During the reigns of James I and Charles I, kings of England, the puritans (as Bellini sings in his opera) were subjected to a destructive oppression, and a furious persecution for
conscience sake.
And seeingy no end to their sufferings, projected settlements in
the wilderness of America (a continent discovered by Amerigo Vespucci, hence the name), as a place of retreat for the Church of God, and
where the salvation and freedom of themselves and of their posterity might be
promoted and secured.
Hence large companies left their native land and crossed
the Atlantic ocean.
Among them were persons of wealth, learning, and distinguished piety and eminence.
On the 26th July, 1637,
-- John Davenport,
-- Samuel
Eaton
-- Teofilo Eaton
Edward Hopkins
Thomas Gregson,
and their company
arrived at Boston.
They were invited to continue there, or in that vicinity.
This proposal they rejected.
They were determined to settle a new "colony", or plantation, as they called it -- "south, where the weather is milder."
Accordingly, in the fall of that year, Tefofilo Eaton and others explored the country
along the sea-coast, west of The Connecticut River.
Teofilo Eaton finally fixed upon the Quinipiack River, as the place of their settlement.
On the 80th March, 1638, the whole company sailed from Boston.
In about two weeks arrived safe and sound at the place of
their destination.
On the 18th April, the first Lord’s day after their
arrival.
The people attended public worship under a large oak, and Davenport preached to them from Matth. vi. 1.
Soon after their arrival, they
held a day of fasting and prayer at the close of which, they solemnly
entered into a plantation covenant, binding themselves, that as in matters that
concern the gathering and ordering of a Church, so also in all public, ofifces
which concern civil order; as choice of magistrates and officers, making and
repealing laws, dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of like
nature, they would all of them, be ordered by the rules which the scripture held
forth to them.
By this covenant they were regulated the first year.
On the
24th Nov. 1638, Teofilo Eaton, John Davenport, and the other planters, made their first purchase of Momauguin, sachem of that part of the
country, and his counsellors.
The colony promised to protect Momauguin and his
Indians from their enemies, and that they should have sufficient planting ground
between the harbour and Saybrook fort.
This ground was located in East-Haven,
from the Old Ferry Mount or Red-Rock, to the Solitary Cove, on the west.
On the north, the road from the ferry to Stoney-River.
On the east, from the said road
along the foot of Grave or Fort Hill and the road that runs from Bridge Swamp to
the Solitary Cove.
The purchasers also gave the sachem and his counsellors coats of cloth, alchemy spoons, hatchets, hoes, knives, lmrringers, and scissors.
This contract was signed
by Momauguin and his council on the one part, and John Davenport and Teofilo Eaton on the other part.
Thomas Stanton was the interpreter.
By the oppression
of the Mohawks and Pequods, this tribe was then reduced to about 40 men.
On
the 11th Dec. 1638, the plantation purchased another large tract, which lay principally
north of the former purchase.
This was bought of Montowese, son of the great
Sachem.
It was 10 miles long, north and south, and 13
miles in breadth.
It extended 8 miles EAST of the river
Quinipiack, and 5 miles west of it.
For this tract they have coats, and
allowed the Indians ground to plant, an liberty to hunt on it.
These purchases “included all the lands within the ancient limits of the towns
of New Haven, Branford, and Wallingford, and almost the whole contained
within the present limits of those
towns, and of the towns of East Haven, Woodbridge, Cheshire, Hamden and North Haven.
On the 4th June
1639, all the free planters of Quinipiack convened in a large barn of Newman’s, and formed their Constitution.
Sixty-three names were
subscribed to it on that do ,' and about fifty more were added soon after.
Among tlie subscribers who settled in East Haven, or were concerned in that
settlement, were
William Andrews
Jasper Crayne
Thomas Gregson
William
Touttle or Tuttle
Garvis Boykim
John Potter
Matthew Moulthrop
Matthias
Hitchcock
Edward Patterson.
To these were added
Thomas Morris and John
Thompson.
On the 7th March, 1644, the colony constitution was revised and
enlarged and then were added the names of:
Matthew Rowe
John Tuthill.
In July following:
Allin Ball
Edmund Tooly
Thomas Robinson, sen. and jun.
William
Holt
Thomas Barnes,
Edward Hitchcock.
In August:
Peter Mallory
Nicholas Augur.
On the 4th April, 1654:
George Pardee
John Potter, jun.
In
May:
Matthew Moulthrop, jun., were added.
Feb. 7, 1657, John Davenport, jun.
Jonathan Tuthill, and John Thompson subscribed: May 1st, 1660, Nathaniel Boykim,
and Thomas Tuttle.
Thomas Morris was admitted at free inhabitant 3d July, 1648
John Chedsey, 19th Feb. 1658
George Pardee, 16th June, 1662
and Robert Augur
in 1674.
The town was named New Haven in 1640.
The first division of lands
was made within the town plat, and that vicinity, for home lots.
But several
enterprising farmers turned their attention to the lands on the east side of
the Quinipiack, and began to settle there, when the second division was
made.
In 1689, Thomas Gregson petitioned for his second division at
Solitary Cove, and on the 5th August, 1644, 133 ' acres were alottted to him at
that place.
There Gregson placed his family—the first in East Haven.
The next year
he was appointed agent for the colony to the Parliament in England, to obtain a
patent. In 1647, Mr. Gregson, and Capt. Turner, and Mr. Lamberton, and five or
six more of the principal inhabitants, sailed for England, in a ship of 150 tons
; and were all lost—Jane, the widow of Thomas Gregson, in 1677, gave a deed for
38 acres of the Cove farm to her dau hter Phebe, who had married Rev. John
Whiting, 0f Hartgird, which he sold 18th July, 1678, to George Pardee. And the
remainder of the farmwas sold to George Pardee, jun. soon after it was divided
among the heirs, in 1716.
12 List of Falls, and value of Estates.
In
1640, lots were laid out on the East side the river.
The proportion for the
second division was 20 acres of upland for lOOl. estate, and 2% acres for every
poll in the family.
And on 4th Nov. 1642, the town voted that those who have
their farms at the river called Stoney River (later the East Haven River), shall have liberty to make a
sluice in the river for their own convenience.
Fifty acres of meadow on the
east side, was granted to Rev. M r. Samuel Eaton, 29th Aug. 1640.
Benjaniin
Linge and William Tuttle are allowed to have their meadow when Mr. Eaton hath
his first 50 acres, viz. in the fresh Meadow towards Totokett, and Crayne
is to have his also there.
Jasper Crayne had his lot and house on the east side
of the green;
William Tuttle on the south side of the fresh meadows.
We cannot
ascertain the spot where Benjamin Lingo built.
These were men of wealth, and
much employed in public affairs.
Jasper Crayne sold his farm of 16 acres, to
Matthew Moulthrop, 7th Sept. 1652, and removed to Totokett; and from thence his
son Jasper removed to Newark, 1667.
Wlliam Tuttle had five sons, all of whom
sold their patrimony and removed, except Joseph.
Some of William Tuttle's descendants (via Joseph Tuttle) still
remain in the town.
Benjamin Linge died without children, and Dixwell, one
of King Charles’ judges, married his widow.
In 1649, it was ordered that
Mr. Davenport, pastor of the Church, shall have his meadow, and the upland for
his second division, both together, on the East side of the East River, where
himself shall choose, with all the conveniency the place can afford for a farm,
together with the natural bounds of the place, whether creeks or otherwise.
He accordingly laid out a tract 0 land of about a mile square, and containing
about 600 acres, above Dragon.
In 1650, Alling Ball became his farmer, and
was exempted from militia service, while he continued in Mr. Davenport’s
employment.
The following list of polls and estates, by which the first
division was regulated, will show the relative wealth of some of those who first
had their farms in this town:
John Davenport 3 polls £1000
William Tuttle 7 450
Jasper Crayne S 480
Thomas Gregson 6 600
Benjamin Linge
2 320
William Andrews 2 150
John Cooper 8 30
John Potter 4 25
Matthias Hitchcock 3 50
Matthew Moulthrop 1 10
Edward Patterson 1 40
Richard Berkley 4 20
In 1643, pieces of eight were reckoned at five
shillings and eight pence.
Wampum, in 1640, was fixed at six for a enn
.
Totokett being settled about this time, in 1649, a difficulty arose
concerning the boundary between the two towns, which was committed to an
arbitration, but it appears that the business was still unfinished in
1659.
In 1644, a bridge was built over Stoney River on the road to Totokett,
by William Andrews, for which he charged the town of New Haven £8. 8. 9.
The ferry at Red-Rock, had been kept by Francis Brown.
But in 1650, George
Pardee took it, and he was afterwards allowed to build a house there at his own
expense.
And in 1670 the ferry farm was granted to him, which was left by him to
his son George, and continues still in the possession of his descendants.
The
rates of ferriage established in 1671, were as follows.
For a man and horse,
Sixpence.
If the horse swam over, three pence.
Afterwards it was reduced to
four pence,—and a footman, twopence.
In 1651, William Tuttle, and Benjamin
Linge, and Matthew Moulthrop, obtained 14 acres of the fresh meadow.
They and
the Governor had 20 acres of it.
John Potter and Ellis Mew, also obtained 20
acres of it.
In 1662, John Potter, obtained a piece of land upon which to set
his blacksmith shop.
On Sept. 5, 1640, the General Court, at New Haven, made a grant of
Totokett to Mr. Samuel Eaton,brother of Governor Eaton, upon the condition of
his procuring a number of his friends to make a settlement in that
tract of country.
Samuel Eaton failed in fulfilling the conditions.
About three
years after, the subject was acted upon thus.
Totokett, a place fit for a.
small plantation, betwixt New-Haven and Guilford, and purchased from the
Indians was granted to Swayne and some others in Wethersfield, they
repaying the charges, which are betwixt £12 and 13, and joining in one ju.
I'isdiction with New Haven and the forenamed plantations, upon the same
fundamental agreement settled in Oct. 1643, which they duly considering
accepted.”
The settlement began in 1644. [NfHaven records}
About the same time, John Tuttle, jun. sold to him his house and home
lot—it was the same on which Josiah Bradley lived
And about the same time
William Luddington died, and his widow bought of John Tuttle, jun. land at
Stoney River, which was a part of his patrimony.
John Cooper came to
Stoney River about the time of the building of the Iron works, of which he
appears to have been the agent and overseer.
In 1662, Samuel Heminway (of "Hemingway Avenue" fame) appeared and obtained land for a home lot, which was not far from the furnace.
Thomas Barnes bought of John Harriman south of Muddy Rver, 1662—and in 1664,
petitioned the town for a piece of land at the Iron works, for Ralph Russell,
which, by the advice of the townsmen was ranted.
That lot was later occupied by
Thomas Barnes.
John Russel, his brother, come ere about the same time, but we cannot ascertain the spot he located.
William Fowler owned land on the east
side, and in 1676 be confirmed by deed to John Austin, land, that he had
previously bought of widow Jones.
Anna, widow of WVilliam Andrews, sold to
Matthew Moulthrop, sen. a piece of land at "Fowler’s Cove" in 1667.
This name, and
that of "Fowler’s Creek", were both derived from William Fowler, who owned land or
meadow adjacent to both places.
The purchase and settlement of the great
neck, or South End, appears next in order.
VVilham Andrews, John Cooper,
Sergt. Richard Berkley, Isaac Whitehead, and Nathaniel Merriman, petitioned for
land beyond Solitary Cove, in 1645, but their petition was not granted.
In 1649,
W'illiam Andrews alone applied for the same tract, but failed.
In 165I, Richard
Berkley renewed the application for himself.
But the town refused to grant him
the land, because other men had also applied for it.
On the 8d Dec. 1651, the
application was again renewed, and it was finally argued and ordered that,
William Andrews, Richard Berkley, Matthias Hitchcock, Edward Patterson, and
Edward Hitchcock, shall have the neck of land by the sea side, beyond the Cove,
and all the meadows belonging to it below the Island with a rock upon it.
They
are to have the neck entire to themselves by paying to the town one penny an acre
for 500 acres, for every rate ; and for their meadows as other men do.
They are
to settle there.
' Purchase of South-end. 16 and dwell upon it at
spring next, and improve it by way of farmingfor getting corn, and breeding of
Cattle, and not to dispose of it. by letting or selling, without the Town’s
consent.
And if they, or an of them should remove out of the plantation within
five years, they are to leave the lands to the Town, (if they will accept it)
they paying for improvements as it is then worth, being appraised bv indi 'erent
men.
And if their cattle do damage by eating the meadows the farmers now have at
Stoney River, it is agreed, (Mr. Linge and Mr. Tuttle being present) that a fence
shall be made to secure it from their cattle, which is to be made and maintained
betwixt them ; that is, the farmers on the neck half, and the farmers at Stoney
River, who are concerned in it the other half.
Further the farmers upon the
neck promise (that seeing they have the neck entire to themselves) if any of
their cattle get out of the pasture without the neck, they will make a fence to
keep them in.
The taxes laid upon this land seem to have constituted a
kind of rent, and being considered by the tenants as very burdensome, they
petitioned for relief, but could obtain no abatement.
William Andrews sold
his share in the East Haven Neck to James Denison and John Asbill, 1663.
John Asbill sold
his part to J. Denison, 1689.
Thomas Smith married the daughter and only child of
Edward Patterson and so became possessor of his share.
In 1662, Richard Berkley
sold his share to Thomas Harrison and the same year, Harrison sold his share
at South End and land at Muddy River, to John Thompson (of "Thompson Street" fame).
The Hitchcock family
sold their part, and all died or removed from East Haven.
The South End men
still feeling uncomfortable under their one-penny tax.
On the 3d May 1689,
Thomas Smith, James Denison, Eliakim Hitchcock and John Thompson, proposed to
the town a final payment, instead of the yearly rent for their lands, which was
referred to the towns-men.
On the 4th November, in pursuance of the town
order made in May last, the towns-men having treated with the five South End men
about the East Haven Neck of land, for which they were to pay £225 in money, declared that
the said men are willing to pay £15 in money to the town, to clear off the
incumbrance, and the early payment aforesaid; the town makingover the said East Haven Neck
otpiand by their grant, or deed in writing to them the said five men, their
heirs and ass' 5 forever according to law, and with mention of full boun ary
thereon.
The town after some debate voted their acce tance of said £ 15 in
money tendered b the said South End men, to be by them, or their order, paid' to
Mr. Baker of Boston, towards payment for the bell bou ht of said Baker, some
time in May next.
And they or ered that any two of the townsmen are appointed to
sign and seal a deed or deeds to the South End men, for settlement of right and
title to them accordingly.
Tradition states, that this bell is the same
now used in the Court House in New-Haven.
According to this agreement and
vote of the town, on the 7th Dec. 1689, Moses Mansfield and Abraham Dickerman,
two of the townsmen of New Haven, gave a deed, for the consideration of £15 in
money, to John Thompson, Thomas Smith, James Denison, Eliakim Hitchcock, and
Nathaniel Hitchcock bounded on the south and south west by Long Island Sound, and on the
east with Stoney river, from the mouth of it to a stake by the side of the said
river, with a heap of stones at it -- hence its name.
And from thence to a white oak, marked with "N. H." and stones at the root.
And thence westerly-bounded by the meadows of John
Russell, widow Mew, William Luddington, John Austin, Matthew Moulthrop, and John
Potter, into the middle of huckleberry swamp, and so unto Fowler’s meadow
westerly, and so along by the meadows of the Hartford suburbs quarter, and so
unto the east end of a pond by the beach called the Black Pond.”-N. H.
Rec.
On the 16th March, 1671, Capt. Thomas Morris, a shipbuilder, bought the little
neck.
The Neck had Gregson’s farm on the north and the meadows along Fowler’s Creek on
the east.
Capt. Morris's design was to carry on ship building, the timber there being very
suitable for that purpose. But two years afterwards death put an end to all his
purposes.
The lots about "The Dragon's Point", between the Davenport and Ferry farms,
were laid out, but lay dormant several years.
The transaction relative to that
subject stands thus on record.
13th Feb. 1670. the town by vote granted
that those that have land on the east side about The Dragon's point shall have libert
to lay their lots together, and to begin at which end they p case.
And the
townsmen are hereby appointed to settle it with them, both in
respect to convenient highways, and also how far their lots shall run in length
from the river.
In 1703 these lots were occupied.
Next to the Brown farm,
Matthew Rowe, jun. had his farm.
Alling Ball obtained a farm north of the
Davenport farm.
Eleazar Morris, jun. settled on the hill east of the Ball farm.
John Austin appears on record in 1673; and six years after obtained a piece of
land overflowed by the Forge pond.
He built on the north side of the road, west
of the Green.
In 1683 Isaac Bradley came into the village from Branford, and
bought a building lot next to the river,
Of sergt John Potter, and north of
his house. He was a. carpenter.
In 1681 deacon John Chedsey, a tanner and
Shoemaker, settled on the north side of the Green, on three square lot of about
three acres, between John Potter and John Austin.
And afterwards ten acres were
granted him by the village, on the west side of the fresh meadows, which ever
since has been known by the name of Chedsey’s field, and Chedsey’s hill.
In
March 1683 Chedsey proposed to the village to have a third division of land among
us equal to ten heads and £100 estate, which he doth apprehend to be 60 acres;
and for the future he will be engaged to ay towards the expenses of the village
after the rate of) £200 rateable estate, until his estate shall amount to £200,
and then to rise as his estate shall rise.
In 1688 the village made a third
division of land ; and assed the following order, viz.: “ Thomas Pinion, Robert
awson, William Roberts, Joseph Abbot, and James Tailor, on their motion to
the village, are to have no third division with the rest of the inhabitants; but
shall have their land next to that land we obtained from Branford, as follows.
Thomas Pinion, Robert Dawson and William Roberts, being married men, shall have
30 acres each man.
J oseph Abbott and James Tailor shall have 20 acres each
man, provided each of the aforesaid five men do build upon the said land a
tenantable house within three years of the present date.
The lots granted by
the village to the five men above-mentioned, were confirmed by a town vote of
New-Haven.
The lots lay on "Foxon’s Farms", north and south, across the river, and
the road as it now runs.
That plain was called "Foxon’a farms" from the
circumstance of its being the residence of an Indian sagamore, named "Foxon" -- so it has nothing to do with Foxwoods!
It
is on record of the date of 1644, the people of Branford complained that Foxon's Indians set traps in the cattle’s paths and a marshall was sent from ew-Haven
to warn Uncas, or his brother, or Foxon, to come and speak to the Governor about
it.
In 1658 the inhabitants of the village petitioned the town, that a line
might be run from the rear corner of Davenport’s Eastwood farm towards the town to
Foxon’s Weekwam, and so Stoney River be their bounds on the east from which
it appears that the Indian Foxon’s residence was on the ‘
lain, not far from the river.
From an inspection of a number of other documents, we find that "Foxon’s farms" was on the plain between the house of Jared Grannis and Chedsey, and the
river and the swamps at the foot of the hill north and west.
Thomas Goodsell,
from Branford, was admitted an inhabitant of New Haven in April, 1692, and soon
after built the house now occupied by the widow and son of Azariah Bradley.
It is the oldest house in East Haven.
'
Edmund Tooley built on the lot south of
sergt. John Potter.
Edward Vickar lived east of the furnace dam.
William
Luddington, jun. lived on the southeast corner of the road opposite the pumpkin
lot, and the place was afterwards owned by Gideon Potter and by Isaac Mallor.
Samuel Thompson built on the corner lot west of the present stone meetinghouse on High Street.
It is probable that his father, John Thompson, lived there before him.
Thomas
Robinson’s house was opposite the present stone meetinghouse on High Street, on the south side of
the road.
Samuel Russel lived on the lot now owned bv Thomas Barnes.
John
Russell built west of Mullen hill.
The lot of Matthew Moulthrop, the third, is
now in the session of the Shepard family.
John Luddington was coated in bridge
swamp, and his son James succeeded him, and he sold to Jedediah Andrews.
Thomas
Smith, jun. built near where John Forbes livedm and his son Thomas built
between him and Capt. John Russel’s.
We shall now proceed to take a view of the boundaries of the town.
The dividing line between New Haven and Branford had not been de niter
ascertained and fixed at
the
time New-Haven sold Totokett ; which left much room for uneasiness and
altercation.
It is a prevailing tradition, and supported too by collateral
records, that the original line ran along the east side of Branford hills.
And
it appears from the petition of the village to New-Haven, and the grant of
New-Haven to the village in 1679, and the subsequent grant b Branford, of the
half mile, to the village; that Branfor actually held in possession more land,
than was contained in the original purchase from New-Haven in 1644, and that was
not paid for. Branford claimed as far as Lake Saltonstall.
So early as 1649 a
difficulty on this subject appeared, which was submitted to arbitration, but
without efi'ect. In 1656 New-Haven made a grant of the Furnace farm to the Iron
company, and 12 acres to the collier; both within the line claimed by Branford,
though Branford was treated as having some interest in the Iron works.
About the
year 1660 Branford proposed to N ew-Haven to have the line run between them. And
after a long delay the business was acted upon in the following manner, as
appears from the Colony records, Hartford, l4th May, 1674.
“ This Court
ordereth that the agreement between NewHaven and Milford, Branfoi‘d and
Wallingford, about their bounds, be recorded with the records of the Court, and
is as followeth.”
“ Whereas there has been a difference between the
inhabitants of New-Haven and the inhabitants of Branford about the dividin
bounds between each plantation, and the inhabitants of Ngew-Haven aforesaid
having chosen and empowered James Bishop, jun. Thomas Munson', William Andrews,
John Mosse, and John Cooper, senr. on their part, and the inhabitants of
Branford aforesaid having chosen and empowered Mr. John Wilford, Thomas
Blackley, Michael Tayntor, Thomas Harrison and Samuel Ward on their part, to
issue the sayd difference in reference to the sayd bounds, the sayd persons
abovenamed (excepting John Cooper, in whose roome Mr. William Tuttle was desired
by the authority of New-Haven? being mett together this fifth day of October
1669, and a fu l debate and consideration of the case for the preserving of love
and peace and the preventingof trouble for the future between them that have
hitherto been loving neighbours, have condescended so far each to other as to
agree'about the premises as followeth, .viz.
That from the river formerly
called in an agreement Tapamshashack (with the exception of meadows therein
expressed) the great pond at the head of the Furnace shall be the bounds so far
as it
oes; and from the head of the said pond that a straight line
e drawn
to the east end of a Hassukque meadow out of which a brooke called Hercules
brooke runnes into muddye river, and from the east end of the sayd meadowe to
runn a north lyne, with the just variation according to the country unto the end
of the = bounds of Branford aforesayd, that is, ten miles from the sea according
to the order of the Gen— eral Assembly. In testimonie whereof we have set too
our hands the day and year above written.
John Wilford Samuel Bishop
Tho:
Blackley Thomas Munson
Michael Tayntor William Andrews
Tho: Harrison
“'illiam Tuttell
Samuel Warde "
In another instrumemt of a later date the bounds are thus described.
Whereas the General Court of Connecticut Colony, have formerly granted unto
proprietors, inhabitants of the town of New-Haven in the sayd Colony, all those
lands both meadows and uplands with all their appurtenances within these
abutments following, viz. on the sea or sound; on the south, from the mouth of
Oyster river, to the mouth of Scotch Cap, or Stoney River, untill it come to the
brooke called Tappunshaske (only in that line is not included the meadow that is
laid out to New-Haven proprietors, on the east side the sayd river according to
former a reement with Branford) and so the sayd brooke is the boun s to the
FurnaCe dam, and thence the great pond to the head of it, and thence a line
eastward halt a mile to a white oak, marked with H. T. B. and stones laid at the
foot of it.”
' Colony Records, entered 7th Jan._1685.
Branford bounds are
mentioned in another instrument, of alater date, after the half mile was set
off. “Upon the sea on the south, and on the New Haven bounds on the west, at
Scotch Cap, or Stoney River, until it comes to the brook Tappanshasick (only
in that line is not included the meadow, which is laid out to proprietors on the
east side of the said River, and hath been agreed upon,) and that sayld brooke
is the bounds to the Furnace dam, and thencet egreat pond to
the head of it, and thence a line eastward half a mile to astation, which is a
white oak, marked H. T. B."
The east line of the half mile, had not yet been
run and marked.
The village, therefore, moved the matter to Branford, and having
agreed, their Committees met and came to the following result,
We the
subscribers being appointed to measure ofi' the half mile agreed upon with
New-Haven, as by record may appear, to the inhabitants of East-Haven village, in
pursuance thereof on the 14th April, 1713, then meeting with East-Haven
Gentlemen at the head of the Furnace pond, and after full debate and
consideration of the premises, we began at the first bound mark at the head of
sayd pond, near the middle of sayd pond, and run a line eastwart ly, square from
the old line, which was the dividing line between New-Haven and Branford, an 160
rods to an heap of stones, on the east side ofa small hill, at the upper end of
Brushy plane; thence a line northward, according to agreement, to at Walnut Tree
marked with B B, and stones at the root, which Tree is 160 rods eastward from
the Antient bounds Tree; near Hercules’ meadow, and from the aforesaid Walnut
Tree, still northward according to agreement, to the head of the bounds to a
White Oak Tree, with letters on it and stones at the root, which is 160 rods
eastward from tliE‘AntierYf‘corner at the head of the bounds between New-Haven
and Branford. It is agreed, that the abovementioned bounds shall stand and abide
to be the bounds between Branford and East-Haven.
As witness our hands.
JOHN
RussEL,
SAMUEL RUSSEL, Committee
DANIEL Comm, 0
ALLING BALL,
East-Haven.
SAMUEL HOTCHKISS,
NATHANIEL HARRISON, Committee
NATHANIEL JOHNSON,w _ 0
JOHN LINDSLEY, Branford.
Voted in Town-meeting, BranfOrd, 4th Jan. 1714.”
The 29th Dec. 1679, the
village, among other things, petitioned New-Haven for their parish or village
bounds to extend as far north as Mudd River; in answer to which they say—“ That
their bounds shall be the north side of Alling Ball’s Farme, b a line from the
River as his line runs, untill it meets wit Branford line, above
Foxon’s.”
Thus the bounds of the town were all fixed.
But
after several families on the half mile were set off to North Haven Society, the
line in that quarter was changed.
In 1716, the General Court granted the northern parish in New Haven, to be a distinct Eclesiastical Society.
And in May
1718, the Assembly gave them permission to enter into a church state.
A number
of East Haven families living on the half mile, were so far from public worship that they requested the privilege of uniting with North Haven Society, which was
granted as follows:
New-Haven, Oct. 17 37—In the memorial of Samuel J
a-cobs, Daniel Finch, Ben'amin Barns, Isaac Blakeslee, Nathaniel Hitchcock,
William Rogers, Abel Smith, Joseph Moulthrop, and Caleb Hitchcock, inhabitants
in New-Haven, shewing this Assembly that they are settled within the bounds
Parish of East-Haven, on a certain tract of land, called of the the half mile,
in the Northeast corner of said Society and remote from the publick worship of
God in said Parish, praying this Assembl to discharge them from the said East
Socity, and annex t em to the North Society in said Town, so as to include the
said memorialists, and no other inhabitants; bounding so far South, as to
include Benjamin Barnes’ Farm, and so Eastward to the east part of said half
mile between Mr. Mather’s and Mr. Abraham Heminway’s land, and so north to
Wallingford Town line, between Branford and said half mile, including all the
lands east of the said North Society, within said bounds.”-—[Colony
Records.
When North-Haven became a town in 1786, that society line became,
of course, the line between the two towns, across the half mile and all the
hal mile above that line was taken from the town of East Haven and annexed to
the town of North-Haven.
And this alteration of the line on the half mile,
accounts for the crookedness of the north line of East Haven.
The whole line
between the two towns was surveyed 11th March, 1789: .
Beginning at a heap
of stones at Branford line, northeast of the house of Abner Thorpe; thence 4
degrees north 78 rods to the middle of the hi h way or thereabouts to a heap of
stones ;—-thence in the high way 47 rods south 5 degrees west to a heap of
stones; thence in the line of Jonathan Barnes’ farm west 8 degrees north 80
rods, to the old New-Haven line to a heap of stones; thence 4% degrees west of
south, 8t) rods ;-thence south 2% degrees west, 80 rods, to a heap of stones;
thence south 3 degrees west 80 rods to a heap of stones; thence in the same line 80 rods more to a lage
white oak tree marked; thence west [1 degrees south 80 rods; still in the same
course 80 rods more ; thence west 13 degrees south 80 rods; thence west 14
degrees south 80 rods; thence west 12 degrees south 70 rods, to the bend in the
Ball farm, and from said bend 10 rods to another monument; thence west 6 degrees
and 8 minutes south to the East River; erecting monuments at the distance of
every 80 rods, with marked stones at each monument from the white oak Tree to
the River; the number of monuments or 80 rods distance is 12, and 49 rods. 1 1th
March, 1789.
Josiah Bradley,
Stephen Smit ,
Isaac Chedsey,
Ephraim
Hummiston,
Joshua Barnes,
Levy Ray,
This is now, 1824, the condition of
the bounds of the
town of East-Haven.
Committee.
The transactions relative to the Iron “’orks are contain ed in sundry
resolutions and orders.
This was, probabl , the first establishment of the kind
within the present bou mi; of the state. This business was introduced in the
following manner: . v “General Court, N. H. 12th Nov. 1655.
“The Towne was
ac uainted that there is a purpose, that an Iron Worke shall be set up beyond
the farmes at Stoney River, which is considered will be for a publique vood; and
Mr. Goodyear declared that Mr. Winstone and himself did intend to carry it on;
only he desired now to know what the Town desired in it; much debate was about
it ; but no man engaged in it at present; but divers spoke, that they would give
some worke towards making the Damm, whose names and number of days worke were
taken, which amounted to about 140 days : so it issued for that time.”
29th
Nov. 1655.-The Governor informed the Towne that this meeting was called to
consider something further a
bout the Iron Worke, sundry who en d to works,
last Court, have not yet erformed, tho’ all at ers have; and it was now
concluded t at those that are now behinde, should be called upon to perform what
they promised—It was also now desired that men would declare, who will engage in
the worke, and what estate they will putin. But few speaking to it, it was
desired that those who are willing would meet at the Governor’s this afternoon
at 20’clock, to declare themselves therein, and it was now propounded whether
the Towne will give up their right in the place, and what accommodation is
necessary for the best conveniency of the said Iron Works ,- in this case all
the Towne voted to give a full libertie for the Iron Workes to on, and also for
wood, water, ironplace, oares, shells for me, or what else is necessar for that
worke, upon the Towne lands u on that side 0 the great river, called the East
River ; provided, that no man’s proprietie, laid out, or to be laid out, be
entered upupon, nor no planter prohibited, from cutting wood, or other
conveniency upon the said common, in an or erly way ; and that Branford doe make
the like grant, according to their proportion they have in the worke, that
future‘questions about this thing may be prevented.
“ 19th May, 1656. Upon
motion ofMfi'TflYodyéar and John Cooper in behalf of the Collier that comes to
burn coal for the Iron workes; he had 12 acres of land granted him as his own,
if the Iron workes 0 on, and he stay three years in the worke. _ Provided that a
l minerals there be reserved, and that he attend all orders of the Towne for the
resent, and in disposing of said lands hereafter, if it shall so fall out, to
have it. The place propounded for is a piece of land lying betwixt the Great
Pond, and the Beaver Meadows, a 100 or 2 acres, about 2 miles from the Iron
worke. Against which grant or place none objected, so as to hinder the
same.”
This is now called the Farm. It was first in the possession of
Theophilus Eaton the Governor.
It was given to his daughter Mary, who married
Valentine Hill, merchant, Dover—Pisquataqua.
He sold it to Nathaniel
Micklethwaite, merchant, London, 2 Nov. 1660—for £230 sterling, or 81022 22.
He
sold it to Thomas Clark of Boston for £100 lawful money, 28th Feb. 1665.—-And in
the Township of New-Haven.—T he farm contained 300 acres of upland and 60 acres
of meadow.
" 14th Sept. 1657. The Governor informed the Court that Mr. Winthrop has let out his part of the Iron workes to two men
in Boston, Capt. Clarke and Mr. Payne, as they have agreed.” _ _
This plan
met with a general‘ disapprobation.
Debating followed. It was contended, that as
this establishment was made for the pu ose of trade ; there was danger of the
en~ tire alienation o?) the trade and the property. And there Would also be a
collection of disorderly persons, which would corrupt the morals of the
neighborhood, and cause great trouble in the Town. The subject was referred to
the Court, and the Townsman John Cooper to consider of 1t, upon what terms to
let out the workes, and whether they should cut wood upon our ground.”
'That
reference reported thus : '
“An agreement made by the Committee appointed to
consider about the Iron workes, was read to the Towne and by vote confirmed and
ordered to be entered.”
“ At the Governor’s house, 1 Dec. 1657.”
First, It is
agreed that the Iron Workes propounded to and allowed by this Towne, and to
which they granted several priveleges, was, and is only for this Furnace now
made in the place intended, and expressed, as appeareth by the records, with a
Forge, or two, il‘necessary for the Iron which this furnace produceth, which are
to be improved by the Townes jointly within the limits allowed by this
Court.
Second, This Iron works and all the privileges thereunto be~ longing,
were intended and granted for the good of NewHaven and Branford, for bringing
and setting up trade there, which in whole or in a great measure the are like to
be deprived of, if any part of it be alienate either to strangers, or others out
of theirjurisidiction. They, therefore, think it not safe, that any part of it
be sold, or leased out, without particular and express law and licence from, the
Towne, or Jury, or a Committee, as is appointed for ' house lots or lands.
Third, That our neighbors and friends of Branford provide and supply their art of
wood, which is 8-8th parts, with other thiiws of a like nature, from the land
within their own limits, and that New-Haven do the like for their 5-8th
parts.
Fourth, That all servants, women and others employed in any respect about
the Iron workes, shall attend and be subject to all orders and laws already
made, or which shall be made and published by this towne, or jurisdiction, as
other men.
Fifth, That the grant made by the Iron workes be forthwith delivered
to the Secretary here, that it may be read and considered ; as the grant made by
New-Haven shall be to them; that the two plantations may receive and bear their
due proportion in profits and charges, as was at first provided for.”
How far
these resolutions were carried into efi'ect does not appear. But about eight
years afterwards, Benjamin Linge prosecuted John Cooper, agent of the Iron
works, for the damage he had sustained from the water of the dam. And the people
employed there being many of them corrupt foreigners and strangers, were so
immoral and vicious as to require the frequent interposition of the civil
authority.
'- “ The General Court, therefore, ordered that complaint should
be made to Capt. Clark about the disorderly persons that came to the Iron works.
And also ordered that the master, clerk, or overseer, and other officers, shall
not admit any without a certificate from persons of known reputation, under the
penalty of 40 shillings for every ofl'ence ; and if any come or tarry there
without such recommendation and permission, shall be liable to the penalty of
forty shillings.”
And as a further check to these increasing evils, Matthew
Moulthrop, sen. was appointed conservator of the morals of the people about the
Iron works.
Of so much consequence was this establishment, that after the
union of New-Haven with Connecticut, a special was made to grant the people
employed in the work, to ‘free them from taxes for 7 years, as appears from the
following order.
“ 13th May, 1669, Upon the petition of Mr. William Andrews,
on behalf of Capt. Thomas Clark, master of the Iron. works of New-Haven, for
encouragement of the said worke, for the supply of the country with good Iron,
and well wrought according to art, this Court do confirm a grant formerly made b
New-Haven: That the said persons and estates constant y or only employed in the
said work, shall be and are hereby exempt from paying country rates for 7 years
next ensuing.”—[ Conn. Col. Rea]
At this period, and until the business was
relinquished, Thomas Clark of Boston appears to have been the principal' owner.
Business was carried on here both from New-Haven and Branford. It continued
until about 1679 or ’80. 'Why the business was relinquished cannot now be
satisfactorily ascertained. The furnace was supplied with bog ore from
North-Haven. It was chiefly carted, but sometimes brought from bog-mine wharf by
water, round to the point below the furnace; and from that circumstance the
point to this day is called Bogmine. There was a great mortality in the village
in the year 1679, when Ralph Russell, and some other principal workmen died,
which may have obstructed the operation; and, probably, the expense was
too great to realize sufficient profits.
It is a tradition in the Russell family, that the death of the principal workmen produced this
change.
Jasper Crane and John Cooper were overseers and agents. Richard Post
was founder; and John Russell was potter in the furnace.
On the [9th Au st,
1680, Thomas Clark sold to sergt‘l' John Potter, “ Al that farm lying and being
within the township of New-Haven, and near and adjoining to a brook called by
the name of Stoney brook, which Thomas Clarke bought of Nathaniel Micklethwaite
of the city of London, ' merchant, containeth by estimation 300 acres of upland,
be it more or less, and 3 score acres of meadow, be it more or less, adjoining
thereto ; exeepting always all the uplandsthat hath been formerly sold from the
said farme or Iron workes, reserving only all the Iron worke plates of Iron, and
the moveables to himself, that are upon the premises.” John Potter was to pay
£40 per annum for 21 years, in wheat, ork and peas.”
The Farm soon passed
into the hands of \Nilliam Rosewell, whose only daughter and heir married Gurdon
Saltonstall, Governor of Connecticut.
Sergt. John Potter did
not resume the Iron business, as was contemplated when he bought the farm. But
in the year 1692, he and Thomas Pinion petitioned New-Haven for liberty to build
a Bloomary on the first spring, or brook towards Foxon. In April, “ some of the
townsmen having viewed the brooke that runs into Stoney river at the place, or
thereabouts, which was moved for by John Potter, formerly, to set up a Bloomary
; the town by vote approved of‘ his design of a Bloomary ; and for his encoura
ement allow him the use of said brooke, and 20 acres of and, not exceeding 30,
near the first spring, the west side of StOney river ; and grant him the liberty
of what lron mines there are within the town bounds, and the use of what wood he
needs in the commons for the work, if it proves efl'ectual.
And the aforesaid
land is to be laid out and bounded to him, by the surveyor, and one or two of the Townsmen. Always preslgrvipg the
necessary highways if there be any.”-LN. H. ec.
This Bloomary was
established, but we cannot find how long it was in operation.
'1 he site of
the Furnace was sequestered for a grist-mill, as appears from the following
curious document on East-Haven records:
“ Articles of agreement made between
the Inhabitants of Stoney River of the one party, and Samuel Heminway of the
other party, 2 July, 1681, is as followeth, concerning setting up of a
Grist-Mill at the Furnace Dam. >
1. “ The said Villa e doth for his
encouragement give the Furnace Dam, with t re use of the water damed therewith,
and do promise to defend the said Heminway in the possession thereof, (80 far as
in their power) without let or molestation from any, either New-Haven or
Branford, or any oth— er; reserving liberty for John Potter to have a convenient
place for water from the same pond, to set up and manage a ' Bloomary Furnace of
Iron, if the said Potter shall at any time, hereafter, see cause to enter upon
such a design.”
2. “The said Village doth give to the said Heminway the land
that lies next to his house between Stoney River and the Farme, to the quantity
of an acre or two, if it may be spared from the highways, as they shall see good
to set out to him, and 16 or 17 acres of land elsewhere, that may be convenient
for the said Heminway.
Third, “The said Vill e do free the said Grist Mill from
paying taxes to the sai Vill e or Town.
4. “ The Inhabitants of t e said
Village do engage to bring the corn that they would have ground into meal, to
the said Mill.
5. “ The said Inhabitants do engage to perform the whole work
of what is necessary for the setting down said Mill, and to repair it, that the
Dam may be secure from breaches at the setting down said Mill. But the said
Heminway is to secure it at his own charges for the future, when some
extraordinary, or unexpected accident shall hap en to it.
6. “ The said
Inhabitants ofthe said Village 0 engage to assist him to raise the Mill Stones,
and to get them to the said Mill, and to give the said Samuel Heminway liberty
to use what timber and stones may be needful for building and repairing the said
Mill, as shall be most convenient for him in that business.
“ And in
consideration of the premises, the said Samuel Heminway doth en age as
followeth:
First, That the sai Heminway will, before the next winter, in
November next ensuing, set up a sufficient Grist Mill, at the above place, and
keep the said mill in good repair, fit to make good and sufficient meal of corn,
that is dry and fit for
rindin . ' g 2. “ hat he the said Heminway will set
up a house over the Mill sutlicient to secure the inhabitants’ corn from damage
by the neighbours hogs, or other creatures, that might otherwise devour
it—within his compass.
3. “That the said Heminway or somebody for him, shall
attend at the said Mill, one day in a fortnight, if there he need, to grind for
the inhabitants their corn. And shall spend more time, and give attendance on
the same, if need be, that is, till he hath ground all that is brought to be
ground the said day. “
4. “ That the said Heminway will take no more toll for
the grinding our com into meal than what the law allows.
5. “That he will
either keep this mill himself, or if he shall let it to any other, it shall be
to such an one as the Inhabitants of the Village shall a rove of.
6. “ The
said land,'ttifsTn?lP 1 a ‘ 0 ie‘sfiil Heminwa , to/be for the use of said Mill,
and so contin ue, excep ‘the 16 or 20 acres given him.
“ The first article is
thus to be so understood that the said Heminway doth enga to hear his share with
the other lnhabitants of the said illage in any damage that may fall by the Dam
or Stream, or by any trouble for the same, by New-Haven or Branford or'any
other. And as for the land about the house, mentioned in this agreement, it be
understood, that the said Heminway is to have what can be spared there from
highways and across on the other side of the pond.
“ The abovesaid articles
of agreement concerning the Mill, made between the said Samuel Heminway and the
Inhabitants of said Village, 2d July, 1681, is confirmed by Vote to be their
doings.”-—[E. H. Ree]
The grant of 16 or 17 acres, the town of New-Haven
refused to ratify. '
About 25 years after this transaction, the sons of
Samuel Heminwa , viz. John and Abraham, obtained a grant of the Mill privi ege
from Branford, as follows: ‘ '
f‘ Branford, 9.3 Angt. 1706.--At a meeting of
the Propri
etors, warned according to law, John and Abraham Heminway, of
New-Haven Iron works, desire us to at them lib— erty to erect a Dam on the
Furnace pond, w ere it formerly was, and to (get stone, and timber and earth to
erect the same, on our si e.”
1. “ We having considered the public benefit
such a Mill may be, doe on the terms following grant the desire of the said John
and Abraham Heminway, viz. that they shall raise the said Dam no higher than it
was formerly, nor no higher, than shall be allowed by Mr. William Maltbie,
Deacon John Rose, Sergt. Nathaniel Foot, of Branford, when they shall view said
Mill place.”
2. “ John and Abraham Heminway and all who shall after them
possess and improve said Mill, shall at all times, hereafter, grind what corn
shall come from this Towne, in turn, as it shall come to said Mill, not
preferring others before them.”
3. “ The said John and Abraham Heminway,
their heirs and assigns, shall erect and maintayne a sufficient Mill at said
place, at all times, hereafter forever; upon those aforesaid conditions, we
grant the request of said John and Abraham Heminway. But if they or any, who
shall at any time hereafter possess said mill, shall retuse or neglect to
perform any or all the abovementioned conditions, then this grant shall be void
and of no effect, that we, or our successors, may set up 3. Mill ourselves for
the public benefit on this side.”
Voted,and passedeest, by Wm. Maltbie,
Clerk—[Bram forrl Rea]
The manner of expression in this document intimates
that the mill had not been erected by their father, as was expected when he
obtained the village grant.
The water privilege where the forge stood was
disposed of afterwards. Samuel Heminway applied to the town of New-Haven for it
and obtained the following order:
“ April 26th, 1687. Samuel Heminway moved
to have liberty to set a fulling mill where the forge formerly stood. After much
debate the towne granted liberty to the said Heminway to set up a fulling mill
in the forementioned place, provided that he make no dam' that shall make a 0nd
to raise the water above two feet deep 11 on Austin’s ighway. And that he
consider beforehan , whether such a. dam, but of such a height as aforesaid,
will answer his pur~
se.”
Upon this grant, and one that was made by the
village in Diference betwen Branford and New-Haven. 31
1706, John and Abraham
Heminway, and John Marsh, jointly, erected a fulling mill in 1709, on the
premises.
In [684 it was contemplated to build a saw-mill on the first sprin
.
That plan was relinquished, and one was built on Clayplt brook, below
Danforth’s swamp, which. was abandoned many years ago.
A negotiation had been carried on with Branford,
concerning land that lay within their bounds, that the had not paid for, and
that New-Haven had granted to the vi lage,
Branford, finally, promised them land.
But the execution of that promise was delayed ; the village grew impatient and
and passed the following order:
“ At a formal meeting of the village, 15th
Feb. 1681, it was propounded that we might choose men to treat with Branford
about the land in their bounds that was given to us and is now in contention.
After some debate it was ordered and appointed, that John Potter, Samuel
Heminway, John Thompson, Nathaniel Hitchcock, Alling Ball, jun. and Matthew
Moulthrop, them or any four of them were empow ~ ered to treat that matter with
our friends of Branford as to land or line, and finish it.”
This vote was
predicated on a grant from New-Haven in Dec. 1679 as follows, viz. :—“ For the
Quinipiack land now within the town of Branford, and was at first bou ht by us,
and never payed for by Branford to us, that the owne Would grant unto them our
right, the better to enable them to treat with Branford for enlargement on the
purchase mone due, with the consideration that New-Haven hath been oug out of
purse.”_
The same month that the village passed the before-mentioned vote,
Branford acted on the subject thus:
“ Whereas there is a difference between
the Towne of Branford and the Ironworke farmers (or inhabitants of NewHaven)
concerning the propriety of lands in Branford bounds. At a Towne meeting in
Branford, Feb. 1681, the Towne have unanimously agreed to leave the case
depending to a
Committee. And the Towne have made choice of and appointed Mr. William Rosewell,
Mr. Edward Barker, Thomas Harrison, William Hoadly, and Eleazer Stent, a
Committee for the issue of the case aforesaid, and they do give them full power,
in the behalf of the Towne, either by composition with the farmers, (or
New-Haven'inhabitants) or to manage the said case at General Court, either by
themselves, or anyother attorney or attorneys, as they see cause, and to be at
what char e they cause in the management thereof. They do also esire and appoint
the said Committee, to take into their custody whatsoever writings or
conveyances, may be had (or copies of them) that concern the Towne—And do engage
to reimburse what charges the committee shall be at in the whole case.”
But
as an attempt to settle the controvers failed, the Village proceeded to the use
of some high-tone language on the subject, which was met by Branford in the
annexed resolution:
“ Whereas the Ironworks farmers have given us notice that
if we do not grant them land, then they will run a line in our bounds. At
a'l‘owne meeting in Branford, 8th July, 1681 ; the inhabitants of the Towne did
answer and declare by vote that the farmers have no right to do with the running
of any line or lines in our bounds, or within our Township, and, therefore, do
protest against any such proceeding, as an invasion of our just rights and
privileges, and further do forbid them or any ofthem to enter upon our Towne
bounds with any such design, if the do, be it at their peril.”
The case was
brought begire the General Court the next fall, and that body adopted some
measures to promote an adjustment of their difficulties.
“ At a General Court
held at Hartford, 18th Oct. 1681.
“ \Vhereas there is adii’ference between
Branford and the farmers on the East side, about the line between New—Haven and
sayd Branford, or New-Haven purchase of the Indians, this Court do request the
Deputy Governor, and Mr. Andrew Leete, and Mr. Samuel Eales to take some pains
to examine the case, and t0 endeavour an accommodation between them, and if they
cannot attayn an issue, they are to make report how they find it to the next
Court, where both parties are to attend for issue, and the sayd Towne of
Branford, and the farmers, are to attend to this atl'ayre, when they shall be
appointed by the Deputy Governor; they, viz. the Committee, are also to
consider other things.
And they did!
