USA > Maryland > Talbot County > History of Talbot county, Maryland, 1661-1861, Volume I > Part 57
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69
During Alrich's life, D'Hinojosa, as first councillor, was connected with an affair relating to our own State. Gov. Fendall had deputized Col. Utie, who is said to have resided upon and given name to Spesutia Island in the upper part of our bay, to go to New Amstel and lay be- fore the authorities there the claim of Lord Baltimore to the land upon which the colony was seated. Col. Utie was received with great courte- sy and warm hospitality by the Dutch Governor and his little cabinet of ministers. They listened to a statement of the Lord Proprietary's case, and then gave the legate to understand in no equivocal terms that they thought his claim untenable. Col. Utie, who seems to have been a fiery, hot headed man, no unfit representative, however, of the Governor of Maryland, it appears did not behave himself with the de- corum that was becoming a person of his station and official character and was subsequently so told by Augustine Herman when upon a diplomatic mission to Maryland, who said boldly before the Governor and Council that if Col. Utie should come to New Amstel again his conduct would be regarded not as that of an ambassador, but a dis- turber of the peace, and he would be dealt with accordingly-perhaps seized and sent to Holland. In truth Col. Utie's diplomacy con- sisted almost wholly of threats of vengeance upon the Dutch unless they surrendered their settlements to the Lord Proprietary of Maryland. The remonstrance that was handed to Colonel Utie, to be delivered to Gov. Fendall, was signed by Captain Lieutenant D'Hinojosa, and doubtless he had as much to do with the framing this instrument of writing as vice Director Alrichs himself, for it possesses the decision of the soldier united with the ingenuity of the diplomatist.
Before the death of Alrichs, D'Hinojosa had been promised the privilege of visiting the fatherland, but on one pretext or another his departure had been deferred. Becoming Director, or Governor, new duties devolved upon him so that he was not able to perform the long
526
THE WORTHIES OF TALBOT
delayed visit until the year 1662-3. After his arrival in Holland, he made a full and detailed statement to the "Honorable, wise, most prudent Council," of the past condition, the future propects, and the present requirements of the settlement at New Amstel. It soon became evident to him that the great city of Amsterdam had been disappointed in the results of his colonization scheme, and had grown tired of its foster child that entailed such great expense and brought such small returns. D'Hinojosa very plainly told the Burgomasters that he perceived that they did not hold the colony in sufficient esteem and they did not know the value of what they disdained. The city appearing willing to shift the responsibility and care from its own shoulders was not slow to accede to a proposition made by D'Hinojosa and the Commissioners of the Colonies whom he seems to have im- pressed with his own favorable opinions of the colony, that they should take upon themselves the management of the affairs of the settlement upon the conditions of sharing equally the expense and profit with the city. The terms of the agreement had not been ratified when we find the Director about to set sail for America with one hundred emigrants. In his contract with the authorities he fell into a great mistake-the grand moral and economical error of the age, for that cannot be called a crime which the most enlightened consciences of the time did not con- demn, or condemned but lightly. He stipulated that fifty negroes should be bought of the West India Company and sent to New Amstel to cultivate the fertile valleys of the province. It will be remembered that the Dutch were the first to introduce African slavery into our North American colonies. But in extenuation of their offense we should also remember that the commercial conscience is not ever the most intelligent nor the most sensitive of consciences, and that the Dutch were the great commercial people of this period to which reference is made.
The Governor returned to his colony upon the Delaware, doubtless with more hopeful feelings than when he departed. He had made arrangements by which internal discontent should be assuaged and prosperity insured; but he soon encountered external or foreign dangers. Lord Baltimore and the Marylanders had long threatened the settle- ments on South River, of which New Amstel was the most exposed; but now the English of the northern country were casting longing eyes upon all the territories of the Dutch in North America, particularly those upon the Hudson. In the year 1664, Charles II with royal liberality, that is, liberality with other people's property, graciously
527
ALEXANDER D'HINOJOSA
granted to his brother James, the Duke of York, what did not belong to him, all the lands lying between the Hudson River and the Dela- ware bay. Although this did not include the Dutch territories south or west of the last mentioned river, a liberal interpretation of the grant, such as princes give, did not exclude them. The Duke of York was not slow in taking possession of his newly acquired territory. Without warning or any declaration of war, in August of 1664, a fleet of four vessels under Col. Nicols appeared off Manhattan, and summoned the doughty Peter Stuyvesant to surrender. Of the celebrated defense of the city and its final capture, is not the whole account written in that veritable "History of New York from the beginning of the world, to the end of the Dutch dynasty,-by Diedrich Knickerbocker?" It may be presumptious to add one line to that epic, but it is necessary to say that as great a warrior as Peter Stuyvesant was, he found himself when invaded, unprepared for resistance, having neither munitions of war nor military forces at his command. He called upon the minor settlements in New Netherlands for assistance. Director D'Hinojosa hastened to place at his service "5000 lbs. of powder and all necessaries, his person and all his people." This was done like a brave and patriotic soldier, as well as like a wise statesman, knowing that it is better to defend one's home at a distance, than when the enemy is thundering at one's own door. But his offer was declined. Manhattan surrendered on the 8th Sept. without resistance, and Peter Stuyvesant was called to ac- count by the home authorities for his conduct, which had the appear- ance of pusilianimity, if not treachery. One of the charges against him was his declination of D'Hinojosa's offer of assistance. The hu- miliated Governor denied the offer had been made and corroborated his assertion by the declaration of Beekman, who was the W. I. Com- pany's Director at Altona, on South River, just above New Amstel. But doubt is thrown upon Beekman's testimony by the fact that no good feeling existed between him and D'Hinojosa. This ill feeling may have owed its origin to this, or perhaps as trifling a cause, that the Director of New Amstel, on a certain occasion, had neglected to affix the address of the Director of Altona to an official communication, saying by way of apology, which only aggravated the insult, that he "had no time to write the address without breaking in upon his laziness." The English having captured Manhattan immediately turned their attention to other settlements in New Netherlands and accordingly on the 3rd day of Sept. 1664, even before the capitulation of Manhattan had been formerly signed, a commission was issued signed by Col. Nicols,
528
THE WORTHIES OF TALBOT
the conqueror of the redoubtable Peter Stuyvesant, then the chief in command at New York, and by his fellow commissioners to Sir Robt. Carr to proceed to the Delaware river with "His Majesty's friggots the Guinney and the William and Nicolas, and all the souldyers that are not in the fort," and to reduce the Dutch settlements thereon to obedience to English rule. With no surprise and with as little apparent dismay the valiant Governor of New Amstel saw on the last day of Sep- tember the fleet on its way up the river, but his astonishment was great that the ships sailed on past without deigning to recognize by a single shot the existence of his fort. The object of the commander of the expedition soon became apparent. By first visiting the settlement, composed mostly of Swedes at the mouth of Christiana creek, called Altona, and offering the inhabitants good terms, he succeeded in se- curing their quiet and unresisting submission. He also had an oppor- tunity for a parley of two or three days with the Governor and Burghers of New Amstel. The Governor was firm in his purpose to defend the fort, but the Burghers were persuaded to withhold from him all sup- port and to accept the offers of the English commander. The governor finding himself left to his own resources without any hope of aid from his people, withdrew his soldiery into the fort and awaited events. On the following Sunday morning the ships "Guinney" and "William and Nicolas" dropped down and anchored off New Amstel. The English forces were landed under Captains Hyde and Morley, Sir Robt. Carr remaining on board the "Guinney" until the fight was over, but disem- barked as soon as the "sporte" of plundering began.
The fort was garrisoned by fifty men and mounted, if the words of Sir Robt. Carr be correctly interpreted, with fourteen guns. D'Hi- nojosa, though deserted by the Burghers, his people refused all propo- sitions of surrender. Preparations were made for immediate assault. The ships having drawn in to within musket shot opened on the fort with two broadsides each, to which D'Hinojosa replied. Then the order was given to "the soldiers to fall on," "which done," as Sir Robt. Carr says in his report to Col. Nicols,
the soldiers neaver stoping untill they stormed ye fort, and soe conse- quently to plundering; the seamen, noe less given to that sporte, were quickly within, and have gotten good store of booty [Sir Robert was doubtless among them]; soe that in such noise and confusion no word of command could be heard for sometyme [and it is doubtful whether any was given]; but for as many goods as I could preserve, I shall keep intire. The loss on our part was none, the Dutch had tenn wounded and three killed.
529
ALEXANDER D'HINOJOSA
This completed the conquest of the New Netherlands and to the credit of D'Hinojosa it can be said that he was the only commandant in all the New Netherland colonies who made any resistance to the English. His defense must be regarded as gallant, and he surrendered only after more than one fourth of his garrison had been killed and wounded. Col. Nicols says in his report to the English Secretary of State that the fall of New Anstel gave no satisfaction to the Marylanders, who were enjoying a profitable and satisfactory trade with the Dutch upon the Delaware. Perhaps, too, the Marylanders saw that the prize which they coveted was snatched from them; for the rights and claims of the Lord Proprietary were not yet surrendered nor abandoned. In this same letter of Col. Nicols, he recommends that in case any attempt should be made by the Dutch to recover their settlements, the people of that nation should be expelled or banished. In truth an attempt was subsequently made several years later and was entirely, but tempo- rarily, successful. This recommendation of Gov. Nicols may account for the presence in Maryland of D'Hinojosa, for when we next hear of him, he is in St. Mary's county, and at the house of Capt. Thomas Howel, whence he writes a letter to Gov. Nicols. Apprehension of an attempt of the Dutch to regain their lost possessions may have prompted the banishment of D'Hinojosa, or he may voluntarily have left the Delaware for the Chesapeake immediately after his surrender. His estate had been plundered, his lands bestowed upon his enemies, including his island in the Delaware which Col. Nicols in a letter to the British authorities recommended should be given to Sir Robt. Carr, in consideration of his services, his negroes had been traded off by the same Sir Robt. Carr to the Marylanders in exchange for provisions for his military and naval forces, and even his faithful soldiers sold as servants to be transported to the plantations in Virginia. Under these depressing circumstances he addressed the following letter to the Gov- ernor of New York:
Right Honorable Sir,
SIR .- Your very agreeable answer to our letter came safely here to hand and I learn from it that your Honor is sorry for my loss.
If your Honor would please to console me therein, it can be done by the restitution of my lost estate, and could I get it back, I am re- solved to live under Your Honor's government; yea, on the same con- ditions that I had from the City of Amsterdam-to cultivate the land in company for our mutual profit, should this be more advantageous to your Honor and more serviceable for the South River than that I should now quit.
530
THE WORTHIES OF TALBOT
Meanwhile should your Honor incline thereunto, the answer should be sent me to Capt. Thomas Houwel's in Maryland, where I shall remain two or three months. Should these not be accepted by your Honor, I would hereby respectfully request you to send me a letter under your Honor's hand to his Highness the Duke of York, in order that I may take occasion to apply in London to his Highness aforesaid on the subject. Herewith I shall remain, Right Honorable Sir Your Obedient Servant,
ALEXANDER D'HINOJOSA.
Sint Merry's at Capt. Thomas Houwell's House.
[Without date, but supposed to have been written in 1664 or 1665.]
From this it appears that D'Hinojosa after the fall of New Amstel took refuge among those very Marylanders who, through their am- bassador, Col. Utie, had threatened him and his colonists with the terrors of conquest. The seat of our colonial government was at this date at the ancient city of St. Mary's, and Charles Calvert, nephew of the Lord Proprietary and heir of the province, was the Governor. It long had been a matter of complaint that Maryland was the refuge of fugitives from labor from the Dutch settlements, and Gov. D'Hino- josa, of New Amstel, was among those who were most strenuous in urging their rendition. He little thought that he himself should be a fugitive in the same land and a petitioner for the hospitality of its people. After the writing of the letter which appears to have had no favorable effect upon the Governor of New York, as Manhattan was now called, we lose sight of D'Hinojosa until we discover him in Talbot county, where we find him without purpose of his own, but by the inaptness of the clerk, concealed under the strangely perverted name of Vingolsea, and as the purchaser of Poplar Island, off our Bay side, in the Chesapeake, in the year 1669. Doubtless this island was chosen by him as his home because it reminded him of his lost island in the Delaware, which he held while governor and which had been wrested from him and assigned to his conqueror Sir Robt. Carr. Upon Poplar Island the exiled governor lived for some years, how many our records do not indicate. He was certainly there in 1671, for his petition for naturalization in that year mentions him as being of "Foster's Island," the alternative or interchangeable name for Poplar Island at the period. When he abandoned his home on Poplar Island it is impossible to say, but a record made in the year 1791 speaks of Alexander D'Hi- nojosa as being at that time of Anne Arundel county. Another record
531
SAMUEL CHAMBERLAINE
mentions his son Johannes as being a resident of Talbot as late as 1698, when he sold lands in the "Forks of the Choptank" which he had bought of Peter Sayer, to one Benjamin Clarke. Mr. L. L. Davis says the last trace he was able to discover of him was in
Prince George's county, where his family dwindled down into a state of extreme misfortune or of great obscurity.
What authority Mr. Davis had for this last assertion does not appear in his book. It is probably incorrect for a more accurate annalist and historian, Vincent, who is now writing an exhaustive account of Delaware, says that D'Hinojosa returned to the father-land and died in Holland among his own people. Let us hope and believe, even without ground for hope and evidence for belief, that he lived to a good old age, honored for his public services, loved for his private virtues, and blessed with competence and content.
SAMUEL CHAMBERLAINE, OF PLAIN-DEALING
1697-1773
The admirable harbor, deep and sheltered, that is formed by the Third Haven creek, at its mouth, where it opens into Choptank river, attracted vessels trading with eastern Maryland from the time of the earliest settlements in Talbot county. The cluster of houses erected for the accommodation of the seamen and officers of the ships; or for that of the resident merchants or factors; the warerooms intended for the storage of tobacco awaiting transportation, or for the foreign goods that were sent over for sale, was erected into a port of entry and clearance in 1694 as being the most considerable place upon the Eastern Shore, and most easy of access. To this port came two brothers the sons and grandsons of English merchants who had for more than one hun- dred years been engaged in trade with the Colonies seated upon the Chesapeake and its tributaries. These were John and Samuel Cham- berlaine. Richard Chamberlaine, the grandfather of these young men, was one of the original members of the Virginia company of merchants, that became the founders of the Dominion; but he was never in America. The commercial intercourse with Virginia and Maryland thus insti- tuted was continued and extended by his son Thomas Chamberlaine of Liverpool, who was merchant and ship-owner trading between that emporium and Oxford. It was in one of his ships, the Elizabeth, built at Skillington's Point, at the mouth of Trippes Creek, by Gilbert Lives-
532
THE WORTHIES OF TALBOT
ley, and carrying twenty-four guns and ninety-six men, that his two sons, John and Samuel, the last mentioned but seventeen years of age, came to Oxford for the first time in 1714. Of this ship the elder brother was in command. After this they made several voyages, the elder brother becoming a partner of his father and commanding as well as owning ships, and the younger acting assupercargo. Among the records of Talbot county there are frequent references to the presence of the Messrs. Chamberlaine, and in those of the year 1718-19 John Cham- berlaine is mentioned as the master of the ship "Squire," and part owner with Richard Warbrick, while Samuel Chamberlaine is mentioned as being the supercargo. Captain John Chamberlaine died in the year 17211 in Virginia, and in the same year Samuel Chamberlaine married a lady of Maryland. The connection thus formed determined his settlement at Oxford, to which he returned after a brief visit to his father in England, no more to cross the ocean. It is of this gentleman, worthy of commemoration, that it is now proposed to give such account as the very imperfect record of his life will allow.
Samuel Chamberlaine, who may be spoken of as of "Plain Dealing," to distinguish him from his equally well-known son, Samuel Chamber- laine of Bonfield, and others of his family bearing the same name, the
1 In the parish church at St. Michaels there is inserted in the walls a beautiful mural tablet commemorating John Chamberlaine, which at one time was sur- mounted by an elaborately carved frame of wood, and was originally erected in the church edifice that preceded the one recently demolished (1878) to make room for the present structure. This tablet has inscribed upon it beneath the Cham- berlaine arms the following:
UNDERNEATH LYETH THE BODY OF JOHN CHAMBERLAINE WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE JUNE THE FIRST 1721 IN THE 31 YEAR OF HIS AGE.
The Coat of Arms of the Chamberlaines is thus given in Kerr's Genealogical Notes :
First and Fourth, Gules, an Escutcheon argent, in an orle of eight Mullets, or: Second and third gules, a Chevron between Three Escallops or: Crest, an Ass' head out of a Ducal Coronet. Mottoes, "Mors portior macula" also, "Prodesse Quam Conspice;" "Vir- tute Nihil invicum;"' "Stub born in the right"
533
SAMUEL CHAMBERLAINE
youngest son of Thomas and Ann Penketh Chamberlaine was born May 17, 1697, at Sanghall on the Dee, in Cheshire, near the ancient town of Chester. Here had lived his family for nearly five hundred years-a family that claims descent from Count de Tankerville, who followed William the Conqueror from Normandy in 1066. John, a son of this Count Tankerville became Lord Chamberlain to Henry I of England in 1125, and his son Richard held the same office under King Stephen. Hence the surname of the family which has been otherwise and better honored than by kingly service. Of the education of Samuel Chamberlaine, nothing whatever is known. There had been examples in his family of liberal training and high scholarship, notably Edward Chamberlaine, Doctor of Laws, and sometime student at Oxford, and John Chamberlaine, his son, who took his degree at the same university and became a Fellow of the Royal Society. Both of these were men of learning and writers of repute and authority, the first having written several works, the best known of which is the Anglia Notitia, or "Present State of England," often reprinted and quoted; and the latter having translated several books from the Dutch and French, and continued his father's Notitia. With such examples before him it is not likely that Thomas Chamberlaine neglected the education of his sons, and we know, from documents of one kind or another left behind by Samuel Cham- berlaine, that he had, at least, such literary training as qualified him for the avocation to which he was destined, and in fact rendered him qualified to fill creditably the functions of a provincial statesman. After receiving elementary instruction, it is probable he was received into his father's counting room, where his mercantile training was ac- quired, and those habits of order and precision for which he became so well known and by which he so much profited in after life. It is known that at the early age of seventeen he came out in one of the ships belonging to his father and elder brother John and commanded by the latter, probably in the capacity of captain's clerk or supercargo. We know that a little later he was discharging the duties of such an officer on board the ship "Squire" as before mentioned. In 1709 he pur- chased an interest in the mercantile firm of Ratchdale Norris and Com- pany of Liverpool, and in the following year became factor or agent of Mr. Foster Cunliffe, a Liverpool merchant, trading with Maryland. In 1723, having determined to settle in America he bought the entire interest of Messrs. Rachdale and Company, and forming a copartner- ship with his father and his sister-in-law, Mrs. Margaret Clay Cham- berlaine, the widow of his brother John, the commercial business was continued for several years with satisfactory success.
534
THE WORTHIES OF TALBOT
In a record of a power of attorney of Talbot county court John Cham- berlaine and Samuel Chamberlaine are mentioned as being merchants of Liverpool, England, Feb. 29, 1722-23.
On the third of April, 1721, Mr. Chamberlaine married Mary, the only child of Mr. Robert Ungle, a merchant of Oxford, residing at Plain- Dealing, a plantation upon the opposite side of Third Haven Creek, which had come to him through his marriage with Frances, the grand- daughter of John and Margaret Pope, people of good condition, who have not perpetuated their name in this county. After their marriage and bridal tour to England, Mrs. Ungle accompanying them, Mr. and Mrs. Chamberlaine took up their residence in the town of Oxford, in the pros- perity of which he became deeply interested, as will presently be shown. But Mrs. Chamberlaine did not long survive her marriage, for she died September 13, 1726, leaving no children. A portrait of this lady in the possession of Dr. Joseph E. Chamberlaine of Easton represents her as a beautiful woman, of slight figure. Mr. Ungle lived but a short time after the death of his daughter, dying in 1727. Difficulty was experienced in discovering the heirs at law, but they were found to be Mrs. Abagail, the wife of Thomas Hill of London, and Mrs. Mary, the wife of Phineas Alferino.2 The interests of them in the Plain Dealing estate were pur- chased by Mr. Chamberlaine, and this large plantation at a later day became his residence. Mrs. Ungle survived her husband many years dying in 1754, and by her will made her son-in-law one of her executors and her residuary legatee, the other being his son Thomas Chamber- laine. She also left considerable legacies to the children of Mr. Samuel Chamberlaine by his second marriage. She appears to have been a Roman Catholic in her religious belief, a priest of that church, the Rev. John Lewis of Wye, officiating at her funeral, and receiving a legacy of ten pounds by her will.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.