USA > Connecticut > New London County > New London > History of New London, Connecticut, From the First Survey of the Coast in 1612 to 1852 > Part 18
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 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64
Major Talcott's little army, after a short dispersion and rest, was ordered to re-assemble at New London on the 18th of July. They marched again about the 20th, and made their way this time into the very heart of Plymouth colony. July 31st, they were at Taunton. From thence they returned homeward, but hearing that a large party of Indians who were taking their flight westward, into the wilder- ness, had committed some depredations on cattle and corn near West- field, they immediately took the route thither, and pursuing the trail of the now forlorn and famished savages, they had a sharp and final struggle with them, beyond the Housatonick, in the route to Albany.3 The troops then returned to Connecticut, and on the 18th of August were ordered by the council to repair to their respective counties, and disband their men. Philip had been hunted down and slain (August 12th) by the Plymouth men, and the war was at an end.
Returning to an early period of the contest, we find that in Feb- ruary, 1675-6, commenced that series of forays, into the Indian terri- tory, which issuing at short intervals from New London county, and led by those noted Indian-fighters, Denison and Avery, contributed in no small degree to the favorable result. These partisan bands were composed of volunteers, regular soldiers, Pequots, Mohegans,
1 Conn. Colonial Records, vol. 2, p. 456.
2 Letter of Talcott, in Colonial Records, vol. 2, p. 458.
3 In the present town of Stockbridge. (See Hubbard's Indian Wars.)
187
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
and Nahanticks-disorderly among themselves, but condensed against the foe-the Indians usually double the number of the whites, and more useful as scouts and plunderers, than in direct attack. It was in the third of these roving excursions, begun March 28th, and ended April 10th, 1676, that the brave Narragansett chieftain, Canonchet, was taken prisoner. This was one of the great exploits of the war. The unfortunate captive was brought to Stonington, and there put to death, after the Indian mode of execution, being shot by Owaneco, and two Pequot sachems, the nearest to his own rank among the con- querors.1 This was done by the captors, without any waiting for ad- vice, or reference to superior authority.2
The Indians taken in arms during this war, were generally execu- ted. As far as those called warriors were concerned, it was a war of extermination. Quarter was seldom conceded, and death followed close upon capture and submission. This was the customary and le- galized mode of proceeding in wars with savages, and regarded as the only safe course, the dictate of stern necessity. The women and children were saved, and either amalgamated with the Mohegans or . distributed among the English for servants.
The signal service performed by these partisan bands, is thus ac- knowledged by Hubbard, the early historian of the Indian wars.
" The inhabitants of New London, Norwich and Stonington, apprehensive of their danger, by reason of the near bordering of the enemy, and upon other pru- dent considerations, voluntarily listed themselves under some able gentlemen, and resolute soldiers among themselves, Major Palmes, Capt. George Denison, Capt. Avery, with whom, or under whom, within the compass of 1676, they made ten or more several expeditions, in all which, at those several times, they killed and took two hundred and thirty-nine of the enemy, by the help and as- sistance of the Pequots, Mohegans, and a few friendly Narragansetts ; besides thirty taken in their long march homeward, after the fort fight, December 19th, '75 ; and besides sixteen captivated in the second expedition, not reckoned within the compass of the said number ; together with fifty guns, and spoiling the enemy of an hundred bushels of corn."
These expeditions had very much the character of marauding par- ties, or border raids. The English were generally mounted, and the
1 Hubbard. The Pequot sachems were probably Cassasinamon and Momoho.
2 Major Palmes, in a letter to the Council of War, dated April 5th, 1676, alluding to the death of the Narragansett sachem, says: " Might my opinion pass when there is no help, I apprehend it might have proved more for the public benefit if his execution had been deferred till your Honors had the intelligence first of liis being seized." (Council Records.)
188
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
Indians on foot. The latter had no wages, but were recompensed with the plunder they obtained, a portion of the prisoners for servants, and various presents from the government. In most instances, the sol- diers retained the booty and the captives that they brought home. Capt. Denison was the most conspicuous soldier of New London county. Captains Avery and Minor were also prominent in these excursions. Major Palmes, though active in the forwarding depart- ment, took the field but once, and that was in one of the flitting in- roads into the Narragansett territory.1
The statement has been sometimes made, that Connecticut lost no men on her own soil in Philip's War. This is an error. Five men, at least, within her limits, were sacrificed by sudden shot from a lurk- ing foe.
1. Two men belonging to Norwich, Josiah Rockwell and John Reynolds, were slain on the 27th or 28th of January, 1675-6, on the east side of Shetucket River, which they had crossed for the purpose of spreading flax. Their bodies were found thrown down the river bank, with the usual Indian trophy taken from their heads. A young lad, the son of Rockwell, who was with them, could not be found, and was supposed to have been carried away as a prisoner, but he was never heard of afterward.2
2. John Kirby, of Middletown, was killed between Middletown and Wethersfield.
3. Edward Elmore, or Elmer, was slain in East Windsor.
4. Henry Denslow, slain in Windsor.
5. William Hill, of East Hartford, wounded but not killed.3 These were all in 1676.
John Winthrop, Esq., the patron and founder of New London, and governor of Connecticut for nearly eighteen years, died in Boston,
1 The summary given above, of the part taken by Connecticut in the contest with Philip, is partly drawn from the journal of the Council of War, from 1675 to 1678, preserved among the records of the colony, and recently printed in vol. 2, of the Colo- nial Records of Connecticut. (Hartford, 1852.)
2 An account of this tragedy was sent by Major Palmes to the governor and coun- cil, in a letter dated Jan. 29th. He calls Rockwell's name Joseph, and gives fifteen or sixteen years as the age of the son. The author has ascertained that it was Josiah Rockwell that was slain, and his son Joseph, who was with him, was born in March, 1665.
3 The last four instances are mentioned in the examination of an Indian, named Menowniet, taken captive near Farmington. (Colonial Records, vol. 2, p. 471.) The name of John Kirby, not mentioned in the examination, is supplied by Mr. Judd, at whose instance, also, Edward Elmore is substituted for G. Elmore.
189
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
April 5th, 1676.' He had been called to Boston to attend the meeting of the commissioners, to which he was the delegate from Connecti- cut. His remains were deposited in the tomb of his father,2 in the cemetery of King's Chapel, where afterward his two sons were gath- ered to his side. His wife, who deceased not long before him, is sup- posed to have been buried in Hartford.3
Governor Winthrop's family consisted of the two sons so often mentioned, Fitz-John and Wait-Still,4 and five daughters. The sons were residents in New London at the time of their father's decease. Wait-Still succeeded his brother as major of the county regiment,5 but at a period ten or twelve years later, removed to Boston. Lucy, the second daughter, the wife of Edward Palmes, belongs to New London ; but her death is not on record, neither is there any stone to her memory in the old burial-ground, by the side of her husband. It is therefore probable that she died abroad, and from other circum- stances it is inferred that this event took place in Boston, after the death of her father, in 1676.6 She left a daughter, Lucy, who was her only child, and this daughter, though twice married, left no issue. Her line is therefore extinct.7
The very extensive landed estate of Governor Winthrop, which fell to his two sons, was possessed by them conjointly, and undivided during their lives. Fitz-John, having no sons, it was understood between the brothers, that the principal part of the land grants, should be kept in the name, and to this end be reserved for John, the only son of Wait Winthrop. These possessions, briefly enumerated, were Winthrop's Neck, 200 acres ; Mill-pond farm, 300 ; land north of the town on Alewife Brook and in its vicinity, 1,500; land at Pequonuck, (Groton) 6,000; Little-cove farm half a mile square on
1 His will may be found in the registry of Suffolk county, Mass. It is also recorded in Hartford.
2 Elliot's Biographical Dictionary.
3 She was living in March, 1670. Mass. Hist. Coll., 3d series, vol. 10, p. 79.
4 The adjuncts Fitz and Still, are very seldom used on the New London records.
5 This regiment, in 1680, consisted of 509 men.
6 The family of Major Palmes was in Boston during the Indian troubles. Mrs. Palmes was living, at the date of her father's will, April 3d, 1676, but in November, 1678, the minister of New London records the baptism of a child of Major Palmes, by a second wife.
7 The first husband of Lucy Palmes was Samuel Gray, a goldsmith, of New Lon- don-originally from Boston-who died in 1713. She afterward married Samuel Lynde, of Saybrook, being his second wife.
190
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
the east side of the river-these were within the bounds of New London. On Mystic River, five or six hundred acres ; at Lanthorn Hill and its vicinity, 3,000 ; and on the coast, Fisher's Island and its Hommocks, and Goat Island. Governor Winthrop had also an undis- puted title from court grants to large tracts in Voluntown, Plainfield, Canterbury, Woodstock and Saybrook, amounting to ten or twelve thousand acres. He also claimed the whole of what was called Black-lead-mine Hill in the province of Massachusetts Bay, computed to be ten miles in circumference. Magnificent as was this estate in point of extent, the value, in regard to present income, was moderate. By the provisions of his will, his daughters were to have half as much estate as his sons, and he mentions that Lucy and Elizabeth had already been portioned with farms. The above sketch of his landed property comprises only that which remained inviolate as it passed through the hands of his sons, and his grandson John, the son of Wait, and was bequeathed by the latter to his son, John, John Still Winthrop, Still Winthrop, in 1747.1
April 11th, 1678. At this date was exhibited in town meeting a list of the proper, or accepted inhabitants of the town, and their names registered. The list comprises 104 names. Only household- ers or heads of families are supposed to be included. The number of freemen that had been recorded at this time was forty-five, and only twenty more are added before 1700.
On the last Thursday, in Feb., 1677-8, a town meeting was held to deliberate respecting a new meeting-house. The old, or Blinman house, had stood twenty or twenty-five years ; it was not only decay- ing, but the town had outgrown its dimensions. It was resolved to build a new one by the side of the old, the latter to be kept for use until the other should be completed. The building committee were Capt. Avery, Charles Hill and Thomas Beeby, who procured the timber and made preparations to build. But now a strong party ap- peared in favor of an entirely new site-viz., the corner of an un- improved lot that had been reserved for the ministry.2
1 The will enumerating these possessions, is on record in New London.
2 On Hempstead Street at the south-west corner of Broad Street, just where the Edgecombe house now stands.
191
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
A vote was obtained to build upon this spot, but the dissatisfaction was so great, especially among the people east of the river, that a meeting to reconsider the subject was called April 19th, 1679, which passed the following conciliatory resolution.
" The town sees cause, for the avoiding of future animosities, and for satisfac- tion of our loving neighbors on the east side of the river to condescend that the new meeting-house shall be built near the old, Mr. Bradstreet having spared part of his lot to be made him good on the other side, for the accommodation of this work ; but that the vote above [i. e., before taken] was and is, good in law, and irrevocable, but by the loving consent of neighbors is altered, which shall be no precedent for future altering any town vote."
The second or Bradstreet meeting-house, was therefore built near the old one, on the south-west corner of what was called the meeting- house green (now Town Square.) It is not strange that the inhab- itants east of the river should have murmured at any aggravation of their Sabbath-day journeys, which at the best, were of a wearisome length, crossing the river and ascending from the ferry stairs to the town street, and from thence up the hill through the present Richards Street to the place of worship. We are disposed to ask, why under such circumstances the house was built on a hill at all? why not on a level near the water's edge? The answer is ready-the early church of New England was not only a church, but a tower, and a beacon : its turret must serve as a look-out post, affording timely notice should any danger threaten the dwellings of those who were engaged in the service of the sanctuary. Moreover, the people of New England seem to have had a natural taste for a church set on a hill. It was to them the position of beauty, propriety, and adapta- tion.
The contract for building the meeting-house was made with John Elderkin and Samuel Lothrop. It was to be forty feet square; the studs twenty feet high with a turret answerable; two galleries, four- teen windows, three doors; and to set up on all the four gables of the house, pyramids comely and fit for the work, and as many lights in each window as direction should be given : a year and a half allowed for its completion : £240 to be paid in provision, viz., in wheat, pease, pork and beef, in quantity proportional : the town to find nails, glass, iron-work, and ropes for rearing; also to boat and cart the timber to the place and provide sufficient help to rear the work.
This meeting-house, instead of being completed as the contract specifies, in October, 1680, lingered several years in the road to com- pletion. Repeated orders were enacted concerning it; the pulpit
192
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
from the old house was removed to it; the carpenters were accused of violating their contract, and the work not satisfying the committee, two of the craft from other towns-John Frink, of Stonington, and Edward De Wolf, of Lyme-were called in to view the work, and arbitrate between builders and people. Sept. 6th, 1682, the town came to this emphatic decision :
" Voted : that the meeting-house shall be completed and finished to worship God in; according to conformity of duty of Church and Town, and Town and Church."
The old Blinman edifice-the unadorned church and watch-tower of the wilderness-decayed and dismantled, was sold to Capt. Avery, in June, 1684, for £6, with the condition annexed, that he should remove it in one month's time. According to tradition, he took it down and transporting the materials across the river used them in building his own house at Pequonuck. Retaining through this pro- cess something of its sacred predilections, it was again used as a house of worship about a century after its removal, by Elder Parke Avery, a leader of the separatists. The same timbers, the same boards, joyfully resounded once more to the ancient but well remem- bered voices of exhortation and praise. This house is still extant, and with its later but yet antique additions, and its charming situa- tion, exhibits one of the most interesting and picturesque farm-houses in the county.
While the meeting-house was building the parsonage was to be repaired. This, though called a parsonage and the town house, and kept in repair by the town, had been given to Mr. Bradstreet and was his property in fee-simple. It stood on the south side of the present Town Square.
" March 22d, 1680-1.
" Voted, that Mr. Thomas Parkes, Senior, hath given him one hundred acres of land in one entire piece adjoining his own land, in consideration of providing good cedar clapboards, for the parsonage house, and nails and workmanship and all other charge about the same, to be finished by the last of August next ensuing."
In 1680, Mr. Bradstreet's health began to decline. In August, 1681, being no longer able to preach, he proposed to the town to re- sign his charge, but the people requested him to remain with them adding :
" The town is willing to allow him a comfortable maintenance as God shall enable them, and they will wait God's providence in respect of his health.
193
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
** Voted, to allow him £120 a year in provision pay, and also to find him his fire-wood, ninety loads for the ensuing year."
The baptism of a child is recorded August 12th, 1683, in Mr. Bradstreet's hand : this is the last token of him living. On the 19th of November, a rate was voted to pay Mrs. Bradstreet the arrears due to her deceased husband. His death is not registered, neither is there any memorial stone bearing his name in the burial-ground.
Rev. Simon Bradstreet was the oldest son of Hon. Simon Bradstreet who was governor of Mass. from May, 1679, to May, 1692, with the exception of two years, '87, and '88, which belong to the iron rule of Sir Edmund Andross. The son died at the age of forty-five, while the father, though venerable in age, was in the mid career of usefulness.1 The mother of Rev. Simon Bradstreet was Ann, d. of Gov. Thomas Dudley. He was born in 1638; grad, at H. C. in 1660 ; began to preach in N. L. in 1666; was ordained in 1670 and died in 1683.
" Children of Simon Bradstreet and his wife Lucy.
" Simon b. 7. March 1670-1, baptized 12. March.
" Anne b. 31. Dec. 1672, bap. 5. Jan. 1672-3, died 2. Oct. 1681.
" John b. 3. Nov. 1676, bap. 5. Nov.
" Lucy b. 24. Oct. 1680, bap. 31. Oct."
Mrs. Lucy, relict of Rev. Simon Bradstreet, afterward married Daniel Epes, of Ipswich, whom she likewise survived. In 1697, the Bradstreet house-lot in New London, was sold to Nicholas Hallam, and the deed of sale signed by Mrs. Epes and her oldest son, " Symon Bradstreet of Medford, clerk." 2
It has been mentioned that the church at Mr. Bradstreet's ordina- tion, in 1670, consisted of twenty-four members. During his min- istry forty-four were added, four only by dismission from other churches.
" Mrs. Ann Latimer from the old church at Boston.
" Widow Lester from the church at Concord.
" Old Goodman Moore and his wife from the ch. at Milford."
Mr. Bradstreet's record of baptisms comprises seventeen belong- ing to other churches, and 438 of his own church : of these last a con- siderable number were adults; some parents being baptized them-
1 Gov. Bradstreet died in Salem March 27th, 1697, at the age of ninety-four.
2 This younger Simon Bradstreet, a native of New London, was afterward minister of Charlestown, Mass., and a man of great classical attainments, but of an infirm constitution and desponding temperament. His son of the same name, the fourth that had borne it in lineal succession, was ordained at Marblehead, January 4th, 1738. (Mass. Hist. Coll., 1st series, Vol. 8, p. 75.)
17
194
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
selves, at the time that they owned the covenant, and presented their children for baptism.
Baptisms followed close upon births ; numerous instances may be found where the child was but one, two or three days old ; children of ministers, deacons, &c., were usually less than a week old. To renew, or own the covenant of baptism, entitled a parent to the priv- ilege of presenting his or her children for baptism. And not only children, but grandchildren, children bound to the person as ap- prentices, and slaves, might be presented by giving a pledge for their Christian education.
-
There is no account of any marriage performed by Mr. Bradstreet. Throughout all New England, previous to 1680, the marriage rite was performed by magistrates, or by persons specially empowered by the colonial authorities. Hutchinson supposes that in Massachusetts. there was no instance of a marriage by a clergyman during the exis- tence of their first charter-that is, previous to 1684.1 It is singu- lar, that in a country and at a period of time when the clergy were so much venerated, the privilege of solemnizing the marriage con- tract should not have been assigned to them. When also the im- portance of the act is considered, the sacredness of its associations, and the propriety of regarding it as a holy rite, we are surprised that our devout ancestors should not have connected the sanctions of religion with this most important of their social compacts. Yet even when a clergyman was present, the ordinance was made valid by a magis- trate.
The first marriages in town were by Mr. Winthrop : none of these are recorded. Wm. Chesebrough, Capt. George Denison and Mr. Bruen officiated in these services being commissioners ; but by far the greater number of marriages between 1670 and 1700 were by Dan- iel Wetherell, Esq.
The appointment of deacons is not registered. William Douglas may have been the first person that held the office after Mr. Brad- street's ordination. He was at least active in the church economy, and held the box at the door for contributions. He died in 1682. In 1683, William Hough and Joseph Coite were deacons ; the for- mer died August 10th, of that year, before Mr. Bradstreet's decease,
1 " All marriages in New England were formerly performed by the civil magistrate, but of late they are more frequently solemnized by the clergy." Neal's New Eng. land, vol. 2, p. 253.
195
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
and no other deacon except Coite, is mentioned during the next ten years.
" Ata Towne meeting November ye 19, 1683.
" Voted that Major John Winthrop, Major Edward Palmes, Capt. James Avery, Mr. Daniel Wetherell, Mr. Christo. Christophers, Tho: Beebee, Joseph Coite, John Prentis Sent, Clement Miner, Charles Hill, are appointed a Comit- tee in behalf of the towne to send a letter by Capt. Wayte Winthrop to the reverend Mr. Mather and Mr. Woollard [Willard] ministers at boston for there advice and counsell in attayneing a minister for the town to supply the place of Mr. Bradstreet deceased, and that the sd Capt. Winthrop shall have instruc- tions front the sd Comittee to manadge that affaire wth them."
No minister was obtained until the next June, when the commit- tee gave notice that they had applied to Mr. Edward Oakes, of Cam- bridge, and received a favorable answer. The town declared their approbation, and voted Mr. Oakes a salary equal to £100 per annum, for so long a time as he and they could agree together.
Mr. Oakes is presumed to be the Edward Oakes that graduated at Cambridge, in the class of 1679. He preached in New London about a year, and some preparatory steps to a settlement were taken. But the inhabitants were not unanimous in his favor, and he left the place.1 In September, 1685, the committee of supply obtained the services of Mr. Thomas Barnet, who arrived in town soon afterward with his family, and entered upon the duties of a pastor. These he performed to such entire satisfaction, that in November a vote was passed by the town in acceptance of his ministry. Again, Dec. 26th,
" Mr. Thomas Barnett by full consent none contradicting was accepted by the inhabitants to be their minister." " Major John Winthrop is chosen to ap- pear as the mouth of the Town to declare their acceptance of Mr. Barnett." " The time for ye solemnity of Mr. Barnetts admittance to all ministerial offices is left to the direction of Mr. Barnett and the townsmen to appoint the day."
It is a fact, but an unaccountable one, that after this date, Mr. Bar- net's name disappears from the records. No hint has been found to explain why the arrangement with him failed, and the connection was dissolved. He is never again mentioned except in the town ac- counts, where Jonathan Prentis exhibits a debt of 16s. "for going with Mr. Barnet to Swanzea."
Mr. Barnett was an English clergyman, ejected from his living for non-conformity, and driven from England by the rigorous church
1 Farmer, in his Genealogical Register, says he died young.
His decease, therefore, probably took place soon after leaving New London.
196
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON.
measures which followed the restoration of the house of Stuart to the throne,1 that is, after 1662. His history after leaving New London, has not been traced.2
On the 22d of June, 1687, the inhabitants were again assembled in solemn deliberation upon that oft recurring and momentous ques- tion-What are "the best ways and means for procuring an able minister of the gospel?" A committee of seven, with Colonel John Winthrop at the head, was appointed to act for the town, which after a few months' delay was so fortunate as to secure the services of the Rev. Gurdon Saltonstall. He preached during the winter and in a short time engaged all hearts and votes in his favor. In May, 1688, the inhabitants passed a unanimous vote of acceptance of his minis- try, requesting his continuance among them, promising to give him due encouragement, and adding, " on his return from Boston, whither he is shortly going, they will proceed to have him ordained." The ordination, however, did not take place, though the cause of delay is not mentioned. Another vote of acceptance was passed the 7th of June, 1689.
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.