Let us take a brief view now of the policy of the Town in regard to lands and heritages during its Second Period. It was the same fundamentally with that described in a former Paper. It involved the same easy, republican principles of tenure,. and the same facilities of acquisition, ownership, and alienation. It continued to be free entirely from the restrictions, from all the deadening weight of feudalism, and kept on nourishing that just pride of property, and that high sense of independence, which are the necessary concomitants of an allodial system, and the noble marks of freedom. Not content that the feaes of this policy should remain, as they were for fourteen years after the foundation of the Town, unwritten, the Settlers of Hartford, with those of Windrsor and Wethersfield, solemnly installed them in their ode of 1650, and there commanded, in terms which once laid the axe to the root of possible oppression, at their lands and heritages should "be free from alles and licenses upon alienations, and from all heriots, wardships, liveries, primer seisins, yeare, day and waste, escheats and forfeitures, upon the death of rents or ancestors, be they natural, unnatural, casuaI or judicial and that forever!"

In its particular legislation with regard to lands, Hartford from time to time renewed its former orders, and kept a vigilant eye to their fulfillment. It still compelled the owners of home-lots, within twelve months to erect suitable buildings thereon, and "to maintain them sufficiently in a comely way.", It ill prevented the accumulation of many lots in the me hands. Still its Selectmen took charge of the common lands, and managed them as before, and let out the Indian ground in the South Meadow, from ear to year, I for the Town's use,' until, in 1663, with liberality on the part of the Town which is praiseworthy, this ground was distributed to those native Indians of Hartford who had remained within the municipal limits.

But the lands of Hartford alone, as we have heretfore had occasion to suggest, did not satisfy the Sets. They were continually stretching out their hands for more, for the purpose of extending trade and settlement, or were receiving more, many of them, in reward for public services. And the General Court gratified their wishes and its own in this respect freely. It gave them many lands at various points I within the liberties of Connecticut,' where the grants would not I prejudice' any existing plantations-among others to Jeremiah Adams three hundred acres of upland and forty of meadow-to Tohn Talcott and John Allyn jointly, six hundred acres of upland and one hundred of meadow-to Matthew Allyn, four hundred acres of upland and one hundred of meadow-to Jonathan Gilbert, three hundred of upland and fifty of meadow-to Governor Haynes, in addition to one thousand acres, about the Pequot country, granted him in 1643, three hundred acres more, in 1652, of meadow and upland I for a farm'to Joseph Haynes, two hundred and fifty acres of upland and fifty of meadow-to Richard Lord, three hundred and fifty of upland and fifty of meadow-to Ensign Olmstead, three hundred of upland and forty of meadow-to Mrs. Stone and her son Samuel Stone, in lieu of a former grant to the husband and father, of a farm for "his good service to the country both in the Pequot War and since," five hundred acres of upland and fifty or sixty of meadow-and to Samuel Wyllys, one hundred and fifty acres of upland, and fifty of meadow. How far these grants were improved does not particularly appear., That most of them were, however, is certain-and also that in this way the nuclei of new towns were fixed in various portions of the State. Hartford certainly was, in its very infancy, a remarkable bee-hive for new settlements! A little swarm here, one there, another there, and they clung, each, almost wherever in the region round about, a free branch shaded the flowers of the wilderness.

So one clung, 1645, at Tunxis, present Farmington. Thither went from Hartford, as chief settlers, John Steele, William Lewis, Stephen Hart, Thomas Judd, John Brunson, John Warner, Nathaniel Kellogg, Thomas Barnes, Richard Seymour, and Thomas Gridley. Farmington-be mindfnl of the parent from whom you sprung! You "Let the tender office long engage, To rock the cradle of reposing age!"

So another swarm clung, 1650, at Norwalk. The first survey of this place was made by Richard Olmsted of Hartford. He and his fellow-townsman Nathaniel Ely first petitioned the General Court for its settlement-and succeeded. They, and Matthew Marvin, and Ralph Keeler, and Nathaniel Richards, all from Hartford, joined by a few families who preceded them in purchasing, settled the town. Norwalk-remember who started you on your career! "No earth of thine is lost in vulgar mould!"

So still another swarm clung, 1650-at this date particularly, but some of it before, and some just after our Second Period-at Maltabesett, now Middletown. One large portion of this place was first bought by Governor Tohn - Haynes of Hartford, from Sowheag its pr imitive Sachem. The rest of it was first purchased, 1662, by Samuel Wyllys, likewise of Hartford, from Sepunnemo and other Indian chiefs, and for the benefit of a band of Hartford planters, who chiefly settled the spot. Among these were John Hall, John Kirby, Alexander Bow, George Hubbard, Joseph Hubbard, Daniel Hubbard, Thomas Hubbard, Anthony Martin, John Savage, Samuel Stocking, Samuel White, Thomas Wilcox, and John Wilcox. Middletown-child of Hartford's loins-we grew together, like to a double cherry' " twin, as 'twere, in love Unseparable, till within this hour, On a dissension of a doit," we fell out! 'Air-line' at least your friendship then back again, if you please, to its parent home!

So still another swarm clung, 1659, not as hitherto within the domain of Connecticut, nor from the, motive merely of industrial enterprise-but in Massachusetts, and from the motive particularly of church quiet after an ecclesiastical difficulty which sorely divided the Town. It settled up the river at Hadley the first there. Governor Webster and Elder William Goodwin were its leaders, and following with them, were John Crow, Nathaniel Ward, John White, John Barnard, Andrew Bacon, William Lewis, William Westwood, Richard Goodman, Win. Partridge, Thomas Stanley, Samuel Porter, Richard Charch, Francis Barnard, John Marsh, Nathaniel Stanley, William Markum, Samuel Moody, Zachariah Field, and Andrew Warner-all from Hartford-besides perhaps one widow, whose illegible name leaves the place from which she emigrated in doubt.

So still other emigrant bees left Hartford, not as in the cases already mentioned, in swarms, but singly, or a few only together-as Reinold Marvin, William Pratt, Zachariah Sanford, Jr., Robert Wade, and several others to Saybrook- Richard Webb to Stamford-John Mead, John Banks and others to Fairfield-Richard Lord, Thomas Stanton, Thomas Hungerfort, and a few others to New London, and to the Pequot country round about.

But what made the Hartford Settlers, save in founding Hadley, swarm so? It is matter of surprise that with lands so fertile, extensive, and untilled as those they possessed here, they, a mere handful comparatively, should so at once spread themselves! Was it restlessness, a desire for the "inlargement of the King's Dominions," a spirit of solitary proprietorship, thirst for acquisition, fondness for strange acquaintanceship, or what? But look at the spirit of emigration since! See it converting the Ohio and Missouri solitudes into civilized homes-while far beyond-tbreading the thousand devious arms of the Mississippi, and crossing the rugged declivities of the Rocky Mountains-the fearless hunter, and trader, and emigrant, listen to the savage whoop on the banks of the Columbia, San Joaquin, and Sacramento, and found and rear institutions and temples, to Liberty and to God, within sound of the breaking billow on the very shore of the Pacific! Everywhere, almost, behold the white sail! Listen to the elastic steam! Hear the tramp of the iron horse! Like sons, like fathers!

SCAEVA.