Connecticut Historical Law Guide

A genealogical research guide to Connecticut historical statutes from 1636 to 1950.

Historical Law Guides > Connecticut


Contents

Legal Ages at a Glance
The legal system
Legal age of adulthood
Marriage
Property ownership
Inheritance
Taxation
Courts, juries, and testimony
Sources & Where to Verify


Legal Ages at a Glance


Legal milestone Age Notes
Full majority21Both sexes, whole period
Marry14 male / 12 femaleThe common-law ages; from 1921 a license below 16 needed written consent. No absolute minimum until 2017
Marry without parental consent21A parent or guardian had to consent for any minor, of either sex
Choose own guardian14 male / 12 femaleBoth sexes 14 from 1885
Guardianship ends21The guardian's final settlement is filed at 21, bracketing the ward's birth year
Make a will21 land / 17 personal propertyBoth 18 from 6 July 1870; three witnesses required
Serve as executor21The executor posted a probate bond; a minor named in a will was replaced by an administrator until majority
Witness a willAny age if competentA gift the will leaves to a witness fails, though the witness stays competent
Testify as a witnessAny age if competentThe judge tested whether the person understood the oath and could give a rational account
Apprenticeship ends21 male / 18 femaleThe length of the indenture
Taxable as a poll16 to 70, then 21 to 70, then 21 to 60Lower age rose to 21 in 1821; upper age fell to 60 in 1918, when women became liable; repealed 1947
Jury service21Raised to 25 by the twentieth-century statute and back to 21 in 1963; Black men eligible from 1876, women from 1937
Criminal responsibility14 at common lawUnder 7 none; 7–14 presumed none; from 1921 a child under 16 went to the juvenile court



Connecticut was an English common-law jurisdiction from settlement to the end of this period. Its law descends from English law, received into the colony and then heavily overwritten by statute. Property between spouses was governed by the common law of coverture until 1877 and by statute thereafter.


Three structural features shape almost every Connecticut record. Land descended to all of a person's children. Dower — a widow's right to the use of part of her late husband's land for the rest of her life — attached to the land a husband held at his death. 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.




Full majority was 21, for women and men alike, and it stayed 21 for the whole period. The colonial rule is set out in a single short act that also governs several related matters at once: persons of 21, of sound 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: And to give their Vote, Verdict or Sentence in any Matter or Cause"1.


Three other Connecticut ages sit near majority and are fixed by their own rules:

  • A boy could be bound out as an apprentice until 21; a girl until 182. This is the length of an indenture.
  • A boy could choose his own guardian at 14; a girl at 12 (see Inheritance, below).
  • Marriage ages are separate again (see Marriage, below).


On contracts, the colonial revision of 1672 provided that a person under the government of a parent, guardian, or master could make a binding contract with that person's allowance. The 1821 revisers dropped the clause, observing that its effect had been to withhold from minors the power to contract for necessaries, which they held at common law3. From then on the common-law rule governed: a minor's contract, including a deed, was voidable — good until the minor chose to undo it, which he could do on reaching 21.



Marriage


Age, and the parental-consent rule


Until the twentieth century the common law fixed the marriage ages: 14 for a boy, 12 for a girl. A marriage below the age of consent was void, by an act of 17174. The colonial marriage act itself set the ceremony, the publication, and the consent requirements and left the ages to the common law5, and the revisions of 1784, 1821, 1835, 1849, 1866, and 1875 kept that arrangement.


The first statutory age arrives in 1921, and it is a threshold rather than a floor: 16, but with a way underneath it. The act of that year forbade a license "to parties either of whom is less than sixteen years of age unless one of the selectmen … shall indorse on the license his written consent." The consenting officer changed within the decade: by the Revision of 1930 the endorsement had to come from the judge of probate for the district where the minor lived6. 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 was required for any minor — anyone under 21 — of either sex. 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"; the 1821 revisers glossed this as "minors"7. The licensing statutes repeat it: the registrar issues no certificate "to parties either of whom is a minor until a parent or guardian of the person of such minor shall have given to such registrar his consent in writing"8.


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 the rule plainly: although the statute forbids joining persons in marriage without publishment and, in the case of minors, without the consent of their parents or guardians, "it has ever been considered, that the marriage was valid, and that the magistrate or minister celebrating it, was liable to a penalty"9. The courts have held the same in an unbroken line10.


For a researcher, this means a runaway teenage marriage is a real marriage and its children are legitimate. If the record is hard to find, that is because the duty to file the return lay with the officiant, who bore the penalty for an irregular marriage.


How a marriage was made


A Connecticut marriage required a ceremony before an authorized officiant, and 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 posted in writing on a door or post 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, and the new system began on 1 January 1855; the officiant endorsed the fact, time and place of the marriage on the license and returned it to the registrar11. Connecticut marriage publications therefore run to the end of 1854, and licenses and returns begin on 1 January 1855. The return is the core vital record, and from 1855 it names both parties with their ages, birthplaces and residences.


Who could officiate widened over time. Under the Code of 1650 a magistrate performed the ceremony; ordained ministers gained the authority in 169412, and by 1875 the list ran to judges, justices of the peace, and ordained or licensed clergymen of any state13. The 1875 statute also provided that a marriage solemnized according to the forms and usages of any religious denomination in the state was valid — the provision that carries Quaker and other self-solemnized religious marriages.


The restrictions on marriage


Marriage within the prohibited degrees of kinship 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"14. By the modern codes the list had narrowed: no man might marry his mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, aunt, niece, stepmother, or stepdaughter, and the equivalent list for a woman; such a marriage is void15. 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 canon law, were never received here16.


A bigamous marriage was void, subject to an exception where a spouse had been absent and unheard of for seven years17.


From 1895 Connecticut made it a crime, punishable by up to 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 marriage18. Couples already lawfully married on or before 31 July 1895 were expressly left alone, so the date to test a marriage against is that one rather than the date the act was approved. The statute reached the parties by criminal penalty and left the marriage standing; the Supreme Court of Errors upheld the statute and held such a marriage voidable for fraud19. If your couple falls in this category, the marriage holds and the children are legitimate.


The impediments to a Connecticut marriage were the four set out above — kindred, an existing marriage, want of the age of consent, and (from 1895) health — and they applied to all persons alike, whatever their race20. Black, mixed-race, and enslaved couples married under the ordinary law, appear in the town and church records, and their children were legitimate. As a practical matter a master'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.


Every Connecticut marriage required a ceremony solemnized by an authorized officiant21. A couple who only lived together remained single in the eyes of Connecticut law, and their children were born out of wedlock and inherited on that footing (see Inheritance) — unless the parents afterwards married, which legitimated the children. Connecticut marriage records are therefore licenses and returns.



Property ownership


Men and land


A man could own land, and could own it at any age. A male took land from birth when it came to him by inheritance, gift, or devise — a gift of land made by will — on the same footing as anyone else (see Children and land, below). The age that mattered for a man was the age at which he could deal in the land himself.


At 21 — full majority — a man held full power over his own land in his own name: to buy it, sell it, mortgage it, and convey it by deed. The colonial rule gave a person of 21 "full Power, Authority and Liberty … [for] all other lawful Alienations of their Lands and other Estates"22. A deed a man gave before 21 was voidable — good until he chose to undo it, which he could do on reaching majority — so a minor's land was ordinarily sold for him by a guardian under a probate order (see Children and land, below). The age for leaving land by will is set out under Wills, below.


Marriage left a man with the same power over land that a single man held: a married man bought, sold, and devised his own land in his own right, and his deed carried his signature alone (see When a wife signed a deed, below).


Women and land: the divide of April 20, 1877


Until 1877 a married woman lived under coverture — the common-law doctrine that merged a wife's legal identity into her husband's. A single or widowed woman (a feme sole) could own, buy, sell, sue, and be sued freely. A married woman (a feme covert) held her land subject to her husband's management, and he took its rents and profits; her personal property passed to him.


Public Acts 1877, ch. 11423 ended coverture for marriages contracted after it took effect. Section 1 provides that in all marriages thereafter contracted, neither husband nor wife acquires by force of the marriage any right in the property of the other; the wife's separate earnings are her own; and she may contract with third persons and convey her real and personal estate "in the same manner as if she were unmarried."


The law took effect on April 20, 1877 — four weeks after the legislature adjourned, which was when a Connecticut law came into force24.


Fifty years later, Connecticut was still running two marital-property systems side by side: one for couples married on or after April 20, 1877, and one for couples married before it25. The couple's marriage date decides which rules apply. A widow dying in 1935 who married in 1870 was still under the old law. Connecticut courts presumed a marriage was after April 20, 1877 unless it was proved earlier, so the burden fell on whoever relied on the older law to establish the earlier date26.


A pre-1877 couple could opt into the new law by a written contract mutually abandoning their rights under the old — and that contract had to be recorded both in the probate court of the district and in the town clerk's office27. Both copies are findable records, and an opt-in 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:


Year What the act provided
1809A married woman may dispose of her real and personal estate by will, like any other person — reversing Fitch v. Brainerd, 2 Day 163 (1805), which held a married woman's devise (a gift of land by will) invalid28
1849A married woman's personal property vests in her husband in trust — income to him for life, remainder to her or as she wills. He may sell or transfer it where she joins in a written conveyance29
1850Real estate conveyed to a married woman in consideration of property acquired by her own personal services is her sole and separate estate30
1853, 1856An abandoned wife may hold property and act as a feme sole, or petition the Superior Court to convey her land31
1877Full separate property, for marriages on or after April 20, 187732


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, taking it from birth by inheritance, gift, or devise. Conveying it was a different matter, and Connecticut handled that through the probate court.


A minor's land was sold on a probate court order, and the deed was executed by a guardian. The probate court could order the sale of a minor's real estate on the application of his parent or guardian, and empower a proper person to sell and convey it, on that person giving bond with surety — a second person who promised to pay if he failed in the trust — to the State — conditioned on reinvesting the proceeds in other land for the minor, spending them on his "nurture, education, or advancement in marriage," or investing them as trust funds33. Every such application had to be advertised in a newspaper near the land for three successive weeks before the court would order the sale34. 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 life interest in her late husband's land) attached in Connecticut to the land the husband owned at the moment of his death. The colonial dower act gives her a third "in Houses, and Lands which he stood Possessed of in his own Right at the Time of his Decease"35, and the language survives verbatim through the Revision of 182136, the General Statutes of 1875, and the 1930 code37.


The 1821 revisers explained the policy: because a lien on land the husband had merely held during the marriage restrains the free transfer of property, "it was a valuable improvement of the law to confine the dower of the widow to the lands of which the husband died possessed"38.


The consequence for the records is immediate. Land a husband sold during his life passed to the buyer free of any dower claim, and his deed carried his signature alone. 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:


1. The land was hers. Before April 20, 1877 a married woman's own real estate was conveyed by a deed executed by her jointly with her husband, duly acknowledged and recorded39. 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. 2. Her trust personalty — her personal property, meaning money and goods rather than land — was involved, under the 1849 act, which required her to join in a written conveyance by her husband of that property40. 3. After April 20, 1877, she conveyed her own property alone, in her own name.


Deed formalities and witnesses


A Connecticut conveyance had to be in writing, subscribed by the grantor with his own hand or mark, attested by two witnesses, acknowledged before a justice of the peace or judge, and recorded at length in the land records of the town where the land lies41. Recording is what makes the deed good against the world; between the grantor and his heirs it stands unrecorded.


A deed witness qualified on competency. The law fixed the number of witnesses at two and left the question of who could serve to the common law: a witness had to understand the obligation of an oath and be able to give a rational account of what he saw. 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 personal property in estate inventories, appraised alongside livestock and furniture. The dates below determine whether a person of color appears in the records as property or as a person:


A child's birth date fixes the year of their freedom:


Born Held in servitude until
Before 1 March 1784For life — freedom came by manumission, a master formally freeing an enslaved person, or by the act of 1848
1 March 1784 – 31 July 1797Age 2542
On or after 1 August 1797Age 214344
  • 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 themselves45. 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 master lived46. Either way the town record names the person freed.
  • 1848: "no person shall hereafter be held in slavery in this state"47, and made former masters liable for the support of those who fell into want48 — which leaves selectmen's records naming formerly enslaved people and their former masters.


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.


Native land passed only with the General Assembly's approval. By the Act of May 1717, all land in the colony was held of the Crown, and title accrued by a purchase from Indians only where the Assembly gave its allowance or approbation, before or after the sale. Only an approved conveyance of "Native Right" could be given in evidence or pleaded in court49. Where you have a deed from a Native seller, the operative document is the Assembly's act or resolve — look for it in the colony and state records.


Tribal land was administered by overseers rather than held individually. The Superior Court annually appointed an overseer for each tribe, who had "the care and management of their lands and money" and settled an account with the court each year50. Those accounts report the value of the tribe's lands and the number and condition of its people.


Aliens held land by license, and later by right. Into the 1800s an alien held land in Connecticut only on a special license from the legislature51 — so a foreign-born ancestor holding land early may have a private act in the session laws. By 1930 any resident alien (and any citizen of France, reciprocally) could purchase, hold, inherit, and transmit real estate as fully as a native-born citizen, and the alien's wife could take land by devise or inheritance and claim her statutory share; a non-resident alien could hold land for quarrying, mining, or smelting, forfeiting it after ten unused years52.



Inheritance


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


An intestate estate before 1877: the widow and the children


Real estate and personal estate alike were divided among all the children, with the eldest son taking a double portion — two shares where each other child took one. The rule came from Mosaic law53. Two features of it shape the records:

  • Sons took their shares in the land so far as the land would stretch; where there were no sons, the daughters inherited as coparceners (co-heirs holding together). A daughter in a family with brothers might therefore be paid out in money and movables and never appear in the land records, while her brothers do.
  • The double portion ended in October 1792, by an act whose whole substance is the repeal: "An Act in alteration of An Act, entitled An Act, for the settlement of testate and intestate Estates"54. A savings clause preserved the old rule for estates of persons who had died before that session rose. 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 has two parts, and they work differently.


1. She owned her share of the personal estate outright: one-third absolutely and forever where there were children, one-half where there were none55. 2. She held a life interest in her share of the real estate. She took dower: a life use of one-third of the land her husband died possessed of. The land itself descended to the heirs at his death, subject to her thirds, and came to them free and clear at her death; her interest was a life estate, and she held it for her lifetime.


Dower was set out by three freeholders — men who owned land outright — appointed by the probate court, on the heirs' application, within 60 days56. The return, accepted by the court, describes the widow's thirds in detail — often a room-by-room and field-by-field division of the homestead. She kept the buildings, fences, and lands in repair57.


The widow also had an election. Where a husband's will gave her something in lieu of dower, she took dower by giving written notice declining the devise within two months after the deadline for exhibiting claims against the estate; on her silence, the devise stood and dower was barred58. Her notice — or its absence — is in the probate file, and it tells you which she chose.


Curtesy is the husband's mirror-image right: a widower's life estate in all of his late wife's land, conditional at common law on a child having been born alive to the marriage. Connecticut kept it as a common-law right; the 1930 statute simply provides that for marriages before April 20, 1877 the surviving husband "shall be tenant by the curtesy as at common law"59.


An intestate estate from April 20, 1877


For marriages within the act, section 6 of the 1877 act repealed the statutes giving either spouse an interest in the other's property, and dower and curtesy gave way to a single, sex-neutral statutory share60:

  • The survivor — husband or wife — takes the use for life of one-third in value of all the property, real and personal, that the deceased spouse owned at death, after debts. The third is set out by distributors appointed by the probate court and may be taken in land, in personalty, or both.
  • A will is subject to it. A devise or legacy to the survivor is presumed to be in lieu of the statutory share 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.
  • Where there is no will, the survivor takes the third outright, as an absolute interest. This changes who owned the land afterwards.
  • Where there are no children or representatives of children, the survivor took one-half absolutely under the 1877 act; by 1930 the survivor took $2,000 plus one-half of the remainder absolutely, and where no parent survived either, the entire estate.
  • The share is barred by a written pre- or post-nuptial contract, and by abandonment without sufficient cause continuing to the other's death61.


The residue went in equal shares to the children and the legal representatives of any who had died, with lifetime advancements brought back into account so that each child's total came out even62. 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 stopped with the children of brothers and sisters63.


Minors' inheritance and guardians


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


The ages differ by sex. The age for choosing a guardian was 14 for a male and 12 for a female, from the colonial "Age, Ability, and Capacity" act64 through the General Statutes of 187565. The probate revision of 1885 equalized it, setting the age for choosing a guardian at 14 for both sexes66. Guardianship ended at 21.


Below the age of choice the probate court appointed. Above it, the minor chose and the court approved the choice; where the minor made no choice, or chose someone the court disapproved, the court appointed67.


A guardian was appointed in these circumstances — each throws off a probate file:

  • The minor had no father, mother, guardian, or master68.
  • The minor came into property from a source other than his father — his father being alive and well69. 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 unfit70.
  • The father had left the state and neglected support for two years — the mother or another person could then be appointed71.
  • A non-resident minor owned property in Connecticut72.


A parent could name a testamentary guardian by will — "all persons, except married women," could do so73, 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 surety where the minor had an estate, conditioned on a faithful discharge of the trust "and for accounting to the minor when he arrives at full age"74. The guardian's final settlement is therefore filed when the ward turns 21, bracketing the ward'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. Connecticut courts treated such a child as the mother's heir, able to inherit her estate. The rule comes from decided cases, which the codes cite in the annotations75.


The second route, and the one that reaches furthest into a family's records, was legitimation by the parents' later marriage. Public Acts 1876, ch. 14, § 1 (approved 8 June 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 codes carried the rule forward, though not unchanged: the section still required in 1897 that the parents recognize the child as their own, and that condition was gone by the Revision of 1902, after which the section read simply "Children born before marriage whose parents afterwards intermarry shall be deemed legitimate and inherit equally with other children"76 — The courts held the section legitimated such children for every purpose, not merely for inheritance77. 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.


Where paternity of a child born out of wedlock was contested, it was determined in a bastardy proceeding against the putative father — a support action, and the file names the father78.


The colonial law disqualified one group of children 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 mother"79.


Wills


The age to make a will changed in 1870. The split that preceded it was already in force in the Acts and Laws of 1702 and held until 1870; it traces back further still, to the Code of 1650, which fixed a single age of 21 to make wills of "goods and estates"80. By 1702 the rule had taken the two-age form it kept for the next century and a half.


Period Will of land Will of personal property
Code of 1650 – Revision of 1866211781
From 6 July 1870181882


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 will." 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, subscribed by the testator, and attested by three witnesses, each subscribing in the testator's presence83. There was no Connecticut deathbed exception: an unwritten will was a nullity however urgent the circumstances, and the only classes the courts left open were a mariner at sea and a soldier in actual service. Do not expect to find an oral will proved in a Connecticut probate district. Three witnesses were required for a devise of real estate from the colonial "An Act concerning Witnesses to Wills"84, and the requirement was extended to all wills, real and personal, on 27 June 184885. A pre-1848 Connecticut will disposing only of movables can therefore be perfectly valid with fewer than three witnesses.


A will witness qualified on competency. The law fixed the number at three and left the question of who could serve to the common law. What it did settle is the effect of a gift to a witness: a beneficial devise or legacy to a subscribing witness is void — and from 1849 the same applies to a gift to that witness's husband or wife — unless the will is legally attested without that signature, or unless the witness is an heir at law of the testator. The witness stays competent; the gift fails86. A legatee — someone left something by the will — among the three witnesses means the legacy failed — and it tells you the drafter thought the witness close enough to the family to leave something to.


The later birth of a child left unprovided for revoked a will87. An old will proved despite a later-born child means either that the child was provided for or that the will was re-executed.


An executor qualified on capacity, and gave a bond. The law required the person named in the will to be capable of accepting the job and to post a probate bond — something only a person of full age could do. Where the person named in a will "shall refuse to accept or be incapable of accepting such trust," the probate court commits administration with the will annexed to the surviving spouse or next of kin, or to any suitable person88. So where a minor was named as executor, the court put an adult in the role, and the letters of administration name the person who actually settled the estate.



Taxation


The grand list


Everything turns on the annual town list (later the "grand list"). Inhabitants gave in their own lists of taxable persons and property on 20 August each year; the listers inspected them, added fourfold for anything a person had left out, and delivered the completed list of "the Polls, and Rateable Estate" to the town clerk in January89. The list names every taxable person in the town, every year. It is the closest thing Connecticut has to an annual census.


Four kinds of tax fell on individuals:

  • The poll (or head) tax was a fixed sum — or a fixed valuation entered in the list — charged on a person simply for existing; a capitation tax is the same thing under a Latin name, and a "poll" is the taxable person.
  • The property tax on "rateable estate" reached land (assessed by category and quality), livestock (by species and age), ships (by the ton), money at interest, and fisheries.
  • A faculty or occupation tax fell on attorneys, physicians, surgeons, traders, mechanics, taverners, brokers, and distillers, who were assessed at the assessors' discretion "according to the value and income of their business, occupation or profession"90; an ancestor's occupation may therefore appear on a tax list.
  • A succession (inheritance) tax fell on property passing at death, and was in force in the twentieth century91; it generated a tax return in the probate file, usually listing every beneficiary and their relationship to the deceased.

Who was a poll, and at what age


Period Who was set in the list as a poll At what value
Colonial (1750 act)92All males 16 to 70£18 each
Revision of 1784Males 16 to 21£9 (half rate)
Males 21 to 70£18
Revision of 1821White males 21 to 70$30 in the list
General Statutes 1875Males 21 to 70a $1 poll tax
1918 / 1930 (the "personal tax")Each person 21 to 60 — women included$2
1947Repealed


Three things stand out from that table. A boy first appears on the colonial or 1784 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; by 1875 the tax statute reads simply "males," and by 1918 it reads "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 Yale (until the time for taking their second degree)93. The 1784 revision added persons "disabled by Sickness, Lameness, and other Infirmities." The Revision of 1821 exempted ministers, college and academy instructors and students, and — importantly — militia officers and privates liable to do duty, on producing a certificate from their commanding officer that they were equipped, uniformed, and had performed duty that year94. The 1875 and 1930 codes exempt students and active firemen95.


Exemption is the common explanation for a young man vanishing from the poll list in his twenties: he joined the militia or a fire company. Check his age and the year against the exempt classes.



Courts, juries, and testimony


One point about the reported cases is worth carrying into the search. The decisions that settle whether a marriage was valid, or whether a child born before marriage was legitimate, almost never reach the Supreme Court of Errors as family disputes. They arrive as arguments between towns over which of them owed a pauper's support, as suits by a creditor against a wife, or inside litigation over something else entirely. A question about a marriage may therefore be answered in a case whose title names two towns and whose subject appears to be a highway or a poor rate.



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 their Vote, Verdict or Sentence in any Matter or Cause"96. It was raised to 25 in the twentieth century.


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


Period Qualification
Colonial (1750)"Able, Judicious Freeholders" — landowners — each with a freehold estate rated at fifty shillings in the general list. Chosen each January by the town's civil authority, selectmen, constables, and grand-jurymen; names written on slips and kept in a locked box at the town clerk's, from which the constable drew them
Revisions of 1821 and 1835Freeholders, each with a freehold set in the list at $9 or more
1837 – General Statutes of 1875"Able and judicious electors" — the men qualified to vote in the town
1918 / 1930Electors at least 25 years of age, "men of good character, approved integrity, sound judgment and fair education"


The land requirement ended in 1836 and 1837. From then on a juror simply had to be one of the town's "able and judicious electors" — he needed no property of his own.97


The freehold applied to the regular panel, and talesmen — bystanders summoned on the spot to fill out a short jury — were held to the same standard98. Where your ancestor sat on a colonial or early-nineteenth-century Connecticut jury, he owned land, and the tax list will show it.


Women and Black men on the jury


The statute in force through the 1930s provides that jurors shall be "men of good character"99. Women became eligible for jury service in 1937, when the General Assembly passed "An Act Concerning Jury Service for Women."100


Jurors had to be electors, and from 1818 the state constitution defined an elector as a white male citizen101. Amendment Article 23, adopted in 1876, struck the word "white" out of the elector clause.102 Black men therefore became eligible for Connecticut juries in 1876.


Age of criminal responsibility


The common law fixed criminal responsibility in Connecticut, and the statutes left it there: a child under 7 lacked criminal capacity altogether; between 7 and 14 the law presumed incapacity, and the prosecution had to overcome the presumption; from 14 the child bore full responsibility.


In 1921 the practice changed. Public Acts 1921, ch. 336 created Connecticut's juvenile courts and defined a "child" as any person under sixteen103. From then on a child under 16 accused of an offense was handled as a "delinquent child" by the juvenile court. After 1921, then, the practical floor for a criminal conviction is 16 — and the record you want sits in the juvenile court files, where it is likely to be closed.


Witnesses


Competency governed who could testify — in a criminal case, a civil one, on a deed, or on a will. The test was whether the person understood the obligation of an oath and could give a rational account of what they had seen. A judge decided it witness by witness, on the spot, and children did testify.


Two Connecticut statutes reshaped who could take the stand, and both explain what you will find in the files:

  • 1830 — a person who believes in the existence of a Supreme Being is a competent witness whatever his religious opinions104.
  • 1848 — "No person shall be disqualified as a witness in any action by reason of his interest in the event of the same, as a party or otherwise, or of his conviction of a crime"; interest and conviction now go to credibility105. From 1848 the parties themselves could testify in their own case. Before that date the interest rule kept them 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.


In criminal cases the accused was a competent witness at his own option, and a husband or wife of the accused was competent and could elect whether to testify for or against the spouse — except that a wife who had suffered personal violence from her husband could be compelled106. Conviction of a capital crime required the testimony of at least two witnesses, or its equivalent107.


The grounds on which a witness could be disqualified were the ones the statutes named — want of competency throughout, want of religious belief until 1830, and interest in the cause until 1848108 — and they applied to all persons alike, whatever their race or sex. Women were competent witnesses throughout the period; 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.


(Guide compiled by Jeniann Nielsen with AI assistance from Claude Opus 4.8 and Gemini Pro 3.1. Check primary sources as needed.)



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." The constitution as it stood in 1875 is printed in the front matter of The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., 1875. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/generalstatutes00conngoog (accessed 22 July 2026). The amendment numbering is confirmed against the text of the 1818 constitution published by the Connecticut General Assembly, https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/constitutions/1818Constitution.htm (accessed 22 July 2026).

Codes and Compilations


Session Laws and Public Records

  • 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. The imprint is taken from the title page. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-made-and-_connecticut_1792_0 (accessed 22 July 2026).
  • Cumulative Supplements to the General Statutes, Revision of 1930 … Special Session 1936, January Session 1937. Hartford: The State. 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 reference 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).
  • Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1836–1850. Ch. VI of 1836 and ch. X of 1837, ending the freehold qualification for jurors. Issued without a named publisher. 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, 1851–1859. Ch. LXIII of 1852 (registrar) and ch. LXXVIII of 1854 (marriage license). 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, 1866–1871. 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, 1875–1880. Public Acts 1876, ch. 14 (legitimation) and Public Acts 1877, ch. 114 (the Married Women's Act). 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, 1881–1887. Public Acts 1885, ch. CX, § 69, the age for choosing a guardian. 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, 1889–1895. Carries ch. 63 on marriage licenses and ch. 325 on capacity to marry. 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, 1918–1921. Carries ch. 260, which first set sixteen as a marriage threshold, and ch. 336, the juvenile courts act. Digital images. Connecticut State Library. https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/87515 (accessed 22 July 2026).
  • The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut. Ed. Charles J. Hoadly. Hartford: Lockwood & Brainard. Vol. 4 (1689–1706). The catalog record dates the series, not the volume. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofc4168conn (accessed 22 July 2026).
  • The Public Records of the State of Connecticut. Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Brainard. Vol. 9 (May 1797 – October 1799). The catalog record dates the series, not the volume. Digital images. Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofs09hoad (accessed 22 July 2026).
  • The chapter numbers this guide gives for 1895, 1921 and 1937 have been read against these volumes, and the two 1921 chapters have been checked a second time against the side notes to the Revision of 1930 (§ 5149 for ch. 260, § 1854 for ch. 336) and the 1895 chapters against the side notes to the Revision of 1902 (§§ 1354–1356): Public Acts 1895, ch. 63 (marriage licenses and parental consent) and ch. 325 (the epilepsy and "feeble-minded" marriage crime, approved 4 July 1895); Public Acts 1921, ch. 260 (the age of sixteen, approved 1 June 1921) and ch. 336 (the juvenile courts); and Public Acts 1937, ch. 99 (jury service for women).

Court Cases

  • Eaton v. Eaton. 88 Conn. 269 (1914).
  • Fitch v. Brainerd. 2 Day 163 (Conn. 1805).
  • Goshen v. Stonington. 4 Conn. 209 (1822).
  • Gould v. Gould. 78 Conn. 242, 61 A. 604 (1905). Opinion. CourtListener. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3322929/gould-v-gould/ (accessed 22 July 2026).
  • Heath v. White. 5 Conn. 228 (1824).
  • Manning v. Manning. 16 Conn. Supp. 461 (1950).
  • Markel v. DiFrancesco. 93 Conn. 355, 105 A. 703 (1919).
  • Moore v. Saxton. 90 Conn. 164 (1916).
  • State ex rel. Felson v. Allen. 129 Conn. 427 (1942).
  • Stone's Appeal from Probate. 74 Conn. 301, 50 A. 734 (1901).
  • Town of Simsbury v. Towns of East Granby & West Hartford. 69 Conn. 302, 37 A. 678 (1897).
  • Towns of Winchester & Colebrook v. Hinsdale. 12 Conn. 88 (1837).
  • Several locators in this guide — 12 Conn. 94, 69 Conn. 303, 74 Conn. 304, 90 Conn. 168 and 93 Conn. 358 — are cited as they appear in the annotations to the Revision of 1930, which give a volume and page without a case name. Each is a pinpoint page inside a case that begins earlier, which is why they resist a direct lookup. Heath v. White, Eaton v. Eaton, Moore v. Saxton, Markel v. DiFrancesco and Town of Simsbury v. Towns of East Granby & West Hartford have been read against the points they are cited for. Towns of Winchester & Colebrook v. Hinsdale has been read, and supports its point in dictum rather than in its holding. Stone's Appeal from Probate has likewise been read. One caution for anyone following these locators: a page may carry the end of one decision and the beginning of another, so 74 Conn. 304 is both the last page of Stone's Appeal and the first of an unrelated case, and a lookup by page alone will return the second.

Secondary and Reference Works


Citations

  1. 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)
  2. The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: S. G. Goodrich, and Huntington & Hopkins, 1821), Title 64, "Masters and Servants"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicstatutelaw00conniala : accessed 22 July 2026)
  3. Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 64
  4. 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)
  5. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for Regulating, and Orderly Celebrating of Marriages," pp. 144–46
  6. Public Acts 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.: Wilson H. Lee Co., 1930), § 5149; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/9389 : accessed 22 July 2026)
  7. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 63, § 3 and note
  8. General Statutes (1930), § 5149; earlier, The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., 1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, § 2; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/generalstatutes00conngoog : accessed 22 July 2026)
  9. Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 63
  10. Goshen v. Stonington, 4 Conn. 209 (1822); Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. 242, 247 (1905); Manning v. Manning, 16 Conn. Supp. 461 (1950), holding that lack of parental consent leaves a Connecticut marriage valid
  11. Public Acts 1854, ch. LXXVIII, §§ 5–7, 10–11, approved 1 July 1854 (in 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)); The Revised Statutes of the State of Connecticut (Case, Tiffany and Co., 1849), Title VII, ch. 1, § 1, for the publication rule (digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/42499 : accessed 22 July 2026)); General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, §§ 2–4; General Statutes (1930), § 5149.
  12. The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, ed. Charles J. Hoadly (Hartford: Lockwood & Brainard), vol. IV, 136; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofc4168conn : accessed 22 July 2026)
  13. General Statutes (1875), Domestic Relations, ch. 1, § 5
  14. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 144–46
  15. General Statutes (1930), § 5148
  16. Towns of Winchester & Colebrook v. Hinsdale, 12 Conn. 88, 94 (1837), decided 15 June 1837. The point arises while the court is deciding whether affinity disqualified a judge from sitting. Holding that the English affinities drawn from the canon law were never received here, the court observed that it had never been supposed in this state that a widow might not lawfully marry a brother of her deceased husband. That observation is dictum, the decision itself turning on judicial disqualification and on the laying out of a highway; the annotations to General Statutes (1930), § 5148, nonetheless collect it for the proposition that the section does not prohibit such a marriage. The rule itself rests on the statutory list of prohibited degrees, which does not include a spouse's sibling
  17. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 144–46
  18. Public Acts 1895, ch. 325, approved 4 July 1895, with ch. 350 of the same session; carried forward as General Statutes (1930), §§ 6275–6277, and appearing in The General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1902 as §§ 1354–1356, whose side notes give both chapters. The 1902 text preserves the saving clause: nothing in the section affects the mutual relations of any man and woman lawfully married on or before 31 July 1895
  19. Gould v. Gould, 78 Conn. 242 (1905)
  20. The marriage titles: 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
  21. State ex rel. Felson v. Allen, 129 Conn. 427, 432 (1942); the rule holds throughout the period and since
  22. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act relating to the Age, Ability, and Capacity of Persons," pp. 2–3
  23. "An Act in Alteration of the Act concerning Domestic Relations," approved 16 March 1877 (Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, in 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))
  24. General Statutes (1875), Legislative Department, § 20
  25. General Statutes (1930), §§ 5154–5157 and §§ 5158–5173
  26. Markel v. DiFrancesco, 93 Conn. 355, 358, 105 A. 703 (1919). The defendants there did not claim to have married before April 20, 1877, and the court held it had the right to infer that the wife's status was governed by the Married Women's Act; the reporter's headnote puts it that a woman married since that date may contract with third persons as if she were a feme sole. The case is collected in the annotations to General Statutes (1930), § 5154, which state the rule as a presumption that a marriage is after April 20, 1877 unless proved to be earlier
  27. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 5; General Statutes (1930), § 5157
  28. Public Statute Laws (1821), Wills, § 1
  29. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, §§ 3–4
  30. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, § 1
  31. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, §§ 2, 6
  32. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 1
  33. General Statutes (1875), Probate Courts, § 18
  34. General Statutes (1875), Probate Courts, § 23
  35. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act concerning the Dowry of Widows," p. 43
  36. "of which her husband died possessed, in his own right" — Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 1
  37. General Statutes (1930), § 5158
  38. Public Statute Laws (1821), note to Title 26
  39. General Statutes (1930), § 5009
  40. General Statutes (1875), Property of Married Women, § 4
  41. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 56, §§ 6–8; General Statutes (1930), §§ 5005–5010
  42. Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut in America (New London: T. Green, 1784), servants and slaves act (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 (digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-of-the-sta_1796 : accessed 22 July 2026))
  43. "An Act in addition to an Act, entitled, 'An Act concerning Indian Mulatto and Negro Servants and Slaves,'" May 1797; The Public Records of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Brainard), vol. IX, 39; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/publicrecordsofs09hoad : accessed 22 July 2026)
  44. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 93, § 1
  45. Acts and Laws (1784), same act
  46. 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]
  47. Act of 1848; Revised Statutes (1849), Title LI, "An Act to Prevent Slavery," § 1
  48. Revised Statutes (1849), Title LI, § 2
  49. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act concerning Purchasers of Native Rights to Land," p. 110
  50. General Statutes (1930), § 5057
  51. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 56, § 5
  52. General Statutes (1930), §§ 5055–5056
  53. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for the Settlement of Testate and Intestate Estates," pp. 49–53
  54. Acts and Laws (October session 1792); reprinted in Acts and Laws (1796) as "[Enacted in October 1792]"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_acts-and-laws-made-and-_connecticut_1792_0 : accessed 22 July 2026)
  55. Acts and Laws (1750), settlement of estates act, pp. 49–53; Public Statute Laws (1821), note tracing the rule to the revision of 1702 and to the English statute of distributions
  56. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 2
  57. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 3; General Statutes (1930), § 5160
  58. Public Statute Laws (1821), Title 26, § 4; General Statutes (1930), § 5161
  59. General Statutes (1930), § 5158
  60. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 3; carried forward as General Statutes (1930), § 5156
  61. Public Acts 1877, ch. 114, § 4; General Statutes (1930), § 5156
  62. General Statutes (1930), § 4980
  63. General Statutes (1930), § 4982
  64. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 2–3
  65. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 1
  66. Public Acts 1885, ch. 110, § 69, "An Act revising and compiling the Probate Laws" (in 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)); carried into the Revision of 1887 and forward to General Statutes (1930), § 4796
  67. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 2
  68. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 2
  69. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 4
  70. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 5
  71. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 6
  72. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 7
  73. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 11
  74. General Statutes (1875), Guardian and Ward, § 9
  75. 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
  76. General Statutes (1930), § 4980
  77. Town of Simsbury v. Towns of East Granby & West Hartford, 69 Conn. 302, 303, 37 A. 678 (1897), decided 15 June 1897, holding that the section legitimates a child born before marriage not only for the purpose of inheriting property but for all purposes, so that a daughter born before her parents' marriage took her father's domicile as fully as if she had been born in wedlock; and Moore v. Saxton, 90 Conn. 164, 168 (1916). Both are collected in the annotations to General Statutes (1930), § 4980. The 1897 opinion quotes the section as then numbered 630 and as still requiring that the parents recognize the child as their own. That condition is already gone from The General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1902, § 396, which reads as the 1930 text does, so it was dropped between 1897 and the revision in force on 1 July 1902
  78. The General Statutes of Connecticut: Revision of 1949 (Hartford: Bond Press, 1949), §§ 8178–8186
  79. Acts and Laws (1750), marriage act
  80. The Code of 1650 (Hartford: S. Andrus, 1830), "Ability"; digital images, Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/codeof165000conn : accessed 22 July 2026)
  81. A single age of 21 for both under the Code of 1650
  82. Public Acts 1870, ch. 62, § 1 (in Public Acts Passed by the General Assembly, 1866–1871; digital images, Connecticut State Library (https://cdm15019.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p128501coll3/id/79242 : accessed 22 July 2026))
  83. General Statutes (1930), § 4876, providing that no will or codicil shall be valid to pass any estate unless it be in writing, subscribed by the testator and attested by three witnesses, each of them subscribing in his presence; and Stone's Appeal from Probate, 74 Conn. 301, 304, 50 A. 734 (1901), decided 20 December 1901, holding that a nuncupative 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 same opinion, at 302–303, traces the requirement from the Code of 1650 through the act of 1719, which first demanded three witnesses to a devise of real estate, to the Revision of 1821. Note that the opinion ends on page 304, the page on which an unrelated decision begins, so a search by that page alone returns the wrong case. The statutory wording was not constant: The General Statutes of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., 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. The annotators to the section record a holding that mutual presence was unnecessary, at 43 Conn. 85
  84. Acts and Laws (1750), p. 113
  85. Revised Statutes (1849), Estates, § 2, which expressly saves earlier wills of personal estate "made before the twenty-seventh day of June, 1848"
  86. Public Statute Laws (1821), Wills, § 3, for wills executed after 1 January 1808; Revised Statutes (1849), Estates, § 3; General Statutes (1930), § 4877
  87. Public Statute Laws (1821), Wills, § 5
  88. General Statutes (1930), § 4885; General Statutes (1875), Estates of Deceased Persons, ch. 11, § 11
  89. Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for the Direction of Listers," pp. 135–38
  90. Public Statute Laws (1821), Taxes, ch. 1, § 4
  91. General Statutes (1930), ch. 77, §§ 1360 ff., its derivation line running back through 1918, ch. 66
  92. Acts and Laws (1750), listers act, p. 137; Acts and Laws (1784), listers act; Public Statute Laws (1821), Taxes, ch. 1, § 2; General Statutes (1875), Taxation, § 10; General Statutes (1930), § 1244. On the 1947 repeal, see Edward T. Howe, "The Connecticut Poll Tax," ConnecticutHistory.org, connecticuthistory.org (https://connecticuthistory.org/the-connecticut-poll-tax/ : accessed 22 July 2026).
  93. Acts and Laws (1750), p. 137
  94. Public Statute Laws (1821), Taxes, ch. 1, § 3
  95. General Statutes (1875), Taxation, § 11; General Statutes (1930), § 1245
  96. Acts and Laws (1750), pp. 2–3
  97. Public Acts 1836, ch. VI, approved 2 June 1836, and Public Acts 1837, ch. X, approved 10 June 1837 (in 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)); Acts and Laws (1750), "An Act for Providing, and Regulating of Jurors in Civil Actions," pp. 102–03; 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)); Revised Statutes (1849), § 106; General Statutes (1875), Juries, § 1; General Statutes (1930), § 5558.
  98. Public Statute Laws (1821), § 37; Revised Statutes (1849), § 112
  99. General Statutes (1930), § 5558
  100. Public Acts 1937, ch. 99, "An Act Concerning Jury Service for Women," approved 28 April 1937, codified at Cumulative Supplement to the General Statutes, Revision of 1930 … Special Session 1936, January Session 1937 (Hartford: The State), § 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
  101. Conn. Const. of 1818, art. 6, § 2; art. 8, adopted October 1845
  102. Conn. Const. amend. art. 23 (1876), striking the word "white" from the elector clause of art. 6, § 2. The 1845 change to the same clause was amend. art. 8
  103. General Statutes (1930), ch. 95, §§ 1854–1855
  104. General Statutes (1875), Evidence, § 35
  105. General Statutes (1875), Evidence, § 36
  106. General Statutes (1930), § 6480
  107. General Statutes (1930), § 6479
  108. General Statutes (1875), Evidence, §§ 35–36

Back to Top