USA > Connecticut > The trade of Revolutionary Connecticut > 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
The Loyalist element in Connecticut exercised a significant economie influence during the War. Loyalists probably constituted mly about one-thirteenth, or eight per cent, of the total population
.
176.
in 1778.27 The line of demarcation between Patriot and Loyalists fundamentally was one of religion, with Patriots being Congregationalists, and Loyalists, Anglicans. 18 Alt Although Loyaliste were not numerous in 28
Connecticut, they probably formed a larger proportion of the Stato's population than did the Loyalists in Massachusetts, Maine, or Now. Hampshire.29. The Loyalists offered a serious threat in Connectiout because they wore dangerously concentrated in one section -- Fairfield County. They comprised about one-third the population of that strategio County, 30 located close to New York City, a hot-bed of Toryiem, In .. other words, the Connectiout Tories were clustered in the preoise area where they could do the maximum amount of harm to the Patriot cause in political, military, and economic realms. In the economic sphere these hanful activities chiefly took the form of illioit trade by land and water with the Long Island-New York City seotion, which subject will be ..
27 Two different methods of calculation have been employed to obtain this figure. The first is to find the member of Anglicana, and automatically class all Anglicans as loyalists. There must have been a few Patriot Anglicans, but the few exceptions wero undoubtedly compensated for by dofactions from the Congregationalist majority. E. E. Beardsley, m early authority on the Anglicans in Connecticut, set the total of Anglicans as one in thirteen in his work, The Episcopal Church in Connecticut, pp. 288-289. The second method is to tare the estimate of Lorenzo Sabine in the American Loyalists, vol. I (Quoted in George Gilbert, "The Connecticut Loyalists," A.H.B., IV, 280) that there were 2000 loyalists in the militia. Since the militia rolls totalled 26,000 in 1775, the one-thirteenth figure resulted. Oscar Zeichner in his excellent article, "The Rehabilitation of Loyalists in Connecticut;" New England Quarterly, II, 809, in general agrees with these figures.
28 Epophrodi tus Peck, The Loyalists of Connecticut (Publications of the Tercentenary Commission of Connecticut, No. 31), p. 3. Also, The Quakers, a tiny minority, were generally Loyalists. Franklin B. Dexter, Notes on Samo of the New Haven Loyalists, Papers of the How Haven Historical Society, vol. IX, 37.
29 Sabine, I, 16.
30Beardsley, p. 289.
177.
discussed later. 31 The towns of Stratford, Newtown, and New Haven contained unusually large numbers of Loyalists; 32 but Patriots controlled even those towns from the very start of the War.
A spirit of preparedness had evidenced itself at the October, 1774 session of the general assembly, especially in the way of calling for extra militia drills and expanding militia organization."> The towns were ordered to collect twice the usual amount of powder, ball, and flints,&# which required considerable effort.
Connecticut leaders decided to make their own effort to persuade the British government to change its policies toward the American colonies. In March, 1775 Governor Trumbull wrote a letter, approved by the legislature, to the Earl of Dartmouth, Secretary of State for American affairs. The letter constituted a vigorous protest against recent British policies, but at the same time a reaffirmation of loyalty to the Crown. Trumbull expressed grave concern over the situation in Massachusetts and the unduly harsh treatment accorded her. The letter closed with a plea for "some wise and happy plan" to restore harmonious . 35
relations between Britain and the colonies.
The Governor's sincere effort for conciliation came too late. His words were drowned in the maelstrom of fiery events which quickly followed.
51 Seo pp. 369-362.
.
32 Robert O. East, Business Enterprise in the American Revolutionary Era, (New York, 1938), p. 219. Many businessmen of New Haven were Loyalists. Ibid.
33c. R. XIV, 327-329.
34c. R. XIV, 343. 35c. R. XIV, 410-412.
178.
April 19, 1775 cans and brought the famous engagements at Lexington and Concord, after which horsemen quickly galloped through Conneotiout with the portentious news. Many crucial decisions confronted the mxious leaders of the Colony as they pondered the electrifying . developments. In the economio sphare, as in others, the problems to be faced were mmerous and very perplexing.
.
.. -
.
.
+
- 22
.
.
.
-
٨مه
?
. .
CHAPTER XIII
The Beginnings of Goverment Regulation (April, 1775-June, 1776)
The first step in govermental economie regulation in Connectiout occurred late in April, 1775 in the form of the imposition of an embargo. This step was followed in later years of the war by an extension of the embargo program and the gradual introduction of other forms of economie regulation. In the opening period of the struggle, from April, 1775 to the Declaration of Independence, the embargo provided the center of interest in the sphere of the economic history of the State.
The embargo has been a peculiarly interesting type of institution in American colonial economic history with its roots going far back into the early days of colonial settlements. Embargoos were employed in three main types of situations: (1) during times of peace; (2) on the eve of a war; (3) during a war. The motivation for laying an embargo varied according to the time, place, leaders, and general political and economio situation. In any case, the embargo fundamentally constitutes a form of econode pressere used consciously in an attempt to achieve certain definite ends, usually primarily political in nature.
Labargoes played a very important role in the economic history of Connecticut during the Revolution. The use of the embargo was firmly anchored in customs and precedents dating from the early colonial period. As far beok as May, 1657 an embargo may be found in which the Colony prohibited the export of hides. 1 The next year it. followed up this .. action by forbidding tamers to export leather except when required to
C. R. I, 293.
-
180.
purchase hides." 2
The use of embargoes in the Revolution seemed natural; for the same weapon had been employed in all four of the intercolonial .wars. They began with an act in April, 1690, during King William's War, that forbade the shipment of corn or other provisions on board any ship for three months without special license from the Governor or two assistants." Other acts followed during that struggle, Queen Anne's War, King George's War, and the French and Indian War.
The practice of imposing embargoes in the late colonial period was not limited to wartime. In May, 1772 the general assembly voted for no $ exportation of wheat, com, other grain, meal and flour until July 15, .. 1772.º In June Silas Deane, as spokesman for a group of Hartford County merchants, urged the continuance of the embargo. He pointed out that ~ vessels were loading, and grain purchasers were everywhere; but the poor still were suffering from want of grain.º In addition, thirty-six .
.. prominent citizens of the town of Hartford sent a hurried letter to the Governor imploring him to continue the embargo until the next session so that four or five vessels loading in anticipation of the embargo's
2 C. R. III, 14.
C. R. IV, 16-17.
Embargo aotions were taken as follows: in King William's War -- 1690, 1695, 1696, 1697 (repsal ); in Queen Armo's War -- 1710, 1713, 1714 (repeal); King George's War-1744 and 1745; French. and Indian War -- 1755, 1758, 1757, 1758, and 1762. See C. R. IV, 16-17, 154, 157, 160, 166, 200; V, 161, 417, 420 (repeal ); IX, 88, 254; X, 350, 424, 461, 485, 550; XI, 22, 105; XII. 65.
5 C. R. XIII, 579-580. A. T. P., III, Doo. 115.
1
181.
expiration would not be able to leave." What, if anything, was done is unknamn. 8
From this brief survey of embargo legislation up to 1775, it is'Ai . apparent that the embargo was already a well-established and familiar type of regulation in Commootiout.
In quick reaction to the opening of aotual fighting came the first revolutionary embargo, that of April 26, 1775. It served as a sort of model for late legislation.
Resolved by this Assembly, That an Embargo be forthwith laid upon the exportation out of this Colony by water of the following articles of provision, visi wheat, rye, indian oorn, pork, beef, live cattle, pease and beans, broad fleur, and every kind of meal, except necessary stores for vessels bound to sea; and that his Honor the Governor be, and he is hereby, desired to issue a proclamation laying such embargo and prohibiting the exportation of such provisions accordingly: Such embargo to contime till the 20th day of May next. "9
Since war had not been declared as yet, and independence would not be proclaimed for many months, this embargo could properly be classified . ..
in the second type, one passed on the eve of a war. This action suggests at least two observations. In first place, it deals only with basie .. -
. foodstuffs, normally extensively exported from Connecticut. In second place, the extreme promptness of the action reflected a strong fear of imminent shortages in these basic items.
Almost immediately, certain merchants considered that they had
legitimate cause to be exempted from the embargo for some specifio
A. T. P., III, Doo. 114."
The Journals of this period for both the House and the Comoil are missing.
ºC. R. XIV, 415-416.
182.
1
transaction, Among the first in the eight-year flood of petitions for exemption was that of Joseph Manson of New Haven. He asked permission" to transport to the West Indies in his ship, Sea Flower, twenty-six head of cattle purchased for that purpose before the embargo was laid."The petition was granted. 10.
"On the local town level, evidence of a deep interest in the embargo " problem was evident from the start. In Norwich the Committee of .
Inspection was moh perturbed about a possible shortage of molasses. May 1, 1775 it voted maninously that,11
"At this alarming and Critical Setuation of affairs in -- Amerion, and the great need end Necessity in all probability we shall have of what Molasses we now have in the Colony, wo therefore think it expedient that none of that Comodity bo Transported to any other Colozys and we do advise that no person send any from this Tara for the above Reason. We do also Advise for the above Reason that No Sugar be Shipd to any other Colony from this fora
Certify by ns Dudley Woodbridge Clerk."
The same committee was not satisfied to drop the matter with the action cited. On July 27 it sent a letter to Providence, Middletown, and New London asking whether it would not be wise to stop the distilling of molasses into rum due to the scarcity of molasses caused by the seizure of som Ameriom ships in the West Indies. 12 1
At the May session, the general assembly continued the embargo until August with the proviso that the Governor, with consent of the Council, was empowered to discontinue it wholly or partly at any time, a
- 1ºC. R. XIV, 439. 11W. G. Lano Collection. 12 road.
4
163.
13 discretionary power which was included in most later embargoos .. : In July the Governor was authorized to grant permits for the export by water of live cattle and provisions, in such cases as he. doomed wice, 14
Comsetiout's embargo soon was felt by her neighbors. In eastern Massachusetts, a grave food shortage developed, which caused. the . Massachusetts legislature to request that the inhabitants of the stricken area be permitted to purchase provisions in Connecticut and carry them to Massachusetts. The general assembly approved and gave the Governor - discretionary power in such matters, 15
In October, the general assembly enacted a new embargo law, almost exactly like that of April, 1775. The new law was to be in effect until June 1, 1776.16
By May, 1776 the legislature was confronted with a serious problem. "Sundry persons" were "ingrossing rum, sugar, molasses, salt, and other West India woods, with an interest to export the same out of this Colony.#17 Therefore, it was voted to forbid the export of West Indian goods out of Connecticut by land or water on or before November 1, 1776. If such goods wers needed, however, for the Continental army (especially ruai ), upon application by the Congress or General Washington, the Governor could grant a lomuss for export. 18
C. R. XV. 14-15. On August 17 the Governor and Council extended the embargo to October 20. C. R. XV, 119. ..
14 C. R. XV, 101.
15 C. R. XV, 105-105.
1ºc. R. XV, 135. Batter and cheese added.
17c. B. XV, 314.
-
- 18 Ibid.
-
184.
At the special session in June, 1776 it was time to reconsider the cabargo problem as the basic law had expired. " A new one was enacted that followed the same pattern of no export by water, except that pork could go out neither by water nor land.19 2.
In the period of fourteen months from Lexington and Concord to the Declaration of Independence, Connecticut lammkers, therefore, passed da impressive body of legislation dealing with the embargo problem. Driven by a fear of local food shortages in the Colony, they established embargoos; but they soon discovered that unforeseen complexities were involved. It did not take long to recognize the impossibility of an absolutely inflexible embargo. At least three sound reasons could be oitodi."":": (1) individual hardship cases of Connecticut merchants; (2) the suffering and danger of starvation in eastern Massachusetts; and (3) imperative needs of the Continental Army for West Indian goods. The old saying that "the Revolution was fought and won on rum" carries a semblance of truth. Despite the necessity for frequent exemptions it is probable that the embargo program did conserve a larger proportion of the Colony's . agricultural produce for its people then would otherwise have been the oss ..
The need for intelligent handling of the first type of oase above is obvious. By and large, Judging from the decisions made upon individual cases in published and unpublished sources, one omn say that both the general assembly and the Governor and comoil of safety showed great reasonableness and liberality in granting exemptions in the first
10 This change was made by the lower house as an addition to the Act passed first by the upper house, A. R. W., IT, Doc. 806. Exports by land, however, were small as compared with those by water.
-
185.
year and a half. : :: 10
The second cause for exemptions tied in closely with the operation of the law of supply and demand. In Massachusetts at the start of the war a larger proportion of farmers joined the Continental Army and : militia for active service, since the Boston area was the locale of the campaign. This produced a shortage of labor, and hence of productica in the growing season of 1775. Frices, therefore, rose unduly on most 1
necessities through the fall and winter, and soon climbed above the" -
level in Commectiout where conditions were less abnormal. Connecticut farmers and merchants attracted by the more favorable prices in the Massachusetts market hastened to supply its deficiencies. This normal functioning of an open market appeared to hold dangerous possibilities for Connecticut's supply needs as a whole.20 The result was the olapping of an embargo upon the export of supplies.
The embargo systems produced significant economie repercussions beyond those already described. As is usual, the embargo backfired upon its sponsors. Kany merchant ships were laid up and rotted away at the wharves. Large amounts of provisions were sold at lower prices in locally glutted markets, or at the low prices set by commissaries, or never found a buyer at all. 2] The very frequency of the petitions to the legislature or Governor and Council indicate the magnitude of the whole problem. Furthermore, indirectly the embargo undoubtedly encouraged some owners of idle ships to transfer their attention to privateoring.
In the first uncertain fourteen months of warfare, no other important
20 Andrew N. Davis, "Trials of a Governor in the Revolution, V.H.S.C., XLVII, 138.
2 Royal R. Hiramn, Historical Collection (Hartford, 1842), p. 547.
-
186.
type of regulatory economio legislation was passed in Connecticut. Attention was focussed upon organizing the militia for service and equipping it, and upon other military and political problems. Economio factors were not yet considered as very significant. Only the growing economic repercussions of the greatest military struggle yet in Connecticut's history would force consideration of these grave problems. The first steps were taken, however, in this period in issuance of . - i new "bills of credit," or paper money. A considerable sum was issued in the various missions of 1775 and early 1776. It took time, however, for their baneful influence to be felt in currency depreciation. A moderato weakening commenced before 1776 was over, but serious depreciation came later, 22 so that regulatory action upon the currency was delayed.
8 ::
-
. $1, 864
1
1.
*
.
1
.
..
-
f.
Ses pp. 307-315 in reference to later depreciation and its effects.
163,
CHAPTER XIV - --
:
Kamifacturing and Mining in Wartime
1
I. Cloth and Clothing
The effects of warfare upon Connecticut's manufacturing were most -t- 5 marked and uneven. Many peacetime manufactures continned on an even keel, but some had to be abandoned. Even in peacetime, manufacturing was .. a very uncertain activity as multifarious handicaps existed. War added divers complicating factors to an already discouraging general situation. On the other hand, for some types of manufacture, umparallelled demand afforded a fine opportunity and incentive for high production and large -
. 6 profits.
The making of cloth and clothing affords an example of a manufacture which was greatly stimulated by wartime demands. Not only were uniforms needed, but all kinds of clothing wore out faster under the rigors of active service in the field. As has been seen earlier, most cloth goods and clothing were made in the home, and. large-scale mamfacture was confined to a fer manufacturers like Christopher Leffingwell of Forwich. The fundamental pattern does not seem to have been altered much in the war, although some new firms entered the field. ..
Clothing needs for the militia and Continental Army (Connecticut
> Line) were not met generally by clothiers, but by levies upon the towns. Each town in turn put pressure upon individuals to help fill its quota. For example, ono of the earliest requisitions for Continental supplies was that made by the Governor and Council of Safety on July 17, 1776 - which called for the following,1
C. R. XV, 482, 484.
188.
County
Coats and Waistcoats
Felt Hats
* Shirts
Shoes
Hartford
1000
800
1600 -
1600
New Haven
400
450
1000
900
Now London
.700°
850
1400
1300
Fairfield
300
300
600
1000
Windhan
400
400
1000
800
Litchfield
200
200
400
400
.
4
This requisition meant, in the final analysis, that each town was supposed to produce its share, which in actual practice proved most difficult .*
Another example is found in an act of the legislature in October,
1777 which required each town to provide immediately one shirt, one, .. hunting shirt, one pair of woolen "overhalls," one or two pair(s) of stockings, and one pair of good shoes for each non-commissioned officer end soldier of the tom in the Continental Army. Specified values wero set for each item and impresmment was permitted. Towns delinquent in quotas by January 1, 1778 could be fined 120.2
"State of Connecticut To the Select Men of Plainfield" € Juno 10, 1777
To 1 Blankett apprised @24/ ≥ 1 4 .
O 0
To 2 Blanketts apprised ~ 50 2 10
To 1 Blankott @ 18/
18 0
?0 4 Blankett PP 24/3 4
17 0
To 5 Blankets 28/5 7
2
1
To 137 W Load
2
To ruming 137 W Load into Dull[eta] 12/ 5
12
Sworn to by Andrew Backus, selectman of Plainfield.
A further examination of the supply problem in this and other aspects will be found at another place in this study. 3
By and large, eloth and clothing manufacture was on a very small .
2 S. R. I, 421.
S Seo Chap. XVII.
-
.
189, -----
scale since the bulk of army clothing was made in individual homes. As an aid to such manufacture, Nathaniel Miles of Norwich, in 1775 established a place for making iron wire for cotton and wool cards. He found it difficult to get the enterprise going, so that he petitioned the general assembly for monetary mocuragement. A ocumittos was appointed to study the matter and authorized to allocate him not over 3500 to be repaid without interest in four years.4
In 1777 Jemes Wallace, a stocking weaver from abroad, sought from the legislature a loan of L100 to build stocking-looms and a machine to spin materials. Although he advertised himself as very skilled in making cotton, silk, and worsted stockings, his petition was rejected."
In West Hartford and Farmington, there was an important oloth manufacturing industry, which fashioned a kind of woolen material. 6 In Middletown, George Starr ren a sizeable shoe and leather goods fustory. It was important enough for General Washington, at the proprietor's request, to ask Governor Trumbull to exempt his operatives from militia service. It seems probable that this was done. In East Grecorich, woolen spinning must have been quite important as the town fixed the wage for such work, apparently for women in household production. In Danbury, hats were already being made. On the northern edge of tom stood a small hat factory, managed by Zades Benedict. He hired one journeyman
Aroh., Industry, II, Does. 151-162; C. R. XV, 81.
5Bishop; p. 418.
·Chastellux, pp. 37-39. 7 John Fitzpatrick, Writings of George Washington, XV, 284-285.
8 Cole, pp. 19-20, fth.
190.
and two apprentices, and they managed to turn out three hats daily.
. ...
:: . . ....
F
5
1 .
9 J. Moss Ives, "Danbury Leads the World in Eatting," Connestiout Magazine, VII, 627.
1 .
191.
2. Distilling
· Th distilling business was one of the chief industries of colonial Connostiout; yet the legislature dealt it a resounding. blow because of its use of vitally needed grains. Distilling apparently had contimed unchecked until the end of 1776, When that session, of the legislature mot, thres distillers, anticipating unfavorable action, petitioned the body at length. This trio, Josinies Erkelens, Mary Alsop, and Nathaniel Shaler declared as follows: 10
"That your Mami's have at a great Expance srooted a Distillery .... ' under an apprehension that a Namfacture of this Kind would be of Great Advantage to this Country in its present Situation ... that the long use of Spiritucas liquors (whether Necessary or not) has been such that the Generality of the people of this Country have an Idea that they cannot do without them and by long habit, aro so accustomed to the sure that in the present Situation of Affairs, and restraint of our Trade with the West Indies & a people so accustomed, would with great Difficulty bo prevailed on to abstain intiroly from the Use thereof."
Theyproossded to point out that France and Great Britain encouraged liquor production in several ways. Erkelens esme to this country and ", want to great expense to set up works from which scarcely any return had bonn obtained yet.
"They further Apprehend that the pittanes of Rys which they shall Distill will not contribute to enhance the Price of Grain in this State but will be Elg[h]ly Beneficial by Keeping dom the price of Liquor Ocensioned by the Searsity thereof sad that their Distillery which will expend no more than 4000 Bushels of Ryo P Amman will not raise the price of Rys more than one Single penny pr bushel and also to this that the Avails of the Distillery in Grain which will feed and fatt a large mumber of Swing."
This would be as beneficial to Commscticut as the total loss involved in purchasing barley from Rhode Island. In view of all these frotors the petitionsrs requested, therefore, that no law be passed without giving 1
A. R. W. Y, Doos. 253, 284.
10
192.
them a hearing previously and that, if in the future, distillers were prohibited, the law should not affect distilleries already established. This petition served to heighten the interest in the whole broad problem of whether to allow any distilling as a matter of polloy. 1 committee which had been appointed to study this question reported to the December session with a negative recommendation which touched of a lengthy and warm discussion. 14: Although no direct action was taken on this particular petition, apparently the "prohibitionists" won the"". battle, for the general assembly at the same meeting took this action. · "Whereas it is apprehended the distilling of spiritucus liquors from grain will occasion a scarcity of bread in this State,"
12
it is resolved, 4
. "That no person or persons whatsoever within this State shall !" . distill any spirituous liquor of any kind from wheat, rye or indian corn, at any time before the rising of this Assembly in Way next, excepting such grain as is already so far in the
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.