USA > New York > Suffolk County > Bridgehampton > Sketches from local history > Part 19
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
September 4". 1871. he writes: "I am 71 years old and neighbor Charles Howell is 69. We went sailing on Shinnecock Bay. Sailed over to the light house. Went to the top of it. Had a beautiful view of the bay, and beat every sail boat we came in con- tact with. Had a delightful sail and a beautiful day. Never enjoyed myself better. Got home at 9 o'clock."
The items given above I have selected from the
{ 125 }
١
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL, HISTORY
diary referred to in the beginning of this article, and cover a period of almost one-half of the last century. I presume to many they will be of little interest, but I am sure there are others who will appreciate the taking of these facts relating to the local history of this community, and compiling them, with the sole idea that they may be preserved.
A few items from the diary of my Father, Noah H. Halsey : "In the year 1848, a neighbor died, and a good black walnut coffin cost $10.00, bill for cof- fin, plate, box, and shroud was $15.75. About this time is an account of 'beef sold at New London for 6 cents per pound, and sheep for 2 & 1/2 cents per pound'. May 23rd, 1848. the fishing company caught at one draught at North Side 1.000.000 fish by estimation. it took one week to cart them, and they measured 850,000. May 8th, 1850, they caught 465.000 at one draught. April 17th. 1851. bought 8 sheep and 5 lambs of Thomas Cooper. 13 in all, for $10.00, or 77 cents per head. December 25th. 1855, it began to snow, and sleighing lasted until the last of February. March 21st, 1856. one fox and two dogs crossed Noyack Bay from Doctor's Banks to Jessup's Neck, on the ice. No plowing was done this year until the 14th of April, because of the frost in the ground.
"1869, February 16th, caught Two Raccoons: Feb. 20th, one: March Ist, two; March 3rd. seven ; March 8th, four; March 11th, one ; making 17 Rac- coons in less than one month.
"1857, 27 snow storms this winter, had sleighing between two and three months.
"July 2" of this year thermometer stood at 55 degrees.
"1863. March 20" Annie. Louise and William D. were all baptized at home by the Rev. Mr. Bangs.
"1865. On Wednesday, September 20", William D. went to school for the first time."
This was in the old school house in Dis. No. 18. and I am sure that I remember that day. I sat in the front seat on the south side of the aisle, and I think C. W. Dickinson taught school. He had a large slate on which he drew the picture of a pig. with a piece of chalk. I imagine this kept me quiet for a time.
"1866. The thermometer registered on January 8" of this year. 10 degrees below zero, almost all day."
"September 1", sold four loads of wheat to Oliver Wade for $2.70 per bushel."
NOTED LAWSUITS
In almost every community there have arisen im- portant questions and disputes, that at last had to be settled in the courts. In our own community sev- eral such cases are on record, five of which I will mention in this chapter, and include some incidents in connection with the lives and careers of some of the men who took an active part in these trials.
In the chapter on "Mills and Millers" I stated that in the early part of the last century there stood two wind mills on the Triangular Commons in Bridgehampton.
In 1836 or 1837 Judge Abraham T. Rose bought one of these. and a company consisting of Messrs. Hiram Sandford. Nathaniel Topping, David Pier- son and Smith S. Topping bought the other, and moved it to Poxabogue, where they placed it in the highway in front of the property of Paul Topping, a little way south of his house. (See 1850 map).
Topping forbade them to leave it there, but they paid no regard to his protests, and he, having no money to defend his rights, had to submit. Here it stood and was in actual use for about five years, when in 1842, Colonel Hervey Hedges, (the son- in-law of Paul Topping) furnished the necessary money, and Topping began suit against the above named company. This trial is known in our local history as "The Sagg Mill Case or Cause".
This case has been written up by several local historians, and referred to many times. so I do not propose to repeat what these men have already writ- ten. No one of these writers, however, has given the actual facts or account of this trial, and I have often wondered as to why they had not. and because of this fact I wish to give in this article an abridged account of this trial, and name some of the men who took an active part in it. I am quite sure that. except the original copy of the proceedings, it has never been written or published.
In an account of this trial written by Mr. Wil- liam S. Pelletreau, who though usually very correct. in this case was in error. He says the case was "tried before Judge Selah B. Strong". The fact is, Mr. Strong was an attorney in the case, but not the Judge, as I will explain later.
{ 120}
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL HISTORY
Mr. Charles H. Hildreth also wrote an account of this matter, which I think is reliable and authentic. for he lived in that locality at that time and was an eye-witness to the whole affair:
Mr. Hildreth says: "The Poxabogue Cemetery at that time was common land, that is, it belonged to the Town, and that there was a road on three sides of it, and that those on the east and west sides came together at the northwest corner of Mr. Haney's lot, leaving quite a vacant place at the south end of the Grave Yard (see 1850 map), where the Town Trustees granted a Mill Site. If they had placed the Mill there, it might have stood there undisturbed. but they placed it on the highway in front of Paul Topping's property, and quite near the fence."
The case was tried at Riverhead at the Suffolk Circuit of the Supreme Court, before the Hon. Charles H. Ruggles, Circuit Judge. G. Miller was attorney for the Plaintiff. Selah B. Strong and W. P. Buffett attorneys for Defendants.
"The following jurors were impannelled : John Barto, Islip. John Youngs, Riverhead. Peter Dick- erson. Shelter Island. Jeremiah Terry. Riverhead. Mulford Osborn, Brookhaven. Nicoll Youngs. Riv- erhead. Abel Corwin, Jr .. Riverhead. Henry Wil- liams, Huntington. Philetus C. Jarvis, Huntington. Joshua B. Smith, Huntington. Henry K. Townsend. Brookhaven and John W. Woodhull, Riverhead.
"Nicoll Youngs was challenged by Plaintiff's counsel. The first two jurors were sworn as triors. ( In law a trior was a person appointed by the Court to examine whether a challenge to a juror was just ). The Triors decided that he was competent.
"Mr. Miller opened the case for the Plaintiff, and stated that this was an action of ejectment brought to recover a piece of land, being 40 feet in every direction from the center of a certain Wind Mill. standing on the highway in the village of Sagg. in the Town of Southampton. the Plaintiff owning land adjoining the highway, on which the said Mill stood.
"Then follows the evidence proving the Plaintiff's ownership of this adjoining land. Which he does prove.
"The Defendants claimed title in the Trustees of the Proprietors of the common land of the Town. and that they had the power to grant or convey common land, not subject to the adjoining owners. and that from an old Patent.
-
"Judge Ruggles in charging the jury, said in part : There is a general principle, not controverted here. that wherever there is a highway, the public have an easement merely, and the fee belongs to the ad- joining owner. This is on the principle, that this land was originally taken from his land, or his ancestor's.
"It is a rule of convenience also, that the public. when they have done with it, should not own it. The Plaintiff has shown himself the owner of the land adjoining this highway. The presumption of law is, that he runs to the middle. The Defendants, then, must show that there is a title in some other. We find the Defendants there, indeed, but as mere squat- ters, without lease, without permission, without right. The burden of this proof falls on the De- fendant. . They must show title in someone else. First, they have set up a title in the Trustees, and have shown an old Patent. There is no proof that this Patent granted this land, nor, that it has come regularly to them from it. On the contrary, there is proof. that Sagg was then settled and apportioned, and the Patent only confirms these appropriations.
"The Patent then fails them. Next, they have shown certain acts of ownership by the old Trustees. The Court does not think these acts sufficient to show title. They are not acts coupled with posses- sion. and regard to the sale to Captain Halsey. (I omit the next two paragraphs, as they simply cite illustrations).
"The Trustees certainly have done a good many acts about these highways, but how and by what authority they did them, does not exactly appear. The Defendants set up these acts, as evidence of title. The Court does not think them sufficient. They should show something more to make out a iec.
"In 1726, the commissioners found this an old road, and ascertained its width. They called the spot from . Abraham Pierson's north 8 poles wide all the way, except the crook left out by Stanborough. There is nothing, therefore, to prevent the comumnon law principle from applying to this highway.
"Has this been changed or altered by Acts of Legislation? The Court regrets that older Acts have not been produced. The oldest shown here is that of 1813. The first section of this Act authorizes the commissioners to lay ont roads ete, and regulate the manner. But in the 22nd section. it is provided.
{ 127 }
.
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL HISTORY
that all roads that shall have been used as public highways for twenty years or more, next preceding the 21st day of March, 1797, shall be taken and deemed public highways.
"The Court is inclined to think that this road. Sagg Street, comes under the provision of this Sec- tion, and that if discontinued, under this Act of 1813, it would revert to the owners of the adjoining land. The Act of 1830 has altered the provisions of the previous .Act, in regard to this matter, and in conformity with the principles of the common law.
"In the case of laying out a road now, there is no provision for a full value to be paid to the owner of the land, only the damages, and in discontinuing the road, the land would revert to the adjoining owner. It appears that where the Mill stands, the highway is now more than 8 rods wide. The ques- tion arises, to whom does this surplus belong? Is there a strip of land between the highway and Top- ping's land. that does not belong to the highway? There is none. Topping cannot advance his fence. The public have acquired the right to all the land as a highway. And from the acknowledgement of Henry Topping, the ancestor of the Plaintiff, as to the boundary, and from the old cart or carriage track under the Mill, it wouldl evidently appear that the Mill is on the highway. To Recapitulate :
"First, The Plaintiff has shown his title, and ac- cording to that he is entitled to the fee to the middle of the highway.
"Second: The Court is of the opinion that the acts of ownership as exercised by the Trustees, do not make out title, connected with all of the circum- stances of the case; and regards the question as a question of strict right. If the Plaintiff recovers the fee, and the Mill with it, he will have no right to keep her there, for he would be subject to prose- cution for so doing. He will merely be entitled to be put in possession of the land, subject to the pub- lic easement."
""The jury retired, and in about one half an hour. came into the court with a verdict for the Plaintiff. Upon this verdict, a judgment has been entered up, and a writ of possession issued, by which the Plain- tiff has been put into possession of the Mill."
This Mill was afterward torn down. This trial was held September 7th and 8th. 1842.
The result of this case established a precedent in
regard to the ownership and control of highways by adjoining owners, in case of closed or discontinued roads, that is cited to this day in the courts.
(The above is quoted from the published account of this trial compiled by Judge Abraham T. Rose. )
A Juror In The Foregoing Case
One of the jurors in the foregoing case was Peter Dickerson, of Shelter Island. This man was the ancestor of the present family now living there, bearing that name.
He was an industrious and thrifty farmer, a man with a distinct individuality. He never had to de- pend upon some other man to assist him in forming an opinion on any subject. I am confident from what I can learn concerning his character, he must have made an ideal juror in that noted case.
He was a man that never paid strict attention to his personal appearance, nor catered to the varying styles in the fashions of dress. It was said he us- ually used a piece of rope for a belt to hold his coat about him, and he did not hesitate to go away from home in this costume, so to a stranger he would give the impression of being destitute, and a subject of poverty.
He went to New York at one time and visited the stock yards, thinking he might find some bargains at the sales. At that time almost all of the stock had to be driven to the city on foot, and where they. were driven hundreds of miles would sometimes get to market in poor condition, and unfit to kill. In such cases, these herds or flocks were often bought by farmers at reduced prices, to feed until fat enough for the shambles.
On this occasion a flock of sheep was offered. with the privilege of taking one or as many as the buyer wanted. The auctioneer called for bids. Peter stood looking on, and then bid fifty cents per head. The auctioneer looked at him, noted his uncouth ap- pearance, and as a joke. said: "It is yours; how many do you want?" Peter replied : "I will take the whole flock," and proceeded to pull out his roll of bills to pay for them.
"I guess not." said the auctioneer. "You cannot have them at such a price, it was simply a joke." He was about to offer them again, when Dickerson said, "I have bought those sheep, and can pay for them, and what is more I am going to have them. and if you dare to sell even one of them, you will
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL HISTORY
find yourself in trouble, for I will take it into the courts.'
Dickerson got his sheep without delay. Ilis ap- pearance had misled the auctioneer, who thought him a poor man.
Another Juror In The Same Case
Abel Corwin. Jr., was another juror in the same case. He was rather a matter-of-fact kind of man, and not sentimental in the least. Some may have called him cold blooded, and lacking in natural af- fection; but I have never heard but that he was a kind neighbor and a good citizen.
He had a neighbor, who had the misfortune of having sickness enter his family, resulting in the cleath of his wife. Mr. Corwin sympathized with his neighbor, and attended the funeral. This man cried and moaned, and groaned over the loss of his helpmate, and to such an extent, that it disgusted Corwin, and at last after having lost all patience with him he turned to him and said : "What are you making such a devilish fuss about? You are cer- tainly making a d-n fool of yourself. Why. man, you have only lost one wife. I have had four al- ready. No one wants to hear your noise. Go out and get another, and keep still, there are plenty of them, and stop all of this nonsense."
A MUTINY
During that period which covers the most pros- perous days of the whaling industry on eastern Long Island, almost every boy with any ambition left home at an early age and shipped as cabin boy or as common sailor, and these were wanted, for. as an old captain once said: "The best crew that ever sailed on a whale ship out of Sag Harbor, was made up of young men from the Hamptons," and the reason of this was, that they went with a purpose.
The officers of necessity had to be men brought up in the business, with many years of experience. not only as sailors, but especially as whalemen. Sometimes the owners of these ships, would for the sake of economy ship as part of the crew stevedores and sailors from New York City, who took no in- terest whatever in making a prosperous voyage. for they were at home and contented anywhere.
Some of these men were desperate characters. often shipping for a whaling voyage. because it would isolate them, and take and keep them away
from some port where a penalty for crime awaited them. These men had no money saved up with which to buy an outfit for a long voyage, so the owners would advance, and charge to their respec- tive accounts, as a lien on the prospective voyage, such as, clothes, wearing apparel and shoes as they needed.
Then, after getting this outfit, if they could run away it would be clear gain for them. The ship owners were obliged to keep a sharp watch on them, and many times they were taken on shipboard in- toxicated and in a quarrelsome mood, and often were so bad that they were handcuffed and confined below decks, until partially sober. Then they would want to fight the other sailors and make trouble generally.
This made it very unpleasant not only for the rest of the crew, who were decent, but often times more so for the officers.
On one voyage out of Sag Harbor, Captain An- drew Jennings had just such a crew as I have de- scribed, and was obliged to work the ship down bay and out past Montauk, with his officers and a lot of boys, who were going to sea for the first time.
He had these bad fellows shut below, and as they sobered up, he allowed one to come on deck at a time, and after he had been given a sufficient amount of discipline, and he realized that. Jennings was cap- tain, there would be no more trouble from that man. This was continued until the whole company were in subjection.
Captain Jennings was not a man to be run over, and all knew that he was Commander. In the ac- count of this particular voyage Captain Jennings wrote home to the owners, and told them what a hard time he had had with that crew, and said : "If you had raked Tophet and sifted the ashes, you could not have found another such gang." (Cap- tain Jennings lived in Hay Ground, on place mark- ed Luther Halsey on 1850 map).
In the story I am about to relate, I do not propose to give my own personal views or opinion, but rather to present the two sides as told to me by the men of that day, some favoring one side and some the other.
The whaling barque Oscar, was bought in New York, by Huntting Cooper in 1844. and was of 339 tons burden. This vessel sailed on October 31st. 1844, for the Crozettes or South Atlantic, in com- mand of Captain Isaac Ludlow, of Bridgehampton.
{129 }
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL HISTORY
Jeremiah Eldridge of Sag Harbor was first mate. (I have not been able to ascertain the names of the crew, owing to the fact that the records were burn- ed) except Andrew Gilbride, of Sag Harbor, Oscar Brown, of Bridgehampton, and the unfortunate member, Leonard A. Curtis, of New York.
While in the port of Ilha Grande, (just south of Rio Janeiro) the crew was allowed shore liberty. On August 18th. 1845, they returned to the barque. drunk, and in a fighting mood, resenting grievances claimed to have been suffered on the outward bound voyage. Headed by Leonard A. Curtis, who shipped from New York, they mutinied and came aft in a body. Captain Ludlow stood in the com- panion way. Curtis, armed with an axe, ascended the ladder to the poop deck. He was ordered to go back, by Captain Ludlow, but, drunk and desperate, disobeyed the command. The Captain procured a rifle from the cabin, and shot Curtis, killing him in- stantly. The American Consul took charge of the whale ship and sent her home.
The ship arrived in Sag Harbor November 11th, 1845. Captain Ludlow and his, crew, were taken to New York by a United States Marshal, and held for trial, where he was acquitted of the charge of murder. All the possessions of the crew, and prob- ably the ship's papers were taken from the Oscar. and stored in Huntting Cooper's shipping office, and were destroyed by the big fire in Sag Harbor No- vember 13th, 1845.
On this voyage 700 barrels of whale oil, and 5600 lbs. of bone were taken, valued at $9,000. Captain Barney Green took the Oscar out on her next voy- age. Captain Ludlow went one more voyage, in the Arabella, to the Pacific, and made a fairly success- ful voyage. The only man he had with him on this last voyage from this locality was William Foster, of Water Mill, who went as boat-steerer in the Cap- tain's boat.
I have been told that Captain Ludlow was a highi tempered, passionate man, and one that acted almost as if insane when angry, and an arrogant. proud and dictatorial officer, yet very ignorant and a cow- ard at heart. His crew were doubtless a rough and brutal class of men. He unquestionably had a very serious problem to contend with, but I have wonder- ed where his officers were at this time, that they
did not figure in this affair, and assist him in quell- ing this disturbance without carrying it to such a tragic ending.
Captain Charles .\. Pierson claimed that there was at this time a United States Man-of-War lying in the harbor of Ilha Grande, and that Captain Lud- low should have called for help from this ship, if he could not handle these men himself, and let them settle the difficulty, and not have taken it into his own hands as he did, or perhaps, shot to cripple the man and not to kill him.
This was one man's opinion. On the other hand. Captain Benjamin H. Halsey, (who had been com- mander of a whale ship for years, and a man of ex- cellent judgment ), said, in commenting on this case at the time of the trial : "If Captain Ludlow is con- victed in this case, I will never again set my foot on a whale ship." William Foster, who went with Captain Ludlow on his next voyage, heard him tell the story to another captain, and said that Curtis was drunk and desperate, and that he had to shoot to save his own life, and that Curtis said as he ad- vanced. "I have driven one man over the taffrail, and I will drive you over the same way." It was a sad and extremely unfortunate incident for all par- ties concerned, captain, crew and ship owners, for it out the voyage short, and made what promised to be a prosperous and money-making adventure, a fi- nancial failure, for the ship was out of commission for a long time, in fact many months, and the crew were all held for the trial.
The Hon. Abraham T. Rose defended Ludlow at the trial in New York. Some say it was Judge Rose's greatest case, and he proved himself a most competent and able attorney, and if ever a man used his entire strength of mind, soul and body in de- fending the life of another, it was he. Even then he ·
won his case by a very close margin.
It established a bad precedent for Ludlow, for af- ter this affair he had great difficulty in getting men to ship with him. But few men are living today that remember the incident, and they were quite young at that tinte. I will say it is from these men that I learned many of the facts in this case, and confirmed the story as I heard it related by the older men when I was a boy. (For location of homes of both Cap- tain Ludlow and Judge Rose, see map for 1850).
{ 1,30 }
SKETCHES FROM LOCAL HISTORY
"The Fox Case" or "Pierson vs. Post."
At the southerly end of Sagg, on the map for 1800, may be seen the location of the home of Jesse Pierson. It was he that became the noted school teacher for so many years in Sagg. His father was David, and I think, lived in the same homestead.
On the map of the same date, on the southerly side of the Main Road in Bridgehampton, just east of the "Beach Road." may be seen the location of the home of Nathan Post and his son. Lodowick. In the year 1803 Nathan Post died, and the place fell to Lodowick, who in 1817 exchanged this farm with John Pierson for the latter's farm in Poxa- bogue (see 1800 map).
The incident in question, which resulted in the lawsuit. must have taken place before 1803, and while the Posts were living in Bridgehampton. I think the date should be about 1796. In relating this story I am quoting from the account as given by the late Judge Henry P. Hedges.
"Jesse Pierson, son of David, coming from Ama- gansett saw a fox run and hide down 'an unused well near Peter's. Pond, (see same map for Pond ) and killed and took the fox. Lodowick Post and a company with him were in pursuit and chasing the fox, and saw Jesse with it, and claimed it as theirs. while Jesse persisted in his claim.
"Captain Pierson said his son. Jesse, should have the fox and Captain Post said the same of his son, Lodowick, and hence the lawsuit contested and ap- pealed to the highest court in the State, which de- cided that Post had not got possession of the fox. when Pierson killed it and that he had no property in it as against Pierson, until he had reduced it into his own possession.
"This became the leading case often cited, because it established, and I think for the first time, by the court of last resort in the State, that to give an indi- vidual right in wild animals, the claimant must cap- ture them.
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.