History of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, Part 9

Author: edited by John F. Meginness
Publication date: 1892
Publisher: Chicago, Ill. : Brown, Runk
Number of Pages: 1650

USA > Pennsylvania > Lycoming County > History of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania > Part 9

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 1774 Samuel Wallis and Joseph Jacob Wallis, his half brother, entered into an agreement to engage jointly in farming and stock raising on the Muncy plantation. The article shows that the partnership was to last for eleven years, beginning on the 1st of January, 1774. All the "servants," stock, farming uten- sils, etc., which were on the farm were to be valued at their original cost, and an estimate of the value of the crops was also to be made. Joseph Jacob Wallis, " the party of the other part," was to pay one-half of the full amount of the valua- tion, "estimate and original costs of the servants, stock, etc." Each of the said par- ties were to have equal privilege and share of the dwelling house for their families, and all costs and expenses which might arise in the "purchase of servants," stock, and other incidental charges necessary for conducting the farm were to be equally borne by the respective parties. All the "servants " and other property purchased by Samuel Wallis previous to entering into the agreement, were to be the joint property of the parties, and all moneys arising from the sales of produce were to be equally divided. In consideration of Samuel Wallis giving to Joseph Jacob Wallis for the term of eleven years "one-half of the benefits and advantages of a well improved farm," the latter agreed to undertake the sole care and management 5

HISTORY OF LYCOMING COUNTY.

of the "said farm and premises for their joint benefit, except at such times" as Samuel Wallis might choose to be there, when the said parties were to "manage in conjunction." It was also agreed that their accounts should be settled annually; but in the case of the death of Joseph Jacob Wallis, then the partnership was to be dissolved and everything connected with it equally divided between the heirs of the said parties.

The article was duly signed by the respective parties after binding themselves in the penal sum of £1,000 each for its faithful observance. Bnt a difficulty evidently arose after the execution of the agreement, for the signatures are partially torn off and the word " canceled" is written on the back. No reasons are given for its abrupt termination. The most important feature of this instrument, and the reason reference is made to it in this connection is that it establishes the fact beyond doubt that Mr. Wallis was the owner of the slaves, else why would he speak of the cost of servauts, which were his "property," and make it obligatory for his partner to pay one-half of their value? This is the first evidence we have of slaves being brought to this valley at that early date. That they came a few years later in con- siderable numbers there is abundant evidence.

Farming at that time was not a very pleasant business. The country was largely a wilderness, and hostile Indians were constantly prowling about to murder the settlers and destroy their improvements. When the great flight took place in 1778, known in history as the "Big Runaway," Mr. Wallis, like all others, was forced to abandon his improvements to the mercy of the savages and seek a place of safety. His house was not destroyed, because it was built of stone and the walls were very thick and strong, as may be seen by examining it at the present day. Very likely the roof was burned and the casings defaced, but they were easily replaced.

That Wallis quickly returned on the restoration of peace and renewed the work of making improvements, is shown by a draft for a mill found among his papers. The site selected was just below the canal aqueduct over Carpenter's run, a few hundred yards east of his house, and a portion of the excavation for the race is still visible. According to the draft, which is a quaint piece of drawing, it called for a building "20x24 feet, with glass windows, two doors 4x63 feet, and a chimney, clear, 5x62 feet 9 inches. Light holes and shutters, 2x2} feet. Water house, cog-pit, gate hole, mantle piece and shaft," all clearly specified and indicated by letter on the plan. For the machinery "120 cogs, 3 inches square and 13 inches long, together with 40 round cogs 3 inches in size and 16 inches long. The whole to be of good, tough hickory. well seasoned." The specifications further called for "12 oak boards one inch thick; 17 inch boards and 15 feet long for water-wheel buckets; S00 feet of well seasoned pine boards, 6 pieces of pine scantling 42 inches square, 16 feet long, well seasoned, if possible." It was also specified "that the mill irons should be sent to the smiths to be repaired and altered according to directions to be given by Mr. Antes." From this statement it is inferred that the irons were second-handed, and that Colonel Antes, who had built a mill previous to this time at the month of Antes creek, was entrusted with the work of getting the new mill under way. The plans and specifications were signed by George W. Hunter. The mill was built in 17S5, and although it was a small affair. it doubtless did good service in those early days.

That the stone dwelling house was not destroyed after its abandonment to the

SAMUEL WALLIS, THE LAND KING.

enemy, is further proven by a contract still in existence, made with one Thomas Sisk, a plasterer of Philadelphia, on the 27th of June, 1787, to proceed to Muncy Farm and "plaster certain buildings." It is probable that the house was not plastered at the time it was erected, owing to the inability of the owner to secure the services of a plasterer, and the lack of facilities to do the work.

The contract was witnessed by Laurence Ross and Matthew Conroy, and there is nothing on record to show that it was not carried out according to the terms. One of the houses plastered at that time has long since disappeared, but the stone house still stands.

MICHAEL ROSS.

Who Laurence Ross was is not known, but it is possible that he was the father of Michael Ross, afterwards the founder of Williamsport. It is well known that Michael Ross (if not his father) was long in the employ of Samuel Wallis, and through him he got his start in life. This is only a theory but the circumstances are such as to make the conclusion appear reasonable.

February 8, 1773, the application of Joseph Schute for 300 acres was conveyed to Samuel Wallis, and on May 8, 1776, was by him conveyed to Michael Ross for five shillings and other valuable considerations; also the application of Samuel Richards for 300 acres of land above the mouth of Toby's creek, dated, April 3, 1769, was conveyed to Wallis, and on May S, 1796, was by him conveyed to Michael Ross for five shillings and other valuable considerations. There is no positive evidence to establish it, but it is believed that the Toby's creek referred to is what is now known as Grafius run, which passes through the central part of Williamsport. The fact that Michael Ross afterwards located on this tract and founded the city, lends color to the supposition.

After an unusually busy life Samuel Wallis died at Philadelphia, October 14, 1798, aged sixty-seven years, eight months, of yellow fever contracted while on a visit to North Carolina to look after his great creditor, James Wilson. On his return he stopped at a lonely inn and was put in a bed where a man had died with the fever but a few days before!

His wife, who had shared in his triumphs and sorrows for twenty-eight years, was called upon to undergo more trials and tribulations. She survived him about four- teen years. Her death occurred, September 4, 1812, at the home of her daughter, Mrs. Cassandra Smith, at Milton. She was aged sixty-eight years and five months.

Thus closed the mortal careers of two of the earliest and most prominent settlers within the limits of Lycoming county. They bore a conspicuous part in the days of trial and their names are inseparably linked with our early history. Samuel Wallis and Lydia Hollingsworth left the following issue:

1. Mary, born April 25, 1771, in Philadelphia. She married Dr. William Kent Lathey, June 30, 1800. He was a native of Exeter, England, where he was born, January 29, 1772, and died at Northumberland, July 28, 1809.

2. John, born March 20, 1775. Never married. Died, September 14, 1810, at Northumberland.

3. Cassandra, born October 6, 1776, at Muncy Farm. Married Daniel Smith, Esq., an attorney, who lived at Milton.

HISTORY OF LYCOMING COUNTY.

4. Sarah, born August 19, 1778, at Elkton, Maryland, whither the mother and family had fled during the Indian troubles in the valley. She grew up to be a very beautiful woman, and married Gen. Hugh Brady, of the United States Army, and died at Detroit, August 25, 1833. She left five children, and her descendants still live in that city.

5. Hannah, born February 21, 1781, at Philadelphia. Married William Miller in 1816, Rev. John Bryson, of Warrior Run church, performing the ceremony. Died, February 28, 1859, at Muncy. They had three children who became of age, viz .: Cassandra S., who married J. Roan Barr, of Muncy; Samuel W., now residing at Waverly, New York, and Susan H., who married Joseph Stauffer, of Muncy, and died in 1865.

6. Samuel Hollingsworth, born January 18, 1784, at Philadelphia. He studied medicine and became a practicing physician. Married Elizabeth Cowden, April 17, 1807. Dr. Wallis died at Dunnstown, Clinton county, April 19, 1832, and was buried in the Friends' burying ground at Penn's Dale, Lycoming county. He left a son and a daughter, viz .: Mary, who married Phillip Shay, and Cowden Smith Wal- lis. Mrs. Shay left one son, W. Field Shay, Esq., now an attorney at Watsontown, Northumberland county. Cowden S. Wallis died at Muncy, April 24, 1862. He left the following children: Sarah C .; Mary M .; Elizabeth; Roberta; Samuel H. (died December 15, 1887,) and Howard R., the civil engineer. They all reside at Muncy. Dr. Samuel H. Wallis was the grandfather of these descendants, and Sam- uel Wallis, the pioneer, was their great-grandfather, but he left but two sons, John and Samuel Hollingsworth, to perpetuate his name. John never married. The last son did and left two sons, one of whom is deceased. The . other, Howard R.,. survives and has one son, so that the name is likely to be continued.

Samuel Wallis left a very large estate, consisting almost entirely of lands, but as they were heavily encumbered, it proved a very difficult one to settle. John Wallis, his eldest son, Daniel Smith, his son-in-law, William Ellis, and John Adlum, were appointed administrators.

The administrators qualified and entered upon their difficult and intricate task. After satisfying themselves of the condition of the estate, they made a report to the orphans' court of Lycoming county, sitting at the April term, 1799, in these words:

" That according to the debts and credits, which they had been able to learn, and from the value of the personal estate as appraised by persons legally appointed and returned iuto the of- fice of the clerk of the court, it appeared that the estate of Samuel Wallis was indebted in the sum of £33,798 13s 31%d, and that the debts due the estate amounted to about the sum of £99,904 14s; that the amount of the personal property returned by the appraisers was £2,932 18s 10d." They said furthermore: "The amount of the debts which the estate owed far exceeded the amount of the value of personal property; that the debts owing the estate were, many of them, against persons supposed not to be able to pay them to their full amount; that none of the said debts could be recovered until suits were brought, and of course could not be collected for some time; that, on the other hand, the debts owing by the estate had many of them been put in suit during the life time of Samuel Wallis and judgments obtained thereon and executions issued- particularly a judgment at the suit of Charles Bitters, on which about $20,000 remained due; and one at the suit of Ruth Piret, executrix of Palatiah Webster, on which about $18,000 re- mained due. On each of these suits executions had been issued and levies made on the man- sion house and adjoining property, otherwise thau by a sale or mortgage of part of the lands. They therefore prayed the court to make an order authorizing them to mortgage any lauds for a sum not exceeding one-third of the value thereof, or sell the lands of deceased bought by him

SAMUEL WALLIS, THE LAND KING.

at sheriff's sale in August, 1798, in Luzerne county, for which lands a sheriff's deed had been executed to the administrators in trust for the heirs, in order to pay off the executions."

On the 2d of May, 1799, the court granted the petition and directed the admin- istrators to give four weeks' notice in the Gazette of Luzerne county, and in a paper in Philadelphia, there being no paper published in Lycoming county.

In addition to his own large personal business, Wallis had served as agent for the Holland Land Company a long time, and in order to raise money to carry on their business he had mortgaged his plantation known as the Muncy Farms. The Holland Land Company was largely interested in western lands. It was composed of capitalists in the United Netherlands, who had advanced large sums to Robert Morris, the financier of the Revolution, and at its close, either from choice or neces- sity, received payment in lands in western New York and Pennsylvania. In the History of Venango County we are informed that the first lands acquired in Penn- sylvania consisted of a number of 1,000 acre tracts east of the Allegheny river in the purchase of 1784.

The same work informs us that one of the largest transactions in the history of Pennsylvania land titles was a purchase aggregating half a million acres, negotiated for this company in 1793 by its agents at New York, Herman Leroy and William Bayard, from James Wilson, of Philadelphia, a judge of the United States Supreme court. The land in question consisted of 912 tracts of 430 acres each lying on French creek and the Allegheny river (History of Venango County, page 76), which John Adlum had agreed to secure for Judge Wilson by a contract bearing date April 26, 1793. In Deed Book A, pp. 62-66 (Lycoming county), will be found an article of agreement entered into with certain parties to survey one and a half million acres lying on both sides of the Allegheny mountains. Adlum was engaged for some time in making the survey, after which he acquired land near the Wallis plantation.

When the Holland Land Company commenced winding up its business it was able to pay all its debts. But from some cause not clearly understood, Samuel Wallis allowed Judge Wilson to assume the debt owed him by the Land Company. And on settlement a mortgage was executed by James Wilson to Samuel Wallis for 22,000 acres of land, being an undivided part of 300,000 acres in Northumberland county, (now Lycoming, ) which were a part of the million and a half acres already referred to.

This land was subject to a mortgage given by Judge Wilson to John Adlum, February 3, 1793, to secure $60,000. Some time elapsed before Wallis could get a final settlement with Wilson. An elaborate statement of the account is still among his papers. All the items are given in detail and fill six large folio pages. The statement shows that the first article of agreement between James Wilson and Samuel Wallis was dated April 14, 1793, and the second April 1, 1795.

The account was audited by referees- Joseph Thomas, attorney for James Wilson, and T. Duncan, Jr., for Samuel Wallis, who signed the same July 6, 1797. The report provides an allowance of twenty days for filing exceptions. The account as stated showed a debt of £116,077 17s 23d and a credit of £27,577 1s, leaving a balance in favor of Mr. Wallis of £88,500 16s 2}d. This shows how vast his busi- ness was for that period. An affirmation on the back of the statement made before

HISTORY OF LYCOMING COUNTY.

Isaac Howell, an alderman of Philadelphia, August 16, 1797, sets forth that on July 21, 1797, at Burlington, New Jersey, Samuel Wallis delivered a copy of the account to the "Hon. James Wilson," in the presence of William Johnson, who made the copy from the original, and up to that date he had not been served with any written objections. The notations by the auditors appear on the margin written in a neat and delicate hand. The statement bears this indorsement on the back : "On the 21st day of last July I received a copy of this account. James Wilson, Ist Septem- ber, 1797." The signature of Mr. Wilson is clear and distinct.

The account recites the items of expense for securing titles, locations, surveys, court costs, traveling expenses, interest on money advanced, etc., for James Wilson and the Holland Land Company, between the second fork of Sinnemahoning and Boston; on locations west of the Allegheny river and Conewango creek; on the Mahopeny and Bowman's creek, in "Westmoreland county; " on Sugar creek, Luzerne county; on Loyalsock creek; in Huntingdon county, besides several trans- actions with John Adlum at Fort Franklin.

At the final meeting between Wallis and Wilson, tradition informs us, the latter said that he did not have money enough to wipe out all his indebtedness, but he could pay one-half in cash, or furnish him (Wallis) with wild lands for the whole debt. No papers were signed, but they separated, evidently expecting to meet again soon and close up their business.

Here comes the most mysterious part of this strange business transaction. Judge Wilson, who was a member of the Supreme court of the United States by appoint- ment of General Washington, started for North Carolina to hold court. But his mind seems to have been so greatly disturbed that he resolved to end his life. He was found dead. in bed at Edenton, North Carolina, August 28, 1798, from an over- dose of laudanum. This was less than a year after his meeting with Wallis for the purpose of making a final settlement.

Judge Wilson was a man of high legal attainments, conspicuous as a member of Congress, and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His sudden death was the beginning of grave troubles for Mr. Wallis, which culminated in the sacri- fice of a magnificent estate.

Had the acting administrators for Wallis-Smith and Ellis-shown more busi- ness tact, it is believed they might have saved a portion of the estate. Creditors commenced clamoring for their money and pushed their claims. Finally a writ was issued by the Supreme court of Pennsylvania, directed to Henry Vanderslice, sheriff of Northumberland county, and that officer seized "a part of that valuable body of land commonly called the Muncy Farm," and advertised it for sale, at Williamsport, on the 3d of May, 1802. The sale bill, a copy of which is still in existence, says that the tract contained about 3,900 acres, and extended for five miles along the river between Loyalsock and Muncy creek, and also comprised an island in the river called Spring island. The land was sold in tracts for the convenience of purchasers, and the conditions were "one-half part of the purchase money to be paid to the sheriff at the time and place of sale; otherwise the premises to be immediately re-sold, etc., and the remaining part of the purchase money to be paid to the sheriff on the return day of the writ, to wit, the first Monday of September next, at the court house, in the city of Philadelphia."

SAMUEL WALLIS, THE LAND KING.

The Muncy Farm tracts were numbered from one to eight, and those in Bald Eagle township from nine to fourteen. No. 8 was the tract on which the mansion house was situated, together with "barn, stables, and outhouses," and contained about 700 acres. The sale took place according to announcement and the bill of sale, which is still in existence, is given herewith:

Charles Bitters for the use of Mahlon Hutchinson versus Samuel Wallis, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Acct. of the sales of the real property of S. Wallis made by Henry Vanderslice at Will- iamsport on the 3d and 4th days of May, 1802, in pursuance of his advertisement, dated at Sunbury, 17th of April, 1802.

Sales made on the 3d of May, 1802, viz:

No. 9 containing 310 acres. Sold to Thos. Grant, Esq., for $883.67

321

310 338

13 1 2

. 66 400 acres. 400 66 400

500 500

66 2,012.00 66 5 6 500 66 - 500 7 66 2,014.00 1,702.00 1,525,00 66 Sales made on 4th May:

No. 13 containing 282 acres.

4,502.00

Acres - 5,766 156 p.

$19,188.67

66 353.00 631.00

313 156 p.

66 100.00 50.00 66 1,803.00 66 66 66 1,661.00 1,652.00

66 700

Sold to Thos. Grant, Esq., for $301.00 66 16

Thomas Grant, who was a resident of Sunbury, and afterwards sheriff of Northumberland county, made the purchase for Henry Drinker, a prominent land speculator, and creditor.

That splendid domain of nearly 6,000 acres brought less than $4 per acre. To- day the greater portion of it could not be bought for $200 per acre! What an appalling sacrifice! The proceeds of the sale fell far below the indebtedness of the estate and left the heirs penniless.

A letter written by John Wallis and Daniel Smith, the acting administrators, to Henry Drinker, under date of March 10, 1803, states that "the Muncy Farm con- tained in one connected body 7,561 acres, and the debt and interest due on the mortgage was £4,443 16s 8d." The farm extended to Loyalsock. Spring island contained about 500 acres. After deducting Grant's purchase at sheriff's sale, 2,300 acres remained unsold. The letter recites at great length the encumbered condition of the estate, and refers by name to the holders of various mortgages, liens, execu- tions, etc., including claims of servants for .pay. The letter continues: "The 2,300 acres, although much inferior to those purchased by Grant, are neverthe- . less valuable, and depressed as the price of land is, and speaking with our hands on our hearts, we solemnly declare that we believe the 3,960 acres purchased by Grant to be worth at a cash valuation $20 per acre. This estimate is low, and we believe that indifferent persons, good judges of lands, would make the price higher. But, further, it is to be remarked that the amount of Grant's purchase is $19,188.67 !"'

11 12

HISTORY OF LYCOMING COUNTY.

That the appeal of the administrators failed to soften the hearts of the creditors, or excite sympathy on the part of Drinker, is evident, for nothing appears to have been done to stay the ruinous storm which was sweeping over the estate and every- thing available was finally swept away. There were those who harbored resentful feelings against Wallis and they seemed to take pleasure in seeing his wife and children driven from under the roof which had so long sheltered them.

From the tone of a letter written in January, 1805, by Henry Drinker to Robert Coleman, it appears that he was tired of his purchase and anxious to sell. He admitted that the title for the "valuable estate formerly possessed by Samuel Wal- lis" was now vested in him. He enclosed a map of the farm and a description of the several subdivisions. "I may own I have been greatly disappointed in my expectations respecting this estate, having for many years entertained an opinion and heard it described as equal if not superior to any farm in this State," he writes, "and under this impression believed it would invite numerous purchasers, and com- mand a speedy sale; especially as it was agreed to offer it at rates much lower than lands, neither equal in quality, nor so well situated, had been selling for." "It is trne," he adds, "many applications have been made by persons who wished to be indulged with extended payments for a considerable part of the money," but in his situation, and under the pressure of heavy advances made by him "to remove and relieve " Mr. Coleman's "estate from every inenmbrance," distant payments could not be assented to. He then proposed to sell to Mr. Coleman on easy terms, but does not state them in the letter. "Several wealthy farmers," he adds, had been treating with him for a large part of the estate with the view of founding a colony or community, but had given up the project. He then closed his letter by soliciting an offer from Mr. Coleman.

Among the many old papers in the Wallis collection bearing on this subject, is one, now yellow with age, containing this endorsement: "Henry Drinker and wife to Robert Coleman." It is dated November 18, 1805, over eleven months after his January letter was written, and gives the "courses and distances" of "the several tracts of land in Muncy township," purchased by them "in consideration of £11,558 1s 4d." This is the only paper found in the collection which mentions the price paid for the farms, aside from the sheriff's bill of sale.

Another paper, signed by the administrators, contains a proposal to Robert Cole- man to "sell a quantity of land at a place called the Long Reach, on the West Branch of the Susquehanna, at $4 per acre." The proposal states that Mr. Coleman " heard a description of the quality of the land when last at Lyco- ming." This sum they "deemed to be not more than one-third part of its real value," but they "would rather take it than run the risk of an approaching sacri- fice." They informed him, furthermore, that they would "have the lands sold on the earliest judgment and bought in, and conveyed to him by thepurchaser. There are at least 1,200 acres free from dispute as to title- perhaps something more. It must also be understood that these lands are subject to the purchase money due to the Commonwealth. It may be necessary also to state that this sum must be paid in cash, and $4,800 must be at Williamsport on the 3d of May next." Signed and dated, April 27, 1802.

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 Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, Part 9

Author: edited by John F. Meginness Publication date: 1892 Publisher: Chicago, Ill. : Brown, Runk Number of Pages: 1650

Author: edited by John F. Meginness
Publication date: 1892
Publisher: Chicago, Ill. : Brown, Runk
Number of Pages: 1650