Origins of Killingworth

The town of Killingworth experienced a little different beginning than most of the Connecticut townships. The area known as Hammonaset lay between the existing towns of Guilford and Saybrook. A stage road connected the Connecticut towns that bordered on Long Island Sound. Each community was required to maintain the section of stage road within its vicinity. Hammonaset represented a section where no one was available to improve and maintain the road. The stage road ran along what is now Main Street in Clinton. As a result the General Assembly sought to provided incentives for families to settle the township. Somewhat unique to Hammonasset, soon to be renamed Killingworth, was the idea of granting all of the property to the township to be distributed relatively free of charge. As the town grew it conducted on a yearly basis a division of the remaining property. We see references in the deed records to Lot 10 4th division etc. By the late 1700’s most of the available land had been granted. The pattern suggests that the original families, the Planters, were given some preferential treatment, but anyone who desired a home lot and made his point with the town council was granted property. Samuel Griffin must have received his lot in Clinton in this fashion. The deed records suggest an active trade in property once it had been granted. We would like to present here two documents. One is the original document calling for the establishment of Killingworth. The second document is from one of the land divisions. The Killingworth document starts” The determination and conclusion of the committee chosen by the general Assembly for the ordering of the settling of Hammonasset, Oct. 1663”. Some of the key features: Each person who applied to become a “Planter” must settle in Killingworth within two years. Once settled they must remain for four years or forfeit their property rights. The goal was to have thirty families settled as soon as possible. As a reminder of the role of the Congregational Church within the Connecticut Politic two provisions were added, One “That their be a convenient allotment reserved for the minister forever”. Two “That they shall settle an able Orthodox and Godley Minister free from scandal and with the advice of the major part of the Magistrates of Connecticut”. Among the names of the original Planters we recognize names that are common to the Blog, Rossiter, Hull, Kelsey, Meigs, and Buell. Click on documents to enlarge

Death records for Henry and Elizabeth Doud from Guilford

One of the surviving volumes from the early days of Guilford is titled Record Of Mortality Guilford. In this ledger we find the death record for Henry and Elizabeth Doud/Dowd and two of their children, their daughter Elizabeth and their son Jeremiah, both of whom died at a young age.I have also included a record from my own family tree. My great grandfather Janna Meigs lost twin girls who in the spirt of Congregational symbolism he had named Silence and Submit. Click on documents to enlarge.

Congregational, Doctrine or Confession of Faith

We have discussed at various times and in a number of different contexts the Congregational doctrines concerning Full Communion and the idea of Covenant. We would like to present here a complete collection of these documents as they appear in the opening pages of the church records. When a new Society was organized one of the first tasks was to obtain a ledger in which the business of the Society could be duly recorded. Among the first items in the ledger was the document usually titled, “The Doctrine or Confession of Faith”. The next document was titled, “The Covenant”. At some point the, “Articles of Faith” were added which were used both as a missionary tool and as a teaching tool in their Sunday Schools. These ledgers were then used to record the business of the Congregation. The ledgers are also a primary source for information on births, deaths, and baptisms. A major portion is dedicated to the minutes of the regular meetings of the Congregational leadership, the Minister and Deacons. Much of that material is, quite frankly, very mundane. Scattered among the minutes of these meeting you see described little bits of church business that we today may find a little unusual. A number of these items have been previously posted on the Blog. Sinners were called out in the belief that it was for their own good. Committees were appointed to help them with their repentance. Full Communion was suspended. If the parishioner was unrepentant we see the notation “watch and care withdrawn” and maybe even excommunication, i.e. Full Communion rescinded. We see notations on sinners being restored to Full Communion. We see members “dismissed” so they could go to another Society. We see notations on members being received “by letter” meaning they were offered Full Communion on their arrival from another Society. But the key sections of these ledgers were the notation on who had been accepted into Full Communion, which identified members who were in full faith and standing within the Society. These believers were eligible to receive all of Gods Sacraments and blessings starting with baptism for themselves and more importantly baptism for their children. The final act of moving into Full Communion was a public profession before man and God of The Covenant. Abraham Pierson, in his notebook, made note of the date on which members made their profession. Every Congregational Society had these two key documents. Some were written with a little more flourish than others but in core context they were all the same.------ The main document was “The Doctrine or Confession of Faith”. It starts, “We Believe, That there is only one, true living and Eternal God”. The remainder of the document defines the nature of their God and the Godhead. The essence of religion to them, and perhaps all religions, was to clearly understand the nature of and their relationship with the God they were to worship. Given the fact of their God they then entered into a “Covenant”, after the manner of the Biblical covenants, that bound them to him and required of them certain behaviors so that they may be in Full Communion and worthy to receive all of his Sacraments and blessings. The first paragraph of “The Covenant” starts with, “We that are sinful creatures”, acknowledging the need for redemption, and ends with, “do now in the presence of the Great God, his holy angels and this Assembly, Solemnly Covenant with the Lord and with one another”. The Covenant includes a profession that the God described in the Confession of Faith is, “to be our God”, professes that the Lord is our Prophet, Priest and King, includes a promise to obey the revealed will of God in all things, Piety towards God, Sobriety, Justice and Charity toward neighbors, Promote the welfare and union of the Church of Christ in “this place particularly”, and ends with “Amen”. It is interesting to contemplate the effects that the acceptance of the Confession of Faith and the making of a Covenant had on our ancestors and the communities they lived in. The last document is the heading for the section in the church ledger in which those found in Full Communion were recorded. Of note is the connection between Communion and the saving Sacrament of baptism. The issue of baptism was at the center of the debate in the First Great Awakening that began in the early 1700’s. With church membership on the wane the fear was that taking on the responsibly of Full Communion was too daunting for some. Without Communion the opportunity to have your children baptized was not available. The compromise was the “Half Covenant”. In the Half Covenant you were welcomed into the ‘watch and care’ of the Church before you made the commitment to Full Communion. More importantly the halfway covenant meant your children could receive the Sacrament of baptism. The hope was that you would eventually become a fully committed member of the Church of Christ. Click on documents to enlarge.

Ministry in the Second Society

In the article on Abraham Pierson’s notebook we discussed the ministers who had served in Killingworth during his tenure. We present here a few documents that relate to the Rev. Henry Ely and the Rev. Josiah B. Andrews. The first document concerns the Rev. Ely. The record notes the agreement to set his salary at 90 pounds. Raising funds to provide keep for a minister was one of the primary tasks in any Society. It seemed unimaginable to not have a minister. In town minutes you also see references to assignments and projects to build or maintain housing. Another of the needs commonly discussed was efforts to provide the minister with an adequate supply to fire wood. As we discussed earlier conflicts arose between the Rev. Ely and the Society over the amount of financial and other support he was to receive. The conflict grew to a point that they agreed to part ways. The document reads in part “The Rev. Henry Ely, by mutual agreement, between him and the people was regularly dismissed from the pastoral care of the Church of Christ in this place”. The interesting term and concept here is the idea of being “dismissed”. It is a term used with the church membership as a whole. The term was used as an acknowledgement that the parishioner was being released from his covenants with the Society in order to move to a new Society. Entry into the new Society was noted using the term “received by letter”. This process was in essence a transfer of the blessings of being in Full Communion. It seems that the idea of being unaffiliated or outside of the “watch and care” of a Society was almost unthinkable.------The third document records the ordination of the Rev. Andrews to the role of Minister. “The Reverend Josiah B. Andrews was ordained to the work of the gospel ministry and received the pastoral charge of the 2nd Church of Christ in Killingworth”. Also listed is the quorum of Ministers and Deacons who presided over the ordination. The imagery in this document highlights a religious conundrum that persists to this day. The Congregational movement was one iteration of the broader Protestant movement that had as a core belief the rejection of the Catholics Church’s concept of the need for a priestly class to intercede on our behalf with Heaven. For Congregationalists the role of intersession was filled by the congregation. Yet in their desire to be true to the scriptures and finding themselves still somewhat trapped by their Catholic past they maintained the concept of ordination, which is itself, an argument for Apostolic Succession. To reconcile the conundrum they argued that ordination was only necessary for the sake of authorization and church order. This angst over such doctrinal confusion only increased with time. One of the responses was to try to reform Congregationalism just as it had tried to reform the Anglican Church and Catholicism. Thus we see the rise of the Baptist and Methodists movements. The debates divided movements and even single Societies. It is ironic that the Killingworth Second Society today is without a minister, the result of doctrinal disagreements. These debates touched the average churchgoer and even involved the theological elites on both sides of the Atlantic. A famous example involves John Wesley. After he ordained Thomas Coke a superintendent to administer sacraments to the Methodists, his brother Charles wrote:” So easy are Bishops made, By Man’s or woman’s whim? Wesley, his hands on Coke hath laid, But who laid hands on Him?”. Click on documents to enlarge.

Azuba Griffin and Henry Davis

Leonard/Azuba/ Samuel/ Samuel Griffin of Killingworth------We have been unable to find a probate record for Henry Davis the husband of Azuba Griffin. However their son Leonard left a detailed probate record. Leonard was the only son of Henry and Azuba. Being the only son tradition suggests that he probably ended up with most of his fathers property either by purchase or inheritance or as an inheritance from his mother. Historically the girls received their inheritance in the form of cash or household goods with the property to remain in the family. Based on this premise we can use Leonard’s probate to approximate his fathers and thus gain a sense of what life may have been like for Henry Davis and Azuba Griffin. In one section of the probate is a list of the properties involved. They include the stone house lot with 12 ½ acres, old chimney place lot of 2 ½ acres, 14 acres of salt marsh in Madison, dwelling house, wood house, best barn, and cow house on the east side of the yard all on 52 acres. Also listed were the cow house on the west side of the yard, old barn, old cow house and the cider mill house on 212 acres. It lists two additional lots containing 42 and 49 acres respectively. What conclusions might we draw from this list? 370 acres in 1841 was a large farm. With three separate “cow houses” mentioned it is my assumption that this was primarily a dairy operation, dairy being a major industry in Killingworth. Did the 2 ½ acres at the old chimney lot represent the original home lot of Henry and Azuba ? Was the stone house lot their second home? Did the 212 acres associated with the old barn represent Henry’s farm? Leonard left a bequest to five people in his will. To each of them he granted access to the “cider mill house”. To have a dedicated structure to house a cider mill would seem to indicate that the mill had a fairly large capacity and that it represented a valued resource. A cider mill also would seem to imply apple orchards. Having reviewed a fair number of probate records there are little hints in Leonard’s probate that that would seem to suggest a little affluence. He had enough resources to build a building dedicated to wood storage. This was not only for firewood but probably also finished lumber, which was a commodity, named in many wills including Leonard’s. To each of the people mentioned in his will he left a silk handkerchief. To his son Joel he left a razor and lather box. The household goods, that make up a large part of every probate, were numerous and decidedly upscale. One of the marks of affluence in that age was the possession of books. Leonard’s probate lists the following volumes, Large Bible, Beauties of the Bible, Exposition of the New Testament, Companion to the Alter, Berna Family Worship, History of England, Biographical Dictionary, Webster Dictionary, Morse Geography, Hukeweldins Narrative, Modern Geography, Civil Officer, and Gazetteers. The book list would seem to indicate people studying the issue of religion at home and people with a worldview. It’s an interesting exercise to imagine what the nature of the household that Leonard grew up in was like. To imagine how much of what he became came from his Griffin heritage.

Death of Marah Griffin August 13, 1765

Marah and Samuel Griffin’s marriage lasted a short six years. Yet despite this brief time together they enjoy the legacy of a large and successful posterity. Their posterity is traced mainly through the family names of Kelsey, Doud and Davis. Through our research we have come to know more of their posterity than they, in particular, Marah. We would like to address that topic as best as we can. The date and location for the birth of Marah “Griffin” Griffin remains an open question. The Barbour Collection would seem to suggest that at the time of her marriage she was living in Killingworth with several of her siblings. However there is no record of her parents or a recorded birth date in the existing Killingworth records. Discovering even her last name posed a challenge. In the town records there are several lists of marriages, each covering a few selected years. In these records we see listed husbands and wives with each new bride being listed by her first, and most importantly, last name. On one such list she is identified as Marah “Griffin”. We also see in the records three people who historical context would suggest could very well be her siblings. Ame Griffin who married Elihu Wellman, April 17, 1744, Elizabeth Griffin who married Benjamin Turner, November 15, 1753, Samuel and Marah bought their home lot from Benjamin Turner. The last possible sibling was William Griffin who married Eunice Crane, May 13, 1769. These three additional marriages help establish the presence of a second Griffin family in the Second Society. The First Society had within its boundaries a third identifiable Griffin clan. The existence and identity of that clan was discussed in our article on the family of James N Griffin. Marah’s documentary history in Killingworth starts with her marriage to Samuel Griffin on May 17, 1759 (document). Key for our discussion here is the fact that there remains some confusion concerning the spelling of her first name and the date of her death. In the blog we have made note of the three spellings used in the various records, Marah, Mariah, and Mary. In the documentary history there are only two different spellings. In her marriage record and death records, both found in Volume Two of the Town Records, her name is written as “Marah.” The Barbour Collection is taken from these town records. For her marriage record Barbour used the correct spelling Marah. For her death record there is a transcription error changing the name to Mariah. This entry in the Barbour Collection is the only source for the “Mariah” spelling. In the church records we see listed people who on a yearly basis were admitted to Full Communion. We see Samuel Griffin and Mary the wife of Samuel Griffin listed on July 19, 1761 (document). This record is the source for the name Mary that I have always assumed was a version of Marah. The commonly used date for Marah’s death is the Barbour date of August 13, 1763, which is taken from the town record. (document). As part of the documentation that we are presenting is a notation that is written in Volume Two concerning the section of documents in which this date for Marah’s death is found. It states that these records are themselves a certified copy of other original records (document). As with all transcriptions they presented an opportunity for transcription errors. The three most common numerical errors are between the numbers 1 and 7, 7 and 9, and 3 and 5. In this case I argue that a 5 became a 3 and the Barbour Collection simply passed along the error. The primary argument for a date of 1765 is the birth dates of her children. Together Samuel and Marah had three girls (document). The oldest is Lois (Kelsey) her date of birth, as noted in the concise little family record that was unfortunately smudged, is recorded as November 21, 1760. The church records list Lois as being baptized, along with two other children, January 19th, 1761. The Barbour Collection dates for the three girls are obviously taken from the family record discussed above. For Polly (Doud) the records note that she was born August 13, 1762, and baptized August 15, 1762. They show Azuba (Davis) being born April 9, 1765 and her baptismal date noted in the church records on April 14, 1765. The key dates are for Azuba who was born and baptized in April of 1765 (document). Marah married in 1759, her children were born in 1760, 1762, and 1765. These dates follow a pattern that is very common for the era and can be used as a secondary form of historical verification for family groupings. I propose that Marah died August 13, 1765 leaving Samuel with three young daughters one only months old. Again following a commonly seen historical pattern the records show Samuel remarrying fairly quickly on May 15, 1766 taking Mercy Nettleton as his second wife (document).

Samuel Nettleton's Earmark

One of the features of the New England landscape is the town common. The town common was used in the earliest days as a common pasture where livestock could be grazed. As towns grew larger they developed other parcels of common ground. This property was marginal for the purpose of agriculture but had a value as grazing land. What you see in the deed and probate records is the right to access these common grounds being passed from one farmer to another and from father to son. In Killingworth such land was referred to as the salt marshes. The existence of common land gave rise to the need to be able to easily identify your own cattle and sheep that were mixed in with those of your neighbors. Thus we see as a prominent feature in all town records the registration of earmarks. Here we have the earmark registry for Samuel Nettleton father of Mercy Nettleton Griffin.