John2 Meigs
(Vincent1); born 1612 Chardstock,
Devon, ENG; married Tamazine Fry 1632 Weymouth,
Dorset, ENG; died 2 Jan 1671/72 Killingworth, Middlesex, CT.
At the general court in New Haven held 10 March
1646, "the names of people as they were seated in the meeting house were
made in court," and John Meigs was seated in the
center, in Row 8 of the men's seats [to the minister's right], and his wife in
the corresponding position in the women's seats [to the left].
In December 1656, John Meigs
sued William Chittenden as agent for Mr. Nathaniel Whitfield, for debt. Meigs claimed that William Stone hired for him four years
earlier, a vessel to carry goods from
John Meigs was a
shoemaker, and during the time he was in
In an apparently related case Meigs sued Henry Gregory for poor workmanship on materials
delivered to him by Meigs. Meigs
had delivered the leather to him already cut out and paid him one shilling per
pair for making them. Customers complained that the shoes came apart. The
matter was referred to a committee of shoemakers and tanners who determined
that neither the leather nor the workmanship was good.
"Goodman Gregory, upon this testimony, seemed to be convinced that he
had not done his part, but then laid the fault on Goodman Meigs,
that he was the more slight in it through his encouragement, who said to him,
'Flap them up: they are to go far enough.' In this statement be was confirmed
by two witnesses, who had heard Meigs say to him,
"Flap them up together: they are to go far enough.'"
Goodman Meigs being called to propound his damage,
instanced five particulars: 1st damage to his name; 2d, damage to Mr. Evance, to whom he had engaged himself to supply him with
these goods for exportation to the value of thirty pounds sterling; 3d, damage
in having his wares turned back upon his hands, Mr. Evance
having refused to accept them; 4th, hinderance in his
trade, people having on account of these shoes shunned to buy any wares of him;
5th money paid several men for satisfaction.
The plaintiff and defendant professing, upon the Court's demand, that they
had no more to say, and the court considering the case as it had been
presented, debated, and proved, found them both faulty. Goodman Gregory had
transgressed rules of righteousness, both in reference to the country and to
Goodman Meigs, though his fault to Goodman Meigs is the more excusable because of that encouragement
Goodman Meigs gave him to be slight in his
workmanship; though he should not have taken any encouragement to do evil, and
should have complained to some magistrate, and not have wrought such leather in
such a manner into shoes, by which the country, or whomsoever wears them, must
be deceived. But the greater fault and guilt lies upon John Meigs
for putting such untanned, horny, unserviceable
leather into shoes, and for encouraging Goodman Gregory to slight workmanship
upon a motive that the shoes were to go far enough, as if rules of
righteousness reached not other places and countries.."(5)
Meigs was determined to be most at fault and was fined £10.
The shoes were ordered to be burnt. Gregory was fined £5 and had to pay the
charges of the court. He was also forbidden to charge Meigs
for the work done.
John Meigs left
On
In another case that same year, John Meigs sued Chapman and Parker because their hogs broke down
his fence and ate his corn, claiming that he had "fenced his land at Athamonossock, wth
such an orderly fence, as was sufficient to keep out great cattell;
yet the Defendant's hoggs came into his field &
destroyed his corne." The court ruled that the
fence was not sufficient and recommended that Chapman and Parker make "in
a neighborly way" some compensation "that amity & good agreement
might be the better maintained betwixt the persons & Towns of Seabrooke and Guilford as formerly."(7)
In 1662 when the Colony of New Haven was
incorporated into the Colony of Connecticut, John Meigs
was chosen as constable over those submitting to the new Connecticut Charter.
Protests to the General Court in
The dissention between those who remained
loyal to
5. Edward E. Atwater, History of the Colony of
6. Bernard Christian Steiner, A
History of the
7. Steiner, p. 90.
8. J. Hammond Trumbull, ed., The Public
Records of the Colony of Connecticut, (