Friday, August 19, 2011

Fort Stamford: The city's Revolutionary stronghold

From The Stamford Times: Fort Stamford: The city's Revolutionary stronghold
Editor's Note: The following is the next installment of The Stamford Times' history article series, "The Stamford Times Machine," which covers the city's most seminal moments in history.
STAMFORD -- Although Stamford was not invaded like it's neighboring towns during the American Revolution, a raid from the British army was something that was feared by many Stamford residents at that time, said Stamford Historical Society historian Ron Marcus.

Stamford, being very close in proximity to New York, was also close to the many British Loyalists or "Tories" living there, according to Marcus.

"Tory harassment and looting was very common in Stamford," he said. "Tories would often come to Stamford and destruct much of their property. Or they would conduct raids against anyone who was for independence. Stamford was not the safest place to live for many of the residents."

In the fall of 1781, a state fort was built in Stamford to protect the Stamford-Greenwich area from Tory raids, according to Marcus. Fort Stamford was finished in December of 1781. It was approximately 135 feet by 165 feet inside, and the redoubts had an inside measurement of 30 feet by 30 feet.

The fort was built under the direction of General David Waterbury and was located alongside the Post Road at the time, which was the most common route for traveling, said Marcus. The fort also had a perfect view of Long Island Sound, he said. Today, the land which Fort Stamford once stood is located at 900 Westover Road, which is now a park of the same name and includes an education center and a garden.

"General Waterbury strategically placed this fort where the soldiers could see the Post Road, and see Long Island Sound," Marcus said. "Of course, now everything is different, but back then this was the perfect location for a fort."

Roughly 300 men were manned at the fort, and conditions were less than favorable for a soldier, he said.

"The men who manned this fort were there in the dead of winter," Marcus said. "They didn't have much to eat and much to keep warm. We know this because of some of the accounts that were written down from various 'Joe privates,' which, in my opinion, are a very important part of our history."

One account was written by a soldier named Johnathan Rathbum from Colchester. Rathbum was ordered to Fort Stamford in April of 1782, and was "subjected to the usual hardships of military life," according to the "Narrative of Jonathan Rathbum," by Jonathan Rathbum, Rufus Avery and Stephen Hempstead.

According to Rathbum, "on one occasion, a rifle ball passed through (his) hat and cut away the hair on (his) head, but a kind Providece protected me."

In Rathbum's narrative, he wrote about one instance where he had to spend the night in the woods to avoid the British, who were planning an attack on the fort. "One evening, the orderly sergeants passed around among the men, and with a whisper, commanded us to equip ourselves without noise; and then were marched out of the fort to a woods two miles distant, and ordered to lie down on the frozen ground, where we passed a bitter cold night with only one single blanket and our overcoats to protect us."

In November of 1782, the preliminary articles of the Treaty of Peace were signed, and on Sept. 3, 1783, the formal treaty was signed, ending the American Revolution. With the revolution at an end, the fort was considered surplus property and was shortly sold, according to Marcus.

Since 1783, the Fort Stamford land was owned by private residents, the last of which was Augusta Goodbody, who died in May of 1970. After her death, there was a lot of public concern over the fate of the Fort Stamford land, Marcus said. In 1972, the Stamford Board of Representatives approved the purchase of the 113-acre Goodbody property, he said.

"I think it was very important to preserve this land," Marcus said. "It is an important part of Stamford's history and would be a shame to let it go to waste."