Post on 09-Mar-2016
description
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 1
Continued on next page
Kendall F. Wiggin,
State Librarian
In this Issue
Not so Bold Vision by
Kendall Wiggin, Pages 1-2
Connecticut Archives Month-October 2012 by Mark Jones, Page 2
Edith Stoehr, the First Female Game Warden in Connecticut by Mark Jones, Pages 3-5
The LSTA 2008-2012 Five-Year Evaluation... by Douglas C. Lord, Page 6
Connecticut Arms the Union by Dean E. Nelson,
Pages 7-11
The Somers Church Fire and the Connecticut State Library by Carol Ganz,
Pages 12-14
The Teaching American History Project in Connecticut by Paul Baran,
Pages 15–17
The Origins of Flag Day,
by Allen Ramsey,
Pages 18-19
Sharon Brettschneider Retires as Director of Library Development by Kendall Wiggin, Page 20
Not so Bold Vision
by State Librarian Kendall Wiggin
In June I had the privilege of attending “Bold Vision + Collective Capacity >
Transforming Communities,” an ALA Pre-Conference sponsored by the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation and the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies. The
objectives were to re-envision public libraries’ community information services;
identify promising practices that will drive community transformation; and
develop plans to use our collective capacity to achieve favorable outcomes at all
levels.
Key drivers for this discussion were the redefining of communities through the
development of new partnerships; the abundance of information and scarcity of
attention; mobile and interactive information services; and the yearning for place
and community in a world of global virtual connections.
We did not emerge from the several days of great conversation with a bold new
vision. Instead it became clear to me that we, the library community, need to
make the mission of today’s library known to the community. There are any
number of innovative things going on in libraries around our state and our nation
that address the needs of the citizens they serve. This has been the great strength
and contribution that libraries have made since the social library evolved into the
public library in the late 19th century. Since the early beginnings of the public
library movement in this country, libraries have changed and transformed along
with the ever diversifying socioeconomic structure of the nation.
The Gates conference galvanized two things for me – the need for policy makers
to understand the role libraries play, and should play, as our towns and cities
transform and secondly the need for library leaders and staff to have the skills
needed to meet the rapidly evolving information needs of their communities.
At a time when policy makers believe the role of the library is diminished because
of a perception that everything is online and that all books are ebooks, we have to
better educate them about the important role that libraries play in this world of e-
everything. We know libraries are still vital to those seeking to improve their
lives, succeed at school and work, find a job, start a business, access government
information, or just enjoy a good read. Libraries are about making sure every
child is ready to read. Libraries support continuous education. Libraries promote
all literacies, especially digital literacy. Libraries play an important role in civic
engagement. Some libraries already excel as community conveners, but more
need to take on this role.
...Preserving the Past, Informing the Future
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 2
Connecticut Archives Month, October 2012 by State Archivist Mark Jones
The State Library’s Division of Library Development (DLD) has recently completed their strategic plan and the
State Library has completed and submitted the 5 Year Plan for LSTA. Both of these plans recognize that much of
what the State Library does is not “bold” but rather supportive of library service statewide. DLD’s vision is that
all people in Connecticut will be welcomed by vital and exciting libraries that will be centers of community life
and lifelong learning. Both plans recognize the need to provide librarians and trustees with the information and
skills to effectively advocate for community support to meet the needs of their communities in a time of rapid
transformation. To that end in the years ahead the Division of Library Development will focus advocacy efforts
on helping libraries demonstrate value to community and state policy makers. The Division will also focus
continuing education efforts on technology skill, civic engagement, and developments in the information
ecosystem. ♦
Kendall Wiggin, State Librarian 7/17/12
In his article, State Librarian Ken Wiggin offers a
proactive approach for librarians. He recommends
that the entire profession think about the future
impact of technology and its potential and publicly
enumerate the benefits of a library in such a world.
Institutions with archival holdings are also challenged
by the lack of understanding about the value of
archives to the everyday person and to research fund
allocators. Ken’s article is a “right on!” to us archivists.
In the face of mounting difficulties, shrinking budgets
and devaluation of cultural programs in this country
during the Great Recession, what can archivists do?
October is American Archives Month which is
sponsored by the Society of American Archivists and
the Council of State Archivists. The purpose of the
celebration is to exhort the public through posters,
special workshops and media initiatives asserting that
archives are necessary for government to continue its
operation in case of disasters, that archives enable
families to strengthen their bonds to each other, and
that archives are one of many cultural institutions in
our democracy that help citizens and officials to find
out where we were, where we are, and where we
might be going.
As in previous celebrations, we shall post on the
Connecticut State Library web site a copy of the
Proclamation signed by the Governor designating
October as Connecticut Archives Month. We shall also
keep a public log of special activities of local historical
societies, libraries and
museums around the state
during October, and we shall
post an announcement about
the Archives Month poster
funded by a grant from the
National Historical Records
And Publication Commission
and available from the State
Library. We shall have sent
copies of posters to public and academic libraries,
historical societies, and museums. Is this enough?
Is Archives Month enough? No, but there will be
more opportunities for us to make the case that
archives matter. There is; however, strength in
numbers. As Ken suggests, librarians need to make
the case that libraries matter more in a world of
rapid transformation and growing community
needs. So do Archives! Archivists and librarians
should join together to help “demonstrate value to
the community and state policy makers”.
For more information on American Archives Month,
go to http://www2.archivists.org/initiatives/
american-archives-month.
For more information about activities around the
state and the Connecticut Archives Month poster,
contact State Archivist Mark Jones at
mark.h.jones@ct.gov. ♦
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 3
A Connecticut Wildlife Pioneer and the WPA
by State Archivist Mark Jones
Continued on next page
[Several years ago, I wrote the following article for this newsletter. Subsequently
I discovered a connection between Edith Stoehr and the WPA.]
“Gosh, what’s the world coming to, anyhow?” Edith A. Stoehr and the Women’s Fishing
and Hunting Reserves in Connecticut
On January 24, 1934, the Hartford Courant carried
a story about the first woman game warden in
the United States, Connecticut’s own Edith A.
Stoehr. She was the only woman, the story noted,
to be attending the Twentieth Annual Game
Conference in New York. The Connecticut Board
of Fisheries and Game had chosen her in the
spring of 1933 after she won a fly-casting contest
on the Branford River in North Branford. Now at
the conference, Warden Stoehr said that she
loved her job because “it’s getting paid for
something you love to do.” She had the police
powers of arrest and carried a gun. So far, she
had hauled off two men to local courts for
violations. Stoehr stated that “it shocked some of
them to have me come trudging up in my
hunting clothes-boots, riding breeches, and
hunting jacket, and ask for their license. Some of
them said ‘gosh, what’s the world coming to
anyhow?’ but they all very courteously
displayed their [hunting] certificates.” Indeed,
what in the world was happening to the male
bastions of hunting and fishing in Connecticut?
The State Board of Fisheries and Game oversaw
the enforcement of fish and game laws. In 1932
the Commission voted to approve a motion to
lease five miles of the Branford River only for
women, making it, as the Courant declared, “an
exclusively feminine trout stream.” Rules
allowed only fly-casting. A Board annual report
noted that ”this action is believed to be in line
with modern tendencies, and the constantly
increasing interest of women in all forms of sport. In 1940, seven years after the program’s beginning, the Board
reported that . . .
“Connecticut has always had a large number of women who were interested in fishing and a small group
Edith Stoehr was a “crack” shot. She taught women how
to hunt on the women’s reserve in
Farmington, Connecticut.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 4
Continued on next page
interested in hunting, and in recent years the number of real [female] enthusiasts has increased tremendously.
Many of these women have acquired fine hunting dogs, guns, fishing tackle and other accessories necessary
to enjoy these sports on a par with men.”
In fact, officials “soon realized” that “many of these women possessed skill equal to that of men, and from this
thought was born the ambitious program” of setting aside not only the trout stream in Branford but also a hunting
reserve in Farmington.
It was the age of Babe Didrikson and Amelia Earhart. Like them, Edith Stoehr demonstrated that she could mingle
with men and do what they did. A photograph of a 1938 Warden’s School, for instance, shows her seated in the
audience among her fellow male wardens wearing an attractive hat that shaded her eyes. She did not marry,
defying society’s norms that women could find only true happiness in marriage and could lead lives of fulfillment
only as mothers. Instead, Edith found satisfaction on her own terms in a job usually reserved for men.
Who was Edith Stoehr? She was born and grew up in Hartford. She did not graduate from high school but learned
about the outdoors from her father, Henry W. Stoehr. Writing to an inquirer in 1946, she stated that she had been
“fond of hunting and fishing since a very small child went with my father whenever he would allow me to tag
Miss Edith A. Stoehr, first woman Warden uniformed
and assigned to regular duties, checking the catch on
the first state-leased stream reserved for women.
Branford River, Connecticut 1932.
1937 Wardens school. Former Governor
Templeton addressing wardens. Edith is in
the background in a white hat.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 5
along with him.” Both ran a kennel in South Wethersfield on Mills Street, raising setters and pointers. She was
devoted to her calling, writing that her “work is also a hobby, because I love everything about the work, the out-
of-doors, dogs-fishing and hunting.”
Edith became a celebrity. Radio stations, newspapers and
magazines interviewed her and praised this remarkable
woman. In spite of this, there was opposition within the
Agency to her appointment. It took Fisheries and Game
ten years to make her job as Deputy Warden a permanent
position so that she could collect a pension for the period
1933-1943 and subsequent years.
Her life was cut short. She died at Hartford Hospital on
March 6, 1946. The New York Times carried a photograph
with her obituary. At her funeral, fellow game wardens
were her pall bearers in a show of respect .
After the above article, I discovered that the WPA’s
Federal Art Project honored her in one of its paintings. In
2008 working on the CSL WPA Inventory, I came across a
black and white print of a painting of her by Harry
Townsend. I substantiated this with two photographs of
her: one, seated holding a shotgun and the other, posing
while standing in a stream giving out a ticket to a hapless
female angler. In the painting one of her dogs lay at her
feet. Was it her favorite? I wonder what Edith thought of
the painting. Did Townsend give it to her? Unfortunately
most of the FAP paintings were lost as the federal program
closed down in 1942. Still, we have the photograph of the
work and know that she was painted along with local
officials and judges, all men, by the WPA. ♦
Note: all photos came from RG079:003 Department
of Energy and Environmental Protection, Board of Fisheries and Game.
The only two snapshots Edith had of herself in uniform. One is with her two favorite dogs and the other
with her father, Henry Stoehr, and an unidentified angler.
[Game Warden Edith Stoehr]
Artist: Harry Townsend
Connecticut Federal Art Project, WPA
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 6
The U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services
(IMLS) provides Library Services and Technology Act
(LSTA) funding to states through a population-based
formula; Connecticut receives approximately
$2 million per year. To participate, states conform to
federal policies and guidelines and create five-year
plans which direct funds into the specific areas the
law intends to affect.
IMLS requires a formal evaluation of these plans. The
State Library awarded the contract for evaluation of
the most recent (2008-2012) plan to longtime
consultant firm Himmel & Wilson (H&W) from
Wisconsin.
Using data provided by the State Library, H&W
submitted Connecticut’s 95-page evaluation to IMLS
on time and on budget; Connecticut met or exceeded
all nine of its major goals and was praised for using a
wiki site as an electronic commons to gather
programmatic data in one place.
The evaluation provided a contextual overview of the
LSTA program and also served as an environmental
picture of Connecticut’s libraries. The bulk of the
report (60 pages) -- and by far its most valuable part --
was the rich comment and feedback provided by
members of the library community through focus
groups, telephone interviews, and a Web survey.
Feedback was gathered from groups comprised of
continuing education users, subgrant recipients,
public library directors and other special guests from
the library community, patrons of the Library for the
Blind and Physically Handicapped (LBPH), members
of the Advisory Council for Library Planning and
Development (ACLPD) and of the Connecticut Digital
Library Advisory Board (CDLAB). A wide-net online
survey also provided feedback representative of the
whole state.
Though unwieldy to discuss as a whole, the
evaluation provided few surprises and also cemented
and validated the Library Development Division’s
priorities and concerns. iCONN and Ccar are by large
margins the services about which respondents were
most concerned, with continuing education, summer
reading, and the two Library Service Centers rating
frequent mention.
The Evaluation did contain a few recommendations
which include implementing incremental outcome-
based evaluation measurement into the four projects
that account for most LSTA expenditure: LBPH, Ccar,
iCONN, and the collections and programs of the two
Service Centers. The evaluation also recommended
developing a method for data reporting akin to a
‘dashboard’ model and designing and implementing
new evaluation protocols to capture longer term
measures of skill, knowledge, and behavior changes
resulting from programming.
Fortunately, the evaluation provided all the input that
the Division needed in order to construct the Five-
Year Plan for the 2013-2017 period. This plan was
submitted to IMLS in June, 2012, with the library
community and ACLPD providing much guidance
and input.
One significant change coming to Connecticut’s LSTA
program has to do with programmatic subgrants,
which are awarded to public and other libraries and
which return much useful outcome-based evaluation
data. However, because subgrants, like snowflakes,
are unique, the Division is implementing directed
grants so that the larger impact of LSTA subgrants in
the states libraries may be woven together more
convincingly. Uniform outcome indicator data begins
in July of 2012.
Like the last plan, the 2013-2017 LSTA Plan will
account for the traditional LSTA pillars: access,
partnership, resource sharing, literacy and lifelong
learning, and telecommunication/infrastructure and
will include new IMLS initiatives on workforce
development, 21st-century skills, and digital literacy
skills. ♦
The LSTA 2008-2012 Five-Year Evaluation and Road Map for the
2013-2017 LSTA Plan by Douglas C. Lord, LSTA Coordinator
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 7
Continued on next page
Connecticut Arms the Union
by Dean Nelson, Administrator, Museum of Connecticut History
A year into the Civil War, the U.S. War Department’s Commission on Ordnance and Ordnance Stores
reported to Congress on the state of the nation’s confused armament contracts involving tens of millions of
federal dollars. The goal was to impose order on the frenzied rush to arm the Union caused by “the unexampled
demand for arms consequent upon the sudden breaking out of the present gigantic rebellion….” In the report,
General James W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance, estimated 500,000 new Model Springfield .58-caliber rifle muskets
(“the best infantry arm in the world”) would be needed in the next twelve months; he also assessed how many
rifles and revolvers would be needed. Connecticut’s armories were ready to respond.
By the mid nineteenth century, Connecticut manufacturers had mastered the complexities of innovation,
capital, labor, and raw materials for machine-based precision mass production of intricate metal parts and, with a
collective and deeply rooted firearms production heritage going back a half century, were ideally poised to make
arms for the Union. By the war’s end, Connecticut makers had supplied some 43 percent of the grand total of all
rifle muskets, breech loading rifles and carbines, and revolvers bought by the War Department, along with
staggering quantities
of small arms and
artillery ammunition.
Rifles and
Carbines
Of twenty-three
private Northern
contractors rising to
the challenge and
pursuit of profit in
Model 1861 Springfield
rifle musket
manufacture, eight
Connecticut
entrepreneurs and
established gun-
makers together
delivered an
extraordinary 37
percent of the war’s-end rifle contract total: more than 155,000 regulation guns plus 75,000 Colt Special Model
1861 rifle muskets to supplement the National Armory output at Springfield.
Connecticut’s major rifle makers included Colt Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company of Hartford. As
the war broke in the spring of 1861, Colt was coincidentally well into design and development of its newest
military shoulder arm, its first muzzle-loader (loaded at the muzzle end of the barrel). It was generally similar to
the government Model 1861s, but not cross-interchangeable in lock, stock, or barrel. The War Department
waived its requirement of parts compatibility and contracted for these non-conforming guns in part because
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 8
Continued on next page
General Ripley, in the Commission report, endorsed Colt as “probably further advanced in their preparations
than any of the other companies…we are more likely to get good home manufactured arms from them…. in less
time than elsewhere…”
The Ordnance Commission report cited two other Connecticut private armories, Whitney Arms Company
in New Haven and Savage Revolving Firearms Company in Middletown, as well-established. But other
Connecticut firms without gun making experience moved into rifle production, too. For these newcomers,
musket production posed an industrial challenge. Before the war, Parker Snow & Company of Meriden made
kitchen utensils and sewing machines; the Connecticut Arms Company of Norfolk forged wagon axles; William
Muir, a New York City dry goods merchant, established his new gun making company in Windsor Locks; and the
triumvirate of J. D. Mowery, Norwich Arms, and Eagleville Manufacturing Company, all of Norwich, were
principally textile manufacturers.
The Model 1861 rifle musket and its close cousin the Colt 1861 Special Model were the finest infantry
shoulder arms issued to rank and file and the most common Union infantry arm of the war. Muzzle loading,
single-shot, and sighted to 500 yards, they fired a one-ounce lead conical-shape hollow base bullet propelled by 65
grains (a weight avoirdupois) of black
powder with average velocity of an
astonishing 1,000 feet per second. The
58/100-inch (.58 caliber) bore was rifled
with three slow spiral grooves that
imparted to the bullet an axial spin that
stabilized and ensured a true, speedy
flight. Resolute infantrymen could load
and fire one aimed shot about every thirty
seconds, and average shooters could
routinely hit a five-foot-square target at
100 yards. Bullet strikes to the head,
chest, and stomach were generally death
blows.
Gearing up to produce such arms
required extensive retooling. The
machinery inventory of any armory
making most of their own major parts
would count steam engines, boilers, and
piping to run an arrayed sequence of
reamers, lathes, milling machines,
grinding machines, planers, drill presses,
polishing frames, screw machines, drop
presses, trip hammers, belting, shafting,
heat treating furnaces, and more. Mark
Twain, a special correspondent for the
San Francisco newspaper Alta California,
in 1868 described Colt’s complex
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 9
Continued on next page
operation (albeit the factory’s post-war, 1864-fire rebuild): “…on every floor is a dense wilderness of strange iron
machines… a tangled forest of rods, bars, pulleys, wheels, and all the imaginable and unimaginable forms of
mechanism. …machines that shave [parts] down neatly to a proper size, as deftly as one would shave a candle in a
lathe…” Some companies sidestepped the challenge: Connecticut Arms Company and William Muir &
Company, for instance, opted to assemble arms with parts made by sub-contractors and therefore required little
more than workbenches and simple hand tools to adapt to its new line of production.
The interchangeability of each and every component part, regardless of maker, was a War Department
requirement. To that end, the Union’s 1862 Ordnance Manual listed 77 distinct “verifying gauges” for the 50 parts
of a rifle musket and specified that “Each component part is first inspected by itself and afterwards the arm in a
finished state.” At the discretion of the government inspector,
completed arms were priced according to quality of fit and finish in
four classes. The government paid a high of $20 for a first-class
Model 1861 rifle musket and $16 for one deemed fourth class.
Whitney posited in ordnance hearings that his profit per gun might
be around $3, or 15 percent.
The Sharps Rifle Company of Hartford was well respected
by the government before the war for its reliable single-shot
percussion .52-caliber breech loading (loaded at the rear of the
barrel) carbines (a lighter rifle with a shorter barrel) and rifles.
General Ripley implored of Sharps late in 1861: “…. I desire that
you will continue to supply this department with Sharp’s carbines,
to the utmost capacity of your factory, until further orders.”
Sharps’s carbines were by far the most common Union cavalry
arms of the war. Their rifles, most set up for angular bayonets,
armed the famed Berdan’s Sharpshooters with limited quantities
issued to ten Connecticut regiments, especially flank companies
and for arming picked marksmen. With $2,400,100 in War
Department sales, Sharps ranked fifth in the nation of the thirteen
military contractors that surpassed $1 million in government sales.
Connecticut inventors secured seventy patents for arms and
munitions between 1840 and 1865. The introduction of Manchester,
Connecticut inventor Christopher M. Spencer’s 1860 ingenious
patent repeating rifle and carbine into U.S. service benefited
substantially from his contacts with Secretary of the Navy Gideon
Welles of Glastonbury. Welles got Spencer an initial contract for
800, though at the time “the only things they lacked were a factory,
machinery, and a workforce.” Securing financial backing in
Boston, Spencer scrambled to establish his armory in the Chickering Piano factory there, and through political
connections even arranged a presidential test fire with Abraham Lincoln on the White House grounds. The
Spencer made use of coil springs for butt-stock magazine feeding of newly perfected rim-fire metallic cartridges,
which held a lead bullet, explosive powder charge, and detonating primer all fixed in a copper casing. A soldier
observed, “The 37th [Massachusetts Volunteers] have now the Spencer Repeating Rifle, which can be discharged
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 10
Continued on next page
eight times with but two or three seconds intermission, and then eight more charges can be put in the magazine of
the gun more quickly than you can put one charge in the Springfield Rifle…. Having this rifle carries this
disadvantage:… any delicate and difficult job to be done…is almost sure to bring into requisition our regt…” The
Spencer carbine was the second most common Union cavalry shoulder arm. The army purchased 11,471 rifles with
angular bayonets. Spencer Arms Company finished the war with the eighth highest contract total, at $2,078,427.
Inventor Benjamin Tyler Henry worked tirelessly for Oliver Winchester’s New Haven Arms Company to
get his 1860 patented .44-caliber repeating rifle (nicknamed a “Henry”) into mass production. It, like the Spencer,
employed a coil spring to feed rim-fire bullets into the loading mechanism. Lacking the range and stopping power
of other military shoulder arms, the Henry failed to attract much interest from the U.S. government until the last
year of the war when it purchased only 1,200, which represented about ten percent of total production. In the
Ordnance Commission report, General Ripley balked at the rifles’ “…lack of practical trials…as military
weapons…” their weight and need for special ammunition and “…very high prices asked…” Soldiers liked it,
though. A soldier of the 1st District of Columbia Cavalry wrote: “We have got our rifles and they are a nice pretty
piece…we can fire fifteen rounds without loading…The rebs say that we can load up on Sunday and fire all week…
the rebs hate them sixteen
shooters worse than they do
the verry [sic] devil himself.”
The models 1862 and 1864
carbines of Benjamin Joslyn’s
Firearms Company in
Stonington were single-shot
breechloaders using .56-
caliber rim-fire metallic
cartridges. West Point trials
documented the firing of
forty shots in five minutes.
Connecticut manufacturers of
breech loaders and repeaters
(perhaps a bit generously
including Christopher
Spencer’s Boston operation)
can be credited with 47
percent of those arms genres
totals.
Revolvers
Connecticut’s claim to
have produced 47 percent of
all the domestically made
percussion military revolvers
used by Union forces is no
stretch. The Ordnance
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 11
Department in September 1861 requested of Colt’s: “Deliver weekly, until further orders, as many of your pistols,
holsters, new pattern, as you can make.” Those Model 1860 Army .44-caliber percussion revolvers, priced
initially at $25 each (reduced to $14.50 in the spring of 1862 to be competitively priced with rival Illion, New York,
Remington Army revolvers), saw regular deliveries in lots of 1,000 or more per week through November 1864
until the pistol works burned in February 1864, ending revolver production for the remainder of the war. Colt
sold more revolvers to the Ordnance Department than any other maker. Colt’s revolvers orders combined with
its Special Model rifle musket orders totaled $4,687,031, the second-greatest Union armament contracts total for
the war.
Like Colt, three other Connecticut military shoulder arms makers had contracts for revolvers. Savage
Repeating Arms Company, Whitney Arms Company, and Joslyn Firearms Company each produced distinctive
patented percussion handguns with both military purchases and commercial open market sales.
The Lincoln administration and Union commands in the field were able to vigorously pursue their
respective political and strategic goals backed by a supreme confidence that there were armaments and munitions
aplenty to press the war. Northern industrial might, with Connecticut manufacturers well in the forefront,
ensured eventual military triumph on the battlefield. The end of armed hostilities and consequent surplusing of
hundreds of thousands of soon-to-be-obsolete military guns predictably saw many of Connecticut’s wartime
contractors withdraw from the armaments business. Collins went back to agricultural implements. Parker
expanded its line of kitchen hardwares and began post-war manufacture of fine commercial shotguns. Spencer, in
Boston, and Joslyn sold off their production machinery. Colt, Whitney, Sharps, and Henry (becoming in 1866 the
Winchester Repeating Arms Company) adapted quickly to the new era of self-contained metallic cartridges and
dominated the American firearms industry long after the war. ♦
Note: “Connecticut Arms the Union” first appeared in Connecticut Explored, Vol. 9,
No. 2, Spring, 2011, and is here shortened (omitting Connecticut-made small arms
and artillery ammunition and Collins edged weapons) for space constraints.
Connecticut Explored has graciously permitted this version of the original essay.
Third Thursday’s at the State Library
The third year of State Library and Museum of Connecticut History’s Third Thursday BrownBag Lunchtime
speaker series kicks off on September 20th. This series, which features a variety of speakers on various
aspects of Connecticut history, is held on the third Thursday of the month September through December
and January through June from Noon until 1pm in Memorial Hall, Connecticut State Library, 231 Capitol
Avenue, Hartford. All programs are free and open to the public and attendees should feel free to bring their
lunch. The series is sponsored in part by the Connecticut Heritage Foundation. Email jane.beaudoin@ct.gov
if you would like receive mailings about this and other Library programs. ♦
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 12
Continued on next page
When Somers Congregational Church went up
in flames after dark on last New Year’s Day,
televised images left little room to imagine that
any part of the structure survived. History and
Genealogy staff immediately checked records at
the Connecticut State Library to see if it had
historical volumes for this church, because it
appeared any at the church would have burned.
The Connecticut State Library houses records
from over 500 hundred churches in the State
Archives, the result of a project begun in the
The Somers Church Fire and the Connecticut State Library
by Carol Ganz, History and Genealogy
Pencil construction drawing with some dimensions.
Layout plan of the sanctuary,
showing pews.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 13
Continued on next page
1920s to encourage churches to place records here for safekeeping and to make them available for research.
During the next two decades churches of all denominations were invited to bring in their original records and
the library made photostatic copies of the major volumes. If congregations were willing to permanently deposit
their records, they were given handsomely bound copies in return. Some churches preferred to bring in records
for copying but took back the originals, so the collection includes many original manuscript volumes but also
many in copy form. Of course, some churches preferred not to participate at all. The Connecticut Society of
Colonial Dames provided volunteer time to talk to church authorities and, in some cases, to transport the
precious volumes to Hartford. Florence Crofut, Chairman of the Society’s Manuscripts Committee, was
especially active in making this project a success.
At her suggestion, Reverend Charles L. Ives of Somers Congregational Church brought in three volumes for
copying in October 1941 and two more the next April, with the understanding that the church would retain the
originals. The Archives held copies of the five volumes for forty years until the church reconsidered and traded
their original volumes for the copies in 1982, ensuring the safety of the historic manuscripts.
In addition to official registers containing the “vital records” of a congregation (baptisms, marriages,
membership, burials) and recorded minutes of meetings, sometimes other manuscripts came with the deposits,
such as for Sunday School classes, the church treasurer or a women’s group. In many cases there were also
some “papers,” loose items that record the life of a church such as correspondence, receipts, or drawings of pew
arrangements. Materials also arrived from other sources, such as a dealer in antique books and records, who
customarily did business with the State Library.
On checking State Archives holdings, staff discovered that, in addition to the five volumes of manuscript
records, there were papers that were probably not in duplicate at the church. Incredibly, these were described
as “Somers Congregational Church - meetinghouse plans, contracts, reports and correspondence, 1841-1842,” records
from the building of the historic structure that had just been destroyed! The State Library had purchased these
from Gilbert Whitlock in 1958.
Staff excitedly contacted the church and soon
Somers Church Historian Ailene Henry and her
husband Roland visited the Connecticut State
Library to take a look at these documents.
While the records do not provide the type of
detailed drawings that would be expected
today, there were floor plans with dimensions
marked and an agreement with the builder with
some of the specifications. The church hopes to
rebuild as closely to the original appearance as
possible, with some hidden concessions to
modern materials, conveniences and
regulations. While the 1842 plans are not
sufficient to thoroughly inform that project, they
make a nice reference to consider - and a
wonderful historical artifact of the now-lost
Somers Congregational Church Historian
Ailene Henry and her husband Roland
examine the documents.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 14
meetinghouse. Library staff was able to provide digital images for the congregation’s future use, happy to be
able to do some small thing to help after the tragic loss of their beautiful and historic building.
Somehow the serendipitous discovery of plans for the landmark church building caught the imagination of the
media and the story was recounted over and over on television and in newspapers. Even a sharp-eyed USA
Today reader in Florida caught the reference and sent a clipping to a staff member. This story reminds everyone
that the State Library contains important historical records that people, such as the members of Somers church,
can use. In light of the publicity given this story, yet another church has donated its records to the State
Archives. ♦
Dimensions of a House of Public Worship, as
proposed by a Committee of the
Congregational Society in Somers.
Notable Acquisition on The History of
Connecticut Education
The State Library has recently acquired the following:
CHRISTOPHER COLLIER. Connecticut’s Public Schools: A History, 1650-2000. Orange, CT: Clearwater Press, 2009. Pp. Xxii, 873, illustrations, bibliography, index (ISBN 978-0-578-01661-0)
Receipt from Chauncey L. Root acknowledging
payment for itemized work done.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 15
Teaching American History
by Paul E. Baran, Assistant State Archivist
Continued on next page
This past June marked the completion of the
Connecticut State Library’s involvement in a three-
year Teaching American History (TAH) grant
administered by EASTCONN. EASTCONN,
headquartered in Hampton, is one of six Regional
Educational Service Centers in Connecticut. It
provides a wide range of educational services to
thirty-three towns and thirty-six boards of
education in New London, Tolland, and Windham
Counties.
TAH grants are awarded by the U.S. Department of
Education to “enhance teachers’ understanding of
American history through intensive professional
development, including study trips to historic sites
and mentoring with professional historians and
other experts. Projects are required to partner with
organizations that have broad knowledge of
American history, such as libraries, museums,
nonprofit historical or humanities organizations, and
higher education institutions.”
The EASTCONN grant, entitled “Themes of History:
Expanding Perspectives on the American Story”
offered fall, winter, and spring workshops, a
summer institute, public history events, and
seminars designed to highlight a different broad
theme each year. About forty-five middle school and
high school teachers participated in all three years of
the grant. Five students from the University of
Connecticut’s Neag School of Education also took
part each year. EASTCONN partnered with the
Connecticut State Library and several other
institutions to offer the workshops. The other
Assistant State Archivist Paul Baran speaks to Teaching American History workshop
participants at the Mashantucket Pequot Museum and Research Center on June 28, 2012.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 16
Continued on next page
partner institutions were the American Antiquarian
Society, the Choices Program of the Watson Institute
for International Studies at Brown University, the
Connecticut Historical Society, the Thomas J. Dodd
Research Center at the University of Connecticut,
Historic New England, and Museums of Northeast
Connecticut.
Each fall, representatives from each partner
institution and the EASTCONN TAH project staff
held a full day planning meeting to discuss the yearly
theme, and to suggest topics to be explored, materials
from their collections that could be the focus of an
activity, and historians who are experts on related
topics to speak at the public history events. By the
end of the day a draft outline of a professional
development program for the year was produced.
Details of workshop days were worked out in smaller
follow-up meetings between EASTCONN TAH
project staff and partners taking part in a particular
workshop day. This approach fostered collegial
planning among the partner institutions. The State
Library participated in two different workshop days
during each of the three years. A look at the activities
of these days, though a fraction of what was offered
each year, still provides a sense of the program as a
whole.
For Year One’s theme on Freedom, Security, and
Diversity, I teamed up with the Connecticut Historical
Society to present a workshop day held at CHS,
focusing on the home front during the Civil War,
World War I, and World War II. First, Ben Gammel
of CHS presented an activity on Civil War draft
quotas. For the World War I unit, I held a mock
Council of Defense meeting. The Council of Defense
was a state agency that coordinated war-related
activities on the home front. Split into smaller groups,
participants examined documents from one of the
Council’s departments: Americanization, Food
Supply, Fuel Conservation, Fundraising, Publicity,
Transportation, and the Woman’s Division.
Then each group reported on their “department’s”
activities. We followed this with a discussion on the
concept of a “total war” or the complete mobilization
of resources and population toward the war effort.
Finally, Ben Gammel,
Emily Dunnack, and
Richard Malley of CHS
had participants look at
the material culture of
World War II through
objects in the Society’s
collection. At another
workshop that year,
History and Genealogy
Librarian Carol Ganz
showed the participants
how genealogical resources
could be used for historical research, emphasizing
techniques on how to find and use data on
immigrants and immigrant groups.
The theme for Year Two was Individual Opportunity
and Social Responsibility. During the planning
meeting many of the ideas seemed to center on the
ideal of getting ahead in America. To this end,
Museum Educator Patrick Smith presented his
“Connecticut Invents” workshop. However, it
occurred to me that perhaps there should be a
workshop day to address those for whom
opportunity either passed by or seemed out of reach
and worked with the Mansfield Historical Society (a
member of the Museums of Northeast Connecticut)
to plan the day. For the first activity on poor relief
during the early Republic, I had participants
examine documents drawn largely from town
records for the years 1790-1830. During this period,
responsibility for poor relief in Connecticut fell to
the individual towns. We discussed the various
strategies used by towns to provide for the elderly,
the infirm and incapable, transients, slaves and
servants, and children. Ann Galonska of the
Mansfield Historical Society led the participants
through an examination of the Superintendent’s
journal from and other documents related to the
Connecticut Soldiers’ Orphan Home that operated
from 1866 to 1875. Finally, participants looked at
some of the “make work” projects of the Works
“The Teaching
American History
grant provided the
State Library and the
other institutional
partners with the
opportunity to make
their rich historical
collections known to
a group of educators.”
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 17
Progress Administration during the Great
Depression. Using the State Library’s digital
collections of the WPA Architecture Survey and the
WPA Art Inventory Project as examples, participants
searched the Internet for other digital collections of
WPA projects.
The Year Three theme of Sharing Power – Federalism
and International Relations seemed tailor made for
resources in the State Library. For the first workshop
of the year, Government Records Archivist Allen
Ramsey and I used documents identified by State
Archivist Mark Jones from the General Assembly
papers dealing with the sectional crisis leading up to
the Civil War. First, Allen led participants through
an examination of documents concerning Texas
annexation, the Mexican-American War, the
Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Act, the
Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the Dred Scott decision.
In a follow-up activity, I asked participants to
compare resolutions adopted by both northern and
southern states concerning the Peace Conference of
1861 in Washington to determine whether there was
any way the Civil War could have been prevented.
These activities were a good juxtaposition with the
mock Constitutional Convention presented earlier in
the day by Historic New England in which
participants debated the ratification of the federal
constitution.
In the second workshop of Year Three, the State
Library planned a workshop day with a new
institutional partner in the grant, the Mashantucket
Pequot Museum and Research Center (MPMRC), on
State-Tribal relations. The workshop was held at
Mashantucket. In the first activity, Laurie Pasteryak
of MPMRC guided the participants through close
readings of visual representations of the Pequot War.
I presented an activity where participants looked at
“The Year Three theme of Sharing
Power – Federalism and International
Relations seemed tailor made for
resources in the State Library... ”
Connecticut General Assembly documents on
detribalization, or the efforts of state government to
legislate indigenous peoples out of existence in the
second half of the nineteenth century. J. Cedric
Woods, a citizen of the Lumbee Tribe of North
Carolina and Director of the Institute of Native
American Studies at the University of Massachusetts
Boston came in to speak to the group on the issue of
tribal recognition. In between were behind the
scenes tours and time to explore the museum.
The Teaching American History grant provided the
State Library and the other institutional partners
with the opportunity to make their rich historical
collections known to a group of educators. The
teachers came away not only with broader historical
knowledge but an understanding of how they might
incorporate historical documents and artifacts into
their lesson plans. A few of the teachers’ comments
about the program sums this up nicely. One wrote:
“Participation in the grant has prompted
me to consider for every unit: What
primary documents can I use?”
A second teacher commented:
“Words can’t express my gratitude to this
program in terms of influencing my
teaching. I started this program as a
beginning teacher and I have taken so
much of these informative sessions about
using primary sources…”
On the program as a whole, one wrote,
“This is an incredible program, I will miss
it so much. It has truly made me the
teacher I am.”
In my last activity with the teachers I told them that
all the hours it took me to design workshop
activities gave me a greater appreciation for what
they do to create lesson plans. From hearing their
comments afterwards I know it was time well spent.
♦
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 18
150th
Anniversary of the Connecticut Flag Day
and Constitution Day Resolution
by Allen Ramsey, Government Records Archivist
June 17, 2012 was the 150th
Anniversary of the
Connecticut General
Assembly’s passage of a
resolution recommending
the observance of Flag Day
on the fourteenth of June
and Constitution Day on
the seventeenth of
September of each year as
holidays. June 14 was the
day in 1777 that the
Continental Congress
adopted the Stars and
Stripes as the flag of the
United States, and
September 17 the day in
1787 the United States
Constitution was ratified.
The original 1862 Connecticut General Assembly resolution, which is available on the State Library’s Flickr site at http://flic.kr/s/aHsjzMN7zR, quashes the common misperception, as stated in U.S. House Resolution 662 passed in 2004, which states that Flag Day originated in Ozaukee County, Wisconsin in 1885. The founder, it claimed, was school teacher Bernard John Cigrand, who urged his students to observe June 14 as the “Flag’s Birthday.”
In truth, the resolution was the
idea of Jonathan Flynt Morris of
Hartford who proposed a
national Flag Day and
Constitution Day in June 1861 as
a direct result of the Civil War
and President Lincoln’s call for
75,000 troops to defend the
Union.i In a Flag Day address
before the Connecticut Society of
Sons of the American Revolution
delivered June 15, 1891, Morris
told how he proposed “the
propriety of celebrating the day
by public demonstration” to
Hartford Evening Press editor
Charles Dudley Warner, who
“...at once fell in with the idea”
believing as Morris that, “…the
flag and the constitution were
both on trial, and it was the duty
of every loyal man to sustain
them.”
That being the case, on June
10, 1861, Warner wrote an
editorial titled “National
Holidays” “…suggest[ing]
another day, worthy to
become a national holiday. It
may be too late for its general
observance this year, but we
hope that it will, in time, be
recognized wherever the
American flag floats. We
mean FLAG DAY.”ii
The Hartford Courant voiced
its support on June 14 and
reported that Hartford and
several Connecticut towns
embraced the idea. On June
15 the Courant reported that
“American Flags were the
order of the day all over the
city yesterday…Nearly all
the leading dry-goods
merchants made handsome
displays.” Three days later the
Courant reported that “the people
of Terryville celebrated Flag-day
by having a speech…and a
collation in a large new barn,
appropriately decorated with the
stars and stripes.”
This success was followed a year
later on June 6, 1862, by a
resolution introduced by Senator
Henry K. W. Welch that read,
“Resolved. That we recommend
to the people of this State to
observe the 14th day of June and
the 17th day of September in each
Continued on next page
Jonathan Flynt Morris
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 19
iJonathan Flynt Morris in his speech before the Connecticut Society of Sons of the American Revolutionary War, at the Lebanon War Office, on Flag Day, 1891, talks about writing to Congressman Dwight Loomis in early June “asking him to introduce in Congress a resolution for the observance of “Flag Day” as a national holiday, to embrace “Constitution Day” also.” However, as of this writing, there is no direct evidence that Morris wrote asking State Senator Henry K. W. Welch to introduce a resolution in the Connecticut General Assembly for Flag Day and Constitution Day even though both the federal and state resolutions are identical in wording. iiCharles Dudley Warner, “National Holidays,” Hartford Evening Press, June 10, 1861. iiiFor Craig Harmon’s extensive research see: http://lincoln-highway-museum.org/FD-1862/FD-1862-Intro.html
year as holidays – the first to be
known as Flag Day and the latter
as Constitution Day.” The Senate
passed the resolution on June 12
and the House of Representatives
on June 17, 1862. A similar
resolution was introduced at the
suggestion of Morris in the U.S.
Congress by Representative
Dwight Loomis of Connecticut on
June 11, 1862, but was tabled on
June 12.
Governor Luzon B. Morris on June
14, 1893 signed into law “An
Act concerning Flags for
School Districts” which
required selectmen to
provide each schoolhouse in
their town with United States
flags. The second section of
the act required “Suitable
exercises, having references
to the adoption of the
national flag, shall be had on
the fourteenth day of June in
each year…” The General
Assembly four years later
passed an act imposing a fine
of ten dollars on selectmen
that failed to provide flags or
apparatus to school districts
as required by the 1893 act.
The statute was then
amended in 1905 by House
Bill 634, which added the
requirement that “The
governor shall, annually, in
the spring, designate by official
proclamation the fourteenth day
of June as Flag Day…” Governor
Henry Roberts issued the first
Connecticut Flag Day
proclamation on May 26, 1906
and the practice has been
continued by governors to the
present.
On the national level, President
Woodrow Wilson issued the first
Presidential Flag Day
Proclamation on May 30, 1916,
requesting that June 14 be
observed as Flag Day across the
United States. On August 3,
1949, President Harry Truman
signed an Act of Congress
designating June 14 of every
year as National Flag Day.
I would like to acknowledge and
thank Craig Harmon, Director of
the Lincoln Highway National
Museum and Archives, who after
years of research into the origins of
Flag Day, put all the pieces together
and discovered the long lost
1862 original handwritten
Loomis resolution [H Res
84], located at the National
Archives, which he brought to
the attention of the
Connecticut State Library
and shared with me along
with his ongoing efforts
nationally to set the record
straight and honor Jonathan
Morris as the originator and
Warner, Welch, and Loomis
as facilitators of what we
celebrate today as Flag Day
and Constitution Dayiii.
Anyone who wants to consult sources used by Allen Ramsey should contact him at
allen.ramsey@ct.gov. ♦
Portrait of Judge Dwight Loomis by artist
Gustave Adolph Hoffman, 1934.
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 20
universal remote access to iCONN’s
licensed resources. The Public Library
Construction Grant Program has
awarded millions of dollars and helped
communities throughout the state build
new and expanded libraries thanks to the
efforts of Mary Louise Jensen and keen
oversight by Sharon. A much needed
update of the public library statutes was
spearheaded by Sharon. A variety of Gates
Foundation grant programs bringing new
technology resources to Connecticut libraries,
including Equal Access Libraries, Project Compass,
and Spanish Language Outreach were a result of
Sharon’s efforts. Her efforts and participation in
library development extended beyond Connecticut,
and gained her the respect of her colleagues in State
Library Agencies throughout the Northeast.
The annual federal Library Services and
Technology Act state grant which brings several
million dollars to the state each year was
meticulously administered by Sharon through good
times and bad. She was held in high regard by the
staff and officials at the Institute of Museum and
Library Services, the federal office that awards
LSTA grants.
But above all else she was beloved by her staff and
always acknowledged and appreciated them and
made the work more fun through her good humor.
Sharon was also held in high regard by her
colleagues throughout the State Library and by the
State Library Board.
The State Library has received approval to refill the
position of Director of Library Development, and
recruitment is underway. ♦
On January 31, 2012,
Sharon Brettschneider retired after
twenty two years of service to the
Connecticut library community, the last
sixteen of those years as the Director of
Library Development at the Connecticut
State Library.
Sharon gained the respect of librarians,
trustees, and friends of libraries throughout
Connecticut and beyond. During her career she was
recognized numerous
times by her colleagues,
receiving the
Connecticut Library
Association Special
Achievement Award in
1987 for her work co-
chairing the Legislative
Committee; the
Association of Connecticut Library Board’s Award
of Appreciation in 2003 for work as the State
Library’s liaison to ACLB; and being named the
Connecticut Library Association’s Outstanding
Librarian in 2004. Her efforts as the Director of
Library Development led to many improvements
and innovations in statewide library services.
Sharon initiated a cost study report for
Connecticard which helped lead to an expansion of
and more funding for the program. She oversaw
the establishment of the Connecticut Library
Network and its successful transformation into
iCONN, Connecticut’s research engine. She helped
initiate the State Library’s participation in the
WebJunction program providing valuable Web
services and continuing education opportunities for
Connecticut library staff. Sharon was the prime
mover behind the development of a statewide
library barcode that eliminated the need for patrons
to have multiple library cards and made possible
Sharon Brettschneider Retires as Director of Library Development
by Kendall Wiggin, State Librarian
“But above all else
she was beloved by
her staff and
always acknowledged
and appreciated
them and made the
work more fun.”
Connecticut State Library The CONNector Vol. 14, No. 1/3
January/July Page 21
The Connecticut State Library has entered into a licensing relationship with EBSCO Publishing. The full text of The
CONNector will be available in LISTA (Library Information Science & Technology Abstracts) Full Text, one of the
EBSCOhost® databases. Anyone interested may use the open access version of LISTA (index only). It is available free of
charge, courtesy of EBSCO, at http://www.libraryresearch.com.
STATE LIBRARY BOARD
John N. Barry, Chair
Robert D. Harris, Jr., Vice Chair
Honorable Michael R. Sheldon
Honorable Robert E. Beach, Jr.
Linda Anderson
Daphne Anderson Deeds
Eileen DeMayo
Allen Hoffman
Joy Hostage
Scott Hughes
Mollie Keller
Stefan Pryor
CONNECTICUT STATE LIBRARY
CONNector EDITORIAL BOARD
State Librarian Kendall F. Wiggin
State Archivist Dr. Mark H. Jones, Editor
Carol Ganz, History & Genealogy Unit
Dave Corrigan, Museum Curator
Stephen Slovasky, Reviewer
Ursula Hunt & Carol Trinchitella, Graphics
Christine Pittsley, Photo Imaging