Source: Hinman, R. R. 1846. A catalogue of the names of the first puritan settlers of Connecticut, with the time of their arrival in the colony, and their standing in society, together with their place of residence, as far as can be discovered by the records; collected from the state and town records. No. 1

Pages 8-9: https://books.google.com/books?id=dt7CGDD0PsgC&pg=PA8

As early as 1640 the General Court intended that the inhabitants should measure their apparel by the length of their purses—the Court being the judges. The constable in each town was ordered to take notice of all persons, and if he judged any persons exceeded their rank and condition in life, in their attire, to warn them to appear before the Particular Court to answer for the offense. All excess in the price of labor, in 1640-41, was expressly forbidden by law. All artificers and other laborers were priced, as well as the labor of horses and oxen. Most of the penalties attached to the criminal laws, were accompanied with flogging and pillory; so much so that a law was enacted in 1643, which made it imperative upon all the towns on Connecticut River to appoint a whipper to do execution upon offenders.

As Massachusetts and Plymouth were settled a few years earlier than Connecticut, and had become somewhat organized as a government, many of their laws were copied into the code of laws enacted by Connecticut. Labor and dress were regulated by law in those colonies before it was in this. Their laws upon these subjects were much more severe than in this jurisdiction. They had a law that ladies dresses should be made so long as to cover their shoe buckles. They prohibited short sleeves, and ordered the sleeves to be lengthened to cover the arms to the wrists. They forbid by law, immoderate great breeches, knots of ribbon, broad shoulder bands, silk roses, double ruffs and cuffs. Even as late as 1653, John Fairbanks was solemnly tried for wearing great boots. He probably showed he was afflicted with corns on his toes, and therefore he could not comfortably wear small ones, as he was acquitted on trial. The colonies were poor, and it appears the object of the law was to prevent all kinds of extravagance, and to compel the inhabitants to govern their living, strictly by their means.

As there were no printing presses in the colony or country in the early settlement of Connecticut, the laws enacted at each session of the General Court, were promulgated to the inhabitants of each town, by copies of the laws being made out by the Secretary of the Colony, and sent to the constables of each town, and read by them at public meetings to the people. This inconvenient practice was continued in the Colony nearly forty years, until 1672.

Windsor 

Page 66: https://books.google.com/books?id=dt7CGDD0PsgC&pg=PA66

Preston, William, probably was an officer, as he was ordered by the court in 1642, to take into his custody, James Hullet, THOMAS GILBERT, George Gibbs and LYDIA BLISS, and keep them in gins, with coarse diet, hard work and sharp correction. A William Preston came from England in the ship Truelove, James Gibbs, master—this may be the same William Preston. John Preston came with him.

New London

Page 66: https://books.google.com/books?id=dt7CGDD0PsgC&pg=PA66

PRENTICE [sic], JOHN, N. London, fined £5 for notching a colt's tail*, 1664.

*nick: to cut nicks or notches in; to notch; To nick a horse’s tail is to make an incision at its root to make him carry it higher. (American encyclopedic dictionary by Robert Hunter, John Alfred Williams, Sidney John Hervon Herrtage, p. 2842: https://books.google.com/books?id=b1xYAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA2842d)