USA > Pennsylvania > York County > The Beginnings of the German Element in York County, Pennsylvania > Part 3
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
20 Col. Rec., IV: 150.
3
34
German Element in York County, Pa.
ability is that if John was not a German he was at least not bound to the English Quakers of Lancaster County with such strong bonds of intimacy and nationality that they could not be severed.
Nevertheless before the Hendrickses crossed the Sus- quehanna they were evidently regarded as Englishmen by their fellow-citizens in Chester County. For in an old assessment list21 for "Conestoga," Chester County, which gives the names of all the inhabitants of the Conestoga district in the year 1718 together with the rate for each, the inhabitants are distinguished as "English" and "Dutch." Here we find the names of James Hendricks and John Hendricks listed among the "English in- habitants."
A similar inference may be drawn from the case of the Tobias Hendricks mentioned above as one of the mem- bers of "James Hendricks and company" settled on the Conestoga in 1715. Here the names, both Christian and surname, might be either English or German.22 But this Tobias Hendricks was certainly regarded as English, for he became one of the magistrates of the peace for Lan- caster County about 172723 and served repeatedly in that capacity. His signature, still to be found on many docu- ments in the Division of Public Records at Harrisburg, is always in English script. From the appearance of his signature in 1737 and from the fact that he died as an old man in 1739 he seems to have belonged to the generation
21 In the court house at West Chester. Copied by Gilbert Cope, Esq., and published in Egle's " Notes and Queries," Second Series, p. 131.
22 The Christian name Tobias is of frequent occurrence among the Ger- mans of Pennsylvania and John Tobias is the full name of a German who arrived in New York port Sept. 17, 1743. See Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 33, p. 232.
23 According to his own affirmation. Archives, I: 362.
35
The First Settlers.
of the elder James Hendricks and was probably his brother. 24
But here again midst the conclusive evidence for the English nationality of Tobias Hendricks there are clear indications of close relationship with the Germans. For Tobias Hendricks, Jr., second son of the magistrate, very early associated himself with the Germans of York County in religious affairs. He was one of the founders of the German Lutheran Congregation of the Codorus. In the baptismal records of that Church his name appears as one of the heads of families in that congregation. All the other members of the Church were pure Germans. But it is a significant fact that a slight distinction is made in the Church Record between Tobias Hendricks and the other members of the Church. Pastor Stover, who kept the record, made all the entries in deep German script with the sole exception of the entry concerning Hendricks. His name is written in English script. The words of the entry are written in the German language and in German script but the English (or Latin) name of one of the children baptized is also in English script like the super- scription "Tobias Hendricks."25 This is a clear indica-
24 He died in the Cumberland Valley west of the river in Nov. 1739, leaving a wife, Catherine, one daughter, Rebecca, and six sons. Egle's " Notes and Queries," Vol. II, 1896, p. 264. He was the ancestor of Vice- President Thomas A. Hendrix.
25 This record is in the possession of Pastor Enders of York. The entry referred to is as follows (the words in English script are here in italic) :
Tobias Hendrick
Geb.
Getauft
[Here are records of baptisms of two sons, Joh. Jacob and Joh., and two daughters, Elizabetha and Rebecca.]
1744 1744
Jan. 30 .- Eine tochter Veronica zeug. Joh: Wolf .- April 15.
36
German Element in York County, Pa.
tion that Tobias Hendricks, though associated with the Germans in their worship, was nevertheless regarded by Pastor Stöver as English.
What conclusion may we draw from these considera- tions? It is highly probable, but remains without positive proof, that these Hendrickses were of German descent, that their ancestors one or two generations previous were Mennonites in Switzerland or in the Rhine Valley and had fled before persecution and found refuge in England; that there they quickly associated themselves with their English brethren in the faith, the Quakers, and with them came to America. In this case they might be called Eng- lishmen of German descent, and this would account for their German spirit of enterprise in pushing across the Susquehanna and locating where they did, while at the same time it would account for their English associations and the English form of their Christian names. Certain it is that soon after their location in York County the Hendrickses were close associates of the Germans who followed them into the county. They sympathized with them in times of adversity and cooperated with them in matters of religion. But while there were these strong bonds of sympathy and cooperation, perhaps even ties of blood between these pioneer Hendrickses and the early Germans in the county, nevertheless the places from which they came, their associates before their migration, together with the other evidence in the case, seem to leave little room for doubt that John and James Hendricks were regarded as Englishmen when they crossed the Susque- hanna and that the honor of the first authorized settle- ments in York County cannot be claimed for the pure Germans.
CHAPTER III.
THE FIRST SETTLEMENT.
F the first individual settler in the county was not a German the first community of settlements did undoubtedly consist of German settlers and those parts of the county which were first tamed and subdued to the purposes of civiliza- tion have from the beginning borne the stamp of German language and culture.
It was in that same valley of the Kreutz Creek where the Hendrickses were settled and where unsuccessful efforts at permanent settlement had previously been made that the first stream of newcomers from the eastern side of the Susquehanna deposited itself. It followed very closely upon the settlement of John Hendricks in 1728. Even before that settlement was consummated many of the set- tlers east of the river had begun to manifest a desire to settle on the west bank. The Shawannah Indians of the village opposite Hempfield had removed into the interior. The false impression had got abroad among the people east of the river that the Indians of the Five Nations had resigned their claims to the lands on this part of the Sus- quehanna, and a letter of August 10, 1727, from James
L
37
38
German Element in York County, Pa.
Logan to Samuel Blunston indicates that not a few citizens of Pennsylvania were prospecting daily on the lands be- yond the river with a view to staking out claims and set- tling there. We have one instance of this in the effort of Henry Hendricks and Thomas Linvil mentioned above.1 Such settlements were, however, prevented for the time being. But when the opposition of the Indians subsided and when Hendricks had made a beginning, a veritable tide of immigration began to rise and sweep into the new territory. Many of these settlers took the trouble to secure the permission of the proprietary representative. Others settled irregularly though not without the knowl- edge and tacit consent of the government. It is known, for example, that Caspar Spangler settled in the valley in 1729 and that Tobias Frey had settled there prior to 1733.2 Already in November, 1729, Blunston could write to Logan : " Many people out of this province are for remov- ing over the River so that I doubt not but another year will settle most of the habitable land for they flock over daily in search. The remainder of that by Hendricks would have been settled before now had they not been prevented."3
These settlers all took up their claims in the valley of the Kreutz Creek stretching westward and southwestward from John Hendricks's property. Hendricks's plantation was the oldest and therefore the best known of the planta- tions in that neighborhood and so was used to designate the location of other places. A number of these settlers afterwards in their depositions in referring to the location of their plantations would regularly affirm that they were
1 Vide supra, p. 25.
2 " The Spengler Families With Local Historical Sketches," pp. 17 and 138.
3 Vide Appendix A.
-
39
The First Settlement.
situated a certain number of miles westward or southwest- ward from John Hendricks.4 The nationality of these earliest settlers in the community of the Kreutz Creek was almost without exception German. This fact is important for the subsequent history of the county and for a while it entailed rather serious consequences upon the settlers them- selves. Carter and Glossbrenner remark: "The earliest settlers were English; these were however succeeded by vast numbers of German immigrants. ... Most of the German immigrants settled in the neighborhood of Kreutz Creek. . . In the whole of what was called the 'Kreutz Creek Settlement ' (if we except Wrightsville) there was but one English family, that of William Morgan." We have it upon the same good authority that the first tailor in the county was Valentine Heyer, that the first blacksmith was Peter Gardner, that the first shoemaker was Samuel Lan- dis, who had his shop somewhere on the Kreutz Creek, that the first stone dwellings were built in 1735 on the Kreutz Creek by John and Martin Schultz. The first schoolmaster was known by no other name than "Der Dicke Schulmeister." Thus all the known arts of that primitive civilization among the county's first inhabitants were in the hands of Germans. The number and names of these earliest German settlers in the Kreutz Creek settle- ment, their legal status and their distressing experiences in their new homes we shall be able to understand after we have taken a glance at a parallel effort at settlement that was being made by Marylanders.
This Maryland settlement within the present limits of York County centered about the spot from which Parnell and others had been compelled to remove in 1728. The
4 For example, Pennsylvania Archives, I: 523, 524; Col. Rec., III: 613.
40
German Element in York County, Pa.
settling of the Marylanders here began in the year 1729 and grew rapidly during the next few years. Already on November 30, 1729, Blunston wrote to Logan "All the land about Parnels5 is surveyed and settled by Mary- landers." Afterwards when the dispute concerning the boundary had become acute the Marylanders sought to establish their claim to the region by proving their priority in time of settlement. For in 1736 after the undignified controversy between the provinces had led to forceful con- flicts and among other acts of violence the house of Col. >Thomas Cressap, a Marylander settled at the mouth of Cabin Branch on the west bank of the Susquehanna, had been burned over his head, evidence was adduced to show that a number of persons living in the immediate neighbor- hood of Cressap's house had held lands under Maryland warrants for several years. Thus the evidence of Stephen
> Onion, taken at Annapolis on January 12, 1736, and pre- served in the unpublished Calvert Papers,6 indicates that in 1729 Onion had secured a warrant from the Maryland office for "Pleasant Garden" which he sold to Thomas Cressap who settled and built "soon after it was sur- veyed"; that by virtue of a warrant from the Maryland office in the same year Jacob Herrington surveyed and " soon thereafter settled " a tract of 81 acres called " Bul- ford"; that in 1730 by the same authority Thomas Bond secured a tract of 460 acres called " Bond's Mannour " and settled thereon William Cannon and John Lowe; that by virtue of warrant dated December 19, 1729, Onion had surveyed on June 2, 1730, a tract of 600 acres called "Conhodah" and had occupied the same in February,
5 Parnell evidently had been located there long enough to give his name to the place.
6 No. 319.
4I
The First Settlement.
1732; that in 1731 Onion had secured a tract of 290 acres called "Smith's Choice" which was occupied by William Smith. "And this deponent also saith that before the im- provements made on the said lands by the said settlers there were no improvements on them that this deponent saw but a few Indian Cabbins and a little hutt made of logs and a small quantity of ground cleared by a White Man who was driven away by the Indians as this deponent was informed and which hutt was sometimes empty and at other times possessed by the Indians and that no white person or persons was or were settled on any of the lands to this deponent's knowledge or that he hath heard of when the people herein beforementioned settled and im- proved the same, and further this deponent saith not."
Now Cressap's log house is known to have stood upon the spot cleared and improved by Edward Parnell and others and relinquished by them on order of the Pennsyl- vania government in 1728. It was therefore about three and one half miles south of the property of John and James Hendricks.7 The other tracts referred to in Onion's deposition adjoined the Cressap property. For on March I, 1736, Rachael Evans testified that her husband Edward Evans lived " about one and one half miles from Cressap's late dwelling house "; that Jacob Herrington lived one and one fourth miles westward from Cressap; that William Smith lived two miles westward from Cressap; and that Robert Cannon lived one and one half miles north from Cressap. 'Adjoining Cannon was John Lowe less than a mile westward from Cressap's house.8 No dates are given
7 The foundations and cellar of the house are still to be seen on the Maish property in Lower Windsor Township. A photograph of these re- mains in the possession of the York County Historical Society.
8 No. 319.
42
German Element in York County, Pa.
for the actual settlement of these persons except in the case of Stephen Onion himself, and this date (February, 1732) in all probability refers not to his first occupation but to a later location. But from other sources it would appear that Thomas Cressap was the first settler there. For on September 13, 1731, Governor Gordon of Penn- sylvania complained to Governor Calvert of Maryland because for several months he had heard rumors about grants from the Maryland Office for lands on the west side of the Susquehanna. Two weeks later the Indian Cap- tain Civility complained to Samuel Blunston of Lancaster County because Cressap had settled at Conejohela and had been disturbing the peace of the Indians there. And the following January Cressap himself declared under oath that he had been living on the west side of the Sus- quehanna since March 16, 1731.9 Stephen Onion seems therefore to have been the first Marylander to take out a warrant for land in that neighborhood and Thomas Cres- sap seems to have been the first settler. But as Onion's warrant was not secured until 1729 and as Cressap did not settle there until 1731 it is clear that the Maryland settle- ments could not have followed very closely upon that of John Hendricks and certainly the closing sentence in Onion's deposition is a mistake. Priority of authorized settle- ment in the Kreutz Creek Valley cannot be maintained for the Maryland settlers even if this had constituted a valid claim to the territory. But from the foregoing it is evi- dent that the settlements under Maryland authority were early enough and numerous enough and far enough north to constitute a real source of apprehension to any others who might claim jurisdiction over those parts.
9 Archives, I: 291, 295, and 31I.
43
The First Settlement.
Now it was the bitter conflict between the English citi- zens of Maryland gathered about Thomas Cressap at the mouth of Cabin Branch and the German citizens of Penn- sylvania whose plantations stretched westward and south- westward from John Hendricks along the Kreutz Creek Valley, that shaped events among the very earliest inhabi- tants of our county and occupied the attention of both the settlers and the provincial authorities for several years. And it is from the documents pertaining to this conflict that we draw much of our information concerning those earliest settlers.10
10 This conflict was one of the incidents in the general contention between the two provinces concerning the boundary. William Penn received his title to Pennsylvania from the British Crown in 1681, and for more than eighty years thereafter the boundary lines between his province and Mary- land were the source of almost constant dispute. There is now a bulky literature pertaining to this controversy and its tedious negotiations. Many of the documents bearing on the dispute are found scattered over the Archives and Colonial Records of the two provinces, and many of them remain un- published among the " Penn Papers " in the Historical Society of Pennsylva- nia at Philadelphia, in the Department of Internal Affairs and the Division of Public Records at Harrisburg, and in the Maryland Historical Society at Baltimore (vide, e. g., Pennsylvania Archives, Second Series, Vol. VII, pp. 301-400; for other literary references see Winsor's "Narrative and Critical History of America," Vol. III, p. 514). A brief statement of the issues involved and the facts of the negotiations is found in the article by J. Dunlop, " The Controversy between William Penn and Lord Baltimore," in the "Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania," Vol. I, pp. 163-204. A popular statement of the case in brief compass is Chapter XI of Sydney George Fisher's "The Making of Pennsylvania."
Suffice it to say here that the whole difficulty concerning the southern boundary of Pennsylvania grew out of ignorance on the part of the pro- prietors in England as to the location of the 40th degree of latitude in America. Lord Baltimore's grant (1632) was merely for the unoccupied part of Virginia from the Potomac northward, a very indefinite description. But in Penn's grant of 1681 the province of Pennsylvania is described as bounded " on the south by a circle drawn at twelve miles distance from Newcastle, northward and westward unto the beginning of the 40th degree of north lattude and thence by a straight line westward." Now the " begin-
44
German Element in York County, Pa.
It follows from the conditions of haste and irregularity under which the first surveys west of the Susquehanna were made and from the circumstances of intercolonial strife
ning of the 40th degree " from the equator is the 39th parallel. But the 39th parallel runs just north the present city of Washington. And the 40th parallel runs somewhat north of Philadelphia. Neither of these parallels falls within 12 miles of Newcastle. Thus the boundary was uncertain and while the propietary negotiations dragged on in England a petty border warfare began in America. The disturbances began east of the Sus- quehanna where the Pennsylvanians contended for lands as far south as the mouth of the Octoraro Creek, about 5 miles south of the present border. In 1723 both proprietors agreed to abstain from making further grants in the disputed territory for eighteen months or until satisfactory adjustment could be made. But years passed and no conclusion was reached. By 1732 the controversy was carried into the region west of the Susquehanna, and here the Marylanders laid claim to the lands at the mouth of Cabin Branch and in the Kreutz Creek Valley, nearly thirty miles farther north than any point claimed by them east of the river. Their object was to extend the Maryland domain west of the river as far north as the 40th parallel of latitude. This region west of the river and within the present limits of York County, was the chief scene of the border warfare and the disturb- ances here are known as " Cressap's War."
In 1732 the proprietors of the two provinces agreed to have the boundary line surveyed. This agreement placed the southern boundary of Pennsyl- vania on a parallel of latitude fifteen miles south of a parallel passing through the most southerly point in Philadelphia. But because of other stipulations in this agreement it proved distasteful to Lord Baltimore and under various pretexts he delayed its fulfillment and refused to let the sur- vey be made. So the acrimonious correspondence between the provinces continued but without effect. In 1735 the Penns began a suit in equity against Baltimore to compel him to fulfil his contract. This was not ended until 1750, when it was decided in favor of the Penns. Meanwhile re- peated appeals came from America asking that a provisional line be run in order to allay the hostilities between the inhabitants of the provinces. This resulted in an order from the King establishing the " temporary line of 1739" fifteen and one fourth miles south of Philadelphia on the east side of the Susquehanna and fourteen and three fourths miles south of Philadelphia on the west side of that river. The pending proceedings in chancery resulted in 1750 in a decree that the agreement of 1732 should be carried into specific execution. But forthwith a dispute arose as to the proper methods of mensuration. This was not settled until 1760. In 1736
45
The First Settlement.
attending the first settlements there, that the legal status of the earliest settlers is not easy to determine. It prob- ably was not in all cases clearly defined at the time. The Marylanders took out their claims and settled under ordi- nary warants from the Maryland Office. This gave them a certain advantage over those who came from Pennsyl- vania. For according to established custom and law in Pennsylvania no titles whatever could be granted to lands until they had been purchased from the Indians. The government of Pennsylvania did not begin to issue even temporary licenses until 1733. John and James Hen- dricks had settled on Indian territory before that time but this was by special permission of the proprietary govern- ment and then only on condition that they first secure the consent of the Indians. Their formal license was not is- sued until March, 1733, and even this was only a tem- porary license. But in Maryland no such custom obtained with reference to the lands of the Indians and the Mary- land authorities did not hesitate to grant permits to settle on lands that had never been purchased from the natives.
The Maryland government did indeed early recognize such a purchase as desirable for the security of its people. For Philemon Lloyd, the proprietary agent at Annapolis, in a letter of October 8, 1722, to the "Co-Partners" in London urges at great length a treaty with the Susque- hanna Indians and then remarks,
I do assure you Gentlemen that something of this Nature is very necessary to be don; for now, that we are about Lycencing our
two expert surveyors, Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon, were sent to America to supervise the survey of the boundary. This survey, carrying out the agreement of 1732, was completed on December 26, 1767, and has given us the famous Mason and Dixon Line, celebrated now as the dividing line between the two sections of the country during the Civil War.
46
German Element in York County, Pa.
People, to make Remote Settlements, we must likewise use the Proper Measures to protect them; for the Lands next above our Settlements upon the west side of the Susquehannah, and all along upon the West side of Baltimore County, are cutt off & separated from the Present Inhabited Parts by large Barrens, many Miles over; so that as yet, the setlers there can expect very little Com- munication with us; yet if they should be Cutt off & Murthered by the Indians we must insist upon Satisfaction for the security of our present Outer Inhabitants; which may involve us in a fatall War. But by this Means of Purchasing those Indian Rights, we may think ourselves pretty secure, as well from those Indians them- selves as from any strange Indians that shall traverse those Woods.11
Nevertheless no such purchase was ever made by Mary- land and hence the Marylanders who took up lands within the limits of our county must be regarded as squatters and not as authorized settlers. They had warrants, it is true, but the validity of these warrants was always denied by the Pennsylvania authorities who claimed that whole region under the terms of the royal grant to William Penn.
Not until January, 1733, did the proprietary govern- ment of Pennsylvania begin to issue its first licenses to take up land west of the river. The settlements that had been made there by Pennsylvanians before 1733 had been per- mitted by the government authorities with the consent of the Indians but no titles had been given. It was hoped that the lands west of the Susquehanna would soon be pur- chased from the aborigines and thus the Indian policy of the Penns might be carried out. Thomas Penn (son of William Penn, Sr.) arrived in the province August, 1732, and John Penn (eldest son of William) came in October, 1734.12 But the Indian purchase west of the river was
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.