Silver and Gold Spectacles and Thimbles

Did you know that Longmeadow once had a thriving spectacle and thimble manufacturing industry? From 1830 through 1861, at least 38 men in Longmeadow made gold or silver spectacles and thimbles for a living. According to an account in the archives of the Longmeadow Historical Society four manufacturing shops were in town; they were run by: Jacob Colton and Gilson Hollister; E. K. Colton and George Ferre; Sumner W. Gates; and Samuel Burbank.

Jacob Colton began making spectacles and thimbles in the early 1830s and all sources point to him as the founder of the Longmeadow industry. Dimond Chandler, who had learned to be a silversmith in New York City, was also an early craftsman. He sold his business to Jacob Colton in 1847 or 1848.

New-York Daily Advertiser, Sept. 14, 1821

Jacob Colton enlarged his business, partnering with Lester Noble (his nephew) from 1844-1847 and then with Gilson Hollister from 1847-1860, and the Longmeadow Historical Society archives contain five account books from these partnerships. In reviewing these books, names of almost all of the Longmeadow spectacle makers appear as either apprentices or employees, documenting the training that Jacob Colton provided to his fellow townsmen.

So, what supplies do you need to make spectacles and thimbles? The account books document purchases of silver, gold, convex glass, and steel tops. Why steel tops? Thimbles made solely of silver were too soft and could be easily punctured by sewing needles; steel tops greatly increased the useful lifetime of the thimble. Records reflect that, in addition to bars of silver and gold, Jacob purchased old gold coins and old silver to melt down to make his products.

Manufacturing shops were located up and down Longmeadow Street, often in small buildings which had previously served other purposes. For example, the E. K. Colton and George Ferre shop had previously been a schoolhouse. After the spectacle shop closed, the building moved to Williams Street and became the first Catholic church in town- St. Mary's RC Church.

In 1848, Dimond Chandler purchased 776 Longmeadow Street (where The Spa on the Green resides today) and began his button manufacturing business. The button business flourished and it moved next door to 19 Chandler Avenue. Dimond Chandler was a true entrepreneur and today’s Chandler Avenue is named for him. In the 1850s, Dimond sold the button business to his son-in-law, Nelson Newell, and Nelson's brother. Newell Brothers soon outgrew its space in Longmeadow and the business relocated to Springfield around 1863. To learn more about the button manufacturing enterprise, please see this article- Buttons, Buttons, Everywhere.... by Michael Gelinas, former president of the Longmeadow Historical Society.

After buttons ceased to be made at 776 Longmeadow Street, at least part of the building became a shop to manufacture spectacles and thimbles. A dry goods store occupied the front part of the building and a shop in the back of the building (visible in the c. 1885 image below, but not longer standing today) was a spectacle shop. E. K. Colton, a former spectacle manufacturer, operated the general store in the front and William W. Coomes operated the spectacle shop in the back.

776 Longmeadow Street circa 1885

The account books show that Jacob Colton sold spectacles and thimbles to over 60 stores from Boston to New York. William Rogers & Co. in Hartford was a frequent customer.

Hartford Daily Courant, Mar. 5, 1845

And, the industry was lucrative. A number of Jacob Colton’s apprentices accumulated enough capital during their employment with him to start their own shops. In 1860, Jacob Colton sold $15,000 worth of spectacles and thimbles and Sumner W. Gates sold $6,000 worth of spectacles.

1860 Nonpopulation Schedule Manufacturing

This booming business came to an abrupt halt in 1861. The uncertainties at the start of the Civil War caused many customers to cancel their orders. And, many of the technically-trained men working in the shops found other employment. Springfield Armory ramped up armament production and many of these skilled men were enticed to Springfield to make rifles. And, at least eight of the former spectacle makers were drafted into the U.S. Army to use these rifles in the Union Army.

Former spectacle makers, Lester Noble and his brother, Henry Bliss Noble, utilized their skills in working with gold when they became dentists. Both started their dental practices in Washington, D.C.; Lester later moved to Longmeadow and opened a practice in Springfield.

Jacob Colton, who never resumed his business, sold his company to one of his employees, William W. Coomes. Mr. Coomes continued working in the spectacle shop behind the general store until he died in 1893, the last remaining spectacle maker in Longmeadow.

With such an abundance of precious metals in Longmeadow, I was surprised to find only one account of theft. According to an article in the Springfield Republican, both the store and the spectacle shop were robbed in December, 1888. The burglars blew open the safe and absconded with a bar of silver and 4 pieces of gold, and gun play ensued as James W. Coomes, the nephew of William W. Coomes, chased the wounded burglar down Longmeadow Street.

Springfield Republican, Dec. 22, 1888

Although there are few tangible reminders of spectacle and thimble manufacturing in today’s Longmeadow, the collections of the Longmeadow Historical Society include some of the spectacles that were created here.

Sources

- Longmeadow Historical Society Archives - Springfield Republican, Dec. 22, 1888 - New-York Daily Advertiser, Sept. 14, 1821 - Hartford Daily Courant, Mar. 5, 1845 - U.S. Censuses: 1850, 1860, 1870 - Massachusetts Census: 1855, - 1865 U.S. Nonpopulation Schedule Manufacturing 1860

Contributed by Elizabeth Hoff, Longmeadow Historical Society Board Member Originally published August 12, 2021

Peter Pease- "... if he should be living..."

Indenture of Peter Pease to Noah Ashley

“…if he should be living…”

Sometimes, research leads you to more questions than answers, and this has been the situation with recent research on Peter Pease.

Among the documents in the archives of the Longmeadow Historical Society is the indenture dated May 6, 1805 for “…a poor child named Peter Pease son of Sally Kibbe of said Longmeadow a miner under the age of three years as a servant to Noah Ashley of said Longmeadow...to dwell with and serve the said Noah Ashley from the day of the date hereof until the day when the said Peter if he should be living will be twenty one years of age…” The indenture does not name a father, but it is clear from documents in our archives that Sally Kibbe identified Peter Pease.

Peter Pease was a married man. In 1794, Peter Pease married Anne Bliss of Longmeadow and the couple had two daughters, Sally Pease and Polly Pease, within the next few years. The 1800 census shows that Anne and two daughters were living in the Peter Pease household.

In early 1802, Sally Kibbe found herself to be “in the family way.” We do not know much about Sally, but she was possibly the daughter of Gideon Kibbe or Samuel Kibbe, both of whose households included young women in the 1800 U.S. Census. A Sally Kibbe was assigned a pew at First Church in 1796 and perhaps this was our Sally Kibbe. What we do know is that by September, 1802, Sally Kibbe was in unenviable situation – heavily pregnant, unmarried, and destitute enough to be considered a town pauper.

As a town pauper, the Town of Longmeadow financially supported her through her travails. Selectman’s Orders in the Longmeadow Historical Society archives show that the town reimbursed many members of the community who actively cared for Sally and her unborn child. Truly, it took a village to do so.

The town housed and fed her: “To Capt. Ethan Ely for the keeping & nursing Sally Kibbe from August 20 1802 to the 3 day of December 1802 its being services done by Zadock Stebbins”

The town tried to secure paternal acknowledgement and financial support for her baby by obtaining the name of the father, tracking him down, and serving him with a warrant:

• “Also to Wm. Ely Esq. of Springfield for his service September 16th 1802 to coming to Longmeadow & taking examination of Sarah Kibbe”

Selectman’s Order August 25, 1806

• “To Deac. William Colton for his time and expenses in securing Peter Pease/ also for his paying Eliphalet Terry Esq for writ/ also for his paying Capt. Williams for his service"

Selectman’s Order April 2, 1803

• “To Col. Gideon Burt for his making a warrant for Peter Pease in 1802…

Selectman’s Order April 6, 1804

The town provided obstetric care for Sally during what appears to have been a long and difficult delivery: “To Doct. Joshua Frost attending Sally Kibby 1802 Sept. 28th to 9 hours attendance the 30th to opperatic obstetrics”

Selectman’s Order April 2, 1803

The town housed and fed Sally and her child after the birth: “To John Comes for his keeping Sally Kibbe child from Nov. 9th 1803 to 28th of March 1804 being twenty weeks…” / “Also To John Comes for his taking care Sally Kibbe last fall in her sickness three weeks…” / “Also to John Comes for Trouble in Weaning & Taking Care of Sarah Kibbe’s child.”

Selectman’s Order April 6, 1804

Finally, the town arranged for a permanent home for Peter Pease. On December 18, 1804, the Selectmen paid Noah Ashley $46 to assume care of Peter Pease until he turned 21 years of age. The indenture is dated May 5, 1805.

Selectman’s Order December 18, 1804

And, then the definitive records for Peter Pease cease. We do not know what happened to Peter; the best that we can do is conjecture.

Noah Ashley and his family went through difficult times after they accepted Peter into their home. Noah’s wife, Naomi Field Ashley, died suddenly in 1807 after falling from a wagon. Noah married Sarah Douglas in 1810 and it appears that he and his family left Longmeadow shortly afterwards, perhaps taking young Peter with them.

Perhaps Peter never had the opportunity to grow up but, instead, succumbed to a childhood disease like so many children in the 1800’s. We do not have a record of such a death, but his death might not have been recorded.

I like to think that infant Peter Pease became the Peter Pease who died March 30, 1872 and is buried in West Street Cemetery in Granby, Mass. That Peter Pease married, had children, and farmed for a living. His death documentation says that he was born in Longmeadow around 1803 and it lists John Pease and Nancy Combs as his parents. But this genealogical information is not reflected in Longmeadow's vital records.

Longmeadow has no record of John Pease or Nancy Combs ever living in our town, and the only Peter Pease born in Longmeadow in the 1800s was the infant born to Sally Kibbe. While I cannot definitively connect the two Peters, it is possible that John and Nancy took young Peter from the unsettled Ashley home and raised him as their son. It is unlikely that we will ever know the answer.

Sources

Longmeadow Historical Society Archives Marriage-Church Records 1716-1844 Massachusetts, U.S., Town and Vital Records, 1620-1988 1800 U.S. Census

Contributed by Elizabeth Hoff, LHS Board Member

August 5, 2021

Searching for Susan Freedom

Susan Freedom d.1803, Springfield Cemetery (image courtesy of Betsy McKee)

Under the shade of evergreen trees in a section of Springfield Cemetery near Pine Street, Susan Freedom is buried under a stone with an epitaph which reads,

Tho’ short her life, and humble her station, She faithfully performed all the duties of it. “The wise and great could do no more.”

Susan Freedom’s epitaph doesn’t tell us much about her life or circumstances, but two details on her inscription are of note: her last name “Freedom” and the words “humble her station.” Among the few details we know for sure about Susan Freedom are that she was a woman of color, she was 18 or 19 years old at the time of her death, and that at some point in her short life she was a pauper under the care of the town of Longmeadow. In recent months, an email from one Longmeadow Historical Society board member to other board members has triggered an eager and urgent search to learn more about Susan Freedom more than 200 years after she took her stories to her grave.

Indenture Document for Susanna Freedom, "a pauper"

In the process of sharing her fastidious research on the 18th and early 19th century indigent and indentured members of the Longmeadow community, board member Beth Hoff sent off an email with a list of names and details she was able to pull from the pages of fragile, yellowed documents residing in our archives. One name was Susannah Freedom, who was indentured out to Thomas Dwight and his wife Hannah for a period of four years in 1798. A little quick math indicated that Susan Freedom must have been approximately 14 years old. It was a common practice to indenture children who were otherwise considered wards of the towns in which they resided. It was a way to provide a needed home, and had the added bonus of giving them an opportunity to learn a trade.

This email sparked the memory of our board president, Al McKee, who remembered encountering the name in local historian Bob Drinkwater’s 2020 book, In Memory of Susan Freedom: Searching for Gravestones of African Americans in Western Massachusetts. Was it possible that Susan and Susannah were the same person? Surely the time period fit. Looking again at the details in Drinkwater’s book and the indenture document in our archives confirmed that Susan Freedom and Susannah Freedom were in fact the same person. The person buried in Springfield Cemetery resided with Thomas Dwight and his wife, Hannah - the same name on the indenture certificate signed just five years before her death.

Now we felt great responsibility to uncover as much as we could about the life of this young woman whose name appeared before us. As a Historical Society, we strive to tell the stories of all aspects of early life in our community, and feel particularly compelled as of late to step back and look for the previously untold stories and long forgotten names that help us piece together a more authentic view of Longmeadow in its colonial and post-colonial years. Unfortunately, history of this period is often documented by white men of means about other white men of means. For example, the nation’s first census was compiled in 1790 and lists only the names of heads of households. In most cases, this was white men. Their wives, mothers, sisters, children and servants are unnamed and simply noted as a number in a column. For the poor and for people of color there was likely not even a count.

If we wanted to find out details for Susan Freedom’s life, we would need to combine what we knew to be true about the time she lived and think of where she might appear in town records. Taking what we knew from her headstone, her indenture document, and the two and a half pages about her from Drinkwater’s book, we set out. We knew her birth year, her death date, her name and that she was a pauper of the town of Longmeadow in 1798. We know that she was connected with the Thomas Dwight family of Springfield. Being born in 1783 as her headstone says (or more likely 1784 per her indenture document), meant Susan was born just after the Revolutionary War, and if she was born in Massachusetts she was born just as our state was transitioning away from being a slaveholding colony. Bearing the last name “Freedom” indicates that she was likely born free, perhaps the first generation of her family in this country to be free from slavery. Most indenture documents for minors in our collection name parents, but Susan’s does not. Had her parents died or had she been separated from them? So far we haven’t been able to find an answer to that.

Her indenture document was very much a standard form that was filled in with name, the dates her service was to begin and end, the expectations of her work and behavior, the responsibilities of her master, and what she could expect to receive upon the completion of her time.

Susan Freedom's official Indenture certificate signed by Longmeadow Selectman, 1798

On August 18, 1798, fourteen year-old Susannah Freedom was indentured to Thomas and Hannah Dwight of Springfield “…To learn the Art, Trade or Mystery of a spinster and housewife…” The document begins, “This Indenture witnesseth, That We … Selectmen and Overseers of the poor of the town of Longmeadow and in the County of Hampshire & Commonwealth of Massachusetts Do by these Presents bind Susannah Freedom a pauper of said town and with the free Will and Consent of the said Susanna she is hereby bound an Apprentice to Thomas Dwight of Springfield in said County of Hampshire and Hannah his wife To learn the Art, Trade or Mystery of a spinster and housewife; and with him the said Thomas Dwight & wife, after the Manner of an Apprentice, to serve from the Day of the Date of these presents, until the sixth Day of August, which will be the Year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and two – when the said Apprentice will arrive at the Age of eighteen Years.”

To learn the “Art, Trade or Mystery of a spinster and housewife” would have provided Susannah Freedom with useful and practical skills. To be a spinster had to do with the practice of spinning yarn or thread and housewifery skills related to domestic management and household and family care. During her indenture period, Susannah was to:

• Well and faithfully serve her Master and Mistress, keep their secrets, and duly obey their lawful commands;

• Do no damage to her Master or Mistress, nor suffer it to be done by others, without giving feasonable notice thereof to her Master or Mistress;

• Not waste her Master’s goods, nor lend them unlawfully to any;

• Not play cards, dice or any other unlawful game;

• Not absent herself without leave, by day or by night;

• Not haunt or frequent alehouses, taverns, or gaming places; and

• Not contract matrimony nor commit acts of vice or immorality.

In turn, her new Master and Mistress, Thomas and Hannah Dwight, were to:

• Instruct Susannah how to be a spinster and housewife;

• Provide Susannah with good and sufficient wearing apparel so that she could appear properly dressed at public worship on Lord's Days and on other days;

• Teach her to read and write; and

• Upon completion of the indenture, provide her with two good and complete suits of wearing apparel and a new Bible.
  

While there is no mention of her race on her headstone, local historian Joe Carvallho III in his book, Black Families of Hampden County, Massachusetts, 1650-1865 cites an 1850 book called Inscriptions on the Gravestones in the Graveyards of Northampton and Other Towns in the Valley of the Connecticut by Thomas Bridgeman who identifies her as “(A Colored Girl) bro’t up by Col. Worthington.” It would make sense for Susan Freedom to have been connected with the Worthington household and then the Dwights since Thomas Dwight married Hannah Worthington.

With the help of archivists Cliff McCarthy and Maggie Humbertson at the Wood Museum of Springfield History who pulled ledger books and other records to shed more light on the Dwight household, Longmeadow Historical Society board members Betsy and Al McKee were able to piece together more of a picture. In his ledger book, Thomas Dwight recorded details about expenses incurred by and paid to Susannah. Like most ledger books, Dwight’s included an alphabetical index to people listed in his account book. Susan’s name was not included in this index. Thankfully, Al and Betsy dove into the book page by page anyway and eventually found written in ink across the top of two pages in beautiful script the name: Susannah Freedom. From those pages in Dwight’s record we learn that her indenture ended as scheduled in 1802 and that she then began her services “on hire” for which she was paid. Between August 1802 and her death in December of 1803, Dwight records purchases of “sundries,” a bureau that she had recorded in her own record book, and then, abruptly, a coffin, a grave stone, and doctor’s bill for her “last sickness.” Records from Springfield’s First Church indicate that she died of “canker rash,” a form of scarlet fever.

From Thomas Dwight's Account Books

Wood Museum of Springfield History

One final note before signing off with the words “Done with” mentions, “Susan had several small articles of furniture but after her death were delivered over to her sister who then lived with Mrs. Terry relict of Colonel Terry of Enfield.”

There is one more mention of her in print that we know about. The fact that it exists is curious. Someone, likely in the Dwight household, thought it important enough to publish a notice of Susan’s death in a newspaper. The Federal Spy includes among a few other regional death notices in January, 1804: “At the house of Thomas Dwight, Esq. Susan, a negro girl, aged 19.”

Mortuary Notice Federal Spy, January 3, 1804

But what about the Longmeadow piece? Why would Susan/ Susannah appear as a pauper in Longmeadow? What is her connection to our town? That is a question we have as yet been unable to answer. So what’s next? Off to Enfield we go. Into their archives and vital records to search for the sister that is mentioned as the recipient of the few worldly items Susan Freedom left behind.

Sources

• Longmeadow Historical Society archives

• Bridgeman, Thomas, Gravestones in the Graveyards of Northampton and Other Towns in the Valley of the Connecticut, 1850

• Carvalho, Joseph, Black Families of Hampden County, Massachusetts, 1650-1865, New England Historic Genealogical Society: Boston, 2011

• Drinkwater, Bob, In Memory of Susan Freedom: Searching for Gravestones of African Americans in Western Massachusetts, Levellers Press, Amherst, MA, 2020

• Dwight, Thomas, Account Book, Box 16.52; Springfield History Library & Archives, Lyman and Merrie Wood Museum

• Federal Spy Jan. 3, 1804 via Genealogy Bank

• First Church [of Springfield] Records, Book 1, 1736-1809 transcriptions in Massachusetts: Vital Records, 1620-1850

• Online Database: AmericanAncestors.org, New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2001-2016

Contributed by Melissa M. Cybulski, Longmeadow Historical Society Board Member

(contributions by Elizabeth Hoff, Al McKee and Betsy McKee,

LHS Board Members)

Originally published July 1, 2021