The Romance of Norwalk

This new grant gave Fairfield jurisdiction over a piece of land which commenced at the Sasqua or Mill river and ex¬ tended west two miles. The small strip of land between the new extension of Fairfield property and the alleged east¬ ernmost limits of Norwalk property was then claimed by both towns. The General Court took a hand May 21, 1653, when it ordered that each town send two men “to viewe the place and debate betwixt themselves.” In 1664, Thomas Fitch was voted “to be assisting in the business.” In 1670, Lieutenant Olmsted and John Gregory, sr., were added to the list of peace propagandists. June 4, 1674, Norwalk having become tired of waiting for any definite settlement, voted allotments on the east side of Saugatuck “to the utter¬ most of our bounds eastward.” 1687 found both Norwalk and Fairfield again in a deadlock with Norwalk hotly declaring in town meeting that “they shall not comply nor agree with the aforesayed per¬ sons, viz., Captain Eells, Captain Beard, Mr. Judson, as a committee, or any persons in the measuring of any mile or running any dividend lyne upon any land of ours lawfully purchased by us; allso doe hereby forewarne any person or persons’ on any land of ours soe to do at present.” However, it was not long after this outburst that the trouble was peacefully settled, the boundaries definitely placed, and Norwalk allowed that strip of land which included the old Indian “Compoe” domain. Evidence of the futility of those 20 years of argument is given in the fact that when Westport was first organized it helped itself to portions from both sides of Saugatuck river. QUARREL WITH STAMFORD While the quarrel with Fairfield was in progress, a dis¬ agreement which threatened to become a serious breach, BOUNDARY DISPUTES 73 took place with Stamford, over the Five Mile land boun¬ daries. An Indian was at the bottom of this trouble. March 24, 1645, Piamikin, a sagamore, exchanged for “divers rea¬ sons and considerations,” land lying west of Five Mile River and deeded same to Andrew Wood and Richard Law, two prominent Stamford men. Six years later, Piamikin figured in a conveyance of prop¬ erty whereby several Norwalk planters were given quiet and peaceful enjoyment of a portion of the same territory. Neither Stamford nor Norwalk knew of this double trade and consequently both claimed that choice piece of land west of Five Mile river where the forests were good and the farming land was excellent. So the Norwalkers went merrily about their work, crossing the stream, cutting the hay and felling the trees, blithely disregarding the protests of the Stamfordites. Backing up its citizens, Norwalk voted at a town meeting under date of August 26, 1666, “that such men of our inhabitants as doe goe to cutt hay on the other side of five mile river, the towne will stand by them in the action to de¬ fend them, and to beare an equall proportion of the damage they shall sustaine upon that account; and if they shall be afronted by Stamford men, the towne will take as speedy a course as they can to prosecute them by law, to recover their just rights touching the lands in controversy; and also they have chosen and deputed Mr. Thomas Fitch to goe with the sayed men when they goe to cutt or fetch away, to make answer for and in behalfe of the towne and the rest to be silent.” In 1668, Norwalk, becoming weary of the continual argu¬ ing voted to send a letter to the Stamford townspeople to see what could be done about an agreement. In 1670, in desperation, Norwalk dispatched Mr. Fitch, Lieutenant Olmsted and Daniel Kellogg as a committee to go to Stam¬ ford, “to treat with the inhabitants their, to se if they and we can come to a loving and neighborly issue and agree¬ ment.” Stamford won and Norwalk gave up the piece of 74 ROMANCE OF NORWALK land to which she laid claim, west of Five Mile River in Rowayton. NORWALK IN PERIL 200 YEARS All this time, while Norwalk was embroiled in land argu¬ ments with her neighbors on both sides, a much bigger argu¬ ment was going on concerning the ownership of the very land upon which Norwalk stood, both Connecticut and New York states claiming it. Thus we have three wrangles within one big wrangle and all over portions of the same section of land. During the argument, Norwalk, Connecticut, very nearly became Norwalk, New York. The trouble between Connecticut and New York, over the ownership of the southwestern corner of this state and over the western boundary line of Connecticut, commenced in 1650, and was not finally nor definitely settled until 1879. Thus for more than 200 years the little town of Norwalk never knew from one moment to the next when she would be torn from the protection of the Connecticut colony and thrust under the jurisdiction of New York. During those years, the boundary lines were changed sev¬ eral times, many agreements were made and many broken. A brief glance at the map will reveal three distinctly differ¬ ent boundary lines: in the center, a short one agreed upon in 1650; to the left, a second, agreed upon in 1664; to the right, a third, agreed upon in 1731 and confirmed in 1879. The story of the squabble between Connecticut and New York, which so vitally affected Norwalk, is very interesting, but it is also very complicated. In fact, so many different boundaries are given in so many different histories, that ad¬ dling of the brain is apt to result with those who would unravel the tangle. Of all explanations given, that offered by Clarence Winthrop Bowen in his 1882 book, “The Boun¬ dary Disputes of Connecticut,” was found to be the most reliable. And so we will try to present, as simply as possi¬ ble, a resume of the situation, with Mr. Bowen’s work as the basis of the information. In the very beginning, by an early grant, Connecticut BOUNDARY DISPUTES 75 claimed that her western lands extended right across the country, with the Pacific Ocean as the boundary. Naturally, any such assertion conflicted with the ideas of the Dutch, who had settled in the New Netherlands. In 1650, the Eng¬ lish met the Dutch, and the boundary line marked Q to R on the map was agreed upon. This line ran up the west side of Greenwich bay, “about four miles from Stamford,” in a northerly direction about 20 miles. Nothing came of the agreement, however, after all the elaborate preparations, because before the treaty was rati¬ fied between the parent states in Europe, war broke out between England and Holland and the agreement died. Aug. 27, 1664, New Amsterdam became New York, named in honor of the Duke of York. December 1, 1664, a definite agreement was reached be¬ tween Connecticut and the Duke of York. The line agreed upon is marked on the left hand side of the map under date of 1664. It commenced at the Mamaroneck river, “13 miles east of West Chester” and continued in a north-north¬ westerly direction, crossing the Hudson river above Peeks- kill, and going on until it touched what was then the southern boundary of Massachusetts, and now is the northwest corner of Ulster county in New York state. Note that at that time, Massachusetts claimed territory right across the north¬ ern part of New York state and set her southern boundary line, as indicated on the map. Under the new agreement, Long Island was declared New York’s property. See how large Connecticut would have been, had the new agreement concerning our state’s western boundary held. A large portion of New York state would have been ours, all of Connecticut as it now stands, and in addition, Port Chester and Rye. Connecticut was immensely pleased with this boundary, for instead of losing half her colony as she had feared, she gained considerable territory. But the boundary was never even surveyed. In 1674, Connecticut appointed a commission to run the 76 ROMANCE OF NORWALK line from the Mamaroneck river to the Hudson river. This state even went so far as to make a few settlements on its new land, up the Hudson river by virtue of the treaty. New York looked with disfavor on these settlements and then announced her claim to half of this state as far east as the Connecticut river, according to a grant made to the Duke of York by England. In 1682 New York was insisting upon all land as far as 20 miles east of the Hudson river and said if she didn’t get that territory, she would push her claim for all the land as far east as the Connecticut river. November 28, 1683, a new agreement was reached between the two colonies. The Byram river between Greenwich and Rye was established as the westernmost bounds of Connecticut. The line ran up the river a little way and then went north, northwest for eight miles, then east, parallel to the Sound for 12 miles, then north to the Massachusetts line. It was placed 20 miles from the Hudson river and parallel to it. Follow the line on the map, commencing at the mouth of the Byram river, thence to letter D, thence to H, then I, then north to the Massachusetts line. As the first part of the line, Byram river to letter D, came nearer than 20 miles to the Hudson river, it was agreed that New York should have a piece of land on the rest of Connecticut’s boundary line, equal to the amount which New York gave up on the Connecticut coast. By this agreement Connecticut lost Rye and Portchester, but it did gain Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, New Canaan, part of Wilton and Norwalk. Note dotted lines on map encircling Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, New Canaan, Wil¬ ton and Norwalk, which lines mark the piece of territory given up by New York on the coast. In return, New York received a strip of land 1 and 3-4 miles and 20 rods wide along the west side of Connecticut, parallel to and 20 miles distant from the Hudson river. This was called the Oblong or “Equivalent Tract” and included 61,440 acres. See map. In 1731 a joint survey was made of the oblong territory. c/2 pi <U CD ' Pi Me M P -m P <u u p ^ m ^ 2 o ^ MH Vi c r P > p <u +-> P 4-> Vi Vi i| i—< *-< Ctf a cu 4-> o £ p m P 4-> <u m CP P S 0) rP 4-* MM ' o Os P Vi i— i ^ 00 ON oo pb P o pi P £ u O £ P o CP p