USA > Connecticut > New Haven County > East Haven > History of East Haven > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32
134
History of East Haven.
forms on the surface, which soon breaks and sinks down. This is followed by another, and the crystal- lization proceeds very rapidly. The salt is then removed to sheds open at the sides, piled in heaps, and left for a few days, in order to dispel the chloride of magnesium which is quickly done as it liquefies by contact with air. The salt is then redissolved and crystallized for market.
These works were all destroyed by fire at Tryon's invasion of New Haven, July 5, 1779. Although peace was declared soon after, the works were never rebuilt, as Turk's Island salt could be imported for less cost than salt could be made here.
Near the close of the war with England in 1812, another attempt was made to manufacture salt on the East Haven side, just below Tomlinson's bridge. Owing to so much fresh water flowing down the Quinnipiac and Mill rivers it was not successful and the works were loaded on scows and moved to Mer- win's Point (now Woodmont-on-the-Sound). They were destroyed by the violent gale called the Salt Storm, September 3, 1821.
WAX FIGURES.
In 1903 Mr. L. S. Bagley brought to light an almost forgotten industry, which he credits to East Haven as the original place of manufacture. He says: "Exhibitions of wax figures started from here, for the whole country, and there was a fortune in this for a great many." On looking up the subject it was found the business was in full blast soon after the war of the Revolution. The manufacture was carried on by Mr. Reuben Moulthrop as principal, and his
135
Iron Works and Mills.
brother-in-law, Mr. Justin W. Street. Mr. Bagley says the work was done at the "lean-to" house on the west side of Hemingway avenue known for the last twenty-five years as the Dillon place. Mr. Moulthrop was by profession a portrait painter, and probably did the modeling, moulding and painting. These exhibitions were conducted very much as the stereopticon views and lectures are presented at the present time, and were quite instructive at that period. The manager had to be a man of talent and tact, of ease and gracefulness of manner, of refinement, and courteous attention to all, with a certain degree of dignity and courtliness of address. Such a man was found in Mr. Daniel Smith of East Haven, who. traveled the country over with great success. "When- ever a man became a public character," Mr. Bagley says, "his figure was taken in wax, boxed up and sent off on these exhibitions." If he was married, the statue of his wife accompanied the husband many times. The whole business gave employment to many in different capacities, both male and female. The wax figures of the women were dressed with great care and richness of material. Mr. Moulthrop brought two expert dressmakers, sisters, from Bristol, Con- necticut, by the name of Shailor, to reside in his house, to superintend and construct the dresses. One of the sisters was married to Mr. Daniel Hughes, April 5, 1818; she was his third wife. The exhibition carried two ladies, a brunette and a blonde, to one of which this placard was attached, "The beauty of this place." If the belle of the town was a brunette, then the bru- nette had the card, and vice versa, and if there was
136
History of East Haven.
one of each, then both were labeled. In some places it was a source of great speculation to know who was meant.
That the business was very renumerative is proved by Mr. Moulthrop erecting what was then considered a palatial residence on Townsend avenue. Although the structure has been enlarged, built upon, and changed by its different owners, yet the original house has always been preserved, and is the basis of all the additions. For several years it was known as the "Mitchell House." It is now the the home of Mr. Frank H. Kimberly. If, as Mr. Bagley says, the business was broken up by gamblers using wax figures 'as an attraction to their dens, certain it is that no such proceeding would receive the countenance of Mr. Smith, its chief manager. Neither would he have any- thing to do with a business upon which discredit could be thrown. From boyhood he was a man of the strictest integrity, of moral purity, with a high sense of honor. In fact, the least that could be said of him is, "He was one of God's noblemen." He filled the highest offices of the town with ability and satisfaction, beloved by all.
Mr. Bagley further says: "The last phase of this wax business in East Haven was the making of shrines for the South American trade. These consisted of glass cases in which stood beautiful little figures of women in wax in front of the shrine. This trade alone mounted into the thousands, and meant a fortune to its promoters, although scarcely any one in the town knew of this part of the trade."
137
Iron Works and Mills.
SHIPBUILDING.
This enterprise has been carried on at different times and places on the East Haven side since 1728, for in that year Samuel Forbes was employed in shipbuilding on the point below the mill. His son Jehiel had a shipyard south of Tomlinson's bridge, before and after the Revolution, and was succeeded in business by his son Samuel, who built the three last vessels, which were brigs, after the close of the War of 1814.
Near 1844 Lane & Jacobs, shipbuilders, removed their shipyard from New Haven to South Quinnipiac street, Fair Haven, just north of Quinnipiac bridge. This branch of industry was carried on for several years, giving employment to a large number. When Lane & Jacobs retired, they were succeeded by their foremen Gesner & Baldwin. This was a very busy place; sometimes they had three schooners on the stocks at once. They built two-masted schooners of large tonnage for coast and West India fruit trade. Three-masters were not then in use. When the general depression of shipbuilding took place all over New England, this yard was affected in common with others and the business decreased. The works were then taken by Mr. Warren O. Nettleton from Quinni- piac street to below Red Rock, now the site of the late National Wire Company; from this it went into the hands of Armstrong & Darton as a marine railway for vessel repair ; finally to Capt. Wm. Wright; lastly the site was sold to the Wire Company.
HUMPHREYSVILLE COPPER COMPANY.
About 1855 ground was secured at what is now Fort Hale Park and vicinity, wharves were built, and works
138 History of East Haven.
erected for smelting copper ore. In a very short time it was discovered that the fumes from the chim- neys were so poisonous that they were killing all vegetation in the vicinity and were noticeable two miles distant. An injunction was served on the company to stop the works, and as the company had found that the business was not profitable, on June 30, 1857, the works were sold to Mr. John Dwight, through the agent of the company, Mr. T. B. Buckingham. Mr. Dwight manufactured saltpetre here until after the close of the War of the Rebellion, when he removed and passed over the works to the New Haven Chemical Company on the site now owned by the National Wire Company. The Chemical Company manufactured soda for several years and then sold the property to the New Haven Wire Company.
CHAPTER V.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NEW HAVEN AND BRANFORD SETTLED.
HE dividing line between New Haven and Branford had not been definitely ascertained and fixed at the time New Haven sold Totoket, which left much room for uneasiness and altercation. It is a prevailing tradition, supported by collateral records, that the original line ran along the east side of Branford hills. 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 by Branford of the half-mile to the village, that Bran- ford 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 the Furnace pond (now Lake Saltonstall). 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 pro- posed to New Haven to have the line run between them. After a long delay the business was acted upon in the following manner, as appears from the colony records, Hartford, May 14, 1674.
140
History of East Haven.
"This Court ordereth that the agreement between New Haven and Milford, Branford 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 inhabi- tants of New Haven and the inhabitants of Branford about the dividing bounds between each plantation, and the inhabi- tants of New-Haven aforesaid having chosen and empowered James Bishop, jun., Thomas Munson, William Andrews, John Mosse and John Cooper, sen., on their part, and the inhabitants of Branford aforesaid having chosen and empow- ered 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 above named (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 full debate and consideration of the case for the preserving of love and peace and the preventing of 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 goes; and from the head of the said pond, that a straight line be drawn to the east end of a Hassuakque 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 General Assembly. In testimonie whereof we have set too our hands the day and year above written.
John Wilford Samuel Bishop
Tho : Blackley Michael Tayntor Tho : Harrison Samuel Warde
Thomas Munson William Andrews William Tuttell
John Mosse."
141
Difficulties Settled.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BRANFORD AND EAST HAVEN VILLAGE SETTLED.
A negotiation had been carried on with Branford con- cerning land that lay within their bounds, which they had not yet paid for, and which New Haven had granted to the village of East Haven. Branford finally promised them land, but the execution of that promise was delayed; the village grew impatient 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 conten- tion. After same 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 empowered 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 December, 1679, as follows, viz .: "For the Quinnipiack land now within the town of Branford, and was at first bought by us, and never payed for by Branford to us, that the Towne would grant unto them our right, the better to enable them to treat with Branford for enlargement on the purchase money due, with the consideration that New Haven hath been long 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 New Haven) concerning the propriety of lands in Branford
142
History of East Haven.
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 Hoadley, 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 inhabi- tants) or to manage the said case at General Court, either by themselves, or any other attorney, or attorneys, as they see cause, and to be at what charge they cause in the man- agement thereof. They do also desire 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."
As this attempt to settle the controversy failed, the village proceeded to the use of some high-toned lan- guage on the subject, which was met by Branford in the annexed resolution :
"Whereas the Ironworke farmers have given us notice that if we do not grant them land, then they will run a line in our bounds. At a Towne 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 of them to enter upon our Towne bounds with any such design, if they do, be it at their peril."
The case was brought before 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, 13th Oct., 1681. "Whereas there is a difference between Branford and the farmers on the East Side, about the line between New Haven
143
Difficulties Settled.
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 do endeavour an accommodation between them, and if they can not 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 affayre, when they shall be appointed by the Deputy Governor; they, viz. the Com- mittee, are also to consider whether there be any obligation that doth lie upon New-Haven, that doth hinder this people from building a Dick at the East side or South-end." (Col. Rec.)
This arrangement of the General Court had a happy effect. The parties came to a settlement of their difficulties and Branford gave the village a deed dated May 8, 1682, for that tract of land called the half-mile, in which it was stipulated, that "the line shall run and be as formerly, from the Sea to the head of the Furnace pond," etc., as is described in the bounds already mentioned.
On the 9th of May, 1682, in behalf of the village, Samuel Heminway, James Denison, John Potter, Matthew Moulthrop, John Thompson, and Nathaniel Hitchcock gave a quit claim to Branford for all lands within their bounds. The Committee appointed by the General Court reported their proceedings, which by a formal vote were accepted and ratified.
"Hartford, May, 1682. The Gentlemen of New-Haven and Branford had agreed about the purchase of their lands, which they were appoynted by the Court to issue; and Major Treat, William Leete, and Mr. Eales were desired to assist them in Oct. last." (Col. Rec.)
144
History of East Haven.
DIFFICULTY BETWEEN EAST HAVEN AND NEW HAVEN.
In the year 1678 the people of East Haven petitioned New Haven for their consent to become a distinct village, and for some other privileges. With zeal they prosecuted this object. Not succeeding this year, on the 18th of August, 1679, they renewed their applica- tion, which resulted as follows: "At a town meeting held in New-Haven, 29th Decr. 1679 a committee was appointed to examine and prepare matters against some other meeting. After the town had heard the considerations of the Committee, the request was approved and confirmed to be their order by vote." [The full text of this grant has been recorded in Chapter III, under head of Ecclesiastical Affairs.]
After the village had obtained their village grant, from the General Court, to become a society, they proceeded to transact local business, separately from the town of New Haven. They seem to have appre- hended that their parish grant involved some authority for the choice of village officers, and for the laying out and disposing of land within their parish bounds. This course brought upon themselves and New Haven a long scene of confusion and trouble and not a little expense.
"At a meeting of the Village, 19th March, 1683, it is agreed by vote that in laying out the third division we will follow the method of New Haven, viz .: 20 acres for each hundred pounds in the list, and 4 acres to each child, and 20 acres to each family, tho' their heads and estates do not amount thereunto." Novem- ber 26th, 1683. "It was agreed to lay out the one
145
Difficulties Settled.
half of said third division upon Stoney river; and the other half where it will be most convenient, and begin the lots as to their order upon the land next to the five men's land at Foxon."
After the arrangements for the third division were made, they voted to lay out the third division "by the list of the estates we give in to the payment of the minister this present year with the addition of our persons' heads not there given in, because not rated, but here to be added, as in the list alphabetically arranged." With this small population and with this small property, they supported a minister of the Gospel about four years."
Their public expenses and some other embarrass- ments were so great that some began to cherish the idea that they should not be able to proceed and especially as their crops had recently failed. They therefore took a vote, March 29, 1684, "whether they should go forward in building up the Village." Nine- teen men being present, they all voted to proceed.
The proceedings of the village in dividing land gave offence to New Haven, and they appointed a com- mittee to confer with the village on the subject. The village also appointed a committee to go to New Haven and inform that committee of all their pro- ceedings. In 1685 they appear to have relinquished their village privileges and returned to their former connection with New Haven. About this time they requested New Haven to furnish them with a further division of land, which was referred to a special com- mittee whose report was accepted and recorded as follows :
146
History of East Haven.
"In answer to the inhabitants of New-Haven, the Committee appointed by the Towne to consider their proposals about the third division, order as followeth :
"I. That in laying out the remainder of the third division, not yet taken up by the said inhabitants, being approved planters, it be laid out to them in quantity according to the list of estates in 1679, by appointed sizers, and Enos Talmadge for the Towne.
"2. That the grants which have been made by the late Village Company to any of them, having a right to the third division as aforesaid, be accounted as part of such remainder of third division, except eight acres granted and laid out as appended to the Mill.
"3. That they lay out the said remainder upon and out of the half mile of lands, or addition from Branford as far as their granted bounds, provided that they lay it out as to others of the Towne, viz. one half mile in depth, and lying together, and not in particular tracts or parcels; and if there be not enough found there, then to make up their quantity elsewhere within the bounds formerly granted, provided, that the Towne commons, as formerly appointed, be stated by the now appointed sizers and surveyors, who are to view and lay out the said proportions of third division, and the remainder for commons.
"4. As to the grants of land made to the sundry particular persons by the East side inhabitants we see not cause at present to confirm; but before we so do, we expect that now, having laid down the Village designs, and being returned to their former station for power and privilege with ourselves as one plantation, that they plainly declare themselves in so doing without reservation, not to go off from us when they please, or judge themselves in a capacity for it, without the Towne's approbation in that case.
"5. We appoint Mr. Bishop, Capt. Mansfield, and Thomas Kimberly sizers, and Enos Talmadge surveyor: and at the charge of the East side inhabitants: and we desire their answer to these premises in writing under their hands." (N. H. Rec.)
Difficulties Settled.
147
A reply to these resolutions cannot be found, but from this time their affairs seem to have proceeded without any particular controversy until 1703, when the village moved to resume their village grant of 1680. The village bore their proportion of town and colony charges and endured great hardships and dangers in attending public worship at New Haven. After the termination of King Philip's War the Indians were frequently in a state of commotion. Some powerful tribes that were under the influence of the French in Canada frequently assumed a hostile attitude. In 1689 the town prepared a flying army, which stood ready to march at a moment's warning. A patrol of four horsemen was continually scouring the woods, and all the militia were obliged to carry their arms with them to public worship prepared for battle. The Indians near the village were sometimes employed as scouting parties and in other respects as useful auxiliaries. The following incident may be worth preserving:
A friendly Indian warrior was requested to act as sentinel in the Gap, north of Mullen hill. He con- sented, and for this purpose borrowed Mr. Heming- way's gun, and was assured it was well loaded. Without examination he took the gun and went to his post. He soon saw two Indians descending into the valley from Pond Rock, and advancing toward the Gap. They passed him and when he had them in range, intending to kill both at one shot, he leveled his gun to fire but it only flashed in the pan, for it was not charged. The spies, without observing it, passed on across the fresh meadows, and mingled with the friendly Indians about Grave hill. The disappointed
148
History of East Haven.
Indian was greatly enraged and threatened to kill Mr. Hemingway for deceiving him in order that he might be killed. Mr. Hemingway was innocent of the charge for he had loaded the gun himself, but some other person had discharged it without his knowledge, and priming it, left it in the usual place in that con- dition. With the discovery of this fact the warrior was finally pacified. In a day or two one of these spies was found dead on the Indian land-supposed to have been killed by the enraged warrior.
Nothing further appears on record of a special nature, respecting the village, until the close of the year 1703. The following extracts from the village records will show the course of their affairs at that period.
"At a Village Meeting, 23d Decr. 1703. The inhabitants voted that they would take up their Village grant; and to the end chose Capt. Alling Ball, Lieut. Samuel Hotchkiss, Samuel Heminway, Sergt. John Potter, William Luddington, Ensign John Russel and George Pardee, for a Committee to manage the concerns of the Village in order to a settlement according to the General Court's grant. And informed New- Haven of their design."
"20th Nov. 1704. They voted that all the undivided land within the Village bounds shall be equally divided unto each of the present inhabitants, according to the heads and estates in 1702, when we were in a Village way, according to New- Haven grant, excepting persons that are tenants."
"The Committee appointed to search for land reported that they judged there were yet 1200 acres of undivided lands."
"30th March, 1705, they agreed to lay out a half division of land, according to the list in 1702, and to draw lots, who should pitch first, and next, &c .; and none shall pitch on the half mile gained from Branford. George Pardee was chosen to draw lots. Samuel Thompson and Samuel Hotchkiss, jun., were chosen surveyors of the half division."
Difficulties Settled.
149
The town of New Haven was offended with the proceedings of the village respecting the laying out of the land and while the village petition for the renewal of parish privileges was pending before the General Assembly passed some angry resolutions, manifest- ing their unwillingness to admit the village to society privileges, and forbade the people south of Muddy river, and north of the village line, to pay any longer to the support of the ministry there, but to return to New Haven. .
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.