The history and genealogies of ancient Windsor, Connecticut, Vol. I, Part 53

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909
Publication date: 1891
Publisher: Hartford, Conn., Press of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard company
Number of Pages: 1038

USA > Connecticut > Hartford County > Windsor > The history and genealogies of ancient Windsor, Connecticut, Vol. I > Part 53

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).

" Old Capt. Palmer related (to the Chief Justice) that he remembered when . the Island' was the thickest settled part of Windsor -the road to Hartford then ran through it and he remembers seeing warehouses, malt-houses, stills, ete."

" Mr. Josiah Barber told (the Chief Justice) that settlements along the Little River were made at an early date North, towards Poquonock, as well as upon the Mill Brook, near which he had found remains of one old fort or house, in which neighboring old people who were born in beginning of Isth century (old Mr. and Mrs. Gilbert) told him they had lain some nights."

Couches and other Vehicles, - In 1796, of coaches taxed at $17, East Windsor had three: in 1799 Windsor shared with Hartford " the highest dignity on wheels, having a coach taxed at 884; and in 1820, Windsor bad xirty and East Windsor sixty-six riding carriages." - Hartford Co. M.m. Hist.

" Two-horse business wagons were common, but little used for ordinary travel. both men and women rode on horse-back. The first one-horse road wagon ever seen here was made in Pinemeadow, by David Birge, an elder brother of Horace, about 1800 lle lived to see the street, nearly half a century after, filled with one-horse pleasure car- ringes."-J. 11. Hayden.

" Stills were probably introduced in Windsor soon after the first settlement. Mr. Thomas Stoughton, Jr., used stills in manufacturing cider-brandy." In 1819, Windsor lad 4 stills; in 1820, 21; in 1828, 17; these were cider-brandy distilleries.

Brick and Stone House. - In 1810 there were only 22 " brick and stone houses," of which Bust Windsor, Windsor, and Wethersfield each held one. - Hartford to. M.m. Hixt

Iron Works, - As early as 1710 there were iron works along the line of Suffield and Windsor - making the iron from bog-ore. The iron manufacture carried on within the present limits of Vernon and Rockville, C1. - 1737 1450-tonehes upon Windsor history, but our limited space forbids more than reference to two interesting articles upon the subject, published by Mia.ys S. Kritoce, of Newtonville, Mass., in the Rockrille Journal, dates of Nov. 14 and 21, 1889.

444

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

RELATIVE POPULATION OF THE WINDSOR TOWNS, According to Census Reports, from 1756 to 1880 - Taken from Hartford County Memorial History.

1756. 1774. 1782. 1790

1800 1810. 18:10

1830 1810. 1850. 1860. 1870. 1850

Windsor. 2 11 10 5

4 10

1 15

11 10

1,220 2.125 9, 882 2,714 2,723 2.868 3, 008 3, 220 2,283 3, 294 2.278 2.783 3,058

12 10 11

East Windsor

7 2,9993,237 2. 600 2. 766 3, 081 3. 100 3.536 3, 600 2, 633 2.580 2. 882 8.019

Bloomfield.

986 1. 412 1, 401 1.473 1,316 18 18 18

South Windsor,

1,638 1, 789 1.088 1,902 19 16 14

Windsor Locks,

1,587 2.1542.332

NOTE .- The small figures represent the relative size of each town (as compared to other towns in the State), according to population.

Witches in Windsor. - In relation to this subject, I venture to repro- duce an article which I contributed to the Hartford Evening Post of July 29, 1885.

STR : I have seen frequent allusions in your paper, of late, to " Windsor Witches "; and I wonder not that this is a subject of great interest to your Hartford gentlemen. Being myself of Windsor and Hartford descent, and being, withal, much given to anti- ¿quarian researches, I have the best of reasons for knowing that, for the past 250 years, the Hartford witch-hunters have taken genuine delight in the pursuit of Windsor witches. And, indeed, it could not be otherwise; for to my knowledge and to yours, Mr. Editor, so winsome have ever been the features, form, and manners of the genuine Windsor witches, that no one, knowing the nature of man, coukl blame the men of your town for going beyond "Hartford bounds" in the pursuit of such fair game And knowing, as we do, Mr. Editor, the virtue, discretion, and " faculty " (to use a good old New England term) of these Windsor witches to be equal to their other charms, we can better appreciate the life-long joy, peace, and domestic bliss which many a Hartford man has ensured to himself by seenring and domesticating one of them, And, since the genuine breed is by no means extinet in Windsor (as I have had ample meansof judging within the last few days) I wonder greatly at the folly of some who are now trying to dig up a specimen more than two hundred years old. Surely this (when one of the present generation, sixteen years old, is so much more bewitching and satisfactory in all her winning ways) is a wilful despising of "the good which the gods provide." It somewhat reminds me of Bunyan's " man with the mnek-rake," moiling and grubbing amid the dirt and cast-off rubbish of the earth, and totally unobservant and blind to the brightness and beauty of the world around him. Still, as such a " witch hunter " is now atield with his rake, and seems disposed to produce for our inspection a very shabby and altogether doubtful specimen of the witch genus, which he would credit to Wind sor, I feel impelled in defense of the good name of the real witches of that goodly town to examine the evidence.

In The Connectiont Post of August 11 and 18, 1883, under the headings of ". Witch of Windsor," and " Our Witch Histories, " appeared a couple of articles which, as we believe. Affixed a most unjust stigma upon that ancient town. The writer having chanced upon a hint that one Mary Johnson, who was executed at Hartford about 1618 for witchcraft, was a resident of Windsor, proceeded to " interview " Rev. Mr. Wilson, the present pastor of the old church of Windsor ; and getting but little satisfaction from that gentleman, he wandered into the Windsor graveyard, apparently expecting to find

20 19 21 20

445

WITCHES IN WINDSOR.

therein the gravestone of Mary Johnson as proof of his theory. He found it not, but fortunately for his proposed article, he found enough quaint and interesting epitaphs to enable him to reel off a column or more on general antiquarian topies, In the succeed- ing week's issue (the 18th) he returned to the charge with another column of matter about the old gallows tree af Hartford, the indictment and trial of Mary Johnson, and some remarks on the literature of Connecticut witchcraft, all treated in the usual loose. disjointed fashion of such sensational articles. The totally irresponsible character of this "interviewer " of Mary Johnson's ghost is especially manifest in his statement that "Dr. Stiles, in his history of Connecticut, deliberately asserts that there were no trials nor executions " for witchcraft in the State. We may remark that Dr. Stiles wrote the history of Windsor, not of Connecticut; and that he made no such statement as the above. Rev. Dr. Trumbull, however, in his history of Connecticut, said that "after the most careful researches, no indictment of any person for that crime, uor any pro cess relative to that affair, can be found."

Our own immediate business, however, is not with the general suhjeet of witchcraft in Connecticut, but with the statement which endeavors to fix upon Windsor the equiv- ocal honor of having been the residence of this Mary Johnson.

We call then upon the Hartford "witch-hunters" to prove that Mary Johnson belonged in Windsor.

" Mary Johnson, for theuery, is to be pr'sently whipped, and to be brought forth a month hence at Wethersfield, and there whipped." See the records of a court held August the 21. 1616, in Trumbull's Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, Vol. I . p. 1-13.

No better proof is needed that her home was at Wethersfield, and not at Windsor. Was Mary Johnson the first person who was hanged as a witch in New England ?

She could not have been banged before the action of " the particular courte, this 7th December, 1618," which action is thus recorded in Col. Rec. of Conn., Vol. VIII., p. 171: " The jury tinds the Bill of Inditement against Mary Jonson, that by her owne confes- sion shee is guilty of familiarity with the Devill."

Having fixed her home at Wethersfield, and fixed a date before which she could not have been hanged, her history, if it has not already been sufficiently told, may well be Jeft to the witch-hunters of Hartford.

What authority can be found for the assertion that Mary Johnson, or any other witch, belonged in Windsor ? None, so far as history goes, except in Winthrop's Jour- tal, or Winthrop's History of New England (edition of 1853, Vol. II., p. 374; former edi- tion. p. 305). as follows: " One [ blank ] of Windsor arraigned and executed at Hartford, for a witch." This assertion, without date, without name. without any statement of anthority : not made at the time of the alleged occurrence, nor in the regular sequence of the journal, but in a blank space formerly left therein, by a writer in Boston, one hundred miles from Windsor, and wholly unsupported by contemporary records or statements, is all that has been brought against the good fame of Windsor in that respect. And we respectfully submit that it is no more to be accepted as historical truth than would be a similar charge made by a paragraph writer in a Boston newspaper, under similar circumstances to-day.

What have others said about the "first case " ? Dr. Holmes, in his _American Intelx (1. 345; second edition. 1. 287 388) under date 1648, June, says: " The first instance of capital punishment for witchcraft in New England, occurring in colonial his- tory, was in this year. Margaret Jones, of Charlestown, was indicted for a witch, found guilty and executed."

It is evident that he considered Governor Winthrop's allusion to Windsor, a year carlier, as too vague to have any force or value: and who can say that he was in error ?

Hubbard's New England (published by the Massachusetts Historical Society in 1815) page 580, says: " In June, 1648, one Margaret Jones, of Charlestown, was indicted for a witch, and executed for it."

Hutchinson (ed edition. 2 vols., published in London MDCCCIX) vol. I., page 150,

446

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

says: " The first instance I find of any person executed for witchcraft was in June, 1618. Margaret Jones of Charlestown was indicted for a witch, found guilty and executed."

Drake, in ".Annals of Witchcraft in Nor England, 1869," refers to each of these three cases, but makes no comment on that mentioned by Winthrop against Windsor except: " No circumstances have been found, nor the name of the sufferer." He puts it under the year 1616.

What was the dictum of Judge Savage in the case ? In commenting on the vague statement of Winthrop, he said: " Nothing of this is found in the ' History of Connecti- cut by Dr. Trumbull, yet it is deserving of melancholy commemoration as the first instance of delusion in New England, too soon infectious. We may presume the un happy woman was tried as well as arraigned before execution, if the wretched ceremo- nies in such cases deserve the name of trial." See Trumbull, I. S, in preface, where he says: " After the most careful researches, no indictment of any person for that crime, nor any process relative to that affair can be found." Perhaps there was sense enough early in the colony to destroy the record; but, at least, we know that in 1670 the court, after conviction of Catharine Harrison, of Wethersfield, for that capital crime, had firm- ness and cunning in their decision to dismiss her from her imprisonment, she paying her just fees: willing her to mind the fulfillment of removing from Wethersfield, which is that will tend most to her own safety, and the contentment of the people who are her neighbors. The Connecticut law. December, 1612, may be read in three lines of Trum bull's (67. Ree .. 1., 77, including the authorities from Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. Massachusetts borrowed every letter and figure of the text and comment.

Returning to the subject, in his Genealogical Dictionary of Nor England. (11. 59. article Johnson), Judge Savage says: " The first person in New England guilty of the impossible crime of witchcraft, and executed at Hartford, was a Johnson of Windsor: and one of the most distinguished was Rev. Samuel Johnson, born at Guilford. 14th October, 1696, the first President of Kings College at New York, who died 6th Janu- ary, 1772."

In the same volume, page 568, he says: " Margaret Jones, the woman executed as a witch, 15 June, 1648, was the second example of such infatuation in New England, the first being at Windsor a year before."

Wonderful wisdom. In each of the references he calls the Windsor case the first, though Winthrop had said no such thing. In the first he had learned the sex, and in the second the name of the person in question, though Winthrop had given neither, and though she whose name he gave belonged in Wethersfield, not Windsor, and was not tried, and so certainly not hanged, till six months after the well-authenticated case of Margaret Jones, the first, though Savage makes her the second. " Melancholy com- memoration," indeed! If he meant to class Rev. Samuel Johnson as " the most distin. quished person in New England, guilty of the impossible crime of witchcraft," he ought to have given some evidence of his guilt. If he really meant to call him the most distinguished of the Johnsons, he should not thus have grouped him with the most unfortunate.

Would not his purpose have been just as well served if he had charged upon Windsor the responsibility for Goodwife Elizabeth Johnson, who probably suffered in 1652 for committing one of the twelve crimes which were capitally punished under Connecticut laws. And who can tell which he really did mean ? The anacronism is scarcely worse in one case than the other. And who can tell why all cases of offenders except for murder, under those twelve capital laws, should be called cases of witchcraft by the modern witch-hunters ? Why did Judge Savage attempt to reverse the decision of those historians who had preceded him ? Perhaps because they had left the intro duction of witcheraft into New England to appear as a " Boston notion," the trial and excention having taken place there ; and he, a Boston man, desired to shift the doubtful honor upon the people of some other place.

A later historian. Rev. Samuel Orcutt, in his History of Stratford, Conn., gives a

117

WINDSOR WITCHES.

chapter on witches and witcheraft," in which (at page 156), under the heading, " Witcheraft in Connecticut - Authentic Records, " he repeats the erroneous statements already made.

Mother's Maynalia (Book six, chapter seven, "Thanmatographia Pneumatica." or " Wonders of the Spirit World "), gives as the " eighth example" a history of Mary Johnson, which the Hartford witch-hunters have read in that book, but it is curious that he gives it no date ; while his first example was that of the Greensmith woman in Hartford, who, in 1662, so troubled "Ann Cole, a person of serious piety." that she could only be " happily delivered from the extraordinary troubles wherewith she had been exercised " by the exception of Mrs. Greensmith, or, possibly, as shown by the History of Stratford, by the execution of both Greensmith and his wife at Hartford. and the flight of the two others " from the country."

Would it not he well for the Hartford witch-hunters to work out a full history of "Greensmith and his wife," and of the " two others " who " fly from the country " in 1662; as well as of Elizabeth Seager of Hartford, who, in 1665, was found guilty, but escaped by an informality in the verdict, - before hunting too much in other towns ?

They might then restore Mary Johnson to Wethersfield, look up her full history. and also that of Catherine Harrison, who, in 1670, was convicted, " but allowed to pay costs and leave the town." It might also he pertinent to inquire if Dr. Savage was cor- rect in his identification of Nathaniel Greensmith as the " Imsband " of the woman there excented for a witch in 1662; and to show, if he was not also executed, why his own conveyance of his property might not have been allowed, instead of appointing Mr. Samuel Willys, Captain Tallcott, and the secretary to convey it to Andrew Benton. The property can probably still be identified, and it would be pleasant to know if Bou- ton or his successors have ever suffered inconvenience from the visits of the spirits of the witches to their former haunts ?

When Hartford and Wethersfield shall have been fully worked, the experience there gained may help in the Windsor hunt. This ought not to be seriously difficult, for Matthew Grant, the first town clerk of Windsor, whose veracity has never been ques- tioned, was in the habit of putting on record every occurrence which was of interest to Windsor people. If his records, either public or private, fail to show such facts, then the inference will be that no such facts existed: but if he did make such records, then we must accept them as true, even if they involve the best families of the colony.

11. R. S.

Since the above was written, I have heard that, upon the inside of the cover of a diary kept by Matthew Grant, and in his own hand- writing, is an entry to the effect that, on a certain day in 1617. "Achsah Youngs was hanged for being a witch :" and that the date corresponds with about what would to the date intimated in Winthrop's entry in his Journal ( Vol. II., p. 374) above referred to -- which would seem to be from the context, in March, 1647. N. S. Such a record, by Matthew Grant, giving the name of the person executed, with a date fitting in with the imperfect record of Winthrop, would be quite conclusive : if our information as to the Grant record was fully satisfactory.

We know that a John Youngs bought land in Windsor. of William Hubbard, in 1611, which he sold in 1619; and thereafter disappears From record. Ile may have been the husband or father of " Achsah," the witch : if so, it would be most natural that he and his family should Frave Windsor.

448

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

11 is bat fair to admit, however, that there does seem to have been a " witch case " which may be fully credited to Windsor ; and it was with the design of obtaining, if possible, more information about it that the above letter was written. In the lack of any further testimony, we proceed to tell what we know concerning the real Windsor witch case, which, however, dates as late as 1653-4, and therefore does not help the case of the " Hartford and other witch-hunters " who are trying to fasten the Mary Johnson case upon Windsor.

This " real, original," Windsor witch case, the author is happy to say. is intimately connected with the history of his own ancestry. The Stileses, never having had even a " family ghost " to prop their ancient greatness, can at least claim the honor of an ancestor killed by a witch! Smile not, gentle reader, at what to you may seem a singular and a tri- fling resting-point for family complacency. But hundreds of " high-born" families have held themselves above their fellow creatures, for successive generations, on much slenderer grounds of self-respect.

HENRY STILES, the oldest of four Stiles brothers who came to Wind- sor in 1635, a carpenter by trade, and a bachelor, was killed Oet. 3, 1651. at the age of 58 years, by the accidental discharge of a gun in the hands of Thomas (son of Mr. Matthew) Allyn, of Windsor, and, as tradition avers ( Pres. Stilex Max. ). " in a military Train waiting upon Gov. Win- throp when he was embarking for England to procure the Connecticut charter, which he obtained 1662." The records of the Particular Court ( Vol. 11., fol. 29), which met at Hartford on the first Thursday of Decem- ber, 1651, contain the following proceedings of "The Grand Inquest upon the death of Henry Stiles,"- the jury being Edward Stebbins. John Drake, John White, Humphrey Pinney, Will Gibbons, Steph. Terry, John Moore, Anthony Hawkins, Richard Goodman, Peter Tilton :

"INDITEMENT OF THOMAS ALLYN.

"Thomas Allyn, thou art indited by the name of Thomas Allyn that not having that due fear of God before thine eyes for the preservation of the life of thy neighbor didst suddenly, negligently, carelessly cock thy piece, and carry the piece just behind thy neighbor weh piece being charged and going off in thine hand, slew thy neighbor to the great dishonor of God, breach of the peace, and loss of a member of the Common- wealth, what saist thon, art thou guilty, or not guilty ?

" The Inditement being confessed, you are to Inquire whether you finde the fact to bec man-slaughter. or Homiside by misadventure.

" The said Thomas Allyn, being Indited for the fact, the Jury finds the same to be Homicide by misadventure.

" The Court adjudge the said Thomas Allyn to pay to the County as a fyne 220 for his sinfull negleet and careless carriage in the premises and that hee shall be bound 10 his good behavior for a twelvemonth, and that hee shall not beare Armes for the same ternic.

" Matthew Allyn Acknowledgeth himself bound to this Commonwealth in a Recog- nizance of $10, that his sonne Thomas Allyn shall carry his good behavior for the spase of a yeare next ensuing."

449

WINDSOR WITCHES.

Henry Stiles's inventory of estate was also presented to the same court, and distribution ordered.

Subsequently, as appears from the records of "A Particular Court, held at Pegnott, 24th of March, 1653-4" (folio 51, same vol. ) an attempt was made to fasten the blame of this accidental death of Henry Stiles upon witcheraft, and the following indictment was presented against one Lydia Gilbert, who was probably a member of the family of Thomas Gilbert, of Windsor.

" Lydia Gilburt, thon are herein indited by that name of Lydia Gilburt, that, not having the feare of God before thine eyes, thon hast of late years, or still dost give En- tertainment to Sathat[an], the great Enemy of God, and mankinde, and by his helpe hast killed the body of Henry Styles, besides other witcherafts, for which, according to the law of God, and the Established law of this Commonwealth, thou deservest to dye."

It is not absolutely certain whether the court which tried her was that held the first Monday of September, 1654, or that of November 28, 1654. If the former, the magistrates were Mr. Wells, Mr. Wolcott, Mr. Clark, and Mr. Talcott. The names of the grand jury at either court are not given; but there is the grand jury list of the court held first Thursday (7th) December, 1654. The charge to the grand jury preced- ing the record of Lydia Gilbert's indictment is:

" You shall swear by the ever living God that you will diligently enquire and faith- fully present to this court whatsoever you know to be a breach of any established law of this jurisdiction, so far as may conduce to the glory of God, and the good of this Commonwealth, as also what criminal offenses you shall judge meet to be presented as you expect from God in Jesus Christ."

The record further says : " Ye party above mentioned is found guilty of witchcraft by ye Jury." But of the subsequent issue of the trial, or the fate of the unhappy Lydia. no further mention is to be found. It is a part of that mystery which seems to envelop the history of all cases of witchcraft in the Colony of Connecticut.

Some items of the "Account of debts due From Henry Stiles, Sr., to Thomas Gilbert, " which accompanied the inventory of Stiles's estate, as presented to the Court, throw a little light upon the connection of Lydia with Stiles's death. They show that Henry Stiles, being a bachelor, boarded with Gilbert; that the last settlement made between the two, prior to Stiles's death, was on March 25. 1649, and that he was then pay- ing Gilbert " three shilling per week for diet." Gilbert had also charges for his own service " about building his [Stiles's] cow-house," 28 days at 1x. 6d .; also one-half the services and half the diet of John Burton [prob. Stiles's . hired man'] since April, 1651, and for dieting harvesting hands, two harvest seasons, ete. Gilbert was living in a house which he had purchased, in 1647, from Mr. Franeis Stiles, and which was separ- VOL. 1 .- 57

450

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

ated only by an IS-rod-wide lot (Win. Gaylord, Jr.'s) from Henry Stiles's lot. Evidently Stiles and Gilbert were intimately associated in their daily work and interests, and it is quite possible that Lydia Gilbert may have taken some offense with their boarder, and that this feeling was sufficiently known to their neighbors to bring her under the suspicion (so common in those days) of having invoked the aid of witcheraft to compass his death. What relationship she bore to Thomas Gilbert we do not know, for he seems to have had no children born to him at Wind- sor, nor mention of any wife. She may have been his sister; but, who- ever she was, we are left to infer that she bore not the best of reputation in the community, since the record of her indictment says "thou hast, of late years, and still dost give entertainment to Sathan . and by his help hast killed the body of Henry Stiles, besides other witchcraft."

Shortly after this trial Gilbert sold his property in Windsor to Thomas Bissell, and moved to Hartford, where he had brothers. In a few years (1659) he died : and in a letter received from Hon. S. O. Gris- wold, of Cleveland, Ohio, October, 1886, he says, as the result of a close examination of records, etc .. "In the settlement of his debts, as given in the Probate records, the distribution of his estate appears, with the names of his children, among which that of the alleged witch does not appear. She must have died, either by a natural death, or was executed. I think the reasonable probability is that she was hanged."

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.

The history and genealogies of ancient Windsor, Connecticut, Vol. I, Part 53

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909 Publication date: 1891 Publisher: Hartford, Conn., Press of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard company Number of Pages: 1038

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909
Publication date: 1891
Publisher: Hartford, Conn., Press of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard company
Number of Pages: 1038