Norwalk

The adjustment of the exact line between the two tow ns was a matter of some difficulty and because so. of procrastination. On May 21, 1653, each town was appointed to send two men to look at the ground and debate as to an agreement. If unsuccessful, two men from Stratford were to be selected for the purpose. The question seemed to con- tinue an open one until the Fairfield deputies to the Hartford Court of March 10, 1663, were instructed to inform Norwalk that its Fairfield bounds would be fixed in the May following ; and on Oct. 8. 1663. John Hurd and Joseph Judson were elected to lay out the bounds between the two towns. At a meeting held in Norwalk on May 6, 1664. Thomas Fitch w as empowered to bring the matter to an issue. Delay follow ed, but adjustment had to such a degree succeeded that on June 4, 1674, the town voted "allotments" on the east side of the Saugatuck "to the uttermost of our bounds eastward," and it was agreed "that the riser shall be accounted the front of y" lots, and the utmost bounds easterly the rear, the whole breadth of y* ground upon y* hills, and lots to run across y plain from end to end." Notw ithstanding the foregoing, and notwithstanding the fact that the town on Dec. 16, 1684, hastened Samuel Haves to Hartford for the purpose of procuring information, and as the vote would seem to imply, of acting in relation to the matter, definite Court-con- clusion does not seem to have been arrived at until 1687, which year's order appears to have accorded to Norwalk the old Indian "Compoe" domain, from which the line grad- ually bore north-westward from the Sound, passing near the Burr Plain of a later date, and thence continuing below the southern limit of the present town of Weston, and thence north-wester])- it lost itself finally in the vicinity of the New York province angle at The Oblong.' From [687 to 1707 there was Norw alk occupation, to considerable extent, of the Hast Saugatuck territory. At a town meeting held February 28, 1706-7, a committee —Joseph St. John and Samuel Keeler, Sr.— was chosen to "view said property" and was instructed to " methodise " this land and bring it into " a capacity for draw ing of lots." The committee proceeded to its duty, and on December 22. 1709. the following draft of lots (one acre to 50 pounds commonage) w as presented to the tow n and ordered to be recorded. Vol, iv, fol. 158. Norwalk Town Records. .May .7. .654.— 1. is ordered that the towne of ,896, U known as the township of Lewisboro', in Walk shat p«, and injoy all y land which Westchester Co.mtv, New York : a section, a part rLXnti °'"™t "< «** which was once considered as belonging ,0 Nor- to the plantni^t- of Fairfield.' ,,.^11 , - , . , wan,. Lewi.sboro (so named in honor of Hon. John 'This called New York province anefc em « 7"' * b™<'M:lor °] "Ic **»' was anciently known braced 0* extreme southed, portion o what „ '"' ** the r"'"1»ti"nar.r portion " "h'U' ,n *•<•■ a sort of militarv seat. NORWALK. 3' THE LOT-DRAWERS. Acres -Com m oiiage Acres H No. i. —Thomas Seymour, IOO " 2.— Mr. Fitch, 3r4 6 00 1 " i Inlin Nfls.li J. J Willi 1st zlcyll. 166 3 T3 1 " 4. — Samuel Belden, 10 34 ' 5 ™~Matthew Marvin, Jr t 418- 3 iixa lliic w ivi ar v 111, or., > .0 g 1 19 '* 6. — |ohn Gregory, Jr., 50 1 " 7. — Thomas Benedict, 5° 1 *' 8, — Zerubbabel Iloyt, 192 3 3 16 '■ 9. — Joshua Gregory, 50 1 0 00 " 10 — Richard Holmes, 175 3 2 00 " 11. — Ephraim Lockwood, 170 1 1 26 " 12.— Samuel Canfield, 223 4 T 34 ■ " 13. — Christopher Comstock, 146 2 3 28 ' " 14. — Mr. Hanford, 300 6 0 00 " 15. — Samuel Smith, 70 1 T 26 " 16. — Samuel Hayes, 100 2 0 00 " 17. — Richard Olmstead, 2I9-10 4 O 28 ! " 18. — Thomas Taylor, 55 1 OO 16 " 19. — John Gregory, Sr., 353 7 O '* 20. — John Rusco, io5 2 O 16 " 21. — Mark Sension, 252 5 0 6 Acres-Comm ouage A( res K. «.<!■ Rods No. 22. — Thomas Fitch, 150 3 O 00 " 23, — John Hoyt, IOO 2 0 OO " 24- — Ralph Keeler, j 157 " 24. — ]oh.n K.eeler, \ 3 O 12 " 25. — Thomas Benedict, Sr., '73 3 I 13 " 26. — George Abbott, 75 I 2 OO '' 27. — Nathaniel Hayes, »*3 2 I 08 '* 28 Judah G^regorv 5° OO " 29. — James Sension, 1 89 3 3 08 " 30. — John Benedict, 50 1 p OO " 31.— John Bonton, IOO 0 OO " 32.— Thomas Betts, 146 2 3 27 " 33- — John Raymond, f 300 " 33. — Samuel Sension, \ 6 0 OO " 34. — Daniel Kellogg, ■35 2 2 OO " 35- — Robert Stuart, 283 6.8 5 2 26 " 36. — John Piatt, 168 '34 3 1 18 " 37. — Nathaniel Richards, 272 5 1 31 •' 38. — Thomas Lupton, 70 [ I 14 " 39. — Mathias Sension, I50 3 Q OO " 40. — Samuel Benedict, 50 1 0 OO It was eventually determined that Fairfield should extend to the Saugatuck River, and when, in later years, the town of Westport was organized, it took portions from both sides of the Saugatuck. THE STAMFORD BOUNDARY. There are like points in tutored and untutored human nature. Piamikin, a Sagamore of the Indian-paradise-point, Norwalk's south-western portion, made what he, it is to be presumed, deemed a good bargain when, on March 24, 1645, he exchanged for "divers reasons and considerations " lands lying west of Five-Mile River, and deeded the same to Andrew Ward and Richard Law of Stamford, two veritable lights in that town's early history. Six years farther down, the same red Sagamore united in a conveyance whereby several principal Norwalk planters were given quiet and peaceable enjoyment of a portion of the same territory. Stamford and Norwalk were alike oblivious as to what Ponus' con- temporary had done until many moons had fulled. There were fine forests and farms at Five-Mile River and good water-power also, and the land on both sides the river was put under Norwalk tribute. Entirely unsuspicious of victimizing, either by duplicity or stu- pidity, as the case may have been, our pioneers crossed the stream, mowed the grass and felled the trees. From beyond the "staddle by the Oke" towards the west, the land was, as they supposed, their purchase, and they determined to make the most of it. This nat- urally roused Stamford, and an uncomfortable state of affairs was the consequence. Stam- ford, by solemn vote, decided to "confront" Norwalk, and Norwalk on Aug. 26, [666, 32 X ORWALK agreed "that such men of our inhabitants as doe goe to cutt hay on the other side Five- Mile river the town will stand by." Two years after this, Sept. 30, [668, Norwalk voted that the Deputies "shall do their best indevor " to bring about a settlement of the vexed subject. Stamford reciprocated and empowered Richard Law, Francis Bell and John Holly to "treat" with Norwalk men. Two years later Norwalk made advances toward a "loving and neighborly is.-.i and agreement." Stamford's title ranked in point of age that of Norwalk, and the final outcome was that that sister settlement gained the day, and Men-walk's southwestern line was left about as Partrick had established it. North somewhat from this southwest point the ancient line took a northwesterly course, embracing w hat is now West Norwalk, and from thence still northwest, passing to the west of Haynes' Ridge in Canaan parish, and continuing until Pound Ridge was entered and embraced where the line ended in that of the province of New York. THE OBLONG This term is the designation of the debatable lands that lay north of the present boundaries of the tow nships of New Canaan and Stamford, and west of the Ridgefield line. The ownership-dispute of this romantic region was first occasioned through fail- ure on the parts of the Dutch and English to definitely establish the separation line between the Xew York and Connecticut colonies. There seemed to have been some Dutch and English understanding in 1654, in which Norwalk was interested, in so far as its "twelve miles north" possessions were concerned. On Oct. 13, 1664, the Court at Hart- ford sent the Connecticut Governor, with four attendants, to congratulate the English upon their occupancy of w hat had heretofore been Dutch territory and to, if possible, come to an agreement Xew York and Connecticut boundary-wise. The parties met, and on Dec. I, following, signed articles that conveyed to Connecticut all the land east of a north and south line drawn twenty miles east of the Hudson River. This appears to have been a piece of bungling, as it was subsequently ascertained that on account of the course of the Hudson, such a line would give Connecticut possession, at one point, to the Hudson's very banks. The Dutch, after a time, regained a footing in New York, and now all pre- vious agreements were null. In ,683 another agreement was made, and 61,440 acres went to Connecticut. This was not entirely satisfactory either, and for two hundred years there has been more or less dispute- Finally, the matter has been settled, and as Norwalk had parted wtth that portion of its territory bordering upon the so-called Oblong to its daughter 1717 New York was asked to define iu^t wliprp 11 m v, ~ the line lav and \^„aiv „, . ' Alexander Ressigue was effected bv this tne line lav, and .Norwalk, at a town meet ins held recent v.... v 1 ... . Feb. :, ,726, granted lihertv to such of its Oblo', J6""' N ^ °rk <h™^ ^ °» Feb. 19, .729-30, citizens "that had lands taken awav from then bv « relin1ui5hed «"ee-and-a-half Norwalk this new line, "to take up j. same 'in anv of the un ! RT T f ""'f Unt° York >'° P°Und severed common lands" in the township ^ ™f ™ » NORWALK. 33 townships of New Canaan and Wilton, it dropped all challenge to its Indian-granted land lying north of the limits of the two named towns. " Oblong" is now an obsolete desig- nation ; nevertheless, its southeastern angle was once Norwalk soil and the home of Nor- walk sons."