USA > Vermont > Windsor County > Windsor > The birthplace of Vermont; a history of Windsor to 1781 > Part 4
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48
Second, the minutes contain evidence that Colonel Josiah Willard was the man who had engineered the procurement of the charter. His services in this case were probably the same as in many others, since his name appears as one of the grant- ees in a dozen or more of the Benning Wentworth charters. A native of Lunenburgh, Massachusetts, married at the ma- ture age of sixteen, colonel in command of Fort Dummer from 1750, Josiah Willard, son of the first Josiah Willard, had be- come something of a political power among the settlements in the Connecticut valley. He not only knew the ropes in the business of securing township charters, but he had the influ- ence to obtain what he desired in this line. He was the man to be consulted as to prices. Thus one can explain the allu- sions in a facetious letter written a dozen years later by Ethan Allen to Benjamin Spencer of Clarendon, who had settled under a New York title and protested that he could not afford to secure a title under New Hampshire. "We are disposed to assist you in purchasing," says Allen, "and on condition Col. Willard or any other person demand an exorbitant price for your lands, we scorn it, and will assist you in mobbing such avaricious persons, for we mean to use force against oppres- sion, and that only. Be it New York, Willard, or any person,
38
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
it is injurious to the rights of the district." 1 Associated spec- ulators in New Hampshire grants always invited Colonel Wil- lard to become a member of their syndicate if they were wise. Moreover, he seems to have had the capital or credit neces- sary to carry his associate proprietors. A few years later he established cordial relations with the New York government and was rewarded for his services to that province. Had he retained his interest in Windsor down to the time the settlers came seeking confirmatory grants from New York he could have been of great assistance to the people of Windsor.
If further evidence, outside the proprietors' minutes, were needed to show that Colonel Willard obtained the Windsor charter from Benning Wentworth, we have it in the recitals in a deed executed by Timothy Ruggles, one of the proprie- tors, to Joshua Willard under date of March 25, 1762, viz.,
"Know all Men by these Presents that Whereas Josiah Wil- lard Esq. of Winchester in the Province of New Hampshire Incerted my Name as a Grantee in the Patent he Took out for the Township of Windsor in said Province, I, Timothy Ruggles of Hardwick in the County of Worcester Esq' In con- sideration of what Joshua Willard Paid to the said Josiah Willard for his Trouble and expence about said Patent, I do hereby Remise, Release and forever quitclaim ... to him the said Joshua Willard .
Excepting, of course, the Wentworths, it is safe to say that the family most active in promoting township grants along the west bank of the Connecticut River were the Willards.
Third, the compensation voted Colonel Willard, viz. three dollars on each proprietary right, for the cost of securing the charter gives an idea of the initial cost of the enterprise. As- suming that no charge was assessed against the Benning Went- worth or other "reservations," Colonel Willard received by way of reimbursement from his fellow grantees only one hun- dred and seventy-four dollars.
Fourth, the choice of Doctor Thomas Frink as clerk gives an excuse for introducing to the reader a jovial character of Keene. A physician by profession, and a locally celebrated physician, too, Doctor Thomas Frink was also the landlord of
1 H. Hall's Early Vt. Hist., p. 176.
2 1 Windsor Deeds, p. 549.
39
THE PROPRIETORS
a popular public house on the Keene town street and a magis- trate as well. Amid his professional and business cares he found time for speculative investments and for convivial oc- casions. From S. G. Griffin's excellent History of Keene, New Hampshire, comes this story, worth repeating here, of the first secretary or clerk of the Windsor Proprietors. It was told originally by the Reverend Laban Ainsworth of Jaffrey and runs as follows: When Ainsworth was about seventeen years old-just after the opening of the college at Hanover-his father furnished him with a horse, saddle, and bridle, and sent him to Dartmouth. His first stop on the way was at Keene. At the tavern he met Doctor Frink, who was trading horses and drinking flip. After some haggling, a trade was concluded, and the doctor sat down to write a note and a bill of sale. But his last mug had been one too many, and his right hand had forgotten its cunning. After several failures in his at- tempt to put the note in shape, he looked about the tap-room and saw the intelligent face of the bright and sober young freshman. "Here, young man," said he, "won't you jest set down and write this 'ere note for me? I guess I'm a leetle drunk." "Oh, yes," said Ainsworth, "I'll write it," and he sat down and quickly wrote the note. The doctor was pleased, yet was wise enough to say but little. Ainsworth proceeded on his journey and entered the college. In the autumn of that year an epidemic of fever, common in those days, broke out among the students, and young Ainsworth was one of those attacked. President Wheelock was alarmed and sent for all the best physicians within reach, among them Doctor Frink, of Keene, for Frink stood high in his profession notwithstand- ing his habits. The doctor appeared on the scene, thoroughly sober and responsible, and visited every sick student, young Ainsworth with the rest. When the Doctor had attended carefully to his case, Ainsworth asked for his bill. "No, young man," said Frink, "I'll not take a cent. I know you. You're the nice boy who once wrote a note for me in Keene when I was so dang'd drunk."
Fifth, the selection of Winchester in the Province of New Hampshire and Petersham in the Province of Massachusetts Bay as the places for holding the meetings of the Windsor Pro-
40
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
prietors indicates that in those two towns and the regions about them dwelt a considerable proportion of the grantees named in the Windsor charter. In this connection it may be noted that Captain Zedekiah Stone, and his sons David and Samuel, were of Petersham.
Writing of Windsor in the year 1824 for Zadock Thompson's Vermont Gazetteer, "A. A.," who we may guess was Asa Aikens, mentioned "what few of the proprietors' records are now re- maining." Hence we may safely assume that those of the proprietors' records that have been preserved to this day are far from all. They have been poorly cared for and should not be inspected further unless they can be mounted in modern permanent form by an expert. All that were in condition to be copied were carefully transcribed upon large sheets of stout paper by Mr. Sherman Evarts in the summer of 1916. In the year 1923 the Town Clerk discovered a little book into which had been copied, many years ago, a fairly legible transcript of these same originals, but including no others.
After the meeting of December 15, 1761, which we have termed the first meeting, nothing seems to have taken place until, on a request signed by Josiah Willard and Josiah Wil- lard, Jr., dated Winchester, March 24, 1762, Doctor Thomas Frink on that day posted a warning for a meeting of the Windsor proprietors, to be held at Hilkiah Grout's tavern on the 12th of April. From the record-although no entry to that effect was made-it is to be inferred that the committee appointed the preceding December "to vie and lott oute said town" had reported having viewed the land and having laid it out into numbered lots. At all events, Doctor Frink re- corded on April 12, 1762, "Voted to draw the Hows Lotts and meadow Lotts as they [ ] layd oute on the Plan." This seems to have been done. What purports to be the tattered record of such drawing, bearing the lot numbers of the parcels drawn by each proprietor, remains in the town clerk's office. There is another record at the Secretary of State's at Mont- pelier entitled "A list of the Names of the Original Proprietors of the Township of Windsor with the number of Meadow and the first Division of House Lots drawn to each under the Grant of New Hampshire on the twelfth day of April Seven-
41
THE PROPRIETORS
teen hundred and sixty two." The latter list is complete, while a portion of the former is missing. The two do not agree as to the house-lot numbers. Possibly the discrepancy is due to the Montpelier list having been made up after the adoption of a new parchment map of the town on November 3, 1767. In support of this theory we find a third fragmentary list of house lots and meadow lots among the Proprietors' rec- ords substantially agreeing, as far as it goes, with the Mont- pelier list and endorsed in Thomas Cooper's hand as having been turned in in 1767.
At this meeting of April 12, 1762, the committee was in- structed to lay out the "Gleeb" and Church of England rights and the proprietors desired that Captain Zedekiah Stone and David Page "be added to the Committee for the Building of Mills Laying oute Roads [ ] and Pass accompts and for the Laying oute the Town."
As far as the proprietors' records show, there was no further progress in the affairs of the township for more than a year. On July 16, 1763, Doctor Frink posted a warning for a meet- ing to be held at Hilkiah Grout's on August 24, next ensuing. This warning specified as subjects for action the building of a mill, the building of roads, the laying out of the rest of the township, the raising of money for roads and lotting, and to act on any other articles that might be thought best "for the spedy Setelment of sd Township."
Besides the choice of a moderator this meeting actually cov- ered but one transaction, but that was an item of importance. It introduced into Windsor history the substantial name of Israel Curtis and voted him fifty acres of land in consideration of his giving a bond in the sum of one hundred pounds sterling to build a saw mill in Windsor by August 1, 1764, and a grist mill as soon as there should be twenty inhabitants to raise one acre of grain apiece in the township. The land so granted to Mr. Curtis was to abut the south side of house lot forty- two on the north and Mill Brook on the south, "leaving Ten acres between sd Brook and house Lot No. forty-one for a meeting house place Training Feild and Buring Yard Reserving sutible Roads in sd Land for the use of the Town six Rods wide."
Thereafter matters did not proceed with sufficient rapidity
42
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
to suit some who had bought rights of the original proprietors. Accordingly Doctor Frink was addressed in a writing dated "Charles Town May ye 24th 1764" requesting him to call a meeting to "compleat the Laying of the house Lotts, to See if the Commite all Reday Chosen will Lay all Roads ;- other- wise to chuse a commitee that Shall forthwith complete said Roads." Appended to this request is the following: "N.B. as Thare is many of the Props at work Together with us Desir the meeting at this Place." Then come what appear to be the signatures of Israel Curtis, Steel Smith, David Taylor, Phineas Graves, Samuel Hunt, and Enos Stevens. This paper is worthy of notice since it bears the name of Steel Smith, who is popu- larly spoken of as the first Windsor settler in 1764. Appar- ently he and Israel Curtis were then working at Charlestown, New Hampshire.
Pursuant to the request, a meeting was called by the clerk, to be held at Charlestown. It convened, was adjourned to a later date at Keene, convened and adjourned once more, and then, at six o'clock on the morning of August 29, Lieutenant Samuel Hunt, Steel Smith, and Enos Stevens were chosen a committee to join the existing committee with authority to continue laying out the town and the roads. This meeting voted an assessment of twenty shillings on each original pro- prietary right.
After this meeting there is an unfortunate gap of three years in the proprietors' records. The missing records are those for the first years of the difficulties occasioned by the claims of New York. Possibly all the records for that period showing, as they probably did, the appointment of an agent to repre- sent the Windsor Proprietors in New York City and the in- structions given him in the Proprietors' behalf were delivered to Nathan Stone, who represented the proprietors as such agent. In 1771 Thomas Cooper as proprietor's clerk once re- ferred to "Col. Stone's minutes." The minutes so referred to may be the missing records and perhaps were permanently re- tained by Colonel Stone. As late as 1782 a committee ap- pointed by the town visited Colonel Stone in an endeavor to get from him "public papers lying in his hands that concern the town and deliver them into the town clerk's office."
CHAPTER VII COLDEN PREVAILS
WHILE the Windsor Proprietors were holding their meetings at Winchester, Charlestown, and Keene, between the years 1761 and 1764, the titles they had acquired under their New Hampshire charter were not gaining in strength.
With the death of Lieutenant-Governor Delancey of the Province of New York on July 30, 1760, Doctor Cadwallader Colden, as President of the New York Provincial Council, came to the front. He improved the occasion by reminding the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, by a let- ter dated August 30, 1760, that it was important to settle questions relating to province boundaries.1 Again, on Feb- ruary 28, 1761, in a letter to the same authorities2 he touched specifically on the New Hampshire matter. "I am clearly convinced," he wrote, "that the Province of New York ex- tends eastward as far as Connecticut River, that New Hamp- shire can have no pretence to the westward of that River, being bounded westward by the neighboring governments and by no other boundary. The truth of what I now assert I am confident will be evident to your Lordships after perus- ing what you will find entered on the Minutes of Council of this Province the 18th day of October 1751 and more fully and clearly in the Minutes of the 2ยช of March 1753, which I make no doubt have been transmitted to your Lordships." In the same letter he argued that it would be to the advan- tage of the region between the Connecticut River and Lake Champlain to belong to New York because the course of trade naturally would be with the cities of New York and Albany and along the Hudson River.
Colden's letters, many of which have been preserved and are published in the New York Historical Society's Collections
1 7 Lond. Doc. 445.
2 7 Lond. Doc. 457.
43
44
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
and in the New York London Documents, show his activity, his ability, and his zeal in arguing the boundary case. With consummate skill and perseverance and virtually without the aid of any of his colleagues, he so presented what many have termed the weaker side of the controversy that it seemed the stronger and, driving home to England argument after argu- ment, at last obtained a decision in his favor. At those times when there was a governor in charge at New York, the corre- spondence on the boundary question lost most of its pungency and force; but when Colden was left at the helm the case of New York against New Hampshire was handled with vigor. Thus, with the advent of Governor Monckton, the prosecu- tion of the case seemed suspended until February 11, 1762,1 when Colden, as lieutenant-governor, found opportunity to remind the Lords of Trade of the damage being done to the King's interests by the intrusions of the people of New Hamp- shire. Again, on September 26, 1763,2 and with some show of excitement, he wrote how he had just discovered a dangerous representation made to Governor Monckton by five of the New York Provincial Council. That representation, it seems, nearly gave away the New York side of the controversy by suggesting, as a possible compromise, a boundary line twenty miles east of the Hudson River. The lieutenant-governor wrote as if his discovery of this weak-kneed representation was providential and was the means of averting grave injury not only to the Province of New York but to the King. "I have been 40 years at the Council Board," he added, "and in that time have been more conversant in publick affairs than any man now living in the Province." Like an elderly relative he pointed out the comparatively slight experience of most of the other members of the Council and virtually administered to the Lords of Trade a somewhat severe lecture against their paying serious attention to so light a paper as that submitted to Governor Monckton.
Here is an example of Colden's rather artful reasoning: "In my humble opinion no reason of any weight can be given why the King should not affirm his right to the lands on the west side of Connecticut River, or to the Northward of the Colony
17 Lond. Doc. 490.
2 7 Lond. Doc. 562.
45
COLDEN PREVAILS
of Connecticut, unless it be that many families who have un- advisedly settled on the west side of Connecticut River would thereby be ruined. But if the King shall think fit to confirm their possessions to them on their paying the Quit rent estab- lished in his Province of New York, they cannot in any shape be distressed or have any just reason of complaint."1 In this, one may discover a trace of Colden's desire that a re-granting of the Vermont country should be given over to his charge. In view of what eventually happened, his purpose may seem clear, but the letter quickly turned to more unselfish reflec- tions. He intimated that promoters had been taking land titles from New Hampshire merely because such titles were cheaper and so left to the promoters a larger margin of profit. He felt that the settlers under the New Hampshire charters paid inadequate quit rents-all to His Majesty's damage.
Possibly Colden's most fetching argument came through his contrasting the governments of New York and New Hamp- shire. On this head he wrote as follows: "The New England Governments are formed on republican principles & these principles are zealously inculcated on their youth in opposi- tion to the principles of the Constitution of Great Britain. The Government of New York, on the contrary, is established, as near as may be, after the model of the English Constitution. Can it then be good Policy to diminish the extent of jurisdic- tion in His Majesty's Province of New York to extend the power and influence of the others ?" 2
For all that appears in the records, Colden wrote these let- ters without any word of encouragement from England and only at such times as he was at the head of the Provincial Government of New York. No answer and no hint of an an- swer came. In the meantime, as has been seen, Benning Went- worth, with a cool, Yankee aggressiveness that we may be excused for admiring, had resumed his practice of granting charters and had continued it until his townships had covered a great part of what is now Vermont.
It was late in the year 1763 that Cadwallader Colden tried a new method of forcing the issue by publishing broadcast his
17 Lond. Doc. 562.
2 7 Lond. Doc. 564.
46
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
celebrated Proclamation.1 This proclamation declared that under the grant of King Charles the Second to the Duke of York in 1664, "all the land from the west side of the Connecti- cut River to the East Side of Delaware Bay" had become the Province of New York, that the west bank of the Connecticut River was therefore the Eastern boundary of the Province, and that ignorant and incautious persons were being imposed upon by the offer of titles within that territory under grants of the government of New Hampshire. The proclamation also required New York officers to exercise jurisdiction as far east as the Connecticut River with the specific requirement that the sheriff of Albany County must report all persons holding lands westward of the Connecticut River under New Hamp- shire titles "that they may be proceeded against according to law."
Colden transmitted a copy of this proclamation to England and wrote two vigorous letters, on January 20 and February 8, to the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations.2 He gave in the letter of January 20 a full chronological history of the controversy and reported the astonishment of the New York Government at the recent discovery that a great num- ber of townships-"some affirm one hundred and sixty"-had been granted by New Hampshire in the disputed territory since the submission of the case to the King. The letter of February 8 cleverly rubbed the matter in: "The Governt of New Hampshire, I am told has lately granted 160 townships, of six miles square each, on the west side of Connecticut River. A man, in appearance no better than a Pedlar, has lately travelled through New Jersey and this Province, hawking and selling his pretended rights of 30 townships, on trifling con- siderations. The whole proceedings of the Governt of New Hampshire, in this case, if what is told me be true, are shame- ful and a discredit to the King's authority, under which they act."
Colden's proclamation had at least the effect of producing
14 Doc. Hist. 346-347. See, also, Documentary History of the Protestant Epis- copal Church in the Diocese of Connecticut, vol. II, p. 68, for comments on Colden's claims to jurisdiction under date of August 18, 1764.
2 4 Doc. Hist. 348-352.
From a photograph by Pach Brothers
CADWALLADER COLDEN
LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF NEW YORK
From a painting by Matthew Pratt, by courtesy of the New York Chamber of Commerce
47
COLDEN PREVAILS
from Benning Wentworth a counter blast in the shape of a counter proclamation1 declaring that the grant of King Charles the Second was obsolete and assuring the settlers under the New Hampshire grants that if settlements were made in com- pliance with the New Hampshire charters, the titles would be duly confirmed even if the King should decide the boundary dispute in favor of New York. A copy of Governor Went- worth's proclamation Colden promptly forwarded to the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations on April 12, 1764, in a letter2 full of wrath but not omitting to reiterate the argu- ments he had again and again urged upon their Lordships. This was his last plea in the case. In the late summer or early autumn he received a letter under date of July 13, 17643, signed by the Earl of Hillsborough and several other of the Lords of Trade, indicating that the importance of the case was appreciated and that they had recommended to the King that "Connecticut River be the boundary."
The famous order of the King in Council, under date of July 20, 1764, declaring "the Western Banks of the River Connecticut to be the Boundary Line between the said two Provinces of New Hampshire and New York" did not reach America until the following spring. Governor Hiland Hall, in his Early History of Vermont, at page 60, comes pretty near intimating that the New York authorities purposely withheld for a time the announcement of the order. The delay, how- ever, seems to have been wholly on the part of the officials in England, for Benning Wentworth, who also received a copy from England, reported to his New Hampshire Council on May 23, 1765, that his copy had come since the last adjourn- ment of the Council on March 8. Colden duly proclaimed the order on April 10, 1765.4
Thus, after fifteen years, ended the formal controversy be- tween the provincial governments of New York and New Hampshire with respect to the boundary line. Thus, also, after a century, the ancient eastern boundary of the Duke of York's patent from King Charles the Second, north of the Massachusetts line, was vitalized anew. In the meantime
1 4 Doc. Hist. 353. 2 4 Doc. Hist. 354. 3 7 Lond. Doc. 642.
" See also 4 Doc. Hist. 479; N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll. (1923) 28.
48
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
Benning Wentworth had accomplished the granting of the better part of the disputed territory, had given to himself five hundred acres in each township, and had pocketed whatever fees went with the business; but future jurisdiction of the region fell to his opponent, Cadwallader Colden.
It was perhaps natural but extremely unfortunate that Cadwallader Colden should have interpreted the boundary decision as retroactive. Doubtless he remembered the defi- nite admission, made by Wentworth in a letter written to Governor Clinton under date of June 22, 1750, that, if the Bennington grant "falls by His Majesty's determination in the Government of New York, it will be void of course." On that assumption Colden promptly began to make grants of his own in portions of southwestern Vermont already granted by Benning Wentworth and so contributed the beginnings of provocation to the settlers.
CHAPTER VIII THE SETTLEMENT OF WINDSOR
THE preponderance of authority supports the belief that settlement within the township limits of Windsor began in 1764.1 While Steel Smith is commonly spoken of as the first settler, the Windsor newspaper's report of his death does not explicitly so state,2 and, according to Zadock Thompson, there were two persons already on the ground when Steel Smith arrived. These were Solomon Emmons and Mary, his wife. The writer has found no clue to the location of the Emmons cabin or camp, nor is there any tradition in relation to its whereabouts. Solomon Emmons's name appears in the list of the grantees of Hertford (Hartland), which fact might well account for his being in the immediate neighborhood; but Emmons and his wife remained and became citizens and prop- erty owners in Windsor and are deprived of the honor of being the first settlers mainly on Zadock Thompson's assertion that, at Steel Smith's coming, Emmons had bought no land and made no improvements.3 The argument may seem slim; yet no court has rejected Steel Smith's claim to the distinction which, having been recorded upon his gravestone in the Old South churchyard, we shall not further question.
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.