The history of ancient Windsor, Connecticut, Part 3

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909
Publication date: 1859
Publisher: New York : C. B. Norton
Number of Pages: 956

USA > Connecticut > Hartford County > Windsor > The history of ancient Windsor, Connecticut > Part 3

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).

1 O'Callaghan, 1, 154.

2 December 22, 1634. By a letter from Plymonth it was certified that Holmes's House had been attacked. (Winthrop, I, 153.)

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

Yankee neighbors. In 1653, when England and Holland were at war, Captain John Underhill seized the House of Good Hope in the name of the Providence Plantations; and in 1655, an act of sequestration extinguished the last vestige of Dutch claim on the Connecticut River. Soon after, also, Manhattan yielded to the demands of Gov. Nicholls of Virginia, and Nieuw Amster- dam became New York.

The local controversy between the Dutch at Hartford and the Plymouth People at Windsor, seems to have been rather on general principles. Holmes's purchase extended only to the " great swamp next the bounds of Hartford [on the] South."1 This would at most only slightly overlap the northern bounds of the Dutch lands at Hartford, the probability is that it did not. 2 Moreover the Dutch bought their lands of the Pequots who had become the owners thereof by (comparatively recent) conquest. Holmes, with more apparent justice, at all events with con- siderable policy, purchased his lands of the original owners whom he restored to their native soil.3

Yet in all this, we can not avoid a sympathy for the unlucky Dutchman. His honesty, forbearance and constant desire for peace, and his courteous dealing under all these aggravating cir- cumstances, contrast favorably with the rough, over-bearing manner, and grasping desire for gain, which characterized the self-styled "dear servants of the Lord," the English colonists. Obliged by superior force to retire from a well-earned posses- sion, the Dutchman left, among Indian friends and English enemies, a reputation untarnished by deceit, or intentional wrong doing.

If the right of possession depends upon the mere fact of

1 See Deed of Mr. Prince, in behalf of Plymouth Colony, to Windsor, May, 1637.

2 The land purchased of Wapyquart by the Dutch in 1633, extended on the north " to a musket shot over the kill (or a little river) on which the House of Good Hope was built." And Gov. Bradford says of Holmes's party, " They did the Dutch no wrong, for they took not a foot of any land they bought, but went to the place above them," &c.

3 Same.

DUTCH AND ENGLISH CLAIMS.

prior discovery, then England, by virtue of the discoveries of the Cabots in 1495 and 1497, clearly held the title to these western wilds. But if, as England, in the person of " Good Queen Bess," so boldly affirmed in 1580, actual possession con- fers the only valid title to uninhabited lands, we must concede that right to the Dutch. The settlements at Albany and Man- hattan, in 1613 and 1614, asserted the right of the States Gen- eral to the discovery made by Hudson, in the service of a Dutch merchant company, in 1609, long before any Englishmen had made their homes upon this part of the Western Continent. Dutch traders followed close in the wake of their countryman's vessel, as her restless keel, for the first time cleft the still waters of the Fresh River, and established with the natives of the interior, a large and profitable commerce. Nay, more, they had even complied with the great prerequisite of actual possession, established by England, and by purchase and occupation were rightful owners of the soil, full one year before their Saxon rivals. The early Dutch maps of their American possessions, in- clude not only New York, but New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island and a part of Massachusetts.

The discussion of abstract principles and rights involved in the different English charters and patents of New England - a subject in which there is certainly room for a full variety of opinion - belongs rather to the general historian than to the scope of this work. Yet we may remark, that, in our opinion, the Great Charter of New England, granted by King James, fully recognizes the claims of the Dutch, by its express reservation, "that any of the said premises herein before mentioned be not actually possessed or inhabited by any other Christian prince or state." Yet England with strange inconsistency, found it convenient to set aside the just claim of the States General, and "fully consummated an act of spoliation, which in a period of profound peace, wrested this province from its rightful own- ers, by means violating all public justice, and impugning all pub- lic laws."1

1 Hon. Ben. F. Butler of New York.

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

In the early part of November, 1633, Hall and two companions from Massachusetts, visited Connecticut for the purpose of trade, but found the Indians suffering so severely from the small-pox, that they were unable to do any thing. They therefore returned to Massachusetts in January, 1634. This mortality seems to have been general throughout New England, and the Indians of Windsor were among its victims.1 Bradford in his Journal gives the following account: 2

" This spring, also, those Indians that lived about their trad- ing house3 there fell sick of the small pox, and died most miser- ably; for a sorer disease can not befall them; they fear it more than the plague. * * *

* * * The condition of this people was so lamentable, and they fell down so generally of this disease, as they were (in the end) not able to help one an- other; no, not to make a fire, nor to fetch a little water to drink, nor any to bury the dead; but would strive as long as they could, and when they could procure no other means to make fire, they would burn the wooden trays, the dishes they ate their meat in, and their very bows and arrows; and some would crawl out on all fours to get a little water, and sometimes die by the way, and not be able to get in again. But those of the English house ( though at first they were afraid of the infec- tion), yet seeing their woful and sad condition, and hearing their pitiful cries and lamentations, they had compassion of them, and daily fetched them wood and water, and made them fires, got them victuals whilst they lived, and buried them when they died. For very few of them escaped, notwithstanding they did what they could for them, to the hazard of themselves. The chief sachem4 himself now died, and almost all his friends and kindred. But by the marvellous goodness and providence of God, not one of the English was so much as sick, or in the least measure tainted with this disease, though they daily did these offices for them for many weeks together. And this mercy which they shewed them was kindly taken, and thankfully acknowledged of all the Indians that knew or heard of the same; and their masters here did much commend and reward them for the same."

1 See Winthrop's Journal, I, 119-123.

2 Page 325.

3 The Plymouth trading house at Windsor.

4 This was probably Attawanott or Nattawanut, who was brought home and restored to his possessions by Holmes. See the Chapter on Indian History and Purchases.

EMIGRATION FROM DORCHESTER.

We have now arrived at a most interesting point in our his- tory, namely, the emigration from Dorchester of the first settlers of Windsor. The causes of this movement are thus ably and briefly described by the historian of Dorchester.1

" The emigration to Connecticut of a large portion of the first settlers of Dorchester, forms an important crisis in the affairs of the plantation; it deprived it of nearly one-half of its popula- tion, including the ministers, Messrs. Maverick and Warham, and a large part of the intelligence and wealth which accompa -. nied the first comers. This movement has been attributed to different causes, but it appears rather to have been produced by a concurrence of sundry incidents, than any one prominent motive. Cotton Mather, in reference to this subject, says: " Massachusetts soon became like a hive overstocked with bees, and many thought of swarming into new plantations." But the whole colony at this time contained but five or six thousand people. The Dorchester settlers were made acquainted with the rich bottom lands of the Connecticut by Hall and Oldham, in 1633, and the labor of clearing their own rocky fields daily brought to their minds the advantages possessed by the former position. A great quantity of valuable furs had reached the Bay from the River Indians, and many of the Dorchester People were engaged in the fur business. It was known that the Con- necticut Patentees, Lord Brooke, Sir R. Saltonstall, John Hamp- den, and others, were preparing to take possession of their patent, and make a settlement at the lower part of the river.2

1 Hist. of Dorchester before referred to.

2 In 1631, the Plymouth Council in England (chartered in 1620) " for the planting, ruling and governing of New England in America," gave a patent of Connecticut, including all the land from the sea, 120 miles into the Coun- try, and from Narragansett River (in Rhode Island) on the East to the South Sea (Pacific) on the West, to Lords Say and Seal, Lord Brook, Sir Richard Saltonstall, and others. This patent was duly confirmed by the King, and the Patentees, at that time, contemplated removing to Connecticut as soon as settlements were so far advanced as to afford a comfortable accommodation. The indefinite nature of the grant, however, was always a source of misunder- . standing and contest.

We can not but speculate as to the different course which the history of

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

This subject agitated the people of the Bay to such a degree that a public fast was appointed, September 18, 1634.1 Roger Ludlow, one of the assistants and a leading inhabitant of Dor- chester, strongly opposed the movement. In this state of affairs, Israel Stoughton, one of the first Deputies of Dorches- ter, had an altercation with Governor Winthrop, and published a pamphlet which occasioned his expulsion from the House,2 and the Dorchester People petitioned in vain for a remission of his sentence. Roger Ludlow, of Dorchester, aimed at being Governor of Massachusetts Colony in 1635, and protested openly against the choice of Governor Haynes, and was in consequence left out of the Magistracy. It is not improbable that these wealthy and influential gentlemen sought a more congenial field for their political ambition, than the Bay Colony presented to them at that moment. It is certain that Mr. Ludlow sud- denly changed his views on the subject, and was actively engaged in the project in 1635, which he had with zeal opposed in 1634. * * These different considerations will suffice to account for the movement which was at first opposed by the Government, but in the spring of 1635 reluctantly assented to,"3 on the condition that the new colonies should

our state would have taken, had this company of lords and gentlemen of ample means and aristocratic tendencies been the first settlers on the Con- necticut River.

1 Gov. Bradford, with a quiet reference to the previous caution of the Mas- sachusetts folks, says: "Some of their neighbors in the Bay, hearing of the fame of Connecticut River, had a hankering mind after it (as was before noted), and now understanding that the Indians were swept away with the late great mortality, the fear of whom was an obstacle unto them before, which being now taken away, they began now to prosecute it with great eagerness." P. 338.

The animus of the people of the Bay, in this matter, is unconsciously revealed by Winthrop, 1, 140, who, in his account of the session of the general court at Newtown, Sept. 4, 1634, at which the subject was long and earnestly discussed, states the following as among the " principal reasons " assigned for removal to Connecticut: " The fruitfulness and commodiousness of Connecti- cut, and the danger of having it possessed by others, Dutch or English."

And " The strong bent of their spirits to remove thither."

2 Winthrop, 1, 155.

3 Hutchinson, 1, 41.

ARRIVAL OF STILES'S PARTY.

continue within the jurisdiction, and as a part of Massachu- setts.

Early in June, the General Court granted "3 pieces [or can- non] to the plantations that shall remove to Connecticut, to fortify themselves." And in the last days of this month, a company of Dorchester men, the pioneer corps of the proposed emigration, set out for the Connecticut River, to select a loca- tion and make preparations for a settlement. Arriving on the river probably about the 28th of the month, they sat down temporarily near the trading-honse which Holmes had erected two years before. After here experiencing the hospitality of the Plymouth People for a few days, they made an excursion to examine the lands above the falls - probably Long-meadow1 - which not being quite to their liking, they came down the river again to their first camping ground, Matianuck,2 now Windsor, intending, with evident disregard of the claims of their hospit- able Plymouth friends, to settle there.

But here they found that, during their absence, other pioneers had arrived whose claims conflicted with their own. These new comers were a party of some 20 men, under the superintend- ence of Mr. Francis Stiles, who had been sent out in a vessel at the private expense of Sir Richard Saltonstall, to prepare grounds and erect houses for himself and certain other lords and gentlemen, the before-mentioned Patentees of Connecticut. Having arrived in the Bay, June 16,3 Stiles remained there ten days, and then sailed for Windsor, the point designated in his instructions, which he reached about the 1st of July.3 Here he landed his party, and was about commencing his prepara- tions when unexpectedly interrupted by the return of the Dor- chester party from their explorations up the river. Thereupon

1 Masacsick .- See Savage's notes to Winthrop, 11, Appendix R, 393.

2 Sometimes spelt Mettaneug, or Mattaneaug. Also Cufchankamaug, or Ouschankamaug .- Ibid.

3 Winthrop's Journal, I, 161. And Saltonstall in his letter to Gov. Win - throp, Jr., says his Pinnace lay at Boston 10 days, which brings his time of departure from there, to the 26th. His voyage here to W. could not have taken longer than 5 or 6 days.

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

ensued a conflict of claims. The people of the Bay had long been jealous of the projected enterprise of the Patentees of Con- necticut, and Roger Ludlow, who was a magistrate of Massa- chusetts, and a sort of leader of the Dorchester party, claiming that they were within the jurisdiction of that colony, refused to give way to the authority of the Patentees. Although Mr. Stiles, with much firmness, represented the just claims of his employers to the soil, and that, at the time of his arrival, the Dorchester People were unsettled, and seeking for a place fur- ther up the river - yet his workmen were driven off, and his claim disputed and denied, with much abuse. Thus thwarted, he landed his stores in the vicinity of the residence of the late Chief Justice Elisworth, and sending back his vessel to Eng- land, awaited further orders1 This affair was a very serious pecuniary loss to Saltonstall; and Gov. John Winthrop, Jr., who arrived at Boston in the November following, as governor of the Plantations of the Connecticut Patentees, was commissioned to consult with the Massachusetts authorities, "and those who were to go to Connecticut, about the said design of the Lords, to this issue, that either the three towns gone thither should give place upon full satisfaction, or else sufficient room must be found there for the Lords and their companies."2 The matter was not, however, then adjusted, for the next year Saltonstall addressed a letter to Winthrop,3 authorizing him to settle the matter, at the same time cautioning him lest he should " breed some jealousies in the people, and so distaste them with our (the Patentees') Government." It was not settled, however, until 1645, when the Patentees, having abandoned their project of coming hither, sold out their patent, together with the fort, houses, &c., at Saybrook, to the Connecticut Colony. Salton- stall's personal claim at Dorchester seems to have been trans-

1 This vessel of Saltonstall's was cast away on the Isle Sable, on its return voyage. See Winthrop's Journal, 1, 171.

2 See Letter from Winthrop, Vane and Peters, to Ludlow, Newberry, Stoughton and others " engaged in settling on the Connecticut." Winthrop, I, 397-8.

3 This very interesting letter will be found in the Appendix, No. 1.

LIST OF STILES'S PARTY.

ferred to Stiles, 1 who with his party settled there and became participants with the other settlers, in the general distribution of lands in 1640.2

There is no doubt that Stiles's party were, after the Ply- mouth Trading Company, the first actual settlers of Windsor. Fortunately, the researches of that indefatigable antiquarian, the Hon. James Savage, of Boston, among the manuscript treasures of Old England, enable us to present a full list of these first comers.3 It is as follows:

" March 16, 1634-5, to New England, embarqued in the Christian de Lo[ndon], John White, master, bound thither, the men have taken the oath of allegiance and supremacy."

FRANCIS STILES, aged 35 yrs., Jo. Cribb.

aged 30 yrs., 20

THOMAS STILES,

Robt. Robinsou, 45

THOMAS BARBER, 21 ED. PATTESON, - 33 =

Jo. DYER, 28 Fr. Marshall,

Jo. Harris, 28 Rich. Hayles, 16 22

Jas. Horwood, 30 Tho. Halford, 20

Jo. REEVES, 19 Tho. Hauk worth,

Thos. Foulfoot, 22 JO. STILES,

Jas. Busket, 28 HENRY STILES,

THOS. COOPER, 18 16 Jane Morden, 66 30

ED. PRESTON, 13 JOHN STILES,

9 mts.,

JOAN STILES,

35 ¥

RACHEL STILES,

28 yrs.

HENRY STILES, 3

Of these, sixteen, whose names are printed in small capitals, are positively known to have settled in Windsor.4 Three of

1 See genealogy of the Stiles family, in another portion of this work.

2 Though for some time after designated as "the servants," meaning of Saltonstall.

3 Published in Mass. Hist. Society's Collections, 3d series, VIII, 252. It is contained on p. 16 of a folio manuscript volume "at the Augmentation Office so [called], in Rolls Court, Westminster Hall," London. This record contains the names of persons permitted to embark at the port of London, after Christmas, 1634, to some period in the following year, kept generally in regular succession.

4 John Stiles, his wife Rachel, his children Henry and John, his sister Jane, and brother Henry, were permanent settlers at Windsor, as also was Thomas Barber. Mr. Francis Stiles removed to Stratford in or about 1652. Thos. Bar- ber, before mentioned, Thomas Stiles, Jo. Dyer, Jo. Reeves, Thomas Cooper and George Chappel, were his apprentices, in his trade of carpenter. Thomas

THOMAS BASSETT, 37

GEO. CHAPPEL,

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

these were females, and tradition, which tells us that the foot of that fair maid, Mary Chilton, was the first to press the Plymouth Rock, has also preserved the name of RACHEL, wife of JOHN STILES, as the first English woman who stepped ashore in Wind- sor.1

By this time the tide of emigration towards the Connecticut had fully set in, and the Dorchester party were constantly receiving accessions to their number. The following letter to the Plymouth Trading Company, from their agent at Matianuck (or Windsor), presents a lively picture of the stir and agitations upon the hitherto solitary river.

" Sir: &c.

The Massachusetts men are coming almost daily, some by water and some by land, who are not yet determined where to settle, though some have a great mind to the place we are upon, and which was last bought. Many of them look at that which this river will not afford, except it be at this place which we have, namely to be a great town, and have commodious dwell- ings for many together. So as [to] what they will do I can not yet resolve you; for [in] this place there is none of them say any thing to me, but what I hear from their servants (by whom I perceive their minds). I shall do what I can to withstand them. I hope they will hear reason; as that we were here first, and entered with much difficulty and danger, both in regard of the Dutch and Indians, and bought the land (to your great charge, already disbursed), and have since held here a chargea- ble possession, and kept the Dutch from further incroaching, which would else long before this day have possessed all, and kept out all others, &c. I hope these and such like arguments will stop them. It was your will we should use their persons and messengers kindly, and so we have done, and do daily, to your great charge; for the first company had well nigh starved, had it not been for this house, for want of victuals; I being forced to supply 12 men for 9 days together; and those which came last, I entertained the best we could, helping both them (and the

Stiles removed to Long Island, where he became one of the first settlers of Flushing. Jo. Reeves is afterwards found at Salem, Mass., and a genealogy of his descendants can be found in the Medford Genealogies. Thomas Cooper moved to Springfield, probably about 1644-6. Geo. Chappel moved to New London, about 1651. Thomas Bassett removed to Fairfield, about 1650. Edward Preston is found in the neighborhood of Hartford, as late as 1645 ; and Edward Pattison, as late as 1670.

1 Family tradition. See Stiles genealogy.

DORCHESTER VS. PLYMOUTH.

others) with canoes, and guides. They got me to go with them to the Dutch, to see if I could procure some of them to have quiet settling near them; but they did peremptorily withstand them. But this later company did not once speak thereof, &c. Also I gave their goods house room according to their earnest request, and Mr. Pincheon's letter in their behalf (which I thought good to send you, here inclosed). And what trouble and charge I shall be further at I know not; for they are coming daily, and I expect these back again from below, whither they have gone to view the country. All which trouble and charge we undergo for their occasion, may give us just cause (in the judgment of all wise and understanding men) to hold and keep that we have settled upon. Thus with my duty remembered, &c., I rest, Yours to be commanded,

Matianuck, July 6, 1635. JOHNNATHA BREWSTER. 1

It was evident that the Dorchester party had found no place so lovely in their eyes, or so well adapted to their wants, as that of Matianuck which belonged to the Plymouth People. And " after thorough view of the place, they began to pitch them- selves upon their land and near their [trading] house," with an intention of allotting to the Plymouth House, in the distribu- tion of land, a share " as to a single family". This conduct towards those who had, at so much risk and trouble, purchased and occupied the land, and whose hospitality they had but a few days before, nay, even then were enjoying - was, to say the least, ungenerous. The Plymouth People very naturally resented it as an "attempt not only to intrude themselves into the rights and possessions of others, but in effect to thrust them out of all." Bradford's Journal has preserved several extracts from the many "letters and passages that went between" the two parties, on the subject, which fully exhibit the course and tem- per of the dispute.

The Dorchester Party refer to the land in dispute, as that "upon which God by his providence cast us, and as we con- ceive in a fair way of providence tendered it to us, as a meet place to receive our body [company] now upon removal."2 In

1 Eldest son of Elder Brewster of Plymouth, came in the Fortune, 1621, removed to Duxbury in 1622, where he became a prominent man. He after- wards removed to New London, Ct.

2 Or now about to remove."

HISTORY OF ANCIENT WINDSOR.

reply the Plymouth People say: "We shall not need to answer all the passages of your large letter, &c. But whereas you say ' God in his providence cast you, &c.,' we told you before, and (upon this occasion) must now tell you still, that our mind is otherwise, and that you cast rather a partial, if not a covetous eye, upon that which is your neighbor's, and not yours; and in so doing, your way could not be fair unto it. Look that you abuse not God's providence in such allegations."

The Dorchester People having argued that as it was "the Lord's waste, and for the present altogether void of inhabitants," who could use it "to the right ends for which land was created, Gen. 1, 28" -- it was therefore free for themselves to own and improve; and that the "future intentions " of the Plymouth People should not be preferred to their own present necessities and " actions," received the following pertinent reply from their Plymouth neighbors: "That if it was the Lord's waste, it was themselves [the Plymouth People] that found it so, and not they; and [they] have since bought it of the right owners, and maintained a chargeable possession upon it all this while, as themselves [the Dorchester men] could not but know. And because of present engagements and other hindrances which lay at present upon them, must it therefore be lawful for them [the Dorchester party] to go and take it from them ?" But while this matter was in dispute, the Dorchester emigrants were by no means idle. They had set their hands as well as their hearts upon the land of Matianuck; and all through the summer months, the forests echoed to the stroke of the settler's axe as he cut down the gigantic trees, and opened, here and there, a little spot of ground to the sunlight. And all summer long, more mindful of his dear wife and babes in the distant , Bay, than of Plymouth land claims, he labored diligently to construct for them a home and a shelter against the coming winter.

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 of ancient Windsor, Connecticut, Part 3

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909 Publication date: 1859 Publisher: New York : C. B. Norton Number of Pages: 956

Author: Stiles, Henry Reed, 1832-1909
Publication date: 1859
Publisher: New York : C. B. Norton
Number of Pages: 956