From 1752 until 1796, all the educational and religious affairs of the town were under the control of this Society. It located the Schools, fixed the tax, collected it, and superintended the Schools through committees annually appointed. It was, in fact, the School Society for the Town, and as such received Benoni Stebbins’ legacy. It fixed and collected the tax for the salary of the ministers, “for the sweeping out of the Meeting House.” It also, in some measure, managed the financial affairs of the Episcopal Society; for in 1771, after appointing Ichabod Bostwick to gather the minister’s rate, it appointed “Solomon Hodkiss to gather a rate for Mr. Clark.” And in 1772 this Society issued a notice “to warn all the Church people to meet together on Monday, the 13th day of instant, April, at St. John’s Church at 8 of the clock in the morning, then and there to consult such measures as they shall think proper to procure a Glebe house for the Rev. Mr. Clark, and to do such other business as shall be thought proper.” The minutes of the meeting thus warned are recorded as “a meeting of the inhabitants of the 1st Ecclesiastical Society—holden by the Church of England.” This was doubtless done, in a fraternal spirit, to give legal efficacy to the action of the Episcopal Society in disposing of one Glebe and purchasing another. This shows the kindly feeling that then, as now and always, has governed the members of this Society. The Church Review (vol. ii, p. 317,—See Hollister’s Hist. of Conn. vol. ii, p. 545—Note) states that “certain Churchmen in New Milford were fined for refusing to attend the meetings of the established Church. These fines were, by recommendation of Mr. Beach, paid, and copies of the proceedings taken to be forwarded to the King and council. The fact becoming known, the authorities refunded the money and granted permission to build a church, which before had been refused.” I do not know the authority of the Church Review for this statement; but I do know that there is no warrant for it in Town or Society’s books. There is no record of any refusal to permit Churchmen to build, nor of the remittance of a fine upon any person for being absent from the worship of this Church; yet the books contain records of scores of votes remitting fines for breach of the Sabbath and other minor offences. From 1752 to 1819 this Society had all the legal rights in its own hand. But, in all the records there is no instance of anything like intolerance, or a disposition to throw obstacles in the way of others; while there are numerous instances of its generosity, and readiness to aid those who entertained a faith different from its own.