USA > Pennsylvania > Bradford County > History of Bradford County, Pennsylvania, with Illustrations and biographical sketches > Part 8
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132
The Pennsylvania government, now holding a title for the coveted Wyoming, at once adopted vigorous measures to effcet a settlement under the patronage of the Proprie- taries, for whom two large manors were surveyed, and lots of one hundred acres each were leased to Charles Stewart, Amos Ogden, and others, friends to the Proprietaries, at a nominal rental, on condition that they hold possession of the country. Within a short time, warrants were issued and surveys were made of the most valuable lands in the purchase, which were assigned to the friends of the gov- ernment, to be held by themselves or leased to their faithful allics.
In the meanwhile the Susquehanna company were not idle. Learning that the Indians had finally released all claims to the Susquehanna lands, a meeting of the company was held at Hartford, Dee. 28, 1768, at which the former grants were reseinded, and five townships, each five miles square, were offered as a gratuity to the first two hundred and forty settlers, they being proprietors, or their agents ; to the first forty should be given the choice of these town- ships. The others should be divided into fifty-three equal parts, of which fifty should be allotted to the settlers, and the remaining three reserved for the support of the gospel ministry and of schools in each of said townships,-" the aforesaid townships to be held by the said forty and the said two hundred, on consideration of their entering upon and taking possession according to the above vote, and also of their continuing thereon, holding and improving the same, by themselves, heirs, or assigns, under said company, for the space of five years after their entry as aforesaid."
As the movements of the Susquehanna company from 5
this time begin to be conspicuous in the settlement and history of northern Pennsylvania, a brief account of its rules and policy, with regard to its settlers and settlements, as developed by the resolves of its meetings, may be of in- terest.
It was contemplated to divide the whole purchase into townships containing sixteen thousand acres each, to be as nearly square as the nature of the country would admit. Each township to be divided into fifty-three parts or lots of three hundred acres each, of equal quality. Fifty of these lots were appropriated to the settlers, one to the use of schools, one to the church, and one to the first gospel minis- ter who should settle in the township. At first all grants of townships, transfers of land, and certificates of rights were done at the mectings of the company ; but the busi- ness becoming extensive, at the meeting held at Norwich, Conn., April 1, 1772, a standing committee was "em- powered to order and direct where new townships shall be laid, five miles square, divided into fifty-three rights or shares, three of which shall be for publie use, when they shall be applied to by twenty proprietors, by themselves or agents, for lands to settle on as part of their proprietors' rights. Provided, always, that there shall be twenty settlers settled within each of said townships within two years from the time of laying out the same, in order that the said pro- prietors of the said township shall hold the same."
At another meeting of the company, held in Windham, March 9, 1774, the time in which the twenty settlers must be located in the township was extended to three years after the grant was made, " on aeeount of troubles now ex- isting in the purchase." The year before it was ordered that cach whole share proprietor should have liberty to take up two fifty-third parts of a township, and each half share proprietor one At a meeting of the company, held in Athens, Pa., Feb. 20, 1795, in order to still further in- terest settlers and supporters of the company in its des- perate conflict with the Pennsylvania authorities, each township was divided into sixteen equal parts of one thou- sand acres each, of which each whole share proprietor could take two, and each half share proprietor one.
A proprietor was allowed to locate a right and make a settlement on any of the unoceupied and ungranted land of the purchase. Such locations were called Pitches, and on the survey and allotment of the township in which they were situated were to be assigned as part of the occupant's right or share.
In accordance with the several votes of the company five kinds of rights were recognized :
(1) When the company was organized any freeman could become a member of it by paying the sum of two dollars. Such flattering reports of the purchase were brought baek that multitudes sought to be admitted to the company, who permitted a limited number to be incorporated by the pay- ment of sums which varied from two to fifteen dollars. The rights thus acquired were called proprietors' or "original rights."
(2) In order to promote the settlement of their lands several townships were offered as a gratuity to a certain number of proprietors, who by theniselves or their agents should go upon the ground and hold their possessions for a
34
HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
certain number of years. These were called " settling rights."
(3) Many of the Connecticut settlers suffered losses in various ways in their conflict with the Pennsylvania au- thorities in supporting the claims of the company. These losses were usually compensated by additional grants of land, which were known as " suffering rights."
(4) Many proprietors, who did not become actual set- tlers, received certificates for their rights. Also, for pur- poses of revenue, rights were sometimes ordered to be sold to the highest bidder. These certificates often floated about as a species of enrreney or as sources of speculation, under the name of " certificate rights."
(5) At a meeting of the company, held at Hartford, July 13, 1785, it was " voted that every able-bodied and effective man, approved by any one of the company's com- mittee, not being a proprietor, and that will repair to Wyoming, submit himself to the orders of this company or their committee at that place, shall become a 'half-share' man proprietor in said company, entitled to all the benefits of any proprietor thereof that has paid his full taxes to this time, provided he remains in said country for the space 01 three years, and do not depart therefrom without the per- mission of such committee ; also provided that such half- share proprietors do not exceed four hundred, and provided they arrive by the first day of October next." To such as complied with these conditions certificates were issued, which were known as " half-share rights."
At first, the company made no provision for civil govern- ment among its settlers. They lived without courts and without constables. A few simple rules were adopted by conventions of the settlers, which, without the forms, were observed as the laws of the settlements. This pure form of democracy continued for more than five years, the com- pany expecting, either that they would be incorporated as a town by the assembly of Connecticut, or constituted into a separate government by royal charter.
At a meeting held at Hartford, June 2, 1773, after re- counting in brief their history and claim, professing loyalty to the king, and obedience to law, they direct that three directors shall be chosen in cach township, " who shall be able and judicions men, to take upon them, under the gen- eral directions of this company, the direction of the settle- ment of each such town, and the well-ordering and govern- ing of the same, to suppress vice of every kind, preserve the peace of God and the king therein, to whom each inhabitant shall pay such and the same submission as is paid to the civil authority in the several towns of this colony." Elec- tions were to be held each year for choosing directors and a constable or peace-officer. Appeals from the decision of the directors of a township could be taken to quarterly meetings of all the directors. This simple system of juris- prudence adopted by the company continued in force until the incorporation of the town of Westmoreland, when the laws of Connecticut were put in full force by officers legally chosen. Among the directors first appointed were Obadiah Gore, Jr., for Wilkesbarre, Gideon Baldwin for Providence, Captain Obadiah Gore and Parshall Terry for Kingston. These, except Captain Gore, were subsequently residents of Bradford County.
With this brief account of the polity of the Susquehanna company, given to enable the reader to understand terms and allusions which will frequently occur in the succeeding pages of this chapter, we will now return to the movements of both parties to obtain and secure possession of the Wyoming valley.
In February, 1769, the first forty, sent out in pursuance of the Susquehanna company's vote of the previous De- cember, arrived at Wyoming, where they found the Penn- sylvania party, under Stewart and Ogden, in possession of their houses on Mill creek.
Of the captures, reprisals, breaches of faith, and blood- shed, known as the first Pennamite war, whose theatre was Wyoming, it is not proposed to speak. So far as any of our people were connected with them will be mentioned in the personal sketches, which will be given in the township annals.
The years of 1772, '73, and '74 were a period of peace and prosperity for Wyoming, and emigrants poured in rapidly upon the new settlements, which extended through the valley, up the Lackawanna, and up the Susquehanna as far as Tunkhannock. As new settlers continued to ar- rive, their attention was directed to the fertile valleys and Indian clearings in this county, and grants for new town- ships were applied for. Accordingly, Samuel Gordon, who had recently been commissioned surveyor by the Con- necticut assembly, surveyed for David Smith the township of Standing Stone, in the early part of 1774, and for James Wells and others what they called the " Long Township," extending south from Standing Stone thirty miles down the river. From some reason, probably for want of the requi- site number of settlers, the grant of the former township was never perfected, and, although the oldest of the Sus- quehanna company's townships in this county, was excluded from the privileges of the compromises. The Long town- ship survey, not being according to the company's rules, was given up, and Springfield and Braintrim substituted for it.
Immediately after their Indian purchase, the Susque- hanna company, having obtained the approval and indorse- ment of the Connecticut assembly, sent an agent to England to procure a royal charter for their grant. War with France, the opposition of the Penns, and other causes, deferred a hear- ing of their claim. The Connecticut government, however, intimated its willingness to protect the settlements, in a reso- lution passed October, 1773, asserting its purpose to support its claim to all lands within its charter limits west of New York. In 1774, they
" Resolved, That a petition in the name and on the behalf of this colony be prepared, as speedily as may be, to his Majesty, praying that a commission be appointed to settle and affix the boundaries between those lands contained within the limits of our eharter, lying west of the Delaware river, and the proprietaries of Pennsylvania."
But the troubles that led to the Revolution, by which the colonies were forever separated from the jurisdiction of Great Britain, arising about this time, the commission was never appointed. The same year (1774) Connecticut formally assumed jurisdiction over the disputed territory, by organizing the town of Westmoreland and attaching it to the_ county of Litchfield. The county of Westmoreland was constituted October, 1776, by an act of the Conneeti-
35
HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
cut legislature, in which it was provided that it should " have and exercise the same powers, privileges, and au- thorities, and be subject to the same regulations as the other counties in this State by law have and are entitled to." Henceforward members were regularly sent from West- moreland to the Connecticut assembly. Soldiers enlisted there for the Revolutionary war were credited to the Con- necticut line, and the jurisdiction and laws of that State were in as full force over the Wyoming settlements as over any part of the State.
In accordance with a resolution of Congress, passed in 1775, both parties refrained from further violent measures until the question of jurisdiction should be adjudicated by a competent tribunal.
In November, 1779, the assembly of Pennsylvania passed an act assuming to itself the jurisdiction over the entire territory granted to William Penn. By this act the com- monwealth became a party to the controversy, which by these several acts became clearly a question of jurisdiction between the States of Connecticut and Pennsylvania.
Article IX. of the articles of confederation provided for the appointment of special commissions to determine all disputes and differences arising between two or more States concerning boundary or jurisdiction ; also all contro- versies concerning the private right of soil claimed under different grants of two or more States. The supreme executive council petitioned congress, November 3, 1781, stating the matter in dispute between the two States, and praying for a court to be constituted, according to the pro- visions of Article IX., to hear and issue the case. On the 12th of August, 1782, it was announced that commissioners had been mutually agreed upon by the delegates of the re- spective States. Each party having been duly notified, the court commenced its session at Trenton, November 12, 1782.
The agents of Pennsylvania having defined the bounds of their claim by the terms of their charter, presented the following points as embracing the grounds upon which that claim was based :
1. That North America being discovered by Cabot, in the years 1594 and 1596, the crown of England assumed the right of granting the property and jurisdiction thereof to its subjects by letters-patent.
2. That in the year 1664 the crown granted all the land between the west side of the Connecticut river and the east side of Delaware bay to the Duke of York, and shortly after promised to Sir William Penn, in reward for his services, a large tract of land westward of the duke's patent; but Sir William dying, the grant was made to his son in consideration of his father's services and in consideration of debts due from the crown to Sir William's estate.
3. That by letters patent dated March 4, 1681, this grant was made to extend north ward unto the 43d degree of northern latitude.
4. That this grant was long depending before the council, consid- ered with more attention and caution than usual, and, after hearing all objections that could be made to it, passed, and was immediately published with an account of the province of William Peno, the pro- prietor.
5. That to prevent any claim which might be made by the Duke of York, Mr. Penn obtained a release from that nobleman.
6. That upon the faith of this grant, great numbers came over to Pennsylvania, extended the settlements already begun, and together with the proprietor exercised jurisdiction over all the lands within the bounds of their patent, until the Revolution in 1776.
7. That not content with the title which the patent gave him to the soil (which could be no more than the right of pre-emption), the then proprietor and his successors purchased the land from the natives for valuable considerations, and in this legal and equitable mauner ob-
tained a just and complete title to all the lands within the bounds of the province.
8. That in 1736 (being 72 years after the charter of Connecticut was granted, during which time there was not a pretense to a claim to any lands within the limits of the Pennsylvania charter) the In- dians sold the right of pro-emption to the proprictors, and covenanted to sell the lands to none but them, their heirs and assigns.
9. That in 1754 a second deed of the same kind was made, and the former deed recognized.
10. That actual settlements were made northward of the 41st de- gree of latitude by the subjects of Pennsylvania, long before any elaim or settlement of those lands were made by Connecticut.
11. That by an act of Assembly of Pennsylvania passed on the 27th day of Noverober, 1779, the estate of the Proprietaries vested in the com nonwealth of Pennsylvania.
In presenting their case, the agents on the part of Con- necticut, after stating that the limits of their claim were the bounds of their charter, referred the court to the fol- lowing line of facts :
1. That as both parties derive jurisdiction frem the same source (the crown of England), Connecticut affirms alse the first point offered by Pennsylvania.
2. That Connecticut holds the territory elaimed by her under an unbroken line of conveyances from the Great Council of Plymouth, to whom the grant was made by the crown by letters-patent dated Nov. 3, 1620.
3. That the conveyance to Connecticut was purchased at a large price, and confirmed by letters-patent bearing date April 23, 1662 (more than nineteen years previous to the grant made to William Penn).
4. That having granted away the jurisdiction of this territory, the crown could not arbitrarily resume it at pleasure.
5. That the Duteb possessions were excepted out of the grant to Connecticut by the proviso inserted in all the ancient eharters.
6. That the Duke of York was the legal successor of the Dutch to the territory so excepted.
7. That the agreement to the partition line between the province of the Duke of York and the colony of Connecticut did not, and was not intended to, deprive Connceticut of her claim to lands west of the Delaware and within her charter boundaries, but to limit the duke's claim eastward.
8. That a number of people, inhabitants of the then colony of Con- necticut, in accordance with the law then existing in that colony, and with the approval of their governor and assembly, did in open treaty, for valuable considerations, purchase a large tract of land west of the Delaware, of the natives, at Albany, in 1754.
9. That this purchase was made with the full knowledge of the commissioners of Pennsylvania (one of whom was the governer and one of the proprietors), they not making any open objection thereto.
10. That in 1763 the natives executed another deed to eertain in- habitants of Connecticut and others, acknowledging and confirming the grant made in 1754, and giving possession of the land.
11. That these deeds were executed some years previous to any pretended purchase by Pennsylvania from the natives of the same land.
12. That Connecticut had made possessions upon the lands in dis- pute as early as 1762, and is now in possession of them.
The proofs having been offered, and the various points argued, the court, after passing a resolution to give no rea. sons for their decision, and that the minority should agree to make the judgment unanimous, published, Dec. 30, 1782, the following decision : " We are unanimously of opinion that Connecticut has no right to the lands in controversy. We are unanimously of opinion that the jurisdiction and pre-emption of all territory lying within the charter of Penn- sylvania, and now claimed by the State of Connecticut, do of right belong to the State of Pennsylvania."
To this decision of the simple question of jurisdiction between the two States, the only question before the court,
36
HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
all parties professed a ready acquiescence. Connecticut immediately ceased from, and Pennsylvania assumed, control of this grand domain, while the settlers declared their entire willingness to yield obedience to all constitutional laws enacted by the commonwealth, and united in a petition to the legislature for the enactment of a law to quiet them in their possessions, and establish civil government over them.
There were other questions, however, which were still un- decided. It will be remembered that the Proprietary govern- ment made grants of the most valuable tracts of land along the Susquehanna, immediately after the Indian purchase of 1768, while these same lands had been appropriated by the Susquehanna company among its proprietors. The act of 1779, vesting the charter rights of the heirs and devisees of William Penn in the commonwealth, confirmed the grants made by the Proprietaries, or their agents, prior to July 4, 1776, and placed the disposal of the remainder of the lands, except what had been taken by the Proprietaries as their individual property, within the charter limits of the State, into the hands of the legislature. Between the rival claim- ants-those holding under title derived from Pennsylvania and those holding under the Susquehanna company, com- monly called Connecticut titles- was waged a long and bitter contest.
Of all possessions that of real estate is deemed the most sacred, the transfers of it attended with the most rigid for- malities, and claim to it enforced with the most unyielding pertinacity by the great masses of men. This was as true in the earlier history of the country as at the present. It is not, therefore, surprising that the question of the owner- ship of so large and valuable a section of the commonwealth should have been pursued with a vigorous and uneompro- mising spirit to the very last.
The Pennsylvania legislature, on the recommendation of the Trenton court, and on the petition of the Wyoming settlers, sent a commission to make inquiries into the state of affairs, hold elections for justiees of the peace, and do other acts necessary for the establishment of civil govern- ment over the disputed territory. The acts of this com- mission, though unauthorized by the law under which they were appointed, were subsequently approved by the legisla- ture. To this commission both the Connecticut settlers and those holding Pennsylvania titles appealed, and were in- formed that considerations of publie policy would require the State to protect the claims of those who held lands under titles derived from her authority. The justices, who were Pennsylvania land-holders, proceeded to reinstate their friends, and to treat the Connecticut settlers as a band of lawless intruders.
The settlers resisted this summary method of disposing of their claim. They declared that the Trenton court did not decide the question of the right of soil, which was dis- tinet from the question of jurisdiction; that they had acquired a good title to the lands of which they were in possession, under the laws of Connecticut, which, for a number of years, had exercised unopposed jurisdiction over the territory ; that heretofore when new boundary lines had changed the jurisdiction of a territory, as between New York and Connecticut, or between Pennsylvania and Mary- land and Virginia, land in possession under the grant of one
State was confirmed to the possessor by the State under whose jurisdiction the disputed territory was decided to belong.
The Pennsylvania party urged that the same land had been lawfully acquired by them; that they were also in possession; that the decree of Trenton did not change the jurisdiction from Connecticut to Pennsylvania, but affirmed that the jurisdiction and right of pre-emption had always belonged to the latter, and, therefore, that all Connecticut grants were without right, and void.
But these questions were altogether too nice for Justice Patterson to spend much time in discussing. He was a Pennsylvania justice and a Pennsylvania land-holder. He must be protected, and the Yankees driven out at all hazards. Finding that arrests and threats could not intimidate his rival claimants, upon his representations two companies of Pennsylvania militia were stationed at Wyoming, ostensibly to protect the inhabitants, but really to oppress the Con- necticut people. For nearly three years the Wyoming settlements were in a state of confusion and strife more bitter and disastrous than the first Pennamite war. Be- tween the settlers and the Pennsylvania authorities, acting in the interest of the land-holders, the conflict was waged with great acrimony, involving the shedding of blood and the loss of life. Many, to escape the strife, moved into this county, where comparative peace prevailed.
In a letter to President Dickinson, dated April 29, 1784, Patterson writes, "Upon my arrival at this place (Wyo- ming), the 15th inst., I found the people for the most part disposed to give up their pretensions to the lands claimed under Connecticut. Having a pretty general agency from the land-holders of Pennsylvania, I have availed myself of this period, and have possessed in behalf of my constituents the chief part of all the lands occupied by the above claim- ants. Numbers of them are going up the river to settle. In this I give every encouragement in my power, and take care to fill up their vacancy with well-disposed Pennsylva- nians."
The conduet of Patterson and of his troops towards the New England people was an outrage upon all law, decency, and humanity, while that of the legislature was fickle and vacillating. On the instance of the petitions of the Wyo- ming people, and reports of commissions sustained by deposi- tions recounting the cruelty of those acting under the an- thority of the State, the legislature would pass laws one session for the protection of the settlers, only to be repealed the next under the influence of the land-holders, until, wearied by the conflict and worn with the suffering, the settlers despaired of any relief from the legislature or offi- cials of Pennsylvania.
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.