History of York County Pennsylvania, Volume I, Part 14

Author: Prowell, George R.
Publication date: 1907
Publisher: J. H. Beers
Number of Pages: 1372

USA > Pennsylvania > York County > History of York County Pennsylvania, Volume I > Part 14

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).

A few of the first settlers on Digges' Choice were Catholics, who started, in 1730, what became known as the Conewago Set- tlement in the vicinity of Hanover. Among the earliest of these settlers was Robert Owings, who took up a large tract of land a short distance northwest of the present site of McSherrystown.

There were a few adventurers who crossed the Susquehanna as

Digges' Titles. early as 1727. Some Scotch- Irish settlers had taken up land in the southern part of York County under Maryland grants as early as 1733. At a meeting of representatives from the prov- ince of Pennsylvania, held with the Indians from the Five Nations, at Philadelphia, in 1736, the heirs of William Penn purchased the title to a vast extent of country west of the Susquehanna. The first authorized settlements west of the river had been made by authority of Samuel Blunston, the agent of the Penns, who resided at Wright's Ferry, now Columbia. Blunston issued his first license in 1734, but as the Indians west of the Susquehanna were peaceable, a few settlers crossed the river before 1730. The charter granted to Lord Baltimore gave him the privilege of authorizing settlements in parts of western Maryland before the Indian title west of the Susquehanna was obtained by the Penns.

In 1730 Andrew Schriver emigrated from Philadelphia County and took up a valuable tract of land a short distance east of Littles- town, near the site of Christ Church. In 1731 Adam Forney and other German set- tlers procured from John Digges a bond of agreement for lands on Digges' Choice.

Some of these, including a colony of thir- teen families from Eastern Pennsylvania, passed across the present area of York County into the Shenandoah valley in Vir- ginia, where they took up land among the earliest settlers of that fertile region.

The following is a copy of the bond of agreement given by John Digges to Adam Forney in 1731:

Know all men by these presents that I, John Digges, of Prince George's County, in the Province of Mary- land, Gent., am held and firmly bound unto Adam For- ney, of Philadelphia County, in the Province of Penn- sylvania, farmer and tailor, in full and just sum of sixty pounds current money of Maryland, to which payment well and truly to be made and done, I bind myself, my heirs, executors and administrators, firmly by these presents. Sealed with my seal and dated this fifth day of October, Anno Domino, 1731.

The condition of the above obligation is such that if the above bound John Digges, his heirs, executors or administrators, shall and will at the reasonable request of the above Adam Forney, make and order by suffi- cient conveyance according to the custom and common usage of the Province of Maryland, a certain parcel of land containing one hundred and fifty acres, already marked out by the above named Adam Forney, near a place known by the name of Robert Owing's Spring, and on the same tract of land where the said Robert Owings now dwells in the Province of Maryland, then this obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue in law.

JOHN DIGGES. Sealed and delivered in the presence of us, George Douglass. Johann Peter Zarich.

Among the early settlers on Early Digges' Choice were, Robert Owings, Adam Forney and his Settlers. son Nicholas, Peter Zarich, Da- vid Young, Andrew Schriever, Adam Mil- ler, Adam Messier, John Leman, Valentine and Conrad Eyler, Henry Sell, Martin Kitz- miller, Jacob and Derrick Youngblood, Peter Raysher, Charles Jones, Peter Young- blood, George Evanaar, Matthias Marker, Peter and William Oler, Jacob Banker, Peter Welby, Herman Updegraf. (shoe- maker), Peter Schultz (blacksmith), Leon- ard Barnes, Peter Ensminger, Matthias Ullery, William Loyston, John Martin Inyfoss, Martin Brin, Abraham Sell, Adam Buedinger (Bittenger) and son Nicholas, Thomas Lilly, Martin Buyers, Martin Ungefare, John Counts, John Morningstar, Ludwick Schreiver. Michael Will, Peter Middlecauf and Dr. Henry Null.

According to the statement of the late Hon. Abraham Schriver, president judge of the Frederick County Court, his paternal

HISTORY OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ancestor, Andrew Schriver, one of the this place, passed through what is called earliest settlers between Hanover and Lit- Will's Bottom. tlestown, was a native of Alstenborn in the Electorate Palatine, Germany, and immi- grated with his family to this country in the year 1721, landing at Philadelphia, after which they moved to the neighbor- hood of Goshenhoppen, near the Trappe on the Schuylkill, where they made their home for some years.

Before leaving Germany, he obtained a certificate of character, such as was given to most of the early immigrants, belonging to the better class of people. The certifi- cate reads as follows: " That the bearer of (or person showing) this, Andrew Schriver, citizen and inhabitant of this place, and his wife, Ann Margaretha, whom he has with him, profess themselves to be conformable to the pure word of God of the Reformed Church, and until now assiduously observed the outward duties of Christianity, in at- tending our public worship, receiving the holy sacrament, and otherwise, as far as is known, have been irreproachable in their conduct. I attest. And whereas, the said man and wife, with their children, after having borne many adversities, are about to turn their backs on their country, and to go (God knows where) into a strange coun- try. I would therefore recommend them to a willing reception, by the preachers and elders of said Reformed Church, whereas they may show these presents.

Alstenborn, Oberants Lautern in the Electorate Palatine.

(Seal) JOHN MUELLER.

May 13th, 1721."

In the spring of 1733, being then 21 years of age, Andrew Schriver married Ann Maria Keiser, and the following spring moved to the Conewago settlement, taking up lands on "Digges' Choice," four miles west of the site of Hanover, near Christ Church.

In moving to Conewago, Andrew Schriv- er's step-brother, David Yung (Young), came with him and helped him clear three acres of land which they planted in corn. and Young then returned home. During this clearing (about three weeks) they lived under Young's wagon cover, after which Andrew Schriver pealed elm bark, and made a temporary hut, and by fall built a cabin. The wagon that brought him to

There was no opportunity of obtaining flour nearer than a grist mill close to Lan- caster. One hundred acres' where he lived, later known as the Basehore Mill property, were the first he bought and they were paid for with one hundred pairs of negroes' shoes, that being the price agreed upon with John Digges, the owner, of whom he soon after bought more land, which was paid for in money. At the time of his set- tlement in Conewago, the nearest neighbors Andrew Schriver had were the family of Adam Forney, living where the town of Hanover now stands. For a long time the public road from Wright's Ferry to the south came by Andrew Schriver's house, and when he settled here there were a few Indians in the vicinity. They were friendly and smoked the pipe of peace with the white settlers. His brother, Ludwig Schriver, David Young, Middlekaufs, the Wills and others followed in a few years and settled near him.

Many of the citizens of this region who now enjoy the comforts of peaceful homes, can trace their ancestry in the names of these pioneers.

Admiral Winfield Scott Schley, who was born at Frederick, Md., in 1839, is a lineal descendant of Andrew Schriver. With the rank of Commodore he was placed in com- mand of the Flying Squadron on duty in Cuban waters during the war with Spain, and was in immediate command at the destruction of Cervera's Spanish fleet off Santiago, July 3, 1898. He won fame and distinction as a naval officer in this great battle and soon after was raised to the rank of admiral.

An interesting document now A Penn Warrant. in the possession of the York County Historical Society, is a land warrant granted to George Evanaar and signed by Thomas Penn, Oc- tober 5, 1738, one year before the temporary line was run between Maryland and Penn- sylvania. This document reads as follows:

Whereas George Evanaar, of the County of Lan- caster, hath requested that we would grant him to take up one hundred acres of land situated at Conewago, adjoining Adam Forney and Nicholas Forney, in the said County of Lancaster, for which he agrees to pay to our use the sum of fifteen pounds, ten shillings cur- rent money of this province for the said one hundred

I ! i

-----

1 1

- -

--- - --

THE BOUNDARY LINE

acres, and the yearly quit rent of one half penny ster- ling for every acre thereof. This is therefore to author- ize and require you lo survey or cause to be surveyed unto the said George Evanaar at the place aforesaid, according to the methods of townships appointed, the said quantity of one hundred acres, if not already sur- veyed or appropriated, and make return thereof into the secretary's office, in order for further confirmation ; for which this shall be your sufficient warrant; which survey in case the said George Evanaar fulfil the above agreement within six months from the date hereof shall be valid, otherwise void. Given under my hand and seal of the land office, by virtue of certain powers from the said proprietaries, at Philadelphia, this fifth day of October, Anno Domino, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty-eight.

THOMAS PENN. To Benjamin Eastburn, Surveyor-General.

Says Judge Gibson, in the His- A tory of York County, published Maryland Patent. in 1886: On the 18th of April, 1732, there was surveyed in virtue of the said warrant by Philip Jones, Deputy Surveyor, under Charles Calvert, Esq., Surveyor General of the western shore of the Province of Mary- land, a parcel of land said to lie in Prince George's County, called Digges' Choice, in the backwoods, the quantity of 6,822 acres, and the same was returned into the land office, by sundry courses, from one place of beginning, viz. : At three bounded hickories, and one bounded white oak, and one bounded wild cherry tree, standing at the mouth of a branch, which is commonly known by the name of Gresses' branch, where it intersects with Conewago, and running thence north. The remaining courses and distances are not given. Jones' certificate and return were accepted and re- corded, and thereupon a patent issued to John Digges, bearing date the IIth day of October, 1735, at the annual rent of 13 pounds, 12s, IId, sterling, payable at Lady Day and Michaelmas.

could find contiguous to the patented tract. In pursuance of this warrant, there was sur- veyed on the Ist day of August, 1745, a parcel of vacant land contiguous to the patented tract, containing 3,679 acres, for which he paid a new consideration, and on the 18th of October, 1745, a patent issued for the same.

It appears, however, that John Digges had applied for a warrant to the land office of Pennsylvania. On the 18th day of July, 1743, Secretary Peters wrote to Thomas Cookson, Surveyor for Lancaster County, in which county this land was then situated, that Digges had an irregular piece of land at Conewago, by a Maryland survey, and had applied for such a quantity, all around it, as might bring it within straight lines, but upon such terms as the secretary was not willing to grant a warrant. However, Cookson might, at Digges' request, survey for the use of the proprietaries so much as he required, the price to be left to them. On the 20th of April, 1744, Digges wrote to the secretary from Little Conewago, that he had waited at that place to have his lands run round that the vacancy might be re- served for the proprietor's use. Cookson proposed it now in a different manner, but assured him he should have the preference of any vacancy adjoining, with a request not to grant to any other person until he marked and made known his lines. The further correspondence, in relation to this matter, shows that the Germans settled about Conewago Creek, on the lands claimed by Digges, had contracted with him for the purchase of their plantations and re- ceived bonds for the consideration money. They had ascertained by computation, that the extent of his claim was more than his patent contained, and they requested him to have his lines marked, which he refused to do. They procured an attested copy of the courses of his tract from the land office at Annapolis, and, though opposed by him, a surveyor ran the lines sufficiently to show that several plantations he had sold were without the bounds of his Maryland patent. John Digges' application to

The southern boundary of the tract fell four miles to the northward of the tem- porary line as run and returned in 1739, agreeably to the royal order. Digges re- mained in quiet and undisturbed possession thereof. But numbers of foreigners coming into these parts, and lands thereby rising in value, he, by petition, on the 15th of July, 1745, applied to the office at Annapolis, under color of some error in the survey, for Pennsylvania Pennsylvania office was in a warrant to correct those errors, and take Survey. 1743, which seems not to have succeeded. He then, in 1745, obtained a warrant of resurvey up the contiguous vacancy, and he obtained a warrant requiring the surveyor of Prince George's County to add any vacant land he from the Maryland office and took in by it

HISTORY OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

the plantations left out in the original sur- livered to John Digges, the patentee. The vey, including several tracts for which war- irregularity of the tract, it will be remem- bered, is mentioned in the Pennsylvania ap- plication and Digges' claims were not with- out foundation, and all his land would have been secured to him under the Pennsylvania system of making proprietary surveys. That is, trees were marked, and where there were no trees or natural boundaries, arti- ficial marks were set up to distinguish the survey. "The Maryland surveys," as the court said, "were merely ideal, precisely fixed on paper alone. No trees . were marked except the beginning boundary."

rants had been granted by the proprietaries of Pennsylvania, some of which had been patented. Digges, however, contended that he had only marked the true courses of the land that had been granted to him, and he proposed the sale of the lands included in his resurvey. The people complained, and wanted a Pennsylvania surveyor to ascer- tain and mark the lines. Cookson wrote that it would pay the proprietors to have this done. There was no doubt about the resurvey taking in lands not included in his first survey, but Digges contended that his original warrant was for 10,000 acres of land and he had located it, and that the mistakes of the surveyor, in not including all his settlements, and giving him his full quantity, should not deprive him of his original right of claim and possession by virtue of his Maryland warrant.

The facts were these (as appeared after- ward in a judicial determination of the question in the case of the lessee of Thomas Lilly against George Kitzmiller, before Jus- tices Shippen and Yeates, of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, tried at York in May, 1791) : The instructions of Lord Balti- more to Charles Carroll, his agent, dated September 12, 1712, showed the mode of assigning warrants, wherein he directed that in each survey the boundary alone should be marked, and the courses and distances specified in the return of the sur- vey, as the fairest mode and the best calcu- lated to prevent civil suits. It appears that Edward Stevenson, Deputy Surveyor of Maryland, did not return the survey actu- ally made by him on the ground. The John Leman, Sr., first settled on 10,000 acres were really contained within Disputed the lands in controversy under the lines of the lands run by Stevenson, in- Titles. John Digges. He declared to Digges, in 1752, that he had set- tled on the same under a Pennsylvania right. But in the year 1736 he had agreed with Digges for 100 acres of land and had received orders from him to his agent to survey the same. John Leman, Sr., con- tinued there for some time, and had a son born on the land, and afterward sold his im- provements to Martin Kitzmiller, who, in 1738, came to live on the land. In 1733 Robert Owings was directed by John Digges to lay out and dispose of sundry cluding the lands in question, and upon making his plate and finding the figure to be very irregular, he got displeased and declared he would not cast up the contents, or return it in that form, and then he re- duced a number of lines into one, struck off five or six angles in different places, and made a new plate of the whole tract, differ- ing from the courses and distances run on the land. Of 270 courses contained in the field notes, which were for several years in his possession, he left out about 150 of them, and these notes were afterward de- parcels of land, which he did. The lines

Lord Baltimore's instructions of 1712 showed his intentions, and that he was in- fluenced only by the courses and distances returned. The survey was ambulatory, not confined to a certain spot of land, but was governed by the variation of the compass and was continually shifting. The courses and distances returned formed the survey, and determined on an exact measurement, the particular lands granted as often as they were run. The courses and distances were alone binding on the proprietor and conse- quently on the patentee. Any circum- stances shown could not establish a title to lands without the limits of the original sur- vey as returned. Settlers could have bought lands from Digges even within the resurvey and acquired title by possession and improvements, but all this had now been judicially determined. Unfortunately for Digges, his resurvey had been made after the Royal Order, and was ineffectual as against the Pennsylvania settlers. There were other facts that gave color to his claim at the time.

-- --------------------- E 1 1

- -

----------

THE BOUNDARY LINE

run did not extend beyond the limits of the first survey, and the lands laid out for John Leman and others were really in the origi- nal survey of Digges' Choice, except a few corners, and Edward Stevenson actually omitted part of the lines run by him. Thomas Prather executed the warrant of resurvey, and the orders from Digges were to run the old lines as nearly as possible, and to survey the 10,000 acres which were actually included in the lines run by Steven- son. In fact, then, the land had been lo- cated under the warrant by a proper sur- vey, and, therefore, John Digges addressed to the governor of Maryland a remon- strance on complaint of disturbances made by him on the border, contending that the surveyor omitted lines actually run by him and settlements made by him within his tract. In this remonstrance he complained that Nicholas Forney and Martin Ullery had trespassed on part of his land and de- stroyed the growing timber, for which he had sued them. These men, at Digges' suit, were arrested by the sheriff of Baltimore County; and were rescued by Adam Forney, father of Nicholas.

within this province, and as the affair may greatly affect our proprietor, the whole will turn on this single point-whether the place where Adam Forney was arrested be or be not within our province." He then says that Forney must take along with him two witnesses, at least, to Annapolis, who could swear that the place where he was arrested was within our province, and at some distance from Digges' Choice. The ex- penses were to be paid by the government, which also undertook to pay the lawyers. He further wrote that the attorney-general could not go to Annapolis, but he had given all necessary directions to Mr. Calder. The letter to Calder stated that as John Digges had thought proper to execute a writ of the Supreme Court of Maryland against Adam Forney, within the jurisdiction of this prov- ince, Richard Peters desired to retain Cal- der for Adam Forney, and would send by the first good hand two pistols. Mr. Tilgh- man was also to be retained. These law- yers were to defend Adam Forney in such a manner so that there might be an appeal to the King in council. It turned out, how- ever, by the witnesses who were to be se- cured for Forney, and who were reported to be intelligent men who spoke English well, that the spot which Adam Forney and his son occupied was actually within Digges' old survey and patented land. The engage- ment of Calder, therefore, on behalf of the proprietaries of Pennsylvania, was re- scinded, and Forney, after a rebuke, was left to defend his own case.

It appears by a letter of Adam Forney's on the 25th of April, 1746, that the sheriff took his two prisoners to the house of Adam Forney, who asked him by what authority he arrested these men, and offered to be bound for their appearance at court if they owed any money. The reply was that they should give their bond to Digges for the land or depart from it. Adam said that the men had taken up the Another incident in this case may be no- ticed. At a meeting of the Provincial Council, held at Philadelphia, on the 17th of March, 1748, it was reported by an express from Thomas Cookson that Adam Forney was shot dead by a drunken Indian, as he stood at his own door. The Indian was seized and taken before Justice George Swope, at York, and there detained until the governor should give orders as to what should be done with him. The trouble arose from the fact occurring within the lines of Digges' patent, and the attorney- general had to be consulted on the question of jurisdiction. In the meantime the report was contradicted. Forney had been shot but recovered, so nothing further was done. land five years before from the proprietaries at Philadelphia and it had been surveyed for them. He ordered the two men to return to their habitation. The sheriff drew his sword and Forney's party drew theirs, whereupon the sheriff and Digges fled. (Pennsylvania Archives, Series I, Vol. 2, p. 686.) . Consequently in the month of Feb- ruary, 1747, Adam Forney was arrested at his house by an under sheriff, and posse, from Maryland, armed with clubs, and was carried off to the Baltimore jail, for resist- ing officers of the law. This raised a ques- tion of jurisdiction. Secretary Peters wrote to Thomas Cookson to go to Adam Forney, with papers directed to Mr. Calder, who was to defend him "at the Supreme In 1749 a petition was presented to Gov- Court in a writ served on him manifestly ernor Hamilton, signed by Henry Sell and

HISTORY OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

thirteen others, praying for relief. They juries all legal proof of jurisdiction. On were inhabitants of the Conewago Settle- ment and Digges had threatened to sue them, unless they would pay him 100 pounds, Maryland currency. He had mort- gaged his land to Charles Carroll and Squire Dulaney, and they represented themselves in danger of being carried to Maryland, and there confined and be obliged to quit their plantations. (Pennsylvania Archives, Ist series, Vol. 2, page 28.) the 30th day of October, 1752, the attorney- general of Maryland, H. Darnall, appeared and made a petition to the Judges of Oyer and Terminer and Jail Delivery, then sitting at York, stating that by the authority of the President of Maryland in council, he at- tended the court and was expressly charged to insist that the trial of Jacob Kitzmiller be held in Maryland, where the act was committed and not in Pennsylvania. With These troubles continued to this argument-that the aforesaid Dudley Shooting disturb the settlers on Digges' Digges was killed at a place surveyed under of Dudley Choice and claim the attention a Maryland warrant before the date of the said Royal Order of 1738, and possessed under a Maryland right, and that no atone- ment or other pretext of Martin Kitzmiller, or any other person or persons after the date of said order, will prevent or take away the right of the said Proprietor of Mary- land, or can in the least hinder the force, effect and operation of his Majesty's most gracious intentions. (Penna. Archives, Series I, Vol. 2, p. 93.)

Digges. of the Governor and Council, without any result, until the killing of Dudley Digges, which occurred on the 26th of February, 1752. In conse- quence of this disaster John Digges pre- 'sented a petition to Benjamin Tasker, President of Maryland, representing that his son had been murdered within the limits of that province by Martin Kitzmiller, his son Jacob and others of his family, and that the 27th day of April had been appointed for the trial at York. This was communi- cated to Governor Hamilton, of Pennsyl- vania, who answered that he had " carefully examined into the unhappy affair and had found that Jacob Kitzmiller had killed the deceased, Dudley Digges, to the northward of the Temporary Line," and "that he is now imprisoned at York to receive his trial for an offense committed in Pennsylvania. There was a mistake as to the time of the trial, and on the claim of jurisdiction. It was requested that the trial should be de- layed a reasonable time." The reply of President Tasker contains an elaborate argument in behalf of the Maryland claim to jurisdiction, and enclosed affidavits as to the facts already mentioned about the set- tlement of John Leman and the surveyor, Robert Owings. The Council on the 27th of September, 1752, after hearing, debating and considering the premises, were of the opinion that the possession of Digges or his tenants, at the time of the Royal Order, of the land where the crime was committed. was not held by any warrant or patent, and notice was given President Tasker that the court for the trial of the case would be held at York, on the 30th day of October, where persons authorized by the Maryland gov- ernment may lay before the Grand and Petit

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 York County Pennsylvania, Volume I, Part 14

Author: Prowell, George R. Publication date: 1907 Publisher: J. H. Beers Number of Pages: 1372

Author: Prowell, George R.
Publication date: 1907
Publisher: J. H. Beers
Number of Pages: 1372