USA > Connecticut > The trade of Revolutionary Connecticut > Part 19
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
77. G. W., XXII, 311-312. . 78 Johnson, p. 197. . 79S. R. III, 576.
80 Trumbull to Washington, July 9, 1781; M.H.S.C., L, 247.
81M.H.S.C., L, 269.
-
292.
supplemented their income as supply agents for the French by undertaking work under the so-called "American Contract" to procure provisions for the Continental soldiers at West Point and nearby posts.82 Henry Champion and Oliver Phelps also aoted as contractors for the American forces in this final phase of the war. 83
The last important war-time supply acts were passed in January and May, 1782 as the legislature tried to raise the quota assigned to it by Congress. 84 The pressure definitely was removed, however. In January the legislature authorized the Governor and Council to dispose of the surplus part of the state supplies on hand. 85 Before the end of the year peace was seen to be certain, and people's thoughts turned to the post-war period and its possibilities.
·
12. Causes of slow delivery of supplies
In view of these thorough and comprehensive acts, why did the State fail so badly in delivering its quota of supplies to the Continental Army? The main cause probably was laxness in enforcement of the laws which sprang out of the weak central government both of the State and of the United States. The towns were delinquent, in first place, since many selectmen would not put pressure upon their neighbors who often preferred hoarding to accepting depreciated paper currency. The State could exert little effective sustained pressure oven though
82 East, pp. 93-94.
83 S. R. V, 105. 84s. R. IV, 8-9, 171. 85g. R. IV, 24.
-
293.
the Governor and Council did their best to spur the laggards.
Decentralization of authority then provided the basic cause of tardiness in obtaining and forwarding supplies from Connecticut.
Another important cause was slomess in paying farmers for supplies provided. In a sense it was a tribute to the patriotism of many farmers that they had taken commissary notes. These farmers, however, became
On March 10, 1780 Governor restive when payment was not forthcoming. 86 Trumbull commented upon this situation: "Permit me to add to this list of illbodings and misfortunes the failures of payment of old debts, which necessarily disables the fattners of cattle from going on to furnish supplies to the army .... " Even if the farmers were again willing to fatten cattle for the Army, non-payment of their contracts prevented many of them even from purchasing more lean oattle. In 1781 a special 87 act was passed to expedite payment of the sums still due many persons for provisions supplied to Jeremiah Wadsworth or his agents when he was Commismary-General. 88 Another significant cause of trouble was the failure of Congress to make its requisitiona early enough. Governor Trumbull wrote a sharp letter to the President of Congress in November, 1780 relative to the congressional requisition for salted provisions. Trumbull observed tartly, "the Season for making that Supply is almost lapsed -- the Pork and Beef gone to Market-that if we must make a full
86. M.H.S.C., LXIII, 18-19. Many Connecticut farmers still had not been paid by June, 1780 for beef provided the previous year. Koreover, their contracts were for fixed amounts of money, and therefore suffered greatly from depreciation. Trumbull to the President of Congress, Juno 8, 1780, N. E.S.C., LXIII, 50-63.
87 Trumbull to Washington, March 10, M.H.S.C., L, 158-159.
88 S. R. III, 379-380.
294.
Compliance-we shall be obliged to purchase it from the Hands of Engrossers and others ... is it impossible for Congress to make their Estimates & Requisitions in their proper Season -- if it is not -- I think the neglect is almost unpardonable.' 89
13. Supplies for the State navy
Although the amount of supplies required for the Connectiout Navy and privateers was small in comparison with that required by the militia and by the Continental Army, the naval side of the story should not be overlooked. Mention has already been made of the fairly extensive activities of Connecticut naval craft. 90 A glance at the record of supplies received on board one ship, The Trumbull, in a brief period of about seven weeks (March 17-May 6, 1777) is illuminating in showing the large amounts of supplies required for a ship with a crow of about seventy. It included 20 barrels of beef, 10 barrels of pork, 254 gallons of rum, 71 pounds of coffee, 1988 pounds of fresh beef, 1 kog of hog's lard, 2 firkins of butter, and considerable sugar, bread, and soap. 91
14. Supply service rivalries and graft
A factor which caused some trouble in the procurement of supplies was the rivalry between continental and state purchasers. For instance, in the spring of 1779 Peter Colt reported that he was constantly being
89 Trumbull to President Samuel Huntington, November 27, 1780, A. T. P., XIII, Doo. 168.
90Seo Chap. XV.
91
Ship Trumbull. Account Book.
296.
thwarted in his efforts to obtain flour by the activities of continental purchasers. In fact, even some of James Hillhouse's purchases for the stato were seized by Continental agents and by General McDougall. "" Several months earlier, Edward Hallam of New London stated that Continental commissaries regularly seized flour in Connecticut from state commissarios. He wondered whether legal suit for damages could not be undertaken. 93
Dissatisfaction with the state supply organization led the legislature to appoint a committee to inquire into the conduct of the lower supply officials. The committee experienced great difficulty because most accounts were incomplete, so that it resorted to questioning of witnesses in its report of October, 1780.
It appears that the most capital Abuse which has prevailed in the purchasing Department is that the Assistant Purchasers of Cattle have in very many Instances and in largo Proportions purchased Cattle of Speculating Jobbers that have infested the various Parts of the State, during the present War, who have been indefatigable in purchasing under various false Pretexts. All the Cattle in their Power, this has been a principal Cause of the Rise of Provisions but it does not appear these People have in any one Instance boon employed by the Purchasers and those Purchasers have very often been necessitated to purchase of them. "94
Peter Colt, as a purchasing commissary, pleaded with the legislators to give the commissaries greater power to seize all engrossed goods, Bo described the shameful practices provalent:
... A great Number of unprincipled men -- are going thro 'every part of this State, engrossing, & buying up, on Speculation, every
92 Edward Hallam to Governor Trumbull, April 5, 1779, A. T. P., IX, Doc. 159.
95 Ibid., January 27, 1779; A. T. P., IX, Doo. 23. 94 A. R. W., XIX, Doo. 257.
296.
Article that the Country affords for the Subsistence of the Army -- and then sell them again to the stationed Commissary-or transport them out of the State, as best suits their Interest-as these people are always in Cash, and are under no controuls, they have the advantage of those who are employed to purchase for the Army .... These Jobbers pretend to be employed as Agents to the Commissarios or for the French fleet .... 95
As a result, the commissaries often were forced to buy at exorbitant prices from these engrossers, and even then insufficient amounts were procured. A law had been passed to prevent such practices, but it bad proven ineffectual.96
15. Supply depots and other factors
A significant aspect of the supply picture is the matter of supply depots. The selection of the supply depots was determined chiefly by location and transportation facilities. Danbury affords a good caso study. Danbury was chosen in 1776 for this purpose as it was inland, yet accessible by fairly good roads to the Hudson, the Sound, and northern and eastern Connecticut. By April, 1777 large amounts of provisions, clothing, and mmiticas had been collected there. Danbury citizens [probably] welcomed the increased business brought to tom by the supply depot, but they learned to their sorrow that such a depot might serve as a magnet for enemy incursions. On April 26, 1777 a marauding expedition of about 2,000 men under Tryen entered Danbury bent upon destruction of the military stores. Included in the doomed stores was a large amount of rum which was consumed, not by the flames, but as far as humanly possible, by the raiders!9 Not only were the
Not on
95 A. R. W., XIII, Doo. SE abo (October 26, 1778).
96 Ibid.
97 J. M. Bailey, History of Danbury, Connecticut (New York, 1896), P. 69.
.
297.
stores destroyed, but also about twenty private homes and their furnishings, worth over £16,000.98
Although there was frequent reference in various supply laws to impressment as a device for obtaining needed supplies, there is no evidence of its widespread use in Connecticut. Isolated cases such as the two below occurred, but it was not generally resorted to. In August, 1777 Jabez Huntington of Windham submitted an account for 4733 pounds of coffee and four hogsheads of rum seized. In March 99 of the same year a Captain Palmer impressed 11618 pounds of cheese in Stonington from the firm of Church and Hakes at six pence per pound with a one and one-half per cent commission added. 100
The business of procuring supplies was indeed big business. The records of disbursements in 1778-1780 by Jeremiah Wadsworth to Peter Colt and Henry Champion, the two chief Connecticut purchasers, give a good idea of the vast extent of these expenditures. From September 4, 1778 through June 20, 1780 Colt received $7,212,922.28, and Champion, $15,106,500, which totals loom large in the overall picture.101
16. Provision of clothing
Connecticut seems to have been considerably more successful in supplying the clothing needs of her militia and continental troops than the food needs. Two factors may be cited to account in part for the better performance. In first place, clothing involved a much smaller
98s. R. 11, 42.
99 A. R. W., LIII, Doo. 18.
100 Richard A. Wheeler, History of Stonington (Now London, 1900), p. 44. 101 Jeremiah Wadsworth, Commissary General of Purchases, 1779.
298.
cost, both intrinsically and in that much of it was made in individual homes by families of the soldiers. In second place, Connecticut provided only for the olothing needs of her own mon whereas the State provided . food for far more than her own men.
Reference has already been made to the customary wartime device of the legislation in calling upon each town to provide certain items d' supplies for each townsman in service. 102 In January, 1778, upon the earnest recommendation of Congress the State ordered every town to provide one hunting shirt, two linen shirts, two pairs of "linen overhalls," one pair of stockings, and two pairs of good shoes for every continental soldier in the tom's quota, and half as many blankets as soldiers, all to be delivered to the county purchasing commissaries on or before June 1, 1778. Fair prices were to be paid to the towns, and impressment could be resorted to if necessary. 103 This measure was similar to ones passed earlier and later.
The implementation of official state legislative enactment occurred at the tom level. Concerning the act of January 1778, for example, one may see the process unfolding in Middletown. A special tom meeting was held on March 9, 1778 at which Jabez Hamlin presided. The town chose twenty-six men as a special committee to provide the articles of clothing ordered by the general assembly in January. The town also voted to assist this committee in accomplishing this. As a starter, nineteen persons voluntarily offered to provide a total of twenty-eight
102 See pp. 266-267. S. R. I, 424-425.
103 S. R. I, 475-477. Similar acts included one of the Council on September 12, 1777 (S. R. I, 396), and one of the general assembly in October, 1777 (S. R. I, 421).
299.
"Sutes" and eighteen blankets. 104
It is quite certain that the towns experienced great difficulties in meeting their quotas, and undoubtedly, many failed badly at times. As an example of town activity we may cite Waterbury's reaction to the act of October, 1777. A tam meeting was held and fifteen mon were appointed to oversee the collection of clothing. As a result, the town forwarded to and charged the State for 115 woolen shirts, 24 linen shirts, 133 frocks (hunting-shirts), 130 pairs of "overhalls," 184 pairs of stockinga, 127 pairs of shoes, and 5 sacks of "too cloth." The bill included 28 shillings for officera' fees for impressing several articles. Perhaps the 133 frocks represented Waterbury's quota of men. 105 5 It 1 a creditable performance, yet undoubtedly not a full compliance with requisitions.
The state commissarios performed dependably their undramatic duties. Typical of the hundreds of accounts extant listing purchases by state commissary agents is this one.
State of Ct to Edw Hallam for Clothing Purch. for town of New London
Oct. 23 [1778] to 314 p Shoes
25/ 15/
£ 392:1010
to 127 d Stockings
95:510
[53] pr trousers 18/
47:14:0
155 Shirts
30/ 232:10:0
24 Officers Shirts
30% 72 :010
52 Frocks
28/
72:16:0
50 p Overhalls
24/
60:010
£ 972 :15:0 2416:4
Commission 2 per cent
Transportation viz. by
water & trucking oto.
3:0:0
To Wm Carrels for do &o. packing & Coopering
4:1010
E1004:11:4106
losMiddletown Town Records, Envelope 3, 1778.
105Henry Bronson, The History of Waterbury (Waterbury, 1858), pp. 341-342. 106A. R. W., XII, Doo. 279.
300.
17. Excellent record in supply of clothing
In general, Connecticut's cooperation with Congress on clothing matters was quite good, at least as far as enacting measures which Congress called for. Back in 1776 Congress introduced the office of Clothier General, and this official had agents in the various states. Also, Congress, from time to time, called upon the states for fixed amounts of clothing. 107
Usually the Connecticut troops of the Continental Army were well supplied with clothing. Even during the most bitter of winters, that at Valley Forge, the bloody footprints in the snow were not those of Connecticut mon. Washington wrote Trumbull on March 31, 1778:
Among the troops returned unfit for duty for want of clothing, none of your state are included. The care of your legislatura in providing clothing and necessaries of all kinds for their mon is highly laudable, and reflects the greatest honor upon their patriotism and humanity. 108
Perhaps the most significant stato legislation concerning clothing was the act passed in May, 1779 whereby Elijah Hubbard of Viddletown was appointed "Sub or State Clothier," and Chauncey Whittlesey of Middletown, "Purchasing Clothier," and procedures of operation wore outlined. Whittlesey, in general, was empowered to receive and pay for the clothing from the town, pack it, and forward it to the regimental clothiers. Hubbard was to reside and work among the main body of the Connecticut troops in the Continental Army. 109 The value of the clothing
107 Journals of, the Continental Congress, V, 467.
108M.H.S.C., L, 113.
109 S. R. I, 277-279.
301.
110
handled by each of the men ran into hundreds of thousands of pounds. For instance, the Pay Table was directed in January, 1780 to pay . £100,000 to Whittlesey so that he could purchase officers! uniforms. 111
Some clothing was obtained from the French for the Continental
Army, in which clothing Connecticut troops shared. In the fall of 1779 the Connecticut men had been supplied by the State agent with clothing "much inferior in quality to that delivered to the whole of the army afterwards."112 The need for clothing allotments continued virtually up to the end of the war. For example, as late as Qotober 19, 1782, one finds that the Council ordered Hubbard to send to Stratford for Lt. Colonel Canfield's regiment 710 pairs of shoes, 710 pairs of stockings, 355 pairs of woolen overalls, and 355 shirts, together with a suitable amount of white and blue cloth for coats, rests, etc. 11>
. Despite occasional complaints, however, the Connecticut troops generally did have available adequate clothing as the Council especially devoted much attention to the clothing problem. 114
110 Ebenezer Huntington, for example, enoloses an order for L3000 on Elijah Hubbard for specified articles of clothing. Ebenezer Huntington to Andrew Humtington, July 7, 1780, Letters of Ebenezer Huntington. S. R. II, 455-456.
111 S. R. II, 455-456. 112M. G. W., XVII, 184. 113s. R. IV, 328.
114 "Council and general assembly actions may be found in S. R. I. 82, 168, 170, 172, 175-176, 188, 351, 396, 424-425, 457, 462, 465-466, 475, 482, 510, 514, 537, 576, 583; II, 235, 277, 412; III, 135-136, 384-385, 467, 471, 482, 504-505, 510, 522, 553.
302.
18. The supply contribution of Connecticut
From this study on a whole, one may conclude that Connecticut made a very great contribution of food and clothing for the Continental Army, 1 for the French Army, and for its own militia and ships. In regard to food, it ranked among the two or three leading states for beef, pork, and rum. In the Congressional requisitions of 1780 which give a good idea at least of what was expected of Connecticut, the stated quota ranked as shown below.
1780 Congressional Food Requisitiong
Item
Com.
N.H. -
Wasa.
R.I.
N.Y.
M.J.
Pa.
Ma.
Del.
Ve. Rank of Conn.
Beef (pounds)
666,035 166,838 666,035 71,675 71,675 36,760 186,835
First
€
(or pork)
Roma (hhds)
100
25 225
30
225
. 60
Third
Bacon (pounds)
30,000
30,000
30,000
5,000 60,000
. Second
Flour (barrels)
1,500
140
500
5,000
2,500
500
Third
Salt (bushels)
500
500
First
Grain (bushels)
9,142
4.571 2,285 2,285
9,142 11,428 6,857 29,714
Third
400
First
Horses
1,000
150
1,020
200
600
696
1,500
400
Third
1
1-4
1
115_
W. C. C., V, 183-189. 1
303.
(monthly ) 115
148,045 71,678
-
304.
Among the foodstuffs, Connecticut actually lagged behind only in flour as it was not a large wheat growing stato. 116
The very fact that Washington turned consistently, and often first, to Trumbull for aid in the way of food and clothing revealed the great dependence put upon Connecticut for supplies. It is quite probable that Connecticut made a larger contribution to the war effort in her supplies than she did in any other way-military, naval, or political. In fact, she apparently ranked among the top two or three states in her overall contribution of food, clothing, and arms to the Continental cause.
5.
-
116 See pp. 65-66. A. ...
·
CHAPTER XVIII
Currency and Financial Proble
The state of public credit vitally affected the individual person in Connecticut. The financial burdens of the war were largo, since the State provided so many supplies and kept a large number of men under ams.
The emission of paper money began at the special session of April, 1775 when 250,000 was ordered issued, payable in two years." In May £50,000 more was voted," and the race between expenditures and paper 2 issues was laimched. A tax of seven pence on the pound was levied to ensure redemption. The general picture for the war period may be seen from the table belar.
Stating of Bills emitted &o. by the State of 3 Connecticut, and now outstanding, August, 1777.
Total
Mitted
Date Emitted
Payable Date Ro demnablo
Tax Laid
On What List
Amount Retired
$10,000
May 10, 1770
Doo. 31, 1777
2d.
1770
$5,000
12,000
Oct. 10, 1771
Doo. 31, 1772
1d.
1771
6,000
Sept. 30, 1773
1d.
1772
12,000
June 1, 1773
Deo. 31, 1774
1d.
1772
Jmo 1, 1775
1d.
1773
15,000
Jan. 2, 1775
Deo. 31, 1775
1d.
1774
Doo. 31, 1776
1d.
1775
50,000
May 10, 1775
May 10, 1777
7d.
1775
50,000
June 1, 1775
June 1, 1778
78.
1776
C. R. XIV, 432.
2. C. R. XV, 14.
SA. R. W. VII, Doo. 436.
308.
Total Emitted
Date
Emitted
Payable Dato Redeemable
Tax Laid
On What List
Amount Required
50,000
July 1, 1775
Doo. 31, 1779
7d.
1777
60,000
Juno 7, 1776
Dec. 31, 1780
8d.
1778
50,000
June 19, 1778
Deo. 31, 1781
7d.
1779
Issued $309,000. Burned 11,000. Outstanding 289,000. $60,000 issued in notes of E10 each payable at 4 per cent in three years. $72,000 borrowed and payable at 6 per cent in one year.
The story of currency emissions was completed by the issuing of the follaring amounts: 2335,000 in 1778, 149,000 in 1779, and £420,000 in 1780. The grand total for Connecticut in the war period (April, 1775-1783) was approximately E1,200,000. Although a large total, it, fortunately, did not compare with six of the other states. Approximate totala for the Continental Congress and the Thirteen States follows 4
Continental Congress
$191,552,000
Virginia
£51,917,000
South Carolina
16,215,000
Massachusetts
13,400,000
North Carolina
2,653,000
Pennsylvania
2,597,000
Maryland
1,867,000
Connecticut
1,221,000
How York
787,000
Rhode Island
441,000
Now Hampshire
413,000
How Jersey
241,000
Georgia
203,000
Dolarare
168,000
The treasury of the State remained almost constantly in a sadly depleted condition despite higher taxes and aid from Congress. In addition to the
4 Totals are rounded off to the nearest thousand dollars for the Continental Congress, and, nearest thousand pounds for the states. The table is based on Ralph V. Harlow, "Aspects of Revolutionary Finance, 1771,1783," American Historical Review, XXXV (October, 1@29), opp. 50.
.
307.
tazes already listed for the sirking of specific emissions of paper bills, other heavy taxes were levied, such as one shilling on the pound in August, 1777 (payable by November 1) and twelve penos on the pound in October, 1777 (payable by April 15, 1778). In a prewar year, a general tax of one pence on the pound was typical, and two, exceptional.º In a sense, of course, a vicious cirole. was set up by the heavy issues of paper money. The inflation cheapened the money, prices rose rapidly, the currency depreciated and so more and more had to be issued to cover extraordinary war expenses. A few far-sighted men like Roger Sherman spoke strongly for much heavier taxation to curb the price inflation and currency depreciation 7 by paying off a larger proportion of current expenses, but they were in a decided minority. Of course, the legislators tried hard to logislate confidence in the state and continental paper money. Whereas, "some evil-minded persons, inimical to the liberties of the United States of America, have endeavoured to depreciate the bills of credit of this and the said United States," a law was passed strictly prohibiting any actions which would devalue the paper money and give preferences to hard money. Heavy penalties were provided, and the paper bills were firmly established
as legal tender in payment of all taxes and obligations. 8 Other similar acts were passed from time to time later.
The depreciation of the Continental and State paper currency begin
5S. R. 1, 377, 425. -
6 Soo C. R. XIII, 300,' 516 for examples in 1770 and 1771.
7 Boardman, pp. 184-188.
8 S. R. I, 5-6. Soo S. R. I, 231-232 for the ast which prohibited ciroulation of paper bills of other states in Connecticut.
308.
almost immediately, and gradually gathered momentum, despite all laws and exhortations by publio officials, until it ran out of control in 1779 and 1780. On December 16, 1779, Ezra Stiles noted that Yale students had been dismissed since the steward could not provide food due to the rapid depreciation of continental money which had "fallen nearly a quarter in three weeks or a month past."9 Congress, finally, openly recognized the situation and in March, 1780 officially devalued the currency to one-fortieth of face value in terms of Spanish milled dollars. - The Connecticut legislature adopted the Congressional tablo which covered all contracts entered into from September 1, 1777 to March 15, 1780. The Connecticut law applied to Continental and state bills. A good idea of the depreciation can be obtained from this table. ..
Value of one hundred Spanish milled dollars 10
Sept. 1, 1777 100
Mar. 1, 1779
1000
Deo. 1, 1777
135
Juno 1, 1779
1344
Mar. 1, 1778
175
Sept. 1, 1779
1800
Juno 1, 1778
265
Doc. 1, 1779
2597
Sept. 1, 1778
400
Var. 15, 1780
4000
Dec. 1, 1778
034
1 This drastic official stop largely destroyed the little public confidence remaining in the paper currenoy. 11 On May 2, 1781 Ezra Stiles commentod that "At Philadelphia Continental is 150 for 1. At K. Eaven 100 for 1. At Boston 130 for 1.#12
9 Ezra Stiles Diary, III.
10 The Congressional table gave values as of the first and fifteenth day of every month. It undoubtedly was quite rough in its degree of accuracy. Certainly the depreciation began long before September 1, 1777, for example. The table is given in full in S. R. III, 171.
11. Albert S. Bolles, Industrial History of the United States (Norwich, Connecticut, 1878), p. 156.
12Ezra Stiles Diary, III. 1
309.
As in every period of distress, a multitude of remedies were propounded by many interested persons. Governor Trumbull in his opening speech to the general assembly at the Jamary, 1778 session advised that "too great Quantities of Money [are] now Circulating." So Connecticut people were "glutted with Money -- and curtaild of yo necessarys of Life-everything which we can Eat, or Drink, or Wear, becomes more valuable than Cash, And, The only probable means of restoring the lost Balance appears to be, by reducing the Quantity of the circulating Modium, by large Taxation: and giving every Encouragement in our Power, to Importation,"13 Although the Governor's program contained much merit, the legislature did nothing at that session to translate it into motion. Lovying heavier taxes was no more popular in Connecticut in 1778 than one hundred and seventy years later!
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.