Saturday, December 15, 2012

Evert Pels, My 8G Grandfather

Evert Pels, my 8G grandfather, from Stettin, Pomerania, his wife, and a servant came from Amsterdam, Holland, to the colony of Rensselaerswyck in 1642. While still in Amsterdam, on June 5,1642, he was engaged as a brewer for the term of six years. He was to travel to the Colony of Rensselaerswyck to work for the Patroon, KiliaenVan Rensselaer, [who remained in Holland, but had engaged others to administer the Colony for him and his partners who formed a Board of Directors for the Colony.] Evert Pels and his wife came on the ship Den Houten. and landed in New Amsterdam, now New York City. They then went up the Hudson River to Beverwijck, now Albany, New York. 

Evert Pels was a freeman. He paid his own way to the Colony and was, therefore, not indentured to the patroon for a number of years as were those who bound themselves as servants to the patroon for a number of years in exchange for passage to the Colony. The document, dated June 3, 1642, that gives the details of Evert Pel's emigration does not give the name of his wife, Jannetje Symons., but we now know that she is the wife who came with him from Amsterdam. Nor does the memo give the name of the servant who came with them.

Evert Pels was a very enterprising man. After his six year contract as a brewer was finished on February 28, 1648, he leased a farm on Papscanee Island for six years, at f560 a year, but after building a new house and barns, he transferred the lease Jan 14, 1649, to Juriaen Bestvall and Jochem Kettelheym. [Both of whom had come to the New Netherlands on the same ship as Evert. These were two men who had come to the colony by contracting with the patroon to work for six years as laborers. Their time was now served and they were able to lease a farm and work for themselves.] Evert Pels turned the farm over to them on March 25, 1649. 

November 18,1649, he leased jointly with Willem Fredericksz (Bout), a farm in Greenbush, for which he is charged in the accounts with an annual rent of f400, from May 1, 1649 until 1661 when he moved to  Esopus; the same day he also leased the saw-and grist-mill in Greenbush, for which he is charged with an annual rent of f125, from May 1, 1649, till May 1, 1658. He also owned a sloop on the river and a lot on Broadway in Manhattan which he sold in 1656. In 1657 he sent down to New Amsterdam 2100 beaver skins. He advised the Director of the colony on horses and other farm animals.

In the Colony of Rensselaerswyck, they were living on a frontier. The village of Beaverwyck was adjacent to Fort Orange, which was established to conduct the fur trade with the Indians. Even the name Beaverwijck reflects that the fur trade with the Indians was the main purpose for the settlement at Albany. There were fewer than 1000 settlers living from New Amsterdam to Fort Orange. The settlement went as far north as Albany for two reasons, 1) because the level of the Hudson River, raises one foot there at high tide, and that is as far as the sailing ships could travel up the river to bring trade goods and supplies from Holland and to transport the fur pelts down the river to New Amsterdam; and 2) the Mohawk River flows into the Hudson River near Albany which allowed Indians from western New York to bring furs more easily. Traders did not travel about the Indian nations to trade for furs. Instead, the Indians brought their furs to Beaverwijck and the trading was conducted there. Goods coming from Europe were unloaded from the ocean-
going ships at New Amsterdam (now New York) and reloaded on a river yacht for transport up the river to Beaverwijck. (The trip up river took several days.) The colonists were living in the midst of several Indian nations. The settlements did not go very far inland from the river. Their surroundings were really primitive. They lived in log houses and the town was surrounded by palisades.

In 1661 Evert Pels, his family, and a number of friends bought land in the Esopus [the region around the Esopus river where Kingston, New York, now is].

It appears that Ever Pels and his family moved to the Esopus in April, May, or June of 1661. At the time of the move, Evert Pels and Jannetje Symons had seven children. Their names and approximate birth dates are given as follows:
Hendrick, born about 1643-44;
Jannetje, born about 1646;
Evert Evertse, born about 1648;
Clara, christened 10 Sept. 1651;
Marie, born about 1653-55;
Elizabeth, born about 1657; and
Sara, christened, 3 July 1659.
Two more children were born in the Esopus:
Rebecca, baptized 13 Nov. 1661 and
Symon baptized 29 March 1665.

The following History of the Esopus region is from Peter R. Christoph’s Introduction in “The Kingston papers”, published by the Holland Society of New York, together with quotes from the Kingston Papers:

The earliest known sale of land in the region of the Esopus involved a parcel sold by the Esopus Indians to Thomas Chambers, a carpenter and farmer residing at that time in Rensselaerswyck. The patent was confirmed on June 5, 1652.  Throughout the early history of the settlement, the presence of the Indians cast an ominous pall over the whole community. They were particularly vulnerable in their scattered houses and were often at fault for the bad relations with the natives. Director-General Peter Stuyvesant [my half 9th great grand uncle],  recognized the danger to them, and, at his urging, the settlers signed a bond on May 31, 1658, agreeing to erect a palisaded village and demolish their separate dwellings. Then on the night of September 20, 1659, a group of settlers and soldiers senselessly shot three Indians, killing one of them. The result was the First Esopus War, which did not end until the signing of a peace treaty on July 15, 1660.

Despite the war and the uneasiness of the ensuing peace, the population of the community continued to grow. By May 2, 1661, the hamlet had been named Wildwyck by Stuyvesant. About May of 1662 a second community was established nearby, called Nieuw Dorp (New Town) [now Hurley] which was settled by former residents of Beaverwyck and Wildwyck. The farmland bought by Evert Pels was between Wildwyck and Nieuw Dorp.

The fragile peace ended on June 7, 1663, when the Indians burned Nieuw Dorp and attacked Wildwyck. On that morning a number of Esopus Indians entered Wildwyck [now Kingston] to sell their produce, corn, and beans to the settlers. Between 11:00 and 12:00 in the forenoon, some people on horseback, rushed thru the Mill gate, from the village, crying out “the Indians have destroyed the village.” Upon hearing this, the Indians fired a shot and attacked the settlers at every house with axes, tomahawks, rifles, and pistols. Sixteen settlers were killed and a number were carried off as prisoners. Everts Pels’ son Hendrick was one of those who were carried off. He was not found until a year and a half later. By that time he had married an Indian girl and had a child. He lived among the Indians for the rest of his life. The resulting loss of life, concern for settlers taken hostage, and heavy loss of property had a long-lasting effect upon the community. A peace treaty was concluded on May 15, 1664. This was the Second Esopus war

Next new trouble came to Esopus from a new source. English forces sent by the Duke of York seized New Amsterdam on September 8, 1664; on the 25th Wildwyck was placed under the authority of the Duke. New Netherlands and New Amsterdam were renamed New York and Beaverwijck became Albany. The name Wildwyck fell into disuse, the new community was generally referred to as the Town of Esopus. Peter Stuyvesant retired to the life of a private citizen and the residents of Esopus struggled to adjust to the change in rule. It was not easy. All the problems of life under an occupation force faced the settlers. They were compelled to board soldiers in their homes and to suffer insults and abuse from the armed troops. Reaction against such treatment culminated in the Esopus Mutiny of February 4, 1667. This armed threat to English rule subsided after a few hours . Governor Richard Nicholls wisely chose to mete out punishment to soldiers as well as civilians, but incidents continued to occur.

The court of Esopus assigned that original settler, Thomas Chambers, and Evert Pels meet with the British to try to settle the matter as follows: “Thomas Chambers, Captain and overseer, and Evert Pels overseer, are hereby authorised, by the Court to acquaint Captain Broadhead, the answer of the Inhabitants, that Cornelis Barentsen Sleight by him Imprisoned, might be Relaxed, out of his Imprisonment, for to prevent further trouble and danger; and in Case the afore said Cornelis Barentsen Sleight, hath offended the said Captain Broadhead, that the said Broadhead (according to the Governor's Order:) Should sue him to the Court, for to be Examined and Corrected, dated in Wiltwyck this 4/14 of Feb. 1667. Wm Beeckman, Jan Joosten, Roelof Swartwout.”

“In answer to this above standing, Captain Broadhead Replyes, that he will keepe Cornelis Sleight in apprehension, as Longe he thincks good, and in Case the Inhabitants will fetsh him by force, that he Would Waight uppon them, dated in Wiltwyck this 4/14 off Feb. 1667"

On September 17, 1669, Nieuw Dorp was renamed Hurley. On April 6, 1668, Governor Nicolls granted land in a new patent at the Esopus to a number of his soldiers. A village was established there, which, under his successor, Francis Lovelace, was named Marbletown on September 17, 1669. On the same day Nieuw Dorp was renamed Hurley, and on September 25, Esopus became Kingston. The official pronouncement was made on April 25, 1670. Thomas Chambers, the original settler in the region, was rewarded by Governor Lovelace by having his house and land enfranchised as the manor of Fox Hall on October 16, 1672.

The war in Europe between England and the Netherlands reached New York when a Dutch force under Anthony Colve recaptured New York City around July 30-August 9, 1673. Esopus was reduced by the Dutch around August 15. Colve became Governor General on September 19 and re-established Dutch rule. Among other changes Kingston was renamed Swaenenburgh. However, under the Treaty of Westminster, the colony was returned to English control on November 10, 1674. Edmund Andros became Governor on that day and Swaenenburch became Kingston once again.
On this August 5, 1672, it was resolved to dispatch Evert Pels and Robbert Gouldsberry to New York for the purpose of receiving information about the state of affairs at New York. And each of them shall receive a schooner of wheat per day for their trouble. It was also resolved that Capt. Chambers, at the least report, shall call the burghers here to arms in the village, and then to send delegates to the troops, and in the meantime to act in accordance with the reply we shall expect from them.
Instructions of Evert Pels, A. Jansen, court messenger, and R. Gouldsberry: 1) They shall immediately depart for the purpose of learning the condition of affairs at New York, because we have been informed that there are some Holland vessels there for the purpose of taking the country; 2) They shall sail in a boat until they shall meet some yacht or Christians whom they shall ask how things are in New York, and having received trustworthy information shall return immediately and report to us. August 5, 1672, at Kingston, by the honorable court at Kingston, (Signed) W. LaMontagne, secretary.

Monday, December 3, 2012

Egbert Van Borsum My 9G Grandfather excerpt from article










excerpted from

The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, Volumes 25-26 article by William Gordon Ver Planck





Sunday, December 2, 2012

Catalyntje Trico, My 10G Grandmother, Wife of Joris Rapalje

Catalyntje Trico was the daughter of Jeronimus Jan Tricot and Michele Sauvagie. Catalyntje Trico was born in 1606 at Pris, Hainault, Belgium. She married Joris Janssen Rapalje, son of Jean de Rapalje and, possibly Elizabeth Baudoin, on 21-Jan-1624 at the Walloon Church, Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands. She died on 11-Sep-1689 at Wallabout, Brooklyn, Kings County, New York.

She was also known as Catalyntje Jeronomus Tricot. On 17-Oct-1688 she stated in a deposition that she was 83 years of age, born in Paris France [sic*], came to this country in the ship Unity in 1623 which was commanded by Adrian Jorise, and that she arrived in Albany New York and after two years moved to New Amsterdam.

Catalyntje Tricot was a remarkable woman! We encounter her first when she carefully placed her mark on a marriage intention document and then we follow her as an 18 yr. old French-speaking bride on a Dutch ship headed for New Netherland. She bore 11 children and helped her husband with his business affairs as we learn from a successful suit at law in which a considerable debt was recovered. The evidence depended upon the books which she kept and which she was required to exhibit before the court.

An interesting reference to Catalyntje is found in a journal kept by two Labadist travelers who came to New York in 1679 and visited the aging Catalina at her home on the Wallabout. From their account we find that they traveled by boat.to Wale-bocht. a place situated on Long Island. almost an hour’s distance below the city and reached the bay in about two hours. This was a bay tolerably wide where the water rises and falls much and is at low water very shallow and much of it dry. 'The aunt of De la Grange [i.e., Catalyntje Trico Rapalje] is an old Walloon from Valenciennes, seventy-four years old. She is wordly-minded, living with her whole heart as well as body, among her progeny which now number 145 and will soon reach 150. Nevertheless she lived alone by herself, a little apart from the others, having her little garden and other conveniences, with which she helped herself."

In 1685 and again in 1688, Catalyntje was asked to give depositions concerning her arrival in America, one of which was to assist William Penn in a dispute over the boundary between Pennsylvania and Maryland, later known as the Mason-Dixon line. For many years the information she gave was rejected as the babblings of a senile old lady. It is now agreed among historians that the details that she remembered after more than sixty years and when she was over eighty years old, are remarkably accurate.

In the  deposition taken at her home on Long Island on October 17, 1688 2, she states:
"Catelyn Trico doth Testify and Declare that in ye year 1623, she came into this country with a Ship called ye Unity, whereof was commander Arien Jorise belonging to ye West India Company, being ye first ship yt came here for ye sd. Company. As soon as they came to Mannatans, now called N. Yorke, they sent Two families and six men to Hartford River, and Two Families and Eight men to Delaware River, and eight men they left at N. Yorke to take Possession, and ye Rest of ye Passengers went with ye Ship as farr as Albany which they then called fort Orange.--
"Ye sd Deponent lived in Albany three years, all which time ye Indians were all as quiet as Lambs and came and Traded with all ye Freedom Imaginable; in ye year 1626, ye Deponent came from Albany and settled at N. Yorke where she lived afterwards for many years and then came to Long Island."

 Catalyntje Rapalje died September 11, 1689. She was 84 years old. 

* From an article by George E. McCracken in The American Genealogist, Vol. 48, page 118:
For long it was believed that Catelyntje was born in Paris, France, and, indeed, this old error was restated as recently as April 1971 in a letter to the editor of The Colonial Genealogist (Vol. 3, No. 4, New Series, p. 258) . . . The origin of the error is to be found in a  deposition made by Catelyntje on 17 Oct. 1688 (printed in E. B. O'Callaghan, Documentary History of New York [1850] 3:32; also in Frank Allaben, Ancestry of Leander Howard Crall (New York 1908), p. 391; the deposition is from New York Colonial Manuscripts, vol. 35. This begins "Catelyn Trico aged about 83 years born in Paris."
In March 1961 when the distinguished genealogist, John Insley Coddington, was in Amsterdam, he was informed by Dr. Simon Hart of the Gemeinte Archief that Catelyntje was actually born in the tiny hamlet of Pry, 50/215/17' North latitude, 4/215/26' East longitude, on the Herve River directly south of Charleroi in Hainault. It is obvious that when Catelyntje said "Pry," the English-speaking clerk who took down the  deposition misunderstood her to be pronouncing "Paris" as the French pronounce it, an easy error if she rolled the "r" very strongly. This important information was printed soon after in the News-Letter of the American Society of Genealogists, but as that periodical is not available outside the Society, the information did not become generally known.

Friday, November 30, 2012

Joris Janssen Rapalje, my 10G Grandfather

Joris [George] Janssen Rapalje, my 10G Grandfather, was born April 28, 1604, in Valenciennes, Spanish Netherlands [now France]. His name may have been 'Jean' in French. [See note on Dutch given names] He was baptized in the St. Nicholas Church of Valciennes.

In 1623, at age 19, Joris was married in Amsterdam. His wife was Catalyntje [Catalina] Jeronymus Trico [this note on Dutch patronymics might be useful]. Joris Jansen Rapalje and his wife, Catalyntje, a Huguenot, was the common ancestor of all the American families of this name [with an estimated 1,000,000 descendants in the New World]==the practice which afterwards obtained of writing the final syllable of the name with a 'j' was the Dutch version of the original French orthography.

In January of 1624, Joris and Catalina were recruited along with a number of other families by the Dutch West India Company to go to work in the the company's holdings in America. They were assigned to the ship called Eendracht [Unity]. Those families joining them were mostly Walloons.



Joris and Catalina made it a condition before leaving Amsterdam that they could be married before their ship sailed. Common practice at that time was for couples to notify the civil authorities of their intent to wed so that their proclamation of banns could be called for three Sundays in their respective churches. Joris and Catalina registered their intention on Saturday, January 13, 1624, and were married in the Walloon Church in Amsterdam on Sunday, January 21, 1624, only eight days later. The marriage-intention registry reads, with abbreviations and deletions, in Dutch: “Joris Raparlie van Valenchie..../boratwercker out 19 jaerenwoon...op't Waele/padt and Catharina triko van [word “parijs” crossed out] pris in/ [word “Vranckrijck” crossed out] Walslant geasst...met mary Fla[m]egh/haar suster woon...in de Vles out 18 yae.”...Translated: “Joris Raparlie, born in Valencie...borat worker, age 19 years, living at the Waele padt, and Catharina Trico, born [“Paris, Kingdom of France” crossed out] Pris in Walslant, assisted by Mary Flamergh, her sister, living in de Vles, age 18 years.”

Omitted from this record are several items of information customarily included to indicate, for example, duration of residence, and present marital status. Since both were minors, the omission of parental approval suggests that neither had parents residing in Amsterdam or, for that matter, living. And, as Joris was not assisted by anyone, he may not have had a male relative in Amsterdam. From the patronymic used by Joris in New Netherland, we know that his father was Jan (Dutch) or Jean (French) Raparlie, or some similar spelling.

Joris was baptized as Georges Rapareillet on April 28, 1604, in the Church of St. Nicholas at Valciennes as the natural son of Jean Rapareillet. His mother's name was not listed. The registration of the baptism of a Protestant child in a Catholic Church was not unusual at that time.

Joris and Catalina settled in Fort Orange, now Albany. They resided there for three years until the Dutch authorities resettled them and a number of families from Fort Orange to the southern end of Manhattan in 1626. They had resided in Fort Orange until the birth of their youngest child. After the 1626 harvest, the Rapalje's left Fort Orange and returned to Manhattan with eight other families. Ft. Orange ceased to be a settlement and reverted to its former status of fortified trading post.

Their children are recorded on original records now kept at the library of the New York Historical Society. Their daughter, Sarah, married first Hans Hansen Bergen and later Teunis Gysberts Bogart. She was recorded as the first Christian daughter born in the New Netherlands. In honor of this, the Dutch authorities presented her a tract of land at the Wallabout. [Sarah Rapalje's chair is in the collection of the Museum of the City of NY, and is thought to have been brought to New Netherland by the family.]

On June 16, 1637, Joris bought a tract of land called Renneganock from the Lenape Indians , computed at 335 acres, now included in the town of Brooklyn and comprehending the lands occupied by the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The land was renamed Waal Boght, from the dutch meaning either “Bend in the River” or “Bay of Walloons”. This later became Wallabout Bay.

The Rapaljes established a residence near the East River, and were among the earliest purchasers of land in Manhattan, later building two houses on Pearl Street near the Fort. During at least a portion of his time there, Joris kept a tavern or tap-house, his name appearing among the inn keepers and tapsters, inhabitants who promised to observe the proclamation of Governor Stuyvesant [my half 9G grand uncle] of March 10th, 1648, in relation to the regulation of such houses, as late as March 16, 1648, on the records in the book of the Burgomasters Court New Amsterdam. Rapalje's son-in-law, Hans Hansen Bergen, acquired a large tract adjoining Rapalje's. Today the land where the Rapalje’s farm stood is an industrial park under the direction of the Brooklyn Navy Yard.

Joris probably removed to his Long Island farm, which he probably had cultivated a portion of previously, as early as 1655 for, on April 13, 1655, he was appointed one of the magistrates of Brooklyn in the place of Pieter Cornellisse.

Rapalje figured frequently in law suits. He sold his house and lot June 22, 1654, to Hendrick Henderson, drummer [a commercial traveler or traveling sales representative ], for 800 Guilders. Pieter Cornellisse, a house carpenter, in New Amsterdam as early as 1640, was appointed one of the magistrates of Brooklyn, April 9, 1654. In 1646, he obtained a patent for over 27 morgens [a unit of land measure equal to about two acres (0.8 hectare), formerly in use in Holland and the Dutch colonies and still used in South Africa] in Brooklyn adjoining lands of Cornelius Dircksen, ferryman.

In the records of the Burgomaster's and Schepen's court of New Amsterdam, up to 1656, on the 28th of April, of which year a return was made in a suit of Cornelia Schellinger against "Joresy Rapalje," of Rapalje's having departed beyond the jurisdiction of the court, and the same return was made on the 25th of the following November, in a suit of Jacob Schellinger against "Catalyn Joresy," Rapalje's wife. 

On the 16th of June, 1637, Rapalje bought a tract of land of the Indians, "Kakapeyno and Pewichaas," called "Rinnegakonck”, situate on Long Island, south of the Island of the Manhattans, extending from a certain Kil into the woods south and eastward to a certain Kripplebush (swamp), to a place where the water runs over the stones." On the 17th of June, 1643, his Indian purchase was patented to him by the governor, and is described as "a piece of land called Rinnegakonck, formerly purchased by him of the Indians, as will appear by reference to the transport, lying on Long Island, in the bend of Mereckkawick (now Brooklyn), east of the land of Jan Monfoort, extending along the said land in a southerly direction, towards and into the woods."

In August, 1641, Rapalje was one of the twelve men representing Manhattan, Breukelen and Pavonia, elected to suggest means to punish the Indians for a murder they had committed. In 1655,'56, '57, and again in 1660, he was one of the magistrates of Brooklyn.  

Joris Jansen Rapalje and Catalina Trico were the parents of 11 children, including Sarah Rapalje, the first child of European parentage born in New Netherland. Sarah Rapalje's chair is in the collection of the Museum of the City of New York, and is thought to have been brought to New Netherland by the family. Annetje, who married Martin Ryerson and had many children one of which was Cathalyntie who married Paulus Vanderbeek, Grandson of Master Paulus Vanderbeeck, a Dutch West India Company ship surgeon and Brooklyn's first resident doctor. Jannetje, another of Joris Jansen Rapalje's daughters, married another Vanderbeek; Rem Jansen Vanderbeek, whose descendants took the name Remsen and who became a leading New York mercantile family. Rapalie died soon after the close of the Dutch administration, having had eleven children. 

 Catalyntje Trico's Gold Clasp


Because of the number of their descendants, author Russell Shorto has called Joris Jansen and his wife Catalina "the Adam and Eve" of New Netherland as the number of their descendants has been estimated at about a million.
Brooklyn's Rapelye Street is named for the family. The spelling of the Rapalje family name varied over the years to include Rapelye, Rapalje, Rapareilliet, Raparlié, Rapalyea, Raplee, Rapelyea, Rapeleye, Rappleyea as well as others.

 Rapelje, Montana is named for a descendant, and an early descendant, Capt. Daniel Rapelje, founded the settlement which became St. Thomas, Ontario.



Sunday, September 30, 2012

John Concklyne, My 8G Grandfather

John Conklyne was born in England, probably in Nottinghamshire, around the year 1598. His father, possibly William, was a glass-maker ("glasseman") and probably a Lorrainer, that is, an immigrant Huguenot from the French province of Lorraine. John Conklin, too, was a glass-maker and had a younger brother, and partner in glass making, named Ananias. " Conklin Mann, in “The Family of Conckelyne, Conklin and Conkling in America, and The Line of John Conckelyne of Southold and Huntington,” published in The American Genealogist, Volume 21 (1944): pp. 48-51 and pp. 210-215 states: “After considerable reading on the story of the Italian, Lorraine, and Norman glass-makers who came in a steady stream to England for several years following 1560, I venture a few opinions, which at best are mere guesses. My guess is that Conckelyne or Concklyne [or Concklayne and Conculyn] is an English corruption of a Continental name; that Ananias and John Conckelyne were of the second generation in England; that their forebears came from Italy, Lorraine, or Normandy, perhaps by way of Antwerp. The ending -elyne or -lyne does not establish the name as Norman, Flemish, or Scotch, as has been said. If, for instance, the great Venetian glass maker Verzelini, could quickly become Verselyne in English parish records, there is no reason why a Florentine-Norman family such as Concini should not become Concelyne, Conckelyne, or Concklyne.” Conklin Mann's guess was, apparently, quite correct. Brian J.M. Hardyman, a noted English historian of the early glass-makers of England in 1995 believed that John Conklin was a descendant of Conculyns or Concklaynes. These two spelling variants of the Conklin name of a total of nineteen recorded so far do, indeed, seem to be French.

My immigrant ancestor was likely part of that large number of skilled glass-makers, mostly Huguenots, who, escaping Roman Catholic France, arrived in England after 1572, the year of the St. Bartholomewmassacre." This mass immigration was vigorously encouraged by the reigning monarch Queen Elizabeth I. Mr. Hardyman recorded a glassmaker of certain Lorraine origins, one Francis Conklyn, who was working in Old Swinford, Worcestershire, around 1613. Cornelius Conklyn, a son of Ananias Conklyn, was christened in St. Mary, Old Swinford, Worcestershire on August 6th, 1637. One can reasonably assume that there were connections between Francis, John, and Ananias Conklyn.

Jason Ellis, another glass-historian of England,stated that his research places a John Conklaine working as a glass-maker in Bagots Park, England in 1609. Conklin Mann also stated that John and Ananias Concklyne are now (1944) accepted as brothers There is little room for doubt of the relationship, though there is no absolute proof. Should Jacob Concklyne be added? Perhaps. In the Nottingham marriage records appears the following: “12 April 1637, Jacob Conklyne of Awlsworth Parish Nuthall, glasemaker and Elizabeth Hickton of Watnall parish.” We know that John Concklyne named a son Jacob although he never named one Ananias [not so unusual for one to pass up honoring a younger brother in such a manner] nor, for that matter, did Ananias name one John.

" On January 24th, 1625, John Conckelyne married Elizabeth Mylner Allseabrook at St. Peter's Parish, Nottingham, England. Elizabeth's parents are recorded as John Mylner and Winifred Ludlam, so perhaps Allseabrook was a married name and she was a widow when she married. Elizabeth died around, but probably before, 26 Mar 1671 at Southold, New York. Between the years 1628 and 1635 John and Elizabeth appear to have lived in Nutthall, a few miles northwest of the city of Nottingham. Around the year 1638 Ananias Conckelyne journeyed to Salem, in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. His brother John and John's wife Elizabeth followed him and arrived before the 30th of May, 1639.The brothers probably came to the Massachusetts Bay Colony under contract as glassmakers, and together, in 1640, they began what was the very first glass works in New England. Indeed, Grenville McKenzie, and others, say that it was the first in America! According to Salem records of 14 Sept 1640 cited by Mann, John Concline [was officially] receaved an inhabitant of Salem. Also, Granted to John Concline five acres of ground neere the glasse howse [and] Granted half an acre more of land for the said John Concline neer the Glass howse. " The surviving records of glass making in Salem lead to the conclusion that Obediah Holmes, Lawrence Southwick, Ananias Conckelyne and, perhaps, other undertakers [stockholders] formed a company in 1638 and later were joined by John Conckelyne. Evidently the Conckelynes were the master craftsmen while the others advanced the capital. Evidently, too, Holmes, Southwick, and the other investors soon lost interest in the venture, which did not thrive, and the Conckelynes assumed the entire burden. Apparently nothing more elaborate than window glass and bottles were made.

As late as 1879 the scori or slag which is still plowed up, seem to indicate that the glass was much lighter in color than the common bottle glass of early times. The proof of the importance of this glass making venture can be found in the following: “The General Court in Boston on 10 Dec 1641 voted that if the towne of Salem lend the Glassemen 30 pounds, they [the town] shall be allowed it againe out of their next rate; and the glasse men to repay it againe if the worke succeed, when they are able.” In plain words, Salem could deduct the loan/advance from its town taxes payable to Boston even if the glass makers defaulted! Salem, on 27 Feb 1643, voted “its promise by the towne that the 8 pounds that hath been lent by the Court by the request of the towne to Ananias Concklyne and other poore people shall be repayed by the Court, at the next Indian Corne Harvest.” Things got worse for the glass makers and A Humble petition of John and Ananias Conkcloyne [of 1 Oct 1645] “sheweth that your Petitioners have been imployed Divers yeares about the glasse work, and the undertakers now this three yeares neglected the same, so that your petitioners are not able to subsist and shall be necessitated either wholely to leave it off, or to remove elsewhere for better accomodations of themselves; wherefore theere humble request first is unto this Honoured Court, that they might be freed from theire ingagment unto the former undertakers and left free to joyne with such as will carry on the work effectually except the former undertakers forthwith doe the same, that So the Worke which they Conceive to be a public good use for the country may not fall to the ground.”

No further connection of the Conckelyne brothers with glass-making at Salem has been found in the records and it seems probable that they turned to other fields. Apparently, Salem officials still were optimistic about the Conckelynes' future in the town and, on 30 May 1649, they granted each of them four acres of meadow land.

John visited several towns along the Long Island Sound during the autumn and winter of 1649 with a view to settling in one of them, and, in late April 1650, he, Ananias, and members of other Salem families, including Thomas Scudder, removed to Southold, New York. John was recorded as a property owner at Southold by January1653, but probably owned land there as early as 1651. It is not easy to follow the record of John Conckelyne in Southold as many of the entries in the town records fail to specify senior or junior. His oldest son Capt. John Conckelyne (Jr.) was, by far, the more aggressive and active man. John may have gone to Hashamomack (that narrow neck that joins the town spot on the northeast) about 1657 when Capt. John married Sarah, widow of William Salmon, proprietor of Hashamomack. Some time prior to1660, due probably to John Jr.'s claim to the important HorseNeck (Lloyds Neck) lands, John, Sr. and his youngest son Timothy Conckelyne removed to Huntington, Long Island. On 4 Feb 1660, Huntington townsmen voted that “Timothy Conklin shall keepe both his own home lots and his father's and to lay down all comoning [commonage] and medow belonging to his own hous.” Each of these home lots carried a 100-pound right in all divisions of commonage, and transactions by Timothy Conklin 40 years later show that he maintained title to the two home lots and their accompanying rights. These rights were of considerable value.

The General Assembly at Hartford, Connecticut, on 9 Oct 1662 made Goodman [John] Conclin and [Capt.] John Conclin Junr. of Southold, freemen of Connecticut. There was much commerce conducted back and forth across the Long Island Sound and the two Johns undoubtedly had their share. John Conckelyne Senior was, unquestionably, the John Conckelyne who paid 15 shillings for a share among the Monmouth, New Jersey, Associates in 1667. Two of the associates had been affiliated with him in Salem's glass works. He was, however, apparently, never in residence at Monmouth. The John Conckelyne from Southold who served on a New York jury at the trial of a suit between the towns of Gravesend and Flatbush on 27 Sep 1666 was, probably, Captain John Conckelyne (his son), for there are indications that by that date he had a ship in Long Island waters and was serving as a civil representative of Southold in its relations with towns to the westward. On a tombstone in the Presbyterian churchyard, Southold, New York, is the following inscription: “Here lyeth the body of Captain John Conkelyne, born in Nottinghamshire in Englande, who departed this life in the sixth day of April att South Hold, Long Island, in the sixty fourth year of his age. Anno Domini 1694.”

Captain John outlived his father, John, Senior, by only 10 years. On 26 Mar 1671, John Conckelyne Sr. conveyed to his son Jacob Conckelyne “all that my housings, whom [home?] lot, with the yards, orchards, and gardens and all the rest of the accomodations thereunto belonging lying and being in Hashamomuck that is to say, All the upland both arable and woodland with the meadow and commonage thereon belonging.” This conveyance made Jacob an important landowner in Hashamomuck. It was John Conckelyne Senior's last significant land transfer and, although he continued to hold certain lands until shortly before his death, there is nothing to indicate that he ever again maintained a household in either Southold or Huntington. It seems probable that the conveyance to Jacob took place shortly after the death of Elizabeth, John's wife. Thereafter, he divided his time between the two towns, probably living for short periods, with his various children—a rich man and his money are welcome everywhere.

John Conckelyne Sr. was residing in Huntington in 1673, when on 6 Oct, after the Dutch had recaptured New York, the so-called restitutio, the town officials named him and three others as a committee to negotiate with the new Dutch Governor and to petition him to put Huntington on good behavior for one year and not to exact an oath of allegiance from the town.

John Conckelyne Sr. of Southold, on 9 Jun 1683, sold to Richard Browne Jr. “for 70 pounds, my second lot of land lying in the lower Oyster Pond neck [Greenport.]” On 6 Jul 1683 he granted unto John Concklyne Junr., “my eldest son, all lands, etc., given and granted unto me when I was an inhabitant of Salem in New England.” John Sr. had held these latter lands for more than 40 years! John Conckelyne died 23 Feb 1684. His undated will was offered to the Court at Southampton, 18, 19 and 20 Mar 1684. Its contents are quoted from the Old Sessions Book of Suffolk County:” I John Conklin being in my right understanding and perfect memory do bequeath my soul to God and my body to ye earth and my goods as followeth: viz to my son John I doo give ten shillings and to my son Timothy I doo give fifteen pounds, out of that which I was to receive for my land which my son John sold for me at Oyster Ponds. Also I doo further by these presents convey all my meadow lying in ye Oyster Ponds neck unto my son Jacob Conklin, to him and his heirs forever, he paying Mr. Sylvester four pounds and ten shillings. Also I do give to Walter Noakes three pounds and all my wearing cloathes except my best coat. Also I do give unto my grandchild Rebecca Hubert [Hubbard] one horse or mare. Also I doo give unto Mr. Eliphalet Jones twenty shillings and I doo make my daughter Elizabeth Wood my whole and sole executor. (Signed.) John Conklin.”

It is difficult to be certain to which class of society John and Ananias Conckelyne belonged, but it would seem to be that of solid burgher (burgess) or freeman class. The Allseabrook and Launder families of England, into which they married, were leading burgher families of Nottingham. When the time came for their children to marry, they did well. John's two oldest sons married, respectively, Southold's richest widow and the daughter of that town's richest man. Ananias' oldest son, Jeremiah, married, around 1658, the daughter of Lion Gardiner the most important man of eastern Long Island in his day.

There is, apparently, an amusing story in the book The Island by Robert Payne about that marriage. It says that Lion Gardiner was not happy about his daughter's choosing Jeremiah Conklin, and Payne quotes him as saying that the Conklins were bottlers from Nottinghamshire and that they were farmers and handymen without large estates. Of course if he had really been unhappy, the marriage probably would never have taken place. Recently, Honor Conklin of Albany gave me the correct quotation from the book: The quote from Robert Payne's The Island: ... p. 83, “These were tragic years for Lion, who had lost Elizabeth and was soon to lose his daughter Mary. In the summer of 1658 Mary married Jeremiah Conkling, and this was another marriage he disapproved of. The Conklings were settlers from Nottinghamshire. They were farmers and handymen, without large estates. He built Mary and her husband a dwelling house, but withheld the dowry of ten head of cattle he had given to Elizabeth. Then he sat down to write his will. Ananias Conckelyne's line of descendants on Long Island, sometime around the year 1700, employed the affectation of adding the letter =g to the end of their name and to this day there are more Conklings than Conklins in that area. The only other variant spelling currently known to be in use is Concklin, which can be observed mostly in Westchester County, New York. 

 

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Gerret Dircksen Croesen, My 9G Grandfather

Gerret Dircksen Croesen, my 9G grandfather, was born in the year 1637 or 1638 in a village in the northern region of the Netherlands known as Winschoten in the providence of Groningen. It lies very near the present day border with Germany. There are several variations of the name Croesen including Krusen, Kroesen, Kruzen, Kruser, Crusen, etc., many of which were used by or applied to the same family, or, sometimes, even the same individual. English and Dutch versions of the same given name were often used interchangeably by the same individual.

The 1600's were the Golden Age of the Netherlands. The country became the leading sea power in the World. Its merchant fleet tripled in size between 1600 and 1650 and Dutch ships supplied about half the world's shipping. Expanding trade made Amsterdam the world's major commercial city and gave the Dutch the highest standard of living of any nation on earth.

The Dutch West India Company was founded in 1621. The purpose of the company was to carry on trade with the new world and western Africa. In 1624 the Dutch West India Company colonized New Netherland which consisted of parts of present day New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Delaware. In 1626 the famous purchase of Manhattan Island was made. Enterprising Dutch bought the island from the Indians for a small amount of trade goods.

Sometime before Gerret turned 23, he emigrated to the newly established Dutch colonies in America. Gerret was hired at a very young age by the West India Company or one of its subsidiaries to go to New York and work. It is not known what his occupation was.

In what was to become the Borough of Brooklyn, Gerret met and married a woman two years younger than himself, who had been born in this country. Her name was Neeltje Jans Staats. At age 23 Gerret married the 21 year old Neeltje in the Dutch Church in Brooklyn, New York.They settled down together in Brooklyn and nine months after their marriage, on July 16, 1662, they had a son, Dirck Gerretse Kroesen. A year latter they had their second child, a girl whom they named Elsje. Their next child wouldn't be born for five years.

Perhaps Gerret had been a seaman and was on a voyage. We may never know for sure, but by 1667 he was in Brooklyn for a time as his third son, Cornelius, was born in1668. Then a daughter, Catherine [Tryntje], was born in 1670 and Jan, another boy, was born in 1672, indicating that Gerret was often in or near Brooklyn during those years.

When Gerret was 34 years old, with four children, there was another pause in his family growth. Five more years would pass before more children would be born. The couple had their next little girl, whom they named Annetje, in September of 1677. Two years later Hendrick was born in 1679, and the last child to be born, who would carry his father's name, was Gerret, born in 1680.

Gerret senior, at the age of 42, had nine children in his family, the oldest of whom was 18 years old and the youngest, a baby. On March 7, 1680, shortly after his new daughter was born, Gerret died. His death undoubtedly changed matters drastically for the Croesen family. His wife, it is believed, never remarried but, instead continued to raise the little family probably with the assistance of her oldest son Dirck. Neeltje lived until her youngest daughter was 15 years old before she herself passed away at the age of 55.


Sunday, September 9, 2012

John Townsend My 9G Grandfather

The Townsend surname:  This interesting surname of English origin is a topographical name for someone who lived at the extremity of a village, deriving from the Middle English "tone", "tune" meaning a "village" or "settlement" plus the Middle English "end" (Old English "ende"). The surname dates back to the late 13th Century, (see below). Further recordings include one Richard atte Tounende (1297), "Ministers' Accounts of the Earldom of Cornwall", and William atte Townesend (1327), "The subsidy Rolls of Worcestershire". Variations in the idiom of the spelling Townend, Townen, Townsend, etc.. One, Jone Townsend married Edmond Bradley on June 20th 1540, at St. Martin Orgae and St. Clement Eastcheap, London. Henry Townshend married Margaret Bedlow on October 22nd 1542, at St. Stephen, Coleman Street, London. Sir Roger Townshend (died 1413) was a judge and also founder of the Townshend family. The first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Geoffrey de le Tuneshende, which was dated 1273, "The Subsidy Rolls of Norfolk". during the reign of King Edward 1, "The Hammer of the Scots", 1273 - 1307
The Townsend Family in Early America by Martha Burke, Townsend Society of America : Three brothers, John, Henry, and Richard Townsend came to New Amsterdam circa 1640. John already had married Elizabeth Montgomery who had been born in Ireland prior to emigrating.

The brothers resided in New Amsterdam until the Indian War of 1643--there were friendly Indians living among the settlers who, when threatened by a hostile tribe, fled to the fort at New Amsterdam; however, Willem Kieft, then governor of New Amsterdam, did not let the friendly Indians into the fort, but instead had them fired upon. This led to a senseless war that left little of the fledgling colony standing. The survivors were forced to live within the confines of the fort for safety. After they had lived in an overcrowded fort for two years, Willem Kieft granted the English settlers a tract of land to settle which we now know as Flushing.

Forever at odds with the Dutch over many things such as not having English officials--their own sheriff, magistrates, etc., and having to pay a tithe to the Dutch Church, most of the English colonists left and moved to Providence Plantation, Warwick, Rhode Island. One prickly issue there, however, was the treatment of Quakers. Massachusetts expelled them and so they moved to the Dutch Colony to be with other English speaking peoples. The Dutch, at least in the person of their governor, Pieter Stuyvesant, was vehemently anti-Quaker. The Townsend brothers who were not then Quaker (some became Quaker later), objected to the terrible treatment meted out to their countrymen. Henry Townsend was jailed no fewer than three times and paid hefty fines. The Townsends settled first in what we now know as Jamaica in Queens County. Again, they were soon at odds with the Dutch. In 1661 they moved to Oyster Bay on Long Island which was beyond Dutch administration. At that time, Oyster Bay was in the territory under the jurisdiction of the Connecticut Colony. The land that the brothers owned in Jamaica was later sold by their children. What happened to their land in Flushing is unknown since all the records were burned. The main body of the New York Townsends belonged to the Anglican faith. Most of the marriage records of the early Townsends come from St. George's Anglican Church in Hempstead, NY [NB: Two of the charter members of this church were Joseph and William Langdon].

The following is taken from a Memorial of the Townsend Brothers: [Chapter 1; John, Henry, and Richard Townsend]: The Townsend brothers came form Norwich, County of Norfolk, England. The time of their emigration cannot be precisely fixed. It was, however, several years before 1645, as in that year Governor Kieft gave a patent for the Town of Flushing to John Townsend and others; and from a petition by John Townsend's widow to Governor Andros, we learn that he had previously taken up land near New York, and "peaceably enjoyed the same divers years," but that alarms from the Indians, and other difficulties which she did not specify, induced him to leave his improvements , and commence the settlement of Flushing, where he was joined by Henry. These Townsends became Friends (Quakers) and were soon at variance with the Dutch authorities: the differences between them, however, seems to have had their origin quite as much in politics as religion: John Townsend was named by Governor Stuyvesant as among the principal persons of Flushing "who resist the Dutch mode of choosing Sheriff, pretending against the adopted course in the Fatherland, and who refuse to contribute their share to the maintenance of Christian, pious, reformed ministers." John Townsend, with the others named, was summoned to appear, 23 Jan 1648, before the Director-General, Governor, and council, at Fort Amsterdam. If they declined, they were to be apprehended and prosecuted by the Attorney-General. Thompson, in his History of Long Island, says that on account of these difficulties, with the Government, the Townsends left Flushing and moved to Warwick, R. I., where they were, all three, members of the Provincial Assembly and all held various municipal offices.

In 1658, they determined once more to attempt a settlement on Long Island, and in that year obtained, with others, the patent of Jamaica, then called Rusdorp.

Very soon, however, the old religious difficulties beset them. Henry seems to have made himself particularly obnoxious, although, as already shown, John neither concealed nor compromised his opinions. In 1657, Henry was sentenced to pay Ð8 Flanders, or to leave the Province in six weeks, for having "called together coventicles." The people of Flushing held a meeting and addressed a remonstrance [known as the “Flushing Remonstrance”] to the Governor, written by the Town-Clerk, and signed by, among others, Tobias Feake, Sheriff, and Messrs. Noble and Farrington, two of the magistrates, and presented by the Sheriff. The clerk, and magistrates were arrested, and John Townsend also, upon a charge of having induced the magistrates to sign, and Townsend was ordered to pay bail of Ð12 pounds and to appear when summoned. Henry was brought before the Council, January 15, 1658, and condemned to pay Ð100 Flanders, and ordered to remain arrested until it be paid. We are not told how this was settled, but he was in Oyster Bay during this year, as his signature as witness to an Indian deed proves.

In January, 1681, two of the magistrates furnished the names of twelve persons, including John and Henry Townsend and their wives, "who countenanced the Quakers." Henry was again imprisoned, but there is no indication that John was molested. This account of the Townsends, before they came to Oyster Bay, is taken entirely from Thompson's History of Long Island. He probably received it from Dr. Peter Townsend, whose Note-Book shows conclusively the reason why Henry was so much more involved in these difficulties than John, who was also a Friend, who attended "conventicles," and "countenanced Quakers," but Henry went from door to door, urging people to attend their meetings, which gave great umbrage, especially as regarded young people and children.

From the date of the Mill Grant, September 16, 1681, the history of the brothers and their descendants has been taken from the Town Records, and from family papers. [Chapter 2] John Townsend settled in Oyster Bay between the middle of January and the16 September 1661. As he was living in Jamaica at the first date, and his name being upon the Mill Grant, he must have been admitted as a Townsman in Oyster Bay before the latter. There is an entry in the Records that he bought his house in South Street in February, 1661, but the deed, in the possession of J. C. Townsend, is dated October. It reads as follows: "Oyster Bay, this 5th day of the 10th month, 1661. Be it known unto all by these presents, that I, Jonas Halstead, of Oyster Bay, on Long Island, in America, do hereby acknowledge that I have sold and delivered all my right, title, and interest of all the housing and land that is here named, as follows: Richard Holbrook's house or houses, built by him or me, and house, lot, and the shares of meadow on the north side of the Town, and a share of meadow at Matinecock, and one right of meadow at the south, and twenty shares of the Great Plains, that is on the east side of the footpath, near the wood edge, and also all the rights, appurtenances, and privileges that do fall to, or anyway belong to the aforesaid house lot, within the Town bounds. I say, I have sold and delivered it all in quiet possession, for full satisfaction already received, unto John Townsend, of the said Town and place, and do also hereby engage to make good the sale of the aforesaid house and lands, against any person or persons that may any wise lay claim thereto, and I do hereby further acknowledge that I have fully sold all the said houses and lands from me, my heirs and assigns, unto him, his heirs and assigns forever, to enjoy without molestation by me, or any from me, as witness my hand, this day and year first above written. Jonas Halstead."
                                                                  Sir Edmund Andros

John Townsend must have been fairly advanced in years when he settled in Oyster Bay. Since his emigration, he had made three different homes in the wilderness, if not four, before he found a permanent abode. His widow in the petition to Governor Andros mentioned above declared: "Your Honor's petitioner's husband, many years last past, was seized of a certain parcel of land, containing eight acres by estimation, lying and being at the Fresh Water (Collect), New York, then called New Amsterdam, where your Honor's petitioner's husband did build, and make large improvements, and peaceable enjoyed the same divers years in the time of great calamity, being daily alerted by the Indians, and other difficulties attending upon your Honor's petitioner's husband, and afterwards got no better reward than such discouragement's as caused your Honor's petitioner's husband to leave his good improvements. However, your Honor's petitioner is well contented at present, hoping her husband and others, by their adventures, and running through many fiery trials of affliction, has been in some measure instrumental to bring a chaos into goodly fields, buildings, and gardens, and instead of your Honor's petitioner's husband reaping the fruits of their labors, but on the contrary, was forced to hew a small fortune out of the thick wood, with his own hands, for himself, wife and children." Her object in this petition was to reclaim the eight acres taken up by her husband, but as it had been thirty years since he left it, never having had any title but only possession, it is not surprising that her petition was not granted. Perhaps she might have fared better if it had been written in the clear, condensed style of her son Thomas, instead of the clumsy, involved, tedious, and inelegant document elaborated by George Cooke. As we have seen, after leaving this home, he, with others, settled Flushing in 1645, and Jamaica in 1656. At his age, and after such toils and privations as he had undergone, it is not surprising that he should have retired from all public concerns, and left the burden of organizing and managing the new settlement to younger men, especially as he had two sons of an age to take his place. The office of Overseer is the only one he is known to have held here.

In 1663, John Towsned bought from Thomas Armitage the homestead next south of his own and his name frequently appears on the Records as a purchaser of property. His wife was the former Elizabeth Montgomery. He died in 1668, and was buried on his own property, probably thefirst person laid in the graveyard on Fort Hill. As he died intestate, his widow, according to a custom prevailing there, divided his estate, with the advice and consent of her older sons, and her husband's brothers.

The solicitude which she shows for the comfort and welfare of "the lads,” as she called her two younger sons, is very touching. "These presents declare unto whom it may any wise concern, that I, Elizabeth Townsend, widow of the late deceased John Townsend, in Oyster Bay, in the north riding, on Long Island, because my said husband deceased without any will, I herein, with the advice of my husband's two brothers, Henry and Richard Townsend, and with the advice and consent of my two oldest sons, John and Thomas Townsend, all of Oyster Bay, above said, have together parted my said husband's estate amongst his six younger children, for their portions, instead of a will, by which will, each of the children, namely, James, Rose, Anne, Sarah, George, and Daniel may know what shall be, and what to claim for their portion of their father's estate, and this to stand firm and unalterable by me, or any through, or by me, but to remain for a settlement of peace between me and my Children, which is as followeth . . . 1st. Unto my son James, I give for his portion out of the estate, in present possession, in lands, beside cattle and horses he have in hand already, first three acres of land and three-quarters, lying on the south side of that was old Armitage's lot, in Oyster Bay, lying or adjoining to the highway on the eastward and western sides, with commoning and common privileges to it, of wood, land, timber, as other such lots have; and he is to have the land upon part of his common right, that his father did improve, on the east side of Matinecock Creek, joining on the south of his uncle Henry's land, and two shares of meadow lying on the westside of the Creek, or Beaver Swamp, and one share of meadow on the east of the said Creek; and he is to have six acres of Plains, and a quarter of a share of meadow at the south, and so much of the south side of the swamp at the rear of my house as proves to be mine, of which swamp Josias Latting hath a part. To my daughters I do engage to give to each of them thirty pounds apiece, for their portion, and to my eldest daughter Elizabeth, although not above mentioned, yet she is to have, with what she hath already received, thirty pounds, all at such pay as passes between man and man, after the rate of Indian corn at three shillings a bushel, and wheat at five. 2d.To the said Elizabeth, or her husband, Gideon Wright, towards her portion, I give with what her father had before given her already, first two cows, ten pounds; a young horse, five pounds; a bed and furniture, ten pounds; two sheep, one pound; one kettle, one pound; in all twenty-seven pounds; and Gideon, her husband, is to have three pounds more; and that will be thirty pounds in all. 3d. To my daughter Rose I give half a share of meadow at the south, with two cows and two calves she hath already received, and commoning in Oyster Bay, with twenty-six acres of land, and three pounds in Richard Townsend's hands, and a yearling mare colt, it all being called by us at thirty pounds. 4th. To my two youngest daughters, Anne and Sarah, their portions are to be thirty pounds apiece, out of the stock or in lands, as they may desire, if their mother decease before their portions are paid; but if they be disposed of in marriage while I remain a widow; I have liberty to pay to each of them their portion in cattle or land, as I see they have most need and I able to do it, or part one, part of the other. 5th. It is my will, and I do fully agree that my two youngest sons, George and Daniel, shall have these two homesteads I now possess, privileges belonging to them, after my decease, but they are to be mine and for my use, to possess and enjoy for my use and comfort, during my life, and at my decease to be theirs as above said, with privileges as follows: to each part is nominated his particular interest. 6thly. To my son George I give for his portion as above said, being the eldest, the house and house lot that I now possess, and orchard which then shall be on it, and two shares of meadow that lie in the Town of Oyster Bay, which was bought with the lot, and six acres of Plains, with commoning and common privileges, in the First Purchase of the Town. 7th. To my youngest son, Daniel, above mentioned, after my decease above said, is to have the other lot, or that part of land lying between his brother James's lot and his brother George's lot. It was bought of old Armitage. I say, he is to have it, with the privileges belonging to it; namely, two shares of meadow lying on the north side of the town, which was bought with the lot of the said Thomas Armitage, and six acres of Plains, and twelve acres of land, and common privileges. And I do by this will and appoint, that if I decease before these my two youngest sons be of age, that two of their eldest brothers take them and bring them up, and to have the use of the boys' land and what other goods and chattels fall to them. The goods and chattels are to priced when they receive it, and delivered back to the said boys the same price or value again, when they go from their brothers, whether they be of age or not; for I do appoint my brother, Henry Townsend, their uncle, to have the oversight of them if he outlive me, and to remove one or both to the rest of their brothers or sisters, with the lands and estates to make use of toward the bringing up of the said lads; but when they go away to have their whole principal returned to or with them, but not to remove them without their complaint to him on good grounds, for the said removal, of hard usage. And I do by this will and appoint that, at my decease, unalterable by me, or any through or by me, all my estate undisposed of, as goods, household stuff, and cattle, are all to be equally divided amongst all my living children; and I further order and appoint that, if any one or more of my said sons or daughters die under age, undisposed of in marriage, the deceased's lands and estates are all to be divided equally amongst all my living sons and daughters, but it is still to be understood that whoever have the bringing up of the two young lads, and the use of their estate towards their maintenance, their lands and houses is with fences to be delivered up in good repair as when they received it, and the property of lands and houses, and orchard, is not to be altered to or from either of the said lads, although the property of other goods or chattels may be altered upon just and honest terms. But a lot on Hog Island, of the third division, number ten, my husband gave my son Thomas. Unto all the promises and engagements above mentioned, I do hereby engage to perform, under my hand and seal, the twenty-third year of the reign of Charles the Second, King of England, and the tenth day of the fifth month, 1671. Before signing was entered in the fifth and eighth lines, that I now as witness my hand and seal,"Elizabeth Townsend." In the presence of us," Moses Furman,"Benjamin Hubbard." I do own my brother Richard did consent to the substance of which is above mentioned, and with my advice also, as witness my hand."Henry Townsend." And we consent to the above said."John Townsend, James Townsend" Thomas Townsend Gideon Wright." Richard Townsend must have died after this settlement was agreed upon, but before its execution. The thirty pounds allotted to each of the daughters seems to our ideas, a very small fortune, while the Fort Neck estate, given by Thomas Townsend to his daughter Freelove, we regard as a munificent portion; but we must remember that thirty pounds would have bought two such estates. John's daughters, however, received nearer one hundred pounds than thirty, for Rose sold her land for thirty pounds, the cattle and money allotted to her were worth at least twenty, and her dividend, at her mother's death, must have been very considerable; for the widow Townsend appears very often on the Records, buying land and receiving allotments, and was evidently a woman of great energy and ability. So that, no doubt, her daughters' were among the greatest fortunes of their day, as it was not expected that any girls should share equally with their brothers. 


Relationship: Edward David ROCKSTEIN to John TOWNSEND

John TOWNSEND is the 9th great grandfather of Edward David ROCKSTEIN

9th great grandfather



John TOWNSEND
E MONTGOMERY (MONTGOMERIE



b:
1620
b:
1621



Raynham Hall, Norwick, Norfolk,

Ballyleck, Monaghan, Ireland


d:
05 Oct 1688
d:
1684



Oyster Bay, LI, Queens, NY

Oyster Bay, LI, Queens, NY










8th great grandfather





Thomas TOWNSEND





b:
14 Dec 1642






Livingston, NY





d:
1715






Portsmouth, Rhode Island









7th great grandmother






Freelove TOWNSEND





b:
29 Dec 1674






Long Island, Nassau, New York,





d:
Jul 1726






Fort Neck, New York, United Stat









6th great grandmother






Sarah JONES





b:
11 May 1703






Hempstead, Nassau, New York,





d:
Aft. 1727






Newport, Newport, Rhode Island,









5th great grandmother






Catherine (Katherine) CLOWES





b:
1720






Hempstead, Nassau, NY





d:
13 Aug 1779






Jamaica, Queens, New York, US









4th great grandfather






John Langdon





b:
30 Sep 1754






Hempstead, Nassau, New York,





d:
26 Nov 1848






Boston, Suffolk, MA











John TOWNSEND is the 9th great grandfather of Edward David ROCKSTEIN

3rd great grandfather

Benjamin Seaman LANGDON

  1. 15 Apr 1784

Long Island City, Queens, New Y

  1. 18 Sep 1862 NY

2nd great grandfather

John Abyathis LANGDON

  1. 23 Mar 1828 New York, NY

  1. 12 Mar 1896

Stony Point, Rockland, New York

Great grandfather

Charles David LANGDON

  1. 09 Nov 1848

Brooklyn, Kings, New York

  1. 10 Jul 1908

Brooklyn, Kings, New York

Maternal grandfather

Edward Joseph P LANGDON

  1. 19 Aug 1877

Brooklyn, Kings, New York

  1. 07 Jun 1961 New York

Mother

Teresa Margaret Langdon

  1. 20 Aug 1910

Brooklyn, Kings, New York

  1. 25 Jul 1988 Columbia, Howard, MD

Self

Edward David ROCKSTEIN

b: 14 Oct 1941

Riverside, Burlington, New Jersey

d:

 
www.flickr.com
Doc Rock's photos More of Doc Rock's photos

Iraq War Costs--Going Up!!!!

Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)