The Witchcraft Delusion In Colonial Connecticut (1647-1697) by John M. Taylor - HTML preview

CHAPTER XI

"The planters of New England were Englishmen, not exempt from English prejudices in favor of English institutions, laws and usages ...

They had not been taught to question the wisdom or the humanity of English criminal law. They were as unconscious of its barbarism, as were the parliaments which had enacted or the courts which dispensed it." _Blue Laws, True and False_ (p. 15), J. HAMMOND TRUMBULL.

"It would seem a marvellous panic, this that shook the rugged reasoners in its iron grasp, and led to such insanity as this displayed toward Alse Young, did we not know that it was but the result of a normal inhuman law confirmed by a belief in the divine, the direct legacy of England, the unquestionable utterance of Church and State." _One Blank of Windsor_, ANNIE ELIOT TRUMBULL.

This brief review of witchcraft in some of its historical aspects, of its spread to the New England colonies, of its rise and suppression in the Connecticut towns, with the citations from the original records which admit no challenge of the facts, may be aptly closed by what is believed to be a complete list of the Connecticut witchcraft cases, authenticated by conclusive evidence of time, place, incident, and circumstance.

Some minor questions may be put, or kept in controversy, as one writer or another, who regards history as a matter of opinion, not of fact, and relying on tradition or hearsay evidence or on superficial investigation, gives a place to guesswork instead of truth, to historical conceits instead of historical verities.

A RECORD OF THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO CAME UNDER SUSPICION OR ACCUSATION

OF

WITCHCRAFT IN CONNECTICUT, AND WHAT BEFELL THEM.

Herein are written the names of al persons in anywise involved in the witchcraft delusion in Connecticut, with the consequences to them in indictments, trials, convictions, executions, or in banishment, exile, warnings, reprieves, or acquittals, so far as made known in any tradition, document, public or private record, to this time.

MARY JOHNSON. Windsor, 1647.

There is no documentary or other evidence to show that Mary Johnson was executed for witchcraft in Windsor in 1647. The charge rests on an entry in Governor Winthrop's _Journal_, "One ---- of Windsor arraigned and executed at Hartford for a witch." WINTHROP'S _History of New England_

(Savage, 2: 374).

No importance would have attached to this statement, which bears no date and does not give the name or sex of the condemned, had not Dr. Savage in his annotations of the _Journal_ (2: 374) asserted that it was "the first instance of the delusion in New England," and without warrant added, "Perhaps there was sense enough early in the colony to destroy the record."

In al discussions of this matter, it has been assumed or conceded (in the absence of any positive proof), by such eminent critics and scholars as Drake, Fiske, Poole, Hoadley, Stiles, and others, that Winthrop's note was based on rumor or hearsay, or that it related to the later conviction and execution of a woman of the same name, next noted, and the errors as to person, time, and place might easily have been made.

MARY JOHNSON. Wethersfield, 1648.

This Mary Johnson left a definite record. It is written in broad lines in the dry-as-dust chronicles of the time. Cotton Mather embalmed the tragedy in his _Magnalia_.

"There was one Mary Johnson tryd at Hartford in this countrey, upon an indictment of 'familiarity with the devil,' and was found guilty thereof, chiefly upon her own confession."

"And she dyd in a frame extreamly to the satisfaction of them that were spectators of it." _Magnalia Christi Americana_ (6: 7).

At a session of the Particular Court held in Hartford, August 21, 1646, Mary Johnson for thievery was sentenced to be presently whipped, and to be brought forth a month hence at Wethersfield, and there whipped. The whipping post, even in those days, did not prove a means to repentance and reformation, since at a session of the same court, December 7, 1648, the jury found a bill of indictment against Mary Johnson, that by her own confession she was guilty of familiarity with the devil.

That she was condemned and executed seems certain (it being assumed that Mary and Elizabeth Johnson were one and the same person, both Christian names appearing in the record), since at a session of the General Court, May 21, 1650, the prison-keeper's charges for her imprisonment were allowed and ordered paid "out of her estate."

A pathetic incident attaches to this case. A child to this poor woman was "borne in the prison," who was bound out until he became twenty-one years of age, to Nathaniel Rescew, to whom L15 were paid according to the mother's promise to him, he having engaged himself "to meinteine and wel educate her sonne." _Colonial Records of Connecticut_

(I,143: 171: 209-22-26-32).

THE FIRST EXECUTION FOR WITCHCRAFT IN NEW ENGLAND

_A secret long kept made known--Winthrop's journal entry probably correct--Tradition and surmise make place for historical certainty--The evidence of an eyewitness--A notable service._

ALSE YOUNG. Windsor, 1647.

"May 26. 47 Alse Young was hanged." MATTHEW GRANT'S _Diary_.

"The first entry (the executions of Carrington and his wife being next mentioned) supplies the name of the 'One (blank) of Windsor arraigned and executed at Hartford for a witch'--the first known execution for witchcraft in New England. I have found no mention elsewhere of this Alse Young." J. HAMMOND TRUMBULL'S _Observation on Grant's Entry_.

"Who then was the 'witch' with whose execution Connecticut stepped into the dark shadow of persecution? She has been cal ed Mary Johnson, but no Mary Johnson has been identified as this earliest victim. Whose is that pathetic figure shrinking in the twilight of that early record? We could think of her with no less kindly compassion could we give a name to the unhappy victim of the misread Word of God, who was led forth to a death stripped of dignity as of consolation: who to an ignorance and credulity, brought from an old world and not yet sifted out by the enlightenment and experience of a new, yielded up her perhaps miserable but unforfeited life. Here is the note which in al probability establishes the identity of the One of Windsor arraigned and executed as a witch--'May 26, 47 Alse Young was hanged.'" _"One Blank" of Windsor_

(Courant Literary Section, 12, 3, 1904), ANNIE ELIOT TRUMBULL.

Matthew Grant came over with the Dorchester men from the Bay Colony in 1635, and settled in Windsor, Connecticut, where he lived until his death there in 1683.

He was a land surveyor, and the town clerk, a close observer of men and their public and private affairs, and kept a careful record of current events in a "crabbed, eccentric but by no means entirely illegible hand"

during the long years of his sojourn in the "Lord's Waste."

It has been surmised for several years--but without confirmation--and credited by the highest authorities in Connecticut colonial history, and known only to one of them, that Grant's manuscript diary contained the significant historical note as to the fate of Alse Young. It waited two centuries and more for its true interpreter, as did Wolcott's cipher notes of Hooker's famous sermon, and there it is, "not made on the decorous pages which memorize the saints," Brookes, Hooker, Warham, Reyner, Hanford, and Huit, "but scrawled on the inside of the cover, where it might be the sinner might escape detection."

In the publication of Grant's note Miss Trumbul has rendered a great service in the settlement of a disputed question, in the correction of errors, in fixing the priority of the outbreak between Massachusetts and Connecticut; and in the new light shining through this revelation stands Alse, glorified with the qualities of youth, of gentleness, of innocence; and the story of her going to the unholy sacrifice on that fateful May morning more than two and a half centuries ago is told with exquisite tenderness and pathos.

Confirmation of the truth of Grant's entry is given by the scholarly historian of Windsor, Dr. Stiles, who says in his history of that ancient town:

"We know that a John Youngs, [?] bought land in Windsor of William Hubbard in 1641--which he sold in 1649--and thereafter disappears from record. He may have been the husband or father of 'Achsah'[?] the witch; if so, it would be most natural that he and his family should leave Windsor." STILES' _History of Windsor_ (pp. 444-450).

JOHN and JOAN CARRINGTON. Wethersfield, 1651.

They were indicted at a court held February 20, 1651, Governor John Haynes and Edward Hopkins being present, with other magistrates; and they were found guilty on March 6, 1651. Both were executed. _Records Particular Court_ (2: 17). [Dr. Hoadley's note in this case: "Mr.

Trumbull (Dr. J. Hammond Trumbull) told me he had a record of execution in these cases. I suppose he referred to the diary of Matthew Grant."]

The entry of the execution appears in Grant's _Diary_, after the note as to Alse Young. _One Blank of Windsor_, TRUMBULL.

LYDIA GILBERT. Windsor, 1654.

October 3, 1651, Henry Stiles of Windsor was killed by the accidental discharge of a gun in the hands of Thomas Al yn, also of Windsor. An inquest was held, and Thomas was indicted in the following December. He plead guilty, and at the trial the jury found the fact to be "homicide by misadventure." Thomas was fined L20 for his "sinful neglect and careless carriage," and put under a bond of L10, for good behavior for a year. _Records Particular Court_ (2: 29-57).

But witchcraft was abroad, and its tools and emissaries more than two years afterwards fastened suspicion of this death by clear accident, on Lydia Gilbert, it being charged that "thou hast of late years, or still dost give entertainment to Sathan ... and by his helpe hast killed the body of Henry Styles, besides other witchcrafts."

She was indicted and tried in September or November, 1654, and "Ye party above mentioned is found guilty of witchcraft by ye jury." Her fate is not written in any known record, but the late Honorable S.O. Griswold, a recognized authority on early colonial history in Windsor, says that as the result of a close examination of the record, "I think the reasonable probability is that she was hanged." _Records Particular Court_ (2: 51); STILE'S _History of Windsor_ (pp. 169, 444-450).

GOODY BASSETT. Stratford, 1651. Executed.

"The Gouernor, Mr. Cul ick, and Mr. Clarke are desired to goe downe to Stratford to keepe courte uppon the tryal of Goody Bassett for her life"--May, 1651. "Because goodwife Bassett when she was condemned"

(probably on her own confession, as in the Greensmith case). _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (1: 220); _New Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 77-88).

GOODWIFE KNAPP. Fairfield, 1653. Executed.

"After goodwife Knapp was executed, as soon as she was cut downe." _New Haven Colonial Records_ (1: 81).

Ful account in previous chapter.

ELIZABETH GODMAN. New Haven, 1655. Acquitted.

Elizabeth was released from prison September 4, 1655, with a reprimand and warning by the court. _New Haven Town Records_ (2: 174, 179); _New Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 29, 151).

Account in previous chapter.

NICHOLAS BAYLEY and WIFE. New Haven, 1655. Acquitted.

Nicholas and his wife, after several appearances in court on account of a suspicion of witchcraft, and for various other offenses--among them, lying and filthy speeches by the wife--were advised to remove from the colony. They took the advice.

WILLIAM MEAKER. New Haven, 1657. Accused acquitted.

Thomas Mul ener was always in trouble. He was a chronic litigant. His many contentions are noted at length in the court records. Among other things he made up his mind that his pigs were bewitched, so "he did cut of the tayle and eare of one and threw into the fire," "said it was a meanes used in England by some people to finde out witches," and in the light of this porcine sacrifice he charged his neighbor William Meaker with the bewitching. Meaker promptly brought an action of defamation, but Mul ener became involved in other controversies and "miscarriages,"

to the degree that he was advised to remove out of the place, and put under bonds for good behavior; and Meaker, probably feeling himself vindicated, dropped his suit. _New Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 224).

ELIZABETH GARLICK. Easthampton, 1658. Acquitted.

_Records Particular Court_ (2 :113); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_

(1: 573); STILES' _History of Windsor_ (p. 735).

Account in previous chapter.

NICHOLAS and MARGARET JENNINGS. Saybrook, 1661.

Jury disagreed.

The major part of the jury found Nicholas guilty, but the rest only strongly suspected him, and as to Margaret, some found her guilty, and the others suspected her to be guilty. It is probable that the Jennings were under inquiry when, at a session of the General Court at Hartford, June 15, 1659, it was recorded that "Mr. Willis is requested to goe downe to Sea Brook, to assist ye Maior in examininge the suspitions about witchery, and to act therin as may be requisite." _Records Particular Court_ (2: 160-3); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (1: 338).

1662-63 was a notable year in the history of witchcraft in Connecticut.

It marked the last execution for the crime within the commonwealth, and thirty years before the outbreak at Salem.

NATHANIEL GREENSMITH and REBECCA his WIFE. Hartford, 1662. Both executed.

Account in previous chapter. _Records Particular Court_ (2: 182); _Memorial History Hartford County_ (1: 274); _Connecticut Magazine_

(November 1899, pp. 557-561).

MARY SANFORD. Hartford, 1662. Convicted June 13, 1662. Executed.

_Records Particular Court_ (2: 174-175); HOADLEY'S _Record Witchcraft Trials_.

ANDREW SANFORD. Hartford, 1662. No indictment.

_Records Particular Court_ (2: 174-175); HOADLEY'S _Record Witchcraft Trials_.

JUDITH VARLETT (VARLETH). Hartford, 1662. Arrested; released.

It will be recalled that Rebecca Greensmith in her confession, among other things, said that Mrs. Judith Varlett told her that she (Varlett)

"was much troubled wth ye Marshal Jonath: Gilbert & cried, & she sayd if it lay in her power she would doe him a mischief, or what hurt shee could."

Judith must have indulged in other indiscretions of association or of speech, since she soon fell under suspicion of witchcraft, and was put under arrest and imprisoned. But she had a powerful friend at court (who, despite his many contentions and intrigues, commanded the attention of the Connecticut authorities), in the person of her brother-in-law Peter Stuyvesant, then bearing the title and office of

"Captain General and Commander-in-Chief of Amsterdam In New Netherland, now cal ed New York, and the Dutch West India Islands." It was doubtless due to his intercession in a letter of October 13, 1662, that she was released.

The letter:

"To the Honorable Deputy Governour & Court of "Magistracy att Harafort.

(Oct. 1662)

"Honoured and Worthy Srs.--

"By this occasion of me Brother in Lawe (beinge necessitated to make a Second Voyage for ayde his distressed sister Judith Varleth jmprisoned as we are jmformed, uppon pretend accusation of wicherye we Realy Beleeve and out her wel known education Life Conversation & profession of faith, wee dear assure that shee is jnnocent of Such a horrible Crimen, & wherefor j doubt not hee will now, as formerly finde jour dhonnours favour and ayde for the jnnocent). _Ye Ld Stephesons Letter_

(C.B. 2: doc. 1).

MARY BARNES. Farmington, 1662. Convicted January 6. Probably executed.

_Records Particular Court_ (2: 184).

WILLIAM AYRES and GOODY AYRES his Wife. Hartford, 1662. Arrested. Fled from the colony.

ELIZABETH SEAGER. Hartford, 1662. Convicted; discharged.

Goody Seager probably deserved al that came to her in trials and punishment. She was one of the typical characters in the early communities upon whom distrust and dislike and suspicion inevitably fel . Exercising witch powers was one of her more reputable qualities.

She was indicted for blasphemy, adultery, and witchcraft at various times, was convicted of adultery, and found guilty of witchcraft in June, 1665. She owed her escape from hanging to a finding of the Court of Assistants that the jury's verdict did not legal y answer to the indictment, and she was set "free from further suffering or imprisonment." _Records County Court_ (3: 5: 52); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (2: 531); _Rhode Island Colonial Records_ (2: 388).

JAMES WALKLEY. Hartford, 1662. Arrested. Fled to Rhode Island.

KATHERINE HARRISON. Wethersfield, 1669. Convicted; discharged.

See account in previous chapter. _Records Court of, Assistants_ (I, 1-7); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (2: 118, 132); _Doc. History New York_ (4th ed., 4: 87).

NICHOLAS DESBOROUGH. Hartford, 1683. Suspicioned.

Desborough was a landowner in Hartford, having received a grant of fifty acres for his services in the Pequot war. He owes his enrol ment in the hal of fame to Cotton Mather, who was so self-satisfied with his efforts in "Relating the wonders of the invisible world in preternatural occurrences" that in his pedantic exuberance he put in a learned sub-title: "Miranda cano, sed sunt credenda" (The themes I sing are marvelous, yet true).

Fourteen examples were chosen for the "Thaumatographia Pneumatica," as

"remarkable histories" of molestations from evil spirits, and Mather said of them, "that no reasonable man in this whole country ever did question them."

Desborough stands in place as the "fourth example." No case more clearly illustrates the credulity that neutralized common sense in strong men.

It was a case of abstraction, or theft, or mistaken thrift. A "chest of cloaths" was missing. The owner, instead of going to law, found his remedy "in things beyond the course of nature," and he and his friends with "nimble hands" pelted Desborough's house, and himself when abroad, with stones, turves, and corncobs, and final y some of his property was burned by a fire "in an unknown way kindled." Is it not enough to note that Mather closes this wondrous tale of the spiritual molestations with the very human explanation that "upon the restoring of the cloaths, the trouble ceased"?

ELIZABETH CLAWSON. Fairfield, 1692. Acquitted.

Account in previous chapter.

MARY and HANNAH HARVEY. Fairfield, 1692. Jury found no bill.

GOODY MILLER. Fairfield, 1692. Acquitted.

MARY STAPLIES. Fairfield, 1692. Jury found no bill.

Account in previous chapter.

MERCY DISBOROUGH. Fairfield, 1692. Convicted; reprieved. Account in previous chapter. HUGH CROTIA. Stratford, 1693. Jury found no bill.

Account in previous chapter. _C. & D._ (Vol. I,185).

WINIFRED BENHAM SENIOR and JUNIOR. Wal ingford, 1697. Acquitted.

They were mother and daughter (twelve or thirteen years old), tried at Hartford and acquitted in August, 1697; indicted on new complaints in October, 1697, but the jury returned on the bill, "Ignoramus." _Records Court of Assistants_ (1: 74, 77).

SARAH SPENCER. Colchester, 1724. Accused. Damages 1s.

Even a certificate of the minister as to her religion and virtue, could not free Sarah from a reputation as a witch. And when Elizabeth (and how many Connecticut witches bore that name) Ackley accused her of "riding and pinching," and James Ackley, her husband, made threats, Sarah sued them for a fortune in those days, L500 damages, and got judgment for L5, with costs. The Ackleys appealed, and at the trial the jury awarded Sarah damages of ls., and also stated that they found the Ackleys not insane--a clear demonstration that the mental condition of witchcraft accusers was taken account of in the later and saner times.

NORTON. Bristol, 1768. Suspicioned. No record.

"On the mountain," probably Fal mountain in Bristol, the antics of a young woman named Norton, who accused her aunt of putting a bridle on her and driving her through the air to witch meetings in Albany, caused a commotion among the virtuous people. Deacon Dutton's ox was torn apart by an invisible agent, and unseen hands brought new ailments to the residents there, pinched them and stuck red hot pins into them.

Elder Wildman set out to exorcise the evil spirit, but became so terrorized that he cal ed for help, and one of his posse of assistants was scared into convulsions. This case may be counted among the last, perhaps the last traditions of the strange delusion which aforetime filled the hills and val eys of Quohnectacut with its baleful light.

_Memorial History Hartford County_ (2: 51).

ROLL OF NAMES

ALSE YOUNG 1647

MARY JOHNSON 1648

JOHN CARRINGTON 1650-51

JOAN CARRINGTON 1650-71

GOODY BASSETT 1651

GOODWIFE KNAPP 1653

LYDIA GILBERT 1654

ELIZABETH GODMAN 1655

NICHOLAS BAYLY 1655

GOODWIFE BAYLY 1655

WILLIAM MEAKER 1657

ELIZABETH GARLICK 1658

NICHOLAS JENNINGS 1661

MARGARET JENNINGS 1661

NATHANIEL GREENSMITH 1662

REBECCA GREENSMITH 1662

MARY SANFORD 1662

ANDREW SANFORD 1662

GOODY AYRES 1662

KATHERINE PALMER 1662

JUDITH VARLETT 1662

JAMES WALKLEY 1662

MARY BARNES 1662-63

ELIZABETH SEAGER 1666

KATHERINE HARRISON 1669

NICHOLAS DISBOROUGH 1683

MARY STAPLIES 1692

MERCY DISBOROUGH 1692

ELIZABETH CLAWSON 1692

MARY HARVEY 1692

HANNAH HARVEY 1692

GOODY MILLER 1692

HUGH CROTIA 1693

WINIFRED BENHAM, SENR. 1697

WINIFRED BENHAM, JUNR. 1697

SARAH SPENCER 1724

---- NORTON 1768

What of those men and women to whom justice in their time was meted out, in this age of reason, of religious enlightenment, liberty, and catholicity, when witchcraft has lost its mystery and power, when intel igence reigns, and the Devil works his will in other devious ways and in a more attractive guise?

They were the victims of delusion, not of dishonor, of a perverted theology fed by moral aberrations, of a fanaticism which never stopped to reason, and halted at no sacrifice to do God's service; and they were all done to death, or harried into exile, disgrace, or social ostracism, through a mistaken sense of religious duty: but they stand innocent of deep offense and only guilty in the eye of the law written in the Word of God, as interpreted and enforced by the forefathers who wrought their condemnation, and whose religion made witchcraft a heinous sin, and whose law made it a heinous crime.

Is the contrast in human experience, between the servitude to credulity and superstition in 1647-97 and the deliverance from it of this day, any wider than between the ironclad theology of that and of later times, and the challenge to it, and its diabolical logic, of yesterday, which marks a new era in denominational creeds, in religious beliefs, and their expression?

Jonathan Edwards, in his famous sermon at Enfield in 1741, on "Sinners in the hands of an Angry God," was inspired to say to the impenitent:

"The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you and is dreadful y provoked; His wrath toward you burns like fire; He looks upon you as worthy of nothing else but to be cast into the fire; He is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in His sight; you are 10,000 times so abominable in His eyes as the most hateful and venomous serpent is in ours.... Instead of one how many is it likely will remember this discourse in hell! And it would be a wonder if some that are now present should not be in hell in a very short time--before this year is out. And it would be no wonder if some persons, that now sit here in some seats of this meeting-house, in health and quiet, and secure, should be there before to-morrow morning." One hundred and sixty-three years later, Rev. Dr. Samuel T. Carter, a godly minister of the same faith, "a heretic who is no heretic," stood before the presbytery of Nassau, was invited to remain in the Presbyterian communion, and yet said this of the doctrine of Edwards, as written in the _Westminster Confession_: "In God's name and Christ's name it is not true. There is no such God as the God of the confession. There is no such world as the world of the confession. There is no such eternity as the eternity of the confession.... This world so full of flowers and sunshine and the laughter of children is not a cursed lost world, and the 'endless torment' of the confession is not God's, nor Christ's, nor the Bible's idea of future punishment."

What should constitute the true faith of a Christian, and set him apart from his fel owmen in duties and observances, was one of the crucial questions in the everyday life of the early New England colonists, and the hanging and discipline of witches was one of its necessary incidents.

It was the same spirit of intolerance and of religious animosity that was written in the treatment of the Quakers and Baptists at Boston; in the experience of Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson; and of "The Rogerenes" in Connecticut, for "profanation of the Sabbath," told in a chapter of forgotten history.

In the sunlight of the later revelation, is not the present judgment of the men and women of those far off times, "when the wheel of prayer was in perpetual motion," when fear and superstition and the wrath of an angry God ruled the strongest minds, truly interpreted in the solemn afterthoughts which the poet ascribes to the magistrate and minister at the grave of Giles Corey?

HATHORNE

"This is the Potter's Field. Behold the fate Of those who deal in witchcrafts, and when questioned, Refuse to plead their guilt or innocence,

And stubbornly drag death upon themselves.

MATHER

"Those who lie buried in the Potter's Field Will rise again as surely as ourselves

That sleep in honored graves with epitaphs; And this poor man whom we have made a victim, Hereafter will be counted as a martyr."

_The New England Tragedies._

HISTORICAL NOTE

ROGER LUDLOW

The Connecticut historians to a very recent date, in ignorance of the facts, and despite his notable services of twenty-four years to the colonies, left Ludlow to die in obscurity in Virginia or elsewhere, and some of the traditions, based on no record or other evidence, have been recently repeated. It is therefore proper to state here in few words who Ludlow was, what he did both in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and after his "return into England" in 1654.

Ludlow came of an ancient English family, which gave to history in his own time and generation such illustrious kinsmen as Sir Henry Ludlow, a member of the Long Parliament and one of the Puritan leaders, and Sir Edmund Ludlow, member of Parliament, Lieutenant-General under Cromwel , member of the court at King Charles' trial, and whom Macaulay named "the most illustrious saviour of a mighty race of men, the judges of a king, the founders of a republic."

In May, 1630, Ludlow came to Massachusetts, as one of the Assistants under the charter of "The Governor and company of Massachusetts Bay in New England."

His services in the Bay Colony from 1630-35 ranged from the duties of a magistrate in the Great Charter Court to those of the high office of Deputy Governor. The quality of that service is written in a bare statement of his various offices--surveyor, negotiator of the Pequot treaty, colonel ex officio, auditor of Governor Winthrop's accounts, superintendent of fortifications, military commissioner, member of the General Court, Deputy Governor when Thomas Dudley was Governor; and he was always one of the foremost men in civil, political, and social affairs, to the day of his departure to "the val ey of the long river,"--a day of good fortune for Connecticut.

When Massachusetts established church membership as the condition of suffrage,--and radical differences of opinion on other matters arose,--it marked the culmination of a set purpose of some of her ablest men to remove from her jurisdiction, among whom Hooker, Ludlow, and Haynes were the most notable. The General Court created a commission to govern Connecticut