From The history of Fairfield, Fairfield County, Connecticut, from the settlement of the town in 1639 to 1818 by Elizabeth Hubbell Godfrey Schenck. Published in 1889.
Fairfield was explored in 1639 as a destination disgruntled Puritans from Massachusetts and settlement began the following year and the town was laid out in 1648.
It is fascinating, in pursuit of genealogical research, to absorb the details of how these early settlements worked.
The right to residency in a settled town was tightly controlled (page 138).
At a town meeting December 2, Jehu and John Burr, and John Green were appointed to run the boundary line between Fairfield and Stratford forthwith; and to lay out a parsonage lot in Uncoa neck. Complaint being made that the lands at Mill plain had not been justly laid out, and that the highways had hot been kept up; Jehu Burr, John Wheeler and William Hill were appointed "to settle the bounds & lay out highways." Samuel Smith was given liberty to settle in the town, until the 29th of September next, when he was to "depart the town or submit to law." Samuel Davis and his heirs were bound in the sum of five pounds, to depart the town by Michaelmas next. John Camp was bound in the same way. Jonathan Miles was bound in the sum of twenty pounds, unless he had further permission to remain.
On the 28th of April the town voted that Jehu Burr, John Wheeler and William Hill, should survey the land between Mill river and the Maxumux farmers. Also a highway was ordered to be laid out between the meadows of John Green and John Burr on Mill river, and Samuel Ward's and the commons. Thomas Staples and John Green were to agree with them for a highway over the river. On the 1st of February, the salt marsh at the Horse-tavern, below the path and pond and swamp that lies in Sasco field, was granted for the encouragement of a school. John Thorp, who was ordered in 1667 to leave the town without delay, was at this meeting admitted as an inhabitant, and granted the use of two acres of land to improve for seven years. A vote to leave the town did not necessarily imply a want of good character, but it was done to give time to ascertain whether strangers who appeared among them, were worthy to be made members of the community. The townsmen expressed their disapproval of the suit brought by Simon Couch and John Andrews, as heirs of Francis Andrews, in claiming their rights in his Bankside land, by voting that "they should not be accepted as inhabitants of the town." The right, however, of this injustice prevailed in the course of time.
Page 139
At a town meeting held in October, 1668, it was voted to lay out a new planting field, between Mill River and the rear of the farmers' home-lots [in town], to be divided among all the inhabitants of the town, in such proportion as the town should agree upon. Cornelius Hull, John Knowles and Samuel Morehouse were appointed to examine and report as to the quality of the land.
New settlements were in some senses a corporation paying dividends in land to the original settlers as well as to any subsequently admitted as freemen. The land came from the original grant of lands to the settlers beyond the boundaries of the town itself. As these lands were made accessible, the rights to that land were distributed among the freemen of the town with some receiving bonus allotments in return for work done for the town. Under this system, the importance of proper fencing, surveying, and building of roads and highways becomes clear. Page 140.
Another new planting field was ordered to be laid between the Uncoa river and the Stratford bounds. Richard Hubbell, Humphrey Hide and John Sturgis were appointed to survey and report the quantity and quality of this land. Jehu Burr, John Wheeler, Cornelius Hull, Nathaniel Seeley and William Hill were appointed to lay out the new planting field on the other side of Mill river, to stake out for fencing each man's land, and to lay out highways in this and the Uncoa fields, according to the old rules of the dividends.
It was voted to divide four hundred acres among the owners of estates. The waste land at the east side of the creek, and at the harbor and in Uncoa neck was to be taken into the division, but the town sedge and marsh below the path or highway near the beach, were not to be included. Each man was allowed his dividend in the rear of his home-lot, which the committee were to exchange to their satisfaction. In case some received poor land, it was to be exchanged for better.
A considerable tumult was raised at a town' meeting held on the 30th of January following, by a vote, that only those whose names were contained in the October list of estates, made by an order of the General Court in May, should share in the land dividends. Against this vote John Burr and William Ward protested; when it was voted, "that those planters who had sons of age should have lands for them only as children," and not according to the law of the colony, which required that none should be made freemen, except such as held an estate valued at eighteen pounds. Great dissatisfaction existed because those who had cultivated the eight years' lands at Sasqua, were not to be allowed to hold them; in consequence of which, on the 15th of March it was voted that no one should build upon the lots of the new field at Sasco, or sell the school lands without permission from the town, under a penalty of £20. Goodman Joseph Middlebrook and Peter Newton were the only dissenting voices.
The first rules of fencing were to be observed in this new dividend. The lots were to run east from Frost point to a gate to be made over Mill River. The hill in this field on the left "as one goes towards the farms commencing at the school land " was also to be laid out. The committee was to lay out these lands under the new arrangement for dividends; and they were to purchase sufficient lands of the dividend holders on the Sasqua and Mill rivers for two gates; and also for a sea fence. The first tier of lots included one-third of this dividend.
I love the practicalities to be dealt with. Page 142.
On account of several persons having been injured by "disorderly riding in the colony," it was voted that any person or persons who should ride through any town, "except in an ordinary & easy hand gallop," should pay a fine of five shillings. The third Wednesday in June was appointed a day of fasting and prayer. Great losses had been sustained the previous year by a blight which had fallen upon fruit and grain. Fears were also entertained, that through the king's sister, the Duchess of Orleans, he would embrace the Roman Catholic religion. Mercy in behalf of the spiritual liberties of his people both in England and in the colony, was to be another burden of their supplications.
Keep in mind that this was a town of about forty dwellings laid out on a matrix with three roads running north and south and three roads running east and west.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment