History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II, Part 152

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898,
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1286

USA > New York > Westchester County > History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II > Part 152

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).

The "layers out " were chosen from among those peculiarly fitted for the business, and among the per- sons thus selected, the names of Isaac Denham, John Brondig and the justices, Deliverance Brown and Joseph Purdy, most frequently occur. For discharg- ing their duties they received, as their compensation, an additional allotment of land.

There was a tract of land adjoining the lower part of "Will's first purchase," but not included in it, which was held by the proprietors of Peningo Neck. This was the tract between Blind Brook and the Ridge road, south of the road to Park's Mill. The lower portion of this tract was called Brush Ridge and the upper part Branch Ridge. The former was divided about the same time as the first division of Will's Purchase ; the latter in 1713. Samuel Brown, son of Deliverance, bought up a considerable part of the land on both ridges, a few years after the division, and thus procured a farm of one hundred acres, on which he resided.

The title to the lands in the town of Rye was vested in a corporation known as the "Proprietors," an in- stitution not peculiar to the town itself, but known also to many other towns in Connecticut, and also in Massachusetts. Usually the settlers, before starting for their intended location, would enter into a written

654

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

agreement, after which they would send an agent or committee ahead to purchase land from the Indians. The bargaiu having been effected, they would make application to the General Conrt of the colony for confirmation of their title. This request was generally granted, and the company became a corporation of proprietors. The corporation owned the land as tenants in common until it should be divided and assigned for individual occupation. Every member of the company was entitled to a certain share of land for immediate use. He also possessed a right or share in the undivided or common lands, by which he could claim his portion of any part of them that might be distributed at any time. These were called Proprietors' Rights, and were handed down, in most cases, from father to son, as valuable privileges. Sometimes, however, a proprietor would sell his right in the un- divided lands to a new-comer in the settlement, who would thus acquire all the privileges of an original member. More frequently the proprietor would sell a part of his proprietary right, and then the new member would become joint owner with the seller in any lands that might fall to him in future.

The original proprietors in Rye were Peter Dis- brow, John Coe and Thomas Stedwell, with whom were afterwards associated John Budd and William Odell. On the 28th of April, 1663, Disbrow, Coe, Stedwell and Budd conveyed the island, together with the mainland which they had purchased, to a body of seven planters,-Samuel Alling, Richard Vowles, Philip Galpin, Thomas Applebe, William Odell, John Brondig and John Coc.

The four grantors, no doubt, retained their personal interest in the property thus conveyed, so that the new body of proprietors consisted of eleven persons. Another was probably added before long, making twelve, and this, no doubt, was the original number of the company afterwards designated as "The Eighteen Proprietors of Peningo Neck." About 1690 the list of proprietors comprised, it is thought, the following names : Peter Disbrow, John Coe, Thomas Stedwell, George Knithu, John Brondig, William Odell, Richard Vowles, John Ogden, Philip Galpin, Jacob Pierce, George Lane, Isaae Sherwood, John Banks, John Purdy, Thomas Merritt, John Merritt, Thomas Browne and Hachaliah Browne.

The number of proprietors fluctuated, although they were always spoken of in popular parlance as " The Eighteen," but the number of shares remained the same. Parts of shares were often sold. The pro- prietors met for the transaction of business twice every year, and the records of their proceedings are contained in the same books with those of the town- meetings, but entered separately. From time to time at these meetings a new division of the common lands was ordered. Various other matters also engaged the attention of the proprietors. In 1711 they "agree to build a school-house upon their own charge." In 1708 they lay out a traet of land for a sheep pasture. In

1709 they grant to Isaac Denham "liberty to make a woulf-pitt on the pull-pitt plaine, and to fence in half an acre of land about " it. One of the last meetings, of which there is a full account, was held November 23, 1731.

At this meeting a committee was chosen to lay out and distribute the undivided lands remaining, and sell, and appropriate the proceeds of the sale for their trouble. Some small pareels are mentioned as still left. About this time, probably, the affairs of the com- pany were wound up, and it soon ceased to be. There were common lands held and distributed long after this period ; but these belonged to the town, being outside of the proper limits of the first purchase on Peningo Neek.

A last division of Peningo Neck is mentioned in 1751 as having occurred since 1744. Among the lands then distributed was a traet on the Boston road, above the house where Mr. Ezrahiah Wetmore now lives. In this division a pareel of land was laid out "to the Lyons."

TOWN GOVERNMENT-DEPUTIES TO THE GEN- ERAL COURT-BOUNDARY DISPUTE .- The little island settlement of Hastings was never a town, in the striet sense of the word, though honored with that title in the records of the General Court of Connecticut. It was not enumerated among the plantations of the colony, nor had it any deputy in the court. In Octo- ber, 1663, " Ln& John Bud" was appointed commission- er for the town of Hastings, and invested with " Mag- istraticall power " within the limits of the town. At the same time Richard Vowles was appointed towu constable. Rye is mentioned for the first time in the records of the General Court October 13, 1664, when the court ordered that Lientenant Budd continue in his place of commissioner for Hastings and Rye. At the following spring session "Peter Disborough " was ad- mitted to a seat as the representative of Rye, which was henceforth recognized as one of the plantations of the colony. October 12, 1665, Richard Vowles ap- peared as deputy, and Rye for the first time has a place in the "List of Persons and Estates." The town brand for horses, as fixed by the court, was the capital letter R. May 10, 1666, Lieutenant Budd was the deputy. Rye was now included within county limits. "From the East bounds of Stratford," the court ordered, "to ye west bounds of Rye, shal be for future one County, web shal be called the County of fairfield. And it is ordered that the County Court shal be held at Fairfield on the second Tuesday in March and the first Tuesday in November yearly."

May 9, 1667, the court confirmed Joseph Horton as "Lieutenant to the trayn band of Rye." " Mr. Richard Lawes (Law) and Mr. John Holly are chosen Com- missioners for the Townes of Standford, Greenwich & Rye, and to assist in the Execution of Justice at the courts at Fayerfield for the yeare ensuing."

October 8, 1668, Rye sent two deputies to Hartford, John Budd and Riehard Vowles. The latter was again

655

RYE.

chosen deputy in 1669. May 12, 1670, John Banks and " Peter Disbroe " appear for Rye, and at the Oe- tober session Timothy Knap was deputy. In May, 1671, Banks and Disbrow again represented Rye. At this session the court decided that the bounds of Rye should " extend up into the country northiward twelve miles." May 9, 1672, the court,-

"desires and appoynts Lnt Olmsteed, Mr. John Holly, Jonathan Lock- wood and Lat Joseph Orton, a committee to measure on an east north- east lyne from Mamorenack River to the west bownds of Fayerfeild, and to make report to this Court in October next, the distance twixt the sayd places aud the quantitie of miles belonging to each of those plantations. This to be dou at the charge of the townes of Norwalke, Standford, Greenwich & Rye.'"

A similar committee was appointed in 1673,-

"to consider of those lands between Stratford and Momoreanoke River that are not allready granted by order of the Court to any plantation ; and to proportion them to the seuerall plantations between Stratford and Mom- oranoke River, as they judge may be nost equal and accommadating to the plantations as now they are setled."

In the same year the General Court confirmed the report of a committee appointed to settle the bounds and dividing lines of the several towns in Fairfield County. "The bownds between Greenwich and Rye," according to this act, " is to be from the mouth of Byram River, to runn up the River one quarter of a mile above the great stone lyeing in the cross path by the S" Riuer ; and from thence the sayd comons, upwards, between Standford bownds and the Colony line, is to be equally diuided between them by a par- alell line wth Standford and Norwalke, to the end of their bownds up in the countrey."

October 12, 1676, the court appointed a committee to put a value upon all the lands in the several plan- tations, determining the rate of their valuation in the list of estates. Lauds at Rye were to be estimated " as Stonington," -- that is " for one fowerth of their im- proved land by tillage, moweing and English pasture to be listed twenty shillings p. acre ; the other three . partes at ten shillings pr. acre ; and all other lands perticulerly impropriated by fence at one shilling per acre."

May 9, 1678, Lieutenant Joseph Horton, of Rye, was " commissioned to grant warrants and to marry persons." This commission was repeated in 1679 and 1680, and in 1681 Lieutenant Horton was made com- missoner, or justice of the peace, for the town.

At the October session of the General Court in 1681, Peter Disbrow was deputy again from Rye, and was remitted his county rate for the year ensuing, on ac- count of the "great losse " that had befallen him by fire.

May, 1682, John Ogden, of Rye, presented himself before the General Conrt and, ou behalf of the peo- ple, complained that suudry persons, and particularly Frederick Philipse, had been making improvements of lands within their bounds. Mr. Philipse had been building mills near Hudson River, encroaching there- by upon the town's territory, which was believed to extend in a northwesterly direction from the mouth of Mamaroneck River to the Hudson, and even be-

yond. The General Court gave Mr. Ogden a letter to the Governor of New York protesting against such proceedings, and reminding him that by the agree- ment made in 1664, a line running northwest from the mouth of Mamaroneck River to the Massachu- setts line was to be the dividiug line between Con- necticut and New York.

Timothy Knap was deputy in October, 1683, at the last meeting of the General Court of Hartford at which deputies from Rye were present until the revolt of the town to Connecticut, some years later. In the following month, November 28, 1683, Rye was ceded to the province of New York, according to the articles of agreement then concluded for the establishment of the boundary line. Rye remained unwillingly under the rule of New York for several years, until, smarting under certain grievances, the inhabitants " revolted " back to Connecticut. They were strongly attached to the colony, and it would seem that even while submitting outwardly to the new government, they made overtures to their former friends, asking to be received back. Thus, as early as 1686, we find them applying for a patent, doubtless in view of an order which the General Court had issued the year before to all the towus within its jurisdiction, relative to the securing of charters for their lands. Novem- ber 23d, "the town empowered Benjamin Colyer and John Brondige to treat with the governor for a general patent for the township of Rye." The pro- prietors of Peningo Neek at the same time authorized these persons to obtain a particular patent in their behalf for the said Neck. The court, it ap- pears, however well inclined, did not see fit just then to grant either of those applications. Again, in 1692, at the October session of the General Court, " Mr. Un- derhill, of Rye, and Zachary Roberts of Bedford," were in attendance and the court granted them an al- lowance for their expenses. Finally, at a meeting of the Governor and Council, January 19, 1697, Thomas Merritt and Deliverance Brown appeared in behalf of " the town of Rie," with the request that the planta- tion might be owned as included within the colony and that a charter be granted to them for their lands. The petition was granted and a patent for the town was ordered to be prepared forthwith. In this patent the boundaries of the township were described in the following language :

" Bounded westward eight miles upon the Dividing Line between the Province of Newyork and the Colonie of Connectientt according as it was settled by his Maiesties Commissioners as appears by their act or Report thereupon. And Eastward on a line be- ginning at the mouth of Byram River and Running up the said River one quarter of a mile above the Great Stone lying in the path by the said River and from thence Coutinued by a parralel line eight miles into the Countrey and bounded southward upou the sea and northward upon the Wildernesse."

This tract was bargained, granted, enfeoffed and

656

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

confirmed by Robert Treat, the Governor of the col- ony, " to Joseph Theale, Thomas Merritt, Deliverance Brown, John Horton, Joseph Horton, Francis Pur- die, Hechaliah Brown, Timothie Knap, George Lane and John Merritt, their heirs, assignes and their As- sociates forever," who were to hold it as of " his Majesties mannor of East Greenwich [in Kent] to have and to hold in free and Comon Soccage, And not in Capite nor by Knight Service. Excepting and reserving for his Majestie, his heirs and sue- cessors, the fift part of all the Oar of Gold and Silver which shall be found therein from time to time." At the meeting of the General Court, May 13, 1697, "Mr. Vmpbrie Vnderhill" and Deliverance Brown took their seats as deputies .. The court "did by their vote declare their approbation of the act of the Coun- cill, January the 19th, 1696 [1697] in undertaking the protection of the townes of Rie and Bedford as members of this corporation, and appointed John Horton Lieut. for the town of Rye, and John Lyon to be their Ensign."

At the next spring session, May 12, 1698, Mr. Jo- seph Horton was the representative from Rye. Cap- tain Humphrey Underhill was sent to the court in October of the same year. Deliverance Brown, of Rye, was appointed one of the justices of the county of Fairfield; and in October. 1699, the deputies of this town appeared for the last time. They were "M" Tho' Merritt " and "Lieu' Jnº Horton." The follow- ing year, the King having decided the boundary con- troversy adversely to the elaims of Connecticut, the court gave order, October, 1700, that "a signification thereof be sent to the inhabitants of Rye and Bedford, signed by the secretary, that they are freed from duty to this governm' and that they are under the gov- ernin' of Newyorke." 1

October, 1664 Int John Budd. October, 1665. Richard Vowles. October, 1666. Lt. Bud.

May, 1667. Mr. JJnº Bud.

October, 1668. Mr. John Budd. Richard Vowles.

May, 1669. Richard Fowels.

May, 1670. Mr. John Banks. Peter Disbroe.

October, 1670. Timothy Knap.

May, 1671. Mr. John Banckes. Peter Disbroe.

Mny, 1672. Mr. John Bankes. Mr. Jos. Orton.

May, 1673. l'eter Disbroe. October, 1671. MIr. John Ogden. May, 1675, Mr. John Bankes.

„Inly, 1675. Mr. John Bankes,

Mny, 1676. Peter Disbroe.

October, 1676. Timothy Knap. May, 1677. John Brundige.

October, 1677. Mr. John Bankes.

May, 1678. Mr. John Bancks. October, 1678, Timothy Knap. October, 1679. Peter Disbrongh.

May, 1680. Mr. John Bankes.

May, 1681. John Braindige. October, 1681. Peter Disbroe.

October, 1682. Timothy Napp.

October. 1653. Timothy Kmp.

May, 1697. Mr. Vmphrie Vn- derhill.

Mr. Deliveranc. Brown.

June, 1672. Mr. John Bancks. October, 1672. Mr. John Bankes.

May, 1698. MIr. Joseph Horton, October, 1698. Capte Vmpbrie Vi- derhill.

October, 1699. Mr. Thos Merrit.

Lient Jno Horton.

Meanwhile the authorities of New York had vainly endeavored to induce the people of Rye to accept the arrangement which had transferred them from the

mother colony of Connecticut. In 1685 Governor Dongan issued a proclamation requiring the people of Rye and Bedford to appear before him and prove their title to the lands upon which they were seated. This simmons, it appears, was not obeyed. The conse- quenee was that Rye was despoiled of that portion of its territory afterwards known as Harrison's Purchase, and which was one of the earliest acquisitions of the settlers of Rye. The traet was situated above West- chester Path, between Blind Brook and Mamaroneck River, and extended as far north as Rye Pond. It was in consequence of the failure of the people of Rye to secure the revocation of the grant to Harrison that they " revolted " back to Connectieut. The town, in fact, seeeded, renouneing the authority of the provincial government and returning to Connectient. For four years Rye was a part of the latter colony. From 1697 to 1700, inclusive, the inhabitants designated themselves as living in Rye, " in the county of Fair- field in the colony of Connecticut." They applied to the General Court at Hartford for the settlement of any matters in dispute and the court seems to have considered and disposed of sneh applications pre- cisely as in the case of any town east of Byram River. In 1700, however, the King's order in Conneil placed them back within the jurisdiction they had renonneed, " forever thereafter to be and remain under the gov- ernment of the Province of New York." The people acquiesced in this decision, but at a meeting held on the 29th of September, 1701, Deliverance Brown, Sr., was chosen to go to New York to make the town's grievances known to the Governor and Council. At another meeting in February, 1702-3, the town, "by a major vote," chose Captain Theale, George Lane, Sr., and Isaac Denham " to forewarne any person or persons that shall lay out any Lands within the towne bounds without the towne's approbation or order ; that is to say, within the township of Rye."

For a period of seventy years and more the town was harassed by the famons boundary dispute between the colonies of New York and Connecticut. In 1731 the line was at length virtually fixed where it is now considered to be. Strictly speaking, however, the question is an open one even yet. After a lapse of two hundred years the boundary between New York and Connecticut remains unsettled. By the erratic course of the line five towns and part of a sixth, which would otherwise fall within the territory of New York, are ent off and inclosed within the limits of Connecticut. Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, New Canaan, Noiwalk and a part of Wilton are thus secured to Connecticut, while Rye just falls short of being included.

The differences as to the boundary question began with the Dutch and continued under the English domination. The western boundary of Connecticut, as agreed upon by representatives of the two colonies on the 28th of October, 1664, was the Mamaroneck River and a line drawn from the eastern side, "where

1 Following is a list of the deputies from Rye to the General Court 1664-1700.

657

RYE.

ye fresh water fall into ye Salt " at high-water mark, north-northwest to the line of Massachusetts. The line thus determined would have intersected the Hudson at West Point, and cut off a large tract of land on the other side of the river before reaching the linė of Massachusetts, which, at that time, it was claimed, ran across the continent to the sea. A sur- vey made in 1680 showed the people of Rye the ex- tent of the country which, under this compact, might be claimed by Connecticut. As the remotest settle- ment of the latter colony, the territory of Rye would, of course, reach to the extreme western boundary, wherever that might be fixed. It appears that the people of Rye attempted to enforce this claim. Some of them-who they were we do not know-undertook about this time to occupy and settle the land's along the Hudson which fell within the line traced from the mouth of Mamaroneck River. Meeting with opposi- tion in this attempt, they complained to the Legisla- ture of Connecticut, who gravely presented the mat- ter to the Governor of New York as a grievance that called for redress. Nothing came of this protest, and in November, 1683, the articles were concluded be- tween Governor Dongan and Council of New York and the Governor and delegates of Connecticut, by which the dividing line was placed very nearly where it has remained ever since. It was agreed on both sides that the line should run as originally intended- about twenty miles east of the Hudson River. But it became evident that to follow this measurement rigidly would be to inflict a serious injury upon Con- necticut. Under the terms of her charter she had long before planted several towns beyond the limits thus defined. It was, therefore, conceded that these five towns should remain a part of Connecticut, the boundary being so traced as to exclude them from the province of New York, though by so doing it must be made to approach considerably nearer to the Hudson than the distance agreed upon for its general course. Indeed, the nearest of these towns-Greenwich-is actually within eight miles of the Hudson at its northwestern corner. As an offset, however, to the tract thus surrendered, New York was to gain an " equivalent tract " from Connecticut. A strip of land along the boundary, north of the excepted towns, was to be measured off, just wide enough to embrace as many acres-sixty-one thousand four hundred and forty-as they contained, and this tract, lying beyond the required distance of twenty miles, was to belong to New York. It measured two miles in width and over fifty miles in length, and was afterwards known, very appropriately, as " The Oblong." In pursuance of the agreement, the boundary was to begin at the mouth of Byram River, a small stream dividing the towns of Rye and Greenwich, at a point about thirty miles from the city of New York. This river was to be followed as far as the head of tide-water, or about a mile and a half from the Sound, to a certain " Wading-place," where the common road crossed the

stream. Here a rock, known as " the Great Stone at the Wading-place," was to be a boundary mark. From this point the line was to run north-northwest till it should reach a point eight miles from the Sound. A line twelve miles in length was then to be measured, running eastward parallel to the general course of the Sound. From its termination another line of eight miles was to be traced, again running north-northwest. Thence, and for the remainder of its course, the boundary was to run parallel to the Hudson River, in a northerly direction to the Mas- sachusetts line, at a distance of twenty miles, besides the equivalent tract. This determination of the nữat- ter was highly displeasing to the town of Rye, which found itself cut off from the mother colony of Con- necticut, to which it was so heartily attached. The Governor of Connecticut and his associates antici- pated the dissatisfaction which followed their action in Rye, and addressed a letter to the selectmen, ex- pressing their regret at having been compelled by

THIE GREAT STONE AT THE WADING-PLACE.

stress of circumstances to cede the town to New York. On the 8th of May, in the following year, the Legis- lature of Connecticut formally ratified the agreement, and appointed a surveyor and others to attend to the laying out of the line. This duty was performed in the following October. Governor Dongan's procla- mation, issued on the 4th of June, 1685, empowered the high sheriff of Westchester County to warn all the inhabitants of Rye and Bedford to appear before the Governor and Council on the 2d or 3d of October next ensuing to show what right and title they had to their possessions. The summons was not obeyed, and the towns of Rye and Bedford boldly declared the arrange- ment to be null and void, and asserted their inde- pendence of New York and allegiance to Connecticut. For ten years disaffection smouldered, the authority of the province was ignored, taxes were paid but irregu- larly to either government; and whenever possible, matters in controversy were carried up to Hartford, and Hartford magistrates came down to perform their functions at Rye. These were troublous times in the

658

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

town. Feuds and dissensions among themselves added to the perplexity of the inhabitants. Some of them, it would appear, sided with the province in the controversy, and hence, doubtless, some of the actions for defamation and other proofs of disturbance which we find on record about this time. At length the grant in 1695 to John Harrison of lands belonging to Rye caused the people to break out into open revolt. On the 19th of January, 1697, Rye and Bedford ap- plied to the General Court of Connecticut to be taken under its care, and were received. On the 8th of April, 1697, Benjamin Collier, high sheriff of Westehester County, undertook to hold an election for members of the General Assembly of New York in Rye. Only sixteen or seventeen men, however, made their ap- pearance at the place of election, and when the clerk had finished reading the writ of election, " np comes Major Selliek, of Standford," says the sheriff, " with about fifty Dragones, whom he ealled his life-guard, with their arms presented, and demanded my busi- ness." Thereupon the sheriff had the King's writ read again for the benefit of Major Sellick, who " fell into hard words, and said he eame there to protect the In- habitants of Rye under their government of Con- nectient." " The whieh," adds the sheriff, " I denied, and said was within my Bailiwiek. But, after much banter, he invited us into a house and withdrew him- self from his Company, and did aeknowledge his Ex- cellency to be their Captain General, and so I left him."

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.

History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. II, Part 152

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898, Publication date: 1886 Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co. Number of Pages: 1286

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898,
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1286