USA > Connecticut > New Haven County > Waterbury > The history of Waterbury, Connecticut; the original township embracing present Watertown and Plymouth, and parts of Oxford, Wolcott, Middlebury, Prospect and Naugatuck. With an appendix of biography, genealogy and statistics > Part 12
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
* The oldest person that has died within the limits of ancient Waterbury was John Bronson, of Wolcott, who deceased in Nov., 1833, aged one hundred and two years and three months. The next oldest (who died in present Waterbury) was David Prichard, whose death took place Dec. 23, 1738, at the age of one hundred and one years and seven months. I have the names of sixty- two others who have died within the limits of the old township between the ages of 90 and 100.
116
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
Att a metting of ye propriators in waterbury december 2Cd 1697.
In order to ye getting such yong men yt desire to settell in ye town ye propri- ators grant to each one yt desires to settell for their incuragment or accomada- tion thirty acres of upland swam [p] and bogey meadow as alotment with a pro- priety in ye commons according to theyr alotment with a hous lot and four acres for a pastor to be layd out to them by ye town measurer giuing them four years to build a tenantable hous not less than sixteen foots square and he yt takes up a lot and is not in way of improuement and shall not build accordingly shall forfit his lot [;] and what land has been giuen to any yong man shall be accounted as part of his lot [;] this act not to pregedes former grants nor highways [;] this act to be in force for al such as liue a mongs us as they shall com of age and desire this priuiledg and be acsepted by ye propriators but ye priuiledg of acting in giuing away land we do not give them [;] this alotment to be deemed a forty pound alotment in all diuisions and so to have theyr propriety in ye commons and after 2 [altered from "4"] years each alotment to be deemed at too [altered from "4"] pounds Estate in ye bareing town charg: for 4 years, and after according as they improue according to law or ye apprisall of other lands in ye town and not to make sale of any but yt improued & subdued but if any dye here his heirs to poses his lands
At subsequent meetings, certain regulations were establish- ed, designed for the government of the new proprietors in the taking up of their lands, &c.
Att a meeting may 15: 1699 ye propriators granted ye yong men liberty to take up their thirty acers in three places and if any haue perticular grants of land to haue them counted in ye 30 acres and not to hinder theyr pitches* and he yt has had 3 pitches to haue on [one] more.
Dec 23 1700 the propriators granted that thos yong men that build in ye town plat shall haue six acers for a pastor not takeing it where it would do for a hous lot and they yt go out furder to build to haue four acers for a hous lot
The vote of December, 1697, laid the foundation of what were afterwards called bachelor rights or accommodations. In order the more effectually to secure its objects, and to constrain, if possible, those who took advantage of it to remain in the town, the proprietors, at a subsequent period, so altered its conditions as to require those claiming its benefits to reside with them five years after building a house. This is the sup- plementary act :
At ye same meeting [Feb. 22d. 1702-3] ye proprietors took up yt obligation of ye yong men for subdueing and clearing as in yt act december 20d : 1697 : and thos ye haue now built according to sd act to in habit fiue years from this day and
* The word pitch in the record seems to be used in the sense of choice or lot. When a per- son selected his land and brought in an account of it to the measurer, he brought in his pitch. Each act of choice by which he selected a separate tract of land was a distinct pitch.
117
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
then their lands be their own, and others y' are now acsepted on bacheldors accomodations, and hereaftor shall be excepted shall build acording to said aet and inhabit fiue years after they haue build and then their lands be their own.
This vote, so far as its action was retrospective-so far as it affected those " yong men " who had already been made pro- prietors under the act of December, 1697-was plainly ille- gal; and the attempt to enforce it was not persisted in.
The custom of giving away the lands of the town, instead of disposing of them by division, was established as the fixed policy of the proprietors. This policy, because, probably, of some objection made to it, was declared in a vote, as follows :
At a meeting of ye proprietors in Waterbury January 7th 1705-6 it being noated whether ye proprietors would dinide theyr commons according to purchase or no ye noat past in ye negitiue y' they would not deuide their commons but in ye second uoate yt they would gie away their land to perticular men as they see cause or as they iudg men haue need of it.
But notwithstanding these signal proofs of liberality and paternal regard, on the part of the proprietors, the youngsters, in too many cases, would not remain and claim their lands ; or if they made a show of staying, they frequently left the settle- ment when they had resided in it long enough to make sure of their bachelor rights. This conduct was ungrateful, not to say provoking. Considering that the town had not, at this time, a single able bodied man to spare, one is tempted to call it cow- ardly. After several young persons had removed, under the circumstances named, the proprietors in meeting, January, 7th, 1705-6, voted, " to take the forfiture of all the lands that was given to Jos. Gaylord, Jun., Joseph Hickox, Abraham Andruss, Jr. and Benjamin Warner that they cant hold by the records." But the lands given to these persons proved to be beyond the reach of the givers, for their names were continued as proprietors.
The proprietors' profuse liberality in giving away their lands and their marked partiality for those who dwelt among them, caused no complaint and no remark, so long as the lands had little value-so long as it was difficult to induce men to take them and improve them. But circumstances changed. It was found, in process of time, that in some parts of the town, there were richer lands than those first taken up. After
118
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
the peace of 1713, the population began to increase. The prospects for "real estate" materially improved. Then it was that inquiries began to be made into the doings of proprietors. Self interest quickened the sense of right and justice. Those that had not participated in the grants made, saw distinctly the grievous wrong that had been done. Those persons that had removed from the town found that the proprietors that remained were rapidly stripping them of their estate, passing it over to others without consideration, for the sole purpose of obtaining permanent settlers. They complained as men would naturally do. They disputed the legality as well as the justice of the proceedings. They had originally, they elaimed, an undivided right in all the lands of Waterbury which they had secured by purchase and deed, which right had been put be- yond a doubt by the town patent. What they had fairly purchased they had honestly paid for. And there was no equitable or lawful mode, they contended, by which this eom- mon property could be disposed of, except by division among the proprietors according to ownership. A majority, they said, had no power to bind the minority, except in ease of equal distribution. They furthermore complained that they had not been warned to those meetings of the proprietors which had made the extraordinary grants complained of. I copy from the records Dea. Stanley's communication protesting against the obnoxious grants. There is pith in it, when the crust is once penetrated and the meaning arrived at :
To the propriator inhabitance of Waterbury assembled april 12-1715 breth- ren and nabours I the subscriber haueing to grate disatisfaction Obserued the way of your giuing or granting away of land To bring in inhabitance according to an act made for that purpos upon record desembr, 20-1697 which hath a dereet tendensy to uialate and destroy and conterary to right eequity and justis or any well digested reson to inuaid the property of the first purehesars i suppose it to be a truth not to be gainsayed that Those that were the first purehesurs of the land within the township did thereby aquere a right according to the proportion of what payments they made by order of the Comity for the setling of the place and the articles they fullfilled and to be subdiuided as is at large comprised in the pattin [patent] to the then propriator inhabitanc and their heirs. I haue no where seen that the antient propriators did impower the mager part by uoat to gine the land at their plesure-the received prinsiple I perceaue if I mestake not is that the majer parte of the propriators in comon may by uoat when aposed by the miner giue away from the miner when and as they pleas-that which is con- sequent upon it is that the majer may combien and giue it all to and amongst them
119
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
selves so that the miner shall haue nither land nor comonig [commoning] * for my own part to my best remembrance I haue neuer been warned to any propriatory meeting or at the making sd aet in 1697 besure I was not there to my knowlidge-others have not been warned as they have told [me] but upon the whole i take this opertunity to declare and protest aganst the propriators proseding any father in giuing [or] granting any more in [accordance] with sd act to any purticolure person or persons and also i do protest aganst all the grants that have been made according to sd act to make propriator inhabitanee-i hane here unto sett my hand as one of the patentese and one of the first propriators and were posesed of one hundred pound right of my own and by distrbution of john [newel's] estate all his right in the outlands fell to me-pray let there be no strife between us [&e].
JOHN STANDLEY
witness
Jeremiah peck Thomas Clark.
At the same . meeting at which John Stanley's protest was presented, the proprietors, as if to fortify themselves in what they had done, and to make sure the grants, passed a vote which is recorded as follows :
It was inacted by voat that the land formerly giuen to the bacheldors* shall be ther one [own] exsepting thos that haue not fullfild the conditions nor like to fulfill them
We agree that all the grants of land formerly ginen by the town and propria- tors sliall stand good
At the same time that this confirmatory act was passed, another, quite remarkable in some of its particulars, was voted. It appears to have been aimed at the bachelors. It attempted to break faith with them by cutting them off from future divisions of land; and must have been without any binding force. On account of its objectionable features, the act was repealed in the following December. At the same time, a division of land was agreed upon, in which each orig- inal proprietor having a £100 right was to have eighty acres and others in proportion, and each bachelor proprietor thirty acres. Eight acres of it might be taken up in the sequester-
* The reader will understand that the bachelor proprietors were not all literal bachelors. They were men of different ages, married and unmarried, who applied for the privileges grant- ed in the acts of 1697 and 1702-3 and were accepted by the proprietors. They were, how- ever, all what may be called young men, though a few may have been over thirty. In a few in- stances, persons under twenty-one years of age were admitted as bachelor proprietors with the understanding that they were to have five years after they came of age to fulfill the condi- tions.
120
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
ed land. The lot appears to have been drawn Dec. 15th, 1715, and as a pacifying measure, apparently, "it was agreed that Dea. John Stanley* should have the first lot for John Newel's lot," of which he was the owner. John Southmayd, as a com- pliment, was to have the second lot. There are, on the list of 1715, thirty-six original and fifty-two bachelor proprietors.
A propritors meting in Waterbury desmbr the 20 1716 and it was acted by voat that the yong propriators shall be recorded in the 2 cond book of records with the prouisiall or conditions that the propriators laid on the sd bachelldor elot- ments
Dotr Daniell porter and Edman Scott did protest against the act of the yong propriators hauing their lands Recorded in the book of records
Dr. Porter was somewhat in the way of protesting in pro- prietor's meeting. The difficulty in his case seems to have arisen from his having no sons yet old enough to be admitted as bachelor proprietors. He had therefore not been benefited but injured by the proceedings relating to them. He had afterwards, however, a son who was admitted.
On the seventh day of February, 1720-1, a committee was appointed "to sarch the records and finde out what bachelurs haue fulfiled articles and whoo have not fulfiled articles and macke returns to the propriators." A report was made to a meeting held the next day, as follows :
We being apointed a comety to macke sarch to finde out who ware admited upon' bachulders acomedations and who have fufilled the condetions to macke the land theire owne and who have not fulfiled the articles-febeuary 8 1721
Those that haue fulfiled
William hikcox
Stephen wellton
nathaniel Richason
John Gaylard
Joseph hikcox
thomas Richards
Joseph Gaylard
Robert Scott
these on a
John worner ser
John Richason
gorg scott
40 poun
thomas Richason
thomas hikcox dauid scott
propriaty
John Brunson ser
Richard welton
John welton
when we deuided
Isarael Richason
Benjamin worner
* Two of Dea. Stanley's sons, John Stanley, Jr. and Samuel Stanley, appear to have been ad- mitted as bachelor proprietors this year, their names appearing in the division. John Stanley, Jr., lived in Farmington. I am unable to find that he ever lived in Waterbury after his fathers' removal in 1695. Samuel Stanley resided in Waterbury, but went away before 1715. So far as it appears, neither of them could have been admitted proprietors in accordance with the votes of 1697 aud 1702-3, and neither could have complied with the conditions of those votes. I sus- pect the £40 proprieties were given them by special vote and unconditionally, or on easy con- ditions, for the purpose of removing the father's discontentment.
121
IIISTORY OF WATERBURY.
Isaac Brunson
Ebenezer Richason
John barns
Eprim worner
benjamin Richards
thomas brunson
samuell Stanndly
thomas Barns
Joseph lewes
Benjamin Barns jur
stephen hopkins
obediah richards
thomas welton
obediah scott
abraham andrus jur
Joseph Brunson
ebenezer brunson
Stepen ubson jur
thomas clark
Those admited that haue not fulfiled but in a likely way
John seouell
timothy standly ser
Jonathan seott jur
timothy hopkins
Jonn standly jur
gorg scott jur
thomas andrus benjamin worner jur samuell porter
william Judd
John hikeox
Ebenezer hikeox
daniell porter jur
samuell seott
John Judd
thomas ubson
John Richards jur gorg welton
Those that haue not fulfiled as we Judg
william gaylord
stephen hikeox
John worner tailer
moses brunson
daniel porter son of richard
Timothy standly John Hopkins comety
Thomas Judd
At ameating of the propriators of waterbury febeuary 8 1721 they agre by uote to axsepte ye return of the comety and order it to be entered upon record
Thus, thirty-eight persons were reported as having "ful- filed " the articles, eighteen as "in a likely way to fulfil," and five as having "not fulfiled." The last, of course, had forfeited their rights. The eighteen who were "in a likely way," were yet, I conclude, on probation, their five years not having expired. They all finally secured their rights.
February 8th, 1720-1, there was a renewed attempt to make a considerable addition to the propriety rights of the old proprietors, and to increase their proportional interest in the undivided lands, thus counteracting, as far as might be, what had been done for the bachelors. A vote was passed aug- menting the proprieties of the original proprietors ; but they were to submit to the conditions of the acts of 1697 and 1702-3, as to building, &c. ; and what their sons had received was to go towards the increase. But it was not satisfactory on account of the restrictions, and a year afterwards a modi- fied vote was carried :
February 28th, 1721-2 It was agreed upon by vote that where as an Act In February 8th, 1721 [altered from 1720] was grevious to some of our proprietors
122
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
we now Further Agree that Every original proprietor or propriety Shall have two bacheldor Lots upon an hundred pound propriety and proportionally upon Greater and lesser proprietyes with what was Granted Last February notwithstanding what their sons have had which bacheldor Lott Is Looked upon to be now 68 Acres And a forty pound propriety And the Obligation upon those Granted In February 8th 1721 [altered from 1720] and now Granted to be taken off And be free from Any Incumberance of building and cohabiting. And the Grant to the Bacheldors that were admited upon a forty pound propriety that they Shall have as a Division of fifty five Acres to Every bacheldor that has fullfilled Articles or In Away to fullfill articles as they are returned by A Committy Appointed for February and Recorded in the old proprietors Book. and for the future our De- visions shall be made upon Original proprietors with the addition made to their propriety and upon bacheldor proprietors According to their propriety And It is the true Intent and meaning of the proprietors In this act and Shall be so taken and Explained that Every original propriety of one hundred pound shall have two bacheldor proprietyes and no more and so proportionably for Greater or Lesser proprieties and that all Devisions of all our Lands after this shall be made upon the present original proprietors and bacheldor proprietors that are already made
Each original proprietor of £100 obtained by this act an immediate addition to his propriety of two bachelor accommo- dations, amounting to £80, carrying with them the divisions which had already been made to the bachelors. Others were favored, in like manner, according to their existing interests, the addition being always eighty per cent. of the original pro- priety. Thenceforth, the vote declared, lands should be dis- posed of by division and the divisions should be according to interest. Thus the system of unequal distribution and special grants, with its abuses, was put an end to.
By far the largest proportion of the bachelor proprietors were sons of the original proprietors. About nine were grand- sons. The remainder, two only, Joseph Lewis and Thomas Clark, came from other towns. The last was the adopted son of Timothy Stanley. Nearly one quarter of them were made proprietors, in 1699 ; more than one third in 1715, and the re- mainder, with two or three exceptions, between these periods.
The proprietors agreed, Nov. 27th, 1722, that there should be reserved, "for the use of the proprietors," six propriety lots, or rights, of £40 each. They were reserved to meet such contingencies as might naturally be expected to arise. It was determined that they should have all the divisions which had already been made on the bachelor lots, except "the eight acres n sequester," and all the future divisions. On the 28th of
123
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
Nov. 1722, one of these lots was granted to Moses Bronson. It was the fifth propriety lot, so called, and had been formerly given to Bronson and forfeited. At the same time, the fourth propriety lot, (which had belonged to Daniel Porter, the son of Richard, and been forfeited by him,) was granted to John War- ner, son of Ephraim, and William Scott. The other four lots, the first, second, third, and sixth, were ordered, Nov. 29th, 17: 6, to be sold, and the money reserved for building a new meeting house. They brought £262. These six lots were always en- tered, in the record, by their numbers. To the fourth and fifth were added the names of the grantees or owners-thus, "5th Propriety Lott, Moses Bronson," &c.
There were some persons who were accepted as bachelor proprietors, who did not comply with the conditions and who therefore forfeited their rights. I give their names. William Gaylord, John Warner, "tailor,"* Stephen Hickox, Daniel Porter, son of Richard, Zachariah Baldwin, Jr., of Milford, t Obadiah Scovill, Samuel Warner and Moses Bronson, (after- wards re-admitted.)
There were in the end, six forfeited propriety lots that re- mained in the hands of the proprietors. These were the six that were reserved, in 1622, " for the use of the proprietors."
On the twenty-eighth day of November, 1722, a list was made out for the purpose of a land division, containing the names of the original and bachelor proprietors. It is the first complete list to be found on record. We find here thirty-six original and fifty-seven bachelor proprietors, the first having, unitedly, £3,165, and the last, £2,280, propriety. If we add to these the six propriety lots of £40 each, the school lot of £150 and the ministry lot of £150, granted in 1715, we
* On the eleventh of March, 1745-6, Ebenezer Warner, 3d, and George Nichols petitioned the proprietors for the bachelor right of John Warner (tailor) which they claimed to have pur- chased. The petition was addressed "To the worshipfull Moderator and Gentlemen Proprie- tors." The petitioners laid claim to all the lands laid out on Warner's lot-the thirty-eight acres at the date of his acceptance (1701)-the thirty acres of 1715-the fifty-five acres of 1721-2 -the forty acres of 1723-the forty acres of 1727-the thirty acres of 1738-9-" the sixteen acres and twenty rods in the village soon after; in the whole amounting to two hundred and forty-nine acres and twenty rods." The meeting voted " not to do anything."
t Baldwin was accepted in 1710, but in 1713, he sold all his right and title of lands in Wa- terbury with his bachelor propriety and all the improvements which he had made " with the building and other timber," to George Scott, and returned to Milford.
124
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
have a total of £5,985. To this sum must be addedthe increase of the old proprietor and school allotments, amounting to eighty per cent. (The new ministry lot did not have the bachelor addition.) Add this increase (£2,652) to the former total, (£5,985,) and we have a grand total of £8,637. On this amount, all the divisions of land were made in 1722 and afterwards.
If we compare the list of original proprietors of 1722 with that of 1688, we shall observe several changes of names and a few additions. Capt. Thomas Judd, Wm. (meaning the son of William) stands in the place of Smith Judd, as he was at first called. Thomas Judd, Jones, is substituted for Benjamin Jones. John Judd occupies the place of Ensign Judd. Joseph Hickox, John Richards and Jonathan Scott stand in the places of Mr. Frayser, Robert Porter and Samuel Scott. Abraham Andruss, cooper, is written for Abraham Andruss, Jr., the elder Andruss now having a son who was a bachelor proprietor. Mr. Jeremiah Peck and John Southmayd are new names. "Timothy Stanley, original," is thus written to dis- tinguish his original from his bachelor propriety. With these exceptions, the names are the same as in 1688.
Of the fifty-seven bachelor proprietors on the catalogue of 1722, the name of one, that of John Stanley, Jr.,* is sometimes omitted. The whole number of proprietors, original and bach- elor, counting Stanley, Jr., is ninety-three. Adding the six propriety lots, the school lot and the ministry lot of 1715, and we have one hundred and one proprieties entitled to land divisions.
I copy below the list of Nov., 1722, adding to the name of each proprietor the amount of his propriety before and after the bachelor addition.
* "[March 11 1730-31] It was by vote Agreed and Concluded that they [the proprietors } Look upon John Standlies Jur Right to be Good to a Bacheldor Lott and he ought to have a note for his Land to be laid out and he Engaged that the Proprietors might have the Eight acres In the Sequester to be Disposed by them as they See Cause."
In March, 1757, the proprietors again passed a vote in favor of John Stanley, Jr's right and directed his name to be added to the list of proprietors.
125
HISTORY OF WATERBURY.
ORIGINAL PROPRIETORS.
Popriety.
With the
addition.
Popriety.
With the
addition.
Abraham Andruss, Sen., £ 80
£144 Richard Porter,
50
90
Abraham Andruss, Cooper, 100
180
John Richards, Sen.,
80
144
Benjamin Barns, Sen.,
100
180
Obadiah Richards, Sen.,
80
144
Isaac Bronson, Sen.,
100
180 Thomas Richason,
50
90
John Bronson, Sen.,
80
144
Edmund Scott, Sen.,
100
180
John Carrington,
60
108
Edmund Scott, Jr.,
70
126
Joseph Gaylord, Sen.,
80
144
Jonathan Scott, Sen.,
50
90
Thomas Haneox,
100
180
Sohn Scovill, Sen.,
80
144
Joseph Hickox, Sen.,
60
108
John Southmayd,
150
270
Samuel Hickox, Sen.,
100
180
John Stanley, Sen.,
100
180
Lieut. John Hopkins,
100
180
Timothy Stanley, original,
100
180
John Judd, Sen.,
100
180
Stephen Upson, Sen.,
50
90
Philip Judd,
80
144
Daniel Warner,
60
180
Capt. Thomas Judd, Wm., 100
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.