History of Suffolk county, New York, 1683, Part 57

Author: W.W. Munsell & Co., pub; Bayles, Richard M. (Richard Mather); Cooper, James B. (James Brown), 1825-; Pelletreau, William S. (William Smith), 1840-1918; Street, Charles R. (Charles Rufus), 1825-1894; Smith, John Lawrence, 1816-1889
Publication date: 1882
Publisher: New York : W.W. Munsell & co.
Number of Pages: 677


USA > New York > Suffolk County > History of Suffolk county, New York, 1683 > 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 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110


In the southwestern part of the town, near where Beth- page is located, there was a tract of several hundred acres which had been purchased by private persons from the Indians, called the "Bating Place purchase." In 1768 it was held in 149 shares, by 41 persons, whose names and number of shares appear on the records. Afterward the trustees of the town, believing that some of the land claimed and held by these persons was em- braced in another purchase, belonging to the town, were ubout to commence suit against the proprietors of this purchase, but the dispute was finally settled by arbi- tration.


-


The "Squaw Pit purchase," embracing a large tract of land in the vicinity of what is now called Deer Park, was bought of the Secatogue Indians in several parcels. This was held in shares by a large number of individuals, and disposed of according to regulations made by the pro- prietors.


In 1775 the trustees sold to numerous persons owning lands adjoining the harbors thatch beds and lands under water. In this way Stephen Kelsey, William Johnson, Thomas Scudder and Jonathan Scudder acquired title to the water front of their farms along the east side of Hunt- ington Harbor, so that their descendants or assigns now own in many cases all the lands under water to the channel. Similar sales were made about the head of Cold Spring Harbor and other parts of the town. The proceeds went into what was called the "thatch draw," i. e., monies collected on account of the annual hiring out of the meadows, chiefly on the south side. The day for hiring the south meadows was a great event in those days, and hundreds met to bid for the grass at a vendue "by the inch of a candle."


The constant demand for grants or apportionments of the common lands early led to frequent divisions in small parcels to the holders of rights or hundreds, and this caused the necessity of having men appointed to lay out the land. In 1670 Thomas Powell and Joseph Bayly were chosen " layers out of land for the east end of the town, and Richard Williams and Content Titus were chosen as such for the west part."


The bounds of lands and all sales of lands were recorded in the town book. When a person sold land to another both went upon the ground, and as a visible evi- dence of the transfer the seller delivered to the purchaser a twig broken from a tree and a piece of the turf from the soil. This explains the phrase in old deeds "sold by ye turf and twig."


Ancient deeds, especially those written on parchment, had irregular or scalloped edges. This arose from the custom of preparing the deed in duplicate on one sheet and then cutting the two apart in a curved line, each party taking one. The perfect fitting of the irregular edges of the papers one to the other was evidence of the genuineness of the deeds. Hence arose the term "this in- denture," which has come down to our time, though the paper is no longer indented.


THE TITLE TO EATON'S NECK.


The grant or confirmation of title to the town having been obtained, with boundaries satisfactory to the in- habitants, the people regarded with suspicion and hostility the movements of Robert Seely, George Baldwin and others who were seeking to establish a title to Eaton's Neck adverse to that of the town. We have already seen how Theophilus Eaton had procured a deed of this neck from the Indians in 1646, and how by successive purchases this title had passed down from Eaton to others. Robert Seely had in 1663 made his deed of the neck to George Baldwin, and Baldwin was now applying to Governor Nicolls for a grant of it independent of Huntington. Under these circumstances a bitter feeling existed against both Seely and Baldwin. February 7th 1664 the town sent men to the neck, who found Baldwin fencing and building, and notified him that he was there " contrary to the town's mind," and that he should not


22


THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.


remain. October 17th 1666 the following order was made is marryed to Mr. Jones. Its dated March ye 28th 1659. at a town meeting:


" Voted and agreed the day and year above said, by the major part of the inhabitants of this town, that no inhabitant, whether proprietor or renter, shall sell or let any of their lands of commonage or meadow in any part or parcel of that land lying eastwards or north wards from Cow Harbor, to any person or persons that are or shall be proprietors of the neck called Stony Neck or Bald- win's Neck; and whosoever shall act contrary to this order shall forfeit ten pounds sterling for every hundred pounds commonage."


Afterward an action was commenced by the town of Huntington against Robert Seely for trespass, the decla- ration alleging that the town had bought Eaton's Neck of the " right owners " and paid for it, and was entitled to its possession.


This suit between Huntington and Robert Seely, in- volving the title to Eaton's Neck, created much excite- ment at the time, and its importance warrants a statement of the proceedings and the final verdict. It was tried at a court of assize held at New York in the fall of 1666. The following is from the record:


"Mr. John Rider Attorney for the Plts. He produces a copy of the heads of two tryalls had at the Court of Sessions, the first by way of action, the second by re- view, by the governor's special warrant. He likewise puts in a declaration for the Piffs., wherein is alleged that the person under whom the Defendant claymes had no right to the land in question, commonly called Eaton's Neck, having never been in Possesion, or given any Con- sideration for it, but that the Plts. Purchased the same ' from the true proprietors and paid for it. To prove their Declaracon severall Deposicons were read in Court: vizt. one of Mary the wife of Samuel Davis, who affirmeth That if Mr. Eaton had any right to the Land it was onely by guift, and Mr. Eaton resigned the Guift of the said Land to the Indyans.


" Mr. Jones, the sonne-in-law to Mr. Eaton, his letter is also produced, wherein he confesses the uncertainty of his title. The PIts. Deed was shewen and read, bearing date 'in or about the last day of July 1656,' wch is a great uncertainty in a Deed; besides, there are no chris- tian testimonyes to it.


"The Deposicon of Richard Smith of Nesaquack was read, but excepted agst., hee being concerned.


"The Deposicons of Henry Jackson, John Cole, George Baldwin, John Finch, as also the Testimonyes of Thomas Weeks, Thomas Scudder, John Finch, Joseph Whitman and others, With the like of Thomas Scuda- more, and others, were read in behalf of Plts.


"Mr. Sharpe Attorney for Defend. He puts in an answer declaring That ye Plts. have already had two Legall Tryalls upon this same Accot. and had been over- throwne in both, yet the Plts. continue their vexatious suits agst. the Defendt. in appealing to this Court of Assizes, agst all Law and Equity.


" The Attorney for the Defendant delivers into ye Court a writing, wherein severall Indyans acknowledge the Land in Controversy was freely given to Mr. The- ophilus Eaton. It is witnessed by four christians.


"The Plts. object that the witnesses deny their hand; but Samuel Titus, who is one of them, acknowledges his hand writing, but saith that hee was surprized and that there was no good Interpretor between them.


"A Deed is read in Court wherein Theophilus Eaton, to whom the Guift was made, resignes all his Interest to his ffather's Lands in New England unto his sister, who


"Mr. Jones his Bill of Sale of Eaton's Neck to Robert Seely, for the consideration of 50 lbs. Sterling, is also read; it beares date the 22d of December 1664.


"To prove the Land did belong to Mr. Eaton The Deposicons of these Persons following were read, vizt. Samll. Edsall's, John Dickerson's, Nicholas Wright, An- thony Wright, Thomas Benedict and Daniell Whitehead. Together with the Testimony of Capt. Thomas Willett, given in Court by word of mouth.


"The Court, after having at large heard the matter in controversy debated on both parts, though fitt to make this following Order and Decree, vizt .:


"At the Genall Court of Assizes, &c., the inhabitants of the Town of Huntington Plts., Robert Seely Defendt. The Court doth Decree That the two former verdicts given in by the Juryes at the Courts of Sessions in the East Riding of York Shire upon Long Island do stand good, and that the Land in question called Eaton's Neck be adjudged to ye Defendt. That the PIts. do pay or cause to bee paid the sum of ten pounds to the Person or Persons who received the Damage in moving their ffence Pluck't up by them. And that the Plts. do also pay or cause to bee paid the sum of tenn pounds more to the Defendant for the damage he hath sustained by them, and likewise that they Pay the Costs of Court, and charges.


"By Order of the Governor and Court of Assizes.


"MATTH. NICOLLS, Secret."


THE CONTEST WITH RICHARD SMITH.


We have seen how Huntington had lost Horse ( Lloyd's ) Neck after a protracted litigation, and how its southwest boundary had been attacked by Oyster Bay and one neck lost to the town. We will now briefly describe how an attack was made by Richard Smith, the proprietor of Smithtown, upon the northeast boundary of the town, as then claimed. Huntington held the deed of the Matinecock Indians to as far east as Nesaquake (Smithtown) River. The grant by Governor Nicolls had confirmed this title and established the same boundary. Richard Smith disputed this boundary, and claimed under his purchase from the Nesaquake Indians, and possibly under other claims of title, as far west as Cow Harbor (Northport).


Smith brought several suits of trespass against those who occupied lands about Fresh Pond, some of which suits were tried at Southampton, and finally the contro- versy in 1670 came into the court of assize for adjudica- tion. The trial of the cause resulted in a vindication of Huntington's title as far east as Nesaquake River, but the court made it a condition that the town of Hunting- ton should settle families on the land within three years. In order to carry into effect this decree of the court quite an elaborate scheme of settlement was devised. The object was to compel all those who hield shares or hundred-pound rights in the town to contribute pro- portionally to a fulfillment of the order of the court for the settlement of the territory. To this end owners of the rights or hundreds were divided into ten separate groups or companies, and each company was required to to settle one farm, each farm to consist of forty acres of tillable land, together with meadows and commonage for cattle. In order to induce respectable persons with their


23


THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.


families to settle in this new territory very liberal terms were offered by the ten several companies. The settler was not only to have the farm free, but was to enjoy all the rest of the land in that purchase as it might at a future time be divided out. In consideration of this they were to pay or refund to the several proprietors all the costs. and charges of suits with Richard Smith, satisfy all just claims of the Indians, build upon and fence the lands, and "manure so their fruits may be preserved;" to ab- stain from selling or letting any part of these farms "to any person of a vicious life or truly of an evil report;" and further, "all and every of these particular farmers shall have a distinct ear mark for themselves, with wich ear mark they shall mark all their Cattle and Beasts markable, and record in the Town Books."


The several companies held responsible for the settle- ment of the ten farms entered into an agreement dated September 23d 1672, under a forfeiture of £500 for non-performance, "to settle every one of ye aforesaid farms by building, fencing, and placing so many persons on each farm as may properly be a familie according to the court's judgment;" and they also contracted with persons and their families to settle the farms according to the terms here stated, and these persons went with their families and began the settlement. The farms were located so as to occupy all the meadow lands and adjoin- ing uplands lying between the Nesaquake River on the east and the west side of Crab Meadow on the west. The farms were then settled, and Huntington felt secure in her title.


But Richard Smith was not content to lose this terri- tory, and made an application for a rehearing at a court of assize held in New York in October 1672, setting forth that "at ye tryal in ye Court of Assize held ano issue warrants to the justices of the peace, and they were 1670 several false evidences were produced at ye tryal by ye inhabitants of Huntington, whereby ye Court and Jury were misled." The application was granted. At a term of the same court held in New York in the follow- ing December a singular order was made by the court, adjourning the matter. As this shows how business was transacted by this court in those days a part of the order is here given:


"Sometime in ye month of May next his Hon. the Governor intends to have a General Trayning and a meeting of the too troops of hors at the east end of Hempsted Playns; where some indifferent persons from ye east end of Long Island who will be there, and some others from the West, shall be appointed to go and view ye said land called Nassequake land, on the West side of that River, and so make inquiry thereunto in the best manner they can, and if possible to make a conclusion thereon between ye Plaintiff and Defendant; which if it cannot be attained unto that then the plaintiff have lib- erty to present his bill in Equity against the defendant at ye next general Court of assize as to that land called Nassequake land, wherton a deffinate conclusion can be obtained according to law and conscience."


At a term of the court of assize held in New York in October 1675 this cause was tried, and the following ver- dict rendered:


Court, after mature deliberacon, doth finde in equity for the Plt. and the proceedings of the Dutch Court in this case to bee legall and judiciall, and therefore give judg- ment for the Plt. That the lands in question between Nassaquake River westward and Whitman's Hollow, and so to the fresh ponds, doth of right belong unto him [Richard Smith] and he is to be put in possession of the same, if not otherwise delivered up. The present in- habitts. therefore by the Plts. consent to have leave to stay there until the first day of May next, and also to have Liberty to take off the produce of any corne that at or before this tryall was in the ground. However The said Land to bee within the jurisdiction of Huntington, as within their patent, though the Property adjudged to the Plaintiffe. The Deft. to pay the costs of this Cort, but for what hath been formerly each pty. to beare their owne charge."


" The bounds of the land recovered from Huntington by Richard Smith Senr. and layd ont by Thomas Weekes in obedience to the ordr. of the Court of Assizes, hee being imployed by the Courts of Huntington to give pos- session of the same, is declared to bee as followeth, vizt. From the west most part of Joseph Whitman's hollow & the west side of the Leading hollow to the fresh pond Unthemamuck, & the West side of this pond at high water marke (to the River eastward) as it is supposed.


"This is attested by Thomas Weekes undr. his hand, Sept. 24th 1675.


" Possession given by Turfe & Twigge."


The agreement of possession was confirmed by Richard Woodhull, who had order to see the same done, if not agreed to before March Ioth 1676-7. Neither party in this suit obtained all it claimed.


A LITTLE MORE DUTCH GOVERNMENT.


Under the duke's laws put in force at Hempstead in 1665 power was given to the governor and council to to issue them to the constables and overseers, "to cause men to work on public works and highways." Governor Nicolls, however, made no requisition on this town for repairing forts during his administration, but Francis Lovelace on becoming governor made an order in 1670 to the several towns for a contribution to repair the fort at New York city. The Huntington people protested against this on the ground that they could not be taxed without their own consent, expressed through their representatives in a general assembly, and they did not regard the justices, who were the appointees of the gover- nor, as their representatives. They held the order as de- priving them of the liberties of Englishmen, and refused to comply. Their protests were however denounced by Governor Lovelace as scandalous, illegal and seditious, and ordered to be publicly burned before the town-house of the city of New York at the next mayor's court. The recapture of New York by the Dutch, which soon followed, gave Governor Lovelace sufficient employment without troubling himself about the rebellious people of Huntington.


The hostility engendered by the arbitrary proceedings of Governor Lovelace and the partial failure to repair the fort at New York probably had much to do with the


"In the case between the Plt. and Defendts The surrender of that city to the Dutch, July 30th 1673,


24


THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.


though the surrender has generally been attributed to the cowardice of Captain John Manning, its commander.


The English towns had no liking for a transfer to the government of the States General, and Huntington with the other eastern towns would gladly have again joined the Connecticut colony.


A convention of deputies from five towns (Southamp- ton, Southold, Brookhaven, East Hampton and Hunting- ton) was called to meet at Southold. This town sent Thomas Scidmore and Isaac Platt as deputies. The con- vention met August 14th 1673. An address was prepared and signed by all the deputies and sent to the Dutch governor, Anthony Colve. In substance it set out that these towns preferred the Hartford jurisdiction, but had been coerced into submitting to the government of the Duke of York; " but now, by turn of God's providence, ships of force belonging to the States of Holland had" taken New York, and, a summons having been sent to them to submit to the Dutch, they would do so on certain conditions. These conditions were set forth under ten heads, and were intended to guarantee to them about all the liberties and customs they then enjoyed.


This address was delivered by deputies in person to the Dutch governor and council at New York. All the very material conditions asked for were subsequently agreed to by the council; the towns sent nominations for justices from which the council was to make appoint- ments, and the appointments were made. Joseph and Isaac Platt were appointed magistrates for Huntington.


The address, the compliance by the Dutch with the conditions therein insisted upon by the towns, the send- ing of names by the towns from which the governor and his council were to make appointments for office, and the subsequent appointment and acceptance of these officers were regarded by Governor Colve and his council as a full submission to the authority of " their High Mighti- nesses the Lords States General of the United Nether- lands and his Sovereign Highness the Prince of Orange."


about four months later, Long Island was restored to England, there was little opportunity for substituting Dutch rule for English in Huntington. With the restora- tion of English authority came a new governor, Sir Ed- mund Andros. His promises of good government were great, but his performances small. Huntington submit- ted to the new order of things. The duke's laws were re-enacted.


CHANGES OF THE FIRST THIRTY YEARS.


Before passing to the stirring events of the decade following 1680 it is desirable to look more closely into the customs, habits, laws and ways of the people.


Near thirty years had now passed since the first settle- ment. Those who were old in 1653 had passed away; the young had advanced to the prime of life, and a new generation, born upon the soil, had appeared. The physical and mental powers of one generation had been employed in developing the resources of this region. Comfortable farm-houses and barns had been erected; orchards of apple, pear and peach trees in the "home lots " had grown to maturity; broad fields had been re- duced to cultivation; the few horses, cattle and other animals the first settlers brought with them had multi- plied into many. Mills for grinding grain and sawing lumber had been erected on the streams. Public high- ways, watering places and landings had been laid out and farms fenced from the common lands. Vessels were fitted out for trade with the Bermuda Islands, the New England colonies and the James River. The church and the school-house had made their appearance. Train bands paraded at the Town Spot, keeping step to the roll of the drum, and the colony had advanced from in- fancy to a vigorous and promising young life.


These thirty years had been years of peace so far as Huntington was concerned, for this town had taken no active part in the English and Dutch conflicts on Man- hattan Island, but had quietly yielded submission to " the powers that be " as a matter of form, at the same


In October 1673 Governor Colve sent William Kniffe and Nicholas Voss to the towns to administer the oath of time managing its local affairs in its own way. These allegiance to the magistrates that had been appointed, it conflicts had hardly stirred a ripple on the surface of having been agreed that none others need take the oath. Silas Wood is authority for the statement that the Hunt- ington magistrates took the oath and that the people consented to the Dutch jurisdiction.


Huntington thought. A great deal of complaint had been made about the arbitrary proceedings of the several colonial governors and of the inhabitants being deprived of the liberties of Englishmen, but up to this time nothing of the kind had occurred to materially check the pros- perity of the settlement. The grievance was more a matter of theory then experience. If the people were taxed without representatives the tax was too light to be much felt, rarely exceeding for colony purposes a penny on the pound; the tax for town purposes was about one penny on the pound, and that for county purposes was a mere trifle. The total valuation of property in the town then was about £6,500, and the assessed valua- tion of the property of idividuals ranged from fr or less to £200.


When Kniffe and Voss went to the eastern towns on the same mission they met with a far different reception. Southold, though it had committed itself to an acknowl- edgment of Dutch authority, now refused to receive the commissioners. Southampton threatened them with violence and they returned to New York. This change of policy at the east grew out of the fact that Governor Winthrop of Connecticut had sent commissioners over to Southold who promised that the Connecticut colony would claim jurisdiction over the towns and protect them from the Dutch. In this matter Huntington only carried out the policy agreed to at first by all the five There was very little money in the country, but articles of produce passed as money at rates established by law, towns, and her course was honorable. As under the treaty of peace between the English and the Dutch, only |as follows: Winter wheat, 4s. per bushel; summer wheat,


25


THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.


3s. 6d .; Indian corn, 2s. 3d .; rye, 2s. 6d .; pork, 3d. per pound; beef, 2d .; oil, f1 Tos. per barrel. These were the rates for 1679 as established that year by the court of sessions at Southampton. These articles were each a legal tender for debt, and no one could refuse to receive them in pay.


Inducements were held out by the town to cause mechanics to come here and locate, generally by grant- ing them lands and hundred-pound rights, under which they would be entitled to future divisions when such were made. A gift of this kind was made to Samuel Griffing, a blacksmith who came from Southampton and located at Huntington Harbor. He married a daughter of Thomas Scidmore, another blacksmith. John Davis, a brickmaker, was also in this way induced to come here from Setauket. It was a common thing for the town to make such grants to induce worthy and industrious men, skilled in the work required, to come and settle in the town. Great care was taken however in making it the condition of all such grants of land that the parties should remain in the town and pursue their special occu- pation. In 1679 it was ordered at a town meeting that such persons should be bound to diligently follow their particular trade for the benefit of the town in general, for the term of seven years at least, and not to make any sale or alienation thereof; "and in case he leave the town that he place a man of the same trade in his stead, or re- turn the land to the town."


But while the policy was to invite skilled workmen and reputable persons into the town, we have already seen how the utmost care was taken to exclude those whom a committee of censors pronounced unfit to be inhabit- ants. In 1670 complaint was made to the governor that holders of land had sold small parcels " to divers poor, inconsiderable persons, who, though they have but a small part of a lot, yet expect to give their votes in town courts equal to the best freeholders, thereby which in time may prove to ye destruction of the place, in that it will come to be governed by the worst and least con- cerned inhabitants." The governor and council referred them to the court of sessions for relief.




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.