Connecticut Historical Law Guide

Contents

Legal Ages at a Glance

General Principles

An English legal system

Connecticut law came from England. The colony was settled from Massachusetts in the 1630s, and English common law — judge-made law, handed down through court decisions rather than written by a legislature — governed from the start, heavily overwritten by statute as time went on¹.

Three features shape almost every Connecticut record. Land descended to all of a person's children rather than to the eldest son. Dower — a widow's right to the use of part of her late husband's land for the rest of her life — reached only the land he still owned when he died. And probate — wills, estates, guardianships — was handled by civil courts sitting in local districts rather than by a church court, so the records are civil, local, and open.

A common law steadily rewritten by statute

A handful of dates mark changes you will see in the records:

• 1792 — the eldest son's double share of an intestate estate abolished.
• 1848 — slavery abolished outright.
• 1855 — marriage licenses replace the public announcement of an intended marriage.
• 1877 — a married woman given her own property and the power to contract, for marriages from 20 April of that year.

For any given year, the rule in force is the statute where one had been passed by then, and the common law otherwise.

Legal Age of Adulthood

Majority at twenty-one

Full legal age in Connecticut was 21, for women and men alike, and it stayed 21 through 1950. One short colonial act sets it out, and settles several related questions at once. A person of 21, of right understanding and memory, had "full Power, Authority and Liberty to make their Wills and Testaments, and all other lawful Alienations of their Lands and other Estates." The same sentence gave him the power "to give their Vote, Verdict or Sentence in any Matter or Cause"². The same act fixed the age for making a will of personal property and the age for choosing a guardian, both below.

A minor's legal capacity

A minor could own property. What the law limited was the power to dispose of it. A minor's contract, including a deed, was voidable — good until the minor chose to undo it, which he could do on reaching 21.

Connecticut left this to the common law. The colonial revision of 1672 had made a person under the government of a parent, guardian, or master incapable of contracting without that person's allowance, and the 1821 revisers dropped the clause. Their note explains why: its only effect had been to take from minors the power to contract for necessaries — food, clothing, and lodging — which they held at common law anyway³.

Marriage

Who was old enough to marry

For most of the period the common law fixed the marrying ages: 14 for a boy, 12 for a girl⁴. A marriage below that age was void, by an act of 1717⁵. The colonial marriage act set the ceremony, the public announcement, and the consent requirements, and left the ages to the common law⁶; the revisions of 1784, 1821, 1835, 1849, 1866, and 1875 all kept that arrangement.

The first statutory age arrives in 1921, and it triggered a consent requirement rather than barring the marriage outright. The act forbade a license to parties either of whom was under 16 unless one of the town selectmen endorsed his written consent on the license. By 1930 that endorsement had to come from the judge of probate for the district where the minor lived⁷. A Connecticut marriage under 16 after 1921 should therefore carry a written consent in the license file — a selectman's at first, a probate judge's later.

Parental consent

Parental consent was required for any minor — anyone under 21 — of either sex, throughout the period. The colonial act required the magistrate or minister to be certified of the consent of the parents or guardians of parties "under the care and control of parents or guardians," which the 1821 revisers glossed as minors⁸. The licensing statutes repeat it: the registrar issued no certificate where either party was a minor until a parent or guardian of that minor gave written consent⁹.

A defectively celebrated marriage is still a marriage

A Connecticut marriage celebrated without publication, without a license, or without parental consent was a valid marriage. The penalty fell on the officiant or the registrar. The 1821 revisers stated it plainly. The statute forbids joining persons in marriage without publishment, and, in the case of minors, without the consent of their parents or guardians. Even so, "it has ever been considered, that the marriage was valid, and that the magistrate or minister celebrating it, was liable to a penalty"¹⁰. The courts held the same in an unbroken line¹¹.

For a researcher this means a runaway teenage marriage is a real marriage and its children are legitimate.

How a marriage was made

A Connecticut marriage required a ceremony before an authorized officiant. Until the end of 1854 the couple's intention had to be published first — announced in a public meeting on the Lord's day, or set up in writing on a post or door of the meeting house, eight days before the wedding. An act of 1854 replaced publication with a license issued by the town registrar of births, marriages and deaths, beginning 1 January 1855; the officiant endorsed the fact, time, and place of the marriage on the license and returned it to the registrar¹². Connecticut marriage publications therefore run to the end of 1854, and licenses and returns begin on 1 January 1855.

A town record of the marriage itself is much older than the license. From at least 1821 the officiant had to lodge a certificate with the town clerk within thirty days, and the clerk recorded it at full length in a book kept for the purpose¹³. Where the marriage was made by the parties' declaration in open meeting, the clerk of the religious society lodged the certificate instead. That town record, not the license, is the continuous series.

Who could officiate widened slowly. Under the earliest law a magistrate performed the ceremony; ordained ministers gained the authority in 1694¹⁴. By 1821 the list ran to judges of the superior and county courts, justices of the peace, and ordained ministers, and by 1875 it took in licensed clergymen and clergy of any state¹⁵.

Alongside that list sat a separate rule, in force from at least 1821: a marriage performed and solemnized according to the forms and usages of any religious denomination in the state was good and valid¹⁶. This is the provision that carries Quaker and other self-solemnized religious marriages.

Common-law marriage was never recognized

A Connecticut marriage needed a ceremony. Swift put the rule in three parts as early as 1795. The parties had to be able to contract. They had to make a contract in fact. And the contract had to be "executed and published according to the forms and ceremonies required by law"¹⁷.

The date that matters is 1820. Before it, the statute named who could officiate but set no penalty for a ceremony performed by anyone else and did not declare such a marriage void. Whether those marriages were good was genuinely doubtful, and the better view was that they were. An act of 1820 settled it by providing that all marriages attempted to be celebrated by any other person shall be void, and that clause stayed in the statute book through 1950¹⁸.

That clause is what forecloses common-law marriage. In 1942 the Supreme Court of Errors held that it carries the necessary implication that no valid marriage is created where there is no celebration at all, but merely an exchange of promises or a couple living together as though married. The court put it in six words: "Our law does not recognize common-law marriages"¹⁹.

So a couple who only lived together remained single in the eyes of Connecticut law, however long the household lasted and however the neighbors described them. Living together was evidence that a marriage had happened, and often evidence enough, but it was never a marriage in itself¹⁹. Their children were born out of wedlock and inherited on that footing — unless the parents afterwards married, which legitimated the children (see Inheritance, below).

The restrictions on marriage

Marriage within the prohibited degrees of kinship — that is, between close relatives — was void. The colonial act used the full Levitical degrees and reached into the family's property: the children of such a marriage were "for ever disabled to inherit by descent, or by being generally named in any deed or will, by father or mother"²⁰. By the modern codes the list had narrowed to a man's mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, aunt, niece, stepmother, and stepdaughter, and the matching list for a woman²¹. A man was free to marry his deceased wife's sister, and a woman her deceased husband's brother; the wider English prohibitions, drawn from the church courts, were never received here²².

A bigamous marriage was void, unless the earlier spouse had been absent and unheard of for seven years²³.

From 1895 it was a crime, punishable by imprisonment for not less than three years, for "epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded" persons to marry or to live together as husband and wife where the woman was under 45, and a crime to aid such a marriage²⁴. Couples already lawfully married on or before 31 July 1895 were expressly left alone, so that is the date to test a marriage against. The statute punished the parties and left the marriage standing. The Supreme Court of Errors upheld the act and held that a marriage made in breach of it was still a valid marriage; the deceived spouse's remedy was a divorce for fraudulent contract, not a decree that the marriage had never existed²⁵. A couple in this position stayed married and their children were legitimate.

Race was never one of the restrictions. Connecticut never had a law prohibiting interracial marriage, in the colony or in the state, and no Connecticut marriage was ever void on that ground²⁶.

Enslaved people and people of color

The impediments to a Connecticut marriage were the four above — kindred, an existing marriage, want of the age of consent, and, from 1895, health — and they applied to all persons alike, whatever their race²⁶. Black, mixed-race, and enslaved couples married under the ordinary law, appear in the town and church records, and their children were legitimate. In practice an enslaver's consent controlled an enslaved person's marriage, and enslaved spouses could be sold apart, so a recorded marriage may describe a household that was later broken up.

Property Ownership

Men and land

A man could own land at any age, taking it by inheritance, gift, or devise — a gift of land made by will. The age that mattered was the age at which he could deal in it himself.

At 21 a man held full power over his own land in his own name: to buy it, sell it, mortgage it, and convey it by deed²⁷. A deed he gave before 21 was voidable, so a minor's land was ordinarily sold for him by a guardian under a probate order. Marriage changed nothing for him: a married man bought, sold, and devised his own land in his own right, and his deed carried his signature alone.

Women and land: the divide of 20 April 1877

Until 1877 a married woman lived under coverture, the common-law rule that merged a wife's legal identity into her husband's. A single or widowed woman — a feme sole, "woman alone" — could own, buy, sell, sue, and be sued freely.

A married woman — a feme covert, "covered woman" — could not. Swift states the rule plainly: her husband had absolute power to dispose of her personal property, while of her land he could dispose only of the use during his life, and then only unless she joined in the conveyance²⁸. He took the rents and profits of her land; her goods became his.

The Married Women's Act of 1877 ended coverture for marriages contracted after it took effect²⁹. Neither husband nor wife acquired any right in the property of the other by force of the marriage; the wife's separate earnings were her own; and she could contract with other people and convey her real and personal estate as if she were unmarried.

The act took effect on 20 April 1877, four weeks after the legislature rose, which was when a Connecticut public act came into force³⁰.

Fifty years later Connecticut was still running two systems side by side: one for couples married on or after 20 April 1877, and one for couples married before it³¹. The couple's marriage date decides which rules apply, so a widow dying in 1935 who married in 1870 was still under the old law. The courts presumed a marriage was after 20 April 1877 unless it was proved earlier, so the burden fell on whoever relied on the older law³².

A couple married before 1877 could opt into the new law by a written contract giving up their rights under the old one, recorded both in the probate court of the district and in the town clerk's office³³. Both copies survive as records, and such a contract explains an otherwise baffling estate settlement.

The road to 1877 ran through a series of partial acts, each of which changes what you should expect to find:

Note the sequence: a Connecticut married woman could write a will disposing of all her property from 1809, sixty-eight years before she could freely sell it.

Children and land

A child could own land at any age. Conveying it went through the probate court, and the deed was executed by a guardian.

On the application of a parent or guardian, the probate court could order a minor's real estate sold and empower a suitable person to convey it. That person first gave a bond to the State, with a surety — a second person who promised to pay if he failed in the trust. The bond bound him to reinvest the money in other land for the minor, spend it on the child's "nurture, education, or advancement in marriage," or invest it as trust funds³⁹. Every such application had to be advertised in a newspaper near the land for three weeks running before the court would order the sale⁴⁰. A single sale of a child's land therefore leaves an application, a hearing, an order, a bond, a newspaper notice, and a deed signed by someone other than the owner. Where a Connecticut deed conveys a child's land, the probate file holds the family.

When a wife signed a deed

Dower — a widow's right to the use of part of her late husband's land for life — attached in Connecticut only to the land he owned at the moment of his death. The colonial act gave her a third of the "Houses, and Lands which he stood Possessed of in his own Right at the Time of his Decease"⁴¹. That language survives almost word for word into the 1930 code⁴². The Revision of 1821 added one thing: a provision made for her before the marriage, by way of jointure, barred her dower⁴³.

The 1821 revisers explained the policy. A claim on land the husband had merely held during the marriage restrains the free transfer of property. So, they wrote, "it was a valuable improvement of the law to confine the dower of the widow to the lands of which the husband died possessed"⁴⁴.

The consequence for the records is immediate. Land a husband sold during his life passed to the buyer free of any dower claim, so a Connecticut deed of the husband's own land, signed by him alone, is the normal form.

A wife's name appears on a Connecticut deed in three situations, and each is informative:

• The land was hers. Before 20 April 1877 a married woman's own real estate was conveyed by a deed she executed jointly with her husband, acknowledged and recorded⁴⁵. A joint deed by husband and wife before 1877 usually means the land came to her, by inheritance, gift, or her own purchase, and that is a lead worth following.
• Her personal property held in trust was involved. The 1849 act required her to join in her husband's written conveyance of it⁴⁶.
• After 20 April 1877 she conveyed her own property alone, in her own name.

Deed formalities and witnesses

A Connecticut conveyance had to be in writing, signed by the grantor with his own hand or mark, attested by two witnesses, acknowledged before a justice of the peace or judge, and recorded in full in the land records of the town where the land lies⁴⁷. Recording is what makes the deed good against the world; between the grantor and his heirs it stands unrecorded.

The statute fixed the number of witnesses at two and said nothing about their age⁴⁸. Who could serve was therefore left to the common-law test of competency: a witness of any age would do, provided he understood the obligation of an oath and could give a clear account of what he saw⁴⁹. In practice witnesses were adults, and very often kin or neighbors of the grantor, which makes the two names at the bottom of a deed worth harvesting.

Enslaved people, free people of color, Native people, and aliens

Enslaved people were themselves listed as property in estate inventories, appraised alongside livestock and furniture. A person of color's birth date decides whether they appear in the records as property or as a person, and both of the emancipating acts run from the day after the date they name:

Manumission ran on a certificate that had to be recorded. Under the act of 1784 the town selectmen inquired into the person's circumstances and certified that freedom was to their real advantage and that they could support themselves⁵². An act of May 1792 required instead an examination by the civil authority and selectmen, and the recording of the letter of emancipation in the town where the enslaver lived⁵³. Either way the town record names the person freed.

In 1848 slavery ended outright: no person was thereafter to be held in slavery in the state⁵⁴. The same act made former enslavers liable for the support of those who fell into want⁵⁵, which leaves selectmen's records naming formerly enslaved people and the people who had held them.

Free people of color held land on the same terms as anyone else; they bought, held, and devised it, and appear in the land records accordingly. Connecticut's disabilities on free people of color were political rather than proprietary: the conveyancing title restricted aliens, not people of color, and it was the elector clause of the 1818 constitution, not the land law, that drew the color line⁵⁶.

Native land passed only with the General Assembly's approval. By an act of May 1717 all land in the colony was held of the Crown. A purchase from a Native seller gave title only where the Assembly allowed it, either before or after the sale. Only an approved conveyance of "Native Right" could be given in evidence or pleaded in court⁵⁷. Where you have a deed from a Native seller, the operative document is the Assembly's act or resolve.

Tribal land was administered by overseers rather than held individually. The Superior Court appointed an overseer for each tribe each year, who had the care and management of the tribe's lands and money and settled an account with the court annually⁵⁸. Those accounts report the value of the lands and the number and condition of the people.

An alien held land in Connecticut only on a special license from the legislature into the 1800s⁵⁹, so a foreign-born ancestor holding land early may have a private act in the session laws. By 1930 any resident alien could purchase, hold, inherit, and pass on real estate as fully as a native-born citizen⁶⁰.

Inheritance

A person who died without a will died intestate, and a statute divided the estate.

An intestate estate before 1877

Real estate and personal estate alike were divided among all the children. The eldest son took a double portion — two shares where each other child took one — but only where no elder son had left children of his own; where an elder son had died leaving issue — descendants — those grandchildren took his double share instead. The same act directed that the sons take their shares in the land so far as the land would stretch, and that where there were no sons the daughters inherited as coparceners, meaning co-heirs holding together⁶¹. A daughter in a family with brothers might therefore be paid out in money and goods and never appear in the land records, while her brothers do.

The double portion ended in October 1792⁶². A saving clause preserved the old rule for anyone who had died before that session rose, so the date of death is the test: an intestate who died in 1791 has an eldest son with a double share; one who died in 1793 has children with equal shares.

The widow's share had two parts, and they worked differently⁶³:

• She owned her share of the personal estate outright — one-third where there were children, one-half where there were none.
• She held only a life interest in the land. She took dower: the use of one-third of the land her husband died possessed of, for her lifetime. The land itself descended to the heirs at his death, subject to her thirds, and came to them free and clear when she died.

Dower was set out by three freeholders — men who owned land outright — appointed by the probate court on the heirs' application within sixty days⁶⁴. Their return, once the court accepted it, describes the widow's thirds in detail, often room by room and field by field. She had to keep the buildings, fences, and lands in repair⁶⁵.

Where a husband's will gave her something in lieu of dower, she had a choice. She took dower by giving the probate court written notice declining the gift, within two months after the deadline for presenting claims against the estate; if she said nothing, the gift stood and dower was barred⁶⁶. Her notice, or its absence, is in the probate file.

Where there were no children, the residue — what was left after the widow's share and the debts — went down a fixed order⁶⁷:

• First, the brothers and sisters of the whole blood, and anyone standing in their place.
• Then the parents.
• Then half-blood brothers and sisters.
• Then the next of kin.

That order was rearranged later, so check the rule for the year of death.

Curtesy was the husband's version of dower: a widower kept the use of his late wife's land for the rest of his life, provided a child had been born alive of the marriage. Connecticut kept it as a common-law right for marriages before 20 April 1877⁶⁸.

An intestate estate from 20 April 1877

For marriages within the 1877 act, dower and curtesy gave way to a single statutory share that fell the same way for husband and wife⁶⁹:

• The survivor takes the use for life of one-third in value of everything the deceased spouse owned at death, real and personal, after debts. The third is set out by distributors — men appointed by the probate court to divide an estate and report back — and may be taken in land, in goods and money, or both.
• Where there is no will, the survivor takes that third outright rather than for life. This changes who owned the land afterwards.
• A will is subject to the share. A gift to the survivor is presumed to be in place of it unless the will says otherwise; the survivor then elects in writing, lodged with the probate court within two months after the claims deadline. On silence, the will stands.
• The share is barred by a written contract made before or after the marriage, and by abandonment without good cause continuing to the other's death⁷⁰.
• Where there were no children, the survivor took one-half outright under the 1877 act; by 1930 the survivor took $2,000 plus half the remainder, and where no parent survived either, the whole estate.

The rest went in equal shares to the children and to the representatives of any who had died, with lifetime advancements — gifts already made to a child — counted back in so that each child's total came out even⁷¹. With no children, the estate went to the parents, then to whole-blood brothers and sisters, then to half-blood, then to the next of kin; representation among collaterals — relatives who are not ancestors or descendants — stopped with the children of brothers and sisters⁷².

Minors, guardians, and the age of choice

A minor's inheritance went to a guardian, under probate court supervision and under bond.

The age at which a minor could name his own guardian was 14 for a boy and 12 for a girl, from the colonial act on the age, ability, and capacity of persons through the General Statutes of 1875⁷³. The probate revision of 1885 set it at 14 for both⁷⁴. Guardianship ended at 21.

Below the age of choice the probate court appointed. Above it, the minor chose and the court approved; where the minor made no choice, or chose someone the court disapproved, the court appointed⁷⁵. A guardianship record in which the child chooses is therefore evidence the child had reached that age, which brackets a birth year.

A guardian was appointed in these circumstances, each of which throws off a probate file:

• The minor had no father, mother, guardian, or master⁷⁵.
• The minor came into property from a source other than his father, his father being alive and well⁷⁶. This is the one people miss. A legacy from a grandparent, an uncle, or a mother's family triggers a guardianship of the estate, and the guardian is often someone other than the father. A guardian for a child whose father is living tells you the child inherited from elsewhere.
• The parents were unfit⁷⁷.
• The father had left the state and neglected support for two years; the mother or another person could then be appointed⁷⁸.
• A minor living outside Connecticut owned property in it⁷⁹.

A parent could also name a guardian by will — all persons except married women could do so⁸⁰, another window onto coverture.

The guardian's bond is the record that dates a birth. The probate court took a bond from every guardian, with a surety where the minor had an estate, binding him to discharge the trust faithfully and to account to the minor on reaching full age⁸¹. The final settlement is therefore filed when the minor turns 21, which brackets the minor's birth year within a few months.

Children born outside marriage

A child born out of wedlock could inherit in Connecticut, by either of two routes.

The first was from the mother. The courts treated such a child as the mother's heir, able to inherit her estate; the rule comes from decided cases rather than from a statute⁸².

The second, and the one that reaches furthest into a family's records, was legitimation by the parents' later marriage. An act of 1876 provided that where the parents of a child born before marriage afterwards married each other and recognized the child as their own, the child became legitimate and inherited equally with the other children. The requirement that the parents recognize the child was dropped between 1897 and the Revision of 1902, after which the section read simply that children born before marriage whose parents afterwards intermarry are legitimate and inherit equally with other children⁸³. The courts held the section legitimated such children for every purpose, not merely for inheritance⁸⁴. A single marriage can therefore turn a child born years earlier into a legitimate heir, so when an inheritance runs to a child whose birth predates the parents' marriage, the marriage is the record to look for.

One group of children was disqualified entirely. A child born of a marriage within the prohibited degrees of kinship was for ever disabled to inherit by descent, or by being generally named in any deed or will, by father or mother²⁰.

Wills, executors, and witnesses

The age to make a will depended on what was being given away. The Code of 1650 set a single age of 21 for wills of goods and estates⁸⁵. By the colonial revisions the rule had taken the two-age form it kept for the next century and a half. One short act carries both figures. Persons of 21 could dispose of their lands by will, and persons of 17 could dispose of their personal estate by will⁸⁶.

The 1870 act says it in one line: all persons of the age of eighteen years, and of sound mind, may dispose of all their estate, both real and personal, by will⁸⁷. So a will made by a 19-year-old in 1850 is good as to his goods and void as to his land; a will made by a 19-year-old in 1875 is good as to both.

Every valid Connecticut will was in writing, signed by the testator — the person making the will — and attested by three witnesses, each signing in his presence⁸⁸. Writing was required in every case, so a spoken will was no will at all, however urgent the circumstances; the only classes the courts left open were a mariner at sea and a soldier in actual service.

The three-witness rule reached wills of land from the colonial period⁸⁹, and was extended to all wills, of land and goods alike, on 27 June 1848⁹⁰. A Connecticut will made before that date disposing only of movable property can therefore be perfectly valid with fewer than three witnesses.

A witness to a will could be of any age; the test was competency. What the statute settled was the effect of a gift to a witness. A gift of land or goods to a witness who signed — and, from 1849, to that witness's husband or wife — is void. There are two exceptions: the gift stands if the will is properly witnessed without that signature, and it stands if the witness is one of the testator's heirs at law. The witness stays competent; the gift fails⁹¹. Where one of the three witnesses was left something, the gift failed — and the naming tells you the drafter thought that person close enough to the family to remember.

An executor had to be of full age, because he had to be capable of giving a probate bond. Where the person named in a will refused or was incapable of accepting the trust, the probate court committed administration with the will annexed to the surviving spouse, the next of kin, or any suitable person⁹². So where a minor was named executor, an adult did the work, and the letters of administration name whoever actually settled the estate.

Taxation

The town list

Everything turns on the annual town list, later called the grand list. It names every taxable person in the town, every year, which makes it the closest thing Connecticut has to an annual census.

How the list was taken changed. Under the colonial act, inhabitants gave in their own lists of taxable persons and property on 20 August each year. The listers inspected them and added fourfold for anything a person had left out. They delivered the completed list of "the Polls, and Rateable Estate" to the town clerk in January⁹³. By 1821 the town met in October and chose up to five assessors, lists were due on 20 October, the penalty for failing to list had become threefold, and a separate board of relief heard appeals in January and could raise or lower any person's list⁹⁴.

Four kinds of tax fell on individuals:

• The poll, or head, tax — a fixed sum, or a fixed valuation entered in the list, charged on a person simply for being one. A capitation tax is the same thing under a Latin name, and a "poll" is the taxable person.
• The property tax on rateable estate — the taxable property entered in the list — which reached land, livestock, ships, money at interest, and fisheries.
• A faculty or occupation tax on attorneys, physicians, surgeons, traders, mechanics, taverners, brokers, and distillers, assessed at the assessors' discretion according to the value and income of the business⁹⁵. An ancestor's occupation may therefore appear on a tax list.
• A succession, or inheritance, tax on property passing at death, in force in the twentieth century⁹⁶. It generated a return in the probate file, usually listing every beneficiary and their relationship to the deceased.

Who was a poll, and at what age

Three things follow⁹⁷. A boy first appears on the pre-1821 list at 16, at half value from 16 to 21, so his first entry brackets his sixteenth birthday and his move to the full rate brackets his twenty-first. From 1821 he first appears at 21. And the 1821 poll ran to white males, while by 1875 the statute reads simply "males" and by 1918 "each person" — so women aged 21 to 60 were taxed by name in the twentieth century, appearing on lists that had carried only men.

Exemptions, and why a man leaves the list

A man could leave the poll list while alive and still resident. The colonial exemptions covered the Governor, Deputy Governor, Assistants, ministers of the gospel, schoolmasters, and the president, tutors, and students of Yale⁹⁸. The Revision of 1821 exempted ministers, college and academy instructors and students, and militia officers and privates liable to do duty, on a certificate from the commanding officer that they were equipped, uniformed, and had served that year. The same section let the assessors and board of relief abate the polls of infirm, sick, and disabled persons, up to one-tenth of the town's taxable polls⁹⁹.

The 1875 list is longer still. It covers students in colleges and incorporated academies, and active members of fire engine, hook and ladder, and hose companies. It also covers fire engineers and wardens with six years' service, uniformed field and staff officers, and men who had served five years in the active militia. Last, it covers men honorably discharged from the army or navy of the United States after at least a year in the rebellion¹⁰⁰.

So when a young man vanishes from the poll list in his twenties, check his age and the year against the exempt classes: militia service, a fire company, Civil War service, or an infirmity abatement is usually the explanation.

Courts

Jury service

The age was 21 for most of the period, and it came from the same colonial act that fixed majority: a person of 21 could give his vote, verdict, or sentence in any matter or cause². In 1895 it rose to 25.

The other qualifications changed sharply, and they tell you what kind of man sat on the jury that heard your ancestor's case:

The land requirement ended in 1836 and 1837¹⁰⁵. From then on a juror simply had to be one of the town's judicious electors¹⁰³. Where your ancestor sat on a colonial or early-nineteenth-century Connecticut jury, he owned land, and the tax list will show it.

The act of 1895 that raised the age also set the character test that ran through 1950¹⁰⁴, and it changed how the list was made. Two electors in each county, appointed by the judges of the superior court, sat as jury commissioners; they examined the list of jurors from each town and erased half the names, and only the names left standing served¹⁰⁶. From 1895, then, a name on a town's nomination list did not mean the man served.

Before 1837 the freehold applied to the regular panel and to talesmen alike — bystanders summoned on the spot to fill out a short jury. After the freehold went, both were drawn from the same pool of electors¹⁰⁷.

Women and Black men on the jury

Jury service was limited to men until 1937. The statute in force through the 1930s provided that jurors be electors, esteemed in their community as men of good character. Women became eligible in 1937, when the General Assembly passed "An Act Concerning Jury Service for Women"¹⁰⁸.

Jurors had to be electors, and from 1818 the state constitution defined an elector as a white male citizen¹⁰⁹. What removed that bar was federal, not state. Connecticut ratified the Fifteenth Amendment in May 1869, and on its adoption in 1870 no state could deny the vote on account of race, so Black men in Connecticut became electors — and so eligible jurors — from 1870¹¹⁰. The state caught its own text up six years later: Amendment Article 23, adopted in 1876, struck the word "white" out of the elector clause¹¹¹.

Eligibility and service are not the same thing, though. The jury commissioners' power to erase half of every town's list, from 1895, gave ample room to keep Black men off the panels.

Criminal responsibility

The common law fixed criminal responsibility, and the statutes left it there. A child under 7 could not commit a crime at all. Between 7 and 14 the law presumed incapacity, and the prosecution had to overcome that presumption by proving the child knew right from wrong. From 14 the child bore full responsibility and was tried as an adult¹¹².

In 1921 that changed. Connecticut's first juvenile courts act defined a child as any person under sixteen and gave the juvenile court the case¹¹³. From then on a child under 16 was dealt with as a delinquent child rather than convicted, while a 16-year-old was tried as an adult. After 1921 the practical minimum age for a criminal conviction is therefore 16, and the record you want sits in the juvenile court files, where it is likely to be closed.

Witnesses

A witness of any age could testify, if he or she understood the obligation of an oath and could give a clear account of what they had seen. Swift is explicit that no precise age was fixed at which children might testify, and that the question turned on the discretion and capacity of the particular child⁴⁹. The judge decided it witness by witness, on the spot, and children did testify. A very young child's uncorroborated word carried little weight, but that went to weight rather than to competency.

Two statutes reshaped who could take the stand, and both explain what you will find in the files. From 1830 a person who believed in a Supreme Being was competent whatever his religious opinions. From 1848 no person was disqualified by reason of an interest in the case, as a party or otherwise, or by a criminal conviction; interest and conviction went to credibility instead¹¹⁴. Before 1848 the interest rule kept the parties themselves off the stand, which is why a Connecticut lawsuit file from the 1830s is full of depositions from neighbors and silent from the two people who were actually arguing.

Women were competent witnesses throughout the period, and the grounds of disqualification the statutes named applied to all persons alike, whatever their race or sex. What reached a married woman's testimony before 1848 was the interest rule, which caught any party or interested person, together with the common-law rules about spouses. In criminal cases the accused could testify at his own option. A husband or wife of the accused was competent, and could choose whether to testify for or against the other. The one exception was a wife who had suffered personal violence from her husband: she could be compelled¹¹⁵.

Sources & Where to Verify

Constitutions

• Connecticut. Constitution of 1818, with amendments. Art. 6, § 2 sets the elector qualification; amend. art. 8 (1845) replaced the freehold with a residency requirement, and amend. art. 23 (1876) struck the word "white." Connecticut General Assembly. https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/constitutions/1818Constitution.htm (accessed 22 July 2026).

Codes and Compilations

• Acts and Laws of His Majesties Colony of Connecticut in New-England: Printed in 1702 and Now First Reissued. [Hartford]: [The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company], 1901. The colony's first printed law book, and the earliest in which the two will ages appear in the form they kept until 1870. The 1901 facsimile is the copy to work from, being a clean reset of the 1702 text. Digital images. HathiTrust. https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/010471484. The original printing is also online as digital images, Internet Archive, https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-his-ma_1702 (accessed 6 August 2026).
• Acts and Laws of His Majesty's English Colony of Connecticut in New-England in America. New London: Printed and sold by Timothy Green, printer to the Governour and Company, 1750. The single most useful colonial volume: the ages of majority, will-making, and guardian-choosing in one act at pp. 2–3, and the acts on marriage, dower, intestate estates, listers, jurors, will witnesses, and Native land. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-his-maj_1750_0 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut in America. New London: Printed by T. Green, printer to the Governor and Company of the State of Connecticut, 1784. The two-tier poll, the manumission-certificate procedure, and the gradual abolition act. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/actsandlawsstat00lawgoog (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut, in America. Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1796. Carries the 1792 intestacy amendment and the servants-and-slaves act at p. 399. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-the-sta_1796 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Code of 1650. Hartford: S. Andrus, 1830. The earliest Connecticut compilation, reprinted with the Fundamental Orders. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/codeof165000conn (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1902. Hartford: Hartford Press, The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, 1915. In force 1 July 1902. Carries a side note to each section giving the statute's origin and the dates of its amendments, which makes it the fastest way to date a change. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. Vol. 1, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/31860; vol. 2, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/2153 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1930. Orange and New Haven, Conn.: Press of the Wilson H. Lee Company, [1930]. In force 1 September 1930, and the code governing the last decades covered here. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. §§ 1–1966, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/8020; §§ 1967–4150, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/8683; §§ 4151–6573, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/9389 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The General Statutes of Connecticut: Revision of 1949. Hartford, Conn.: The Bond Press, Inc., [1949]. In force 15 January 1949; the last code touching this period. Digitized in six parts, two to each volume, so a section number must be matched to the right part. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. Vol. 1 pt. 1, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/16918; vol. 1 pt. 2, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/18530; vol. 2 pt. 1, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/19135; vol. 2 pt. 2, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/19700; vol. 3 pt. 1, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/20163; vol. 3 pt. 2, https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/20640 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut. New Haven: John H. Benham, Printer, 1866. The last code to carry the 21/17 will ages. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/33677 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1875. Carries marginal derivation years beside every section. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/generalstatutes00conngoog (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: S. G. Goodrich, and Huntington & Hopkins, 1821. With the revisers' historical notes to each title, which explain why a rule changed. Wills and intestate estates are in Title 32, "Estates"; dower in Title 26; marriage in Title 63; minors' capacity to contract in Title 64; conveyances and aliens in Title 56, "Lands"; taxation in Title 100. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicstatutelaw00conniala (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: John B. Eldredge, Printer, 1835. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicstatutela01conngoog (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Revised Statutes of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: Case, Tiffany and Company, 1849. Wills at 21/17; marriage by publication; jurors as electors; "An Act to Prevent Slavery" (Title LI). Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/42499 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Statutes of the State of Connecticut. New Haven: T. J. Stafford, Printer, 1854. The marriage-license system as first compiled. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/41720 (accessed 22 July 2026).

Session Laws and Public Records

Each session's acts were printed separately, with their own title page and often a different printer — Hartford and New Haven firms alternate, sometimes from one year to the next — so the imprints below differ from volume to volume.

• Acts and Laws, Made and Passed by the General Court or Assembly of the State of Connecticut … October 1792. Hartford: Elisha Babcock, 1792. The act repealing the eldest son's double portion. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-made-and-_connecticut_1792_0 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut, Passed at the May and December Sessions, 1836, and the May Session of the General Assembly, 1837. Hartford: Printed by John L. Boswell, 1837. Ch. VI of 1836 and ch. X of 1837, ending the freehold qualification for jurors. Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1836–1850. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/76512 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts, Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, May Session, 1852. New Haven: Osborn and Baldwin, State Printers, 1852. Ch. LXIII, creating the town registrar. Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1851–1859. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/77547 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts, Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, May Session, 1854. New Haven: Babcock & Wildman, State Printers, 1854. Ch. LXXVIII, the marriage-license act. Bound in the same run as the preceding entry. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/77547 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, 1866 to 1871 Inclusive. Hartford: Press of Case, Lockwood & Brainard, 1871. A collective edition with its own title page, carrying Public Acts 1870, ch. 62, the single will age of 18. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79242 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1876. Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1876. Ch. 14, legitimation by the subsequent marriage of the parents. Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1875–1880. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79967 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1877. Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1877. Ch. 114, the Married Women's Act. Bound in the same run as the preceding entry. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79967 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1885. Hartford, Conn.: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, Printers, 1885. Ch. 110, § 69, the age for choosing a guardian. Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1881–1887. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/81197 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1895. Hartford, Conn.: Press of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, 1895. Ch. 63 (marriage licenses and parental consent), ch. 219 (jurors: the age of 25, the character test, and the county jury commissioners), and ch. 325 (the marriage crime approved 4 July 1895). Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1889–1895. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/82060 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1921. Hartford, Conn.: Published by the State, 1921. Ch. 260, first setting sixteen as a marriage threshold, and ch. 336, the juvenile courts act. Bound in the run cataloged as Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1918–1921. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/87515 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• 1937 Supplement to the General Statutes of the State of Connecticut, January Session, 1937, Special Session, 1936. Hartford, Conn.: Published by the State, 1937. The 1937 acts, including ch. 99 admitting women to juries, were issued in this form rather than in the public-acts series; the volume prints a table correlating each supplement section to its chapter of the public acts. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/22387 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from August, 1689, to May, 1706. Vol. 4. Edited by Charles J. Hoadly. Hartford: Press of Case, Lockwood and Brainard, 1868. The 1694 act giving ordained ministers authority to marry. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofc4168conn (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Van Dusen, Albert E., comp. The Public Records of the State of Connecticut, from May 1797 through October 1799. Vol. 9. Hartford: Connecticut State Library, published by the State, 1953. The May 1797 emancipation act, at p. 39. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofs09hoad (accessed 22 July 2026).

Court Cases

• Eaton v. Eaton. 88 Conn. 269, 91 A. 191 (1914). A child born out of wedlock as the mother's heir.
• Fitch v. Brainerd. 2 Day 163 (Conn. 1805). Held a married woman's devise of land invalid; reversed by the act of 1809.
• Goshen v. Stonington. 4 Conn. 209 (1822). A marriage celebrated in breach of the statutory formalities is still a valid marriage.
• Gould v. Gould. 78 Conn. 242, 61 A. 604 (1905). Upheld the act of 1895 and held a marriage made in breach of it valid. Opinion. CourtListener. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3322929/gould-v-gould/ (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Heath v. White. 5 Conn. 228 (1824). A child born out of wedlock as the mother's heir.
• Manning v. Manning. 16 Conn. Supp. 461 (1950). Want of parental consent leaves a marriage valid.
• Markel v. DiFrancesco. 93 Conn. 355, 105 A. 703 (1919). The presumption that a marriage is after 20 April 1877.
• Moore v. Saxton. 90 Conn. 164, 96 A. 156 (1916). Legitimation by the parents' later marriage.
• State ex rel. Felson v. Allen. 129 Conn. 427, 29 A.2d 306 (1942). The leading authority that Connecticut does not recognize common-law marriage, and the fullest account of the law before and after the act of 1820. Opinion. CourtListener. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3322981/state-ex-rel-felson-v-allen/ (accessed 6 August 2026).
• Stone's Appeal from Probate. 74 Conn. 301, 50 A. 734 (1901). A spoken will is no will at all.
• Town of Simsbury v. Towns of East Granby & West Hartford. 69 Conn. 302, 37 A. 678 (1897). The legitimation section operates for every purpose, not merely for inheritance.
• Towns of Winchester & Colebrook v. Hinsdale. 12 Conn. 88 (1837). A spouse's sibling is outside the prohibited degrees.

Secondary and Reference Works

Swift and Howe are cited in the notes below. The rest are finding aids and background reading, listed because they are the fastest way to reach the records this guide describes.

• Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries. Research guides on marriage validity and on cohabitation. https://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/notebooks/pathfinders/marriageinct/marriage.pdf and https://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/Notebooks/Pathfinders/Cohabitation.pdf (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Connecticut State Library. "Connecticut Statutes 1650–1958." A list of every Connecticut revision and compilation, with links. https://libguides.ctstatelibrary.org/law/statutes/1650-1958 (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Connecticut State Library. "Probate Court Records." The research guide relied on for what a Connecticut probate file contains and where it was kept: wills, petitions for probate or administration, bonds, inventories and accounts, receipts from heirs and creditors, and petitions for dower, support, distribution, or division, together with guardianships and conservatorships. https://libguides.ctstatelibrary.org/hg/probate (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Connecticut State Library. "Vital Records for Connecticut." Relied on for the custody and content of town marriage records. https://libguides.ctstatelibrary.org/townguides (accessed 6 August 2026).
• "Elizabeth W. Coe Demands the Right of Jury Service." ConnecticutHistory.org. The campaign behind the 1937 act admitting women to Connecticut juries. https://connecticuthistory.org/elizabeth-w-coe-demands-the-right-of-jury-service/ (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Howe, Edward T. "The Connecticut Poll Tax." ConnecticutHistory.org. The tax's four forms and its repeal in 1947. https://connecticuthistory.org/the-connecticut-poll-tax/ (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Swift, Zephaniah. A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut. Windham: Printed by John Byrne, for the author, 1795–96. 2 vols. The first commentary on Connecticut law, and the authority for most of what this guide says about the common law. The passages relied on are the reception of English law (1:40–41), marriage and the ages of consent (1:185–86), a husband's power over his wife's property (1:202), the witnesses to a deed (1:306), who could be a witness (2:237–38), and the age of criminal capacity (2:262–63). Digital images. Internet Archive. Vol. 1, https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif; vol. 2, https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst02swif (accessed 22 July 2026).
• Buchanan, Sara Louise. The Legal Status of Women in the United States of America: January 1, 1948, Report for Connecticut. Bulletin 157-6, rev. ed. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau, 1949. A section-by-section statement of Connecticut law on a married woman’s contracts, property, and separate earnings as it stood at the close of this period; an addendum brings it to 1 January 1953. Digital images. HathiTrust. https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011418490 (accessed 6 August 2026).

Citations

1. Zephaniah Swift, A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut, 2 vols. (Windham: John Byrne, 1795–96), 1:40–41; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif : accessed 22 July 2026). Swift divides Connecticut law into common law and statute law, and traces the common law to two sources, the common law of England and the decisions of Connecticut's own courts: because the settlers acknowledged allegiance to the British government "it was natural for them to admit and establish their laws, so far as it was consistent with the difference of situation" ↩
2. Acts and Laws of His Majesty's English Colony of Connecticut in New-England in America (New London: Timothy Green, 1750), "An Act relating to the Age, Ability, and Capacity of Persons," pp. 2–3; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-his-maj_1750_0 : accessed 22 July 2026). One act carries the age of majority, the two ages for making a will, and the ages for choosing a guardian ↩ ↩
3. The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: S. G. Goodrich, and Huntington & Hopkins, 1821), note to Title 64, "Masters and Servants"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicstatutelaw00conniala : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
4. Swift, System of the Laws, 1:185–86; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif : accessed 22 July 2026). Swift gives the age of consent as fourteen for boys and twelve for girls. The statutory rule that a marriage below those ages was void is the act of 1717, recited in Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. 242, 246 (1905) ↩
5. The act of 1717 is recited in Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. 242, 246 (1905); opinion, CourtListener (https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3322929/gould-v-gould/ : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
6. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for Regulating, and Orderly Celebrating of Marriages," pp. 144–46 ↩
7. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1921 (Hartford, Conn.: Published by the State, 1921), ch. 260, "An Act concerning Marriage Licenses," approved 1 June 1921, amending § 5263 of the general statutes; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/87515 : accessed 22 July 2026). Its predecessor, Public Acts 1895, ch. 63, required a parent's or guardian's written consent for any minor but set no age. The later form of the rule is The General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1930 (Orange and New Haven, Conn.: Press of the Wilson H. Lee Company, [1930]), § 5149; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/9389 : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
8. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63, "Marriage," § 3 and note ↩
9. General Statutes (1930), § 5149; earlier, The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, § 2; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/generalstatutes00conngoog : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
10. Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 63 ↩
11. Goshen v. Stonington, 4 Conn. 209 (1822); Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. at 247; Manning v. Manning, 16 Conn. Supp. 461 (1950), holding that a want of parental consent leaves a Connecticut marriage valid ↩
12. Public Acts, Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, May Session, 1854 (New Haven: Babcock & Wildman, State Printers, 1854), ch. LXXVIII, §§ 5–7, 10–11; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/77547 : accessed 22 July 2026). For the publication rule it replaced, The Revised Statutes of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: Case, Tiffany and Company, 1849), Title VII, ch. 1, § 1; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/42499 : accessed 22 July 2026); carried forward as General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, §§ 2–4, and General Statutes (1930), § 5149 ↩
13. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63, §§ 4–5, requiring the certificate within thirty days, the recording at full length, and a $15 penalty for neglect ↩
14. The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from August, 1689, to May, 1706, vol. 4, ed. Charles J. Hoadly (Hartford: Press of Case, Lockwood and Brainard, 1868), 136; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofc4168conn : accessed 22 July 2026). The 1821 revisers date the magistrate-only rule to a law of 1640 and the extension to ordained ministers to 1694; Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 63 ↩
15. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63, § 2; General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, § 5 ↩
16. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63, § 2, proviso; General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, § 5. The provision is already settled law in 1821 and is not, as is sometimes said, an innovation of the 1875 code ↩
17. Swift, System of the Laws, 1:186; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif : accessed 22 July 2026). Swift sets out three requirements for a Connecticut marriage: that the parties be of ability and capacity to contract, that they make a contract in fact, and that "the contract must be executed and published according to the forms and ceremonies required by law." He notes at 1:185 that in Connecticut marriage is treated "merely in a civil light." Writing again in 1822 he put it more shortly still — "The contract must be solemnized according to the ceremonies prescribed by law" — as quoted in State ex rel. Felson v. Allen, 129 Conn. 427, 432, 29 A.2d 306 (1942) ↩
18. Public Acts 1820, ch. 13, § 2, adding that "all marriages attempted to be celebrated by any other persons, shall be void"; printed in Public Statute Laws (1821), p. 316, with the revisers’ note explaining that under the former statute "a question having been frequently agitated, whether a marriage by any other person was valid, it was thought best to remove all doubt, by declaring it to be void." The clause survives as General Statutes (1930), § 5153. For the state of the law before 1820, and for Tapping Reeve’s view in 1816 that such a marriage was not void, see State ex rel. Felson v. Allen, 129 Conn. 427, 429–31, 29 A.2d 306 (1942) ↩
19. State ex rel. Felson v. Allen, 129 Conn. 427, 432, 29 A.2d 306 (1942): "Our law does not recognize common-law marriages." The couple had exchanged promises before a man they believed to be a justice of the peace, in Greenwich in 1921, and could not later prove he held the office; the court held the marriage void under the statute and refused to record it. On cohabitation as evidence of a marriage rather than a marriage in itself, the opinion collects Budington v. Munson, 33 Conn. 481, and State v. Schweitzer, 57 Conn. 532, 538. Opinion, CourtListener (https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3322981/state-ex-rel-felson-v-allen/ : accessed 6 August 2026) ↩ ↩
20. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 144–46, § 13 ↩ ↩
21. General Statutes (1930), § 5148 ↩
22. Towns of Winchester & Colebrook v. Hinsdale, 12 Conn. 88, 94 (1837). The point is made in passing, while the court is deciding whether a family connection disqualified a judge from sitting; the rule itself rests on the statutory list of prohibited degrees, which does not include a spouse's sibling ↩
23. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 144–46 ↩
24. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1895 (Hartford, Conn.: Press of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, 1895), ch. 325, approved 4 July 1895, with ch. 350 of the same session; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/82060 : accessed 22 July 2026); carried forward as General Statutes (1930), §§ 6275–6277, and appearing in the Revision of 1902 as §§ 1354–1356, whose side notes give both chapters. The 1902 text preserves the saving clause for anyone lawfully married on or before 31 July 1895 ↩
25. Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. 242 (1905) ↩
26. The marriage titles carry no racial restriction in any period: Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 144–46; Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63; General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1; General Statutes (1930), §§ 5148–5153 ↩ ↩
27. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 2–3 ↩
28. Swift, System of the Laws, 1:202; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif : accessed 22 July 2026). The husband had "an absolute power of disposing of the chattels real, and personal estate of the wife: but of her lands he can only dispose of the use and improvement during his life, without her consent. She may join in conveying or leasing them; and the contract will be valid" ↩
29. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1877 (Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1877), ch. 114, § 1, "An Act in Alteration of the Act concerning Domestic Relations," approved 16 March 1877; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79967 : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
30. General Statutes (1875), Legislative Department, § 20: public acts, unless otherwise directed, take effect at the end of four weeks after the rising of the General Assembly which enacted them ↩
31. General Statutes (1930), §§ 5154–5157 and §§ 5158–5173 ↩
32. Markel v. DiFrancesco, 93 Conn. 355, 358, 105 A. 703 (1919), collected in the annotations to General Statutes (1930), § 5154, which state the rule as a presumption that a marriage is after 20 April 1877 unless proved to be earlier ↩
33. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 5; General Statutes (1930), § 5157 ↩
34. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 32, "Estates," ch. 1, § 1, providing that married women may dispose of their estate, both real and personal, by will, in the same manner as other persons. The decision reversed is Fitch v. Brainerd, 2 Day 163 (Conn. 1805). The 1821 volume has no separate title for wills; the index entry "Wills, who can make" points to p. 199, which is Title 32 ↩
35. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, §§ 3–4 ↩
36. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, § 1 ↩
37. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, §§ 2, 6 ↩
38. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 1 ↩
39. General Statutes (1875), Probate Courts, § 18 ↩
40. General Statutes (1875), Probate Courts, § 23 ↩
41. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act concerning the Dowry of Widows," p. 43 ↩
42. General Statutes (1930), § 5158 ↩
43. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, "Dower," § 1: dower in one third part of the real estate "of which her husband died possessed, in his own right," to her during her natural life, unless a suitable provision was made for her support before the marriage by way of jointure ↩
44. Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 26 ↩
45. General Statutes (1930), § 5009 ↩
46. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, § 4 ↩
47. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 56, "Lands," §§ 6–8; General Statutes (1930), §§ 5005–5010 ↩
48. Swift, System of the Laws, 1:306; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst01swif : accessed 22 July 2026). Swift recites the statute: every grant, bargain, sale, and mortgage of houses and lands must be in writing, subscribed by the grantor with his own hand or mark, and attested by two witnesses with their own hands or marks. Nothing in the section fixes an age for the witnesses ↩
49. Swift, System of the Laws, 2:237–38; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst02swif : accessed 22 July 2026). All persons of sufficient discretion who may be presumed to have a just sense of the nature of an oath may be witnesses, and "there is no precise age fixed at which infants may testify," the question depending on the discretion and capacity of the particular child, whom the court may examine where the matter is doubtful ↩ ↩
50. Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut in America (New London: T. Green, 1784), servants and slaves act, freeing every child of color born within the State "after the first Day of March, One thousand seven hundred and eighty-four" at the age of twenty-five; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/actsandlawsstat00lawgoog : accessed 22 July 2026); reprinted Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut, in America (Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1796), p. 399, § 13. The statute runs from the day after the date it names ↩
51. "An Act in addition to an Act, entitled, 'An Act concerning Indian Mulatto and Negro Servants and Slaves,'" May 1797, freeing every such child born "after the first day of August, 1797" at twenty-one; Albert E. Van Dusen, comp., The Public Records of the State of Connecticut, from May 1797 through October 1799, vol. 9 (Hartford: Connecticut State Library, 1953), 39; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofs09hoad : accessed 22 July 2026); carried into Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 93, "Slavery," § 1 ↩
52. Acts and Laws (1784), same act ↩
53. Acts and Laws (1796), p. 399, "An Act in addition to, and alteration of an Act, concerning Indian Mulatto, and Negro Servants, and Slaves" [May 1792]; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-the-sta_1796 : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
54. Revised Statutes (1849), Title LI, "An Act to Prevent Slavery," § 1 ↩
55. Revised Statutes (1849), Title LI, § 2 ↩
56. The conveyancing title places no racial restriction on who may take, hold, or pass land; its only status-based restriction is on aliens. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 56, "Lands"; General Statutes (1930), §§ 5005–5010 (conveyances) and §§ 5055–5057 (aliens). The color line in this period runs through the elector clause of the constitution, not the land law; Conn. Const. of 1818, art. 6, § 2 ↩
57. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act concerning Purchasers of Native Rights to Land," p. 110 ↩
58. General Statutes (1930), § 5057 ↩
59. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 56, § 5 ↩
60. General Statutes (1930), §§ 5055–5056 ↩
61. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for the Settlement of Testate and Intestate Estates," pp. 49–53, giving two shares to "the Eldest Son then Surviving, where there is no Issue of the First-Born, or of any other Elder Son," directing that the male heirs take their parts in the real estate so far as the estate will allow, and providing that where there are no sons the daughters inherit as coparceners ↩
62. Acts and Laws, Made and Passed by the General Court or Assembly of the State of Connecticut … October 1792 (Hartford: Elisha Babcock, 1792), "An Act in alteration of An Act, entitled An Act, for the settlement of testate and intestate Estates"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-made-and-_connecticut_1792_0 : accessed 22 July 2026); reprinted in Acts and Laws (1796) ↩
63. Acts and Laws (1750), settlement of estates act, pp. 49–53; Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 32, ch. 1, § 30 (one third of the personal estate to the wife forever, and one third of the lands and houses during life) and § 32 (one moiety of the personal estate where there are no children) ↩
64. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 2 ↩
65. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 3; General Statutes (1930), § 5160 ↩
66. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 4; General Statutes (1930), § 5161 ↩
67. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 32, ch. 1, § 32, which puts the brothers and sisters of the whole blood ahead of the parents — the reverse of the order in force by 1930 ↩
68. General Statutes (1930), § 5158 ↩
69. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 3; carried forward as General Statutes (1930), § 5156 ↩
70. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 4; General Statutes (1930), § 5156 ↩
71. General Statutes (1930), § 4980 ↩
72. General Statutes (1930), § 4982 ↩
73. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 2–3, "And the Age for choosing of Guardians, [shall] be Fourteen Years for Male, and Twelve Years for Female Children"; General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 1, whose marginal note dates the section's last re-enactment to 1797 ↩
74. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1885 (Hartford, Conn.: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, Printers, 1885), ch. 110, § 69, "An Act revising and compiling the Probate Laws"; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/81197 : accessed 22 July 2026); carried into the Revision of 1887 and forward to General Statutes (1930), § 4796 ↩
75. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, §§ 1–2; § 1 governs minors under the age of choice, § 2 those who have reached it ↩ ↩
76. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 4 ↩
77. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 5 ↩
78. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 6 ↩
79. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 7 ↩
80. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 11 ↩
81. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 9 ↩
82. Heath v. White, 5 Conn. 228, 232 (1824); Eaton v. Eaton, 88 Conn. 269, 270 (1914); both collected in the annotations to General Statutes (1930), § 4980 ↩
83. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, in the Year 1876 (Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers, 1876), ch. 14, § 1, approved 8 June 1876; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79967 : accessed 22 July 2026); the recognition requirement is still in the section quoted in 1897 and is gone from the Revision of 1902, § 396, which reads as General Statutes (1930), § 4980 does ↩
84. Town of Simsbury v. Towns of East Granby & West Hartford, 69 Conn. 302, 303, 37 A. 678 (1897), holding that the section legitimates a child born before marriage for all purposes and not merely for inheriting; Moore v. Saxton, 90 Conn. 164, 168 (1916) ↩
85. The Code of 1650 (Hartford: S. Andrus, 1830), "Ability"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/codeof165000conn : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
86. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 2–3: persons of twenty-one may make their wills and all other lawful alienations of their lands, and "all such Persons of the Age of Seventeen Years, shall have Power and Authority to dispose of their Personal Estate, by Will or Testament." The same two ages are carried into Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 32, ch. 1, § 1, and stand unchanged to 1870 ↩
87. Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, 1866 to 1871 Inclusive (Hartford: Press of Case, Lockwood & Brainard, 1871), Public Acts 1870, ch. 62, § 1; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79242 : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
88. General Statutes (1930), § 4876; and Stone's Appeal from Probate, 74 Conn. 301, 304, 50 A. 734 (1901), holding that a spoken will made in this state by a person domiciled here is no will at all, the statute requiring in express terms and without exception that a will be in writing. The opinion ends on p. 304, the page on which an unrelated decision begins, so a search by that page alone returns the wrong case. The wording was not constant: General Statutes (1875), Estates of Deceased and Insolvent Persons, ch. 11, § 2, additionally required the three witnesses to subscribe in the presence of each other, a phrase absent from the 1821, 1902, and 1930 texts ↩
89. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act concerning Witnesses to Wills," p. 113 ↩
90. Revised Statutes (1849), Estates, § 2, expressly saving wills of personal estate "made before the twenty-seventh day of June, 1848"; the same saving clause is printed in General Statutes (1875), Estates of Deceased and Insolvent Persons, ch. 11, § 2 ↩
91. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 32, ch. 1, § 3, for wills executed after 1 January 1808, with the proviso saving a gift to an heir at law; Revised Statutes (1849), Estates, § 3; General Statutes (1875), Estates of Deceased and Insolvent Persons, ch. 11, § 3, which adds the witness's husband or wife; General Statutes (1930), § 4877 ↩
92. General Statutes (1930), § 4885; General Statutes (1875), Estates of Deceased and Insolvent Persons, ch. 11, § 11 ↩
93. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for the Direction of Listers," pp. 135–38 ↩
94. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 100, "Taxes," ch. 1, § 1 ↩
95. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 100, ch. 1, § 4 ↩
96. General Statutes (1930), ch. 77, §§ 1360 ff., its derivation line running back through 1918, ch. 66 ↩
97. Acts and Laws (1750), listers act, p. 137; Acts and Laws (1784), listers act; Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 100, ch. 1, § 2 ("The polls of all white male persons from twenty-one to seventy years of age, shall be set in the list at thirty dollars, each"); General Statutes (1875), Taxation, § 10; General Statutes (1930), § 1244. On the 1947 repeal, see Edward T. Howe, "The Connecticut Poll Tax," ConnecticutHistory.org (https://connecticuthistory.org/the-connecticut-poll-tax/ : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
98. Acts and Laws (1750), p. 137 ↩
99. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 100, ch. 1, § 2 (abatement of the polls of infirm, sick, and disabled persons, not exceeding one tenth of the town's taxable polls) and § 3 (exempt classes) ↩
100. General Statutes (1875), Taxation, § 11; General Statutes (1930), § 1245 ↩
101. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for Providing, and Regulating of Jurors in Civil Actions," pp. 102–03 ↩
102. Public Statute Laws (1821), § 36; The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: J. B. Eldredge, 1835), § 36; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicstatutela01conngoog : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
103. General Statutes (1875), Juries, § 1; the 1875 text reads "judicious electors," the word "able" belonging to the earlier freeholder statutes ↩ ↩
104. Public Acts 1895, ch. 219, § 1, "An Act concerning Jurors": "All jurors shall be electors not less than twenty-five years of age, esteemed in their community as men of good character, approved integrity, sound judgment, and fair education." Carried forward as General Statutes (1930), § 5558, and repealed as to the age by the act of 1963 ↩ ↩
105. The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut, Passed at the May and December Sessions, 1836, and the May Session of the General Assembly, 1837 (Hartford: Printed by John L. Boswell, 1837), Public Acts 1836, ch. VI, approved 2 June 1836, and Public Acts 1837, ch. X, approved 10 June 1837; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/76512 : accessed 22 July 2026) ↩
106. Public Acts 1895, ch. 219, § 3 ↩
107. Public Statute Laws (1821), § 37; Revised Statutes (1849), § 112; General Statutes (1875), Juries, § 12, which draws substitutes from the same judicious electors as the regular panel ↩
108. Public Acts 1937, ch. 99, "An Act Concerning Jury Service for Women," approved 28 April 1937, codified at 1937 Supplement to the General Statutes of the State of Connecticut, January Session, 1937, Special Session, 1936 (Hartford, Conn.: Published by the State, 1937), § 840d; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/22387 : accessed 22 July 2026). The chapter number is taken from the reference table of public acts printed in that volume ↩
109. Conn. Const. of 1818, art. 6, § 2; the freehold in that clause was replaced by a residency requirement by amend. art. 8, adopted October 1845 ↩
110. U.S. Const. amend. XV, § 1. Connecticut ratified the amendment on 19 May 1869, and it was proclaimed adopted on 30 March 1870, from which date no state could deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The state constitutional text was not conformed until 1876; Conn. Const. amend. art. 23 (1876) ↩
111. Conn. Const. amend. art. 23 (1876): "That article eight of the Amendments to the Constitution be amended by erasing the word ‘white’ from the first line." The clause it amended is amend. art. 8 (1845), which had by then replaced the elector qualification of art. 6, § 2 and had carried the word "white" forward from it ↩
112. Swift, System of the Laws, 2:262–63; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/systemoflawsofst02swif : accessed 22 July 2026). Ch. 16, "Of the Age and Capacity to Commit Crimes": infants under seven "are supposed to be totally incapable of committing a crime"; between seven and fourteen incapacity is presumed, and the child's "capacity of discerning between good and evil, must be the rule of determining" ↩
113. Public Acts 1921, ch. 336, the juvenile courts act; General Statutes (1930), ch. 95, §§ 1854–1855 ↩
114. General Statutes (1875), Evidence, §§ 35–36 ↩
115. General Statutes (1930), § 6480 ↩

Note: This law guide was created with assistance from multiple AI tools. Though a diligent effort was made to ensure the accuracy of the information provided, there may be unintentional errors. It's important to check the primary sources as needed to ensure accuracy.