New London - settled 1646, named 1658 is located at the mouth of the Thames River on Long Island Sound and has an excellent harbor.
"The Indian name of New London," says Trumbull, "was Nameaug, alias Towawog." The first was undoubtedly the prevalent name: it was used, with many variations in the spelling, to designate both the site of the town and the natives found upon it. The Indian names are all descriptive, and this is supposed to mean a fishing place, being compounded of Namas, fish, and eag, aug, eak, terminations which signify land.
The other name, Tawaw-wog, is not often found on record: it occurs however, as an alias, in several deeds, about the date of 1654. It is probable that this also has a reference to fish; and may be derived from Tataug or Tatau-og, black-fish, for which the neighboring waters are still renowned.
A few examples, all from the handwriting of Mr. Bruen, will show the variations of orthography in these names; "Thomas Parke of the towne of Pequott otherwise called Nameeg or Tawaw-wag." (1653). "Samuel Lothrop of the towne of Pequot (alias Nameeag and Tawaw-og." (1654).
Bradford, Joseph (ca. 1715-1747)
Gallop, Capt. John (1651)
On the town street, east of Stallion and Bayley, a lot of ample dimensions was laid out to John Gallup, eight acres in the very heart of the town covering the space east of the town street to the beach and extending north from State street to Federal.
Lake, Hannah (1651) - wife of Capt. John Gallop above
Lathrop, Samuel I (1648/9-ca. 1688)
1648 - We turn now to the record of house-lots, and the names of the first planters. It is plain that no grants had been recorded before 1647, but many of the planters were before this in actual possession of lots. When therefore, they were confirmed and registered, reference was occasionally made to the fence that inclosed the lot, or the house built upon it."His house lot in the new plantation was the third in order from that of John Winthrop, Jr., Esq., and his name is one of the first eighteen to whom were assigned lands on the east side of the `great river' of Pequot, and for these the lots were drawn on the 17th and 31st of January 1648-49."The home-lots were originally numbered up to thirty-eight; but erasures and alterations were made, reducing the names of grantees to thirty-six; of these, the first six are missing, and several of the remainder are partially erased, but by comparison with subsequent records, the whole thirty-six can be ascertained.1. John Winthrop, Esq., whose home-lot was undoubtedly selected by himself before all others: it covered the Neck still known by his name. The next five were probably John Gager, Cary Latham, Samuel Lothrop, John Stebbins, and Isaac Willey, whose homesteads lay north-west of Mr. Winthrop's, on the upper part of what are now Williams Street and Main Street."He received a large grant of land, also, on the west side of the Pequot river north of the settlement. It was about five miles up the river at a place called Namussuck. A farm of 260 acres at this place remained in the family until 1735, when it was sold by his grandson Nathaniel, after settling all claims, for 2,300 pounds."Though Mr. Lothrop removed to Norwich about the year 1668, his farm "at Namucksuck, on the west side of the Great River," remained in the family until 1735, when his grandson, Nathaniel, having cleared the land of other claims, sold out to Joseph Powers [now the Browning farm] (260 acres, with house and barn, for £2,300, old tenor.)
Lathrop, Samuel II (1650-1688)
Scudder, Elizabeth (1648/9-1688) - wife of Samuel Lathrop I, mother of Samuel Lathrop II
Truman, Joseph (?-ca. 1698)Norwich - settled in 1659 by Capt. John Mason & Rev. James Fitch and many people from Old Saybrook. It lies about 13 miles north of New London on the Thames River.
The project of establishing a plantation in the Mohegan territory, fourteen miles above New London, originated, in all probability, with Capt. Mason. When his previous adventures, his long familiarity with Uncas, and his frequent explorations of the Indian country, are considered together with his influence in the Colony, there can be no hesitation in affirming that he was the prime mover and ruling spirit of the undertaking. If any of the first proprietors, more than another, has a special claim to be considered the founder of Norwich, the pre-eminence must certainly be accorded to Mason. He had been one of the founders of Dorchester and Windsor, had re-awakened the breath of life, in the dying settlement at Saybrook, and was now ready for the fourth time to erect his lodge in the wilderness.
At what period the plan of this new settlement was broached is uncertain. Probably it was for several years under consideration. A large proportion of the best inhabitants of Saybrook entered into it; a few names from other places were added to the list, and in May, 1659, application was made to the General Court for permission to begin the work. The proposition was favorably received by the Assembly, and sanctioned by the following enactment:
Hartford, May 20, (59.) This Court haveing considered the petition presented by the inhabitants of Seabrook, doe declare yt they approve and consent to what is desired by ye petitioners, respecting Mohegin, provided yt within ye space of three yeares they doe effect a plantation in ye place propounded.
The enterprise having been sanctioned by the General Court, and the deed obtained from the Indians, the proprietors began to prepare for a removal. The township was surveyed, the town plot or central village laid out, a highway opened, and house-lots measured and assigned to the purchases in the fall of 1659. By what rule the distribution was made is not known. The probability is that Mr. Fitch and Major Mason had the privilege of a first choice.
No removal of cattle or goods appears to have taken place until the next year. Doubtless some small cabins were erected, and a few persons remained on the ground to keep watch and guard. The flying attack made by the Narragansetts, already mentioned, shows that there was one English house and five Englishmen at Norwich during the winter; and this, as far is known, comprises the whole settlement previous to the spring of 1660.
The Mohegan territory, comprising all the lands claimed by Uncas and [p. 57] his tribe, by whatever name known, within the bounds of the Connecticut colony, was ceded by Uncas to the colonial authorities at Hartford, Sept. 28, 1640. This appears to have been regarded as as cession of jurisdiction only; for whenever afterward settlements were about to commence a regular purchase of the place was made. Often also additional gratuities were made for special tracts within these purchased towns, by individuals.
When the settlement of Norwich was projected, the township was conveyed to the proprietors by Uncas and his sons, for the sum of seventy pounds. This was in June, 1659. Major Mason was at this period acting under a commission from the General Court, the object of which was to obtain a fresh conveyance to the colony of all the Mohegan lands not actually planted and improved by the tribe. In this business he was successful. A deed of cession was obtained, signed by Uncas and his brother Wawequaw, Aug. 15, 1659. Thus it appears that the nine-miles-square of Norwich purchase was three times legally transferred from the aborigines to the whites, and each time, apparently, in the way of fair and honorable dealing.
"On just and equal terms the land was gained; No force of arms hath any right obtained."
The original deed of Norwich is not extant. In March, 1663, the General Court ordered it to be placed on record at Hartford. Apparently, in recording the deed, some slight variations from the original copy were allowed, for the phrase used by one of the contracting parties, viz., Town and Inhabitants of Norwich, seems to imply that a settlement had been made.
The dwellings of Mr. Fitch and Major Mason were near together, facing the Green, and with the river in their rear. The road running from the Green to the river, and spanning the stream with a bridge separated the two homesteads. The allotment of Mr. Fitch, consisting of eleven acres, was on the south-east side of the Green; the home-lot of Mason, "eight acres more or less," the early measurements were extremely liberal, -- was on the south-west side.
Major Mason was the controlling spirit of the party, and without doubt the name was either suggested in the first place by him or sanctioned by his favor. If Norwich, the capital of Norfolk Co., England, had been the place of his nativity, it would be easy to account for the planting of the name in this new soil. But it is not known where Major Mason was born.
The original meaning of the word Norwich, renders its application to the new township strikingly appropriate. It is derived from North-wic, a Saxon name, signifying North-Castle, and the formidable piles of rocks found here, some of them crowned with the stone forts of the Indians, are forcibly suggestive of walls, towers and battlements.
Across the road, opposite the school-house, begins the Olmstead home-lot, recorded as 8 acres, more or less, abutting east on the Town street 30 rods, abutting south on the land of Stephen Backus 37 rods, north-west, and north on the land of Rev. James Fitch, and Deacon Thomas Adgate 73 1/2 rods, and west on the river (with a foot-path through it). Miss Caulkins errs in her map of the early home lots of Norwich, in placing the Olmstead property west of the lower road, whereas it fronted on the present North Washington Street, extending from the Gilmans' north garden wall to the lower fence line of the lane leading by Gager's store, and was bounded on the west by the river.
Dr. John Olmestead (or Holmstead), is said to have come to New England with his uncle James, who was one of the first settlers of Hartford. Dr. John went from Hartford to Saybrook, and from thence, in 1659-60, to Norwich. On the Saybrook records of 1661, he is called John Olmstead of "Mohegan (shoemaker)," but with this trade, he probably combined the calling of a surgeon, as he served in that capacity in King Philip's war, and is known as the earliest physician of Norwich. Dr. Ashbel Woodward of Franklin, writes of Dr. John Olmstead: "He is said to have had considerable skill in the treatment of wounds, particularly, those caused by the bite of a rattlesnake. He was fond of frontier life, and enjoyed in a high degree the sports of the chase."
Dr. Olmstead married Elizabeth, daughter of Matthew Marvin of Hartford, later of Norwalk, Ct. He died in 1686. Even at this early date, several slaves are mentioned in his will, who are to have their freedom at the death of his wife. The widow, Elizabeth Olmstead, died in 1689, leaving in her will £50 to the poor of Norwich, £10 to the Rev. Mr. Fitch, legacies to Sergt. Richard Bushnell, to "brother Adgate's four children," and to the children of her husband's sister, Newell, but the greater part of her real estate, including house and home-lot, to her "friend, and kinsman, Samuel Lothrop." Samuel Lothrop had married Hannah Adgate, the step-daughter of Mr. Olmstead's sister, Mrs. Mary Adgate. This is the only relationship which has been traced between them.
Miss Caulkins surnises that the original lot, assigned to John Elderkin and sold to Samuel Lathrop, was in this neighborhood, which was not the case. We shall come to the Elderkin lot later. This land was Olmstead land, and Samuel Lathrop received it only by inheritance from Elizabeth Olmstead.
Adgate, Hannah (ca. 1670-1695) - daughter of Thomas Adgate, wife of Samuel Lathrop II
Adgate, Thomas (1659-1707)
Bradford, Joseph (ca 1698-ca. 1705)
Bushnell, Mary (ca. 1670-ca. 1724) - wife of Sgt. Thomas Leffingwell
Crow, Deborah (ca. 1691-1755) - granddaughter of Sgt. Thomas Leffingwell, wife of Samuel Lathrop III
Fitch, Anne (1675-ca. 1705) - daughter of Rev. James & Priscilla (Mason) Fitch, wife of Joseph Bradford
Fitch, Rev. James (1660-1683)
Hodges, Charity (1722-1741/2) - 2nd wife of Capt. Jabez Perkins
Lathrop, Elkanah (1754)
Lathrop, Ezra (1718-1760)
Lathrop, Hannah (1677-1721) - daughter of Samuel & Hannah (Adgate) Lathrop, wife of Capt. Jabez Perkins
Lathrop, Samuel III (1688-1730)
Lathrop, Samuel II (1682-1732)
1730 - William Reed to Deacon Samuel Lathrop a portion of Reed's 40 acre grant
Lathrop, Samuel I (1682-1700)
"Mr. Lothrop appears to have erected a house on the town street before 1670, which from that time became his home. The house built by Dr. Daniel Lathrop, his great-grandson, about 1745, probably stands upon the same site--now Mrs. Gilman's [1852]. The house lot of about seven acres on whcih he settled, covered mainly that hill side enclosed by the streets and lanes, as now, which lies south of the present residence of Daniel W. Coit, Esq., and extending down to the present Main street. He added during his life time successive tracts of land amounting to about four hundred acres."
Leffingwell,Sgt. Thomas (ca. 1668-1724)
Upon this side road near where it came into the Town street, was the lot of Sergt. Thomas Leffingwell, twelve acres, with an additional pasture lot of ten acres, with Indian wigwams then upon it, "abutting easterly upon the rocks." The house lot was eighty-six rods in length upon the narrow highway. The residence of the late Judge Hyde (originally a Leffingwell mansion,) stands on this old house lot; but the first house built upon it by the ancient proprietor is supposed to have stood on the opposite side of the road, founded up upon a rock and sheltered by a hill.
Sergt. Leffingwell was peculiarly the soldier and guardsman of the new town, and Sentry Hill was the look-out post, commanding the customary Indian route from Narragansett to Mohegan. A sentry box was built on the summit, and in times of danger and excitement a constant watch was kept from the height. Here too, in the war with Philip, a small guardhouse was built, sufficient for some ten or twelve soldiers to be housed. It has of late been called Center Hill, an unconscious change from Sentry, that has probably obtained currency from the supposition that the name referred to its position among other elevations in this multitude of hills. Nor is the name at present inapplicable, this being not far from the center of the modern township, tough by no means central in reference to the original nine miles square.
Leffingwell, Lt. Thomas (1660-1714)
Marvin, Mary (ca. 1658-1713) - wife of Thomas Adgate
Mason, Priscilla (ca. 1663-1683) - daughter of Capt. John & Anne (Peck) Mason, wife of Rev. James Fitch
Mason, Capt. John (1660-1662; 1671-1672)
Peck, Anne (1660-1662; 1671-1672) - wife of Capt. John Mason
Perkins, Charity (1724-?) - daughter of Capt. Jabez Perkins and wife of Ezra Lathrop
Perkins, Jabez (ca. 1695-1741/2)
He and his brother Joseph had purchased in 1635, a large tract of land in that part of Norwich which is now Lisbon. On which after his marriage, he settled. He became one of the wealthiest and most honored citizens of Norwich.
Scudder, Elizabeth (1668-1688) - wife of Samuel Lathrop IWhite, Mary (1660-1711) - wife of Lt. Thomas LeffingwellLebanon - lies about 19 miles northwest of Norwich where the Shertucket and Yantic Rivers meet to form the Thames. It was settled in 1663 by Capt. Mason, Rev. James Fitch and other Norwich families to obtain additional land for their expanding families.
The territory which now constitutes the town of Lebanon called by the Indians, as to its main part, Po-que-chan-neeg, was orginally claimed by the Indian chief Uncas. He belonged to the Pequot tribe, which had its seat in the present town of Stonington, near the village of Mystic. He was of the royal family, and married a princess of the royal family of the same tribe. Aspiring to the leadership of the tribe by means decidedly crooked and summary, and failing in his rash purpose, he was obliged to secede, and with a few adherents withdrew across the Pequot, now the Thames river, where he established himself on lands which have since been held by the remnant of Indians, in the present town of Montville. Here he set up a claim to a territory twenty-two miles wide, bounded on the east by the Thames river, and on the west by the Connecticut, and extending from the sea shore north indefinitely; embracing large portions of the present territory of Tolland and Windham counties. This included the tract which formed this town.
After the destruction of the Pequot fort at Mystic by Major Mason, in 1637, Uncas seems to have been so impressed by the bravery and power of the English, and to have felt so strongly that if he had their friendship, they could defend him against any enemy, he ceded, from time to time, to his many friends among the white settlers, and to the colony of Connecticut, all his lands and possessions, reserving to himself certain rights and privileges.
The first proprietor of land within the limits of this town, was Major John Mason. In 1663 the General Assembly of the colony gave him for meritorious services, five hundred acres of land, which he might take, as he should choose, in any unoccupied territory in the colony. Norwich had then purchased to the line which now divides Franklin and Lebanon. Mason came just across that line, and selected his five hundred acres in the southwestern part of the town, in what is now the society of Goshen; that section being called by the Indians Pomakuk. This land was surveyed and formally conveyed to him in 1665.
In 1666 the General Assembly gave Rev. James Fitch, who came from Saybrook to Norwich and was the first pastor of the church there, and son-in-law of Mason, one hundred and twenty acres of land adjoining Mason's tract. Subsequently Oweneco, son and successor of Uncas, gave to Rev. Mr. Fitch for favors received, a tract five miles long and one wide, which is described as extending from the southwestern corner of the town, next to the tracts already mentioned, along the Franklin line to near the Willimantic river. According to this description, it was nearer seven than five miles long; but surveys had not then been made, and boundaries were very loosely drawn. This is familiarly known as "Fitche's, or Mason and Fitche's mile."
In 1692, Oweneco, who still claimed a sort of ownership in unoccupied lands here, sold and conveyed to four proprietors, Capt. Samuel Mason and Capt. John Stanton of Stonington, and Capt. Benjamin Brewster and Mr. John Birchard of Norwich, a tract called the five mile purchase adjoining, and northwest of "Mason and Fitches mile," so called. The General Assembly of the colony in 1705 confirmed this deed of Oweneco; and at the same time and by the same instrument, confirmed a deed from these four proprietors, conveying all their rights and interests in this tract and all that pertained to it, to fifty-one persons named, who had taken lots; most of whom were inhabitants here.
These several tracts, with two smaller sections, one called the gore, and another, the mile and a quarter propriety, constituted the original territory of this goodly town of Lebanon, which one hundred and eighty years ago was a wilderness.
The four proprietors, Mason, Staunton, Brewster and Birchard, evidently designed that the "Five mile purchase," and "Mason & Fitche's mile," should form the main part of a plantation, and that this street since called Town street, should be the center, and under the direction the street was laid out, and the land adjoining it allotted.
Having in view the earliest establishment, and most efficient maintenance of the worship of God, and the means of education, the land along the street was divided into home-lots of forty-two acres each, and there were second and third lots lying back of these, and in other parts of the town. Every one taking a home-lot was entitled to a lot of the other divisions. In this they seem to have had in view access to water in the streams running each side of this ridge, and the possession of meadow land in the valleys. The second and third divisions, taken from unoccupied land in other parts of the town, were assigned by lot, and hence were, literally, lots.
This broad street and open common, which became so marked a feature of the place, seems to have been formed in this way. Originally, it was a dense alder swamp. When the settlers came to build their houses, they would of course set them on the dryer ground of the edge of the slopes extending back on each side. Thus, between the lines of dwellings there was left this swampy space, varying in width, but in general some thirty rods wide. Of course, it was owned by the original fifty-one proprietors of the five mile purchase.
The actual settlement of the plantation began in 1695, and its increase appears to have been rapid, the number of grants and allotments bearing date November of that year being more than fifty. The five mile purchase evidently came then to be fully open for occupancy, and settlers rushed in. They came from different quarters; some from Norwich, others from Northampton, still others from other places in this colony and in that of Massachusetts.
Lebanon has been spoken of as originally a dependence of Norwich. No part of its territory was ever embraced in the nine mile square, which constituted the territory of Norwich, or was ever under the jurisdiction of Norwich. And there is no evidence that a majority of the early settlers came from that town.
The inhabitants held a meeting in 1698, and the earliest record of the town, or settlement as it was properly called, was then made.
In 1697, under the direction of the first four purchasers and proprietors, a lot was set apart for a minister, to be his, when in an orderly way, he should be settled among them, and, as worthy of note, it was one of the best lots through the whole length of the street; near, and directly opposite the spot which had been selected as the site of the meeting-house. It was land which the Lyman family, and Mr. Asher P. Smith now occupy. And in a house which stood a little south of Mr. Smith's dwelling, the first minister, Joseph Parsons, from Northampton, Mass., is supposed to have lived.
The first inhabitants of course had to struggle with the inconveniences and hardships of a new country. Where these dwellings, and gardens, and farms now are, all was forest, and as we infer from the moisture of the soil, and from other evidence, with a thick undergrowth.
It serves to indicate their condition, that in 1700 they took action in reference to a grist-mill. And the plantation offered Mr. Joseph Parsons of Northampton, afterwards of Norwich, as we infer, the father of the minister, as an encouragement to build such a mill, one hundred and twenty acres of land, provided he would maintain it ten years. From the fact that the road running west from the brick church was cut to this mill, the conclusion is warranted, that it was built near where the present mill on that road stands. The first saw-mill was built a little below where Hinckley's mill now is -- in a tract called "Burnt Swamp."
In 1699, four years after the settlement of the plantation really began, the General Assembly at its May session "ordained and appointed a committee to view the lands at Lebanon, and to consider what quantity may be allowed for a plantation there, and to make return to the General Court in October next." There were various "lands" -- not a few tracts here -- held under different titles and with uncertain boundaries. Though the inhabitants hd met to consider their interests, and had their officers, they had not been legally organized, and had not been recognized as a town.
At the fall session of the General Court, there is made a record of this sort, "Whereas, differences between Lebanon and Colchester hath proved much to the prejudice of both places, and impedimentall to their comfortable proceedings in the settlement thereof, these proposals are the nearest that can be agreed unto which here follow." The bounds are then given as agreed upon by Joseph Parsons for Lebanon, Nathaniel Foot and Michael Taintor for Colchester. The line thus determined was "approved and confirmed to be the standing divident line between the above-named towns. The rest of the bounds to be according to the return of the committee in 1699."
And further, "This Assembly doth grant to the inhabitants of the town of Lebanon all such immunities, privileges, and powers as generally other towns within this colony have, and doe enjoy." There is then, an order as to the rates for defraying the local charges in the town, and the record proceeds: "Free liberty is by this Assembly given to the town of Lebanon to embody themselves in church estate there, and also to call and settle an orthodoxe minister to dispense the ordinances of God to them, they proceeding therein with the constant of neighbour churches as the lawe in such cases doth direct."
The people acted on these grants of privilege, and the town was formally organized in 1700. The church was embodied November 27th of the same year, and Mr. Joseph Parsons was ordained pastor of the church and minister of the town. A military company called a "train band" was also formed, yet I find in the public records no mention of any officers commissioned until the May session of 1702, when Lieut. John Mason is appointed Captain of the "train band" in Lebanon, Ensign Jeremiah Fitch to be their Lieutenant, and Mr. Joseph Bradford to be their Ensign, and to be commissioned accordingly. In 1708 there was a second train-band here, I conclude in that part of the town now called Goshen.
It is worthy of notice, that though the town was organized in 1700, and invested with all immunities, privileges, and powers of other towns, it did not send deputies to the General Assembly until the May session of 1705, the reason being, doubtless, that it had not been required by the colonial government to bear any portion of the public expense until a tax was levied on the inhabitants for that purpose, at the October session, 1704. It was at that time a distinctly recognized and a cherished principle that representation should accompany taxation, and "no taxation without representation" at length became the war-cry of the Revolution.
Though the town was now fully organized, with church and minister, and train-band, and about to take its place by its deputies in the General Assembly with the other towns of the Colony, its settlement was hindered. The bounds and titles to lands were in a very unsettled condition, and, growing out of this were uncertainties and controversies and frequent appeals to the Assembly for relief. In 1704, the public records say, "there were great difficulties and trouble among the inhabitants of Lebanon, through the unsettledness of their lands," and they appointed a surveyor to run the south or southerly line of the five mile square purchase. The boundary between this town and Colchester was not yet settled. And in 1705, several of the inhabitants of the town of Lebanon made complaint of sundry difficulties and inconveniences under which they were laboring, respecting the purchase of a tract of land five miles square of Oweneco and the four proprietors.
It is not surprising that there was this uncertainty as to bounds and titles, when we consider that gifts and cessions were made by Indian chiefs, and Sir Edmond Andros said their deeds were so indefinite and contradictory; as "to be worth no more than the marks of a cat's paw," and that these chiefs, as to ownership were in controversy among themselves, while the settlers had gained a variety of titles from them. In 1705 the General Assembly passed a broad healing act. Referring to the deed of Owaneco to the four proprietors, Mason, Stanton, Brewster and Birchard, and to the deed of these proprietors to fifty-one proprietors most of whom were residing there, the Act is to this effect: "And the same recited deeds or conveyances, and the grants, sales, and bargains therein contained, are hereby allowed, approved, and confirmed to be firm and effectual to all intents and purposes, according to the true meaning and intent thereof, as shall be construed most favorable on the behalf, and for the best benefit and behoof of the grantees and purchasers (heretofore named) their heirs and assigns forever." And by this Act a degree of satisfaction and quiet seems to have been established.
At the May session of the Assembly, 1705, Mr. William Clark was deputy from this town to the General Assembly, the first whom it sent: at the October session, Mr. Samuel Huntington was deputy. Lebanon was "listed," i.e., the property was put into the grand list to be taxed for general purposes, for the first time in 1704. In the roll of persons and estates presented to the General Assembly in 1705, embracing thirty-three towns, Lebanon is rated at £3,736, and is the twenty-first in the list; it has ninety taxable inhabitants, perhaps indicating a population of 350. The next year it stands £4,390 and 105 taxable persons. And this year, this town sent two deputies, viz: Ensign John Sprague, and Mr. William Clark. The town sent as deputies the same persons repeatedly; the number from which selections were made from year to year being small, in strong contrast to the present practice of rotation, and never more than one term for the same person.
The next year, 1707, Lebanon stands £5,179, and 135 taxable persons. For a few years the settlement of the town appears not to have been rapid. Privations and hardships must have been endured by those who came here; their dwellings must have been loghouses among the trees and bushes, with here and there a clearing, and all uncertainty as to the bounds and titles of lands had not ceased to perplex and embarras.
That there was a great amount of danger or annoyance from the Indians does not appear, the Indians of this section being friendly to the English, in league with them, and very much dependent on them.
There is a tradition that some Indians of a tribe at war with the Mohegans -- perhaps from a remnant of the Pequots -- possibly from the Narragansets, still further east in Rhode Island, took a Mohegan child from the house of Mr. Brewster, who lived on the Brewster place, near where Hon. Edwin M. Dolbeare now resides, and killed it, dashing its head against the garden fence. This tradition comes, reliably, from one who lived near the time of the alleged event, and who spoke of it, as a fact well known. There is also a tradition that the Abel house, which stood where Mr. Robert Peckham's house now stands was a sort of fort, (stockaded, I conclude,) to which the inhabitants fled in times of danger.
If the Indians did not seriously trouble the settlers, the wild animals did. So late as 1730 the town offered a bounty of £10 for every full grown wolf that should be killed.
Deer and wild turkeys were abundant. The first settlers had common corn-lots which they joined in clearing, fencing, and guarding. I have queried whether they had the fever and ague; and I am sure they had, and must have shook soundly with it; but probably it did not frighten people away; for it must have prevailed in all the new settlements.
After about 1707 the number of taxable persons ceases to be given in the public records, and only the property listed is noted. The list continued to steadily increase, and to gain on the lists of other towns in the colony. In 1730 it was £19,972; in 1733, £23,808; and was in amount, the eighth in the colony: in 1740 it was £31,709, and was the fifth among the forty-eight towns in the list, and more than that of Hartford or New London. in 1748, £35,570.
From 1730 to 1760 Lebanon must have gained rapidly in population and wealth. The colony of Connecticut had greatly prospered. In 1730 the number of inhabitants, according to a census then taken, was 38,000, and about 700 Indian and Negro slaves, and 1600 Indians. In 1756 twenty-six years, later, the population of the colony, consisting then of seventy-nine towns and settlements, was 130,612; an increase of 90,312; and Lebanon then had a population of whites 3,171, and blacks 103; total 3,274. Only five towns in the Colony had a larger population, viz. Middletown, the largest, 5,664; Norwich, 5,540; New Haven, 5,085; Fairfield, 4,455; and Farmington, 3,707; Hartford had only 3,027.
And from the first, Lebanon has been active in military enterprises. While this town was never directly menaced by the Indians, the frontier towns of this colony, and of the colony of Massachusetts were; and this town was required to aid in the common defense. As early as 1709, Mr. Jedediah Strong, one of the original settlers, and an ancestor of the Strong family which remained and still has representatives here, was killed in an expedition against the Indians near Albany. This colony sent troops to the defense of the county of Hampshire, Mass., in which, in 1704, the Deerfield massacre occurred, and which was exposed to the incursions of the French and Indians.
In 1709, in an expedition against Canada, in Queen Ann's war, the proportion of troops from this colony was 147, and the quota of Lebanon eleven.
In the wars in which the mother country was engaged at this period, the colonies were involved; in the Spanish war of 1739; in King George's war; a war with France in 1744, in which Louisburg, in Cape Breton, a very strong place, termed the Gilbraltar of America, was taken; in the French and Indian war which began in 1755, and ended in 1763 with the conquest of the whole of Canada. During these wars the seas were infested with hostile ships, and the colonists were exposed on every side. The colonies learned how to raise troops, to equip and supply them, and to tax themselves in order to pay them, and thus were in most important training for the crisis now just before them. The drums used at Bunker Hill were the same which had been used at the capture of Louisburg.
Bradford - Irene (1735-ca. 1748) - daughter of Joseph & Anne (Fitch)
Bradford, wife of Jonathan Janes
Bradford, Joseph (ca. 1705-1715
Fitch, Anne (ca. 1705-1715) - daughter of Rev. James & Priscilla (Mason)
Fitch, wife of Joseph Bradford
Fitch, Rev. James (1683-1702)
Janes, Jonathan (1713-ca. 1748)
Janes, William (1713-ca. 1750
Janes, Abel (ca. 1713-1718
Judd, Mary (ca. 1713-1735) - wife of Abel Janes
Loomis, Abigail (1713-ca. 1750) - daughter of Josiah & Mary (Rockwell)
Loomis, wife of William Janes
Loomis, Josiah (ca. 1680-1735)
Mason, Capt. John (1663-ca. 1670)
Peck, Anne (1663-ca. 1670) - wife of Capt. John Mason
Powell, Rowland V (1751-?)
Powell, Rowland IV (1730-ca. 1775)
Powell, Rowland III (1718-ca. 1735)
Powell, Rowland II (ca. 1688-1716)
Powell, Mary (ca. 1688-ca. 1739) - daughter of Rowland Powell I, wife of Stephen Tilden
Powell, Rowland I (ca. 1688-ca. 1718)
Richardson, Mary (1750-ca. 1775) - wife of Rowland Powell IV
Rockwell, Mary (ca. 1680-1738) - wife of Josiah Loomis
Tilden, Mary (1718-ca. 1730) - daughter of Stephen Tilden, wife of Rowland Powell III
Tilden, Stephen (ca. 1688-1727)
Truman, Elizabeth (ca. 1688-after 1716) - wife of Rowland Powell II
No comments:
Post a Comment