History of Bradford County, Pennsylvania, with biographical selections, Part 12

Author: Bradsby, H. C. (Henry C.)
Publication date: 1891
Publisher: Chicago, S. B. Nelson
Number of Pages: 1340

USA > Pennsylvania > Bradford County > History of Bradford County, Pennsylvania, with biographical selections > Part 12

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).

In February, 1769, the first forty Connecticut settlers arrived. Finding the block-house in possession of Ogden, they sat down, mid- winter as it was, to besiege it and starve out the garrison. Ogden proposed a conference. " Propose to a Yankee to talk over a matter, especially which he has studied and believes to be right, and you tonch the most susceptible chord which vibrates in his heart." It was so here. Three of their chief men went to the block-house to "argue the matter." Once within, Sheriff Jennings arrested them on a writ, "in the name of Pennsylvania." They were taken to the jail at Easton. Friends there bailed them, and they returned to Wyoming. Ogden then raised the posse of Northampton county, stormed the Yankee fort and carried the whole forty to Easton. They were all immediately liberated, on bail, and all immediately returned to Wyoming.

In April, the quotas of four townships, two hundred men, arrived. These with the others constituted a force of nearly three hundred now on the ground. They erected " Fort Durkee" on the river bank, and thirty huts. (The fort stood at the lower end of the "river com- mon" in Wilkes-Barre; the town itself being laid out by Maj. Dur-

118

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

kee, and named after Cols. Wilkes and Barre, two members of Parlia- ment friendly to the colonies). They had full possession now, and went vigorously at felling forests and planting fields. As the Colony of Connecticut was as yet taking no part in this struggle, the Susque- hanna Company undertook to gain time and get delay by opening negotiations with the government of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania listened, but kept right on with the more rigorous preparations to recover the disputed ground.

In September, the indefatigable Ogden appeared before Fort Durkee with two hundred men, the posse of Northampton, for so far all was done under civil process. A four-pound iron cannon had been brought up from Fort Augusta (Sunbury). Capt. Durkee was captured by the adroit Ogden, and under the persuasion of the dreadful four- pounder, the whole garrison surrendered, and the Connecticut people were compelled to leave. This closed the year 1769, Wyoming re- maining in possession of Pennsylvania.

Ogden, believing he had made thorough work, disbanded his troops, and leaving a small garrison in his fort at Mill Creek, went to Philadelphia to enjoy his honors. In February, Capt. Lazarus Stewart, of Hanover, Lancaster county, and his "forty " settlers (mostly Pennsylvanians these, who had purchased the township which he named for his own home, Hanover), appeared in the valley. They ousted Ogden's men from his fort, and captured the "four pounder." This brought Ogden rapidly back from Philadelphia with fifty men, and he re-possessed his Mill creek fortress. In a sally made upon him here, the Connecticut people were repulsed, and lost one man, killed- the first bloodshed as yet. Ogden was obliged to surrender in April, and retired from the valley.

Planting time had come, peace reigned, and confidence began to prevail. Spring and summer came, and the harvests were ripening, and no foe.

Pennsylvania, for some reason, had not crushed this dispute. In point of fact, the Proprietaries having appropriated the best part of the valley to themselves, the people very generally sympathized with the settlers, and wished them success. However, with a new force, Ogden appeared once more in September, and by stratagem, most of the inhabitants being in their fields, without arms, once more captured the fort, dispersed the settlers and destroyed their crops. For the fourth time he retired to Philadelphia, in the full belief that the con- test was at an end. At the very close of the year, on the 18th of December, Capt. Lazarus Stewart, with thirty men, again swooped down upon Ogden's garrison, and the year closed with the valley in possession of the Yankees.

Promptly with the opening of 1771, Pennsylvania again sent her forces to the recapture of Fort Durkee and the fields of Wyoming. Capt. Ogden abandoned his fortress at Mill creek, and defiantly erected a new one, Fort Wyoming, within sixty rods of his adversary. Capt. Stewart commanded at Fort Durkee. It was Greek against Greek now. Ogden demanded the surrender of Fort Durkee. Stewart replied ; "That he had taken possession, in the name and behalf of

119

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

the Colony of Connecticut, in whose jurisdiction they were, and by that authority he would defend it." Ogden assaulted, but failed, a number being killed and wounded in this affair. In turn he was be- sieged. Escaping himself by a ruse, his garrison surrendered under formal articles of capitulation on the 14th of August, 1771.

The government of Pennsylvania, finding that the Connecticut forces had strongly fortified themselves -- that their numbers were rapidly increasing, and believing, from the boldness and confidence of the intruding Yankees, that the government of Connecticut was sus- taining them, gave orders for the withdrawing of their troops, and left the Connecticut party in quiet possession of the valley.

In answer to a letter from Mr. Hamilton, president of the council, to Gov. Trumbull, of Connecticut, inquiring under whose authority " these violent and hostile measures" were prosecuted, Gov. Trum- bull thus cautiously replies, October 14, 1771: "The persons con- cerned in those transactions have no order and direction from me, or from the General Assembly of the Colony, for their proceeding upon this occasion, and I am very confident that the General Assembly, friends as they ever have been.to peace and good order, will never countenance any violent, much less hostile, measures in vindicating the rights which the Susquehanna Company suppose they have to lands in that part of the country within the limits of the charter of this colony.

Connecticut had not yet " asserted its title " to the country. The inhabitants of Wyoming established a government for themselves. They laid out townships, formed settlements, erected fortifications, levied and collected taxes, passed laws for the direction of civil suits, and for the punishment of crimes, established a militia, and provided for the common defense and general welfare of the " plantation." " Neither the Grecian nor Roman States, in their proudest days of re- publicanism, could boast of a government more purely democratic than was now established at Wyoming."

For the two years, 1772-1773, peace and prosperity reigned. The "settlers " showed themselves competent to defend themselves, and their footing seemed securely established. In October, 1773, the General Assembly of Connecticut " Resolved, That this Assembly, at this time, will assert and, in some proper way, support their claim to those lands contained within the limits and boundaries of their charter, which are westward of the Province of New York."

Commissioners were appointed, who went to Philadelphia, in De- cember, to bring the controversy to an amicable conclusion. The case was there fully gone over on both sides; but the negotiation failed of results. It was conducted with the most stately courtesy and ability. A strong Pennsylvania advocate says of his adversary : "I should have been glad to have seen the excellent temper and abilities of their penman engaged in another cause."

In January, 1774, an act was passed by the General Assembly of Connecticut, erecting all the territory within her charter limits, from the river Delaware to a line fifteen miles west of the Susquehanna, into a town, with all the corporate power of other towns in the

120

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

colony, to be called Westmoreland, attaching it to the county of Litchfield. As might have been expected, this greatly strengthened the settlers, and was hailed with much satisfaction. They were now under the law and protection of the ancient and high-standing Colony of Connecticut. "A sense of security existed, a feeling of confidence ensued, which gave force to contracts, encouraged industry, and stim- ulated enterprise."

The Wyoming region was in Northampton county, until the year 1772, when it went into Northumberland, according to the municipal division of Pennsylvania.

On July 3-7, 1772, Col. Plunkett, of Northumberland county, under orders of the Government, destroyed the settlements of Charleston and Judea (Milton), on the west branch, which had been made under the auspices of the Susquehanna Company, in which affair some lives were lost. With about five hundred armed men, in December, 1775, Col. Plunkett, with his train of boats and stores of ammunition, moved up the north branch to drive off the Connecticut settlers from the Wyoming country. About three hundred of these settlers met him at Nanticoke and repulsed him, with some loss of life on both sides. At this point, Congress interfered and " Resolved, * * * that the contending parties immediately cease all hostilities, and avoid any appearance of force until the dispute can be legally settled." It is evident that the dispute had widened into national importance. After Col. Plunkett's failure, all "appearance of force " did cease until after the decree of Trenton, in 1782.

In 1775, the number of inhabitants of Wyoming was something more than three thousand.

In November, 1776, the town of Westmoreland was erected into a county of Connecticut, to be called Westmoreland, and thereupon its civil and military organization was complete.

Three companies of troops were raised there for the Continental establishment, and were part of the Twenty-fourth Regiment of the Connecticut line.

The Decree of Trenton .- After the failure of Col. Plunkett's expedition, in 1775, we left the Yankees in possession. It required some considerable self-control and more patriotism in Pennsylvania to drop the controversy at that stage. But, under the request of Con- gress, she did so. Promptly on the appearance of peace, after the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown, the State, by petition of her president and supreme executive council, prayed Congress to appoint commissioners "to constitute a court for hearing and determining the matter in question, agreeably to the ninth article of the Confedera- tion." Connecticut asked for delay, " because that sundry papers of importance in the case are in the hands of council in England, and can not be procured during the war." Congress overruled the motion, and on the 28th day of August, 1782, issued commissions to William Whipple, of New Hampshire; Welcome Arnold, of Rhode Island ; David Brearly and William Churchill Houston, of New Jersey ; Cyrus Griffin, Joseph Jones and Thomas Nelson, of Virginia, or any five or more of them, to be a court of commissioners, with all powers,

121

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

prerogatives and privileges, incident or belonging to a court, "to meet at Trenton, in the State of New Jersey, on Tuesday, the 12th day of November next, to hear and finally determine the controversy between the said State of Pennsylvania and State of Connecticut, so always as a major part of said commisssoners, who shall hear the cause, shall agree in the determination."

The Commissioners, except Joseph Jones and Thomas Nelson, met and formed the court November 19, 1782. Messrs. William Bradford, Joseph Reed, James Wilson and Jonathan D. Sergeant, appeared as counsel for Pennsylvania ; and Messrs. Eliphalet Dyer, William S. Johnson and Jesse Root, as counsel for Connecticut.

Upon the assembling of the Court, the agents for Connecticut, after reciting the possession and improvements of large numbers of persons holding under the Susquehanna Company, moved that "the tenants in possession, holding as aforesaid, be duly cited to appear and defend."

The Court rightly overruled the motion " that the same can not be admitted according to the construction of the ninth article of the Confederation."

The Commission under which they acted was founded on the second clause of the ninth article. The determination of the claims of private property, or right in the soil, would have been coram non judice, that jurisdiction being derived from the third clause of the article, the two jurisdictions could not be blended.

Connecticut then moved an adjournment to procure evidence, especially "a certain original deed from the Indians of a large parcel of the land in dispute obtained from their chiefs and sachems, at their council in Onondaga, in A. D. 1763, and now in England."

The Court did not grant the postponement.

The agents of Pennsylvania set forth their claims as follows :

1. The charter of King Charles II. to Sir William Penn, dated March 4, 1681.

2. That said Penn and the succeeding proprietaries purchased from the native Indians the right of soil in some parts of the territory ; and that the Indians had conveyed to Thomas and Richard Penn, particularly on the 25th day of October, 1736, "The full and absolute right of pre-emption of and in all the lands not before sold by them to the said proprietaries, within the limits aforesaid."

3. They stated the limit of the said charter.

4. That by virtue of the Declaration of Independence the articles of Confederation, and the act of the Legislature of 27th November, 1779, the right of soil and estate of the late proprietaries was vested in the State, and that "Pennsylvania was entitled to the right of jurisdiction and right of soil within all the limits aforesaid."

5. The claims of certain settlers under title derived under Connecticut, and the assertion of title by the State of Connecticut.

The agents for Connecticut exhibited a statement of the claim of that State, in which they deduced the title from the Crown, through the Plymouth Council, and the charter of Charles II., dated April 23, 1662, described the limits of that charter; set forth the exception of New Netherlands, afterwards New York ; alleged that in 1753, the State having located and settled their lands on the east side of New York, and being in a condition to extend their settlements in the western part of their patent, for that purpose permitted certain companies of adventurers to purchase large tracts of land of the native Indians, on the Susquehanna and Delaware, within the limits of their

122

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

charter, "and in A. D. 1754, said companies proceeded and made settlements on said lands, so purchased, as aforesaid, and ever since have, though with various interruptions, continued to hold and possess the same, under the title of the Colony of Connecticut, and the Legis- lature have approved of the purchases and settlements of the advent- urers aforesaid, and have actually erected and exercised jurisdiction in and over said territory, as part and parcel of said colony.

The Court was in session forty-one judicial days. On Monday, December 30, 1782, they pronounced the following judgment :

We are of the opirion that the State of Connecticut has no right to the lands in con- troversy.

We are also unanimously of the opinion that the jurisdiction and pre-emption of all the territory lying within the charter boundary of Pennsylvania, and now claimed by the State of Connecticut, do of right belong to the State of Pennsylvania.

All the public, corporate rights of Connecticut, as to jurisdiction and property in the land, were embraced within the jurisdiction of this court, and this decree was final and conclusive Between the States which were parties to the cause.

That this determination did not touch the private rights of property not only appears by the record, but is placed beyond doubt by the written opinions of the members of the court that had decided the case. The individual claims of those who had purchased of the Con- necticut company, it was understood by the unanimous court, were not effected by the decree. However, these facts were not given the pub- lic for a long time.

After the decree at Trenton, a petition was presented to Congress by Zebulon Butler and others, claiming the private right of soil under Connecticut, and praying for a court of commission to determine their claims. On the 23d day of January, 1784, Congress resolved to institute a court for the purpose. At length, however, the resolution was repealed, because the petition "doth not describe, with sufficient certainty, the tract of land claimed by the said Zebulon Butler and others, nor particularly name the private adverse claims under grants from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania." Congress seemed to have acted on the theory that each claimant should bring forward a separate petition, the land claimed, and name the adverse claimants with certainty. They do not seem to have entertained any doubt of the right to such special trials, independent of the decision at Trenton.

But the settlers were poor, oppressed, and wasted by war; and by this time, 1786, the heavy hand of civil and military power was raised to crush them. Before another petition could be brought for- ward the new constitution was adopted, and as a matter of course the Federal Courts succeeded to all jurisdiction vesting in the special courts of commissioners.

It has generally been considered that the decree of Trenton was made rather out of consideration of policy than right ; that Connecticut had pre-arranged the case with Pennsylvania and Congress; and that, out of the arrangement, she was to get the "Western Reserve." The theory is based on a report on finances made in Congress on the 31st of January, 1783, a month after the decree, in which it is said, incident-

123

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

ally, " Virginia and Connecticut have also made cessions, the acceptance of which, for particular reasons, have been delayed." These cessions came thus:

At the close of the American Revolution, the circumscribed States contended that all unlocated lands of the States which ran to the "South Sea " should, beyond some reasonable bounds, belong to the United States in common, as a prize equally contended for by all. Congress recommended that this be done. Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia severally passed such cessions. In 1786, it was "Resolved, That Congress, in behalf of the United States, are ready to accept all the right, title, interest and claim of the State of Connecticut to certain western lands," etc. When the cession was offered, the absolute acceptance of it was opposed by Pennsylvania, whose members in Congress moved a proviso that it should not be construed or understood to affect the decree of Trenton. This proviso was rejected. They then moved that Congress should not accept the cession, because it might virtually imply a sanction of what was not ceded ; but if Connecticut would first relinquish to New York, Pennsylvania, and the United States, respectively,all her claims of jurisdiction and property west of the eastern boundary of New York, the United States would then release to Connecticut the property, but not the jurisdiction of a tract of land, of one hundred and twenty miles in ex- tent, west of Pennsylvania. This resolution was negatived. A proviso was then moved, that the acceptance of any cession of western territory from any State which had been or might be made, should not be "construed or understood, as confirming or in any way strengthening the claim of such State to any such territory not ceded," . which also received a negative. Again it was moved, to be accepted on this condition, that it should in no degree affect the claims of any State to any territory, ascertained by the decree of the Federal Court, to be within the territory or jurisdiction of such State, or to injure the claims of the United States, under acts of cession from any individual State. This was also negatived. At last the acceptance was passed in these unqualified terms : " Resolved, That Congress accept the said deed of cession, and that the same be recorded and enrolled among the acts of the United States in Congress assembled."

This has been regarded as a substantial recognition of the Con- necticut charter by the United States.

By the deed, Connecticut grants " all right, title, interest, juris- diction, and claim to certain western lands, beginning at the com- pletion of the forty-first degree of north latitude, one hundred and twenty miles west of the western boundary line of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as now claimed by the said Commonwealth, and from thence by a line drawn north parallel to, and one hundred and twenty miles west of said west line of Pennsylvania, and to continue north until it comes to forty-two degrees and two minutes of north latitude."

This reservation, or rather tract not ceded, is (bounding it easterly by the west line of Pennsylvania) one hundred and twenty miles east and west, and one degree and two minutes wide, north and south,

124

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

containing several millions of acres. This was called New Connecticut, or the Western Reserve-a goodly part of northeastern Ohio.

Whatever the motive, Connecticut promptly acquiesced in this decision at Trenton. Not so, however, the claimants under her. They held their case as still undecided. They admitted the retrospective operation of the decree as to the public rights of the immediate parties, that is, the two States, but contended that "the principle of relations does not retrospect so as to affect third persons."" They cited the long line of precedents as to settlements between colonies contending about the lines of jurisdiction; that the grants of colonies made to subjects had been held sacred, whether within the line as it was after settled or not. Such had been the case between Rhode Island and Connecti- cut, between Massachusetts and Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, between New York and Connecticut. That had been the case between Pennsylvania and Maryland, and between Pennsylvania and Virginia. New York, indeed, attempted to infringe the rule in the case of New Hampshire grants in Vermont, but finally conformed to the justice of the general rule. And it is perfectly analogous to the doctrine respecting officers de facto, whose acts, so far as relates to the rights and interests of third persons, are effectual in law, notwithstand- ing the offices are found to belong of right to other persons.

The vote of a sitting member in a legislative assembly is legal, though it may afterward be decided that he was not elected. The decision in such cases never operates retrospectively.

By the former Constitution of Pennsylvania, a year's residence was a requisite qualification to vote at elections. Within a year after the Trenton decree, twenty-four Wyoming settlers, who had lived a number of years on the contested land, attended in the county of Northumberland, and gave their votes for two members of the Legis- lature and one of the Executive Council. The votes were received by the returning officer, and decided the election in all the three cases. But the elections were contested, these votes set aside, and the elections declared in favor of the other candidates by the Legislature and the Council respectively, because the twenty-four persons had not resided a year in Pennsylvania, for that territory was Connecticut until the Trenton decree. This legislative and executive determination proceeded upon the same great principle that the jurisdiction, decided by the Trenton commissioners, does not go back and affect the pre-existing rights or condition of private persons.

In this view, the settlers determined to acquiesce cheerfully in the decree, accept their citizenship in Pennsylvania, but to listen to no terms which involved "abandonment of their possessions."

From this time on, matters are to be conducted under the govern- ment of Pennsylvania, and we are to go through the "Second Penna- mite War," but the happy outcome is to be under Pennsylvania statutes, and the decisions of Pennsylvania courts.

The Confirming Act :- "The Second Pennamite War." A bird's- eye view of Pennsylvania in 1783 will show : The Friends, possessed of a prosperous and thrifty metropolis, and rich fields in Philadelphia and the adjoining counties.

Of Chubbuck,

127

HISTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY.

The German, profitably and industriously settled along the eastern base of the Kittochtinny, or " Blue hills," from the Delaware to the Susquehanna, holding that rich agricultural territory, as he holds it yet.

The Scotch-Irish, in the Cumberland Valley, and pushing up the Juniata, and winding around the spurs of the Alleghanies, into the then counties of Bedford and Westmoreland.

The Yankee, seated in the valleys of the North branch of the Susque- hanna.

The rest of the State, except some valleys of the West branch, was an unbroken wilderness. The total population did not exceed three hundred and thirty thousand.

Of the Yankee settlers, there were probably about six thousand. These were scattered, mainly, in seventeen townships in the county of Luzerne, then including the territory of Wyoming, Susquehanna, and Bradford. Their townships were five miles square, and extended, in blocks, from Berwick to Tioga Point, embracing the bottom lands along the river-Providence, the present site of Scranton, being on the Lackawanna. These townships were Huntington, Salem, Plymouth, Kingston, Newport, Hanover, Wilkes-Barre, Pittston, Providence, Exeter, Bedford, Northmoreland, Putnam, Braintrim, Springfield, Claverack and Ulster. They contain a present population of one hun- dred and eighty thousand people.

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 Bradford County, Pennsylvania, with biographical selections, Part 12

Author: Bradsby, H. C. (Henry C.) Publication date: 1891 Publisher: Chicago, S. B. Nelson Number of Pages: 1340

Author: Bradsby, H. C. (Henry C.)
Publication date: 1891
Publisher: Chicago, S. B. Nelson
Number of Pages: 1340