History of Suffolk county, New York, 1683, Part 59

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 59

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).

Our forefathers had their anniversary days. Nothing reminds us more forcibly of the march of time than to consider how completely these have given place to others. The first day of Noveniber was observed as a day of thanksgiving for deliverance from the gunpowder plot of Guy Fawkes. January 30th was made a day of fasting and prayer for what the statute declared " the barbarous murder of Charles I., whereby to divert God's judgment from falling on the whole nation." The 29th of May was a day of thanksgiving, it being the anniversary of the restoration of Charles II. to the throne of England and the birthday of that king; ministers were required to pray and all persons to abstain from work. It is doubtful whether these days were very zealously observed in Huntington. It would have been more in accord with the sentiments of the people to celebrate the birth- day of Cromwell.

Some of the laws in existence at this period seem to us harsh and cruel. There were eleven crimes enume- rated the punishment for which was death. Among these were murder, bearing false witness, maliciously to cause a conviction in a capital case, expressly denying the true God, denying the authority of the king or raising armies to resist him, children over 16 smiting their parents, forgery and arson. Burglary and highway robbery were punished as follows: First offense, branding on the fore- head; second offense, branding as before and whipping severely; third offense, death. For stealing clothes hanging out to dry, or robbing orchards or gardens, the offender was to be publicly whipped. Stealing boats, cows or hogs was to be followed by cutting off one of the offender's ears. Firing woods was punished with 20 stripes, lying or publishing false news with seven hours in the stocks, or not exceeding 40 stripes. Gamblers, drunkards and disorderly persons were put in the stocks or whipped. Every town was required to have stocks erected in the most public place, and pillories and prisons were to be provided where the court of sessions met. The fee of the constable for whipping was two shillings and sixpence.

The following little affair is suggestive of the spirit of the times:

Huntington, June 29th 1682 .- Return Davis, aged about 45, testifieth: "Not long since, while in my house, I heard ye sound of a horse trotting; I looked out and saw Robert Kellam on horseback coming from Oyster Bay, having a bag under him which had ye bulk of 6 pecks in it; I thought it was meal, and I asked him why he set out from Oyster Bay on ye Lord's day to come home; he said it was not Lord's day, for it was night; I said, 'Look yonder-I think ye sun is half an hour high, and I believe you came out of Oyster Bay about ye begin- ing of ye afternoon meeting;' and I told him I though the would be taken notice of; I also asked him whether he had got his meal now; he said yes, he could not have it to come home yesterday."

In the action against " Robart Kallam for breaking ye Sabbath by traveling and carrying a burden, the court finding it legally proved, the court sentence is yt ye said Robart Kallam shall pay twenty shillin, or make such an acknowledgement as ye court shall accept of, and pay

THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.

what is due to ye court." The court charges were 12S. 6d .; constable fees, 5s .; clerk's fees, 3s. IId. It is hardly necessary to add that Robert Kellam made a very humble "acknowledgement " and escaped the fine.

A recital in our time of the harsh penal enactments heretofore mentioned impresses one with the idea that our ancestors were very cruel, but such an impression is to a great extent erroneous. The people of Huntington had no hand in putting in force this bloody code. It was framed by the crown officers in England and pro- mulgated by the Duke of York, through his deputies, at Hempstead in 1665. Many of these forms of punish- ment were copied from statutes then in force in England, and if traced they would probably be found to have had their origin far back in medieval ages, having been en- acted, abolished and re-enacted in England time after time as one faction arose and swept away another. Transplanted here they were not in harmony with the sentiments of the times, and the most barbarous of them were not enforced. An examination of a large number of criminal cases occurring about this period, as they appear in the Huntington court records, leads to the Very few persons here were put into the stocks, very few were whipped. If any were branded in the forehead, or irons, we have failed to discover the fact. When the people came to make their own laws, through their chosen representatives, this bloody code very soon disappeared and was replaced with more humane provisions. It may

The simple habits these people acquired in New Eng- opinion that justice was in all cases tempered with mercy. land, where the length of women's dresses and the width

of men's breeches were regulated by law, still clung to them. There is reason, however, to believe that the mil- had their ears cut off or their tongues bored with red hot itary companies or train bands took pride in their appear-

be added that the number of crimes punished by death our time. When these foot companies and troops of was far greater in England at the date mentioned than here.

At this period nearly all manufactured articles came from England, and the cost was such as to deter the peo- ple from indulging in articles of luxury. Inventories of goods and chattels taken and recorded at this time show that in general their personal property was of the rudest and simplest kind compatible with civilized life. These people, isolated from the rest of the world, and destitute of skilled artisans, tools, and materials necessary in pro- viding ornaments and articles of luxury, were compelled to content themselves with rudely constructed household furniture and plain but substantial dress, and to accus- tom themselves to subsist upon plain food and drink. As Dr. Whitaker says of the people of Southold: "With- in their dwellings they used tables, chairs, drawers, chests, bedsteads, beds, bedding, shovels, tongs, andirons, tram- mels, pot hooks, pots, pans, knives, wooden ware, pewter ware, especially plates and spoons, and sometimes a little earthen ware, and perhaps a few pieces of silver-as a tankard and a cup. But stoves, tin ware, plated ware of every kind, china, porcelain, queen's ware and all kinds of fine work of the potter's art seem to have been un- known among them. So were table cloths, and especially table forks. They had no carpets, and few had any pic- tures, watches, musical instruments or works of art for the adornment of their homes." Tea and coffee were not on their tables.

It must not be supposed, however, that they felt very seriously the absence of these ornaments and luxuries. Pioneers on the borders generally very readily and cheer- fully adapt themselves to the surrounding circumstances, and are not apt to mourn the absence of what it has not been their habit to enjoy. It is questionable whether the advantages arising out of the possession of the more luxurious and elaborate appliances of modern civilized life are not more than balanced by the responsibil- ities and anxieties which these impose, and the way they retard the accumulation of more substantial wealth and obstruct more enduring happiness. The hands and brains of our forefathers were employed in making them- selves plain but comfortable homes; what they accumu- lated was invested in land and stock-those substantial elements of wealth which strengthened them and in- creased their prosperity-instead of being wasted on the maintenance of the luxurious life exacted by modern usages, which, however proper in those who have the wealth to maintain it, is like a millstone hung about the neck of the middle classes of our time.

ance: They wore cocked hats, tight breeches, and straight-bodied coats, and carried long swords and guns. They were probably as proud of their clumsy matchlock muskets as modern soldiers are of the wonderful rifles of horse met on training days for practice, and the sound of the drum and bugle blast went out over the hills, it was a great day in Huntington, and young and old flocked in to the Town Spot to witness the display.

The country was at peace. The Indians were quiet. One of the reasons why so little trouble existed be- tween the first settlers here and the Indians is the fact that the whites did not, as a general thing, occupy the lands of the Indians until deeds had been made and the purchasers had been put in possession by the Indians in person. Thus all the part of the town owned by the Matine- cocks was bought and paid for before a white man is known to have lived within its limits. On the contrary in New England the settlements were generally made in the Indian country first, and the titles acquired afterward. The whites having put themselves in the position of intruders, Indian depredations and wars were thereby often provoked. The settlers here adopted the wise policy of satisfying the Indians so far as the right to the land was con- cerned. A few trinkets were generally sufficient to ac- complish this, and in this way the Indian was led to feel that as he had voluntarily parted with his land he had no ground for quarrel with those who had purchased and paid him for it, although in point of fact the considera- tion was insignificant.

In 1677 Samuel Titus, constable, sent a petition to Governor Andros which disclosed some of the troubles of that period and the mode of meeting them. He said:

THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.

"Your petitioners humbly desire your honor will be Petitions coming up from the towns to Anthony Brock- pleased that some course may be taken that the Quakers holst, the commander in chief, he seems to have admit- may not be suffered to come into our meeting-house in time of God's worship to disturb us, as they frequently do. Also that your lionor will please to order that the county rate and minister's rate may be made both in one; and also that your honor will please to order that the Indians may not plant in our meadows which we have bought of them and paid for, which is very much to our damage," etc.

Endorsed-" The law to be altered; the Indians to be sent for by the constable."

HUNTINGTON AND THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION.

Returning now to a consideration of political events of a local nature it is interesting to see what part, if any, the people of Huntington took in the memorable contest for civil liberty which led up to the revolution of 1689, involving the downfall of James II., the accession of William and Mary, and the establishment of a permanent popular assembly in the colony, where the voice of the people could be heard on public measures. Though so far from the theater of the stirring events in England the people here were fully in sympathy with the revolutionary party in England that welcomed William to the throne. By public meetings and petitions they harassed King James and his officers with complaints that they were taxed without representation, and demands for the repeal of obnoxious laws.

Assemblies of the people met in various places to dis- cuss public affairs, and there were men bold and out- spoken in denunciation of the arbitrary rule of Governor Andros. In April 1681 Isaac Platt, Epenetus Platt, Samuel Titus, Jonas Wood and Thomas Wickes, all of Huntington, were taken to New York and imprisoned without trial on the order of Governor Andros, charged with no other offense than attending meetings of dele- gates to devise means for a redress of public grievances. This did not have the effect to awe the people of Hunt- ington into submission, for they called a meeting in their own town the same year, as the following extract from the records will show:

"Sept. 24 1681 .- At a town meeting legally warned it was voted to make choice of one or two men to be dep- uties to act in the town's behalf with the assembly that adjust the boundaries between the Indians and the town.

in this place shall meet to consider of such things as shall be thought good for the public. The day first above written Capt. Thomas Fleet and Isaac Platt are chosen deputies for the town."

Sir Edmund Andros, however, had left the colony be- fore the meeting of this assembly in Huntington, leaving made to conform very nearly to their wishes. In a letter a subordinate officer, who was not likely to take aggressive measures.

The next April the people in town meeting voted to reimburse the five men who had been imprisoned in New York for the expenses they had incurred and for their loss of time. June 27th of the same year (1682) it was voted "that Epenetus Platt shall go to York, or where the assembly shall meet, if Mr. Wood will not go to carry a petition and to speak to it when occasion shall be."

ted the need of a general assembly to make laws, and, the Duke of York approving the measure, the new gov- ernor, Thomas Dongan, was immediately on his arrival required to summon a general assembly of delegates from the towns, which he did by calling such an assem- bly to meet at New York October 17th 1683. John Sam- mis and Epenetus Platt were elected deputies from Huntington.

Thompson says: "The great and all important result of this enlightened assembly was the adoption of a bill of rights, or charter of liberties and privileges." We think the eulogy of the latter author on this assembly is overdrawn. It and the succeeding two assemblies failed to so fortify the liberties of the people as to perpetuate legislative power, and Governor Dongan quietly put his foot on the bill of rights and dispensed with any more assemblies of the people until the more decisive move- ments for civil liberty in England compelled a restora- tion of popular assemblies here.

At this assembly held in October 1683 the division of the province into ridings was abolished and twelve coun- ties were established, among them Suffolk. This assembly 'also created a sort of town court, to be held by three commissioners. Huntington the next year elected Thomas Powell, Thomas Whitson and Thomas Fleet such commissioners, but upon their refusal to take the oath of office Isaac Platt, Epenetus Platt and John Corey were elected in their places. This court was shortlived. The office of town collector having been created Jonathan Scudder was elected collector of all rates, including the $50 yearly salary of the minister.

Early in 1686 Governor Dongan sent men to examine as to the boundary of the lands held by Huntington, and required the town authorities to appear and show by what authority they held lands, with the purpose of compelling the town to take out a new patent. Isaac Platt and Thomas Powell were appointed commissioners to meet the men sent by. the governor, and to act in the matter according to their discretion. At the same time John Ketcham, Thomas Powell, John Sammis and Jere- miah Smith were appointed to meet the Indians and

The commissioners appointed to negotiate with the governor about the patent, under date of April 8th 1687, drew up and presented to Mr. Graham of the governor's council an elaborate statement of what the town desired the new patent to contain, and it seems to have been afterward written to Mr. Graham on the same subject they say with respect to the cost of the patent: " Hoping his excellency will take into consideration the present state and condition of the town, both with respect to the sparseness of our numbers and the lowness of our es- 'tates, which by reason of the incapacity of the place is not like to be augmented, our lands being both barren and rocky, and so unfit for tillage. Yet, notwithstanding, we are willing to allow twenty pounds to his excellency

THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.

if our lands may be confirmed for the future, and twenty shillings quit-rent," etc. At the request of the governor Isaac Platt took to New York the old patent granted by Governor Nicolls, and left it with John Graham to be used in the draft of another.

The governor, having obtained possession of the old patent of the town, refused to give it up unless the ex- penses of a new confirmatory patent be paid, together with rents, making in all £29 4s. 6d. This sum was eventually paid, but the transaction was indignantly de- nounced by the people. The patent was granted August 8th 1688, but both the old and new patents were re- tained in the government office in New York more than two years afterward, and were not delivered until all charges were paid by the town, long after Dongan had ceased to be governor. The levy of the tax on the people by Governor Dongan the same year without au- thority of law further exasperated the people, and they were rejoiced when in a few months he was ordered by the king to deliver the seal of the province to Sir Ed- mund Andros, who assumed the government.

The news of the overthrow of King James and the ac- cession of William and Mary reached America in April 1689, and Captain Jacob Leisler, having seized the fort at New York in behalf of King William, invited Hunt- ington with other towns to send deputies to New York to form a committee of safety, and also to send two men each to help guard the fort. The people of Huntington, though friendly to the cause of King Wil- liam, distrusted the purpose of Leisler and were at first undetermined what course to pursue. In March they sent two delegates to Southold to confer with the rep- resentatives from other towns, "to act as shall be ad- judged meet concerning the lieutenant governor's warrant." In May following Captain Thomas Fleet was sent to Oyster Bay to consult with the people there "concerning the present state of the country," and Cap- tain Platt was sent to Stamford and to New York on the same business. May 3d 1689 it was voted at town meet- ing here that "in answer to Southold's messenger this town will readily comply and join with them in the de- mand of the fort, and to act further as upon consideration shall be needful." The same day it was voted that Cap- tain Epenetus Platt should " go to York with the east end men to make a demand of ye fort."

The same town meeting made the following remarkable order: " May the 3 1689 .- It was voted and consented that Capt. Epenetus Platt shall have by virtue of the town's choice full power to act as civil and military head officer of this town, he applying himself to such general matters as he with the advice of his inferior officers shall see cause to make use of for that purpose; but as to the administration of civil justice he is to apply himself to English laws." It is evident that the people of Hunting- ton were in a state of great excitement, or they would hardly have declared martial law and made one of their citizens virtually a dictator. The people here had evi- dently made up their minds to support Leisler, as the best way out of the difficulty. It would seem that South-

ampton and East Hampton were at first inclined to join Huntington in this course, but Southold refused and pre- ferred to join Connecticut. There were various reasons which influenced Huntington in its course. Leisler's position as the avowed champion of King William against the adherents of the late king in the colony attracted their sympathy in his behalf. He was in power, holding the fort at New York and all the archives of the government, among which were the two Huntingotn patents.

June 12th following Leisler issued a requisition on each of the towns for "two known Protestant trusty soldiers, armed upon their cost and to be maintained at New York to aid in keeping the fort." Huntington re- sponded to this a few days after by voting at town meet- ing that "this town will bear its equal proportion in what charge of soldiers the country shall see cause to send."

Deputies were sent to meet the eastern towns in order to act in concert with them in complying with the order. Southold and Setauket opposed submitting to Leisler; Southampton and East Hampton expressed their willing- ness to join with Huntington in acknowledging Leisler and sending the soldiers to New York, but asked delay and promised to give notice when they would comply. The probably changed their minds, for no notice came. Leister was peremptory in his demands on Hunt- ington, and April 15th 1690 a declaration by Huntington of full submission to the authority of Leisler was sent to him. He still held on to the town patents, much to the displeasure of the people; finally however, about the be- ginning of 1691, they were paid for in full and delivered up.

Leisler's government was terminated by the arrival, March 19th 1691, of Henry Sloughter, the new governor commissioned by William and Mary. Leisler refused to deliver up the fort to the new governor, was tried, con- victed and executed for high treason. Huntington promptly sent Rev. Eliphalet Jones and Epenetus Platt to New York "to welcome his excellency our governor into these parts."

Under the commission of Governor Sloughter Hunt- ington with other towns in a measure reaped the advan- tages of the great revolution in England. An assembly composed of delegates from each county, chosen by the freeholders, was authorized, and many important changes were made in the government, which continued, with some modifications, until the American Revolution in 1776.

DONGAN'S PATENT.

The patent of 1688 is too lengthy to be given here in full. The needless repetitions and verbosity of the pa- pers coming from the government office at this period arose out of the fact that those who drafted and copied them were paid in proportion to the length of the docu- ment, and not from any lack of knowledge or skill in the preparation of legal papers; for there had about this time grown up a class of attorneys, graduates of the law schools of London (the Inns of the Temple), who were

3.3

THE TOWN OF HUNTINGTON.

not surpassed in any age in their knowledge of the law and skill in their calling.

This Dongan patent, after reciting the substance of the Nicolls patent, proceeded to confirm the former grant as follows:

" And by these presents do give, grant, ratify and con- firm unto Thomas Fleet senior, Epenetus Platt, Jonas Wood senior, James Chichester senior, Joseph Bailey, Thomas Powell senior, John Sammis, Isaac Platt and Thomas -, Freeholders and Inhabitants of Hunt- ington, herein erected and made one Body Corporate and publique and willed and determined to be called by ye name of ye Trustees of ye Freeholders and Comonalty of ye Towne of Huntington, and their successors, all ye above recited Tracts of Land within ye Limitts and Bounds aforesaid, together with all and singular ye Houses, Messuages, Tenements, Buildings, Mills, Mill- dames, fencing, enclosures, Gardens, Orchards, fields, pastures, woods, underwoods, trees, timbers, feedings and Common of pasture, meadows, marshes, swamps, plaines, Rivers, Rivoletts, waters, Lakes, Ponds, Brooks, Streams, Beaches, Quarries, Creekes, Harbours, Highways and Easements, fishing, hawking, hunting and fowling, mines, mineralls (silver and gold mines excepted), and all fran- chises, profits, commodityes and Heriditaments whatso- ever to ye said Tracts of Lands and premises belonging or in anywise appertaining," etc.

As to all grants or patents by governors of the province to individuals, and all grants and divisions of the com- mon land heretofore made by the town to individuals, these were confirmed to such owners, their heirs and as- signs; and all the common or unappropriated lands were confirmed "to the present freeholders and inhabitants, their heirs, successors or assigns forever," in proportion to their several divisions and allotments, as tenants in common, saving to the king such necks and parcels of land as were not yet purchased from the Indians.

Power was given the town as a corporation to acquire, hold, manage and dispose of property, real and personal, and also to bring, maintain and defend suits at law, and a common "seale" was authorized " which shall serve to execute ye causes and affairs whatsoever of them and their successors," etc. Nine trustees, to be known as "trustees of the freeholders and commonalty of ye town of Huntingtown" were to be elected "on the first Tues- day in May forever," together with a town clerk, one constable and two assessors. The trustees were to meet at convenient times and "make acts and orders in writing" for the execution of their trust. Thomas Fleet sen., Epenetus Platt, Jonas Wood sen., James Chichester sen., Thomas . Powell sen., Joseph Bayly, John Sammis and Isaac Platt were appointed such trustees until others were elected. The consideration or rent reserved to the king was one lamb or five shillings, to be paid the 25th day of March every year in the city of New York. The patent passed the office August 2nd 1688.

It will be noticed that no change is made in the bound- aries of the town by this patent, but the former bound- aries are confirmed. The town acted upon the authority given as to a seal, and had one made which has been used ever since. It is round and about three-quarters of an inch in diameter. It has a capital letter E in the cen-

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.