USA > New York > Columbia County > Gazetteer and business directory of Columbia County, N.Y. for 1871-2 > 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
""Tho' the Soil and Frechold of that 6,000 acres which is now called the Camp was sold by Robert Livingston, it yet remained a part of the Man- nor an l enjoyed all the Hereditaments and appurtenances to it belonging. This 6,000 acres is included within the bounds and limits of the Grant and Confirmation in 1715, and tho' the Grant of the Soil of those 6,000 acres is excepted, they are nevertheless included and made part of the Mannor as much as any other part of it is. Consequently all the free- holders of that 6,000 acres, or the Camp have a right to vote for the Rep- resentative sent by the Mannor of Livingston to serve in General As- sembly of this Colony."
The grant of the Manor was confirmed by the Royal authority in 1715, and, says Clarkson in his "Clermont, or Livingston Manor," "belonged strictly to that pernicious class of institutions, close boroughs, which gave way with instantly before the equal influences of Republicanism ; but which from the more congenial soil of England, half a century has hardly extirpated." Before his death, which took place in 1728, Robert Livingston bequeathed to his son Robert that part of the Manor now included in the town of Clermont, about 13,000 acres, as a reward for having discovered and frustrated a plot, which the Indians had formed, for the massacre of all the white inhabitants of the Province; and the residue to his eldest son, Philip. The latter was succeeded by Robert Living- ston, Jr .; and in 1792 the land east of the post road was divided between Walter, Robert C., John and Henry Living- ston, the devisees of Robert Livingston, Jr., according to the provisions of his will. The shares of the four sons were understood to be about 28,000 acres, some deductions having been made by the running of the line between this State and Massachusetts.
The most important settlement was made by German Palatin- ates, in 1710, upon a tract of 6,000 acres, which now consti- tutes the principal part of Germantown, and which had been sold back to the Government by Robert Livingston. These P.Jatinates, with others, to the number of 3,000, who, in the previous year, had fled to England from the rage of persecution in Germany, accompanied Brigadier-General Robert Hunter, a
*For further particulars ece history of Germantown.
83
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
native of Scotland, who arrived as Governor of the Province, in June 1710. Many of them settled in New York city, and others in Pennsylvania. The following extract from a letter written by Lord Clarendon to Lord Dartmouth, under date of March 8, 1710-11, indicates the degree of prosperity which awaited those of them who settled on the Livingston Manor; he says :
" It is most certain that no person that has his Limbs, and will work, can starve in that country, every Man or Woman above 15 years of age may earn two . Shillings and three pence New York money (which is Eighteen pence sterling) every day in the Year except Sundays. Handi- crafts men, such as Smith, Joyners, Carpenters, Masons, and Bricklayers, nmy earn at least Five Shillings New York money every day they will work, so that nothing can bring those people into the danger of starving but willfull Laziness.'
Livingston, in his report of the subsistence of the Palatines up to March 25, 1711, appears to have subsisted them for six- pence per day for each individual. These facts exhibit a strik- ing contrast between what was then considered a fair remunera- tion for similar services-sufficient to meet the demands of subsistence and a modicum of prosperity-and the insignifi- cance of the sum deemed adequate to supply all the wants of those primitive settlers as compared with what is required at the present day. In the letter above quoted Lord Clarendon thus expresses what he conceives to be Livingston's motives for effecting the settlement of the Palatines upon his Manor : " I think," he says, "it is unhappy that Col. Hunter at his first arrival in his Government fell into so ill hands, for this Living- ston has been known many years in that Province for a very ill man, he formerly victualled the forces at Albany in which he was guilty of most. notorious frauds by which he greatly int- prov'd his Estate, he has a Mill and a Brew house upon his Land, and if he can get the victualling of those Palatines who are so conveniently posted for his purpose, he will make a very good addition to his Estate, and I am persuaded the hopes he has of such a Subsistence to be allow'd by Her Majesty were the Chief if not the only Inducements that prevailed with him to propose to Col. Hunter to settle them upon his Land, which is not the best Place for Pine Trees, the Borders of Hudson's River above Albany, and the Mohawks River, Schenectady, are well known to be the best places for Pines of all sorts both for numbers and largeness of Trees. * My Lord, upon the whole matter I am of opinion that if the Subsistence proposed is allowed, the consequence will be that Livingston and some others will get Estates, the Palatines will not be the richer."
The territory of Massachusetts, under its charter, extended westward to the Pacific Ocean, and grants were made by that
84
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
Colony. With a view of settling their claims upon the Hud- son, the Boston Government, in March 1672, sent John Paine to New York to solicit permission to pass and repass by water. The application was received with cold civility, and the subject referred home for the decision of His Majesty. Gov. Lovelace improved the occasion to remind the Massachusetts people of the distrust with which they had received the Commissioners sent over in 1664, and intimated that their application under other circumstances might have been differently received. Conflicting claims from grants issued by these two Colonies gave rise to bitter contentions and riotous outbreaks. Arrests made under Massachusetts warrants led to riots and bloodshed. In Dec. 1:51, persons from Massachusetts surveyed part of the land lying within the Manor of Livingston, under pretence of its lying within that Colony, dissuaded the tenants from hold- ing the same under Livingston, and promised grants and patents under the Colony of Massachusetts. Some were in- duced to petition the Massachusetts Government for grants and titles. This constrained Livingston to commence actions for trespass and ejectment, in which the defendants compromised by taking new leases and giving security for the payment of costs. Oliver Partridge wrote him under date of March 24, 1752, that, in consequence of an order of a committee of the General Court of Massachusetts, he had laid out a large farm encompassing the dwellings of " Michael Halenbeeck" and Josiah Loomis, two of Livingston's tenants, and added, "and you may depend on it the Province will assert their rights to said lands." Fearing that a recourse to the usual process of law would fail to put a stop to the' disturbances, and being re- luctant to contest this matter alone with the Massachusetts Government, he petitioned Gov. Clinton to cause application to be made to the said General Court with a view to effect a stay of proceedings until the true division line between the two Colonies was settled, and to cause the arrest of such persons as, under similar pretence, should, during the pendency of the de- cision, disturb him in the possession of his lands. Wm. Smith, Attorney General, in his report on this petition, says: "I can by no means think it Expedient that 'Your Excellency Issue ' Your Order to the Justices of the peace Living in and near the ' mannor of Livingston, to Cause such Person or persons as shall ' till such settlement under the Pretence of Right in the Province of ' the Massachusetts Bay, Disturb the Petitioner in his said Pos- 'session, to be apprehended and committed' Because I Conceive that your Excellency's Interposition in that form, would rather tend to Obstruct than promote an amicable settlement of the said Division Line, neither could I at any time advise Your
------
85
-
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
Excellency, to Issue your Order in such General and unlimited Terms, because I think such order would be against Law, and Liable to great abuse. Nevertheless, if such Disturbances should be frequently Committed, so as to become a public Grievance, and the Government of the Massachusetts Bay will not Hearken to Your Excellency's Representation on the part of this Government, but will countenance and abett such Pro- ceedings, I conceive, that in such Case it will be the Right of this Government, to Defend itself against such Encroachments.
* But as to private Injuries by Entries into the Petitioners Lands, and Disturbing his Possession, I conceive, that it is most Expedient, that Your Excellency do not Inter- pose at present by any Extraordinary Act or Order, but Leave the Petitioner to his Ordinary Remedy at Law, and if any of his Possessions are forcibly taken or forcibly held from him, the Statutes of England, being duly put in Execution, will suffi- ciently punish the offenders, and afford a speedy Relief to the Petitioner and give him an adequate Remedy, in a way strictly conformable to law." The Council to whom was submitted for investigation, the question involving the right to the lands in dispute reported adversely on the claims of Massachusetts. Pending the consideration of his former petition, Livingston, on the 31st of May, 1753, again petitioned Gov. Clinton for redress from the threatened and actual encroachments of the Massachusetts Colony on his lands, in which petition he sets forth that one, Wm. Bull, and fifty-seven other persons, "as was pretended," and claiming to include some of Livingston's tenants, petitioned the Massachusetts Government for a certain tract of land, two-thirds of which was included within the Manor of Livingston, which petition was granted, the land sur- veyed and a " Tree-fence" cut round it, notwithstanding his remonstrance to the Massachusetts Government through the committee by it appointed; also that one, David Ingersoll, pretending to act by authority of the Massachusetts Govern - ment, " who had been very industrious in seducing" his tenants, "dissuading them from the payment of their rents," and also had issued warrants against his Clerk and Overseer, the execution of which was prevented by the vigilance of his servants, who were obliged to arm themselves in their defence ; and further that a suit instituted by him against George Robin- son, for trespassing on his land and carrying away his goods, was defended by Joseph Dwight, at the instance of the Massa- chusetts Government, under whose authority Robinson claimed to act, which action he construed as aiding and abetting such trespasses, and encouraging others of a like nature; and that, unless he received relief from the Government, he should be
F
-
-
88
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
obliged to relinquish his claim to the lands in dispute, solely from his inability to contend, alone, with the Massachusetts Government. On the receipt of this intelligence, Gov. Clinton, in a letter to Lieut .- Gov. Phips, dated July 28, 1753, urged him to bring the matter to the attention of his Government in such a manner as would effect a stay of proceedings during the pendency of the deliberations looking to the settlement of the boundary line and favor an amicable adjustment of the ditli- culties involved in the dispute, and accompanied his letter with a copy of a proclamation which, in consideration of the forcible removal of Robert Vanduersen and his son Johannis from the Manor of Livingston, by certain persons pretending to act under authority of the Government of Massachusetts Bay, in order to confine them in some jail in that Colony, for a tres- pass committed on lands lying within the Manor of Livingston, but claimed to be in possession of and under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Government, charging and commanding the Sheriff's of the Counties of Albany and Dutchess, or either of them, and the constables and all other officers in those Counties, jointly or severally, to apprehend and take all per- sons concerned in said riot and all who may hereafter under pretence of title or authority from the Massachusetts or New Hampshire Governments enter upon and take possession of any lands granted under the Great Seal of the Province of New York, and commit them to jail, there to remain until delivered by dne course of law. The following letter, though deficient in felicity of expression, doubtless accomplished its mission :
"CLAVERACK, 11th August, 1753. "COZN ROB. LIVINGSTON,
"Last night I was Credible Inform that the New England People Intirely Intendeth to Take you Dad or Alife, the Unther Shirrif has been to the Informer to take a Dibotation to take you & had order to Pay for Every Assistin Eight Shillings Bounty, the Informer desire youl be on your Gard -"The Barer hereof William Pandell will unther take to Gitt Josiah Loomis if he Can Gitt any Power, Pray Incourrige him
from yr Hume Cozn
H RENSELAER"
The conciliatory report of the Massachusetts Legislature on Clinton's letter of July 28, 1753, accompanied by an equally conciliatory letter from Gov. Shirley, of Massachusetts, set forth the grievances of the subjects of that Government, claiming that Livingston with above sixty men, armed with guns, swords and cutlasses, entered upon lands in possession of Josiah Loomis, cut down and carried away his wheat, and destroyed above fisc acres of corn, and that for these proceedings the arrests com. plained of by the New York Government were made; and furth- er that "Michael Hallinbeck," who was imprisoned by the lat-
Tante
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
87
ter Government and still held in custody, notwithstanding good bail had been offered for his release, bail having been accepted by their Government for the release of subjects of the New York Government, imprisoned for similar offences. A. committee was appointed to confer with a similar committee representing the New York Government, with a view to arrive at a better under- standing of the difficulties existing between the two Govern- ments, and adopt measures calculated to prevent their recur- rence. These disturbances incited, perhaps, by persons who were jealous or distrustful of the final disposition of the per- plexing question of boundary and the manner in which their interests were likely to be affected thereby, or restless under the tardy action of the Governments interested, led to arrests and counter-arrests, bloodshed and death, and necessitated proclama- tions by and voluminous correspondence between the two Gov- ernments.
" With respect to the Titles under which the Inhabitants hold their possessions," says Gov. Wm. Tryon in his report to the Captain General and Governor in Chief of the Province of New York, in 1774; "Before the Province was granted on 12th March, 1663-4, by King Charles the Second to his brother James Duke of York, the Dutch West India Co. had seized it, made settlements and Issued many Grants of Land. In August 1664, the country was surrendered by the Dutch to the Eng- lish, and by the 3d Article of the Terms of Capitulation it was stipulated ' That all People shall continue free Denizens and shall enjoy their Lands, Houses and goods wheresoever they are within this County and dispose of them as they please.' Some lands of the Province are held under the old Dutch Grants without any confirmation of their Titles under the Crown of England, but the ancient Records are replete with confirmatory Grants, which the Dutch Inhabitants are probably the more so- licitous to obtain from an Apprehension that the Dutch Con- quest of the Province in 1673, might render their Titles under the former articles of Capitulation precarious; though the coun- try was finally restored to the English by the Treaty signed at Westminster the 9th February, 1674. From that period it has remained in the possession of the English, and the Duke of York, on the 20th of June, 1674, obtained a new Grant from the King, of all the Territories included within the former Let- ters Patent in 1663-4.
"During the life of King Charles the Second, the Duke of York as proprietor of the Soil, passed many Grants (by his Gov- ernor) in Fee, and since his accession to the Throne, Grants have continued to issue under the Great Seal of the Province, in consequence of the Powers given the several Governors by
-
-
--
-
88
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
their Commissioners and Instructions from the Crown. Two instances only occur of Grants or Letters Patent for Lands un- der the Great Seal of Great Britain. * * *
"These are all the different modes by which the inhabitants have derived any legal Titles to their Lands within the limits of this Province, whence it appears that all their lawful titles to Lands in Fee, except in case of old Dutch Grants unconfirmed, originated from the Crown either mediately through the Duke of York before his Accession to the Throne, or immediately by Grants under the Great Seal of Great Britain or of this Pro- vince.
" Purchases from the Indian Natives, as of their aboriginal right have never been held to be a legal Title in this Province, the Maxim obtaining here, as in England that the King is the Fountain of all real property, and from this source all Titles are to be derived."
Combinations were formed to dispossess the proprietor of the Livingston Manor, which resulted in tumults and murders. In 1791, the Sheriff of the County was murdered by an armed mob while in the discharge of his official duty.
We extract the following account of the anti-rent difficulties and the causes which led to them from the "New American Cyclopedia," vol. 1, p. 66S : " The Dutch West India Company, in order to promote the settlement of the country in New Netherland (now New York), authorized its members to take up land upon the banks of the streams and rivers, 16 miles on one side, or S miles on each side, and so far back as might be convenient, on condition of introducing, within a limited time, 50 settlers for every mile of land. The proprietor was invested with the title and privileges of a lord patroon or protector, and his colony or manor was governed by the same customs and laws as were the feudal manors of the United Provinces. A large number of manors were created under the Dutch, and subsequently under the English colonial government, and ex- isted at the outbreak of the American revolution. The feudal system of Europe was thus transplanted to the new world. After the revolution, a very large portion of the land in the settled parts of New York was held by the patroons, and the cultivators occupied their farms on leases for one or more lives. or from year to year, stipulating for the payment of rents, dues and services, copied from the feudal tenures of England and Holland. Almost every incident of the tenures in soc- cage and villeinage were imposed by contract upon the manor- ial tenants. Purveyances, pre-emption, fines for alienation. banalities, ban services, and other similar conditions, burdened most of the farms. In 1979 and 1785, laws were enacted by
1
89
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
the legislature of the State abolishing feudal tenures, but the proprietors of manor grants unwilling to give up all their feudal claims, contrived a form of a deed by which the grantees covenanted to perform services, and pay rents and dues, pre- cisely similar to the feudal incidents thus abolished. The Counties of Albany, Rensselaer, Columbia, Greene, Ulster, Delaware, Schoharie, Montgomery, Herkimer, Otsego, Oneida, include within their limits most of these manors. The people who had settled in these counties, had long been dissatisfied and restive under the feudal exactions imposed upon them, and in 1839 began to consult together about some plan to throw off the burden. Associations were formed in the small counties, and delegates appointed to meet and deliberate for the general welfare. The local societies thus formed soon become known as anti-rent associations. Ere long, the people became more and more engaged and excited, and the anti-rent feeling mani- fested itself in open resistance to the service of legal process for the collection of manorial rents. A secret organization was devised, extending through several counties, by which bands of men were formed, and pledged upon summons to appear dis- guised and armed, and ready to protect the persons of the tenants from arrest, and from the service of process, and to guard their property from levy and sale upon execution. So soon as a sheriff appeared in one of the disaffected towns, a troop of men collected in fantastic calico dresses, and with faces masked, or painted to imitate Indians, and armed with pistols, tomahawks, guns and cutlasses, and generally on horse- back, gathered around him, or hovered near, warning him away and deterring him by threats from performing his duty. In Columbia, Rensselaer, Albany and Delaware counties, during the years 1844 and 1845, large assemblages of men so armed and disguised were accustomed to meet and hear speeches, and to pass resolutions. The leaders and sachems assumed Indian names, such as Big Thunder, Little Thunder, Blackhawk, &c., and the highways and villages became familiar with their antics and whoopings. A conflict between them and the civil authorities was inevitable. The complicity of some officers, and the timidity of others, emboldened the disguised bands, and their audacity and fancied impunity from recognition and arrest led them to appear often in the roads, and to more open demonstrations of their numbers and power. Citizens who disapproved of their conduct were now subjected to insults in the streets and at their houses, and bad and violent men, under cover of these disguises, sought occasion to gratify their pas- sions in acts of reprisal and revenge upon persons who had incurred their enmity. The first conflict which awakened
-
90
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
general attention to the state of affairs, happened in the town of Grafton, in Rensselaer County. A troop of the calico In- dians riding along the highway, met a man named Smith, driving a team with a load of wood, Smith had been out- spoken in denunciation of their proceedings, and they bore him no good will. An altercation ensued, and Smith, a man of coarse nature and violent passions, raised his axe to strike at some of his assailants, when a pistol shot from an unknown hand prostrated him to the ground. He died in a few minutes. The men in disguise dispersed. A legal investigation, at which more than 200 persons were from time to time ex- amined, failed to disclose the author of the deed, and to this day it is not known who fired the fatal shot. Subsequently, at a mass meeting in Sleepy Hollow, in Columbia County, a pistol accidently fired, killed a boy of the name of Riefenberg. In 1845, a deputy sheriff of the name of Steele, who had accompanied the sheriff of Delaware county to the town of Andes, to attend a sale of goods upon execution for rent, was killed. A large num- ber of persons were indicted for the murder, but, as the act of killing could not be brought home to any individual, verdicts of manslaughter were found against several persons proved to have been present armed and disguised. Previously to this fatal transaction, the sheriff's of Rensselaer and Albany counties had each been openly and threateningly resisted in the exercise of their duties, and the military force of the County had once, in Rensselaer, been called out to aid the officer in the service of process in the town of Nassau, and once in Albany County, for a like purpose in the town of Rensselaerville. A rude system of telegraphing gave warning in all the towns of the approach of an officer, and from all quarters came flocking the mimic In- dians as rapidly and mysteriously as the gathering of Clan Al- pine at the summons of Roderic Dhu. The Legislature in 1844 passed some laws against appearing disguised and armed, and imposed severe penalties upon such as should violate the law, or in such disguise resist due service of process, or interfere with the civil officers in the exercise of their duties. In his mes- sages of 1841 and 1842, Gov. Seward had alluded to and discussed the grievances complained of by the tenants. He recommended a reference of the matters in dispute to arbitrators. He appoint- ed three men to investigate the questions in dispute, to hear the parties by their witnesses and counsel, and to make report to the legislature. This commission failed to accomplish any- thing. The disaffection and excitement increased, owing to the obstinate and unyielding exactions of the landlords and the factions and illegal acts of the tenants, until finally, the tragedy at Andes brought matters to a crisis. Gov. Wright issued a
91
COLUMBIA COUNTY.
proclamation, declaring Delaware County in a state of insurrec- tion, and for months the village of Delhi was a military encamp- ment, and squads of soldiers perambulated the county making arrests, and frightening the good people into obedience to the laws. The trials and convictions at Delhi, and the conviction of certain anti-renters at Hudson for conspiracy and resistance to law, put an end to operations by the self styled Indians. The anti-rent associations determined to form & political party, whose policy should be to elect all town and county officers from their own ranks, and to vote for no state, civil, judicial or executive officers, unfriendly to them, or unpledged to their cause. In the legislatures of 1842, '3, '4, '5, '6, and "7, about one- eighth of the members were elected in the interest of the anti- renters. In the Constitutional Convention of 1846, some of the ablest men were avowedly anti-renters, or advocates of their measures and principles. Their influence procured the inser- tion of a clause in the new Constitution, abolishing all feudal tenures and incidents, and forbidding the leasing of agricultural land for a term exceeding twenty years. The legislature, at successive sessions, passed laws which bore heavily upon the landlord interest, and tended gradually to ameliorate the condi- tion of the tenants. In 1846, Gov. Wright, who was a candi- date for re-election, was defeated by 10,000 majority for John Young, whom the anti-renters had nominated. The policy of voting for their friends without regard to former political opini- ons, exerted a marked influence over politicians, and the anti- renters have since been able to command a patient hearing in the legislature and the courts. Gov. Young pardoned from the state prison all the so-called anti-rent convicts, on the ground that their offences were rather political than criminal, and that it was the wise policy of all good governments to forgive and restore to citizenship political offenders, after the law had been vindicated and order and peace restored. Since 1847, the ex- citement which threatened the peace of the community has died out, the anti-rent influence is no longer felt as a disturb- ing force in politics, and the anti-rent organization contents itself with lawful efforts to contest in the courts the validity of the titles of the landlords and the legality of the conditions and covenants contained in the manor grants. Hundreds of suits are pending in the courts, in which every legal objection to the manor grants is raised. Already the Court of Appeals has decided that the quarter sale reservation, or covenant, is a feu- dal incident, abolished by the law concerning tenures, passed February 20, 1787, and therefore void. The remaining coven- ants and conditions reserved in grants in fee will be brought to the same test. The anti-rent excitement which at one time as-
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.