CHAPTER III.

THE CIVIL ORGANIZATION OF WINDSOR, ILLUSTRATED BY HER

RECORDS.

The first act of the settlers of Connecticut, doubtless, was to provide for themselves a civil organization. They were no mere adventurers, but men of sober thought and strong intent, who believed that

"Law is the faint reflection in Man's turbid mind Of the bright order first by Heaven designed." Nothing more clearly exhibits their character in its best and truest light, than the system of laws and regulations which they laid as the corner stone of their social fabric, and which remains, after the lapse of two centuries, as substantial and clearly defined, as when first created. Their Civil Organization was purely democratic as regards those who, in the capacity of inhabitants, framed it. Inhabitants, in those days, were such, and only such, as by virtue of a good character, blameless life, and "honest conversation," and a vote of the town taken in public meeting, had been admitted to the privilege of residence and participation in town affairs.

Vicious and abandoned persons, idlers, vagabonds and paupers, were excluded from such privileges, and not even permitted to tarry in the town. So carefully did our forefathers guard themselves against the influx of bad members of society, that the General Court, in 1637, enacted that

"No young man that is not married, nor hath any servant,

and be no public officer, shall keep house by himself without consent of the town where he lives, first had, under pain of 20 shillings per week."1

"No master of a family shall give habitation or entertainment to any young man to sojourn in his family, but by the allowance of the inhabitants of the said town where he dwells, under the like penalty of 20 shillings per week."2

We accordingly find, scattered along through the town records. of Windsor, such entries as these:

"Dec. 1, 1651. John Moses had allowance to sojourn with Simon Miller in his house."

Also, "Sept. 13, 1652. It is assented that Isaac Shelden and Samuel Rockwell shall keep house together in the house that is Isaac's, so they carry themselves soberly and do not entertain idle persons, to the evil expense of time by night or day."

Also, "that John Bennett3 should be entertained by William Hayden in his family."

Also, 1656: "In town meeting it was consented that Nicholas Wilton should sojourn with John Owen, so he lived orderly with him." Again, "June 27, 1658-The townsmen took into consideration how to prevent inconvenience and damage that may come to the town if some order be not established about entertainment and admitting of persons to be inhabitant in the town. We therefore order that no person or persons whatsoever shall be admitted inhabitant in this town of Windsor, without the approbation of the town, or townsmen, that are, or shall be, from year to year, in being. Nor shall any man sett or sell any

1 This law continued in force until the general revision of the statutes in 1821, being then the oldest statute provision on our records not previously repealed, expressly or by implication. (Mss. of Thos. Day, LL. D.)

2 This was embraced in the Code of 1650, survived the revision of 1673, but disappeared in that of 1702.-Ibid.

3 This John Bennett was an old offender, and the order seems to refer to some previous one. Perhaps the town designated this place because of his proneness to get into mischief. William Hayden's house was at the extreme north end of town, although several families lived near him. In 1648, three complaints had been entered against John Bennett on the same General Court. One for breach of covenant with John Bissell. One for defaming John Griffen, charging him with giving false evidence in Court. The other complaint would indicate that there was even among those humble settlers of Windsor, an aristocracy of worth, if not of family, sufficient at least to forbid an unworthy fellow from defaming the reputation of "an old man's daughter," by reporting that she looked upon him with favor. "John Drake complains of John

house or land so as to bring in any to be inhabitant into the town without the approbation of the townsmen, or giving in such security as may be accepted to save the town from damage. Also, it is ordered by the townsmen, that whereas Edward King1 doth reside in a place remote from the Town where there has sometimes been recourse of divers persons in a private way which we judge may prove prejudicial to divers persons if not timely prevented. It is therefore ordered that on or before the first of October next he shall give in sufficient security for his good carriage in his family and also for his careful attendance of the order of this jurisdiction, and of the order of this town, or else shall continue there no longer than that time, upon the penalty of 20 shillings per week.

"It is also ordered that Edward Ryle shall continue there no longer than the aforesaid time appointed, upon the same penalty."

November 29th, 1667-The townsmen granted liberty to Samuel Pinney that he should entertain Judit Cromel a sojourner in his family for a twelve month, and [he] engageth to see that he carries well, and keeps good order, as an honest man should do, to the best of his endeavor, by counselling him." "Dec. 10, 1659. The townsmen approved of that Thomas Gunn should entertain as a tabler, Capt. Thomas, in his family for this winter."

As late as "April, 1699, the widow Rix made application to the townsmen for liberty to keep at the widow Phelp's house or other place in the Town. She saith that she lived with Left. Joshua Wills for wages, but now that they are parted she wants another place. The townsmen do not see reason to grant her request, but have now warned her to remove out of this town to the town from whence she came, or to some other place, that she may prevent the townsmen proceeding against her according to law."

Bennett for saying that he had enticed and drawn away the affections of his [D.'s] daughter." At the next sitting of the Court, John Bennett appeared and "expressing his repentance and promising better carriage in future, the Court is willing once more to pass by his corporal punishment," and he was bound over for his good behavior. Educated as these settlers were in a land where the grades of society were strongly marked, it is not strange that some distinctions should be retained even in the more unreserved intercourse of this new country. John Drake was not a man of sufficient distinction to entitle him to the appellation of Mr., yet his son Job, a shoemaker, won the heart and hand of the daughter of Mr. Henry Wolcott, one of the first Magistrates of Connecticut, and probably, after the pastor, the most distinguished man in Windsor.

1 This Edward King was an Irishman. He afterwards lived on the East side of the River, near Podunk.

These extracts serve to show how carefully the law interposed its authority to preserve the purity of social life.1

Thus constituted, the Inhabitants themselves managed the affairs of the town and transacted its business. They established the Town Meeting-which has been aptly styled "a little primitive nursery of republican truth," and made it the duty of every man who was an inhabitant to attend it-subject to a fine for each failure without excuse. These town meetings were convened as often as business or convenience dictated. Sometimes by special appointment, "to publish some orders made at the General Court before," or "to read the Capital Laws;" sometimes "after lecture," or on "a day of training," when it was presumed that most of the inhabitants would be in attendance.

1 Although the strictness of these first regulations concerning inhabitants, especially those relating to "young unmarried men," were after a time somewhat softened, yet the settlers always maintained a vigilant eye upon the character and doing of each member of the community. Their deep sense of the individual duties devolving upon every citizen, found expression in the Oath of Fidelity, which was framed by the General Court in 1640, and which was to be administered by any two or three magistrates to all males, above sixteen years of age, who could present a certificate of good behavior.

"I, A B, being by the Providence of God an Inhabitant within the Jurisdiction of Conectecott, doe acknowledge myself to be subjecte to the Governmente thereof, and doe sweare by the great and dreadfull name of the everliving God, to be true and faithful unto the same, and doe submit boath my person and estate thereunto, according to all the holsome lawes and orders that eiher are, or hereafter shall be there made, and established by lawful authority: and that I will neither plott nor practice any evell against the same, nor consent to any that shall so doe, but will tymley discover the same to lawful authority established there; and that I will, as in duty bound, mayntayne the honor of the same and of the lawfull Magistrats thereof, promoting the public good of it, whilst I shall so continue an Inhabitant there; and whensoever I shall give my vote, or suffrage or proxy touching any matter which concerns this Commonwealth being cauled thereunto, will give it as in my conscience may conduce to the best good of the same, without respect of persons or favor of of any man. So help me God in our Lord Jesus Christe."

At the first session of the General Assembly under the charter, Oct. 9, 1662, it was ordered that those who desired to be admitted freemen should obtain a certificate from a majority of the Townsmen, certifying that they are persons "of civil, peacable and honest conversation, & that they have attained to the age of 21 years, and have £20 estate (besides their rent Poll), in the list of Estate," and such certificate should be presented to the court authorized to admit freemen. Provision was made at the same time, for the disfranchise

The first officers created by the inhabitants, as the executives of their will, were townsmen, constables and surveyors.

The duties of townsmen were similar to those of our present selectmen, although more extensive, and laborious. They were exempted from "watching, warding and training," and were "chosen to order the affairs of the town," except cases of taxes, land grants, admission of new inhabitance, and making and repairing of highways. These matters were reserved for the town. It appears, indeed, that many acts which the townsmen were competent to perform, were referred to the people in townmeeting assembled; for we find the townsmen at one time issu

ment of such as were convicted of scandalous offenses. It has been asserted by some, that none but church members were admitted freemen in Connecticut, and that none were permitted to dissent from the faith and form of the established church order. A better acquaintance with the early history of the colony would do away with this erroneous impression.

During the administration of Cromwell, the Colonists had been suffered to manage their own affairs much in their own way; and when Charles II ascended the throne, he soon after sent out, through his Commissioners, to inquire into the administration of the Colonial Governments. At a session of the General Assembly, held at Hartford, April 20, 1668,

"His Majesties Honorable Commissr. propositions were presented and read to the court-as follows:

Prop. 1st. "That all householders inhabiting this colony take the oath of allegiance, and the administration of justice be in his Majesties name." To this the Colony answered.

This we return, that according to his Majesties pleasure expressed in our charter, our Governor formerly hath nominated and appointed meet persons to administer the oath of allegiance."

Prop. 2d. "That all men of competent estates and of civil conversation, though of different judgments, may be admitted to be freemen & have liberty to choose and be chosen officers, both military and civil."

our order for admission of freemen is consonant with that pro

Prop. 3d. "That all persons of civil lives may freely enjoy the liberty of their consciences and the worship of God in that way which they think best, provided that this liberty tend not to the disturbance of the publique, nor the hindrance of the mayntaynance of ministers regularly chosen in each respective parish or township."

To the 3d Prop. "we say we know not of any one that hath been troubled by us for not attending his conscience, provided he hath not disturbed the publique."

Surely this is sufficient to refute the calumnies which have been hurled at the "illiberality" of the founder of Connecticut.