USA > Connecticut > Tercentenary pamphlet series, v. 1 Connecticut and the British Government > Part 26
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
Unfortunately for Connecticut this agreement never received royal confirmation and New York refused to live up to it. In 1674 a new patent was granted the Duke of York which confirmed his grant of boundaries to the Connecticut River. A copy of the patent was sent to
30
Connecticut and she was ordered to submit herself to it. Connecticut promptly asserted that by the agreement of 1664 the boundary line had been already settled between the two colonies and that she would hold to this agree- ment. In reply to this argument of Connecticut's the governor of New York declared that the agreement of 1664 had not been ratified by the crown and so was of no value and even had it been, this new patent of 1674 would supersede it. Connecticut's refusal to submit was con- sidered rebellion.
No decision was reached until May II, 1682, when an agreement was made between New York and Connecti- cut. Connecticut was forced to give up the line of 1664 under a threat from New York of claiming all the land to the Connecticut River. It is doubtful if New York ever hoped or expected to make good her claim as far as the Connecticut River, and she employed this clause of her patent principally as a club to gain other concessions. The agreement put the line between the two colonies at twenty miles from, and parallel to, the Hudson River, but as the line approached the Sound, a rectangle of land consisting of 61,440 acres was granted Connecticut in consideration of the fact that this land had already been settled by towns under Connecticut's authority. The Byram River between the towns of Rye and Greenwich was taken as the westernmost point of Connecticut. The line ran upstream to the wading place, then north-north- west eight English miles, eastward twelve miles parallel to the Sound, and then to the line twenty miles from, and parallel to, the Hudson River.
In order to compensate New York for the area of 61,440 acres of land, which was closer to the Hudson River than the twenty mile limit, Connecticut was re- quired to cede a strip of land along all of her western
3I
MASS.
River
Line of 1664
Hudson
The Oblong
NEW
YORK
Peekskill
Line of, 1650
61,440 Acres
O
Scale of Miles 10 5 15
20
LONG ISLAND SOUND
R.B.A. '33
This shows the various attempts to settle the western boundary of Con- necticut.
CONNECTICUT
boundary from North Wilton to the Massachusetts line. This strip of land was about one and three-quarter miles wide and was known as the Oblong or Equivalent Tract. By the agreement regarding the Byram River, Connecti- cut lost the town of Rye which had been settled by the English, but which had been governed by the Dutch under the 1650 agreement. Connecticut had claimed the town under her charter and it had formally become a Connecticut plantation in 1665. Until 1683 Rye had re- mained as part of Connecticut and the inhabitants of the town were very displeased at being transferred to New York's jurisdiction. It is interesting to note the almost universal popularity which Connecticut enjoyed among the small border towns throughout the period of boundary adjustments. In almost every case, when the question of Connecticut jurisdiction was brought before the inhab- itants of the territory involved they, or at least a majority of them, preferred Connecticut's jurisdiction to that of any other colony. The reasons for this seem clear: Con- necticut had low taxes and great freedom of local self- government under its charter. Only in the case of Rhode Island do we find a government equally liberal and free from English control, and in the case of Rhode Island many of the Puritans felt the inhabitants there were too liberal. Even New Haven in 1664, as soon as the threat of annexation to New York was made, accepted union with Connecticut as preferable.
The people of Rye during fourteen years fought to the best of their ability their transference to New York and in 1697 revolted, joined Connecticut, and remained under her protection until the agreement of 1683 was confirmed by the king, March 28, 1700, when much against their wishes they submitted themselves to New York.
The same story can be told of the town of Bedford. It
33
belonged to Connecticut but had been transferred to New York by the agreement of 1683. In 1688, royal confirmation of the agreement not having been given, Bedford voted to take out a patent under Connecticut. This patent was granted in 1697 and Connecticut agreed to protect Bedford as well as Rye, with fifty armed men, from New York aggression. The confirmation of the 1683 agreement by the crown in 1700 affected Bedford as well as Rye, and Connecticut was forced to relinquish the towns. There seems to be no logical reason why these towns should have been taken from Connecticut. If New York could claim them under the Duke of York's patent, Connecticut could claim them with just as much justifica- tion under her charter which had been granted prior to the Duke of York's patent. Although Connecticut ap- pears to have suffered an injustice in the loss of these towns as well as in the loss of Long Island, at least she had reason to be satisfied that all her territory to the Connecticut River had not been taken from her. In any compromise, each party in the dispute must give up part of its claims and Connecticut may be considered fortu- nate in not losing more of her territory than she did. One may even fear that, as in her attacks on the lands claimed by Rhode Island, if she had been in New York's position she would have demanded more from a smaller and weaker opponent.
Even after the agreement of 1683 had received royal confirmation, New York refused to join Connecticut in surveying the line between the two colonies. In 1713 Connecticut appealed to the king to force New York to join her in running the line. New York continued to de- lay, but, finally, in 1725 at Greenwich, articles of agree- ment were concluded which were substantially the same as those of 1683. Before the line could be finished, dis-
34
putes arose between the two colonies which postponed the final settlement until 1731 when the survey was com- pleted. In the same year the Oblong was formally ceded to New York.
This giving over of Connecticut territory to New York brought up a legal point. Was the land given over to the king directly, and so subject to a new grant on his part, or was the land given to the province of New York with the understanding that the old owners of the land should retain their property rights.
Men in England were quick to recognize that in the un- certainty involving this transfer of land there was an opportunity for profit for themselves. The very day the land was formally transferred a patent was granted for the territory by the crown to a group of Englishmen who acted as dummies for the Duke of Chandos. This grant is of interest in that it was granted directly by the crown- a most unusual proceeding, as land was normally granted indirectly by the crown through a provincial governor and his council. There is only one other example in New York colonial history of a direct grant of land by the crown, that being to Sir William Johnson at a later date. In the same month, Governor Montgomerie of New York granted 50,000 acres of this same land to Thomas Hawley and his associates. Hawley and his group were the old owners of the land, having held it under a patent from Connecticut.
A lawsuit to decide the rival claims ensued and dragged on for several years. Hawley and his group deter- mined to prolong the proceedings and thus make them so costly that Chandos and his group would be forced to yield. Their policy proved successful, for in 1738 Chandos announced that he thought it high time to put an end to the contest, either through selling his patent to the New York grantees or by "flinging it up." So the land re-
35
mained in the possession of the former owners, under New York patent, although with more skillful council, Chandos might have made good his claim.
Even after the line of 1731 was run, a few minor mat- ters created friction between New York and Connecticut. In 1855 it was thought that the old line should be re- surveyed as the old boundary marks had been removed or destroyed, so that people, living near the line, were evading taxes in either state. The question arose as to whether an attempt should be made to re-discover the old boundary marks and so run the line from one to another-or whether taking the southeastern corner of the New York state town of North Salem as the starting point the line should be run due north, thus ignoring all former monuments. The straight line was run but was found to differ from the old boundary. Errors in the sur- vey of 1731 are accountable for this disparity, the devia- tions of the compass not having been corrected when that line was run. Connecticut through this change would have gained approximately 2,600 acres, several hundred inhab- itants, and a small village called Hitchcock's Corners. A dispute arose which continued until 1880, when a final agreement was made with New York. The old line of 173I was granted New York and in return, Connecticut was permitted to extend her southern boundary into Long Island Sound. The wording of Connecticut's southern boundary as made by this agreement follows:
. beginning at a point in the centre of the Channel, about . 600 feet south of the extreme locks of Byrams Point, running in a true south east course 3 and 14 statute miles thence in a straight line northeasterly to a point four statute miles true south of New London light-house;
thence through Fishers Island Sound and on "so far as
36
said States are continuous." This agreement was ratified by both states and Congress in 1881.
The story of Connecticut's boundary disputes is fin- ished. We have traced its course from the earliest colonial days. We have seen the conflict between Rhode Island and Connecticut incited by their charters, the struggle with Massachusetts for the border towns, and the pro- longed strife between New York and Connecticut be- cause of their respective patents. Throughout the long and bitter struggles, Connecticut, although not always the stronger in material resources, made felt what strength she had, and insofar as the diplomatic side of the disputes was concerned, proved herself equal to all emergencies.
Let us consider how large Connecticut would have been had all her claims been recognized, or how small, if the other colonies had in each dispute, triumphed over her.
If she had been entirely victorious her eastern bound- ary would have been Narragansett Bay. Her southern boundary, Long Island, her northern boundary just about what it is now but extended all the way across the United States, and her western boundary the Pacific Ocean.
Had she been defeated in each struggle her eastern boundary would have been the Mystic River, Massachu- setts being her eastern neighbor. Her southern boundary Long Island Sound, her western boundary the Connecti- cut River, her northern boundary a line from Windsor to where the Massachusetts line would have cut through the town to join the headwaters of the Mystic River. Even this small amount of land would have been greatly limited if two claims (which have not been discussed in this paper, being more territorial than boundary claims) had been established. These claims were those of the Duke of Hamilton and the Mohegan Indians.
The possibility of a greater or lesser Connecticut, had
37
-
BOUNDARY FARTHEST NORTH EVER CLAIMED BY CONNECTICUT~
MASS
A C HUSETTS
B?
nnectica
RHOD
YORK
CONNE c
T=I=C=U=T
ISL
NEW
5
10 Scale of Miles 15 20
25
30
N
ISLAN
RBAE
A-B shows extent of Connecticut's claim against Rhode Island.
Unshaded area south of northern boundary line (excluding Massachusetts and Rhode Island) shows width of Connecticut's claim which extended west as far as the Pacific.
Shaded area shows Connecticut's size had all claims been decided against her.
the claims been adjusted differently, gives rise to much historical speculation, and one is forced to recognize how successfully Connecticut utilized her limited powers and resources in opposing the strength of those whose claims endangered her. -
- 38
S
BOUNDARY FARTHEST NORTHSEVER CLAIMED BY CONNECTICUT
MASS A C
HUSETTS
B
River
Connecticut
RHOD
YORK
U
CONNEC
CTI=C=UST
ISL
NEW
10 Scale of Miles 15 20
25 30
ISLAN
RBA E
A-B shows extent of Connecticut's claim against Rhode Island.
Unshaded area south of northern boundary line (excluding Massachusetts and Rhode Island) shows width of Connecticut's claim which extended west as far as the Pacific.
Shaded area shows Connecticut's size had all claims been decided against her.
the claims been adjusted differently, gives rise to much historical speculation, and one is forced to recognize how successfully Connecticut utilized her limited powers and resources in opposing the strength of those whose claims endangered her.
38
5
D quemquatuck
River
Carnage
shaws Hou/c A. Thomas
Thisted fine u preswind by the Words four parter to be the Haverty of y Colony kwas - determined by the Kings Commis" in " ibbs, as douth appear under their hands seals not withstanding withal Cost of Connecticut Colony made continual firodas upon y Eastern Side of y's Lantes ' wiring upon & Inhabitants k. carrying them & imprisoning from in y! colony A make them submit to their usury authority.
Pond's
Town calle west Paly
wood River
us Broken lans
The Inhabitants of this Colony having vyford very much by the usurpation of thego! of connecticut in y year nos. Comment wore appointed to settle, the Restoon line of his Colony, So that the commit" of this colony being unacquainted with the situation of the Country & the Course of the Rivers it was agood that this Green Line to be the dividing. Lino & this Colony's Wekern Bonnes, notleithstanding M .? agreement the younger. of that Colony the often requesto could not be prevails with to join with this Gowenn! in Running k settling the Lines so that they keep us in dispences; k daily make increachients upon Our Propertys.
=Jachusets South Line ._
PakTycker River
Beauf Saiter.
amal join
Patience
Sea Bouk
Kew
indency
Swansey
RhodeIsland
Bristol
Jackweak
Second point
Litle Conton
Siverton
The yellow line Deciphers
The
Western part of Plymouth Colony now the Prounice of the Mafrachusets Bay
A map presented by the agents of the Rhode Island colony to the Privy Council at Whitehall showing their claims against Connecticut. It was presented in 1721. The original can be found in the British Public Record Office, London, C. O. 5, 1293.
point
Watch
Thatcuck River
cochmange C
a Scale of 8 English miten 12 9 68
Block Island
alias now Sheram.
alon
Zast Greenwich
ProvidencePlantations.
Kings Town
Pauluxet &wer
Warwicks
Providence
The Mas=
S
R$ = Rofe Island I : Fort Ists 10: Coasters H = Hogy Island
Free Town
Printed at the Printing-Office of the Yale University Press
74.6 5054 70.12
TERCENTENARY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
QUI
SUSTINETİ
TRANSTULIT
COMMITTEE ON HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS
Early Domestic Architecture of Connecticut
PUBLISHED FOR THE TERCENTENARY COMMISSION BY THE YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1933
TERCENTENARY COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
COMMITTEE ON HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS
Early Domestic Architecture of Connecticut
J. FREDERICK KELLY A.I.A.
T HE colonists who came to Connecticut were faced by two immediate and vital needs; first, that of securing an adequate food sup- ply; and, second, that of providing shelter. Of the two, the latter probably presented the more diffi- cult problem, for it is not unlikely that the first settlers brought with them a limited amount of foodstuffs. These men found in Connecticut an abundance of fish and game, and those who settled along the shores of Long Island Sound soon learned that its waters furnished an unfailing supply of shellfish as well. To protect themselves and their families from the elements with adequate shelter was, therefore, the colonists' most pressing problem.
The men who came from Massachusetts by water, with the intention of making a settlement at Matianuck- where the town of Windsor now stands-knew of the existence of a fortified Dutch trading post at Hartford. Anticipating the hostility of the Dutch, they brought with them the prepared timbers of a house and its outside covering, in order to establish themselves as quickly as possible. Concerning this, Bradford' says:
I Bradford, History of Plimmoth Plantation (Ford ed.) II, 167-168.
I
"They having made a small frame of a house ready, and having a great new barke, they stowed their frame in her hold, and bords to cover and finishe it, having nayles and all other provisions fitting for their use. ... Coming to their place, they clapt up their house quickly, and landed their provisions, and left the companie appoynted, and sent the barke home, and afterwards palisadoed their house aboute, and fortified themselves better." The "barke" was brought to anchor just below the mouth of the Farming- ton River, where a landing was made on September 26, 1633. At that place the house was quickly "clapt up."
While there is a mere thread of tradition to the effect that some of the settlers of Hartford, and nearby towns likewise, brought the prepared materials for their houses with them by water from Massachusetts, there is no evi- dence to support it. It seems more reasonable to believe that these people turned to the abundant forests of Con- necticut for materials with which to construct their first dwellings.
It is not improbable that at first, before the advent of the framed house, log cabins were commonly built, though perhaps for nothing more than temporary use. Cutting timber for such use served the double purpose of clearing the land for crop planting, and providing a sup- ply of building material as well. Atwater, in his History of the Colony of New Haven, states that the first settlers built
such cabins, and that in some instances, if not in most, they were roofed, after the English fashion, with thatch.
We know that the eight men left behind by Eaton, aft- er his first visit to New Haven in the fall of 1637, con- structed the most primitive sort of shelters in which to spend the first winter. These shelters were little more than cellars, built into the sides of steep banks, and roofed with sod or thatch.
2
This period of log cabins and crude shelters was but a brief one, for no doubt the colonists at once began the construction of permanent dwellings. It is known that the Henry Whitfield house in Guilford, built of stone, was erected in 1639, and that, according to old records, George Fenwick had a "faire house" at Saybrook as early as 1641, which house was "well fortified."
The first structures which may be truly called houses were, with the exception of the Whitfield house, invari- ably of frame construction. A little thought makes the reason for this fact apparent. To begin with, most of the colonists who settled in Connecticut were of English birth. The majority of them were natives of regions of the mother country in which oak timber was plentiful, and its use a fixed tradition. For example, the Guilford men came from Surrey and Kent, and the Milford men from Essex and York-all parts of England where the traditional use of oak for building construction was well understood. It was but natural, therefore, that these first settlers, finding an abundance of virgin oak in the Con- necticut forests, should have at once brought into play their native building traditions, and chosen to use the one material with the working of which they were already familiar, and the physical properties of which they fully understood. Furthermore, the axes of the colonists in clearing land had laid at their feet quantities of fine tim- ber, so that in a way, the first step toward timber con- struction was automatically taken. Those who know the rocky hillsides of Connecticut may argue that this very process of clearing the land also involved the handling of immense quantities of loose stone-as the miles of stone walls which interlace the countryside today attest-and ask why the Whitfield house in Guilford is the only early stone house in the state. The answer lies in the fact that
3
timber construction compared with masonry construc- tion, is far more rapid, and that the need of houses was of such urgency that the settlers chose the material which involved the least labor and produced the quickest re- sults. Probably the lack of lime for mortar was another reason for the failure to use stone.
As we have noted, then, but a short period elapsed aft- er the arrival of the colonists in Connecticut before they undertook the construction of framed oak houses. Judg- ing from available evidence today, it is probable that these first houses were of one-room plan, a story and a half or two stories in height, with the chimney stack at one end. It is quite apparent, however, that houses of this type were poorly suited to the domestic requirements of any except the smallest of families, so that additional space was very soon required. This was easily obtained by adding another corresponding room, or unit of construc- tion, on the opposite side of the chimney, which thus be- came enclosed. The house of two-room plan soon became established as a type, and marks the second stage in the development of the Connecticut house plan. From this point onward, it is of interest to note that the chimney stack became the pivotal point about which the plan re- volved in its development.
The next step, made necessary by the constantly in- creasing demands for more room, consisted in adding a "lean-to" across the rear of the house. This addition pro- vided three additional rooms on the first floor, plus a large attic on the second.
By this time, a second generation was beginning to take the place of the first settlers. Cultivated fields had appeared where the virgin forest once stood, hostile Indi- ans were no longer a menace, and times were rapidly be- coming prosperous. Families had increased in size as well
4
as in wealth, and men now found themselves able to turn more attention and devote more means to the construc- tion of their dwellings. Up to this time, the physical home had been essentially for the purpose of shelter and securi- ty. The houses built had been reduced to the simplest terms, and were practically devoid of any ornamental treatment. In fact, there was no feature which was not essential, nor which did not serve a definitely useful pur- pose.
The lean-to house, which now became fixed as a type, underwent a structural change, which, however, did not affect its appearance. The lean-to, which at first was added, now became an integral part of the house, due to the fact that the additional space thus gained had become a definite necessity, brought about in turn by changes in the mode of living. The integral lean-to type may be re- garded, then, as marking the fourth step in the house plan development.
The next change that took place materially altered the exterior house appearance. This was accomplished by building the house of two full stories throughout, al- though the first floor plan remained that of the lean-to house. This change caused the disappearance of the long lean-to roof, with its fine sweeping lines, but the advan- tages of improved interior arrangement so derived were great. The nearly useless atticlike space of the lean-to on the second floor was now replaced by three additional rooms of full head-room across the rear of the house. This step-the fifth-marks the final development of the cen- tral-chimney type of plan.
As we have seen, the chimney stack has been the domi- nating feature of the plan up to this point, governing the general arrangement from its central position. But there now began a change of great significance; namely, the
5
.
introduction of a central hallway, extending straight through the house from front to rear, with an outside door at either end, and the resultant division of the chimney into two parts. Hitherto, utility and economy of arrange- ment had been the governing factors which controlled the house plan. Now, compactness of plan and general inti- macy of scheme gave way to a more open, balanced, and formal arrangement, which constitutes the sixth and final stage in the development of the Connecticut house plan. Formerly communication had been directly from room to room; but with the new scheme, this was no longer neces- sary, due to the introduction of hallways.
In tracing the history of plan development, definite dates cannot be established for the changes that took place. The changes produced were gradual ones, and there was an inevitable overlapping of periods. But in or- der to establish some general divisions of time, it may be said that the central-chimney plan of two rooms held sway up to about the last quarter of the seventeenth century. During this period the added lean-to appeared. From thence onward to approximately 1700 the principal changes were the disappearance of the framed overhang and the altered character of the lean-to, which was incor- porated into the construction and became an integral part of the house fabric. The next period-from 1700 on to about the middle of the eighteenth century-saw the lean-to raised, and the house made of two full stories throughout. The final development of the house plan- the central-hall arrangement-did not appear until about 1750, between which time and the Revolutionary period it became a fixed type.
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.