USA > New York > Westchester County > Rye > Chronicle of a border town : history of Rye, Westchester county, New York, 1660-1870, including Harrison and the White Plains till 1788 > Part 11
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
At the October session, 1681, Peter Disbrow is deputy from Rye. We learn that our little settlement has lately witnessed a calamity which in those days must have been peculiarly distress- ing. 'This Court considering the great losse that hath befallen Peter Disbrow by fyer, doe remitt unto him his country rate for the year ensueing.' 3
May, 1682, Mr. John Ogden of Rye presents himself at the meeting of the Court, and obtains a grant of 'twenty acres of land to make a pasture, provided he take it up where it may not prejudice the colony's interest nor any perticuler persons former grants.' 4 He has, however, a more important matter to lay be- fore the magistrates. The people of Rye complain that sundry persons, and particularly Mr. Frederick Philipse, have been making improvements of land within their bounds. Mr. Philipse has been building certain mills, near unto Hudson's River; encroaching thereby npon the town's territory, which is believed to extend in a northwesterly direction from the month of ' Mamorroneek River' to the Hudson, and even beyond. Mr. Ogden, coming home, is the bearer of a letter from the General Court to the governor of New York, gravely remonstrating against such unneighborly pro- ceedings, and reminding him that by the agreement made in 1664, a line running north-northwest from the mouth of Mamaroneck River to the Massachusetts line, was to be the dividing line be- tween Connecticut and New York.5
Timothy Knap is deputy in October, 1683, and obtains remit- tanee from certain fines imposed upon himself and upon Caleb Hyat as constables of Rye, for failure to make up the payment of the country rate.6
This was the last meeting of the General Court of Hartford,
1 Public Records of Connecticut, vol. ii. pp. 294, 295.
2 Ibid. vol. iii. p. 5.
8 Ibid. p. 89. 4 Ibid. p. 102.
5 Ibid. pp. 100, 313. 6 Ibid. pp. 128, 129.
·
92
RYE IN CONNECTICUT.
at which deputies from Rye were present, until the revolt of the town to Connecticut some years later. In the following month, November 28, 1683, Rye was ceded to the province of New York, according to the articles of agreement then concluded for the establishment of the boundary line. It speaks well certainly for the town that during the twenty years of their connec- tion with the colony, from 1664 to 1683, the inhabitants should have sent up one of their number, and sometimes two, to the leg- islature every year. A long, weary, perilous journey on horse- back, over roads 'from plantation to plantation,' the neglected state of which is vividly described in an order of 1684, 'the wayes being incumbred with dirty slowes, bushes, trees and stones &c.' when wolves and 'panters,' not to speak of the red- skinned savages, were so numerous that ' for the encouragement of the good people to destroy those pernicious creatures,' the gov- ernment frequently offered a liberal bounty.1 Mr. John Banks, Peter Disbrow, and Timothy Knap served most frequently as deputies ; Mr. Banks, who lived part of the time at Fairfield, and so liad a shorter distance to travel, attending sometimes two ses- sions or more in the same year.
Rye remained unwillingly for some years beneath the rule of New York, until smarting under certain grievances, the story of which we shall tell further on, the inhabitants 'revolted ' back to Con- necticut. They were strongly attached to the colony, and it would seem that even while submitting outwardly to the new government, they made overtures to their former friends, asking to be received back. Thus as early as 1686, we find them applying for a patent, doubtless in view of an order which the General Court had issned the year before to all the towns within its jurisdiction, relative to the securing of charters for their lands. November 23, ' the town empowered Benjamin Colyer and John Brondige to treat with the governor for a general patent for the township of Rye.' The pro- prietors of Peningo Neck at the same time authorized these per- sons to obtain a particular patent in their behalf for the said Neck.2 The Court, it appears, however well inclined, did not see fit just then to grant either of those applications.3 Again, in
1 Public Records of Connecticut, vol. iii. pp. 30, 157 ; vol. iv. p. 135, etc.
2 Bolton, History Westchester County, ii. 29. These facts were apparently derived from our lost volume of town records.
8 Mr. Bolton says, 'The general patent appears to have been granted, for on the 28th of Feb. 1686-7, occur certain " charges, arising from the business between Richard Patrick and the town of Rye, and all the expenses of procuring a patent, for the bounds and privileges of the said town."' The inference is unfounded, as the charges
.
93
PATENT FROM CONNECTICUT.
1692, at the October session of the General Court, . Mr Under- hill of Rve and Zachary Roberts of Bedford' were in attend- ance, and the Court granted them an allowance for their expenses in coming, ' to be payd at Standford out of the country rate.' 1 But the time for this step did not arrive until five years later. At a meeting of the Governor and Council, Jannary 19, 1697, Thomas Merritt and Deliverance Brown appear in behalf of ' the town of Rie,' with the request that this plantation may be owned as in- cluded within the colony, and that a charter may be granted to them for their lands. The petition is granted, and a patent for the town is ordered to be prepared forthwith. It is now printed, we believe, for the first time : -
' RIE PATTENT.
' Whereas the Honrd Gen" Court of the Colonie of Connecticutt have on May the fourteenth day 1685 ordered and declared that every town within the said Colonie should take out Pattents or Charters for their severall grants of Lands Given them by the said Gen" Court Or derived by purchase or otherwise obtained. which Pattents they did order should be made and Given to them vnder the seal of the Colonie and hands of the Govern" and Secretary. And that such Pattents shall be a sufficient Evidence for all and every township that hath the same to all Intents and purposes for the holding the said lands firme to them their heirs successors and assignes forever According to the Tenor 2 given by his Maiestie Charles the second In his Charter bear- ing date the three and twentieth day of Aprill. in the fourteenth year of his Reign. And the said Gen" Court having granted and assigned to severall persons a certain township to be known by the Name of Rie bounded westward eight Miles upon the Dividing Line be- tween the Province of Newyork and the Colonie of Connecticutt according as it was settled by his Maiesties Comissioners as appears by their act or Report thereupon. And Eastward on a line begin- ning at the mouth of Byram River and Running up the said River one quarter of a mile above the Great Stone lying in the path by the said River and from thence Continued by a parralel Line eight miles into the Countrey and bounded southward upon the sea and northward upon the Wildernesse. Now know all men by these presents that I Robert Treat Esqr Govern' of his Majesties Colonie of Connecticutt. have given granted bargaind enfeoffed and Confirmed. And by these
inight just as well aecrne from an unsuccessful attempt. It is certain, moreover, that no parent was granted by Connecticut until the revolt of 1697; and quite as clear that the people of Rye never songht nor obtained a charter from New York until long after that escapade.
1 Public Records of Connecticut, vol. iv. p. 83.
2 Tenure.
94
RYE IN CONNECTICUT.
presents doe give grant bargain enfeoffe and Confirme unto Joseph Theale Thomas Merritt. Deliverance Brown, John Horton, Joseph Horton, Francis Purdie, Hechaliah Brown, Timothie Knap, George Lane, and John Merritt, their heirs assignes and their Associates for-" ever. All that part or parcell of Land which lies and is Contained within the bounds above-mentioned.' With all and singular the Lands, hereditaments and appurtenanees whatsoever are thereunto belonging or any way appertaining to the same or any part thereof. As of his Majesties mannor of East Greenwich [in Kent] to Have and to hold in free and Comon Soccage, And not in Capite nor by Knight Service- Excepting and reserving for his Majestie his heirs and successors the fift part of all the Oar of Gold and Silver which shall be found therein from time to time. In witnesse whereof the said Robert Treat with the Secretary of the Colonie have hereunto annexed our hands and afixed Our Colonie Seal, this two and twentieth day of January Anno Domini 1696.1 And in the eighth year of the reign of our Soveraign Lord Wil- liam by the Grace of God of England Scotland France and Ireland King Fidei Defensor : Always provided that nothing herein Contained shall Extend or be understood or taken to Impeach or preiudice any Right, title, Interest or demand, which any person or persons hath or have or claim to have, of into or out of any part of the said township situated within the Limitts above-mentioned according to the Laws and Gen" Customes of this Colonie but that all and every such person and persons May and shall have hold, and enjoy the same in such maner as if these presents had not been Made.
R. TREAT, Gour ELEAZAR KIMBERLY, Secret"? ' 2
The dispute with New York regarding this revolt of the town of Rye will be related in another chapter. The town remained nearly four years connected with the colony. At the meeting of the General Court, May 13, 1697, ' Mr. Vmphrie Vnderhill,' and Mr. Deliverance Brown took their seats as deputies. The Court did by their vote declare their approbation of the act of the Coun- eill Jan. the 19th, 1696 [1697], in undertaking the protection of the townes of Rie and Bedford as members of this corporation, and appointed John Horton Lieut for the town of Rie, and John Lyon to be their Ensign.' 2
At the next spring session, May 12, 1698, Mr. Joseph Horton was representative from Rye. Captain Humphrey Underhill was sent to the Court in October of the same year. Deliverance Brown, of Rye, was appointed one of the Justices of the County
1 1697, New Style.
2 Colony Book of Deeds, Patents, etc. [MS.] Hartford : vol. ii. p. 251.
95
DEPUTIES TO THE GENERAL COURT.
of Fairfield.1 And in October, 1699, the deputies of this town ap- peared for the last time. They were ' M' Thos Merritt,' and ' Lieut Jnº Horton.' The following year, the king having decided the boundary controversy adversely to the claims of Connecticut, the Court gave order, October, 1700, that 'a signification thereof be sent to the inhabitants of Rye and Bedford, signed by the Secre- tary, that they are freed from duty to this govermt and that they are under the govermt of Newyorke.' 2
DEPUTIES TO THE GENERAL COURT, 1664-1700.
October, 1664
Lut John Budd.
May, 1676 Peter Disbroe.
October, 1665
Richard Vowles.
October, 1676 Timothy Knap.
October, 1666
Lt. Bud.
May, 1677 John Brundige.
May, 1667
Mr. Jnº Bud.
October, 1677
Mr. John Bankes.
October, 1668
Mr. John Budd,
May, 1678 Mr. John Bancks.
Richard Vowles.
October, 1678
Timothy Knap.
May,
1669
Richard Fowels.
October, 1679
Peter Disbrough.
1670 Mr. John Banks,
May, 1680 Mr. John Bankes.
Peter Disbroe.
May, 1681
John Brandige.
October, 1670
Timothy Knap.
October, 1681
Peter Disbroe.
May, 1671 Mr. John Banckes,
Peter Disbroe.
October, 1683
Timothy Knap.
May, 1672 Mr. John Bankes, Mr. Jos : Orton.
May,
1697
Mr. Vmphrie Underhill,
Mr. Deliverance Brown.
June,
1672 Mr. John Baneks.
May,
1698
Mr. Joseph Horton.
October, 1672 Mr. John Bankes.
May, 1673 Peter Disbroe.
October, 1674
Mr. John Ogden.
October, 1699
Mr. Thos Merrit,
May, 1675 Mr. John Bankes.
Lieut Jnº Horton.
July, 1675 Mr. John Bankes.
October, 1698
Captn Vmphrie Vnder- hill.
1 Public Records of Connecticut, vol. iv. p. 261.
2 Ibid. p. 335.
October, 1682
Timothy Napp.
CHAPTER XII.
HARRISON'S PURCHASE.
1695-1778.
' Heathcote himself, and such large-acred men, Lords of fat Esham, or of Lincoln Fen.'
POPE.
F TROM the facts already gathered, it is plain that the early proprietors of this town were bona fide settlers. They came hither with an honest purpose to remain, and cultivate the soil, and live by it, and establish homes for their children. Their land was owned in common till it could be parcelled out to advantage in equal shares, and in such quantities as might be speedily improved. This was the uniform policy of the New England colonist. Rye, the last town of Connecticut, well represents, as to the spirit and the method of its settlement, the previous plantations of that colony.
But it was quite otherwise in the province of New York, to which our planters soon found themselves unwillingly annexed. The little stream of Blind Brook separated them from a region in which land speculation was as rife as it has ever been in the ' far West.' Under the rule of the Dutch, vast domains had been given away to wealthy merchants or gentry.1 One of these estates had passed into the hands of Frederick Phillips, who now owned the whole of the western part of Westehester County south of Croton River, between the Hudson and the Bronx.
The English governors of New York were quite as generous as their Dutch predecessors in giving away the publie lands. Grants were made to individuals who succeeded in gaining their favor, of traets that covered in many places from fifty to one hundred thousand acres, and in more than one instance, it is said, of as many as a million aeres. Colonel Fletcher and Lord Cornbury
1 The charter of the West India Company, in 1629, provided that whoever would within five years plant a colony of fifty souls above fifteen years old, was to become Lord of the Manor, or Patron, and should possess in absolute property the lands he might so colonize. These lands might extend sixteen miles in length, or if they lay along a river, eight miles upon each bank, and as far into the interior as circuni- stances might require.
97
LAVISH GRANTS OF LAND.
were especially distinguished for the lavish way in which they squandered the property of the crown- not withont suspicion of interested motives. So carelessly were the patents for these grants bestowed, that not unfrequently they intrenched upon the bounda ries of lands previously taken up, or completely absorbed them.
The people of Rye were sufferers to a considerable extent from this abuse. Their principal troubles related to the tract of land since known as Harrison's Purchase. This tract was situated above Westchester Path, between Blind Brook and Mamaroneck River, and extended as far north as Rye Pond. It was, we have seen, one of the earliest purchases of the settlers of Rye. On the second of June, 1662, Peter Disbrow and his companions bought from certain Indians a territory ' above Westchester Path.' Four years later, John Budd bought a more extensive tract, including this, and reaching to a distance of sixteen miles north of West- chester Path. But like most other inland purchases of our settlers, these lands had remained hitherto unimproved.
Meantime, an individual named John Harrison, in the year 1695, disregarding these claims, bargained with an Indian who professed to be 'the true owner and proprietor,' for the purchase of the territory north of Westchester Path. In the same year, Colonel Fletcher, the provincial governor of New York, gave an order for the survey of Harrison's Purchase ; and shortly after, a patent was granted by the British government to Harrison and certain others whom he had associated with him, for the whole of this tract.
By this summary measure, the people of Rye were despoiled of a most important part of their rightful possessions. It was a loss felt by each proprietor, for each had an interest in the undivided lands, to the distribution of which he looked forward as a provision for his children. The only show of reason for this act of spolia- tion was in the fact that the inhabitants of Rye were as yet with- out a patent for their lands under the government of New York. In 1685, Governor Dongan had issued a proclamation to the in- habitants of Rye and Bedford, requiring them to appear before him and prove their title to the lands upon which they were seated. This summons, it appears, had not been obeyed. The sympathies of the people were with the colony from which they came, and to which they yet hoped permanently to belong. Their rights besides had been amply recognized by Connecticut, and they doubtless saw no propriety in the requirement to obtain a patent from New York.
But nothing could justify the arbitrary measure by which these 7
98
HARRISON'S PURCHASE.
lands were wrested from the town. It was an act simply worthy of its perpetrator - one of the most unscrupulous of the bad men who with few exceptions were sent to fill the place of provincial governor of New York. Colonel Fletcher was notorious for the extravagance with which he disposed of the public lands.1 His course in this respect was so flagrant that his successor in office ap- plied to the British government for power to annul all the grants which he had made. 'They are so extravagant,' writes Lord Bellomont, ' that the province can never be peopled.' 2 'There are many complaints,' he reports, 'against them, many people being violently stripped of their lands by these grants, supported by the favour of former governors.'
The people of Rye, when they heard of Harrison's design, donbtless used every means within their reach to prevent its ex- ecution. One of their number, the grandson of the original pur- chaser of Budd's Neck, was especially earnest in opposing the grant, on the ground that it conflicted with the rights acquired by his ancestor. Harrison's petition to the Council represented that he had bought 'a tract of vacant and unappropriated, uncultivated land in ye County of Westchester, bounded on the north by Rye Pond, on the east by Blind brook, on the west by Mamaroneck river, and on the south by the land of Joseph Budd.' 'At a Council held at his Majesty's fort in New York the 13th of Feb- ruary, 1695-96,' Harrison's petition was referred to the Attorney- General, Major Austin Graham, Surveyor-General, Justice Theale, Joseph Purdy and Joseph Horton, or any three of them, 'to in- quire into the manner of circumstances of said land, and make re- port.' Their report, dated February 17th, states that ' Humphrey Underhill appeared in behalf of Joseph Budd, son and heir to John Budd deceased, and produced an Indian Grant dated December 8, 1661, alleging that the same did contain the lands mentioned.'
1 ' The most extraordinary favors of former governors,' wrote Cadwallader Colden, surveyor-general of the province, in 1732, 'were but petty grants in comparison of his. He was a generous man, and gave the king's lands by pareels of upwards of one hundred thousand acres to a man, and to some particular favorites four or five times that quantity. But the king was not pleased with him, as I am told, and he was recalled in disgrace. This lavishing away of lands probably was one reason.' (Report on the State of the Lands in the Province of New York : Documentary His- tory of' New York, vol. i. p. 380.)
2 Lord Bellomont to Seeretary Popple, July 7, 1698 : Documents relating to the Colonial History of New York, vol. iv. p. 327. In a subsequent letter to the Lords of the Admiralty, he instances some of them, - 'to let your Lordships see that man's fraud to the Crown. To Mr. Godfrey Dellius, a grant of land 86 miles in length, 20 and some say 25 miles in breadth. To Col. Bayard a grant of about 40 miles long and 30 miles broad,' ete. (New York Colonial MSS., vol. iv. p. 780.)
99
VAIN REMONSTRANCES.
The committee found the deed to contain a description of 'a tract of land called Apawanis, bounded on the east by Mackquam River, on the south by the sea against Long Island, on the west by Poee- cottsewaek River, and on the north by marked trees near West- chester Path ; together with range for feeding and range for eattle, and to fell trees twenty miles north.' This land, they say, is altogether diselaimed by Harrison ; the tract purchased by him lying north of said marked trees. Underhill was asked whether he had any other objection to advance, and replied that he had at home an Indian deed which justified Budd's claim to the soil for sixteen miles north of the marked trees ; but he did not bring it along with him, for it was old and spoiled, being dated in 1666 ; but he had a copy of the deed, which he gave to Colonel Heathcote, who left it before the Governor and Couneil. The committee could not examine this paper, but humbly referred the matter to the Council.1
The document which Underhill thus unfortunately failed to pro- duce was undoubtedly the deed of April 29th, 1666, by which Shanarocke and others conveyed a traet between Blind Brook and Mamaroneck River, extending ' sixteen English miles from West- chester Path up into the country.' And it was also, as we have seen, to all appearance the same tract which, four years earlier, June 2, 1662, the purchasers of Peningo Neck, Disbrow, Coe, and Studwell, had bought together with Budd. Both parties, the in- habitants of Rye in general and the proprietor of Budd's Neck, were now to lose a territory for which, had they claimed it jointly and without dispute among themselves, they could certainly have made a stronger plea. As it was, no regard seems to have been paid by the Council to either claim. The lands were granted to Harrison, and the people of Rye 'revolted' back to Connectieut.
The individuals to whom this grant was made, were William Nicolls, David Jamison, Ebenezer Wilson,2 John Harrison,3 and Samuel Haight. Nicolls was a member of Colonel Fletcher's Couneil ; Jamison was elerk of the Council ; Wilson was sheriff of the city of New York, and a prominent merchant. All these men stood high in the governor's favor, and were largely concerned in
1 Connty Records at White Plains, vol. B. pp. 259-261.
2 The patent for Harrison's Purchase, as given by Mr. Bolton ( History of N'est- chester County, vol. i. pp. 249-251), reads Ebenezer Williams - undoubtedly a clerical error. The name is Wilson in the partition deed as entered in the Records of the town of Rye, vol. D. pp. 280-283, and in the patent itself ; see Appendix.
3 In his petition for a patent, he signs his name John Harrijson. Little is known about him. Mr. Bolton supposes him to be the son of John Harrison of Newtown, L. I., in 1655 - father of John and Samuel.
100
HARRISON'S PURCHASE.
the land grants which he made.1 Of course the humble farmers of Peningo Neck had no influence to weigh against the interests of a company so powerfully manned.
Under this grievance, the town of Rye seceded. It renounced the authority of the provincial government, and returned to the colony of Connecticut. We do not greatly wonder at the seces- sion. The provocation was great and the temptation strong. It is more surprising that the Connecticut government should have received the rebellious town. But there was much bitter feeling just at this time between the two colonies, growing out of the un- settled state of the question as to their boundaries. We shall see in the next chapter what passed between the colonial governments relative to this secession. Meanwhile, for four years Rye was a part of Connecticut. From 1697 to 1700, inclusive, the inhabitants designated themselves as living in Rye, 'in the county of Fairfield, in the colony of Connecticut.'2 They applied to the General Court at Hartford for the settlement of any matters in dispute, and the Court seems to have considered and disposed of such applica- tions precisely as in the case of any town east of Byram River.3
We have a curious account of the state of feeling among the good people of Rye during this interval. It occurs in a letter of Colonel Heathcote, written after a visit to Rye, the object of which was to persuade the malcontents to submit with a good grace. Colonel Heathcote writes to the Governor and Council : -
' WESTCHESTER, Feby 19, 1696-97.
' GENTLEMEN, - I had long ere this given you an account of my Rye Expedition, had I not at my coming here been kept Prisoner a Fort- night or three weeks by reason of the weather and a nimble distemper ; . . . . from which so soon as I was disengaged I proceeded and called a meeting of ye Inhabitants, taking particular care to have the Ring- leaders summonsed ; and enquired of them the reason of the Revolt. They told me that the grant to Harrison and his associates was so great an Injury to 'em that their town was nothing without it, and that they
1 Jamison is stated to have been 'first in Col. Fletcher's confidence and favour, above all others, and enriched himself by the grants of land sold by Col. Fletcher, he having a share for brokerage.' (Documents, etc., Colonial History of New York, vol. iv. p. 400.) He afterwards became Chief Justice of New Jersey, and later, Attorney- General of New York. Nicols, a man of great influence and highly connected, was an ardent supporter of Fletcher. Captain Ebenezer Wilson was a prominent merchant of New York, sheriff of the city at the time, and afterwards mayor. (Doc- uments, etc., vol. iv. pp. 377, 555 ; 25 seq .; 769,783, etc.)
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.