USA > Connecticut > The trade of Revolutionary Connecticut > Part 2
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
Perhaps the most unpleasant feature of Connecticut weather, aside from its fickleness, is its dampness. The humidity is high much of the time, especially in the coastal and Connecticut Valley areas.24
Very little information is available upon the weather in Connecticut during the Revolutionary War. It was, however, probably fairly normal, since people then as now, chiefly recorded abnormalities. The chief exception to normalcy was the winter of 1779-80, memorable for tremendous moufalls and very cold weather. For example, Long Island Sound froze all the way across, and people rode over to Long Island from Stratford and elsewhere.25 The rigorous winter coincided with a low point in American fortunes, and it must have added greatly to the gloom in
23 Ibid., pp. 21, 23.
See table in Kirk, p. 24. Average annual humidity at Now Haven is 74 percent (8 A.M. ), 65 (noon), 71 (8 P.M. ); at Hartford, 75, 60, and 67 respectively. Summer.and fall are the most humid seasons; the spring, the drysst.
25 Ibid., p. 33. Another azception was the great northeast storm which hit the state on August 18, 1778 and caused extensive damage to homes, forests, crops, and shipping. Dwight, I, 73.
10
Connecticut. 26
The olimatio conditions of Connecticut, by and large, therefore, were favorable to the life and economic activities of the eighteenth- century populace. The changeableness of the weather, though often heartily damned then as now, did have a generally invigorating and energizing effect upon the people.'
op
.
1 - .
26 Jedidiah Strong, Clerk of the Lower House, entered this comment in the Journal of the House' under the date of May 19, 1780: "After the severest hard winter within the memory of man, distinguished not only by the abundance of snow and frequent storms of the most tedious sort brt also the oxtrums degrees and long continuance of cold-amidst the most backward spring recollected by aged and observing citizens, and whilst the horrors of an ummatural war are increased amazingly and increasing. perpetually .... " S. R. III, 3 ftn.
.
CHAPTER II
Population
1. Introduction
From the first permanent English settlements in the 1633-36 period to the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775 the population of Connecticut showed a steady and rapid rate of growth. An understanding of the basic factors regarding this population growth is essential to V study of Connecticut's trade.
During the entire Colonial period only two censuses were taken in Connecticut, those of 1756 and 1774. For the revolutionary period one can cite only one consus, that of 1782. This study will be built around a presentation and analysis of these censuses supplemented by some 1 attention to the earlier period.
---
.
For the entire period before 1758 one is forced by the absence of any census to employ other means to get any meaningful estimates of population. These ratios have been found' useful:
Form
Batio to Total Population
Notes
Militia
1 to 5
Recommended by Greene and Harrington
-
Folls, Taxables
1 to 4
Families
1 to (nearly) 6
In Commecticut, men 21 and over By 1790 census, actual figuro was 1 to 5.7
Houses
1 to 7
Greens and Harrington's belief
-
E. B. Greene and V. D. Harrington, Population in American Colonies, xxiii.
2 Ibid.
:
12.
Upon these bases most of the estimates of colonial population have been worked out. Obviously, a large margin of error is likely.
2. Estimates for colonial pariod
Some of the principal and more reliable population estimates for
Colonial Connecticut are as follows:
-
1636 - 800 persons, according to Trumbull3
1640 -- 2000-
1655 - 4000 (based upon 775 taxables )5
.
1674 == 10,350 (based upon Trumbull's statement of 2070 militia)º
1677 -- 11,810 (based upon 2362 mon in militia)7
1685 -- 13,284 (based upon 3321 taxables)8
1701 ·· 30,0009
1718 -- 47,50010
1750 - 38,70011
1786 130,61212
3 Benjamin Trumbull, I, 46. Adams accepts this estimate. Soo his Founding of New England, p. 19.
James Truslow Adams, Founding of New England, p. 19.
5Trumball, I, 184, The ration of taxables was probably very low then. Dexter in "Estimates of Population in the American Colonies," Proceedings of American Antiquarian Society, V, 32, asserts that 4000 to 5000 is correct. . .
6 Trumbull, I, 272.
.
7 Groene and Harrington, p. 47.
8 Governor Andros to the Secretary of State in C. R. IV, 149-150.
9 Greene and Harrington, p.
10 Todd., p. 49.
"Secretary Wylly's "Answer to Queries of the Board of Trade" in C. R. VII, 884. Probably much too low.
12C. R. XIV, 492. Official census figures with slight correction.
15.
1762 -- 148,59013 1774 - 197,91014
-
.
Good evidence exists that the early estimates tend to be low. For example, the 1750 figure of 38,000 reported to the Board of Trade probably represents only about two-thirds of the actual mmber. 1º
The author's estimate on population in the colonial period is based om the belief that the population doubled every twenty-five years. The 1774 censas is taken as the most reliable guide-post from which to calcu- -
late.
1649
6,20015
1674
12,400
1699 -- 24,700
1724 - 49,500
1749 - 99,000
1774 -- 197,920 (conmas)
Earlier than 1649 the only reliable estimate appears to be that of
Trumbull of 800 persons for 1036.
To obtain an idea of the rate of growth in the colonial period this table is useful,17 .
-
c. R. XI, 630. Another answer to the Board of Trade. Probably, low.
14c. R. XIV, 483-191, Again census figures with slight corrections.
15 Dexter, les. cit., 32.
16 All figures to nearest one hundred. Other estimates for these . years incinde: 1649 -- 5000 capable of arma; 1674-2070 man in militia (Trumbull, I, ;a]: 1699-3705 taxables; 1724-none; 1749-71,500 in Answers to Queries (undoubtedly, quite low).
...
17 BLssd graph in Olson's Agricultural Eonomy and the Population sacth Century-Cousatinut, p. 21, adapted from Dexter's "Estimates 1 Zicht
.
14.
r Dato
Population
Yearly Per Cent Increase in Each Period
1690
.20,000
1730
60,000
5.0 (1690-1730)
1749
100,000
2.5 (1730-49)
1756
130.612
4.4 (1749-56
1774
197,910
2.9 (1756-74)
1782
208,850
.8 (1774-82)
Connecticut's rate of growth apparently reached a peak around the middle of the eighteenth century after which it declined noticeably. This slowing down can be accounted for largely in terms of (1) great acceleration of endgration and (2) diminution of immigration. The first involved especially large movements of people to such places as western Massachusetts, New Hampshire and the futuro Vermont. 18
.....
3. The 1774 Consus
Connecticut's first carefully-made census, that of 1774, affords a contrast to the elaborate census taken in the twentieth century United States. The facts called for were few-perhaps a wise move in view of the primitive means of transportation, lack of experienced census-takers and other difficulties. The machinery for the consus was set in motion by the general assembly in October, 1773:
Resolved by this Assembly, That the selectmen in the respective tos in this Colony at or before the general election in May next shall take and transmit to his Honor the Governor a particular and exact account of all the persons in their respective towns, as well negroes and indians as white persons, distinguishing the member of those who are under the age of twenty years from those who are above that age, the sexes, and whether married or single; and that the colonel of each regiment of militia shall also within the time
18 R. L. Morrow, Connecticut Influences in Western Massachusetts and Vermont,. (Publications of the Tercentenary Commission of Connecticut, 10. 58), passin.
15.
1
aforesaid transmit to his Honor the Governor the exact mmmber of officers and soldiers in his said regiment, thereby to enable his Honor to prepare a compleat answer to a letter lately received from the Earl of Dartmouth, his Majesty's Secretary of State for the American department. And that this act be forthwith printed and distributed by the Representatives in the present Assembly. 19
.€.
-
19 C. R. XIV, 160-161.
.
Colony of CONNECTICUT, taken on the First of January, 1774.20
Total Negroes and Indians
Total Whites
Indiam Females above Twenty
Indian Males above Twenty
Indian Females under Twenty
Indian Males under Twenty
Negro Females above Twenty
Negro Males above Twenty
Negro Females under Twenty
Negro Males under Twenty
Females above Serenty
Males above Seventy
Females between Twenty and Seventy
Males between Twenty and Seventy
Years
Females between Ten and Twenty
Males between Ten and Twenty Years
Females under Ten Years
Males under Ten Years
COUNTIES
-
S
S
M
8
S
S
X
S
12 15
50678
34
2
32
32 201
370 248. 274 290 358
.-.
27 170 263 206 199 113 179
182
94. 4105 1446
4060 1478 80 2778:28
3167; 4028 4166 Now-Favon
2036
31542
244 142 207 249 255 : 555 276 528 143 208
: 240
84. 4652 1962
4607; 1686 125 3536. 55
5859
5127 52 62
New-London
-
1214
28936
16 19 18
8:234
358 275: 286 119 165
190
65 4589 1248
: 4582; 1415 110 3874:33
42 12
4010 4318! Fairfield
684
27494
37 : 31 47, 48 221 |
147 .. 81: 127: 165 246
263
85 4045 : 1754
3978 1370
18 8202 16 : 3550
4238 4504' Windham
440
26905 26: 19 82 32:
61 99 79: 92
92 | 108
139
i 51 4010, 944
4160 1318
141 2748
3018: 4526 4645 Litchfield
6462
191448
375 244:356: 391
1165
1264 1436: 554
10486 28886 9941 697
2 902 6
21860
31114
--
-
92 3
2 5896
16
9'
19
-
.
1042 1572 1306:922
422
175 7625 8134
7469 2679 165 5722:53
6243 8121 8219; Hartford
222 24049 30050
2ºC. R. XIV, 491. . The actual oensus totals given were 191,392 whites and 6,464 Negroes and Indi ans, which are slightly incorrect.
16.
:
17.
The total population of Connectiout in 1774 was, therefore, 197,910, which represented a gain of 67,298 over the 1756 total.
One may study the census returns from many angles such as distribution by age groups, counties, reference to topography, toms, sections as divided by the Connecticut River, and minority groups. The last-mentioned will be considered separately at the end. 21.,
In regard to the distribution by age group one finds that it is very similar in the five older, more settled counties, but in Litchfield, the youngest county, a variation is evident. A comparison may suitably bo made with How Haven county:
County
Children under 10
Malos 20-70
Females 20-70
Whites over 70
Total Population
How Haven
8194
5535
5551
568
26819
Litchfield
9171
5478
1954
390
27346
In other words, Litchfield possessed a younger population with more children, a disproportionate number of young men, and considerably fewer old folks-all typical of a frontier. area. .
To emphasize the relative growth by counties these figures should be considered: . . .
.
-
1756 Total Population
1774 Total Population
Percentage of Inorenso
Hartford
36,568
61,890
42
New Haven
18,181
26,819
48
How London
23,461
33,578
43
Fairfield
20,560
30,150
47
Windhason
20,015
28,128
: : 41
Litohfield
11,827
27,545
131
130,612
197,910
31.5
21
See pp. 37-42.
18.
It is apparent that population was increasing at a moderate and fairly. uniform rate in the five older counties. But in Litchfield the rate was almost exactly three times as great! In eighteen years Litchfield had registered a gain of one and one-third times hor 1756 population.
The distribution of population in Connecticut at the outbreak of the Revolution was markedly uneven. The area of densest population spread along the coast with offshoots spreading from Stratford up the Housatonic and Naugatuck Rivers to Waterbury, from New Haven northeast to the Connecticut River Valley at Middletam and thence up the River to the Massachusetts Line, and from New London northward up the Thames River to Norwich. is interesting to note that eleven of the twelve most populous towns fall within this fairly narrow area. . Norwalk, Fairfield, Stratford, New Haven, Now London and Stonington lie in the coastal area, while . Wallingford lies on the How Haven-Middletown line. Middletown and Hartford are located on the Connecticut River; and Farmington, the only exception, adjacent to Hartford on the west, is on the Farmington River, an important tribatary of the Connecticut. Now London is at the mouth of the Thames with Norwich on its upper waters. Woodbury was bounded in part by the Housatonic River, so that it, too, essentially fitted into the pattern.
The remainder of the colony ranged from moderate to sparso population density due to such factors as hilly or mountainous terrain, poor soil, lack of good water transportation, later settlement, and other reasons.
Yet Connecticut seems to have been suffering already from a land subsistence problem. Under the backward type of agricultural economy prevailing then, much of the Colony could not support any larger population. As families grew, and the amount of land available remained -
19.
22
fixed, the alternative arose of a lower standard of living or emigration. After the Revolution, especially in the nineteenth century, manufactures were developed on a larger scale, but no such outlet existed prior to the Revolution. Furthermore, land values rose steadily in the eighteenth- century and land became too expensive for many young men to buy.25 Large families were the rule in Colonial Connecticut. Travelers often noticed "ten or twelve little heads peeping out of doors and windows."2% An unknown writer commented: "Our lands are cleared and settleds our faras in general will not bear a further division; maless there be some new rosource our most active, industrious and enterprising young men ... will emigrato to those parts of the continent where there is more vacant territory."25
One may reveal. fairly well the centers of power and wealth of the Colony by a brief view of the twelve leading towns in size in 1774. As a rough indication of relative wealth, the tax list for each is also given.
-
.
.
-
22 Olson, pp. 20-22. See Stella Sutherland, Population Distribution in Colonial America (New York, 1936), opp. p. 62 for a map showing excellently the distribution of population in Connecticut and the remainder of New England for 1776.
25
Olson, p. 11. .
-
24 Ibid., p. 18.
,
25
Did
20.
26
27
Rank 1 Township
1774
1756
Porcent Increase
1774 Tax List
Rank
1
How Haven
8295
5085
63
72,395
1.
2
Norwich
7327
5540
32
68,649
2
3
Farmington
6069
3707
64
67,519
3
4
Now London
5888
3171
86
36,423
12
5
Stratford
5555
5658
52
52,000
5
6
Stonington
5412
3518
54
37,839
11
7
Woodbury
5313
2911
83
60,600
4
8
Hartford
5031
3027
66
49,036
8
9
Wallingford
4915
3713
32
51,051
6
10
Middletown28
4878
5664
-14
43,153
10
11
Fairfield
4863
4455
9
51,005
7
12
Norwalk
4588
3050
4
44,076
9
.
How London and Woodbury showed the greatest rate of population increase, while New Haven jumped from third to first place in total population. The wealthiest town per capita of list was Woodbury with Farmington & close second. Bartford, eighth in population and wealth, offerod a markod contrast to its towering twentieth century leadership in the State.
In view of the tendency of colonial political leaders to split on an East-of-the-River and West-of-the-River basis, especially during the Trumbull-Fitch rivalry of the 1769-75 period, it is interesting to note the relative population of the Colony in 1774 as divided by the Connecticut River. To the West of the River (conservative bolt generally) approximately 115,529 people lived. On the East side (less conservative politieal leadership) approximately 82,381 people dwelt.29 The percentage
26 To the nearest por cont.
UTro the nearest pound.
28 Middletown's decline was due to the cutting off of a part for Chatham in 1767.
.
29 Exact figures are impossible to get because several towns lay on both sides of the river, as Hartford and Middletown. However, Edgar L. Beermance, Preliminary Studies of Connecticut Population, 1756-1930, is useful on this point.
21.
division was therefore: West-58.4 per cent, East-41.6. The preponderance of the West in mambers must have made it harder for Fitch's western group, M
the "Old Party," to accept the Eastern leadership of Trumbull and the How London-Windhan County group.
4. Intra-colonial movements, 1700-1774
The fifty or sixty years preceding the Revolution were marked by a large intra-colonial population movement. During and after the end of Queen Anne's War (1713) a trek began to the remaining unsettled portions of Connscticut. By 1774 this movement had largely spent itself.
The older tas settled the new ones. Goshen was largely filled up by families from New Haven, Wallingford, Durham, Farmington, Simsbury and Litchfield; Sharon, from Colchester and Lebanon. The spread of settlement can be observed in the dates of incorporation of the new towns by the general assembly: 1711, Coventry and Newtown; 1712, How Milford; 1713, Pomfret; 1714, Ashford; 1715, Tolland; 1719, Voluntom and Litchfield; 1720, Bolton; 1726, Windham County created with 11 towns; 1727, Willington; 1734, East Haddam and Union. The last section to be settled was the northwestern section-later called Litchfield County. Harwinton was incorporated in 1751, Now Hartford in 1738, Goshen, Cansan, Kent and Sharon in 1739, Salisbury in 1741, Norfolk in 1758, and Hartland in 1761. So by 1762 all the land of Connecticut was divided up into towns, though many new towns later were created from older ones (such as Chatham from Middletown in 1767). Altogether Connecticut had seventy-six organised towns at the outbreak of the Revolution.
The question of the proper mode for the settling of the "western
.
22.
lands," the unsettled northwestern area of 1713, precipitated considerable debate among colonial leaders. Finally a compromise was decided upon, The Colony was to dispose of the lands west of Litchfield, while certain patentees in Hartford and Windsor received the right to dispose of the land east of the line. In the latter, seven toms were established. Of these seven, Torrington, New Hartford, and Harwinton quickly prospered; but the other four-Barkhamsted, Colebrook, Hartland, and Winchester grew slowly and painfully. In 1756 they counted 18, 30 12,0, and 24 inhabitants. By 1774 they numbered only 250, 150, 500, and 337 respectively. 31 The wooded and rugged nature of the terrain has discouraged heavy settlement from then until the present.
The Colony quickly got rid of the western section of the "western lands" as the pressure had been heavy from hordes of land-hungry petitioners to the general assembly. 32 By the Act of 1737 seven
tamships were laid out along the Housatonie River and were sold at auction under prescribed conditions, with large bonds required. 33 The
now towns created were Salisbury, Canaan, Norfolk, Goshen, Cornwall, Kent, and Sharon. Of these, Norfolk, made the slowest progress. According to the census figures one finds this record of growth to illustrate the filling up of Comeotiout's last frontier,
Dorothy Deming, Settlement of Litchfield County (Publications of the Tercentenary Commission of Connecticut, No. 6), pp. 1v4.
&c. R. XIV, 490, 492.
32 Deming, p. 5ff. 35c. R. VIII, 134-137.
C. R. XIV, 490, 492. The older, more populous towns of Litchfield, New Milferd and Woodbury are omitted.
23.
Auction Town (Western) Group
1756
1774
Sharon
1205
2012
Salisbury
1100
1980
Kent
1000
996
Canaan
1100
1635
Goshen
610
1111
Norfolk
84
969
Cornwall
500
974
5,599
10,677
1
Patentes (Eastern) Group
1746
1774
Harwinton
250 -
1018
How Hartford
260
1001
Torrington
250
845
Hartland
12
500
Winchester
24
339
Barkhamsted
18
250
Colebrook
1
160
7,103
With reference to natural resources it can be said that Litchfield County was fairly thickly settled by 1774.
In the later settlements land speculation played an important part. The settlement of Willington offers an example. A few families settled there about 1715-1720. In 1720 the entire area (seven miles by fire) was sold by the Colony for L610 to seven men who apparently planned the whole project as a speculation. These proprietors succeeded in attracting "planters" from various parts of New England so that by 1728 there were twenty-eight rateable polls and a minister. 35 Undoubtedly the proprietors had sold their land at a good profit.
5. Emigration
Another major aspect of the population problem in the late colonial
"Lafis K. Mathews [Rosenberry], The Expansion of New England, (Boston, 1909), 91-92.
-
24.
period was that of migrations to areas outside Commecticut. As early as the 1640's settlers flowed across the Sound to Long Island. Soon after the Restoration in 1660 families from Branford, Guilford, and Milford moved to the site of modern Newark, New Jersey; and in 1697 a band of
Connecticut pioneers founded Fairfield, New Jersey. 36 The series of The sø colonial wars and the large areas of unsettled land in Connecticut, however, postponed any large-scale emigration until after Queen Anne's War .. The period 1713-1764 (mainly between wars) sur a mmber of bands leaving Connecticut, especially for Berkshire County, Massachusetts. New Marlborough was settled in part by men from Canterbury and Suffield. To Sandisfield, went men from Enfield and Wethersfield; to Lenox, from West Hartford and Wallingford; to Otis, from Enfield, Suffield, Woodstock, Granby, and Hebron, Williamstown and Pittsfield were founded by Connecticut people. 37 The former town was settled largely by people from Colchester, Killingly, and Litchfield, 38
.
Other widely-scattered areas settled in part by Connecticut men prior to the French and Indian War included Putnam and Orange Counties in New York and the Midway tract in Georgia (1752).59
The largest migration wave of the colonial era occurred in the decade or so after the French and Indian War. Connecticut men were prominent in the beginnings of Loo, New Ashford, Huntington, Hancock,
36 Louis K. M. Rosenberry, Migrations from Commecticut Prior to 1800 (Publications of the Tercentenary Commission of Connecticut, No. 28), pp. 2-5.
.
57 Ibid., p. 6, Morrow, p. 9.
58 Morrer, p. 10., - yt
39 Rosenberry, p. T.,
-
25.
Hinsdale, Cheshire, Adams, Windsor, and Richmond, all in Berkshire' County, Massachusetts. 40
Many still more adventurous souls pushed orward into New Hampshire and helped in settling Marlow, Lebanon, Claremont, Hebron, Plainfield, Hanover, Lyme, Campton, Oxford, and Newport. 11
The vitality of the frontier outsurge was felt in Vermont too in the early days of such towns as Norwich, Wethersfield, Norwich, Marlborough, Arlington, Hartford, Pittsfield, Thetford, Tinmouth, Verginnes, Strafford, and Rupert. 42
The largest mass migration took place to the lands of the Susquehannah Company in Wyoming Valley beginning in 1762. Many obstacles arose to the plans of the Company in the form of Indian opposition, Pontiao's uprising, and hostile local groups. The Connecticut settlers felt that they were wholly within their rights in settling in the Wyoming Valley because the Charter of 1662 bad extended Connecticut westward "to the South Sea" (Pacific Ocean). Unfortunately, however, the royal grant of 1081 to William Penn seriously overlapped with the westward extension of Connecticut; and the Wyoming Valley area, in particular, was located in the disputed seotor. The first group of settlers were massacred by Indians early in 1763. The Perms tried vigorously to secure control of the Susquehannah area but failed. By dint of great efforts and even of open border warfare involving "the Yankees" versus the "Permamites," the New Englanders won out. By 1771 the Connecticut settlers had overcome
40Ibid., p. 8.
41 "Ibid., p. 9, Morrow, p. 16.
'Rosenberry, p. 11; Morrow, p. 16. »
their enemies and established e comunal typo of settlement at Wyoming Valley. Shares of stock in the Company were distributed freq in the next several years where they would do the most good. In 1773 cpie Governor Trumbull was granted five hundred acres es a gift, and hosire accepted, The traditional equalitarian. land policy of How England was followed, " and the township system was established. . . The democratie . ion, nature of the land distribution helped create in the Commeotiout settlement a loyalty sufficient to defeat the Fennsylvania settlerq ...... who suffered from an equal, competitive. land system which favored :> speculators. of Confedera .. Inte
u". ' After a long campaign the Company succeeded in getting the krend legislature of Comeotiout to pass en net creating the tom ofer sy. Westmoreland in Jamary, 1774.4% - This precipitated a major political battle. The Susqueharmah Company's chief strength lay in eastern Connecticut and it had become involved in the old sectiomal hostility of eastern and western Commecticut. Moreover, the strong friendship Trumbull and Dyer mads support of the 1774 Westmoreland Act a leading plank in the program of the "eastern" group. The "Od Party" or". .. ticu1, Conservatives, headed by Thomas Fitch, eagerly embraced the issue and fought to reverse the 1774 Aot. In fact, it be me the chief political
Julian P. Boyd, The Susquehannah Company: Commeoticut's Experiment in Extension (Publications of the Tercentenary Commission of the State of Connecticut, No. 34), passim.
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.