USA > New York > Westchester County > History of Westchester County, New York, from its earliest settlement to the year 1900 > Part 23
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
In 1695 a tract of land which for more than thirty years had be- longed to the Rye settlers, "sitnated above Westchester Path, between Blind Brook and Mamaroneck River, and extending as far north as Rye Pond," was bought by a certain John Harrison from an Indian who professed to be " the true owner and proprietor." After having been surveyed by order of Governor Fletcher, of New York, this tract, called " Harrison's Purchase," was patented (June 25, 1696) to llar- rison and four associates-William Nicols, Ebenezer Wilson, David Jamison, and Samuel Haight. In vain did the people of Rye protest against so unrighteous a proceeding. The land was wholly unim- proved and unsettled, its rightful prior ownership was claimed by the Indian from whom Harrison bought it, and, moreover, the Rye men, by having contemptuously neglected to avail themselves of the opportunity extended to them by Dougan in 1685 to prove their
1 Balrd's HIst. of Rye.
216
HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY
land titles, had incapacitated themselves from establishing a supe- rior title by the records. The issuance of the Harrison patent was followed, abont the end of 1696, by a verdict adverse to Rye ren- dered in the New York courts in a suit brought by Mrs. Ann Rich- bell against the Rye people for intrusion on the White Plains lands. These two events brought matters to a crisis. Rye seceded from New York, applied to be received back into Connecticut, and, meeting with encouragement, resumed formal connection with the latter gor-
N
GREENBURGH
SCARSDALE
ernment, until by order of the king compelled to aban- don it.
Z Rye's petition to the gen- eral court of Connectient, in 0 conjunction with a similar RIVER one from Bedford, was sub- mitted on January 19, 1697, BRONX 5 and was graciously re- ceived. On the 8th of April PLAINS following an overt manifes- RIVER 1 tation against New York's authority was made at Rye by Major Sellick, of Stam- Nov - 30 WHITE ford, " with about fifty dra- x ARANECK R R gones, whom he called his life-guard, with their arms presented." The major and his " dragones " presumed to RIVER interfere with an election which was being conducted Boundary Ling. .. g. E there by Benjamin Collier, MAMARONI Y high sheriff of Westchester County, for representative R in the New York assembly. MAMARONECK H Apparently no actual vio- lence was done, but the show of force excited strong feel- ing in New York, and was LONG ISLAND SOUND J Henry Carpenter promptly characterized in very severe terms by the pro- RYE AND ASSOCIATED TRACTS. vincial assembly. Governor Fletcher issued a proclamation ordering Rye and Bedford to return to their allegiance, and also entered into communication on the sub- ject with the governor of Connecticut, from whom, however, he
217
COMPLETION OF EARLY LOCAL SETTLEMENT.
obtained no satisfaction. In addition, Fletcher tried conciliatory measures, dispatching Colonel Caleb Heathcote, one of the members of his council, to Rye, with instructions to do what he could by means of his personal influence toward settling the troubles. Heathcote's report gives a very clear idea of the merits of the controversy, show- ing that the Rye settlers had only themselves to blame for the loss of the Harrison lands. " I asked them," says Heathcote, " why they did not take ont a patent when it was tendered them [by Dongan]. They said they never heard that they could have one. I told them that their argument might pass with such as knew nothing of the matter, but that I knew better; for that to my certain knowledge they might have had a patent had they not rejected it, and that it was so far from being done in haste or in the dark that there was not a boy in the whole town, nor almost in the whole county, but must have heard of it; and that I must always be a witness against them, not only of the many messages they have had from the govern- ment about it, but likewise from myself. I told them as to the last purchase wherein 1 was concerned [that of the Richbell estates, including the White Plains tract], if that gave them any dissatisfaction, that I would not only quit my claim but use my influ- ence in getting them any part of it they should desire. Their an- swer was they valued not that; it was Harrison's patent that was their ruin."
For three years, 1697 to 1699, inclusive, Rye was represented in the Connecticut general court by regularly elected delegates. Dur- ing this period and for one year longer, the town was designated officially by its inhabitants as being " in the County of Fairfield." New York made no attempt at coercion, but referred the matters at issue to the king; and in March, 1700, an order of the king in council was issued, not only approving the boundary agreement of 1683-84, but directing the revolted towns " forever thereafter to be and re- main under the government of the Province of New York." This decision was, as a matter of course, accepted by all parties as final. Rye never recovered the Harrison purchase, although some of her inhabitants bought land there and became influential in its affairs. Moreover, " until the Revolution the inhabitants of the purchase participated with those of Rye in the transaction of town business, without any other distinction than that of having their own ofli- cors for the discharge of local functions "; and Harrison also formed "one of the six precinets of the parish of Rye, under the semi-ecele. siastical system that prevailed." Harrison was settled largely. how- ever, by Quakers from Long Island. The White Plains dispute was not determined adversely to Rye. Caleb Heathcote, while never in
218
HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY
legal form relinquishing his claim to " the White Plains," did not attempt to enforce it, and, indeed, uniformly treated the Rye people interested with generous fairness. He consented to the insertion in the letters patent for his Manor of Scarsdale of a clause expressly withholding from him any further title to the White Plains than that which he already possessed. The Rye settlers of White Plains always retained the lands which they acquired there, and at length, in 1722, obtained a patent for the whole tract of 4,435 aeres. " White Plains," says Dr. Baird, " drew largely on the strength of the com- munity of Rye. Some branches of nearly all the ancient families established themselves there, and, indeed, those families are now represented there more numerously than in the parent set- tlement."
According to the "Lists of Persons and Estates" kept by the general court of Connecticut, there were in Rye in 1665 twenty-five " persons," possessed of estates valued at £1,211; in 1683, forty-seven, worth £2,339; and in 1699, sixty, worth £3,306. By " persons " in this connection are probably to be understood heads of families. The population of Rye, including White Plains, in 1712, as shown by an enumeration then taken, was 516, the town being, next to West- chester (which had 572 inhabitants), the most populous in the county.
A celebrated fact in connection with the history of Rye during the first half of the eighteenth century is the establishment of the ferry to Oyster Bay, Long Island. This was authorized by royal letters patent, dated the 18th of July, 1739, to John Budd, Hachaliah Brown, and Jonathan Brown. The fare fixed for " every person " using the ferry was one shilling and six pence; and in addition rates of car- riage for a great variety of articles were specified. For the privi- lege thus conferred upon them, the patentees paid an annual quit- rent of two shillings and six pence. The operation of this ferry was very instrumental in contributing to the growth of population in the towns of Rye and Harrison, and in the central portions of the county.
The early history of White Plains has been so frequently referred to in the course of our narrative that this subject may be dismissed here with a brief summary. By virtue of the grants to John Rich- bell, issued both by the Dutch government and the first English governor, it was long claimed that White Plains (or " the White Plains," as originally and for many years called) was included in the Richbell lands running northward from the Mamaroneck River "twenty miles into the woods." Indeed, for nearly forty years after the first appearance there of settlers, or intending settlers, the legal title to this region remained undetermined. On November 22,
219
COMPLETION OF EARLY LOCAL SETTLEMENT
1683, six days before the signing of the new boundary articles be- tween New York and Connectient, the enterprising men of Rye pur- chased the whole traet, known by the ludian name of Quaroppas, from the native chiefs who at that time professed to own it. Thus Rye came under the government of New York with a very plausible title to the White Plains. Gradually Rye men began to occupy the lands-a movement that attracted the attention of Mrs. Richbell, who in 1696 brought an ejeetment snit and obtained a favorable ver- diet, which, however, was not enforced. During the lifetime of Colonel Caleb Heathcote, successor to Mrs. Richbell's rights and proprietor of Scarsdale Manor, nothing was done toward settling the question of ownership. Heathcote died on the 28th of Febru- ary, 1721, and soon afterward active measures were begun by the White Plains settlers toward securing a patent from the govern- ment. In this endeavor they were put to considerable vexation and expense by the authorities. " Three times were they compelled to make surveys of their goodly fand, three times required to notify the owners of adjoining lands that such surveys were about to be made, and all to furnish pretexts for oppressive charges by the officers of the governor's council."1 The royal patent was finally granted on the 13th of March, 1722, to JJoseph Budd and others. It was for " All that said tract or parcel of land, situate, lying, and being in the County of Westchester, commonly known by the name of the White Plains." Among the names of the settlers at that period mentioned in the official documents we find the following: Daniel Brundage, Joseph Hunt, Joseph Budd, JJohn Hoit, Caleb Hy- att, Humphrey Underhill, Joseph Purdy, George Lane, Daniel Lane, Moses Knapp, John Horton, David Horton, Jonathan Lynch, Peter Hatfield, JJames Travis, Isaac Covert, Benjamin Brown, John Turner, David Ogden, and William Yeomans. This list is but a partial one, being confined to the patentees. " At the time this patent was is- sned," says the author of the chapter on White Plains in Scharf's History, " Broadway, with its home-lots, had long been established." After the procurement of the patent the population increased so rap- idly that " in 1725 the inhabitants assumed an independent organ- ization, elected officers, and proceeded to manage their own affairs."
In the progress of this History, we have so far followed the move- ments of settlement and development along closely connecting lines. It has thus happened that the settlement of the Town of Bedford, which, under a strictly chronological arrangement, should have re- ceived notice among the comparatively early events, has not as yet been traced, or even referred to, except in the merest incidental manner.
1 " History of White Plains," by Joslah S. Mitchell, Scharf, I., 721.
220
HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY
Bedford, as one of the ancient towns of the county, presents unique aspects. It is the only one of the first settlements having an inland location, and the only one whose original history stands quite apart from that of the remainder of the county, with no associations or relations binding it to other Westchester settlements of early origin and respectable importance. In common with Westchester, East- chester, Pelham, and Rye, it was settled by Connecticut people; but, unlike these communities, it was by its isolation in the northern con- tral portion of the county removed completely from New York en- vironment and influence. Bedford, at least until within recent times,
Muscotan R
Croton River
Bliver
Craton
Cross
NORTH WEST CORNER
VINEYARD
River
PURCHASE
Brook
Miry
DIBBLE
PURCHASE
Brook
PURCHASE
THE OLD PURCHASE
Kisco
Kisco
Hop Ground
S
Brook
River
THE NEW or WEST
Or
Brook
Davida
Bedford Three Miles Square
Broad
Including
Mianus
Caha ?mong Pond
MAP OF BEDFORD.
is to be regarded as a purely New England village accidentally ab- sorhed by New York.
What is now the Township of Bedford was a portion of the pur- chase made by Nathaniel Turner, for the New Haven colony, July 1, 1640, of a tract of land eight miles long on the Sound and extending sixteen miles into the wilderness to the northwest. Upon that tract the village of Stamford was begun in 1641; and in 1655 its interior extension was repurchased from the Indians by the people of Stam- ford. No attempt at settlement on the portion of the traet now known as Bedford town was made until 1680. In that year the Town
NORTH EAST CORNER
River
Brock
Spruce Brook
Broad
Square
or
Purchase
Cohamong
221
COMPLETION OF EARLY LOCAL SETTLEMENT
of Stamford granted to twenty-iwo Stamford men' the lands known as the " Hop Grounds " lying " at the north end of Stamford bounds." Under this grant the beneficiaries, on the 23d of December, 1680, bought from Katonah, Rockaway, and several other Indians, the territory in question, 7,673 acres, for the value of £46 16s. 6d. The purchase thus made became known as " Bedford Three Miles Square." The whole of the southeastern portion of the present township- something more than one-third of the whole township in area-was included in it. Subsequent purchases were added at various times, the last being effected on the 23d of January, 1722, for a considera- tion of £20. The various deeds of sale from the natives during the eighty-two years from 1640 to 1722 were signed, altogether, by thirty. tive Indians.
According to Dr. Baird in his " History of the Bedford Church," the original settlers were nearly all the sons of English Puritans, founders of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, and there is no author- ity for the statement that they came from Bedfordshire, England, and from that circumstance gave the town its name. The name Bedford, says Dr. Baird, was probably bestowed by the general court of Connecticut, in accordance with the principle adopted many years before, intending, as they quaintly expressed it. " thereby to keep and leave to posterity the memorial of several places of note in our dear native country of England." In March, 1681, house-lots were laid ont, under a rule providing that each man's lot be " pro- portionable in quantity to what it lacks in quality." The other lands were divided on the same principle. The house-lots adjoined one another on the village street, it being deemed advisable for the set- tlers to live close together as a precaution in case of Indian attack. May 12 the general court at Hartford officially recognized the set- llement, and recommended that " there be a suitable loot laid out for ve first minister of ye place, and a loot for ye ministry to be and belong to ye ministry forever." This pious injunction was promptly obeyed, and as early as December, 1681, the town took steps to pro- cure a minister. The general court, on May 16. 1682, issued an order to the effect that " Upon the petition of the people of the Hop Ground, this court doth grant them the priviledge of a plantation, , and do order that the name of the towne shall henceforth be called Bedford." Joseph Theale was appointed as the "chiefe military officer for the training band," and Abram Ambler as magistrate.
1 Richard Ambler. Abraham Ambler, Joseph Theale, Daniel Weed. Eleazer Slawson. John Wosent. JJonathan Petit, John Cross, John Miller, Nicholas Webster. Richard Ayres, Will- iam Clark, Jonas Seely, Joseph Stevens, Dan-
iel Jones, Thomas Pannoyer. John Holmes, Ir .. Benjamin Stevens, John Green, Sr .. Davld Waterbury, Samuel Word, and Jonathan Kl. horn.
222
HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY
New proprietors were gradually admitted upon paying forty shillings each for shares in the undivided lands. About the end of the first year Joshua Webb was received as an inhabitant upon the under- standing that he would erect and operate a mill. This arrange- ment was carried out, the mill being built on the Mianus River. All the newcomers for very many years were New England people.
Notwithstanding the exclusion of Bedford from Connecticut by the provisions of the boundary agreement of 1683-84, Bedford con- tinued to recognize the sole authority of Connecticut. Her people, like those of Rye, disregarded the summons of Governor Dongan of New York in 1685, to take out patents for their lands, although this omission did not, as in the case of Rye, cause them any ultimate loss of territory. Frequent applications were, however, made to the Connectient authorities for a town patent ; and on May 21, 1697, after Bedford and Rye had been taken under the protection of that colony, these efforts were finally rewarded. The Connecticut patent for Bed- ford issued on that date was to " John Miller, Senr., Daniel Simkins, Zachariah Roberts, Cornelins Seely, Jeremiah Andrews, John West- coate, John Miller, Junr., John Holmes, Junr., and the rest of the present proprietors of Bedford," and in it the tract was described as follows: " All those lands, boath meadows, swamps and uplands, within these abuttments, viz .: Southerly on the bounds of the town- ship of Stamford; Westerly on the wilderness; Northerly on the wil- derness; and easterly on the wilderness, or land not yet laid ont. Every of which sides is six miles in length, to witt: from the east side westerly, and from the south side northerly, and is a township of six miles square, or six miles on every side, which said lands have been by purchase or otherwise, lawfully obtained of the Indian na- tive proprietors." April 8, 1704, this Connectient patent was con- firmed by New York, an annual quit-rent of £5 being provided for.
By reference to a map of the manors of Westchester County it will be observed that the northern section of Bedford Patent overlaps Cortlandt Manor, taking a quite considerable area from that manor. On the other hand, Stephanus Van Cortlandt's manor grant, dated June 17, 1697, called for a southern boundary beginning at the month of the Croton River and running due cast " twenty English miles "- that is, in a continuous line from the Hudson River to Connecticut. This interception of the southern boundary of Cortlandt Manor by the Bedford Patent requires explanation.
At the time when the Cortlandt Manor grant was issued the Bed- ford Patent for a tract six miles square based upon Stamford bounds on the south, as conferred by the general court of Connecticut, was already in existence, having, in fact, been obtained some six weeks
223
COMPLETION OF EARLY LOCAL SETTLEMENT
previously. Consequently, says a Bedford historian, "when Van Cortlandt's surveyor, working on his ' due east ' line, was advancing through Bedford, he was doubtless apprised by onr settlers that he was on Connecticut soil. No use to go farther; so he ran his line around the north side of Bedford, leaving her out of the Van Cort- landt Manor." 1 Indeed, Van Cortlandt or his heirs, fully accepting the claims of the Bedford people regarding their northern limits, built along those limits, to indicate the line of separation between Bedford and the manor, a solid stone wall, much of which still ro- mains. This wall is to-day, says the writer from whom we have just quoted, " undoubtedly the most notable landmark in this part. of the county," and " for nearly two miles extends right across the country, without regard to the lay of the ground, broken only by two highways, and until lately with not even a barway through it."
By the census of 1712 Bedford was given a population of 172. There are reasons, however, for supposing that this was an under- enumeration. It is noteworthy that no slaves were then owned in Bedford, " the people here being too poor at that early date to in- Julge in such Inxuries."
Early in the eighteenth century Jacobus Van Cortlandt, son of Oloff Stevense Van Cortlandt, and younger brother of Stephans Van Cortlandt, of Cortlandt Manor, became one of the principal landed proprietors of Bedford. This was the same Jacobus Van Cortlandt who married Eva, adopted daughter of the first Frederick Philipse, and founded the Van Cortlandt estate of the Little or Lower Yonkers, above Kingsbridge. He purchased lands of the Indians and settlers of Bedford as late as 1714, and his landed pos- sessions in the town ultimately amounted to 5,115 acres, which he bequeathed to his son Frederick Van Cortlandt, of the Lower Yon- kers, and his three daughters, Margaret, wife of Abraham de Peyster: Anne, wife of John Chambers, and Mary, wife of Peter Jay. The whole of the original estate was partitioned in 1743. Frederick Van Cortlandt receiving 1.424 acres. Abraham de Peystor 1,110 acres, John Chambers 1,282 acres, and Peter Jay 1,299 acres. Upon the death of Peter Jay (1782) his share was divided among his sons, Peter, Frederick, and John (the chief justice). John Jay subsequently became the sole proprietor of the Bedford estate, and after his re- tirement from public life made it his home, dying in the old Jay man- sion in 1829. He was succeeded in the proprietorship by his son, the distinguished Judge William Jay, who in turn was succeeded by his son, the Hon. John Jay.
The great " West, Middle, and East Patents" of central West- 1 " History of Bedford," by Joseph Barrett, Scharf, li., 39G.
224
HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY
chester, which we have already described, secured by Caleb Heath- cote and others from Lieutenant-Governor Nanfan in 1701, were among the foundations upon which such portions of the county north of the White Plains and Harrison tracts as were not included in the Rye and Bedford Patents and the Philipseburgh and Cortlandt Manor grants were seitled. The West Patent, known as " Wampus's Land Deed,"or the "North Castle Indian Deed," based upon a purchase from the Indians made by Heathcote in 1696. but not patented until Febru- ary 14, 1702, was bonnded on the east by the Byram River and the Bedford line, on the north by the Croton River, and at the west took in all the wedge-shaped land between Philipseburgh and Cortlandt Manors, forming an aente angle on the Hudson at the Croton's month. Its northern boundary, however, was subsequently removed from the Croton to the southern line of Cortlandt Manor, in order to conform to the Cortlandt Manor grant. Out of the West Patent was erected much of the Town of North Castle. The patentees, ten in number, included men of prominence and influence in the province, whose "interest was not that of settlers seeking a home, but merely that of speculators." The lands began to be settled about 1718-20 by Quaker farmers from Long Island, who came by way of Harrison's purchase, and whose descendants to this day belong to the principal families of that section of our county, among them the Haights, Weekses, Carpenters, Suttons, Quimbys, Hunts, Birdsalls, Barneses, and Havilands. In August, 1712, the settlers petitioned Governor Burnett to incorporate their lands into a township, mentioning in that document that their number comprised thirty men able to bear arms. Letters patent were soon afterward issued for the Town of North Castle. In addition to the lands represented by the West Patent, North Castle originally embraced a portion of the Middle Patent and also a separate grant made in 1706 to Ann Bridges, Roger Mompesson, and seven others.1 It even encroached on the bounds of the East Patent, covering a considerable part of the present Town of Poundridge. The number of settlers increased rapidly, and we are informed that at the time of its division by the setting off of New Castle " it was the second town in the county in assessed valu- ation, ranking next to Westchester in that respect, and the first in population."2 Inasmuch as North Castle lay entirely in the interior. and quite remoto from New York City, its exceptional prosperity is
1 This grant lay between the West and Mid- dle Patents. Ann Bridges was the wife of Chief Justice John Bridges, Roger Mompesson was chief justice of the province at the time. One of their associates in the patent was
Thomas Wenham, a member of the governor's council.
: " History of New Castle," by Joseph Bar_ rett, Scharf. ii., 615.
-
225
COMPLETION OF EARLY LOCAL SETTLEMENT
a striking proof of the fact that the wealth of our county had its origin exclusively in the agricultural interest.
The old Town of Salem, now constituting the Towns of North Salem and Lewisboro, also has an interesting early history, on account of the inclusion in it of all of the lands of the " Oblong," or " Equiva- lent Traet." It will be remembered that the Oblong was not laid off and mommented until 1731. In 1709 twenty-tive citizens of Connectient (mostly residents of Norwalk) obtained from the gov- ernment of that colony the grant of what is known as the Ridge- field Patent, whose western boundary was the New York State line, at that time supposed to be twenty miles from the Hudson. After the measuring off of the Oblong, the Ridgefield patentees, discov- ering that a portion of their property lay in New York State, peti- tioned the New York authorities for a patent for fifty thousand acres within the Oblong bounds, which was duly granted, June S, 1731. These patentees were headed by the Rev. Thomas Hawley, and are described in the document as " inhabitants of ye town of Ridgefield." These Oblong acres subsequently became the eastern portion of the original Town of Salem, whereof the western portion was taken from Cortlandt Manor.
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.