

Benjamin Upson, s. of Benj., m. Mary '^

Clark, relict of Thomas, Jan. 24, 1780. \

[She d. June 13, 1816, a. 74; he, Mch. 3'.

12, 1824, a. 72.] 4.

z. Stephen, b. June xa, 1783. g

Benjamin Upson m. Luanna Bunnel of

Southington, June 26. 1832. J*

[Rev.] Benoni Upson, s. of Thomas, m. Jose

Leava Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Aug. 6, fo;

1778. 13

Caroline Upson m. Isaac Houghton,
1833.

N<

X.

a.

X.

a.

Charles Upson [s. of Thomas] m. Weal- j^g^
thy Hopkins, May 26, 1773. She d. ^j
Dec. 28, 1783. p^

X. Washington, b. Sept. 2, 1775. j -.1,

2. Lee, b. May 7, 1778. *-*'**

3. Gates, b. July 18, 1780. \^0\\

Charles Upson, s. of Horatio, m. Emma Luc
Clark, d. of William, dec'd, Jan. 15, j^
1823 [who d. the same year, a. 23].

Charles Dwight Upson, s. of Samuel W. , t
m. Martha A. Ilotchkiss, d. of David «
of Bethany, Oct. 30, 1843. g

I. Martha Ellen, b. Nov. 12, 1844; d. Apr. X7, 1846. -^

Daniel Upson [s. of Stephen, m. Mary ^\
Adams, d. of Samuel, Nov., 1796.] ^

1. Stephen, b. May 8, 1797; d. Dec. 6, 1822. .

2. Alvin, b. Dec. 4, 1798 ^J

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 16, 1801. tl

4. Minerva, b. Mch. 10, 1803; d. June 16, 1805.

5. Polly Maria, b. Dec. 29, 1805; d. Jan. X9, 1807.

6. William, b. Nov. i, 1807.

7. Merlin, b. Feb. 28, 1810.

8. Sarah Maria, b. Nov. 19, 1813; m. David Soraert.

9. Thomas Clark, b. Dec. 20, 18 19. . Rei

Mary d. June 29, 1830 [and Daniel m. ^
Phebe Kirtland, Sept. 4, 1831]. ^

Eunice Upson m. S. M. Morris, 183 1.

Ezekiel Upson, s. of Joseph, dec'd, m. ««
Mary Bronson, d. of Andrew. ^

5. Ethelinda, b. Apr. 26, 1786. ^

Fidelia Upson m. Lucius Odell, 1837.

Henry D. Upson, s. of Selah of Wolcott,
m. Polly Tuttle, d. of Abram [Apr. 25,
1838].

X. Elliott Abraham, b. Dec. 9, 1840.
a. Emilyett, b. May 31, 1846.

Horatio Upson :^

Frederic, Lucy, and George, bap. Nov. 3, 1822.

Jesse Upson, b. May 22, 1809, s. of Sa
Mark, m. June 26, 1838, Esther L.

142 Ap

HISTORY OF WAJ'EBBURT.

Upson. XJ bson.

1820, S. Maria Stevens, b. Nov. 20,
1802, d. of Oliver.

1. Charles Dwiii^ht, b. Aug:. 20, xSax.

2. Albert S., b. Mch. x6, 1823.

3. Emeline Maria, b. Dec. 5, 1824; "i- Franklin

Downs.

4. Clark W., b. Nov. 6, i8a6.

5. M. Ashmun, b. Nov. 23, 1838.

6. Ambrosia M., b. Nov. 29, 1830.

Ye account of Stephen Ubson's of Water-
bury marriage with ye birth of his
children given by him.
Stephen Upson of Waterbury was mar-
ried to maRy Lee ye daughter of John
lee senior of^farmington decem :2s -.1682.

May their z born Mary was born november ye : 5 :

(1683); ra. Richard Wclton.
17 their a Stephen was born September ye : 30

(1686)
tToi their 3 Elizabeth was born Febcwary ye : 14

(1689-90); m. Thomas Bronson.
their 4 Thomas was born March ye : 1 (1692)
their 5 Hannah was bornabouKht march ye : 16 :

(1695)* ro. Thomas Richards and John Bron-
son.
their 6 Tabitha was born : march : ye : xi :

(1698) m. John Scovill.
their 7 John was bom December ye : 13 (1702)
their 8 thankfull was born march : 14 =» 1706-7;

m. James Blakeslce.

Mary Upson, wife of the above named
Stephen Upson died Feb. 15, 171 5- 16.
[He d. 1735.]

Stephen Upson, s. of Stephen (above),
m. Sarah Brounson, d. of Isaak, Feb.

26, 1713.

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 8; d. May xx. X714.

2. Sarah, b. July 26, 1715: m. Gideon Hikcox.

3. Stephen, b. Dec. 9, 1717.

4. Joseph, I d. Aujf. 5, 1749.

and _ Vb. Aug. 4, 1720.

5. Benjamin, \

6. Mary, b. May 2, 1724; m. Samuel Porter.

7. Ebenezer, i d. Aui?. 5, 1749.

and >-b. Sept. 29, 1727.

8. Thankful, ) ra. febenezer Johnson.

9. Jemima, b. Apr. 8, 1730; d. Nov. 13, 1736.
10. Hannah, b. Sept. 28, 1735; m. Jesse Sperry.

Sarah d. 1748, and Stephen m. Eliza-
beth, wid. of James Prichard, Nov. 28,
1750. He d. Sept. 10, 1777 [she, in

1797].

Stephen Upson, s. of Stephen (above), m.
Sarah Clark, d. of Thomas (2d), Jan.
14, 1749-50. Stephen, Esq., d. Mch.

27, 1769. [Sarah d. Sept. 29, 18 13, a.
90.]

1. Mary, b. Nov. 21, T750; d. Sept. 25. 1757.

2. Olive, b. Feb. 18, 1753; m. Isaiah Prichard.

3. Ebenezer, b. Aug. 17, 1755; d. Sept. 20, 17^7.

4. Stephen, b. Sept. 12, 1758 [shot in New York,

1776; a Rev. soldier].

5. Esther, b. Sept. 21, 1760; m. Asahel Bronson.

6. Sarah, b. July 15, 1763 fm. Stephen Gilbert].

7. Mark, b. Feb, 20, 1766 [m. Susanna Allen, and

d. ^ulv, i8j-)J.

8. Dantel, b. Mch. 9, 1769.

Thomas Ubson, s. of Stephen, m. Rachill
Judd, d. of Deac. Thomas, Jan. 28,
1718-19.

Ubson. Waldon.

1. Thomas, b. Dec. 20, 1719.

2. Mary, |

and >-b. Jan. 21, 1721.

3. John, ) d. June 5, 1741.

4. Josiah, b. Jan. 28, 1724-5.

5. Asa, b. Nov. 30, 1728.

6. Timothy, b. Oct. 8, 1731.

7. Amoz, b. Mch. 17, X734.

8. Samuel, b. Mch. 8, 1737.

9. Freeman, b. July 24, 1739; d. July 19, 1750, and

his mother d. the same day.

Thomas Upson, s. of Thomas of Farm-
ington, m. Hannah Hopkins, d. of
Capt. Timothy, dec'd. May 28, 1749.
She d. June 6, 1757.

X. Benoni, b. Feb. 14, x 749-50.

a. Charles, b. Mch. 18, 1752.

3. Silva, b. June 7, 1756; d. Sept. 5, 1764.

Timothy Upson m. Mercy M. Holt, Dec.
I, 1833.

Willis Upson, s. of Freeman of South-
ington, m. Hannah E. Wakelee, d. of
Almus, Oct. 9, 1842.

I. Sarah Eliza, b. Nov. 30, 1843.

Hannah d. Jan. 18, 1847, and Willis m.
Julia Ann iJaniels of Harwinton, Apr.
20, 1848.

Abraham Utter (husbandman) and Lydia:

7. Sarah, b. luly 3, 1730.

8. Tat)ez, b. Nov. 7, 1733.
Lydia; m. Thomas Welton.

Cornelius S. Vancleef of Millstone, N. J.,
m. Sarah E. Clark, d. of Elon, May 19,
1845.

Peter Vandebogart m. Electa Osbom,
Apr. 12, 1832.

John Clark Vanduzer from Silver Creek,
N. Y., b. Aug. 30, 1824, and Lucina
Norton from Meriden, b. Sept. 4, 1826,
m. in New Haven, Feb. 8. 1846.

X. Ada M., b. in Poughkeepsie, Aug. a, 1846.

Increase Wade:'

John, b. Nov. 2, 1779.
Polly, b Mch, 2, 1782.
Aaron, b. May 3, 1785.

Joseph Wadsworth, b. Nov. 26, 1821, m
in England, Sept., 1841, Kczia Newton,

b. May 5, 1820.

Charles Buttz, b. Aug. 3, 1846.

Abigail Wait ill. S. C. Fisk, 1839.

Ebenezer Wakelin, s. of James of Strat-
ford, m. Elizabeth Nichols, d. of Joseph,
dec'd, Apr. 30, 1740. [He d. Jan., 1800;
she, Aug. II, 1802, a. 85.]

1. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 28, 1744; m. Joseph Warner.

2. Hannah, b. Oct. 19, 1747; d. July 23, 174^.

3. Hannah, b. Feb. 16, 1751-2; m. Reuben Frisbie.
[David, b. 1754; d. Oct., 1822.]

Hannah E. Wakelee m. Willis Upson,
1842.

Marietta Waldon m. William Moss, 1847.

\

FAMILY BBOOl

"Walker. Warner.

Andrew Walker m. Agnes McLean in
Scotland.

1. Jane, b. in New York, May s, 1844.

2. John Alexander, b. July 8, 1846.

James Walker, s. of James of Scotland,
m. Ann McDougall, June 21, 1843.

1. James, b. in N. Y., July 5, 1844.

2. Ann, b. Mch. a, 1847.

Redmond Walsh, b. Dec. 1805, and
Mary Phelan. b. July, 1806, m. in New
York, Apr., 1841.

X. Richard, b. Dec. 6, 1843.

2. Timothy, b. July 7, 1844.

Jane Wanza m. Isaac R. Castle, 1832.

Arah Ward [of Goshen, 1742; from Rip-
ton, 1746 — and Dinah Towner?]

Aner (Arah>), bap. Oct. 28, 1758.*
[Dinah, m. David Candee.
Eunice, m. Jesse Cady.]

[Richard Ward, .s. of Abel. b. in Wood-
bridge, Sept. 21, 1787, m. Dec. 15, 1811,
Roxana Hoadley, d. of Culpepper.

I. Lewis, b. Sept. ^17, 1812' m. April 19, 1835, Mary
Ann Curtis, and had James Burton, b. 1836.

a. I^uren, b. Dec. 27, 1814: m. Mch. 23, 1840,
Emily Hotchkiss of Bethany.

3. Maria, b. Feb. 11, 1819; m. Ralph Smith, d. of

Philo of Washington.

4. Mary, b. Feb. 17, 1823; ra. D. Gano Potter, and

d. Aug. 2, 1842, leaving a dau. Mary.

5. William, b. Mch. 7, 1825— all b. in Salem So-

ciety.]

Aaron Warner, s. of David, m. Lydia
Welton, d. of Levi, Feb. 12, 1782.

1. Jeremiah, b. Aug. 9, 1782.

2. Arad, b. Nov.- 27, 1784.

Abijah Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim, m.
Rene (Irena) Warner, d. of Obadiah,
Dec. 13, 1764.

1. Garmon, b. Aug. 2, 1765.

2. Lucy, b. Oct. 23, 1766.

3. Agnes, b. Dec. 25, 1769.

4. Rene, b. Oct. xo, 1771.

5. Rebcckah, b. Feb. 34, 1773.

Abraham Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd,
m. Keziah Welton, d. of Richard, Dec.
12, 1734, and d. Nov. 23, 1749.

1. Chads, b. Jan. 18, 1735-6.

2. Levi, b. Mch. 16, 1737-8; d. Apr. 20, 1753.

3. Zuba, b. July 12, 1740; m. Jon. Beebe.

4. Keziah, b. Oct. 6, 1742; m. Zera Beebe.

5. Zilpha, b. May 18, 1745.

6. Daniel, b. Apr. 8, 1748.

Ard Warner, s. of Dr. Benjamin, m.
Elizabeth Porter, d. of Dr. Dan., Jan.
12, 1764 [and d. Apr. 30, 1824.]

X. Joanna, b. Sept. 3, 1764 [m. Rev. Samuel

GunnJ .
a. Lydia, b. Apr. 4, 1766; m. Sam. Alcox.

3. Ephraim, bap. May 15, 1768* [drowned, 1786].

4. Elizabeth, bap. Feb. 11, 1770.

5. [Prudence, b. X772.

6. David, b. Jan. 11, X774.

7. Irena. b. 1776.

8. Ard, D. Oct., 1778.

9. Hannah, b. 1780; m. Anson Warner.
10. Asahel, bap. Jan. a6, 1783.*

I

Waw

XI. (

xa. S

Ard '
Bro
She

X. M

I
a. M

3. El

4. N<

5. Sh

6. Ok
Ml
At

Bela^
of D

[Benji
Chil

De
Be

Jof

Benjai
Kacl
m. E

Be:

£b
Ma
Ra
He
Ha

Thes4

Dr. B

m.

Cole

1772

a.' 1)

3-
4.
5.
6.

7-
8.

9-

10.

R 1

ft' ■■
R I
L 1
B

A I
£ I
E I

XI. A

[Dr. I

min
shoj

175J
Carol

Carol

185:

Chari

Char!
m.
dec

1. 0

2. o

5. ^
Char

144 AP

HISTORY OF WATERBURT.

Warner. Warner.

I Si 9, d. of Elisha and Asenath of
Straitsville.

X. Marion, b. Aug. 6, 1841.

a. Josephine M., b. Oct. 3, 1843.

Charlotte H. Warner m. W. S. Thomp-
son, 1834.

Daniel Warner, s. of Daniel of Farming-
ton [dec'd], m. Mary Andruss, d. of
Abraham, in April. 1693.

I. A aon, b. and d. July,

3. Sarah, b. Jan. 3, 1604-5.

3. A son, b. and d. in Mch., 1695-6.

4. Samuel, b. Sept. 16, 1698.

5. Ebenezer, b. Apr. 11, 1706.

6. Abraham, b. Nov. x6, 1708.

Mary d. Apr. 10, 1709; and Daniel m.
Johanna Richason, d. of Thomas, Apr.

6. 1710. He d. Sept. 13, 1713, and she
m. Isaac Castle of Woodbury.

7. Abigail, b. Feb. zo, 1710-zi fm. Daniel Judsonj.

8. Mary, b. July z6, Z7Z2 [ra. Isaac Tuttle, Apnl,

X73»]-

David Warner J s. of [Dr.] Benjamin, m.
Abigail Harrison, d. of Benjamin, Dec.

II, 1753.

X. Josiah, b. Oct. 6, 1754.
a. Aaron, b. Nov. 24, 1756.

3. Urania, b. Oct. 1, 1758; m. Justus Warner.

4. James Harrison, b. Dec. 18, 1760.

5. Benjamin, b. Nov. 17, Z762.

David, bap. at the house, Feb. 19, i77i.'
[Abigail, b. Feb. Z9, 1770; m. Oliver Todd.
Anna, b. Nov. 32, Z77a; m. Chancey Warner.]

David Warner, s. of Ard. m. Lois Sut-
liff (wid. of Ira Tompkins) from Ply-
mouth, Nov., 1809.

X. Amanda, b. Dec. 29, 1810 [m. J. T. Terry].

a. Vienna, b. Jan. 20, 1815.

3. Betsey, b. Jan. 30, 1818; m. Reuben Tyler.

David Warner m. Betsey Johnson— both
from Humphreys ville, July, 18 19.

I. Sarah Maria, b. Oct. x8, zSso; d. Aug., Z840.
a. Delia, b. July z^, Z823; d. X824.

3. David Dewey, d. Oct. 21, 1825; d. Jan., Z841 —

all b. in HumphreysvilTe.

4. Margaret Eliz., o. in New Haven, Dec. 14, X833.

Ebenezer Warner, s. of John, m. Mary
Welton, d. of Richard, Jan. 22, 1728-9.
She d. Apr. 30, 1747: he, Feb. 16,
1749-50.

1. Stephen, b. June 25, 1730; d. Feb. 24, Z749-50.
a. Dorcas, b. July z, Z732; m. [ Lewis? and]

Amos Scott.

3. Phebc, b. Aug. i, 1735.

4. John, b. Mch. zo, Z739; d. Nov. 8, 1750.

Ebenezer Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd,
m. Martha Scott, wid. [of Edmund]
and d. of John Andrus, in Wat. , Apr.
i8, 1734.

z. Jemima, b. July a, Z735.

2. Benajah, b. Tan. Z7, 1737-8; d. Dec. Z7, Z74Z-2.

3. Benajah, b. Jan. 8, Z74i-a.

Ebenezer Warner, s. of Ephraim, m.
Elizabeth Brounson, d. of Thomas,
Apr. 2, 1740.

Warner.

Warner.

z, Noah, b. Nov. 2z, 1740; d. Apr. 6, Z759.

2. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 17, Z742; d. Dec. 2z, Z746.

3. Margret, b. Oct. 16, Z744; m. Rich. Welton.

4. Eben, b. Jan. z6, Z747-8; d. Aug. Z3, 1750.

5. Jemima, b. Nov. 5, Z749; d. Nov. 7, Z751.

6. Annis, b. Mch. 2Z, Z752.

7. Elizabeth, b. Mch. Z7, Z754; m. Ard Welton.

8. Justus, b. Mch. 27, Z756.

9. Mark, b. Dec. 22, Z757.

zo. Jemimah, b. May Z7, Z76Z.

[Ebenezer m. his second wife, Damaris
Finch, wid. of Dr. Ichabod Foote, who
d. Apr. 15, 1797, a. 71. He d. Oct. 5,
1805, a. 94.]

Edward Warner m. Hannah Adams [d.
of Andrew], Apr. 15, 1824.

Elijah Warner, s. of Deac. John, was
mar. to Esther Fenn, d. of lliomas. by
Mr. Andrew Stores, v. m., Nov. 19,
1767. [He d. June, 1834; she, 1826.]

z. Lvman, b. May 22, Z768 [m. Annis Welton].
a. Chancey, b. June 5, Z770 [m. Anna Warner, d.
of David, Z703].

3. Rosetta, b. Feo. 25, Z773 [m. Talmajj;e.

Elijah. Apollos, m. Chloe Wilcox of Simsbury.]

Emma Warner m. Almon Farrel, 1826.

Enos Warner m. Lydia Williams, Apr.
28, 1769.

z. Jotham, b. Apr. 22, Z770.

2. Asa, b. Dec. 2z, Z77Z.

3. Lydia, b. Mch. za, Z774.

4. James, b. Mch. 24, Z776.

Ephia Warner, s. of Ephraim, m. Eliza-
beth Perkins of New Haven, Jan. 8,

1774.

X. Ephraim, b. July 3, Z774 [m. Tryphena Leaven-
worth; and d. z8z5.J

Dr. Ephraim Warner [b. 1670], s. of
John, m. Esther Richards, d. of Oba-
diah— booth of* Wat. — Aug. 16, 1692.
He dyed in Aug., 1753, in ye 84th year
of his age.

Apr. X. .Marpit, b. in Feb.; d. in Mch^ '693.

20, a. Ephraim, b. Oct. 29, Z695; d. Dec., Z704.

X703. 3. Benjamin, b. Sept. 30, 1698.

4. John, b. June 24, Z700.

5. Obadiah, b. Feb. 24, Z702-3.

[The last two bap. in Woodoury, May 23, Z703.
Probate records also mention Kl>enezer.
Ephraim, and Elsther, w. of Nathaniel
Merrills.]

Ephraim Warner, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin,
m. Lidda Brown, d. of Samuel, dec'd,
Mch. 30, 1760. [He d. May 25, 1S08, a.
70; she, July 20, 1815.]

Ephraim Warner, s. of [Dr.] Ephraim
m. Elenor Smith, d. of William of
Farmington, Feb. 14, 1739. Dr. Eph-
raim d. Nov. 5, 1768.

I. William, b. Sept. Z3, 1740.

a. Abijah, b. Jan. 5, z 742-3.

3. Rebeckah. b. June Z5, Z745; m. Barnabas Scott.

4. Epha, b. Apr. 29, Z748.

5. Seth, b. Oct. 4, Z750; d. Oct. 23, X75Z.

6. Seth, b. Jan. 15, Z753.

7. Elinor, b. Sept. 28, Z757; m. Jesse Tuttle.

8. Elsther, b. Mch. 30, Z760.

FAMILY BECOh

Warner. Warner.

Hzra J. Warner from Pittsfield m. So-
phia Morgan, d. of Walter of Amenia,
N. Y., Nov. I, 1840.

1. Helen, b. July xo, 1841.

a. Sarah Adelaide, b. Mch. 25, 1843.
3. Charles Burton, b. May 35, 1845.

Frederick A. Warner of Pittsfield m.
Ann M. Stanley, June 14, 1846.

Garrett P. Warner was mar. to Eunice
Terrill by Rev. Mr. Barlow (between
Jan. 20, and Apr. 3), 1831.

George Warner, s. of Hermon of New-
town, m. Julia, d. of Joseph Davis
Wei ton, Oct. 19, 1826.

X. Catharine E., b. July 20, 1828.
a. Juliette S., b. Dec. 6, 1829.

Hannah Warner m. Augustus Fox, 1839.

Hannah Warner m. Dan. Hubbard, 1842.

Harriet Warner m. Thomas Stow, 1835.

James Warner, s. of [Deac] John, m.
Eunice Dutten, Jan. i, 1761. [She d.
Mch. 7, 1815, a. 76; he, May 27, 1819,
a. 81.]

X. Sarah, b. Oct. 12, X76X.

a. Noah, b. Aur. 15, 1763 [d. Sept. 18, iSso].

3. Lucinde, b. Sept. 20, 1765; m. Elijah Hotchkiss.

4. Eunice, b. Apr. 3; d. Au>j. qo, 1769.

5. James, b. Jan. 25, 177X; d. Jan. 15, 1773.

6. Eunice, b. May 31, X773 [m. Eli TerryJ.

7. James, b. Nov. i, 1775.

Capt. James s Polly, bap. July 18, 1780.8

Jared Warner, b. Oct. i6, 1785. s. of
Mark, and Mary Bronson, b. May 3,
1785, d. of Levi, m. Aug., 1803.

X. Amanda, b. Nov. 19, 1804; m. Wesley Bronson.

2. Levinus Bronson. b. Aug. 12, 1809.

3. Olive Caroline, b. Nov. i, 181 1 [in. James Con-

verse],

4. Mary Anna, b. Dec. 8, 1828; m. C. I. Pierpont.

• [Dr.] John Warner [b. Mch. i, 1670], s.
of John, m. Rebeckah Richason, a. of
Thomas, Sept. 28, 1698. She d. Aug.
I, 1748; he, Mch. 3, 1751.

X. Tabitha, b. July 22, X699 [bap. at Woodbury],

2. Kebeckah, b. Nov. 24, X703 [bap. at Woodbury,

July 9, X704] m. Sam. Thomas, and Caleb
Clark.

3. Ebenezer, b. Tune 24, 1705.

4. Lidiah, b. Feb. 23. 1706-7.

5. John, b. [at Stratford] Mch. 31, X7X7.
Tapher, m. Isaac Castle, 1^23.
Mary; m. Ebenezer Baldwm, 1736.
Sarah; m. Samuel Renolds, 1742.

John Warner, s. of f^r.] Ephraim, m.
Esther Scott, d. of David, Dec. 17, 1724.
Esther d. Feb. 18, 1726-7, and John m.
Mary Hikcox, d. of Thomas, Oct. 3,
1728.

1. Esther, b. Sept. xx, 1729; d. Nov. 4, 1730.
a. Phebe, b. Jan. 8, X731-2.

3. Annise, b. Jan. 13, X734-5; m. Ebenezer Curtis

and Noah Blakeslee.

4. Tames, b. Dec. xi, 1737.

5. Mary, b. Oct. 9, X74a; d. Apr. 2x, 1745.

6. Elijah, b. Mch. 21, 1745-6.

7. John, b. Oct. 14, X749.

15 •

Warn

[Deac

Reb
Mos
1760

X. El
a. El

3. Be

4. Eb

5. Jo

6. M(

John

ther

Nov

X. Ch
a. Ms

3. Eli

4. Aa

5. Ra

6. Ab

7. Da

John^

m. I

d. ii

X. El

2. Ly

3. Li

4. Si<

5. B<

Josep!

bet!
1762

1. Sfl :
2.

3-

[Eli!
dah
Mel.
180^ ,
4. O i

L i
£ .

Josiai

Str; \
Jan (

175' ;

X. 0 i

Josia

Pri. I

X. E

2. A \

^■\ '

4. A t

[' I

Justv

W2

X. C )

2. I

3. / :

Leos

d. I

[ai

)e1

2, !
I. < :

eo

I

146^

HIS TOE r OF WATERS URT.

Warner. Warner.

Lydia Warner m. Stephen Judd, 1751.
Mark Warner* [d. Oct. 25, 1815]:

Elizabeth, bap. Nov. xo, 1782.
Noah, bap. Sept. 5, 1784.

Nancy Warner m. L. D. Frisbie, 1831.

NancjT Warner [d. of Reuben, and Lu-
cretia Porter] m. Smith Beers, 1834.

Nelson Warner d. July 13, 1846, a. 43.*

Noah Warner m. Esther Hull, d. of Dr.
Benjamin.

Betsey, b. Apr. 5, 1787.'*
Lauren, b. July 17, 1789.

Obadiah Warner, s. of Ephraim, m.
Sarah Lewis, d. of Joseph, Feb. i,
1726-7.

I. Jerusha, b. Dec. 13, 1727; m. Aaron Harrison.
a. Lydia, b. June 6, 1729; m. Thomas Welton, and
Dr. Preserved Porter.

3. Obadiah, b. June 20, 1731; d. June 25, 1750.

4. Esther, b. Nov. 9, 1733; d. Feb., 1746.

5. Joseph, b. Oct. 23, 1735.

6. Lois, b. Mch. 30, 1738; m. Asa Scovill.

7. Enos, b. Aug. 11, 1740; d. Sept. i, 1740.

8. Sarah, b. Fcd. 21, 1742-3; m. A. Tcrrill.

9. F.lloner, b. Jan. 13, 1744-5; ro- Samuel Hikcox.

10. Agnes, b. Feb. 24, 1747; d. Jan. 13, 1759.

11. Irena, b. July, 1749; m. Abijah Warner.

12. Mary, b. Aug. 6, 1751.

Obadiah Warner, s. of Joseph, m. Polly
Welton, d. of Reuben, Oct. 12, 1794,
and d. Sept. 16, 1845. a. 76.

1. Ransom, b. May 6, 1795.

2. Melinda, b. Mch. i, 1797.

3. Eri, b. Mch. I, 1799 [d. June 20, i8oiJ.

4. Eri W., b. May 9, 1801.

5. Nelson, b. Feb. 16, 1803.

6. Reuben, b. Feb. 36, 1805.

7. Roxana. b. Dec. 15. 1806; m. Burritt Judsoo.

8. Richard Lewis, b. Jan. 12, 1809.

9. Polly, b. Aug. 13, 181 1 ; m. Isaac Newton.

10. Bela, b. Sept. 28, 18 13.

11. Philomela, b. Apr. 21, 1816.

12. Marietta, b. Oct. 5, 18 18.

13. Caroline, b. Nov. 27, 1821; m. E. S. Lane, and

Nathan Fenn.

Olive Warner m. Riley Alcott, 18 10.

Ozias Warner, s. of Tosiah, dec'd, m.
Tamer Nichols, d. of Richard, Oct. 9,
1770.

1. Becca, b. Apr. 16, 1771.

2. Eunice, b. in the Kings District in the County

of Albany, Apr. 2, 1773.

3. James, b. Oct. 18, 1774.

4. Anson, b. Aug. 9, 1778 [d. Apr. 14, 1813].

5. Tamer, b. Aug. 13, 1780.

6. Lydia, b. Mch. 14, 1782.

7. David, b. Feb. 20, 1784.

8. Levi, b. Feb. 14, 1786.

Rev. Ransom Warner m. Polly Austin,
Jan. 5, 1S23.

Samuel Warner, s. of Thomas, Sr., may-
ried Sarah Scott, d. of Edmund, Sr.,
May 12, 1715 [and died, 1741].

The two first, sons, still-born.

3. Mary, b. June 5, or July 5, 1718 [m. Robert

Drakely of Woodbury, July 4, 1751J.

4. Sarah, b. sometime in Sept., or Oct., 1720; ra.

Timothy Warner.

Warner.

Warner.

5. Thomas, b. June 20, or June 5, 1722.

6. Benjamin, b. Oct. 22, or Nov., 1724; d. Apr. «,

1760.

7. Thankfull, ) m. Thomas Hammond.

and Vb. Mch. 16, 1727.

8. Patience, \ d. before 1758, unm.

9. Hannah, b. Aug. 20, or July, 1729; m. Abraham

Adams.

10. Stephen, b. Sept. 30, or Oct. 4, 1731.

11. Phcbc, b. Feb. 6, 1735-6; m. Wait Wooster.

12. Martha, b. July 21, 1738; m. Charles Warner.
(There are two different entries; both ar« given.)

Samuel Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m.
Elizabeth Scott, d. of Edman, in Dec.
21, 1719.

X. Daniel, b. Aug. 27, 1720 [d. at Cape Breton].

2. 1 imothy, b. July 26, 1722.

3. >fathan, b. July 6, 1724.

4. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 26, 1726; m. Zebulon Scott.
[5. Thomas; ace. to Dr. Bronson.J

6. Nathan, b. Dec. 25, 1729.

7. Abigail, b. Nov. 15, 1732; m. George Scott.

8. Hulda, b. May 17, 1734; m. Thomas Warner

and Sam. Williams.

9. Enos, b. June 4, 1736.

10. Susanna, b. Aug. 3, 1738; m. Ephraim Bissell

and Abial Roberts.

11. Samuel, b. Jan. 10, 1741-2.

Samuel Warner, s. of Samuel (and Eliza-
beth), m. Ame Camp, d. of Abel, May
6, 1760.

1. Lcvinah, b. Sept. 16, 1761.

2. Antha, b. Feb. 25, 1764.

3- 5?***^f7,TJ)ede) b. July 5, 1766.
4. 1 hankful, b. July 8, 1768.

Samuel Warner of Plymouth m. Mary
Maria Brown, Dec. 24, 1832.

Sarah Warner m. Benjamin Hikcox,

1783.
Seth Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim, dec'd,

m. Irene Parker, d. of John, Dec. 25,

1772.

I. Esther, b, July 11, 1773.

Stephen Warner, s. of Samuel (of
Thomas) m. Phebe Baldwin, d. of
James of Derby, Nov. 13, 1754. He d.
Nov., 1812, a. 81; she, June 22, 1824, a.
97.*

1. Millesent, b. Oct. 27, 1755; m. Abel Sperry [and

Joseph Porter].

2. Roxana, b. Apr. 13, 1757; m. Francis Porter.

3. Bede, b. July 6, 1761.

4. Diana, b. Jan. 4, 1764.

5. Anna, b. Nov. 11, 1765.

6. Arbe, b, Apr. 13, 1768.
[Stephen, b. 1770.J

7.(?> Reuben, b. Oct. 11, 1773.

Stephen Warner, Jr., s. of Stephen
(above), m. Sarah Smith, d. of John,
Mch., 1792. [He d. Nov., 1825, a. 55;
she, Mch., 1847, a. 74.]

I. Baldwin, b. June 29, 1793 [d. in the South.
Sally, b. Ian., 1795; m. Thomas Porter,
Clarissa, b. 1798; m. Giles Hotchkiss.
Reuben, d. in Canada.
Minerva, b. 1801. Garry, b. 1803.
Mary. Benjamin. Stephen C.J

Stephen C. Warner [s. of Stephen], b.
Nov. 18, 1815, and Letetia Combs of

FAMILY RBCOl

Warner. Way.

Southwick, Mass., b. Mch. 17, 1818, m.
in Wolcottville, Sept., 1841.

1. Charles Stephen, b. Jan. 19, 1843.

2. Mary Letetia, b. Men. 17, 1845.

Thomas Warner and Elizabeth ; children:

[Elizabeth, m. Samuel Chatterton.
Benjamin, of New Haven.]

Those of them that were b. in Wat. :

4. John (tailor), b. Mch. 6. 1680-1.

5. Mary, b. Dec. 9, 1682; a. June 7, 1705.

6. Martha, b. Apr. i, 1684; m. John Andrus.

7. Thomas, b. Oct. 38, 1687 [m. Abigail Barnes] .

8. Samuel, b. Mch. 16, 1690.

9. Margaret, b. Mch. 16, 1693; m. Ebenezer Richa-

son.

Thomas died Nov. 24, 1714.

Thomas Warner, s. of Samuel, dec'd
(and Sarah), m. Huldah Warner, d. of
Sam., Jan. 16, 1753. He d. Apr. 5,
1753, and Huldah m. Samuel Williams,

1754.

Thomas Warner, late from England, m.
Mrs. Martha Arnst, July 22, 1832.

Thomas Warner m. Susan Forrest, Oct.
16, 1848.

Timothy Warner, s. of Samuel, m. Sarah
Warner, d. of Samuel, Feb, 25, 1745.

X. Naomi, b. Jan. 4, 1745-6; m. Samuel Webb.

2. Mindwell, b. Aug. 14, 1749.

3. Rosanna, b. Aug, 1, 1753.

4. Lucy, b. Nov. 9, 1755.

5. Jcse, b. Nov. 12, 1757.

6. Keigne, b. Nov. i, 1759.

7. Consider, b. May 19, 1762.

Dr.' William Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim,
m. Mary Chambers, d. of Thomas, Dec.

8. 1762.

X. Austin, b. Dec. x6, 1764.
2. Loretta, b. Jan. 30, X767.

Wooster Warner, b. July 24, 1809, s. of
Herman of Newtown, m. Oct. 7, 1832,
Nancy Fenn Tomlinson, b. Oct. 17,
181 1, d. of Beach of Plymouth.

Mary Jane Darrow, d. of Leonard F. of New
Haven, b. in Mch. 1834— an adopted child.

Lyman Warren and Abigail:

Edward, Nancy, Samuel, Delia, Emeline, Jan-
ette, bap. Mch. 31, 1833.1

Asahel Watrous of Chester m. Adelia
Fenn of Middlebury, Nov. 10, 1839.

B. Pier son Watrous m. Sarah H. Lea-
venworth [d. of William, Jr.] — both of
Albany, N. Y. — Oct. 6, 1839.

Polly Watrous m. John Painter, 1786.*

William Wattles of Bethlehem m. Fran-
ces A. Biscoe, Apr. 26, 1840.

Delia M. Waugh m. Luther Pierpont,
18 14.

Abigail Way m. Eben. Allen, 1756.

Abigail Way m. Thomas Richason, 1756.

Way.

£ben<

Sco'

L^
S^

Hann;

Isaac

Pitt

[May
Reb
Just
mm

Samui

1761

1. Sa

2. Ai
3- Be

4. Sa

5. P^

6. Ja

7. Ai

Samu

^

Thom

For

X. T

2. EI

3. A

4. E

6. T

8. D

9. T

Danic

20,

Jonat I

I77< .
Josep I
D01
d. J ;
1. fl

a. «

Marg I

Reub

m. \
28,

1. s I
a. 1

4. E

Sami !

m.

31,

X. I

Eu i

m.

18,

54t

a.

3- '
4-

BIBTOST Of WATERS URT.

:. Rtubcn-b. lnn.B.
1. loimh. b. M.y iS,
r. Nathan, b. Feb. i

..78s.

b. and A. Julr 3.. 17B,.

Annie Webster m. Jos, Nichols, 1757.

Elias W. Webster m. Melissa Allen,
Sept. z, 1844.

Hannah Webster m. Jcdiah Turner,
1772.

Lucy Webster m, Preston Hall, 1839.

Rhoda Webster m. Hobert Williams,
1841.

Sarah J. Webster m. G. W. Mitchell.
1S49.

Susaaoa Webster m. David Ailing, iSjg.

WilUaiii W. Webster m. Mary A. See-
ley of Bethany. Apr. IQ, 1S51.

Chauncej Wedg m. Mrs. Polly Salina
Terrelf, Apr. 1, 1833.

Martin C. Wedge, b. Mch. 23, i3io, s. of
Stephen of Warren, m. Chloe U. Far-
rell, d. of Benjamin, Aug. 14. 1831-

Weed. Weltonl

Jonas Weed, s. of John of Derbj-, m.

Joseph Weed, s. of John of Derby, m.

Deborah Moses, d. of John of Syms-
bury, June 5- 1740.

L. Hen

[aU., ■

L Be^hV M.', b. Apr.iB,
5. Polly teve. b. May 17,

[Andrew Weed d. 175

. .3}S-

-:."^Ck%.

J:t^^b,'b.>iv'9;.^,'" "

o. Lydia, b. Mch. 7, 17"^.
10. Mary, b. Stpt. 8, 1766.

John Weed, s, of John of Derby, m.
Allice Clark, d. of Daniel of New
Haven, Sept. 11, 1735-

■. Eliiabmh, b, Dec. ii, i7j6.

a, AmBP. b. MayjS, iMa.
3. M<«9, b Ian. 5, ,7,5-6.
4- Dorou, b. Mch. ig, 1747-a.

Sarah Weed d. Feb. 15, 1747-B. [She was

d. of John Richason, and wTfe of

Samuel Weed, "who lately resided

under covert at Waterbury, being an

outlaw," ace. to Probate rec. Children:

Samuel, d. 175.1 anmamrd. Dand, dead Id

1750. Naihaniel, Dan. Reuben. John at

Little Britain, N. Y. Abel.)

Thankful Weed m. James Cnrtis, 1779.
Rev, Holland Weeks m, Harriot Byron

Hopkins, d. of Moses, Esq., of Great

Harrington, Dec 10, 1799.

B. Jan

CharlotU M. Wells m. Samuel Nichols,

1: Saniue!, John. Jo-
sepb. Jonas, l^iep, ^jcorgei and the en. OI

and'all^<^re ch?^ot John of Derby.]

Caleb Weed, s. of John, dec'd [and Mary
Beeman. d. of Geo,] of Derby, m.
Martha Peck, d. of Mr. Jeremiah. July

Aaron Weltou [s. of Eliakim] m. Zenh
Bronson [d. of Capt. Amos], Jan. 13.

3. Harvey, h. Oct. 18. 1780; d. Feb. 7. 17B1.
,. Harvey Bronion, b. Nov. ,, ,781.
J. lunlni b. July 7, .794.1
6. Leve, b. June 4, 17B6.
Amasa Welton, s. of Stephen, m. Mary
Nichols, d. of Benjamin, Sept. 6, 177a

». Oipha. i>, JuMO, 17711.

4! Chandler, b, Dec, «, I'tSl.
5. Sarah, b. Jan, ....784.
[Arad W. Welton, s. of Benjamin, m,
Sally Smith of Northfield,

Ellen, b. Apr. .7. [S17; m. Chulei Wooster.
outer, b. Aug. 14, t8»; d. Jan.. 1841. t
Andrew b. Aog. .7, >8a3: d. Dec, iS:,.. f

Sludentj at Trinflr CoOefc
Noah K., b. Mcb. ai. iSi^.]
Ard Welton, s. of Oliver, m. Elizabeth
Warner, d. of Ebeneier, Sept. 13, 1773,
and d. July 19, 1803. [She d. Apr.,
18S7-]
I. Annis, b. Sept. 13, 1774 [m. Lyman Warner auj

d. ,844].
.. EfaMuj.b, Aug,6,i776,
3. Margalana. b. Feb. ir " "

FAMILY RBCOl

Welton. Welton.

Ard Welton [s. of Erastus] m. Caroline
Welton [d. of Richard F.], Jan. 25,
1826.

[x. Ma]::garet A^ b. Jan. 4, 1827.
a. Ellen S., b. Oct. 18, 1839.]

Benjamin Welton [s. of Oliver] m. Agnes
Gunn, Aug. 5, 1779. [He d. Aug. 31,
1836, a. 82; she, Feb. 3, 1827, a. 67.]

z. Anne, b. May zo, Z780.
a. Willard, b. Jan. 14, 178a.

3. Abel Gunn, b. Feb. 15, X785.

4. Benjamin Smith, b. Mch. 5, 1791.

5. Arad Warren, b. May i, 1794.

Charles Welton m. Sally M. Judd, May

I, 1834.
Chauncey P. Welton of Wolcott [s. of

Hershel] m. Janett Cleveland of Har-

winton, Nov. 8, 1847.
Dan Welton, s. of George, m. Ann Brus-

ter, d. of Samuel of Lebanon, Apr. 16,

1755. [She d. May 17, 1790, a. 58.]

1. Hannah, b. May za, Z757.

2. Gaal, b. Tuly X5, X759.

3. Martha, o. May a, 1762.

4. Ann Bnister, b. Apr. 22, 1764.

5. Tabitha, b. Aug. X4, X766.

6. Rachel, b. Oct. Z4, 1769.

7. James, b. July x, X772.

David Welton, s. of Ebenezer, m. Sarah
Tuttle, d. of Jabez, June 20, 1781. He
d. July 3, 1827, a. 75.

z. Daniel, b. Nov. 19, X781 [m. Susanna Selkrig]
and d. May 26, 1824.

2. Jabez. b. May 30, 1783.

3. David, b. June 27, X78S [d. Mch. 8, x8x2].

4. Hannah, b. Sept. z8, 1789.

David Welton, s. of Jabez, m. Huldah
Bronson, d. of Joseph of Prospect,
Sept. 16, 1833.

z. Frances E., b. Sept. 2, 1837.

2. Maria P. (or Marion), b. May 8, 1643.

Delia A. Welton [d. of Jared] m. Daniel
B. Clark. 1834.

Ebenezer Welton [s. of John] and
Sarah, m. Mercy Earl, Junr., of East
Hampton, L. I., May 22, 1740.

X. Nathaniel, b. Apr. 4, o. s., X741.

3. Sarah, b. Dec. 5, o. s., 1743.

3. Mercy, b. Sept. xs, o. s., 1746; m. Ezek. Welton.

4. Ebenezer, b. July X4, o. s., i74[9].

5. David, b. July 37, Z75[2].

6. Phebe, b. Apr. xz, Z755; d. Sept. z6, Z777.

7. Daniel, b. June 5, Z760; d. Apr. 22, Z777.

Edward Welton [s. of Richard] m.
Laura W. Brown of Reedsborough,
Vt, Apr. 10, 1825.

Eli Welton, s. of Eliakim, m. Ann Bald-
win, d. of Ebenezer, July i, 1771. He
d. Jan. 2, 1792, a. 46.*

z. Eli, b. Aug. zo, Z773.

3. Asa. b. Nov. 24, X773.

3. Phebe, b. Sept. 29, X775; d. Sept. z6, Z777.

4. Eunice, b. Aug. Z2, Z777 [m. J. H. Waters].

5. Benoni, b. Apr. Z9, 1780.

6. Anna, b. Nov. 7, Z78i.»

7. Ruthe, b. Mch. 6, Z785.

8. Selden, b. May 3Z, 1787.

9. Phebe, b. Nov. 6, Z788.

Welt

Eliak

nic(
1731

1. E

2. E

3. A

4. R

5. E

6. W

7. A

8. B<

9. B

Eliak

An:
176

z. J

2. ]

3- ^

S- J
6. .

7- ^

9. ]

zo. \

Eliali

(ab
Jar

z. c

3. A

4. S

5. S

Elija I
Ty !

23, I

z. I

2. I

3. I

Ephr I

Po:

Fe

c

I I

[J

Eras I

Ch
m.
69.

z. I

2. S

3. i .

4. I

5. I

Ezel I
Me
176

z. I
3. C

Fred
Hs
I,

160AP

HISTORY OF WATERS UBY.

Welton. Welton.

The record of the children of George
Welton, s. of John, sen', and Eliza-
beth [Mallory of Stratford, m. Dec. lo,
1712]. He d. Jan. 7; she, Dec. 20, 1773.

1. Stephen, b. Oct. 97, 1713 (probably in Strat-

ford).

2. Samuel, b. Oct. 20, 1715; d. June 16, 1738.

3. Pcatcr, b. Sept. 28, 1718.

4. Elizabeth, b. May 23, 1721; m. Samuel Hikcoz.

5. Hannah, b. June 11, 1723; m. Samuel Frost.

6. James, b. Oct. 9. 1725.

7. Josiah, b. June xo, 1728.

8. Dan (Daniel, on tax records), b. May 19, 1731.

George H. Welton, b. Apr. 21, 1822, s.
of Ephraim, m. Mary T. Nichols, d. of
Joseph, Jan. 28, 1844.

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 20, 1844.

2. Ella Maria, b. May i, 1846.

George S. Welton, b. Apr. 4, 1804, s. of
Daniel, and gr. s. of David, m. Aug.
29, 1835, Fila C. Smith, b. Sept. 3, 1810,
d. of Marshall.

1. Sarah Lucina, b. May lo, 1837.

2. George Marshall, b. July 15, 1839.

George W. Welton [b. Aug. 26, 1809, s.
of Richard F. of John] m. Harriet
Minor [d. of Archibald] of Wolcott,
Sept. II, 1837.

[i. Harriet Minor, b. May 11, 1839.]

Harriet d. May 26, 1839, a. 27* [and
George m. Dec. 22, 1840, at Berlin,
Mary A. Graham.

2. Mary Elizabeth, b. Sept. 13, 1841.

3. Emily J., b. Aug. 27, 1845.

4. Ellen (Jaroline, b. Sept. 7, 1851].

Hannah A. Welton [d. of Herschel] m.
E. L. Frisbie, 1850.

Hobart [Victory] Welton, s. of Rev.
Joseph D., m. Mary Adeline Richards
rd. of Luther Abijah] from Vermont,
Oct. 28, 1834.

1. Edwin Davis, b. Apr. 4, 1836.

2. Sarah Cornelia, b. Sept. 10, 1839.

Horace Clark Welton, b. Feb. 15, 1801,
s. of Adrian and gr. s. of John, Esq.,
m. June 29, 1823, Sophia Bradley, b.
Apr. I, 1804, d. of Daniel of Plymouth
Bay.

J. William Alonzo, b. Dec. 20, 1824.
2. Frederic Alonzo, b. Apr. 8, 1827.

Horace P. Welton, s. of Nathaniel, m.
Julia Ann Finch, d. of Asahel, Nov. 23,
1823.

1. Edwin Austin, b. June 27, 1824.

2. Augustus Peck, b. Mch. 16, 1826.

3. James Horace, b. Mch. i6, 1829.

Julia d. May i, 1830, and Horace m.
Susan Amelia Hitchcock, d. of Samuel
of Prospect, Nov. 13, 1831.

4. Julia Amelia, b. Dec. 23, 1832.

5. David Frederic, b. Sept. 26, 1834.

6. Stella Maria, b. Mch. 9, 1838.

7. Nelson Clark, b. Nov. 17, 1840.

8. Mary Eliza, b. Dec. 15, 1843.

9. William Nathaniel, b. Apr,, d. June, 1846.

Welton. Wklton.

Irena Welton m. J. M. Granniss, 1838.

Jabes Welton, s. of David, m. Betsey
Moore of New Haven [and d. Sept. 25,
1850].

X. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 22, 1805.

a. [Rebecca], b. Jan. 27, 1809; m, Tyler Brooaoa
and Lucius Beach.

3. David, b. Aug. 26, x8ia.

4. Polly [b. Aufr. 6, 18x3] m. Comelins Mansoa.
[5. Deac. Francis, b. Jan. 26, 18x7.]

James Welton, s. of George, m. Mary
Prichard, wid. of Joseph, late of Md-
ford, Dec. 26, 1763. She d. Nov. 17.
1807; a°d ^e» May 19, 181 2.

Jared Welton's wife [Philomela Norton]
d. May 12, 1843, a. 88.

Jennet Welton m. Eric Scott, 183 1.

Jerusha Welton m. Benjamin Pitcher,
1777.

Jesse Welton, s. of Stephen, m. Sarah
Tyler, d. of Isaac of Wallingford, Dec
13. 1770.

X. Parthena, b. July 4, 1772.
a. Abigail, b. Nfch. 5, 1774.
3. Enos, b. Sept. ^, 1776.

Jesse, b. Men. x6, i763.>

Sarah, b. Aug. 37, X784.

The Record of the children of John and
Mary Welton Se*^ of ye: Children that
were bom In Waterbury:

Their seventh child a son Richard bom s&mu^
tinte in March ^ x68o.
9. Hannah, b. Apr. i, X683 [m. Thomas Sqnires,

J'-]
xo. Thomas, b. Feb. 4, X684-5.

XX. George, b. Feb. 3, 1686-7 [was bonnd oat to his
brother Stephen to learn the weaver's trvide] .

xa. Else, b. sometime in Aug., 1690 Tm. Grimn

of Simsbury. Was she '* Else Jones of Wa.t."
in X74a ?

Children bom (at Parmington ?)

X. Abigail, m. Cornelius Bronson, X69X.
3. Mary, m. John Richards, X693.

3. Elizabeth, m. Thomas Griffin of Simsbury; was

a widow in 1736, and d. 1733.

4. John. 5. Stephen. The sixth and eighth,

probably died young.]

John d. June 18, 1726; his wife, Oct, iS,
1716.

John Welton, s. of John, m. Sarah Buck,
d. of Ezekiel, Jr., of Wethersfield, Mch.
13, 1706. She d. Sept. 6, 1751 [he, in
1738].

1. John, b. Jan. 24, X706-7.

2. Ezekeill, b. Mch. 4, 1709 [went to Nora Sco-

tia].

3. George, b. Aug. x6, 17XX.

4. Ebenezer, b. Aug. 3X, X7X3.

5. Mary, b. Jan. 36, 17x6; d. Jan. 5, X7XS-X9.

6. Thomas, b. Feb. 23, X7x8.

7. Mary, b. Oct. xo, X730; m. Samuel Earla.

8. Rachel, b. Dec 10, X723; m. Abel Camp.

9. Oliver, b. Dec. X4, X734.
xo. Silence, b. Dec. 34, 1737.

John Welton, s, of John (above), m.
Elizabeth Hendrick of Fairfield, Feb.
12, 1738-9. She d. Dec. 20, 1773; he.

FAMILY REOOl

Welton. Welton.

Jan. 6, 1780. [The town took his
estate. Feb., 1755, and, by evidence,
cared for him until his death.]

1. Lois, b. Mav 9, 1744 [m. Jacobs.]

2. Luff, b. Men. 9, 1747-8; d. Aug. xi, 1749.

John Welton [Esq.], s. of Richard (and
Anna), m. Dorcas Hikcox, d. of Capt.
Samuel, Jan. 5, 1758 [who d. June 13,
1815; he d. Jan. 22, 1816].

X. Abi, b. Nov. 2, 1758; d. May 14, i8a8.
a. A dau., still- bom.

3. Mary, b. June xo, 1760 [m. Hez. Phelps, and

d. Sept. 6, 181 x].

4. Anne, d. Feb. 11, 1762 [d. May 10, 1803].

5. Titus, b. July 3, X764.

6. Richard Fenton, b. Apr. 17, 1767.

7. John, b. Oct. 28, 1769; d. Dec. i, X776.

8. Dorcas, b. Oct. 29, 1771; d. July 23, 1793.

9. Adrian, b. Feb. X5, X77S [d. Oct. 26, 1804].
10. John, b. Jan. 13, 1778 [d. Apr. a, 18x3].

John S. Welton m. Harriet Thompson of
Norfolk, Sept. 3, 1838.

Joseph Welton, b. Mav 15. 1814, s. of
Rev. Joseph Davis and Eunice m. Mary
Salina, d. of Seabury and Clorana Pier-
pont, Jan. 20, 1836.

I. Homer Heber, b. Feb. 22, 1837.

3. Eunice Clorana, b. Oct. 7, 1839.
3. Lucy Adeline, b. Nov. X4, X84Z.

Joseph C. Welton [s. of Richard F.] m.
Jane E. Porter, June 28, 1839.

[x. Caroline Josephine, b. June 7, 1842.]

Josiah Welton, s. of George, m. Martha
Keley (Kelsey?) d. of Jonathan of
Woodbury, Dec. 28, 1752. He d. Jan.
5. 1758.

Julia Welton m. Vinson Gunn, 1812.

Julia Welton, d. of Rev. J. D., m. George
Warner, 1826.

Levi Welton, s. of Stephen, dec'd, m.
Mary Seymur, d. of Richard, June 3,
1761.

X. Deborah, b. Mch. a8, 1762.

a. Lydia, b. Oct. 28, X763; m. Aaron Warner.

3. Stephen, b. Oct. i, X765 [m. Sus. Bronson?J

Mary, w. of Levi, d. Feb. 7, 1768 [and
Levi m. Molly Hall].

4. Mali (Molly) Seymour, bap. Mch. 25, 1770* [m.

Jesse Silkrigff of Wolcottj .

5. Hannah, bap. July a8, 177X [m. Hez. Welton].

6. Rosanna, bap. Oct. 6, 1776 (b. July 3) ['"•

Michael Harrison].

7. Lavinia, bap. Apr. 5, X778; m. James Brown.

Lucinda Welton m. Neh. Hubbell, 1774*
Lydia A. Welton m. Anson Lane, 1828.

Lyman Welton, s. of Thomas, and
Minerva Judd, b. June 29, 1800, d. of
Benjamin of Watertown, m. Dec. 24,
1822.

1. Henry Augustus, b. Dec. 2, 1823.

2. Lyman Franklin, b. Dec. xi, 1827.

3. James Nelson (Nelson J.), b. Feb. 15, x8a9.

Mary Welton, d. of Adrian, m. R. L.
Judd, 1826.

Welt

Merri
Chl<
Sep

Nathi
Mat
Ha\
1777

1. S«

2. H<

3. Ui

4. Ni

5. J*

6. All

7. Eli

Oliver

gare

1749
d. j£

X. An

2. Ar

3. Be

4. Ar

5. Ml

Peter

Port
chas
d. Ji

1. S.

2. K

3. P

4. J

I

5. A

6. C :

7. A:

8. F

9. £ i
10. C :

IX. A i

Peter '

Coo :

and 1

I. D s

a. L :

3. Si ;

4. P

5. J<

Polly i
Wa 1

Richi

Up:
[an

I. P :

::^

2.

3.

5. T '

6. * :

7. E I

8. T I

9. E <

Richi

m. '■

152 AP

HISTORY OF WATERS URT,

Welton. Welton.

Fairfield, Nov. .3, 1724. She d. Dec.
i7» 1765; and he, Jan. 11, 1766.

X. Anna, b. Aug. 17, 1725; ra. John Brown.

2. John, b. Jan. 6, 1726-7.

3. Abi, b. Oct. 29, 1729.

4. Titus, b. Oct. 20, 1732; d. Tuly 9, 1757.

5. Abi, b. Oct. 5, 1738; m. Tnomas Fenn.

Richard Welton, s. of Eliakim, m. Mar-
gret Warner, d. of Ebenezer, Apr. 27,
1766.

X. Noah, b. Feb. 15, 1767.

2. Richard Warner, b. Oct. 10; d. Dec. 14, 1768.

Marjjraret d. Oct. 19, 1768, and Richard
m. Hannah Davis, Aug. 7, 1770 (1769?).
[He d. Feb. 26, 1820; she, Dec. 11, 183S,
a. 94.]

Their first child Thomas b. (probably an

error).
Richard, bap. June 17, 1770.*
^Nlargaret, b. July 2, 1772] m. Dan. Steele.
Thomas, bap. Jan. 5, 1775.
Hannah, bap. Dec. 9, 1777 [m. David Warner].
Joseph Davis, bap. June i, 1783.

Richard Welton, Jr., s. of Richard
(above), m. Sarah Gunn, d. of Nathl.,
Mch. 19, 1797 [and d. Sept. 26, 1807, a.
38].

I. Artemesia, b. Apr. 15, 1798; m. Lauren Frisbie.
[2. Edward, b. Jan. 19, 1800.

3. Merrit, b. Apr. 5, 1802.

4. Amy, b, Apr. 18, i8o<4.

5. Hannah Maria, b. July 10, 1807.]

Richard F. Welton m. Nancy Horton,
Apr. 8, 1830.

Samuel Welton [s. of Stephen] m. Jeru-
sha Hill, Nov. 23, 1769, and d. May 9,

1777-

X. Annah, b. Dec. 23, 1770.

2. Jonathan, b. Feb. 14, 1774.

3. Lydia, b. Oct. 18, 1776.

Sarah Welton [d. of Dan.] m. D. P.
Bunce, 1833.

Seymour H. Welton, b. Oct. 13, 1822, s.
of Bela, and Elizabeth Merriam, b.
Dec. 5, 1825, d. of Edward S. of Water-
town, m. Dec. 18, 1844.

I. Bela S., b. Jan. 7, 1846.

[Shelden Welton, s. of Erastus, m. Bet-
sey Jordan, Sept. 12, 1825.

1. Adeline E., b. Nov. ii, 1826.

2. Birdsey S., b. Aug. X7, 1831.

3. Hiram E., b. Oct. 14, 1834.]

Stephen Welton, s. of John, m. Mary
Gaylord, d. of Joseph, Mch. 4, 1701-2.

1. Abigail, b. Nov. 14, 170X-2; m. Gershom Ful-

ford.

2. Mary, b. Dec. 10, X704; m. Thomas Porter.

3. Unis, b. Apr. 19, 1707 [m. Caleb Lewis of Wal-

lingford, Jan. 10, 1736J .

4. Sarah, b. July 14, 1709.

Mary d. July 18, 1709, and Stephen m.
Jan. 28, 1712-13, Johannah Westover
of Simsbury. He d. Mch. 13, 1713.

Welton. Wklton.

Stephen Welton, s. of Richard, m. De-
borah Sutliff, d. of John, Dec. 13, 1731,
and d. Apr. 30, 1759.

1. Martha, b. Nov. 19, 1732; d. Dec. ao, 1736.

2. Levy (I,evi), b. Nov. lo, 1734; d. Dec. 27, 1736.

3. Martha, b. Mch. i, 1736-7: m. Jehulah Grillcy.

4. Dinah, b. May 22, 1738; m. Jas. Doolittle.

5. Levy, b. Mch. 6, 1741-2.

6. Stephen, b. Jan. 7, 1744-5.

7. Thomas, b. Dec. 32, 1749; d. Aug. 7, X75x.

8. Thomas, b. Nov. 22, 1751.

Stephen Welton, s. of George, m. Abi-
gail Baldwin, d. of Jonathan, Aug. 27,
1 741. Shed. Nov. i, 1776.

X. Elijah, b. Aug. 13, 1742.

2. Samuel, b. Nov. a, 1744.

3. Jesse, b. Nov. 23, 1746.

4. Amasa, b. Apr. a6, 1749.

5. Daniel, b. Apr. i, 1752; d. Nov. 17, X753.

6. Achsah, b. Sept. 15, 1754.

7. Josiah, b. Feb. 17, 1759.

Stephen Welton (above?) m. wid. Ann
Hotchkiss, Mch. 3, 1779.

Stephen Welton, s. of Stephen, dec'd,
(and Deborah), m. Lucy Thomas, May

2. 1764.

I. Lemuel, b. Nov. 24, 1766.
a. Dinah, b. June 25, 1770.

3. Levi, b. Oct, 9, X772.

4. Lucy, b. Mch. 19, X774.

5. Zilphe, b. Jan. 25, 1776.

6. Elihu, b. Oct. 31, 1779.

Thomas Welton, s. of John, Senr., m.
Hannah Allford, d. of Josiah, Mch. 9,
1714 and d. Apr. 19, 1717.

I. Thomas, b. Dec. X5, 17x4 [d. young],

Thomas Welton, s. of John (and Sarah),
m. Mary Cosset, d. of Ranny of Syms-
bury, Sept. 15, 1742. [He a. May 12.
1803.]

X. Ezekiel, b. Aug. 29, X743.
a. Ruben, b. Feb. 19, 1745-6.

3. Ailing, b. July 14, X748; d. July 3X, 1749.

4. Allyn, b. May 16; d. June 28, 1750.

5- Bethel, b. Aug. 9, X7S1; d. Jan. 5, 1763.

6. Lucretia, b. Jan. 20, 17^4.

7. Roscrty, b. Feb. 10; d. Mch. a,

8. Levina, b, Apr. 20, 1759.

9. Shubill, b. July 29, 1761,
o. Bethel, b. July x8, 1767.

1757-

10

Thomas Welton, s. of Richard, m. Lydia
Utter, d. of Abr., Feb. 21, 1739-40.
She d. Aug. 21, 1750, and Thomas m.
May 28, 175 1, Lydia Warner, d. of
Obadiah. [He adopted his nephew,
Richard, and d. Dec. i, 1780. Lydia
m. Dr. Preserved Porter.]

Thomas Welton, the third [s. of Ste-
phen], m. Abigail Hikcox, d. of Lieut.
William, Jan. 22, 1772.

1. Seymer, b. July 2, X772.

2, Sarah, b. Dec. 28, 1773; ^« J*"** '9« >774«

6. Chloe, b. Nov. 2, 1780.

7. Lydia, b, July ai, 1783.

8. Fanna, b. Apr. i, 1785.

FAMILY REOO

'^

Welton. Wheeler.

9. Lorra^ b. Feb. 15, 1787.

10. Ransom, b. July 18, 1789.

Abigail d. Jan. 13, 1791, and Thomas
m. Ruth, wid. (of Ziba) Norton, Sept.
26, 1792. She d. July 6, 1793; he, Apr.
24, 1835, a. 83.'

11. Thomas Hikcoz, )

and vb. June 34, 179^.

X2. Ruth Hopkins, ) [m. Street Todd].

Thomas Welton, b. Dec. 8, 1774, s. of
Richard, and Sybel Cook from Wal-
lingford, b. Oct. 18, 1778, m. Jan. 3,
1797.

X. Lyman, b. June 15, 1798.

a. Evelina, b. Jan. 23, x8oo; m. Anson Downs.

3. Minerva, b. Mch. 19. i8oa.

4. Sally Desire, b. Sept. 5, 1807; d. Mch., 1808.
5 Sally Desire, b. June 14, 18x0.

6. Nancy, b. Apr. 12, 1812.

William A. Welton [s. of Horace C]
m. Eliza Prichard, d. of Leonard, Nov.
16, 1847.

Eunice Westover m. Oliver Titus, 1850.

Johannah Westover m. Stephen Welton,
1712.

Rachel Westover m. Jer. Kilborn, 1844.

Anne Wetmore m. Seth Blake, 1769.'

Benjamin Wetmore : Marcv, wife of
Benj. [d. of Sam. RobertsJ. d. May 2,
1757, and he m. Apr. 4, 1758. Frances
[d. of John BoamJ, wid. of Richard
Anthony of Middletown. [He d. May,
1770; she, April, 1776.]

Bethiah Wetmore m. Edmund Tomp-
kins, 1754.

Josiah Whetmore [b. 1721, s. of Benja-
min and Mercy Roberts] and Mehit-
able:

4. Benjamin, b. July 23: d. Sept. 7, 1753.

FMehi table was b. July 28, 1721, d. of
James Leavenworth and Hester Trow-
Dridge of Stratford, and was niece of
Rev. Mark Leavenworth.] She d.
1807. a. 86.

Timothy Wetmore and Martha [Eggles-
tone, m. in Middletown, Nov. 2, 1768.

Timothy Clark, and James, b. in Mid.]

3. Polle, b. Feb. 7, 1774.

4. Constant, b. Apr. 4, 1780.

Ana Wheeler m. Edmund Austin, 1795.

David Wheeler from Oxford m. Mary.
Ann Pritchard. d. of Eliphalet, Aug.,
1807.

1. Daniel, b. Mch. 10, x8o8.

2. Rosctta, b. Nov. 12, 1812 [m. Thorp].

3. Mary Ann, b. May 2, x8i8; d. Jan., 1845.

4. Harriet Jane, b. k\\%. 2, 1820.

David d. Mch. 3, 1822 [a. 43], and Mary
Ann m. Jesse Brown.

Joseph Wheeler of Watertown m. Sarah
A. Leavenworth, Oct. 26, 1834.

16 ♦

Whea!
Mary>
Mary'

Reubd

fiel<|

Ruth^

Ruthl

Sarah

Ambr<i
Wool
Mch.

I. Ma

9. Am
3. Sad

Hiram

Aug.

Janett<

John ^

Sami
born;

I. Anc
3. Abr

3. Sey

4. Am

5. Sail

6. Rel

John \

1849.

Thoma

land.

1. Cai

2. Job

3. Ma ;

Betseji

1836.

Sarah i

1744.

Jane \

Mary

1845.

Willia

by R

1780.

Joanni

1825.

Joel \
Cool I

Larnei

of J< I
Lou: I
ham

X. Eli I

Lou
m. ^ I
b. i:
mov

2. Ml I

3. U

4. M !

5. Fr I

164 ^p

mSTOnr OF WATtSRBVBr,

Wilkinson. Williams.

Phcbe Wilkinson m. R. C. Nichols, 1845.

Thankful Wiliard m. Elisha Hikcox,
1764.

[Bartholomew Williams d. 1759; wid.
Sybel (Thompson); children:

Israel. Rebecca. Bartholomew.]

Benjamin Williams, s. of Thomas dec*d,
m. Sarah Painter, d. of John, Apr. 8,
1762.

1. Isabel, b. Dec. 21, 1763.

2. Deborah, b. June s, 1766. •

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 29, 1768.

Charles Williams m. Polly McDonald —
both of Columbia — Jan. 3, 1802.*

Daniel Williams [b. 1710], s. of James,
dec'd, of Wallingford, m. Mary Lewis,
d. of Joseph, May 9, 1732, and d. July
18, 1754. [She m. Obadiah MunsonJ
and d. 1802.

1. Susanna, b. Feb. 14, 1733-3; d. Aug. 24, Z749>

2. Anna, b. May s6, 1735; m. Isaac Judd.

3. Dan, b. Nov. 22, 1737.

4. Unice, b. Sept. 3, 1740; m. Samuel Webb.

5. Zuba, b. Dec. 25, X744 [m. Abner Lewisl.

6. Ame," b. Jan. 31, 1747-8 [m. Joseph Tyler of

Wallingford].

7. Ruben, b. Men. 25, 1754.

Dann Williams, s. of Daniel (above),
dec'd, m. Mary Prindle, d. of Nathan,
dec'd, Dec. 12, 1755.

X. Phebe, b. Nov. 23, 1756; d. Tuly 7, 1758.
a. Anne, b. Oct. 10, 1759; d. Nlay 3, 1762.

Daniel Williams m. Patience Weed,
Nov., 1782.'

Roxana, b. Aug. 19, 1789.3

Eliza Williams m. Alexander Hine, 1849.

Hannah Williams m. George Prichard,
Jr., 1767.

Hannah Williams m. Henry Book, 1789.

Hiram Williams of Bristol m. Lydia M.
Frost [d. of Alpheus], Nov. 7, 1842.

Hobert Williams, s. of Horace, m. Rhoda
C. Webster, d. of Ozias of Harwinton,
June 7, 1 841. ,

X. Horace Ozias, b. July 26, 1842.
3. Hannah Eliza, b. June 20, 1844.

James Williams [b. Sept. 14, 1692, s. of
James of Hartford, who d. in Walling-
ford, 1725, and Sarah Richason, m.
Sarah Judd, d. of Thomas, Jr., Dec.
29, 1715.

Abigail, and two boys both named James, d. in

Wal.
Martha, ra. William Andrews.
Mary, probably m. Thomas Coles.
Sarah. Timothy, b. 1724. J

10. Abigail, b. Keb. 20, 1729-30.

11. Lois, b. Feb. 20, 1731-2.

12. Ruth, b. Oct. o, 1734.

13. Hepsibah, b. Feb. 23, 1736-7; m. John Fenn.

James d. Oct. 13, 1740 [and in 1751,
Sarah was called Saran Wood or
Weed].

Williams. Williams.

James Williams [s of Thomas? m. Lydia
Smith of Wallingford, 1743].

4. Jotharo, b. Apr. 90, 1750.

(See also Thomas.)

James Williams [s. of Timothy of James]
m. Sarah Boardman, Apr. i, 1776.

1. Eunice, b. Nov. rg, 1776.

2. Jonathan, b. July 28, 1778.
[3. Mary, b. X780.

Sarah d. Aug. 27, 1780, and James m.
Hannah Chilson, 1787.]

Lewis Williams [s. of Reuben] m. Polly
Porter, June 14, 1801.*

Lydia Williams m. Enos Warner, 1769.

Obed Williams m. Elizabeth DoolitUe.
Dec. 10, 1776.*

1. Obed, b. Sept. 26, 1777.

2. Sally, b. Sept. 3, X779.

3. Becca, )

and Vb. Jan. 90, 1781.

4. Betsey,)

5. Chauncey, b. Apr. 23, 1782.

6. Isaac, b. May 23, 1783.

7. Polly, b. Aujf. 30, 1784.

8. Billy, b. June 28, 1786.

9. Clarry, b. Sept. 6, 17S8.

Rebeckah Williams m. Thomas Murfee,

1783.'
Reuben Williams, s. of Daniel, m. Anna

Hotchkiss, d. of Capt. Gideon, Mch. i6,

1775.

z. Huldah, b. Apr. 10, 1776.
a. Lewis, b. Oct. 30, X780.
3. Reuben, b. May 24, 1788.

Rosanah Williams m. David Hunger-
ford, 1760.

Samuel Williams, s. of Samuel of Wal-
lingford [who was b. June, 1700, and
Hannah Hikcox. m. Nov. 13, 1722]. m.
Lois Scott, d. of Samuel of Edmund,
May 28, 1752.

I. Samuel, b. Sept. 9; d. Dec. 31, 1753.

Lois d. Sept. 23, 1753, and Samuel m.
Huldah, widow of Thomas Warner,
Aug. 27, 1754.

a. I^is, b. Mav 24, 1755. ,

3. Zcbah, b. ftlay 9, 1757.

4. Huldah, b. Jan. 26, 1760; m. .Sam. Branson.
•5. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 21, X762.

6. Lucy, b. Apr. 26, 1764.

7. Khoda, b. Apr. 17, 1767; ra. Ichabod Terrell?

8. Sibbel, b. Oct. a, 1769.

9. Samuel Warner, b. May 11, 1772.

10. Hannah, b. Nov. 15, 1775.

Sarah Williams m. Asahel Hotchkiss,

1781.

Susanna Williams m. John Hotchkiss,
1790.

Thomas Williams dyed Septem 29, A.D.
1749, in his 49 year. His dau. Cat tern,
in her 19th yv, d. Aug. 14, 1749. His
son Reuben, in his istn year, d. Nov.
29, 1749. Isabel, wife of the above-

FAMILY EECOH

Williams. Wilmot.

named Thomas, in her 53d yr. d. Apr.
25. 1751. Jotham, s. of James Will-
iams d. Sept. 6, 1749.

[His heirs were wid. Isabel!: chil. James (of New
Haven^ >75i)i Thomas, Benjamin and Obedi-
ence,w. of Nathan Brownson. Waliingford rcc.
give James, b. 1721, Hannah, 1733, and Obe-
dience, b. 1732, to Thomas and Isabel.]

Thomas Williams, s. of Thomas, dec'd,
m. Jerusha Brounson, d. of Moses, Jan.
31, 1749-50.

1. Reuben, b. Nov. 34, 1750.

2. Rachel, b. Nov 27, 1752.

3. Rosin, b. Feb. 21, 1755.

4. Catern. b. Sept. 5, 1757.

5. Hannah, b. Nov. 8, 1759.

6. Thomas, b. Apr. 21, 1762.

7. Daniel, b. Oct. 10, 1764; d. May 17, 1768.

8. John, b. Mch. 28, 1767.

9. Mary, b. July 4, 1769; d. May 30, 1783.

Titaiothy Williams, s. of James, dec'd,
m. Eunice [Lydia] Foot, d. of Jona-
than, Mch. 2^, 1750. She d. Dec. 5,
1776 [he, 1803].

1. Jonathan, b. Sept. 13, 1751 [d. 1776].

2. Jerusha, b. Nov. 27, 1753 [m. Soardman

and d. June, 1783].

3. lames, b. Sept. 23, 1755.

4. i)anit>l, b. Apr. 27, 1759.

5. Timothy, b, Jan. 8; d. Jan. 16, 1763.
[6. Timothy, b. May 13, 1765. 1

6.{}) Lydia, b. Apr. 16, 1769 [a. June, 1795.]

Timothy Williams, Jr., s. of Timothy,
m. Susa Maria Hill„ d. of Jared, Nov.
I, 1792.

1. Tcrusha, b. Aug. 3, 1793; m. Alpheiis Frost.

2. Lydia, b. Apr. 10, 1795; m. Mark Warner.

3. Horace, b. in Plymouth, Dec. 28, 1796 [m. Sa-

lina Scott, d. of^Joel],

4. Jere Hill, b. Sept. 2, 1803.

5. Anson, b. Au(f^28, 1807 [m. Marietta KeelcrJ.

Widow Williams d. Oct. 13, 1808, a. 78.'

Abigail Wilmot m. Thaddeus Bronson,
1772.

Abijah Wilmot, s. of Benjamin, m. Ruth
Hikcox, d. of Ambrose, Aug. 5, 1763.

1. Mary, b. Aug. 28, 1764.

2. Silas, b. June 17, 1766.

3. Abijah, b. Mch. 20, 1768.

4. Electa, b. Jan. 3, 1770.

Ruth d. Feb. 26. 1771, and Abijah m.
Tapher Castle [d. of Isaac], July 9,
1771.

5. Fraderick, b. May 25, 1772.

6. Benjamin, b. Apr. i6, 1774.

7. Kuth, b. Sept. 30, 1776.

8. Ebenezer, b. Dec. 25, 1780.

Amos Wilmot d. June 6, 1809, ^* 53-'

Amy Wilmot m. Bennet Pritchard, 1825.

Benjamin Wilmot d. June 25, 1768. Abi-
gail, his wife, d. Dec. 30, 1771.

Benjamin, his son, d. Dec. 28, 1770.

Elijah Wilmot's wife d. Dec. 29, 181 1, a.

7i.»
Eunice Wilmot m, Isaac Hine, 1768,

WiLMO

Jesse '
Sc«

Mary ',
1829.

Metra

Wid. S

89.*

ElizatM

James

Mary

Hanna]
17^7.
Mary \

Obadial

25. 17

I. Jam

Henry ]
June

David 1

Aloi

Rut

A:

Rev. L

Mar
Urs

Child

Luk
Sert
Con
Con
Juli

Edmun I
Oct.

Aner I

John
Mari
field.

1. Ma I

Mari
Delij
pect,

2. Par I

3. Eli:

Georg<

Neal

Enoch '
Oxfc

Frank

ris, < I

Hanna

1697

Isaac i

Sa

1 I

Su
Cc
Is;
CI

G

i

166 ^P

HISTORY OF WATERBUR7.

Woodruff. Woodward.

Mary, b, Nov. 15, 1782.

Luke, a negro servant of Isaac, b. Jan. 31, 1784.

Isaac d. Mch. 31, 1782, a, 36.

John L. Woodruff of Watertown m. El-
mira Downs of Wolcott, June 6, 1832.

Jonah Woodruff m. Mabel Adams, d. of
Abraham, July 30, 1777.'

Marietta Woodruff m. E. E. Smith, 1841.

Mary Woodruff, wid. of Miles J., d. Oct.
6, 1S40. a. 25.*

Samuel Woodruff [s. of John] and Jemi-
ma:

Hannah, b. May ao, 1783.
Enoch J., b. Jan. 15, 1786.

Ensine Abel Woodward, b. Apr. i, 1736,
old stile, s. of Capt. Israel, m. Lucy
Atward fb. May 4, 1735], d. of Jonathan
of Woodbury, Mch. 21, 1765.

1. [Dr.] Reuben Sherman, b. Jan. 9, 1766* [m.

Rachel Prindle, d of David].

2. Eunice, b. Mch. t8, 1767.

3. Lucv, b. Mch. 13, 1769; d. Jan. 14, 1770.

4. Abel, b. Oct. 13, 1770; m. Susanna ^Voodruf! of

Oxford, Oct. ao, i793.'

5. James, b. Sept. 25, 1772.

6. David, b. Oct. 26, 1774.

7. Lucy, b. July 23, 1776.

8. John, b. Auif. 12, 1778.

9. Jerusha, b. Apr. 2, 1781.
zo. Russell, b. Jan. 10, 1783.

Antipas Woodward m. Annis Flinn,
Nov. 6, I788.»
I. Warren, b. Sept. 8, 1789.

Israel Woodward [b. June 5, 1707; d.
Aug. 17, 1799, a. 92; s. of John. Jr., of
Lebanon, bap. 1674; s. of Jonn of
Northampton; s. of Henry of Dorches-
ter, Mass., 1636; m. Abigail Beard of
Huntington, and came to Waterbury
about 1749, with his six sons].

10. Samuel, b. Oct. 25, 1750.

[An Indian woman belonging to Israel
d. July II, 1774.]

Israel Woodward [b. 1740], s. of Israel,
m. Abigail Stoddard, d. of Eliakim,
Oct. 28, 1765.*

I. Sarah Bard, b. Dec. 4, 1767.
a. Pamelia, b. Apr. 15, 1770.

3. Abigail, b. May 19, 1772.

4. Anna, b. Dec. 4, 1774.

5. Asa, b. Aug. 24, 1779.

John Woodward m. Lydia Trowbridge,

July 13, I786.«

I. William, b. May 3, 17^7.
a. Rebecca, b. Jan. 9, 1789.

Nathan Woodward, s. of Israel, m.
Sarah Hikcox, d. of Thomas, June 6,

1757.

I. A dau., b. Tune 3, d. June 25, 1758.

a. Grace, b. C5ct. 25, 1759; d. June ix, 1760.

3. Moses Hawkins, b. Mch. 31, 1761.

4. Antipas, b. June 24, 1763.

5. Saran, b. Sept. 17, 1765.

6. Lois, b. May x8, 176JB.

Woodward. Wooster.

Sarah d. July 9, 1771; and Nathan m.
Eunice Painter, July i, I773.« [She d-
Mch. II, 1813, a. 62; he, Apr. 29, 1824.
a. 92.]

7. Polly, b. June 19, 1775.

8. Laura, b. June 3, 1779.

9. John, b. July 9, 1782.

Rebeckah Woolsey m. Stephen Scott,
1734.

Azariah Woolworth m. Rebekah Allen
of Woodbridge [grand-dau. of David
Wood], Apr. 5, i3i2.

z. Chester Allen, b. Sept. 5, 1814.

2. Philemon Porter, b. Mch. ai, z8i8.

3. Azariah, b. June 2a, 1819.

4. Janies Harvey, b. Aug. 10, xSaa.

5. Robert, b. Jan. ao, 1824.

6. Franklin, b. Dec. 5, 1825.

7. Lyman, b. in Winchester, Sept. 16, 1828.

Abigail Wooster m. R. C. Beebe, 1836.*

Albert Wooster, s. of Levi [eldest s. of
Walter, and Ursula BeebeJ m. Mitte
Chatfield, d. of Joseph, Nov. 19, 1826.

Charles W. Wooster of New York m.
Ellen A. Welton [d. of Ard], Oct, 16.
1842. She d. July 18, 1843, a. 26.*

Cleora Wooster m. J. J. HoUister, 1842.

Daniel Wooster, s. of David, m. Ruth
Wheeler, d. of Obadiah of Southbuiy,
Nov. 4, 1792.

David Wooster and Mary [d. of Nath.
Gunn? Patience, M^ary and Ann
Wooster, grandchildren, are mention-
ed in Nathaniel's will of 1767]:

3. David, b. Dec. ai, 1756; d. Feb., 1757.

4. Mary, b. Mch. 10, 1760; d. June, i79<5.

5. Eunice, b. July 22, 1761.

Mary d. Oct. 5, 1761, and David m.
Ann Doolittle, d. of Thomas, Jan. 7,
1762.

6. David, b. Nov. 2, 1762.

7. Haniwh, b. Oct. x6, 1764.

8. Anna, b. Sept. 22; d. Sept. 28, 1766.

9. Ann, b. Dec. 24, 1767; d. June, 1807.
10. Phcbe, b. Mch. 2, 1770.
It. Rebecka, b. May to, 1772.

Z2. Sibel, )

and Vb. Aug. 31, 1774.

13. Daniel, I

14. Naomi, b. June 16, 1776.

little,)

IS. Ruth,
and
x6. James Doolittle
17. Abigail, b. June 27, 1780

June 27, 1778.

David Wooster m. Anna Chatfield, Feb.
2, 1821.

Polly bap. Dec. 17, 1823.

Elijah Wooster was m. to Mary Osbom,
d. of Daniel, by Rev. Mark Leaven-
worth, Apr. 4, 1764.

z. Ephraim, b. Sept. 17, 1764.

2. Mary, b. Dec. xo, 1767.

3. Hannah, b. Sept. 27, 1769.

4. Mary, b. Dec. 28, 177Z.

5. Sarah, b. May 9, 1774.

FAMILY RECOl

WOOSTER. WOOSTER.

Henry Wooster, s. of Moses of Wood-
bury:

Ned Allen, d. Oct. 30, 1772.

Mary, his wife d. Apr. 29, 1772, -and
Henr^ m. Mercy Gillett, d. of Thomas
Coshier, Jan. 5, 1773.

Mary, b. Sept. 5, 1773; d. May 10, 1775.
Henry, b. Sept. 14, 1775.
Naomi, b. Nov. 20, 1777.*
Marv, b. Nov. 27, 1779.
Rachel, b. Oct. 5, 1781.

Jane Wooster m. Jonathan Baldwin,
1849.

Jesse Wooster, s. of Walter, m. Rhoda
Brocket, d. of Zenas, Mch. 13, 18 13.

1. AbijFail U., b. Dec. to, 1813.

2. Emily, b. Jan. xi; d. Mch., 1816.

3. Emily, b. Jan. 8, 1817.

4. Walter Z., b. Mch. 8, 1820.

5. JesM C, b. June 7, 1823.

Miles Wooster:

Mabel and John, bap. July 21, 1765.9

Mitchel Wooster m. Hannkh £. Terril,
Mch. 6, 1822.

Nancy Wooster m. A. S. White, 1832.

Rebeckah Wooster m. Lyman Smith,
1821.

Wait Wooster, s. of Abraham, m. Phebe
Warner, d. of Samuel, Mch. 9, 1758.
[He was dead June 5, 1770.]

X. Moses, )

and >b. Dec. 21, 1758.

2. Hinman,}^

3. Mary, b. Dec. 21, 1760.

Mary,

Benjamin, b. Oct. 29, 1762.

Wool

6. A

Joho
Od

Natlt
F.

183^

Rebel

176)

Joscp
wic

Melii

Asa 4
Dai

Carol

i85<

Charl

Ira \

ley,

Mary

tis,

Saral

175^

Rufus

Bea

i76r

Jane 1

i85<.

Thoa i
of J:

PAUS.

COL.

LINE

6

9

35

8

2

34

12

z

43

13

2

49

19

2

zo

ao

I

zo

2Z

Z

45

2

54

23

2

37

24

2

49

25

2

6

27

Z

32
34
37

34

Z

51

39

2

35

39

2

36

43

46
58

65
86

90

Z04

108
Z26

»43
H3

2

2

2
2
I

Z
2
I

2

Z
Z

23

62
2Z

16

6z
6z

54

«5
z8

ADDITIONS AND COl .

Wait>r A.
Eliab /br Eliah.
Hoadley^r Hadley.

*7«5 /<^ »775«

Richard left also Richard and ** Lucrecy."

A fid m. Jesse Fenn.

Add Scott, d. of Richard of Sunderland, Maa*

Ohed far Obad.

Mary and Andrew were children of Deacon 7 1

Erase this line.

Anne was wife of Isaac Tuttle in Z75Z.

Martha m. Hill.

Comfort m. Martin.

Esther m. Peck.

Elizabeth m. Cook.

Z652 /or Z647.

Salem /i»r Plymouth. Cook m. before Z725, 5 .

ford, who was, probably, mother of a/Jhat i
Samuel Curtiss d. Z770, leaving wife Elizabe 1

Levit, Manr Benham, Elizabeth Andrus,

Mindwell Clark and Olive Blakley.
Add Feb. 3.
Joseph Gamsey d. Z764, leaving wife Rachel. 1

Ann, wife of Daniel Steele, Mary, wife of ; I
ijgiybr Z87Z.
Probate records (Z758) mention also David, 'A

i7S9/^''/79S. .
Norm y or Moms.

Benjamin left a j^randson, Charles Plumb.

This is probably Ruth, d. of John.

Gideon Skinner, brother of Ebenezer of He <

dren— Ann, Timothy and Dorcas.
Arab Ward, s. of Capt. William of Killingwc
Diantha^r Diana.

I

158 Ap

HISTORY OF WATERBUBY.

DEATHS IN WATERBURY,

Exclusive of Salem, since March i6, 1797, taken from Capt, Ben-
jamin Upson's Account, by Bennet Bronson.*

1797.

July.

"799-

x8oo.
Jan.

1801.
Jan. xa.
Feb. 17.
Mch. 4.

" 12.

Apr. 5.

35.

May 15.

Aug.

Sept. 31.

1802.
Tan. 15.
tjunca^.

" 34.
July 7.

" 21.
Aug. 3.

.1:

Sept. 17.

Oct. 3.

1803.

Jan.

x8.

Apr.

5.
26.

May

5-

June

Aug.

26.

Sept.

Oct.

39.

Eldad Hotchkiss* child.

Joseph Wooster.
ohn McCloud's wife.
Lev. Mr. Thompson's wife.
Thomas Pavne's child.
Nathaniel Welton^s wife.
William Rowley's child.
Samuel Nichols.
Levi Beardsley's child.
Mille Pardee's child.
Reuben Warner's wife.
Fortune, a negro.
Elizabeth Scott.
Aseph Brown's child.
Eli Rowlev's child.
Samuel Blakeslee's child.
Benjamin Hitchcock's wife.
Andrew Bronson,
John Robbinson.
Joseph Pnchard's child.

Noah Candee.

Genhom Bartholomew.

Mingo, a negro.

Ezra Pierpont's child.

Claud (?) Lewis' wife.

3 children of Amasa Cowel.

3 children of William Clark.

Luc^ Bronson.

Levi Bronson,

Jesse Johnson's wife.

Cyrus Grilley's child,

James Cowers wife,

Joseph Bartholomew's wife,

Capt. Ben Hine,

iesse Johnson's child,
Irs. Qames] Baldwin,
William Perkins' child,
Isaac Bradley,
Daniel Tuttle,
Mary Slater,
John Thompson,
Cloe Bartholomew,
Levi Smith's girl^
Jesse Hikcojc's wife,
Wid. Hoadley,

Amos TefHil}
Israel Holmes,

iames H. Warner's child,
[ichael Harrison's child,
Titus Fulford,
Andrew Hoadley.
Aurelia Clark's child,
Obadiah Richard's child,
Jonah Hall's wife,
Fannv Adams,
David Hoadley's child,
Joseph Tompkins' child,
Widow Clark's boy,
Isaiah Prichard's child,
Joseph Fairchild's child,
Truman Hotchkiss* child,
Ephraim Warner's child,
Hez. Phelps' child,
Titus Welton's child,
Joseph Fairchild's child,
John W^elton, Jr.'s child,
Anne Welton,
William Hoadley's child,
Daniel Hill,

79

45

45
35

82

5

97

X

8
97

75
53

«9
20

56
79

70

34
I
I

69

55
3m

X

56

19
3m
I

9
6m

X
X

3m

4
3
xm

X

x8
5

75

X804
Feb.
Mch.

Manly Hitchcock's child,
Wid. Scott,
Enos Warner's child,
Mch. 30. Cyrus Grilley's wife (44); child,
Apr. 9. Joseph Pnchard's child,

xo. Tustus Warner's child, ^
Benj. Hikcoz,
Moses Hall's child,
May. Mrs. Elizabeth Skinner,
June. Calvin Monson's child,
William Comes' child,
Aug. 29. William Rowley,

Mr. TerriU's child,
Oct. 16. Enoch Piatt's child,

Leonard Baldwin's wife,
X805. Daniel Jackson's child,

Apr. Hikcox,

Aug. 24. Southmayd Bronson's child,
'^ 39. John Cossett's wife,
" 31. Rev. Mr. Bronson's child,
Sept. X3. Truman Hotchkiss' child,
" 18. Bethuel Todd's wife,
x8o6.
Mch. -x, James Blaksley's child,

" 36. John Nolton's child,
Apr. 7. Joanna Nolton,

^' Seth Worden's child,

June 13. Peg, a negro,

" 3x. Daniel Brown,
Aug. 34. Samuel Hill's child,
Sept. 33. Samuel Adams' child,

35. Cornelius Johnson's wife,
Oct. 30. Eldad Mix,
Nov. 9. Reuben Warner,
Dec. 19. Ebenezer F. Bennet,
'* 31. David Hine's wife,
X807.

Lvdia Hull,

Mercy Hull,

Scott.

Mch.

May.
June.

II

II

14

Jehulah Grillcy*s wife,
Samuel Bronson, 3d's, child,
Jerusha Bradley,
Ephraim Sanford of Ind.,
" 26. Lemuel Nichols,

Nov. 15. Eunice Culver,

Dec. Titus Welton's child,
x8o8.

Jan. 3. Esther Payne,

Feb. x. Lorana Warner,

Mch. 4. Wid. Hull.

Apr. 8. Crys, a negro,
14. Herraon Hall,
tAsabia Baxter,
Enos Beecher, Wolcott,
Mark Leavenworth's child,
Samuel Nichols' child,
Rachel, wife of Ben. Nichols,

Sept. 3. Seth Castle's child,
** 22. James Frisbie of Salem,

Oct. 25. Fhilo Beers,

Joshua Morgan's child,
X809. Benjamin Hitchcock,
Elijah Crook's wife^

Mch. XX. Ethel Hoadley*s child,
'* 36. Lemuel Allen,

Oct. Joseph Root's child,

" x8xo.

Jan. 7. Caleb Todd.

Feb. 13. Wd. Mary Welton,

May

Aug.

29.
29.
«4.

X3.
28.

4m

X w

6w
4
40
X w

83

74

X

5
21

X

14

X <

69

t

¥>

X I

X

6

4
54
76

3

X

80

73

7a
34
64

d
d

53
a3

70

3

»9

33
6x

84
7

30
13

77
34
as
26

40
xm

2d

68

2
37

19
I

56

35

6m
6a

6m

46
87

* More than six hundred names were found in this list, but certain of the number have been omitted
because given elsewhere. For the year 1815, the year of greatest mortality within the period, the list is given
entire. After Capt. Benjamin Upson's decease, in March of 1824, the work was continued by a person unknown
to the compiler, to August, 1825, when it was taken up in the Public Records.

t Probably date of burial. He died at Demerara, May xx. X ^f^' Asabia Scoviilon grave-stone«

DBAma nr wATi

Mch. 5. Abraham Prichard*s wife,

'' 6. Joseph Root's wife.
Joseph Root's chila,
Apr. 20. Kunice Bronson,
Aug. 15. Two children of Isaac Allen,

Wife of Do. Jr.,

" a8. Infant of Isaac,
Sept. 93. Roswell Pardee's child,
Hannah Nichols' child,

x8ii. Samuel Grilley's child,
Mch. 24. lohn Lounsbury's wife.
Apr. 15. Horace Harrison's chila,
May 25. Amos Prichard, Jr.'s,

" 28. Lorren Barnes, Esq.,
July. Moses Beach's child,

" ao. John I|Ounsbury,
Sept. 9. Asahel Roberts,

'^ 27. Joshua Pelly of Vir.,
Oct. 19. Reuben Adams* child,
Nov. 30. Woster Allen,

Z8l2.

Apr. X. James Blakesley's child,

*' 3. Koxy Adams' cnild,
Aug. 30. A stranger,

Isaac Bronson's child,
Sept. Lewis Hungerford's child,
Nov. 27. Mr. J^ounsburvj

18x3. Elias Root's child,

Hannah Bartholomew,
Mch. 12. Shadrack Benhara,

" 13. Julia Nichols,

" 19. Wid. Mercy Bronson,
May. James Warner,
Sept. X4. Rosa Bill Selkrigg,

*' 19. Sarah Merrill,
Oct. 30. Zenas Brockett's wife,

Hannah, a negro,
Nov. 28. Isaac Benham,
Dec. Z2. Daniel Roberts,

1814.
Jau. 8. Joel Perkins' wife,

Luther Pierpont's child, '

" 30. Samuel Biakeslee,
Feb. z. Edmund Austm's child,

'' 18. Sally Hotchkiss,
Mch. 12. Saloma Peck,

" 19. Samuel Seymour's child,
Asa Bronson's child,
Apr. x8. Harriet Hodges,
June a. William Bradley,
Nov. 2. Ralph Doohttle's wife,
Dec. 15. Amos Terrel's child,

*' 17. Wid. Cook,

" 19. Elijah Porter,

" 20. Amos Prichard,

'' 28. Wid. Elizabeth Brown,

1815.
Jan. Moses Beach's child,

" 8. Sally Nettlelon,

" 19. George Cook,

" 22. Alfred Payne,
Feb. I. Thomas Clark's wife Elizabeth,
8. Miles Nichols,

" xo. Joel Roberts,
" 22. Wid. ~

Elizabeth Terrell,
Mch. A. Bryan's child,
J une. Preserved Porter Bronson,

Wife of John Wclton, Esq.,
Apr. 13. Benj. Hotchkiss,
June 30. Wm. Warner's child,

Charles Leonard's child,
July X3. Moses Beach's wife, Anne,
" 20. Wid. Lydia Warner,
" 21. Elizabeth Terrell,
•* 26. Rev. Luke Wood's child,
" 28. Johnson Warner's child,
Aug. 19. Calvin Hotchkiss,
" 25. Sophia Judd,
" 26. Albert Burton,
" 28. John Tuttle's wife,
" 29. William Secly's child,
" 30. Samuel Judd, Jr.'s widow,
Wid. Lucy Porter's child,
Sept. 2. Enoch Woodruff's child,
Wm. Seely's child,
" 4. Luke Wood's child,

7»

bept.

94

4»

a

(»

19

X w

%%

30

1

X w

'* i

id

X w

" i

2m

1

73

^" *

1^

Oct.

t*

7

i

30

ti

3m

" ,

86

" 1

IZ

" %

33

" «

3m

" ^

33

" »;

** «

aw

" 3i

xm

60

Nov. n

X w

X

2a

6m

" ^

66

77

Dec. ac

«7

x8x6.

76

52

Ian. tj
Feb. 1

X2

Apr. 1

23

* ai

60

12

Aug. i

77

Sept.3r

x6

Nov. 3c

•

Dec. z^

30

X

18x7.

41

z

Apr. ; ,
May x: ,

25

June 2. .

18

6m

x8i8.

am

Feb. X. .

19

U

May

June X .
Nov. a .

2

80

X819.

74

Feb. X .

75

" a .

74

'* 2 .

Mch. .

2

" I .

29

Sept. I .

xi

Nov. .

73

" X .

9

iSao

77

Jan.

75 .

it

id

Aug.

21

" 1 .

U

" 1 .

" 1 .

6

" s .

xd

Sept.

28

Dec. ! .

80

1821

22

Jan. : .
Feb. : .

X

4

Mch.

20

May

Z2

9

•

49

a

6

3

4

4

BISTORT OF WATERBVRT.

U^.Vi

»:-;j;

MilHnda Todd,

Elijuh NlifhoU' w

A Mr. Cady,
1. Swnud Poller.

I»vid Ford of
:>. Huuh Hirubam

Mr, Luke Wood'i <
S. Col. Bt\m Wcllon,

>. Joihua MoKL

I. Martin Ujwo'ichiy,
Thomas fudd'i child,
Nobkjudd't child.

8. John Hull.

ShepardHayden'scbild,

S. Mr. BvingloB [Aiigmlus,

Wile or Mr. Foech,

Cyru. Grill./.
Lc^ McClDud,

y Id. Qf B.
Id Mil,

S

I. Silly L. Pridurd, dan. of Dand. Jr.

(dropay in the head),
F. Child □( ChauDccy Adams (drap^ in

r. David Baldwla. Jr. (fall froi

anu Chat lie Id fcSd' age),
(eiTsipclHs).

: 3:

I. Ralph Dooliule,
i. Lue [Leavy] Treai

bury Becords of Marriagei, Birthi
Illy la 1763." entitled " Account c
iryfimSoiieiy." [BjrAihley.'koi

CaM. Samuel Judd (old age).
Marcui Botsford'i wife,
Kotatio Gate* Bnruon (tip- fe

Wph Nichoia, ;;

}. Ge«geW,Cami>,>.ofGideaii,"
1. John McLand (old age).
'■ Col. Marcui Bn>n»B (lyphui fet
]. Capt, Pliny Sheldon (cooHimplig
3. Almon Clark's wire (lyphni fevei
J. Roiwell Pnii (died al Windwii

buried here (typhoi fever).
i. Capl. Timothy Uibbud in Sociel]

Salem (lyphui (over),
" lame. Scov[ll. E«i. (complicated
). EnkielSmilb (fever).

I. Cap!. Joseph BronwD. "
1. Edward Priebard, 1. Isaac, ■'
,. William Clark.
,. Austin nerpDui's child (blaek ca

I. Else

it Hn.nx
pleuri^),
panielGrilley(p

i').

f H. G. (

""»,

:ph Lane (dysentery),

July ,0. JoMph Hnl
iug. g. Chili oljo.

■• ,7. Wid. Hann... „ ., — .^„|,

Sep>. a. " Elii. Haldwin,

■' g. Stephen HuIchkiH.
l)et. 13. Samuel B.Nonhrop(dropiyinthecl

" 11. Widow Rachel Tohnson (dropay).
Dec. iS. " Eunice Hill (old aae).

" 6. Charles Leonard's i
'- 17. E. F. Memll'schil.
1; 16. Joseph E.Chatfield

0 Plan

_,''"";i

!■ J.'^iiL"'.'' <^-:''

le (old agel,

mplv),
li (old age),

I, Richard F. Welcoo ('typhus
J. Widow Lydi- T-J-l '

>i. Hin

. Tompkins' cbAd (who

Sept, 7. Lydia, wife ij Giles □«

■' '• Amos Terrill (fever).
Oct, 3. Huldnh. wife of Noah l..un.

" 7. Amos Tenill, >d (lung (ever)

" 17. Philena, widow of David Perl
dau.ofAmosTerril],dec'd(l

" 9g, David Dowos' wile,
Nov. 17. Bin Todd an Idiot.
Dec, li. Mary Pratt (coniumatiDn),

'* 16. Ichabud Merrill (old age).

" 16. ji>hn Sandland's child (dropsy in head). 5
" 19. UlilM Holt (lung fever), i«

June 7. Benjamin Furell'sion (canker), n

" v). Daniel Upion'i wife (drnpay), 57

July 6. Benjamin Btockell'i wife (Jropjir). 6s

Dick, a negrn. d, Jan. il, 183;. a. qa—acc. to BesDct

Bronun.
Richard freeman [oegro] d. Jan. 11,1835.8, about jS

— says Rev. Allen C. Morj^an.

ADDITIONS TO THE FA

Adams. Andrews. Arn<

Abraham Adams: Eliza

David, b. June 6, 1764; m. Sarah Tyler. Ma

Andrew Adams: Noali

The first three children died in infancy. F*e1

Clarissa (called Clara); m. David Hopkins about 'Pimfl

Hannaji; m. Edwin Warner, and had Mary, b. b.lS

1826; Andrew, b. Dec. 28, 1838. i?^«,.

Nabby; m. about 1828 Lewis Mansfield, and had '^^^

George, Henrv, Harriet, Warren and Sarah. Wa

Removed to New York. m.

Constant L.; m. Emily Davis, dau. of Truman, _

x8^o, and had Betsey, b. Dec. 4, 1831 (Mrs. Beilj£

Willard Hopkins), and Enos Osborn, b. Sept. j^
10, 1833.

Harriet; m. Oliver Evans and had Grace and Ebcn

Richard. lutl

Emeritt* m. Theo. Bocimsdes and had Orrow, <% ,

Franklin and Ellen. Capt.

Lyman Adams, s. of Reuben, m. Alma 7- £

Rebecca Baldwin of Watertown, Sept. Dani(

17, 1840. \

John Alcox's wife was dau. of John ^

Blakeslee (according to James Shep- Stepl

ard of New Britain). 16,

Gideon Allyn, from Guilford in 1740,

says "my brother Elwell." '• |

Abraham Andrus, Sr., was s. of Francis 3* c

of Hartford and Fairfield, who died J; j

^^^2- Benj^

Abraham Andrus, cooper, s. of John and Ca

Mary of Farmington, b. Oct. 31, 1648, josei

m about 1682 Sarah Porter, dau. of ^ j^J

Robert and his wife Mary (dau. of £ ,
Thomas Scott). Sarah was b. Dec. 20,

1657, and both joined the Farmington \ \

church July 15. 1683. He d. May 3, {. \

1693, and Sarah m. Mch. 2, 1707, James 4. \

Benedict of Danbury. J- -

1. Sarah, bapt. at Farminj^ton, Mch. 9, 1683-4; m. 7. ^

Th. Raymond. Moa

2. Abraham, bapt. at Farmington, July 17, 1687; «»OS

probably d. unmarried. AuiT

3. Mary, bapt. at Farmington, May 18, 1689; m. q~!

James Benedict, Jr. ^"

4. Benjamin, probably d. young. i.

5. Robert, b. 1693; m. Anna Olmstead. a. ]

Gordon Spencer Andrews, b. Tune 17, 3^

1809, s. of Timothy F., m. Nov. 17. jj.^

1844. Catharine Denning of New ^^

Britain y^

Hannah Andrews, b. Feb. 26, 1647, dau. d.

of John, m. Obadiah Richards, 1666. g^^^^

Henry R. Andrews, s. of Gordon, m. mi

July 18. 1840, Lucinda M. Brooks of 2,tti
Haddam.

James Andrews and Martha: Dan

Thomas, b. Aug. 19, 1785. 0<

Laura Andrews, dau. of William, m. d.
Seth Thomas, Apr. 14. 1811.

Thomas Andrews, d. in Hartford, Sept.
12, 1754.

17*

I

162 AP

HI8T0BT OF WATERBUBT.

Ben HAM. Bronson.

Ebenezer Benham, was s. of Ebenezer
of New Haven, who d. before 1763.

Ruth Benham d. May 30, 1826, a. 47.

Jacob Bidwell, Jr., m. Martha Tomp-
kins at Watertown, Nov., 1790.

Joseph Blake of Middletown, s. of John,
m. 1734, Esther Bacon.

X. Esther, b. Oct. 14, 1736; m. Amos Guernsey.

2. Toaeph, b. Dec. 22, 1738 (of Torrington).

3. Richard, b. Nov. 3, 1740; d. 1744.
'4 Seth, b. Mch. 35, 1743.

5. Elizabeth, b. and d. 1746.

Esther d. Apr. 12, 1746, and Joseph m.
Sept. 25, 1746, Rebeckah Higby, wid.
of John Dowd. Joseph d. Nov. i, 1760.
Rebeckah probably returned to Middle-
town and m. Joseph Wetmore, Oct. 12,
1761.

6. Richard, | m. in Litchfield, Damaria

and >-b. Oct. 7, 1747. Smedley.

7. Elizabeth, )

8. Ruth (or Lucretia), b. Sept. 4. 1749.

9. Frcelovc, b. in Waterbury, 1751.

Seth Blake, s. of Joseph, m. Anne Wet-
more, and d. June 5. 1781. Anne m.
Hezekiah Hale of Middletown, Oct.
29, 1783.

Thomas Blake, nephew of Richard, en-
listed in Waterbury, i77g, and received
three bounties.

Bede Blakeslee, dau. of David, m. Eben-
ezer Goss.

Abigail, w. of Ephraim Bostwick, d.
April 20, 1700, aged 77-6-3.

Giles Brackett, s. of Richard (and a
granddaughter of Rev. James Pierpont
of New Haven), was b. in North
Haven, Apr. 30, 1761, and m. Sarah
Smith, b. July 10, 1 768, dau. of Capt.
Stephen of East Haven. He came to
Waterbury 1803, and d. June 2, 1842.
Sarah d. Nov. 27, 1841.

I. Polly, b. Nov. 17, 1786; m. Maj. Samuel Hill.

3. Sally, b. June 30, 1788; m. Smith D. Castle and
removed to Camden, N. Y.; had Samuel D.,
Chloe S., Grace A., Giles, Harriet, Sarah,
Orlando, Orson, Almira and Flora.

3. Patty, b. Apr. 29, 1791; m. Andrew H. John-

son— who made spinnm^-wheels in Waterbury
in 1807 — and had William, Edward, Nancy,
Lydia.

4. Harriet, b. Nov. 38, 1794; m. Ol. Samuel Peck

of Prospect and removed to Bloomfield, N. Y.

5. Roswell, b. July 17, 1796.

6. Lydia, b. July st, 1798- m. Smith Miller

removed to Camden, N. Y.

John Bronson, b. Jan., 1644, s. of John,
m. Sarah, dau. of Moses Ventris and
d. 1696, before Nov. 7. Sarah d. Jan.
6, 1711-12.

X. John, b. 1670; d. in Farm., June 15, 1716.
a. Sarah, b. 1072; m. Ezekicl Buck.

3. Dorothy, b. 1675; m. Stephen Kelsey of Weth-

ersfield.

4. Ebenezer, b. 1677; m. Mary Munn, Aug. 13,

z 703, and d. 1727.

and

Bronson. Constant.

5. William, b. 1683; m. 1707, Esther Barti«s, and

d. 1761 in Farmington.

6. Moses, b. x686, m. Jane Wiat.

7. Grace, b. x68a; m. in 1711, Jacob Barnes, x o£

Joseph of Farmington.

James Brown m. Oct. 31, 1704, Klizabeth
Kirby. b Feb. 20, 1683, eldest child of
Joseph Kirby (b. July 17, 1656. only
surviving son of John Kirby, one of the
original settlers of Middletown) and
Sarah Markham, who were m. at,Weth-
ersfield, Nov. 10. 1681.

Children b. at New Haven:
z. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 1705.
3. Eunice, b. Oct. z, 1707.

3. James, b. June 5, 1709.

4. Sarah, b. Nov. 9 17x1; m. Dan. Thomas.

5. Dinah, b. June 14, 17x4.

6. Joseph, b. Sept. 20, 17x6.

7. Klam, b. July 28, 17 19.

8. Asa, b. Sept. 17, 1731.

William Brown:

3. Eliza J., b. Apr. 1, 183b.

Hezekiah Bunnell d. Nov. 24, 1797. a. 37.

John Camp, s. of Joab, was a Congrega-
tional minister.

John Castle m. Freelove, dau. of Samuel
Brown. Her heirs were Isaac B.,
Chloe Tuttle, Minerva Matthews, Be-
thial and Joel.

Daniel Chatfield's children were bapt.
May 26. 1817.

George E. Chipman m. Mary (or Maria)
Dutton of Watertown, June 13, 1843.

Caleb Clark, s. of Ebenezer and Eliza-
beth (Royce), b. at Wallingford, Sept
6, 1701.

Chauncey Clark d. Dec, 1795.

Elon Clark m. Sally HalL

Joseph Clark m. Marah Parker of Wal-
lingford.

Lydia; m. Caleb Wheeler.
Deborah; m. Samuel Sanford, Jr.

Rev. Silas Constant is said to have been
" son of Col. Joseph Constant, an offi-
cer of the French army, who m. in
March, 1849, Susan Terrell, dau. of
Elijah of Salem, Mass. (?) Soon after
this marriage. Col. Constant sailed for
France to arrange his aflFairs. The
vessel on which he sailed was never
heard from, and Mrs. Constant died
soon after the birth of Silas in Water-
bury, bequeathing him to the care of
her sister, who had married a Beebe."
Although Silas Constant's name ap-
pears frequently on our records, and
his birth is recorded with the familv of
Jonathan Beebe, there is no hint of his
relationship to the family. Beebe's
will— which he did not sign — gives
"to Silas Constant j^so, when he be-
comes of age." No Elijah Terrell has

siHa

ADDITIONS TO THE FAl

Constant. Evans. Pen

been found at Salem nor in Waterbury. Cap

It is said "he married in 1770 Amy Sc

Lewis, his second cousin." Mrs. Jona- N«

than Beebe and John Lewis were of
second cousins. After his thirtieth

year he became a minister. He prob- Tho

ably studied under the direction of \\^

Rev. Jacob Green of Hanover, N. J., (f

and was ordained May 29, 1783. He jy

? reached in various places in New 'pj

ersey, until Nov. 8, 1785, when he 5^
removed to Yorktown, and remained

pastor of the Presbyterian church for "f*

nearly forty years. ^7'

Ebenezer Cook: ^

Justus, grad. at Yale, 1779. RlCll
Rozell, grad. at Yale, 1777: m. Sarah Blakeslee,
June xo, 1784. He (not Ebenezer) was pastor

at Montviile until his death, Apr. 18, 1798. JOSe

Henry Cook, b. 1683, s. of Henry, b. Dec. W

30, 1652, at Salem, Mass.. to Henry '4

and Judith (Birdsall), m. Experience o^

L3rman. x.

X. Martha, b. at Wallingford, Aug. 2a, 1706; m.

Nov. x8, 1729, Joseph Chittenden. ^'

Experience d. Oct. 8, 1709, and Henry 4.

m. Mary Frost, who d. July 31, 1718. 5-
Henry m. before 1720, his third wife,

Mrs. Sarah, eldest dau. of Richard 6.

Towner, and wid. of Samuel Frost. y

o.

Amos Culver: Clarissa, b. 1791, was dau. ,

of the second wife. ,2

xo.

w

Abel Curtis, s. of Stephen, m. Freelove
Bartholomew of Branford, Mch. 20, Isai 1

1741- ^7 '

X. Isaac, b. June 13, 1743. lAe\ I

Lieut. Daniel Curtis, b. Aug. 7, 1707. A i

Stephen Curtis, Jr., b. July 14, 1726, m. ?^ '

Thankful Royce, ly^i ace. to Walling- ^

ford records. ^^

7. Thomas, bapt. Apr. 6, 1766.

Capt. Michael Dayton d. Sept. 22, 1776,
a. 55. His wife d. July 9, 1813, a. 87.

Enos Doolittle m. Marv Doolittle, June
25, 1747, and d. in Wallingford, Oct
27. 1756.

Katharine, b. Aug. 17, 1749.

John, b. Dec. 31, 1754; d. 1755. Qbl

Patience, b. May, 1756. t

Deacon David Dutton d. Feb. 20, 1774, 2

a. 73. t

Ebenezer Elton had twenty-one chil- E

dren, the fourth, Bradley, b. Apr. 11, 3^,
1742; Patience was the fitth.

Charles Englishes wives were sisters, 6<
daus. of Asa Bronson. Jqi,

Randol Evans m. Phebe, dau. of John A
Warner. ,^

Mary; m. Levi Hubbard. •'

Chloc; m. Moses C. Welch. ^

Arad, bapt. Feb., 1766. C

HIBTOBT OF WATSRBURT.

Holmes. Lewis.

Isrftel Holmes, a young silverRinith from

Greenwich, where he was b. Dec. ao,
1768, came to Waterbuiy about I7g3.
He was s. of Reuben Holmes, b. about
1733, and Ruth Wood; grandson of
Benjamin Holmes, who was living in
Greenwicli in 1711; great-gran dsou of
Stephen, b. in Stamford. Jan. 14,
1664-5. m. to Mary Hobby, dau. of
John, Nov. i3. 1686, and d. in Green-
wich, 1710; great-great-grandson of
John, who was b. in England, m.
lachel Waterbury (dau. of John and
Kose). May la, 1659. and d. in Bed-
ford, N. Y. John Holmes was s. of
Francis and Ann. who were in Stam-
ford as early as 1648.
Iaa«c HapkiDs:

Rult, noi Wcilihy, m. Thomai Wilioo.
RoswellHopkiii*, of Nine Partners. 1768.
Timothy Hapkiiia was deacon in 1743.
Darid Hotcbkias m. Peninah Peck, wid.

of Charles Todd.
Frederick Hotcbkiaa was drowned at

Windsor. N. Y.
Gideon Hilla Hotchklsa m. Ar villa

Brooks.
Lauren Hatchkisa m Nancy Hill.
Saronel How m. Elitabeth Benedict,

Nov. 14, 1780,
Elnathan Judd d about Jan. 1, 1777.
Eunice Judd d. Sept. 7, 1837, a. 52.
Harrey Judd, s, of Isaac and Anna:
Niacf Ann. b. iSoirni. Manhill Hojuller.

Lieut. Thomas Judd, b. about 1638, s. of
Thomas, m. Sarah Steel, dau. of John
of Farm.

I, ThomM, b. sboui 1661.
1. John; m. Hmiuh Hikeoit.

William Judd, s of Thomas of Farming-
ton, m. Mary Steele, dau. of John,
Mch 30, 1658, and d. 1690. Mary d.
Oct. 27, 1718, aged about 80.

I. M«r, b. %(<%»-. en. Abel Jana.

I. Tbomis, biic>i. Oa. 13. 1669; d. Jan. 4. 1747.

J. John, b. -667: i. » Farm. 1710.

;. Samuel, b. 1673: m. Ann Han, 1710, and AU-

I. Eliu

~'tl^i..

. .7*8.

Rev, Hark Leavenwortb was s. of

Thomas and Mary (Dorman). She
was b. iGSo to Edmund Dorman and
Hannah, dau. of Richard Hull, who
were m. 1661. Edmund d. 1711.

Lewis. Peck.

Asahel Lewis m. Sarah Atkins, dau. of
Josiah, and had Larmon, Lawrence
Sterne, Lucian, Asahel. and Sarah
Clarissa.

Caleb Lewis and Eunice Welton:

Ucob. b. Sept. 7.
Caleb, b, Apr. '.j

Erastus Lewis, b. June, 1774. 5. of
Adonijah and Elizabeth (Newelli, m.
Mav28. 1801. Salome Booth, b. Mcb.
15. 1785, dau. of Robert. Removed in
1824 to New Britain.

Jacob Lewis, see Abaer Lewis.

Samuel Lewis, Jr., b. 1748: A. July iS.
1S32, a. 74.

Uoses Luddington d. before Oct- 3, 175^.

ThoniAS UaJlorj m. Elizabeth .who

d. 1795. a. 69.

Caleb Uerriman m. Margaret Robinsoo,
dau. of Capt. Josiah and Rutb (Mer-
riam), May 12, 1747. and d. Aug. A.
1797, a. 72.

William Horriss m. Elizabeth Scott of
Watertown, Sept. 3. 1848,

Abner Hunson was s. of Caleb Munson
and Abigail (Brocket) of Wall., who
were m. Apr. 23, 1735- Abner wash.
Mch. 2. 1736; Herraon. Oct. 28, 1738:
Cornelius, Apr. 16. 1742; Benjamin.
Aug. 23. 1744: and Caleb Mch. 13,
1746-7. Caleb d. and Abigail m. Isaac
Bronson (3).

Stephen HnasoD of Plymouth m. Sally
Boughton, Sept. 18, 1842.

George Nichols's will was dated Sept
15, 1788, in which he mentions "mv
daughters Prue— wife of Dr, Daniel
Southmayd — Susanna, and Molly
Nichols,"

Simeon Nichols, b. Jan. 21, s. of Simeos,
m. Jan. 7, 1818, Ronana Prichard, b.
May 19, 1794, and removed to Colum-
bia, Ohio.

John Painter m. Deborah Welsber, Mcb.
27, 1738, at Wall.

JohanDali, b. Jan. 31, ]7w-

gaiah, b. Apr. 1. 174': >n. Benj. WiUianu.

John, b. May J9, .743.

Edoard, b. Oci. 3. 174!-

HenryH. and Harriet Peck: children:

1. Henrr Braadagee. b. Feb. 14, iSii.

1 d. in New Haven.

,. Kaiharine Louu

ADDITIONS TO THE FAM

Perkins. Prindlk. Prin

Elias Perkins m. Sally Adams, dau. of John

Reuben. 5,

Jonathan Pond, s. of Phineas and Martha ^^®

of Branford, was b. 1739. He m. OhBi

Susanna Hungerford of Bristol, and b. ]

Jerusha Jerome. He had nine chil- John

dren, of whom were Phineas, b. before of

1770, and Philip, b. 1778. j^^

Dr. Daniel Porter's wife was dau. of Oc

Joshua Holcombe and Ruth Sherwood Qq\^ <

of Windsor. (j^

Edward Porter, s. of Ezra, d. in Troy, Hu

NY., 1794. Heirs, his brothers and Du

sisters, Francis, Nathan, Daniel, Phin^

Joseph, Ezekiel, Ezra, Mary Buell, of ]

Elizabeth, Huldah Wilcox. Milei

Dr. James Porter and Lucy: Zach

5. Henry, b. June 2, 1775. ^^^

Levi G. Porter, b. June 8, 1760, s. of Edmi

Gideon of Farm. , and Catharine Jones, Yf'ii

b. Oct. 6, 1763, were m. Jan. 16, 1783. j

X. Samuel, b. Mch. 24, 1784.

2. Huldah, b. Feb. a8, 1786; d. 1794.

3. Philander, b. Feb. 19, 1788.

4. Horace, .b. June 15, 1790.

5. Rhoda. b. Apr. 20, 1792; d. 1795. Esth

6. Levi Goodwin, b. Apr. 10, 1794. rTi

7. Abel, b. Apr. 15, 1706. aOl

8. Amanda, b. Aug. 18, 1798. Gidei

9. Huldah, b. June ao, 1801. t>
10. Rhoda, b. Oct. 25, 1805. * a

Robert Porter m. 1644, Mary Scott, dau. *'"

of Thomas of Hartford: Andi

X. Mary, b. Feb. 24, 1646; m. Benj. Andrua. txt'II

2. John, b. Nov. 12, 1648; d. before 1686. Vvill i

3. Thomas, b. Oct. 29, 1650; m. May, 1678, Abigail pn

Cowles, and d. X7X9. p*i;

4. Robert, b. Nov. X2, 1652; d. X689.

5. Elizabeth, b. Jan. ix, 1653-4; ™* Thomas An- Calv !

dreivs, s. of Francis of Hartford. He lived in \^i \

Milford, X675-X700. . . I

6. Joanna, bapt Jan. 6, 1655-6. Stl I

7. Sarah, b. Dec. 20, 1657; ^' Abr. Andrus. OU

8. Benjamin, b. Mch. x8, 1659-60; d. 1689. j^^

9. Hannah, b Apr., X664, m. John Browne. .^^ '.
xo, Hepiibah, b. Mch. 4, x666. ™<

Robert mar., after 1675, Hannah, wid. ^P
of Stephen Freeman of Newark.

Stephen Porter, s. of Thomas, m. Lydia
Manvill of Watertown.

Daniel Potter d. Oct. 29, 1773; his wife
was aged 54 yrs.

Russell Potter of West Troy, N. Y., m.

Sarah Scott, Apr. 22, 1840. Isbm :

Benjamin Prichard of Watertown m.
Mrs. Alma Prichard, Apr. 10, 1842.

David Prindle m. Hope Wetmore: sv

Rachel, b. Oct. 15, X77S; m. Dr. R. S. Wood- w;

ward of Watertown; Sally m. Jacob Turner; rjati

Linus; Rebecca m. Bronson; Eleaser; ^T

Jonathan; Rhoda m. Welton; Ruth m. G*

Asa Bronson: David; Hannah m. Eleazer TaVk

Woodruff; Chauncey; Eunice m. Hershel J"°'

Welton. at

Sc
w:

vi

166 AP

HISTORY OF WATERBURY.

Stanley. Tyler.

TimothT Stanley, living in Waterbury
1707, had land, •* one parcel given him
by the town (Farming^n) which is
called a soldier* s lot"

Jared Terrell:

Esther; m. Capt. Levi Wooster.

Letsom; m. Smith, and had Monroe, b.

Feb. 4, x8x6; m. 1844, Mary, dau. of David

Beecher.

Daniel Thomas, Jr., of New Haven m.
Sarah Brown, dau. of James, Dec. 25,

1735.
Joshna Thornton m. Sally (Judd), wid.
of Benj. Hoadley.

Stephen Tinker m. Rachel Chatfield,
dau. of Samuel, and d. in Pough-
keepsie.

Rev, Samuel Todd, b. Mch. 6, 1716-17.

Samuel Towner, b. at Branford. 1690,
yoimeest s. of Richard of Guilford and
branford (who d. in 1727), m. Rebecca
Barnes, dau. of Thomas, Jan. 25, 1716,
who d. Jan. 31, 1728, in Walhngford;
and he m. June 27, 1728, Amy Ward,
b. Apr. 7, 1707, dau. of Captain Wil-
liam of Wall. In 1 73 1 he removed to
Waterbury, in 1739 to Goshen, to
Woodbury, to Newtown, where in 1750
he sold his lands for ;f2ooo, and
moved on to the now town of Sherman,
where he d. in 1784, a. 94. Of his
thirteen children, Phebe, the eldest, b.
Sept. 14, 1 717, m. Arah Ward, brother
of Amy, his second wife; Samuel, his
eldest son, was living in Waterbury;
1742, and must have died soon after,
as his youngest son, b. 1746, was called

Samuel; Lettice m. Pringle and

lived on Phillips' Patent; Amy, b. in
Waterbury, 1735, m. David Barnum
of New Fairfield, and two settled in
St. John's, Canada.

Dan. Tuttle:

Simon and Salmon are elsewhere j^iven as Lyman
and Solomon.

Jesse Tuttle m. Eleanor Warner, dau. of
Ephraim and Eleanor (Smith). She
was b. Sept. 28, 1757.

Noah Tuttle removed, 1795, to Camden,

N. Y.

3. Sarah may be Laura.

Obed Tuttle, b. June 26, 1776, at New
Haven, s. of Reuben, m. Lucretia
Clark.

z. Rachel, b. Apr. 3, xSoo.
a. Lauren, b. Mch. 13, 180a.

3. Eben Clark, b. Apr. 27, 1806.

4. I^eonard, b. Mch 3, iSoiS.

5. Philemon, b. Nov 19, 1814; m. 1836, Jane E.

Eaves of Birmingham, Eng.

Alma Tyler m. Elias Porter, 1817.

Tyler. Wooster.

Esther and Eunice Tyler had brothers,
Isaac, Abram, Enos, Jacob and Mile*,
whose births should be on our records.

Phineas Tyler m. Elizabeth Hoadley, b.
1776, dau. of Jude.

Jesse Upson, s. of Benjamin, was a phy-
sician. He had a son, Benjam n,
killed in the war of 18 12.

Arah Ward, b. in Wallingford, July 5,
1718, s. of William and Lettice (Beach
of Milford), m. in Goshen, Aug. 13,
1740, Phebe Towner, dau. of Samuel.

Diantha, b. 1741; m. David Candee.

Daniel Warner:

2. Sarah; m. John Hough, of Hanover, N. J.

David Warner, s. of Benj., d. in Strat-
ford, Mch. 18, 1794, a. 62.

John Warner, Sr., m. Ann Norton,
June 28, 1649; d. 1679, leaving John,
baniel, Thomas, and Sarah bapt. Mch.
15, 1656-7, and m. William Higason.
Daniel d. before Nov. 26, 1679.

John Warner, Jr;, d. before Mch, 1706-7.

X. John, b. Mch. x, 1670.

3. Ephraim, d. Aug. i, 1753, in hia 84th year.

3. Robert of Woodbury, d. 1759.

4. Ebenezer, b. 1677; was "capuin" and ''doc-

tor," and d. Apr. 26, 1755, a. 78. (Roxbury
cemetery.)

5. Lydia, bapt. Mch. 23, x68o-i; m. Samuel Bron-

son.

6. Thomas, bapt. X683; d. before his father.

John Warner m. Anne ^\x\X\^,
David Wood: children:

Olive; m. North of New Haven; Alonzo;

Lorenzo. (Erase Ruth Allen.)

Samuel Woodruff m. Jemima Judd,
Sept. 6, 1 78 1.

Israel Woodward m. Mch. 31, 1731.
Israel Woodward, Jr.:

X. Israel Bard.

Azariah Wool worth: erase granddau.
of David Wood.

Albert Wooster m. Mitte (Chatfield),
wid. of Lyman Smith,

C. W. Wooster m. E. A. Welton, dau. of
Arad,

The following physicians, in addition
to those mentioned in the second vol-
ume, were living here between 1730 and
1780:

William Andrews, David Arnold (1769),
John Crane (1768), Daniel Clifford (re-
moved to Stratford), 1769, Benjamin
Hull, Tames Porter, Peter Powers (1755),
Daniel Scott (1733), Daniel Southmavd,
Jesse Upson, John Warner, Ozias War-
ner, William Warner (1773), Jonas Weed

(1737.)

.4.

II

TOWN CLERKS OF WAT!

WITH THE DATES OF THEI

r"

r.

If
\

, JOHN STANLEY,

1696, THOMAS JUDD. Jr.,
1709, Deacon THOMAS JUDD,

1712. JOHN HOPKINS,

1713, JOHN JUDD,
1717, WILLIAM JUDD.

1721. The Rev. JOHN SOUTHMAYD,

1755. THOMAS CLARK.

1764. EZRA BRONSON,

1782. MICHAEL BRONSON.

1784. ASAHEL CLARK,

1787. WILLIAM LEAVENWORTH,

1793, JOHN KINGSBURY,

18C4, ABNER JOHNSON,

1806, ASHLEY SCOTT,

1812, JOHN KINGSBURY,

1817, ASHLEY SCOTT,

1831, ELISHA S. ABERNETHY,

1837, WILLARD SPENCER,

1839, CHARLES SCOTT.

1840, NORTON J. BUEL,

1841, SOLOMON B. MINOR,

1842, CHARLES SCOTT,

(Henry B. Clark,
1^43. "j Horace Tuttle,

^ appointed by the selectmen,

1844, SOLOMON B. MINOR,

1847, JOHN KENDRICK,

1848,
1849,

i85i»

1852.

1854,
1856,

1858,

1859,
1861,

1862,
1863.
1869,

1870,

1871,

1877
1878
1881
1882
1890
1894

1894
1895

•&•

rial .^ <£>rv«^vMV

Umtit Brvmfffn/n

■ Hl'lii/ai-t" I

LOAN DEPT.

This book is due on the last date stamped beloiw, or
on the date to whidi renewe^
Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.

^PYl7lQRRftft --

I.

JAN 11 19

r.

dA

\

j. C. L ^

\\x^

(A/

^

_Y

Ul

m "^

4HTER=J-lBfiA^

LOAN

jm ai 1980

8E6.Qi^MIG2^«0

liD 21A-60m-l? 'HT
(H2<llslOM7<?B

General Library

iTniversity of California

Berkeley