USA > Connecticut > New London County > History of New London county, Connecticut : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men > Part 55
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 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161 | Part 162 | Part 163 | Part 164 | Part 165 | Part 166 | Part 167 | Part 168 | Part 169 | Part 170 | Part 171 | Part 172 | Part 173 | Part 174 | Part 175 | Part 176 | Part 177 | Part 178 | Part 179 | Part 180 | Part 181 | Part 182 | Part 183 | Part 184 | Part 185 | Part 186 | Part 187
1719 .- May, James Rogers, Jonathan Hill; October, Capt. James Rogers, Lieut. John Richards.
1720 .- May, Capt. James Rogers, Jonathan Hill; October, Capt. James Rogers, Jonathan Hill.
1721 .- May, Capt. James Rogers, Jonathan Hill; October, Capt. James Rogers, Capt. C. Christophers.
1722 .- May, Capt. John Rogers, Stephen Prentts; October, Capt. John Rogers, Stephen Prentts.
1723 .- May, C. Christophers, Esq., Thomas Prentts ; October, Capt. James Rogers, Capt. Thomas Prentts.
1724 .- May, Joshua Hempstead, Solomon Coitt; October, Capt. James Rogers, Solomon Coit.
1725 .- May, Capt. James Rogers, Joshua . Hempstead ; October, Capt. James Rogers, Solomon Coit.
1726 .- May, Capt. James Rogers, Joshua Hempstead; October, Capt. James Rogers, Capt. Joshua Hempstead.
1727 .- May, Capt. Joshua Hempstead, John Pickett; October, Capt. Joshua Hempstead, Richard Christophers.
1728 .- May, Capt. Joshua Hempstead, Solomon Coitt; October, Solomon Coitt, Stephen Prentts.
1729 .- May, Richard Christophers, Solomon Coitt; October, Solomon Coit, Stephen Prentts.
1730 .- May, Richard Christophers, John Richards; October, Capt. Joshua Hempstead, John Richards.
1731 .- May, Capt. Stephen Prentiss, John Richards; October, Stephen Prentiss, Solomon Coit.
1732 .- May, Jeremiah Miller, John Richards; October, Solomon Coit, Daniel Coit.
1733 .- May, Richard Christophers, George Richards; October, Daniel Coit, George Richards.
1734 .- May, Richard Christophers, Daniel Coit; October, Daniel Coit, Johu Richards.
1735 .- May, John Richards, Jeremiah Miller; October, Daniel Coit, Wm. Whiting.
1736 .- May, Daniel Coit, John Richards; October, John Richards, Joshua Raymond.
1737 .- May, John Richards, Jeremiah Miller ; October, Capt. Daniel Coit, Capt. Robert Dennisson.
1738 .- May, Capt. Daniel Coit, Joshua Raymond; October, John Rich- ards, Jeremiah Miller.
1739 .- May, Jolın Richards, Jeremiah Miller ; October, Nathaniel Salton- stall, Jeremiah Chapman.
1 Names of deputies without towns are given in 1706, but these are probably.
223
NEW LONDON.
1740 .- May, Capt. Nathaniel Saltonstall, Thomas Forsdick; October, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Thomas Forsdick.
1741 .- May, Capt. John Richards, Capt. Daniel Coit; October, Capt. Na- thaniel Saltonstall, Jeremiah Chapman.
1742 .- May, John Richards, Jeremiah Miller; October, Joshua Raymond, Capt. Robert Denison.
1743 .- May, Jeremiah Miller, John Richards ; October, Jeremiah Miller, John Richards.
1744-45 .- May, Jeremiah Miller, Richard Durfey ; October, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, Jeremiah Chapman.
1746 .- May, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, Jeremiah Miller ; October, Jeremiah Miller, Jeremiah Chapman.
1747 .- May, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, Jeremiah Miller; October, Jere- miah Miller, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall.
1748 .- May, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, Jeremiah Miller ; October, Jeremiah Chapman, Jeremiah Miller.
1749 .- May, Jeremiah Miller, Jeremiah Chapman, Jr .; October, Jere- miah Miller, Jeremiah Chapman, Jr.
1750 .- May. Capt. Stephen Lee, William Manwaring; October, Capt. Stephen Lee, William Manwaring.
175I .- May, Capt. Stephen Lee, William Manwaring; October, Capt. Stephen Lee, Capt. Robert Denison.
1752 .- May, Capt. Stephen Lee, Jeremiah Chapman; October, Capt. Stephen Lee, Jeremiah Chapman.
1753 .- May, Capt. Pygan Adams, Capt. Stephen Lee; October, Capt. Py- gan Adams, Capt. Adonijah Fitch.
1754 .- May, Capt. Stephen Lee, Capt. Pygan Adams; October, Capt. Py- gan Adams, Col. Gordon Saltonstall.
1755 .- May, Capt. Stephen Lee, William Manwaring; October, Capt. Stephen Lee, William Manwaring.
1756 .- May, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, Maj. Robert Denison ; October, William Manwaring, William Hillhouse.
1757 .- May, Col. Gordon Saltonstall, Col. Stephen Lee; October, Col. Stephen Lee, Joshua Raymond, Jr.
1758 .- May, Col. Stephen Lee, Joshua Raymond, Jr .; October, David Gardner, William Hilhouse.
1759 .- May, David Gardner, Capt. Pygan Adamıs ; October, David Gard- ner, Capt. Pygan Adams.
1760 .- May, Col. Stephen Lee, William Hilhouse; October, Capt. Jere- miah Miller, Capt. Pygan Adams.
1761 .-- May, Capt. Jeremiah Miller. Maj. Charles Bulkly ; October, Capt. Jeremiah Miller, Maj. Charles Bulkley.
1762 .- May, Capt. Jeremiah Miller, Maj. Charles Bulkly ; October, Capt. Pygan Adams, Capt. Jeremiah Miller.
1763 .- May, Capt. Pygan Adams, Capt. Jeremiah Miller; October, Capt. Pygan Adams, William Ililhonse.
1764 .- May, Capt. Pygan Adams, William Hilhouse; October, Capt. Py- gan Adams, William Ililhouse.
1765 .- May, Capt. Pygan Adams, William Hilhouse; October, names of deputies not recorded.
1766-67 .- May, Jeremiah Miller, William Hilhouse; October, Richard Law, William Hilhouse.
1768 .- May, Richard Law, William Hilhouse; October, Richard Law, William Hilhouse.
1769 .- May, Richard Law, William Hillhouse; October, Col. Gurdon Sal- tonstall, William Hilhouse.
1770 .- May, Gurdon Saltonstall, Esq., William Hilhouse; October, Col. Gordon Saltonstall, William Hilhouse.
1771 -May, Gurdon Saltonstall, Esq., William Hilhouse ; October, Gur- don Saltonstall, Esq., William Hilhouse.
1772 .- May, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, William Hilhouse ; October, Col. Gurdon Saltonstall, William Hilhouse.
1773-75 .- May, Gurdon Saltonstall, Esq., William Hilhouse; October, Richard Law, William Hilhouse.
1776 .- Richard Law, William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr.
1777 .- Winthrop Saltonstall, William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr.
1778 .- George Gordon, Winthrop Saltonstall, William Hillhouse, Na- thaniel Shaw, Jr.
1779 .- William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr.
1780 .- David Mumford, William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr., Tim- othy Green.
1781 .- William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr.
1782 .- William Hillhouse, Nathaniel Shaw, Jr., Capt. John Deshon.
1783 .- William Hillhouse, Capt. John Deshon.
1784 .- William Hillhouse, Joshua Coit, Capt. John Deshon.
1785 .- William Hillhouse, Joshua Coit, Amasa Learned.
1786 .- David Mumford, J. G. Brainard, Daniel Rodman, Amasa Learned.
1787 .- John Deshon, Daniel Rodman, Amasa Learned.
1788 .- John Deshon, Marvin Wait, Joshua Coit, Amasa Learned.
1789 .- J. G. Brainard, Marvin Wait, Joshua Coit, Amasa Learned.
1790 .- Marvin Wait, Amasa Learned.
1791 .- John Deshon, Marvin Wait, Amasa Learned. 1792 .- Marvin Wait, Joshua Coit.
1793 .- Marvin Wait, Joshua Coit, Guy Richards. 1794 .- J. G. Brainard, Marvin Wait.
1795 .- Marvin Wait, George Williams, Elias Perkins.
1796 .- Marvin Wait, George Colfax, Elias Perkins.
1797 .- N. Fosdick, Marvin Wait, Elias Perkins.
1798 .- Marvin Wait, Elias Perkins.
1799 .- Marvin Wait, George Williams, Elias Perkins.
1800 .- Griswold Avery, George Williams, Elias Perkins.
1801 .- N. Fosdick, George Williams, Lyman Law.
1802 .- George Colfax, Daniel Deshon, Lyman Law.
1803 .- A. Woodward, George Colfax, Richard Douglass, Lyman Law.
1804 .- A. Woodward, J. Woodward, E. Chappel, Simeon Smith.
1805 .- Lyman Law, George Colfax, E. Chappel, Simeon Smith.
1806 .- Lyman Law, Thomas Brooks, George Colfax.
1807 .- Lyman Law, George Colfax.
1808 .- Lyman Law, George Colfax, Isaac Thompson.
1809 .- Lyman Law, C. Manwaring, Isaac Thompson.
1810 .- Lyman Law, George Colfax, George Hallam.
1811 .- Jacob B. Gurley, George Hallam.
1812 .- Jacob B. Gurley, George Hallam.
1813 .- Jacob B. Gurley, George Hallam.
1814 .- Elias Perkins, Jacob B. Gurley, George Hallam.
1815 .- C. Manwaring, Elias Perkins, Jacob B. Gurley, Stephen Peck.
1816 .- C. Manwaring, J. P. Trott.
1817 .- C. Manwaring, J. P. Trott, Henry Channing, William Stockman.
1818 .- Amasa Learned, Henry Channing, William Stockman.
1819 .- Lyman Law, J. B. Gurley.
1820 .- N. Fosdick, Henry Channing.
1821 .- C. Manwaring, Henry Mason.
1822 .- C. Manwaring, John P. Trott.
1823 .- Charles Bulkley, Isaac Thompson.
1824 .- John French, Isaac Thompson.
1825 .- David Frink, Isaac Thompson.
1826 .- Charles Bulkley, Lyman Law.
1827 .- J. B. Gurley, Isaac Thompson.
1828 .- J. B. Gurley, Ezra Chappell.
1829 .- J. B. Gurley, Isaac Thompson. 1830 .- Thomas Mussey, Henry Douglass.
183I .- Samuel Chany, John A. Fulton.
1832 .- Samuel Chany, John A. Fulton.
1833 .- Coddington Billings, Anson Smith.
1834 .- Benjamin Starks, John Deshon.
1835 .- C. Billings, S. K. Smith.
1836 .- No record.
1837 .- No record.
1838 .- Colby Chew, Samnel Chany.
1839 .- John Congden, John P. Trott.
1840 .- William F. Brainard, Daniel Rogers.
184I .- G. C. Wilson, S. G. Trott.
1842 .- Noyes Billings, Charles Douglass.
1843 .- Noyes Billings, no choice.
1844 .- C. C. Comstock, Andrew G. Lippitt.
1845 .- No record.
1846 .- Nathan Belcher, Thomas W. Williams.
1847 .- Nathan Belcher, Hiram Willey.
1848 .-- J. P. C. Mather, J. Abon Smith.
1849 .- Thomas Fitch (2), Willianı C. Crump.
1850 .- Perry Douglass, John Bishop.
185I .- G. R. Comstock, F. W. Holt. 1852 .- Charles Treadway, Henry P. Haven.
1853 .- Charles Treadway, E. V. Stoddard.
1854 .- Edward Prentiss, Augustus Brandegee.
1855 .- Charles E. Hewett, J. N. Harris.
1856 .- Isaac T. Comstock, G. W. Goddard. 1857 .- William P. Benjamin, Hiram Willey.
1858 .- Augustus Braudegee, Charles Prentis.
1859 .- Augustus Brandegee, Hezekiah Knowles.
1860 .- W. A. Weaver, J. C. Learned.
1861 .- A. Brandegee, Charles Burns,
1862 .- W. A. Weaver, A, Coit.
1863 .- D. S. Ruddock, A. Coit.
224
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT.
1864 .- D. S. Ruddock, A. Coit. 1865 .- R. Chaney, R. H. Chapell. ISGO .- D. S. Ruddock, R. II. Chapell. 1867 .- F. L. Alen, Thomas M. Waller. 1868 .- F. L. Allen, Thomas M. Waller. 1869,-1. B. Thurston, Seth Smith. 1870,-B. B. Thurston, Seth Smith. 1871 .~ T. S. Daboll, George Strong. 1872 .- T. M. Waller, John A. Tibbits. 1873 .- George E. Starr, E. T. Brown. 1874 .- Benj. Stark, William Belcher. 1875 .- Charles Prentiss, John Fitch. 1876 .- T. M. Waller, A. T. Burgess. 1877 .- George Burgess, A. T. Burgess. ISTS .- A. G Lippitt, W. R. Austin. 1879 .- Robert Coit, George F. Tinker. 1880 .- J. G. Crump, George F. Tinker. 1881 .- A. T. Ilurgess, H. B. Downer.
Town Clerks from 1650 to 1882.
1650, Jonathan Brewster; 1651, Obadiah Bruen; 1667, William Douglas; 1668, Daniel Wetherell; 1670, Charles Hill; 1684, Edward l'almes; 1685, Daniel Wetherell; 1701, Richard Christophers; 1707, Daniel Wethorell; 1719, George Denison; 1720, None; 1721, Edward Ilal- lam; 1736, Daniel Coit; 1757, John Coit; 1758, Daniel Coit; 1773, James Mumford (three weeks); 1773, Gurdon Saltonstall; 1777, Ed- ward Hallam ; 1781, John Owen ; 1801, Samuel Belden ; 1811, David Colt ; 1817, Ebenezer Way; 1827, Henry Douglas ; 1845, Ephraim H. Douglas; 1850, Henry Douglas; 1855-56, Joseph C. Douglass; 1856- 67, Giles Bailey ; 1867-68, Samuel Fox ; 1868-75, Earl Warner, Jr .; 1875-76, William Douglass ; 1876-82, Isaac W. Thompson.
War of 1812 .- The business interests of the town had revived, and New London from 1799 to 1805 had rapidly recovered her former prosperity. But as early as 1806 the depredations of British cruisers and pri- vateers on American commerce commenced, and the commercial interests of the place, in common with other New England towns, were seriously injured. Appeals were made to the British government to re- peal or modify her unjust edicts, in her warfare against France, in the restrictions imposed on American neu- tral vessels, but in vain. Our flag was insulted, our merchant vessels boarded, and their crews frequently impressed into the British service. The commercial property of American citizens to an immense amount had been seized and confiscated, and yet the British government refused to listen to appeal or entreaty. In 1812 these repeated outrages culminated in a formal declaration of war by our government against Great Britain.
When hostilities commenced, this, like the war of the Revolution, bore heavily on the town. The en- tire naval force of the United States consisted of only twenty vessels, exclusive of gunboats, with an armament of but little more than five hundred guns,- a mere mosquito fleet to cope with the powerful naval forces of Great Britain. Consequently our sea-coast, thousands of miles in extent, was very seriously ex- posed to the depredations of the invaders. New Lon- dlon in particular was a prominent point of interest with the enemy. The British commanders, however, had not forgotten the severe reception of their troops in 1781, and were wary in their attempts at landing and in their offensive operations. But their vessels severely harassed and annoyed the citizens. Early
in June, 1813, the frigates "United States" and "Macedonian" and the gallant little sloop-of-war "Hornet" were pursued by Sir Thomas Hardy with his flag-ship, the " Ramillies," and a fleet of smaller vessels into the harbor, and the city and naval ves- sels were kept under a strict blockade until the close of the war.
A few days after the appearance of Hardy's fleet four more ships and frigates, with a number of smaller vessels, arrived and joined it, making a formidable naval force, whose threatening aspect caused general alarm among the inhabitants, many of whom too well remembered the sad scenes of 1781. Maj. Simeon Smith with a company of vol- unteers hastily prepared to give the invaders a warm reception should they make an attempt to enter the harbor or enforce a landing. The old Fort Griswold, the scene of the massacre thirty-two years previous, was put in the best possible condition to resist the enemy. But no landing was attempted, although sev- eral feints by the vessels near the mouth of the harbor indicated such a purpose. The inhabitants of the town were kept in a constant state of suspense and appre- hension. Commodore Decatur with his three war vessels retreated up the river as far as Gale's Ferry, and threw up a light intrenchment on the neighboring heights.
About this time an affair took place which exas- perated the officers of the blockading squadron and embittered their subsequent intercourse with the peo- ple on the coast, although the latter had no agency in the offensive act. A schooner called the "Eagle," owned in New York, was prepared as a kind of tor- pedo vessel, and sent into the Sound to make an ex- periment upon the enemy. She had a show of naval stores on board, and was captured by the British west of New London Harbor, near Millstone Point. The crew took to their boats, and reached the shore in safety. The British officer, after taking possession of the schooner, attempted to tow her up to the "Ramil- lies," but finding that she fell to leeward, he anchored at the distance of three-fourths of a mile from that vessel. Suddenly, in less than three hours after the desertion of her crew and the seizure by the British, the " Eagle" exploded with prodigious force, and was scattered into fragments. A shower of pitch and tar fell upon the "Ramillies;" timber and stones were hurled aloft, and the waters around thrown into great commotion. A second lieutenant and ten men who were on board the schooner were killed, and several men in boats were badly wounded.
This was wholly a private undertaking; the govern- ment had nothing to do with it. The owners had fitted the "Eagle" as a fire-ship, with a secret piece of mechanism concealed within, which, when set in motion, would cause an explosion after a certain in- terval. Her hold, under the appearance of ballast, contained four hundred pounds of powder and vari- ous other combustibles, with ponderous stones and
225
NEW LONDON.
destructive implements sufficient to inflict a terrible blow upon any ship-of-war alongside of which she might be brought, a blow which the "Ramillies" barely escaped.
Gen. Jiralı Isham commanded at that time at New London, and the next morning Commodore Hardy sent a flag of truce up to the town with the following communication :
"To Jirah Isham, Brig .- Gen, commanding at New London. I am under the necessity of requesting you to make it publicly known that I cannot permit vessels or boats of any description (flags of truce of course excepted) to approach or pass the British squadron, in conse- quence of an American vessel having exploded yesterday three hours after she was in our possession."1
It was said on English authority that the brave Sir Thomas Hardy, while occupying the Sound with a powerful squadron, and carrying his flag in a seventy- four, never remained at anchor during the night, and rarely left the deck except by day, in order to insure safety from Fulton's torpedoes. But a more certain if not more terrific mode of attack was at that time afloat and nearly ready for service in the waters of New York. This was the steam battery, miscalled frigate, " Fulton." This vessel, formidable enough in reality, had been represented by correspondents of English newspapers as a monster of prodigious power. An hundred guns of enormous calibre were said to be inclosed in fire and bomb-proof shelters; the upper deck was reported to be "defended by thousands of boarding pikes and cutlasses wielded by steam, while showers of boiling water were ready to be poured over those that might escape death from the rapidly whirl- ing steel." In reality the vessel presented above the surface of the water the figure of an oval, whose great- est length was about the same as that of an English seventy-four. This was covered by a continuous spar- deck, at either extremity of which was mounted on a revolving carriage a chambered gun capable of throwing a solid ball of one hundred pounds, but in- tended, as is well known, to throw shells. Beneath the spar-deck was the gun-deck, also continuous, ex- cept in the middle, where space was left for the work- ing of a large paddle-wheel, and on this gun-deck was mounted a battery of thirty-two 32-pounders. The sides of the vessel were thickened by cork and wood, not only between the guns, but as low as the water's edge, and incapable of being penetrated by a 32-pound ball. Beneath the gun-deck the hull was formed as if of a vessel cut in two, leaving a passage from stem to stern for water to reach and to be thrown backwards from the wheel. Two rudders were placed in this passage, moving on their centres. The boilers and the greater part of the machinery were below the reach of shot, and even the wheels could be reached but by a stray shot passing unimpeded and in a proper direction through the port-holes.
In June of that year Maj .- Gen. Burbeck, as before stated, arrived from Newport and assumed the com-
mand of the district. The troops on duty, in all amounting to about one thousand of the militia of the State, were transferred to the general government and subsequently dismissed, leaving the town entirely defenseless. Not a soldier remained on duty. Forts Trumbull and Griswold were completely evacuated, and all this with a British squadron of seven ships of the line and frigates and other vessels lying at the entrance of the Sound, within two hours' sail of the harbor. Under these circumstances the Governor, on Gen. Burbeck's application, anthorized Gen. Wil- liams to call out as large a body of the militia as exi- gencies should demand.
" The blockade henceforth assumed a most rigorous character. The enemy resolved to leave nothing afloat. The Sound was alive with petty warfare. Every creek and bay were searched, and nothing in the form of boat, sloop, or smack suffered to live. Yankee enterprise prolonged the task of the invaders, and obliged them to destroy by inches, and to multi- ply and repeat the blows before they could ruin the traffic and clear the coast of sails and oars."2
Varied and numerous were the events of the town and neighborhood during these three successive years of constant rigorous blockade. One of these specially worthy of note is narrated by Miss Caulkins. "The sloop 'Juno,' Capt. John Howard, continued to ply back and forth between New London and New York during the whole war with but a single serious acci- dent; that was the loss of her mast by a shot of the enemy after being driven into Saybrook Harbor. Her enterprising commander was well acquainted with the Sound, made his trips during the darkest nights and in severest storms, guided often by the lantern lights of the enemy's ships as he repeatedly ran through their blockading squadron. He was narrowly watched and several times pursned by their boats and barges, but always eluded capture. Some- times when too closely pursued a spirited fire from his cannon, four pieces of which he always carried on deck, only to be used in defense, would drive away his pursuers and secure his little craft from further molestation. The fact that the enemy were fully apprised of his times of departure and expected arrival, and in fact all his movements, through the newspapers, which they could easily obtain, renders it the more remarkable that she escaped their vigi- lance."
It is remarkable that during the whole war not a man in Connecticut was killed, notwithstanding the long and vigorous blockade and the many encounters between detachments of the enemy and the inhab- itants. One person only, a Mr. Dolph, lost his life on the waters of the coast, off Saybrook, while en- gaged with others in recovering two prizes taken by the enemy. Such a fact appears almost miraculous.
Commodore Decatur entertained the hope that
1 History of New London, pp. 632-33.
2 Miss Caulkins' History, page 634.
226
HISTORY OF NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT.
some opportunity would offer for his escape with his vessels during the winter, and watched for an oppor- tunity favorable to his design. His vessel dropped down and remained at anchor opposite the town, and quietly remained waiting for some remissness of vigi- lance on the part of the enemy. At length the favor- able time seemed to have arrived. A. dark night, a favorable wind, and fair tide all gave every expecta- tion of success. But just as the little fleet were about to start " bluc-lights" appeared on both sides of the river. Such an unusual occurrence gave strong sus- picions that these were concerted signals to the enemy, and notwithstanding every preparation had been made with the most profound secrecy, the commodore con- sidered himself betrayed, and relinquished his inten- tions, making no further effort to run the blockade.
Although he was firm in his belief that his inten- tions were thus signaled to the enemy, it was indig- nantly denied by the citizens that any traitorous designs existed, and that the lights were accidental, or that those who reported them to the commodore were mistaken. He, however, removed his two large vessels up the river, where they were dismantled and only a guard left on board. The " Hornet" remained at New London, and subsequently slipped out of the harbor, and eluding capture, reached New York in safety.
The restoration of peace in 1815 was an occasion of general rejoicing. Our enemies became friends, and receptions, balls, and public rejoicings signalized the event, in which the officers of the British squad- ron cordially participated, and who were as cordially received by the citizens of the town. Such was the close of the war of 1812.
War of 1861-65 .- The following interesting ac- count of New London in the late Rebellion was fur- nished by Hon. William H. Starr :
In the late struggle for the perpetuation of our glorious Union the patriotism of New London, as ex- hibited in her carlier history, was equally manifested. Of the seventy-five thousand noble sons of Connecti- cut who took part in the struggle, New London fur- nished more than her quota. No people in their struggle for liberty probably ever gave of their own free-will so lavishly as did our gallant Connecticut volunteers. This town, with patriotic liberality, gave some of the purest and most promising of her noble- hearted citizens to sustain the government in its hour of peril, and the blood of her martyred heroes has enriched the soil from the heights of Arlington to its most remote southern boundary. Immediately on the news of the attack on Fort Sumter the spirit of '76 fired the hearts of her citizens. The city flag was raised, followed by a display of flags all over the city and by the shipping. At the Wilson Company's works all hands were summoned and the flag saluted with repeated cheers. On the 19th, Mayor J. N. Harris received a dispatch from the Secretary of War requesting him to furnish a company to garrison
Fort Trumbull. The request was immediately com- plied with, and the City Guards placed on duty there. The same evening one of the largest and most enthu- siastic meetings ever convened in the city was held in and outside the court-house. The meeting was called to order by Hon. F. B. Loomis. Hon. Nathan Belcher presided. Hon. Augustus Brandegee offered a resolution declaring that all political differences must be buried and all unite to save the republic, which resolution was passed by a tremendous aye.
With great enthusiasm volunteers offered their ser- vices. Enlistments rapidly followed. Some of the noblest and most promising of our youth gallantly entered the service, fired with the spirit of patriotism and valor. Company after company was raised and equipped for the war, first for three months and then for the three years' service. The daily and weekly papers of that period contained frequent and enthusi- astic notices of their departure for the fields of con- flict, followed by the repeated cheers of their fellow- citizens.1
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.