USA > New York > Suffolk County > Easthampton > A history of the town of East-Hampton, N.Y. > Part 10
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
123
The County of .Kent, in southeastern England, is sur- rounded on nearly three sides by the waters of the River Thames and the English Channel. The Straits of Dover divide it from France. Its location invited invasion and its rich, productive, soil gave impetus thereto. The Belgae from Gaul early made a lodgment there. Cesar landing on its shores thence moved his legions, north and west. In its early history the inhabitants were numerous and increas- ing. The census of 1881 gives 977,585. Commerce and its deep seafishing, immense hop-fields and orchards, thriv- ing manufactories and ship building, poured wealth into the lap of this old county. It was early emancipated, from the darkness and thraldom of feudal barbarism. The ten- ure by which its lands were holden was free and unhampered comparatively. In other parts of England, lands descended to the eldest son. In Kent the custom of "Gavelkind " prevailed, by which all the sons inherited alike. In the patent of Gov. Dongan to "The Trustees of the Freeholders and Commonalty of the Town of East-Hampton," lands were to be holden "in free and common socage, according to the Manor of East Greenwich in the county of Kent, within his majesty's realm of England." The home of our ancestors there, in its level plains and surrounding seas, had like features here. There as "Kentish men" they were known as substantial freeholders. Here in thrift, in industry, in economy, in liberality, they retained the characteristics of their Kentish home. In my early practice I often heard · from a testator the remark "I must give something to my children or the will will be void," probably a tradition of the old home, like that of "cutting him off with a shilling."
The English Maidstone from whence our ancestors came is located chiefly on the eastern bank of the River Medway, about 30} miles E. S. E. of the city of London, in a rich
124
agricultural district in the county and hundred of Kent, and Lathe of Aylesford. The city or town of Maidstone, has for centuries possessed a charter, and is the shire town or capital of the county where its courts are holden. In 1891, its population was 52,150. Its main street ran nearly northeast and southwest. Our ancestors in East-Hampton, as if planning from the same model, laid out their main street in the same direction. From early times the bor- ough of Maidstone, sent two members to Parliament. The inhabitants of the city and county from the earliest history were devoted to the cause of freedom, and jealous of their rights. In the court which tried Charles the 1st, Andrew Broughton mayor of Maidstone was a secretary, and as such read the sentence of death to the King.
The citizens of Maidstone, trained in the vicinity of courts, were familiar with the foundation principles of law, and with Jury trials. As qualified voters there, they were acquainted with the elective franchise, and the right of rep- resentation in government. Their records demonstrate a capacity for free government, which we might infer they owed somewhat to their training in the motherland. Out of chaos they evolved order. They overcame anarchy, re- pressed riot, subdued lawlessness. They framed and en- forced rules, constitutions, laws, government. They were based on the intelligence, the virtue, the piety of the first settlers, and they securely reposed on those solid founda- tions. The inquest held at the death of George Miller, in 1668, and at the death of John Talmage, in 1670, evince a disposition to comply with the demands of law and famil- iarity with its forms unusual in frontier settlements.
They not only felt the responsibility of self government, but they fully determined that each one of their number should discharge his duty. With them there was no es-
125
caping the burdens of government-no shirking it off upon a few of their number. Measures were taken to compel every one to attend their Town Meetings, as has been seen. (See Chap. I, p. 11.)
Further measures were taken, that when they were as- sambled in their Town Meetings, every one should express his opinion, and tha' too, in such a manner that all might know it. With them no bold minority could overawe the · timid majority.
The following Order, entered on the records, expresses their opinion in their own language :
"Nov'r 2nd, 1652 .- Every man to vote by holding up his hands, under penalty of 6d ; the thing being before delib- crately debated."
Nor did they stop here. They understood and acted upon the principle, that each one, as a member of their commu- nity, owed certain public duties, the discharge of which were as imperative upon him as those arising out of his private or domestic relations. When once the duty was settled, the rights of their community upon the individual were rigorously exacted. Entertaining these opinions, and with this end in view, they passed the following enact- ment :
"October 7th, 1656 .- It is ordered that if any being chosen Secretarie or Constable, refuse to serve, and not give a sufficient reason, shall pay 30s ; and if any being chosen Townsmen, refuse without a reason, shall pay 40s.
Those three orders, compelling under penalty, attend- ance at Town Meetings, voting when there, and acceptance of office when elected, show their clear and perfect apprehen- sion of public rights, and with their other acts, exhibit the founders of this little Commonwealth, as worthy of being the founders of an empire.
126
They knew, likewise, right well where, and by whom, and in what proportions the pecuniary burdens of the com- monwealth should be borne. They enacted a rule by which each man himself should give an account of his property to the proper taxing officers; and in the same enactment they coupled a penal provision against a fraudulent con- cealment of any part of the estate.
"November 8th, 1656 .- It is ordered that concerning men's giving in their States for the Rates, that whosoever shall not give in their whole estates that is visible, what- ever is not given in according to order, the partie so doing shall lose the one-half of those goods not given in for the rate."
It may well be doubted whether any advancement has been made in the system of equitable taxation since the days of our forefathers. And in these times of shuffling off the performance of public duties, and more particularly of individual concealment and evasion for the purpose of avoiding the just proportion of the public taxes and bur- dens, it may not be improper for legislators to consider the preceding provisions of our fathers, as a remedy for this prevalent evil, and we commend it to their notice and consideration.
Amid the scarcity of money it was found convenient to pay their rates in produce of their farms or in whale oil or other commodities, and accordingly that primitive method of payment was adopted. The schoolmaster, the minister, and public officers were paid their salaries and fees in like manner. For the satisfaction of the curious, I have given the following extracts from their records :
" Dec'r 8th, 1656 .- It is ordered by the 3 men, that for the payment of the towns rates, wheat shall be paid at 4s. and 6d. per bushel, and Indian corn at 3s. and 6d."
" On a meeting of the trustees, being legally met, March
127
6th 1688-9, it was agreed that this year's towne rate should be held to be good pay if it be paid as follows :
Dry merchantable hides att
07. Os. 6d.
Indian corn ol. 3s. 0d.
Whale Bone, 3 feet long and upwards OZ. Os. 8d.
and what other ways is paid, lett the rule in the county rate be your directions."
The Puritan theory of government included the church as an inseparable, if not controlling element. Their gov- ernment was no godless, no atheistic, no mere earthly and worldly power. The colony at East-Hampton, while not denying the elective franchise to non-church members, was impelled by the strong current of the church. The church and the towns were so far identical that all the churches erected during the first two centuries were built and paid for by authority of the town as a town charge. The salar-
ies of all the ministers for nearly or quite that period were paid by the town authorities as a part of the town expense. It seems singular to find this record of the action of the Town Meeting as late as 1840: "Voted that the whole amount due from the parish for the parsonage house and six months salary of the Rev. Mr. Ely be levied on the tax- able property of this town and collected by the town col- lector " And again in 1847 : "Voted that all the pews and slips be hired out in the meeting house and the money aris- ing from the rent thereof be appropriated to defray the nec- essary expenses of the meeting house, and the overplus towards the payment of the clergyman's salary." The church and parsonage were built and owned by the town. The town Trustees managed and controlled them. While a student of law I inquired of an old deacon of the church where was the title. He answered "In the town," adding, "you now see how it behooves us sacredly to guard the town govern- ment." The impress of the church was indelibly stamped
128
upon the town. Its claims to be supported by the town seem to have been here perpetuated long after they had vanished elsewhere. It is noticeable that although Con- necticut repudiated the restriction of freemen and the elec- tive franchise to church members which Massachusetts and New Haven ordained, yet their overshadowing influence constrained the delegates of the feneral Assembly at Hart- ford, Oct. 13th, 1664, to vote : "The court desires yt ye several officers of the respective churches would be pleased to consider whether it be not the duty of the court to order the churches to practice according to the premises if they do not practice without such an order." It should be un- derstood that previous to this vote complaints had been made that applicants thereto had been denied church mem- bership. That the court do "commend it to the ministers and churches in this colony whether it be not. their duty to entertain all such persons who are of an honest and godly conversation, having a competency of knowledge in the principles of religion and shall desire to join wit h them in church fellowship by an explicit covenant, and that they have their children baptized, and that all the children of the church be accepted and accounted real members of the church, and that the church exercise a due Christian care and watch over them, and that when they are grown up, being examined by the officers in the presence of the church, it appear in the judgment of charity they are duly qualified to participate in that great ordinance of the Lord's Supper by their being able to examine themselves and dis- cern the Lord's body, such persons be admitted to full communion."-Vid Connecticut Colonial Records, Vol. I, p. 438. For two hundred years the thought of New Eng- land in religion, in morals, in manners, in education, in agriculture, in commerce, in industry, in scientific progress,
129
in free aspiration, in human sympathy, in individual and national being, in what animates and restricts the sphere of human action was the thought of East-Hampton. As an evidence of their views of their own rights and a determi- nation not to suffer an infringement therein, we find the following record :
"November 24, 1656-It is alsoe ordered that noe Indi- an shall travel up and downe or carrie any burdens in or through our Towne on the Sabbath Day. Whoever is found so doing, shall be liable to corporall punishment."
Conscious as they were of the evils of intemperance, one of their first efforts was to guard against its seductive in- fluences. In 1651 the General Court passed the following Act or Order :
"That no man shall sell any liquor but such as are dep- uted thereto by the town, and such men shall not let youth, and such as are under other men's management, remain drinking at unseasonable hours, and such persons shall not have above half a pint at a time among four men."
How solicitous to preserve the peace and morals of their community ! How guarded against the inroads of vice ! How watchful in their care over the young !
Nor did their sympathy or their vigilance stop here. Knowing the sad havoc which spirituous liquors had made with the aborigines, as well as their unconquerable thirst for those liquors, they passed laws for the prohibition of the evil, and the protection of the Indians.
"May 28th, 1655 .- It is ordered that for the prevention of drunkeness among the Indians, by selling strong water- First, That no man shall carry any to them to sell, nor send them any, nor imploy any to sell for them. Nor sell them any liquor in the Town for the present drinking, above 2 Drams at one time, and to sell to no Indian but such as are sent by the Sachem, and shall bring a written
130
Ticket from him, which shall be given him from the town, and he shall not have above a quart at a time."
Enlargement might be made to an indefinite extent, upon the characteristic traits of our ancestors. And while there is much in their history in which their descendants may well exult-much reflecting equal credit upon their under- standing and their heart, we are assured from an attentive search, that there is little of which we need be ashamed.
Stern and unyielding as they were in their adherence to duty, tenacious as they were of their rights, uncompromis- ing in their sense of justice, they yet had the most tender sympathy and kindness, mingled with the more rugged ele- ments of their nature ; and when there was an appropriate field, they rarely failed to manifest them. Their commis- seration and sympathy is most touchingly displayed in ex- empting the unfortunate and the poor from public burdens, and in protecting, with a strong arm, the helplessness of the widow.
At a very early day, and before the year 1700, they man- ifested their kindness and sympathy in voluntarily provid .. ing for the wants of a poor cripple who was a sojourner among them. They conveyed her to the west end of the Island, where medicine, advice and assistance could be ob- tained, (there being then no physician among them,) and they freely paid out large sums of money at different times on account of the support, maintenance, and the medical aid furnished abroad, to this child of suffering and want, as their records still show.
As a homely, and yet substantial token of their sympa- thy and kind regard, they exempted widows from those labors and burdens which their generosity led them to sup- pose devolved on others. After naming all the proprietors of the Town, liable to fence the common "Pasturing Field,"
131
placing one column on the side of Widow Baker, and one on the side of Widow Mulford, they say :
"At a meeting of the Trustees, being legally met, Aprill ye 12th, 1689, it was Ordered by ye s'd Trustees, that all the above s'd Parsons do cause their proportion in the above s'd Fence to be sufficiently sett up forthwith ; so that ye said Widdows may be preserved from Dammages coming throw any neglect therein ; or expect no other fav- or than the Law will allow each man yt neglects his Duty herein, viz : to have it sett up for him, and he to pay the double vallu thereof, to him that shall sett up the same. The above s'd forthwith is allowed till Wednesday night, next insuing the date hereof, and not farther."
CHAPTER IX.
Government impartial, p. 132. Prudent, p. 133, Forest pro- tected, p. 133. Combination with Connecticut and New- England, p. 135. Assembly of 1665, p. 138. Duplicity of the Duke of York, p. 138. Southampton disputes the line, p. 139. Some old lots located, p. 139. Emigration, p. 140. Wealth and population, 141. The tea-kettle, p. 142. Stand- point for a view, p. 142.
The rights of the humblest inhabitant were guarded with the same care that exacted the performance of duty from the most honored. When Lion Gardiner, leaving to his son the care and management of his Island, removed, to enjoy the congenial society and friendship of the settlement in East-Hampton, he took upon himself, with the privileges, all the obligations of a freeman. Oct. 10th, 1655, he was by the Town Meeting appointed "to call forth men by turns to look out for whales at all seasons as he shall appoint." For the prevention of fires two men were appointed to ex- amine chimnies monthly and see that they were so built and cleaned as to be secure. Feb. 4th, 1656, Lion Gardi- ner was one of the two men so chosen. The renowned commander of Saybrook fort, the proprietor of an Island a manor and lordship of itself, the friend and compeer of Wyandance and Winthrop, thought it not beneath his dig- nity to serve the Plantation in promoting its prosperity in whaling and its safety from conflagration. His fellow townsmen, in choosing him to discharge these duties, in- tended no discredit to the man whose merits they ever
133
owned and honored. When in 1669 Thomas Chatfield and Robert Dayton neglected to pay their dues to Mr. James "for the work of the ministry." although among the most reputable settlers, a warrant of attachment was issued to enforce payment by seizure of their goods. When in 1657 infirmities afflicted William Hedges, in view of his hard lot, "he is freed from paying rates." The justice that rig- orously exacted the performance of obligation from those who had the ability was tempered with mercy to those who by misfortune were disabled.
The Town Meeting of 7th October, 1651, ordered "that the three men shall have power after the 10th of March to to call forth men to burn the woods," and "that every man that hath a house shall within six weeks get a ladder that may reach so high that a man may go to the top of his house." October 28th, 1651, "It is ordered that whosoever shall deliver fire to any without they have a thing to fetch it that is closely covered shall be liable to pay five shil- lings."
The roof and sometimes sides of the first built houses were thatched and very easily fired. The hardships of the Pioneers were alleviated by habitations both rude and scanty. The loss of one and endangering more, would be a calamity we now can hardly measure. If the forest was burned in early Spring the upper layer of leaves only would be consumed. The low, slow smouldering fire would not blaze so high or grow so hot as to destroy the growing wood. It checked the growth of weeds and underbrush and increased that of the nutritious grasses which fed the game and cattle. The experience of the Indian became the property and experience of the English colonist. The dis- astrous forest fires of a later season were prevented by an early burning. In this preventive and permissive legisla-
134
tion, designed to guard against danger that might ruin the plantation there is no element of uncalled for severity. Both wisdom and prudence would prompt the authorities to enact in positive law just what we find they put on en- during record.
The idea of an uncultivated territory, and of a primeval forest thoughtlessly reiterated as designating the character of the country at its first settlement, is misleading. There- by we naturally conceive that then the woods of gigantic trees extended unbroken over the surface. of the earth. Evidence abounds that this conception is incorrect. Silas Wood, writing of Long Island more than four score years gone by, remarks on the scarcity of timber and assigns as a cause the annual burning of the woods by the Indians. He cites records of orders prohibiting the sale of wood "for pipe staves or heading," and "to any person not being a townsman."
November 10th, 1668, the Constable and Overseers in East-Hampton ordered "that there shall not any man fall young small trees for palasadas, fence," &c. "in the com- mon."
At a court of sessions held at Southold, June 6, 7 and 8, 1676, an order reciting the scarcity of "good timber" in the town of East-Hampton under penalty of ten shillings for every tree, without a license, &c., prohibits all persons having "no allottment" from "cutting or using any timber," &c. "fit for building or fencing or for the use of coopers in making casks." A recital of the date of April 7th, 1713, that "the sheep and swine running on our commons made the fencing stuff "scarce" is further evidence, and as a known fact that cattle grazing in woods will in time defor- est the pasture, it points to a cause.
The Trustees' order, October 16th, 1716, "that there
135
shall be twelve men sent to Mr. Gardiner's island to get timber in order to the building of a new meeting house," confirms the then scarcity of timber and the tradition that the proprietor of the Island contributed as a free gift the timber for the frame of the church of 1717.
The town of East-Hampton united in alliance with the colony of Connecticut, November 7th, 1649. The records of that colony of that date recite : "It is further ordered that East-Hampton of Long Island shall be accepted and entertained under this Government, according to their im- portunate desire." May 20th, 1658, that colony voted "a confirmation of the combination with East-Hampton," &c. At the same time, regarding the jurisdiction of magistrates, it was ordered : "And that those of Southampton and East Hampton shall joyne together in the exercise of judicature amongst them and to summon juries out of either place ; and that they have liberty to repair to any court held at New London for help in any controversy." In 1662 South- old was admitted into the same combination and its inhab- itants advised, if occasion required, "to repair to South and East-Hampton to ye authority there settled by this court." May 26th, 1643, the colonies of Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut and New Haven, with the plantations in com- bination with them, adopted articles of confederation for their mutual welfare and protection. The combination with Connecticut made East-Hampton not only a member of the colony of Connecticut but also a member of the gen- eral confederation of the four colonies. Thereby East- Hampton was bound to the defence of Connecticut and the whole confederation, and they were all pledged to aid in her defence. The confederation was called "The United Colonies of New England." It was represented by two Commissioners chosen from each colony. While local and
136
internal affairs in each town and colony were left to their control, questions of offence and defence, mutual advice and succor upon all occasions, both for. preserving and propagating the truth and liberties of the gospel, of their own mutual safety and welfare, "were controlled by Com- missioners representing the colonies so leagued and con- federated. Except "the exigency constrained, one colony might not engage in war" "without the consent of all." Except "by consent of all," no two members shall be united in one, and no new members shall be received. The ap- pointment of men, money and supplies for war were to be assessed on the respective colonies in proportion to the male population, "between the ages of sixteen and sixty," and "the spoils of war were to be distributed to the several colonies on the same principle. The concurrence of six Commissioners controlled, and failing this, the questions being referred to the general courts of the several colonies, the concurrence of them all was binding. The Commis- sioners were to meet yearly on the first Thursday in Sep- tember, and oftener if occasion required, at places pre- scribed. The choice of a President, the general policy of proceedings towards Indians, the return of fugitives from justice or service, the remedy for breach of the alliance by an offending colony-all these subjects were included in and provided for, in the Articles of Alliance and Confeder- ation. Thus early on American soil was instituted this first of all confederacy of colonies, so complete in its antic- ipation of contingencies, in its conception of surroundings, in its adaptation to circumstances, that it endured assaults, external and internal, for twenty years, until the invasion and subjection of New Netherlands by the Eeglish, and the enforced rule of Royal Governors in 1664, under the then Duke of York, afterwards King James the second. This
137
league, so complete in its extent, so just its provisions, so wise in its principles, so practical in its policy, comprised in its scope the democracy of the Town Meeting, the rep- resentation of towns in the Colonial Assembly, (called also the General Court), the representation of the united colo- nies in the body of Commissioners. Seemingly complex it was in reality simple. Its teachings were well fitted for the work it had to do.
In all local and town affairs the practical knowledge of the yeomanry of the town in Town Meeting assembled, sur- passed that of any non-resident, however wise. They knew their wants, their grievances, their interests, their ability and inability, and could devise the best measures for relief or redress. The delegates of the towns composing the col- ony, assembled as its highest Court or Legislature, repre- senting the whole and every part of the colony, could wise- ly legislate and decide for all. The Commissioners of the United Colonies representing their union and clothed with powers that covered, and only covered, subjects of general concern, affecting the welfare and safety of all the United Colonies, conld best legislate for the union. The thought of the reader outstrips the words of the writer. This ma- chinery of government by towns, by colonies, by confed- erated states, foreshadowed what was to come. The search of the early history of these colonies, brings to mind the flashing conviction that therein the free institutions of this wonderful Nation were born. The self-constituted govern- ment of East-Hampton, and other early settlements in their Town Meetings or General Courts, was an ancestral immunity transmitted to posterity, and now surviving in the modern "Town Meeting." The delegates from the towns in a colony assembled as its Legislature, and called its "General Court," foreshadowed the State governments,
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.