SN orn ant Seley eer se! i ono ec a M riot Pes ; 4 Hho eae ee q CaN its be dpe Ges aM vy FE \5rT aS ee CORNELL _ UNIVERSITY LIBRARY ANNA ALLEN WRIGHT LIBRARY ENDOWMENT FUND Cornell University Library tory of Delaware County, Pennsylvania HISTORY DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. HENRY GRAHAM ASHMEAD. ILLUSTRATED. PHILADELPHIA: L. H. EVERTS & CO. 1884. Copyright, 1884, by L. H. Everts & Co. PRESS OF J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., PHILADELPHIA. TO JOHN HOSKINS, OF PHILADELPHIA, THIS worR-K IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED BY HIS SINCERE FRIEND, THE AUTHOR. PREFACHE. Srvce the publication of the admirable History of Delaware County, written by Dr. George Smith, nearly a quarter of a century ago, the interest awakened in the National Centennial re- sulted in directing general attention in almost every locality through the country to its early annals, and as a consequence in Delaware County, at least, much historical material was reclaimed from the past of which Dr. Smith could have had no information while preparing his work for the press. The present history has been written with the purpose of presenting, as far as could be done in a single volume, an authentic, exhaustive, and unbiased narrative of the events which have occurred in Delaware County from the period of the early settlements within its territory to the present time; and in so doing care has been taken to avoid any reference to in- cidents happening without its boundaries, excepting in those cases where it became necessary to give a brief account of the movements elsewhere in order to render the incidents related in the present work intelligible. It will be noticed that very little attention has been given to the re- cital of political contests which have taken place in the county. The effervescent nature of such public incidents is such that after the reasons which have produced them have ceased to be poten- tial, very little substance remains for the annalist to deal with in relating the story of the times that have passed. In that part of the work devoted to the histories of the several townships, the author has received the assistance of Mr. Austin N. Hungerford, a gentleman whose accuracy of research and comprehensive examination of documentary authorities has made his labors of the utmost value to the writer in the preparation of this history. To Mr. Hungerford’s unwearying industry and quick appreciation of the data necessary to that end is largely due the full history given of the industrial establishments in the county. The pressure of time rendered it necessary that several of the township histories should be prepared by other writers. To Mr. Alfred Mathews was assigned Media borough, and Haverford and Radnor to Mr. John 8. Schenck. Mr. Mathews’ narrative of the history of Media is very full and accurate, and must commend itself to the reader, not only for those features, but because of the graceful style in which the narrative is presented. The histories of Haverford and Radnor, written by Mr. Schenck, are also admirable presenta- tions of the annals of those localities. The author, in the preparation of this work, has been met with the utmost kindness by the residents of Delaware County, who responded promptly to his application for data and access to Vv vi PREFACE. documents of a historical character. From William B. Broomall, Edward A. Price, David M. Johnson, John B, Hinkson, George M. Booth, and others, he has received many favors. The intro- ductory chapter of the General History was prepared by Dr. Ellwood Harvey, and that relating to the ten-hour movement was contributed by James Webb. ‘These articles must commend themselves to the reader, as to style, comprehensiveness, and accuracy of statement. To the Historical Society of Pennsylvania the author desires to return his especial acknowledgments for favors shown, and also to Gilbert Cope, of West Chester, for like kindnesses. The atlas of Early Grants and Patents in Delaware County, prepared by Benjamin H. Smith, is the authority on which the author has based in most cases his references to the lands taken up by the early settlers. The rupture of a blood-vessel in one of the eyes of the author rendered it impossible for him to read much of the proof of the General History, and possibly errors may occur therein which might have been avoided under other circumstances. H. G. A. CuHEstTER, Sept. 9, 1884. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Physical Geography and Geology of Delaware County... 1 CHAPTER II. The Early Settlement of Delaware County to the Grant of the Province to William Penn......... Mente SM Re Sok i secacaslvesenescesaserieteee) 2 CHAPTER III. The Circular Boundary Line between Delaware County and the State of Delaware....... Wecteres 15 CHAPTER IV. William Penn’s First Voyage to his Province in 1682—The Change of the Name Upland to Chester, and the Reason it was Made..... 20 CHAPTER VY. The First Assembly of Pennsylvania, and the House wherein it sees 22 CHAPTER VI. The Colonial History to the War of the Revolution........ Mate Seca 24 CHAPTER VII. The Revolutionary Struggle to the Battle of Brandywine............. 40 CHAPTER VIII. The Battle of Brandy Wine. icissssc0: casececsssessssivccserscescsdsssceeeserss acces O5 CHAPTER IX. From the Defeat at Brandywiue to the Conclusion of the Revolu- HONEY” Waticoxeristesscstew Wieeaascnaears idovaseanedees iviascevitintiossee 65 CHAPTER X. From the Revolutionary War to the Erection of Delaware County.. 77 CHAPTER XI. From the Erection of the County of Delaware to the Second War with Great Britain CHAPTER XII. The Second War with England.... CHAPTER XIII. From the Second War with England to 1850........... CHAPTER XIV. Storms, Freshets, and Earth quake........ssscccssesccesssessrreesesevesenesses 99 CHAPTER XV. The Ten-Hour Movement.......sssssccessesesrcocsesceeecsecceeteesssssteases seve 108 CHAPTER XVI. The Removal of the County-seat to Media.....scesserce see sAsataaateawspe 112 CHAPTER XVII. DG; Cival’ Waris csovsvaaeviysassiaanvae teNscedecadesdestecnvanaedeesdauntacvasvaversanescss LIE CHAPTER XVIII. Crimes and PunishMents........sesseesseveerreerrae iacadahicsaeNa vaeesvevsaccsset 157 CHAPTER XIX. PAGE Manners and Customs— How Inhabitants of Delaware County lived in former Yoars.......:.ccssssrsscnsssscesersceeses cusses eeseseensees Saat’ eee 178 CHAPTER XX. Traveling and Transportation, with an Account of the Railroads in the County.. CHAPTER XXI. Redemptioners and Slavery in Delaware County......ccccsieseseceeree 200 CHAPTER XXII. «. 207 Agriculture, with a brief Mention of our Domestic Animals... CHAPTER XXIII. Wild Animals, Fish, etc., of Delaware County.........eseseseseeeerereeeeees QI CHAPTER XXIV. Delaware County Climate, together with Notices of Remarkable Weoa thet ices cccasescoasisedea recee sd oasirenss pouevarsovesssentestuanoaes vavevess eases 215 CHAPTER XXV. The Court, Bench, and Bar of Delaware County.......00 eanasseceseecean 217 CHAPTER XXVI. Physicians and Medical Societies..........cscesssscssssreceeresseseeenees eesseree 253 CHAPTER XXVII. Civil Lists.. CHAPTER XXVIII. stevanaaeespaeenetecnasa’ tescerssescsssceveesess ZTE The Township of Tinicum CHAPTER XXIX. stenescceeceecsenesseeres 290 Aston Township CHAPTER XXX. sce aero cencassuseue weenie asseecesesserscseneceescses BOD CHAPTER XXXI. Birmingham Township.... Sas iae verse sues e's ous acteadsvetexsecetes dase . 311 CHAPTER XXXII. Clty Of CHES tei as. sciasssccescensciiasssaseusieasninan sbeeostiesegeaariasstiveatecteotns O2T Bethel Township. CHAPTER XXXIII. Chester Township wenden 424 CHAPTER XXXIV. Borough Of Upland.....ccccccsrsecccsssarersesseeserereserssesse seneeeseeeeeeenne 427 CHAPTER XXXV. South Chester Borough............sccseeseseeeeneeea ce Wenseeuses eaiaaebnecasessateasany 435 CHAPTER XXXVI. North Chester Borough.....ccsscccsssseeseecessecceeeesseeeeene a eeseeseen sasesens « 443 CHAPTER XXXVII. Upper Chichester Townsbip......sscsecscocssnsseessssnsssesseseaecsrcsssacrees were 448 vii viii CONTENTS. CHAPTER XXXVIII. CHAPTER XLVII. PAGE PAGE Lower Chichester Township.....sccsssssscsessecssssccssecceceessensessnssseezeres 455 | Middletown Township.......cssssccessescsseosssennssrsessessseessnntsasenseeeeseurs 611 CHAPTER XXXIX, CHAPTER XLVIII Concord! Townships sa isccacecscsssutevsiseoctavscsavscasvegoniiacsesssznachesevsdewansvs 482 | Newtown Township......scscsccessssseesecenecescecenacesssoessrnecegassenneecesseee 634 CHAPTER XLIX. Darby Township Nether Providence Townsbip.... 652 CHAPTER L. Darby: BOPouehicss:secsnscacesnessvorecucueunvecses ioeceedssscdeovceesvecwsdteuieentaewe 5S | Upper Provident Pow sbipnnnmeececeessenrsesressescsenccennonnnneeenvacees 666 CHAPTER XLII. CHAPTER LI. Upper Darby Township.......sscssesssesssssessssesssesesseceesssesesseecsesersnsas 581-1 Radnor Township .cstcievsecsavveccsssssaesvesvesseesesstvovacsiassavsvseacsocavenenve 678 Edgmont Township Haverford Township...........ssssseccescssensecesssoscescceveterssnesecetensscecerone 563 MarploLownship .sesccssessscsssceesssneisvceniacaasaninuanewsvexctaviaveunenceesvonsesk Borough of Media CHAPTER LII. Thornbury Township Springfield Townsbip.......,...sesseseeneecersersenesseesseesseesaaneres reese cesses CHAPTER LIV. Ridley Township... APPENDIX... INDEX........ Da eS Te NS. Abraham, D. © Adams, George B. Andrews, James.. Austin, Obdyke & Co. Bancroft, Samnel.... Bartram, Thomas P. Beaumont, Davis.... Bishop, Jeremiah.... Bishop, Randal... Black, Henry B Blakeley, Abraham Booth, Thomas, Sr.. Brinton, John.. Brinton, Joseph E Brinton, Joseph E., residence of.. Brooke, H. Jones... Burnley, Charles.... Burnley, George.. Burnley, John.. Campbell, James. Cassin, Isaac S.... Cheyney, Charles M.. Childs, George W Childs, George W., residence of... Converse, John H., residence of.. County House, Media.. Court-House and Jail Crozer, John P...... Custer, Bethel M.. Darlington, Ldward, Jr.. Deshong, J. O.....0-.-.0. eee Dunwoody, James.. Dunwoody, John. Eachus, Eber Eckfeldt; A. C.. Edgmont Central Seminary. . Edwards, Samuel Ellis, Rudulph, residence of. Elwyn, A. L. Esrey, D. R.. Etting, Frank M., residence of Eureka Cast-Steel Company....... Friends’ Meeting-House, Middletown... Forwood, J. L.. Gartside, Amos -between 398, 399 Gartside, B. & Sons... a 398, 399 Gartside, Benjamin.. if 398, 399 Gartside, James.. 398, 399 Gartside, John. 401 Gest, Joseph. 502 Gest, Rebekah. 502 Gibbons, Joseph.. 732 Gibbons, Joseph, residence of.. 724 Green, William H...........--+++ 437 Haldeman, Isaac... 604 Hibberd, John....... 251 Hinkson, PB. J.....--sseeerees 377 Holmes’ Map of the Province of Pennsylvania.. i) 364 Hoskins (Graham) House... | at epi PAGE PAGE TOO, A initer, J. Morgan sancvesersccsssrocvangsastavneseseneiesesginineees 676 676 Irving, James.. 444 515 James, Daniel.. 710 551 | Johnson, Charles 633 660 Kent, Thomas.... 544 650 | Keystone Paper-Mills.. 550 650 , Kirk, Benjamin 702 617 | Landing-Place of William Penn. 415 732 = Larkin, John, Jr. 379 403 Leedom, Jesse... 652 400 | Leedom, Joseph B.... 579 311 | Lewis, J. Howard, Paper-Mills 663 711 Lewis, Milton... 609 712 | Lewis, William, Birthplace of.. 561 712.| Magill, Edward H 722 Manley, Charles D. - 608 624 Mathues, C. W .. - 500 545 | McCall, Robert... 310 623; MclIlvain, Spencer. 407 307 | Mendenhall, John... 563 675 | Middletown Presbyterian Church. 614 311 | Milbourne Mills 547 697 | “ Millbourne”.., 649 695 | Moore, James A. 578 678 | Moore, John M.. 586 595 | Mural Tablet in St. Paul’s Church, Chester. 338 poke} Outline: Maps sciicnsueacs sans ienisttaaneaavaeunustaen ll 430 | Palmer, Charles. 601 755 | Palmer, Lewis... 501 Palmer, Samuel.... 423 Pancoast, Samuel.. 585 Peace, Edward... aaa 698 Peace, Edward, residence of. 699 Pennell, Edmund................66 378 Penn Memorial Stone.... 416 Peterman, David Plumstead, Robert... Porter House, the. Pratt, Thomas Ramey, Lawrence. Rawle, James, residence of.. Reece, Thomas Rhodes, John B Rhodes, John B, residence of. 295 Rhoads, William.. 651 Roach, John........ 390 Scott, Alexander, residence of. 486 Seal, William. 634 Seal, Jane T.. 635 Sellers, John Sharpless, Joel.. 633 Shaw, Hugh..... 446 Shaw, Esrey & Co 445 Smedley, Samuel L. 560 St. David’s Church.. 644 Swarthmore College... 719 Tasker, Thomas T Taylor, Joseph x ILLUSTRATIONS. Webster, Joseph... Thatcher, Garrett....... us 618 | West, Benjamin, birthplace of. Thomas, Jonathan, residence “of. Thomson, J. Edgar.. 728 | Wetherill, Robert & Co.......... 405 Thurlow, John J.. 436 | Williams, Edward H., residence of. 680 Trainer, David... 470 | Willcox, James M... 494 Trainer, J. Newlin, residence of. «.. 468 | Willcox Paper Mill 492 Trainer, William....... «+. 481 | Wilson, Dr. Ellwood, ri 292 Tyler, Hugh L... 677 | Worrall, Jacob.. 155 Ward, William.. 422 | Worrell, David.. - Walter, Y. § 883. | Worth, Bdward , residemne Of.asocccsmcmrnsrnceienrerenmemnceen morte OUTLINE MAP OF b COUNTY Nae ie pr al oF ? ee . a: canubt Ling: aved Lizpressly for this Work. ie W © eT 4 aed 3 a “tg Se pat Se Cations poy J of ¥ (oes. < Ib He 3 ye % ee pe cA t \ Ase N an & co) anoint SF > a, 7S S Onn ne ao 2 { / ; ’ Xe A MRE > ei XG ors. RO eines ced mart ees nab if SOP MENS fo sn cy [ ay { A ROS i Ser a S@t RP GSHE Ney ADIN yy xa C oe & po" § { Xv Pee BK ta oan é eA Dak GLEN lige By cS ge ee STAR 4 ‘3 \ ty a. g ne Ww) yt en ye eee : aynide NEE pS a Ren THI OS < \s. woRTH TOWN \ Kak i ae \ ey \ c perenere % S ee / n eee ae A. here ons Se nl bees ssf "go \ , J Pry \ Yomi Cr, ST with t eo, JR eee | Fo. “4 v oP INTERS Kip es CAS ‘ See aonnesTrore ie Re aos \_ Puy Miees > sea De RoR Sy aps —BRANDYWINE if v es ee car PR S WP so Seon? SA TTIMOTSummy ‘ OHS STAG x = \ wn $e A oe 3 as > s f A © ; mit > f f ze NY \ es mea SSH a! / cos Be LA J oC V mn AS bee Lgl | x - = f \ 7 Soe ie “DR 7 = Ray r DA ss A 2 a. ee as Ory ee oF > ee fs E wayNe® +ON en ee \ S&S WAYNE oxy A & 0 \ & e = Ril ANOVA STA On ~~. t es wn us oC oak fo S AY on LPHIA PHILADE Cur: oOn*® «5 PDN staé, HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY. CHAPTER I. PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY WARE COUNTY.! OF DELA- THE surface of the county is hilly with very little exception in its western part, but somewhat level in its eastern portion. Its drainage is by several small streams, called creeks, that flow in a southerly direc- tion and empty into the Delaware River. These and their tributary branches make Delaware a well-watered county. Almost every country house is supplied from a never-failing spring of pure, soft water, and nearly all the fields of every farm have running streams through them. The flowing of these creeks down a surface inclined to the Delaware River, which is the southeastern boundary of the county, gives an abundance of water- power, which is used for various manufacturing pur- poses, The rapid flow of these streams and their numerous branches have cut deeply into the surface of the land, making it beautifully diversified by wood- crowned hills and fertile valleys and hill-sides. No one who has ever seen the charming scenery of this part of our State can exclude from the recollection of it the well-tilled farms, with their tastefully-planned homes, capacious barns, fields of waving grain, and the herds of cows that supply milk and butter of the very best quality to the Philadelphia market. Here grow luxuriantly all the fruits, grains, grasses, and vege- tables of the temperate zone. The declension of the surface of the land toward the south brings it near to aright angle with the rays of the sun, which has an effect on its temperature that is equivalent to being a degree or more farther south. The lower altitude of lands touching tide-water also favors the mildness of the climate as compared with higher surfaces. Grass is ready for pasturing about ten days earlier in the spring than on the higher and more horizontal lands of similar quality a few miles farther north. The river has a considerable influence on the tempera- ture of that part of the county bordering immediately on it. In winter the air may be for a long time at a freezing temperature before the river has ice on it, for the reason that the whole depth of water must be very 1 Contributed by Ellwood Harvey, M.D., Chester. 1 near to the freezing-point before its surface can be- come ice, though the surface of the ground will be frozen by a single night of coldness. Under such circumstances, and they occur every year, the two miles of width of water that is several degrees warmer than the general atmosphere has a very perceptible modifying influence. Fruits and flowers remain untouched by frost for several weeks after hard freezing has occurred in other parts of the county. In summer, evaporation keeps the river cooler than the surface of the land, which, becoming heated by the sun’s rays, radiates the heat into the air above it. The air expanding by the heat becomes lighter, and rises, and is replaced by the heavier air from the river, which flows with refreshing coolness and moisture over the parched land. These river breezes are of daily occurrence whenever the surface of the land is warm and dry, and their visits are delightfully acceptable. The geology of the county is somewhat peculiar. Our rocks belong to the earliest formation known to geologists. They were formed by the first process of hardening, which occurred when the surface of the great red-hot drop of molten matter which now con- stitutes the earth had cooled to the hardening-point. Having been formed by cooling from a melted condi- tion, they are crystalline in structure. It appears that they have not been submerged in the water of seas or lakes, where, if they had been, deposits of mud, sand, and gravel might have been washed upon them, to afterwards be hardened into rocks, but that since rocks have existed on the earth these have been a part of the dry land. They contain no traces of the remains of organic beings, such as are found in the stratified rocks that are formed under water. In many parts of the county great fissures have opened, in the remote past, into which the liquid rock of the earth’s interior has been injected, form- ing what are known as dikes. Into these different kinds of rock have been forced, some being trap-rock and others serpentine. Coming from the earth’s in- terior, this liquid matter was intensely hot, and heated the rocks on both sides the dikes so much as to change their texture by semi-liquefying them, and thereby favoring a recrystallization into different forms. 2 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Overlying the rocks of the country are deposits of gravel, sand, and clay. Some of these are results of the decomposition of the rocks themselves, but the greater part of them appear to have been brought from some other region, and the opinion is generally accepted that they were pushed from the country north of us by immense glaciers, that appear to have at one time covered all the northeastern parts of this country. The minerals of the county are very nu- merous. There are very few places in the whole country that offer such an extensive field for scien- tific research in this direction as the small county of Delaware. CHAPTER II. THE EARLY SETTLEMENT OF DELAWARE COUNTY TO THE GRANT OF THE PROVINCE TO WILLIAM PENN. THE first vessel under the control of white men whose prow ever ruffled the bosom of the great sheet of water now known to the world as Delaware Bay was the ‘‘ Half Moon” (“ Halvemann”), of eighty tons burden, an exploring vessel belonging to the Dutch East India Company, commanded by Henry Hudson. The log-book of Robert Jewett, the mate, records that about noon of Friday, Aug. 28, 1609, a warm, clear day, ‘“‘ we found the land to tend away N. W. witha great bay and river.” The lead line, however, dis- closing many shoal places, the vessel, next morning, was put about and steered on a southeast course, the officers being convinced that “ he that will thoroughly explore this great bay must have a small pinnace that must draw but four or five feet water, to sound before him.” The following year Sir Samuel Argall is said to have entered the bay ; and in honor of Thomas West, Lord De La War, the then Governor of Virginia, he named it Delaware Bay. In 1610, Lord Delaware, it is stated, himself visited it, and again in-1618, when he died on his vessel when off the Capes. In 1614, Capt. Cornelius Jacobsz Mey, in the “Fortune,” a vessel owned by the city of Hoorn, entered the bay, and in commemoration of his visit Cape Cornelius and Cape May between.them still bear his name. Two years subsequent to Mey’s voyage, Capt. Cornelius Hendrickson, in a small yacht, the “ Restless,” is positively asserted by some historians—and the state- ment is almost as positively denied by others—to have explored the Delaware as far as where the Schuylkill empties into the former river. If it be true that Capt. Hendrickson did actually sail up the stream to the place named, he was the first European of whom we have record that saw any part of the land now com- prising the county of Delaware, for his vessel moved along the river the entire length of our southeastern boundary, and he must have noticed the localities where afterwards was planted that germ of civiliza- tion from which has evolved the great commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The history of the various attempts of the Dutch and Swedish powers to establish permanent lodgment on the Delaware is a most interesting theme to the student of our colonial annals. Especially is this true since the indefatigable labors of the members of the Historical Societies of Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey have unearthed in recent years a number of authentic documents and historical papers whose very existence was unknown, which now shed much light on those early days of adventurous colonization. But the scope of this work forbids other than a brief narrative of these events excepting where, happening wholly within the territory now comprising Delaware County, they become part of the immediate story of this locality. In 1621, in Holland, was incorporated the great West India Company, which while its object was a monopoly of the trade of the territory where it might locate posts simply for barter with the savages, the practical result of its efforts was the establishment of a permanent colony in New York and, in a measure, the settlement of the Delaware. Under the auspices of this company, in 1624, Capt. Mey located a garri- son’ near the mouth of Timber Creek, Gloucester Co., N. J., and built Fort Nassau, which post was aban- doned the year following. Nevertheless the Dutch company did not relinquish its purpose of making a permanent lodgment on the Delaware, and with that end in view, Samuel Goodyn and Samuel Bloemmaert in 1631 purchased from three of the chiefs of the resi- dent tribe of Indians a large tract of land, sixteen miles square, extending from Cape Henlopen north- ward towards the mouth of the river. To this pur- chase—although it was not made until after the arri- val of the vessel in the winter of 1630-81, which was remarkably mild—Capt. Peter Heyes, in the ship “Walrus,” conveyed a small colony, which he located on Lewes Creek, designing to establish a whale- and seal-fishery station there, as well as plantations for 1 Dr. Smith (“History of Delaware County,” page 9) states that from the deposition of Catelina Tricho, said to have been the first white woman at Albany, the colonists who located at and built Fort Nassau in 1624 were accompanied by females. The curious document (see “Documentary History of New York,” vol. iii. page 49) is as follows: “New York, February 14, 1684-5. “The deposition of Catelina Tricho, aged fouer score yeares or there- abouts, taken before the right honoble Collo. Thomas, Leut and Governour under his Roy! highss James, Duke of York and Albany, ete., of N. York and its Dependencyes in America, who saith and declares in the pr’sens of God as fulloweth: “That she came to this Province either in the year one thousand six hundred and twenty-three or twenty-fouer, to the best of her Temember- ance, an that fouer women came along with her in the same shipp, in which the Governor, Arien Jorissen, came also over, Which fouer women were married at Sea, and that they and their husbands Stayed about three weeks at this place, and then they with eight seamen more went in a vessel by ordts of the Dutch Governor to Delaware river and there settled. This [ Certifie under my hand and ye Seale of this province, “THO. Donegan.” EARLY SETTLEMENT. 3 the cultivation of tobacco and grain. The settlement was called Swanendale, or “Valley of Swans,” be- cause of the great number of those birds in the neigh- borhood. After the erection of Fort Oplandt, and surrounding it with palisades, Capt. Peter Heyes sailed for Holland, leaving Gillis Hossett, commissary of the ship, in command of the territory. Early in 1682 it was determined that David Pieter- sen De Vries, one of the patrvons of the company and an experienced navigator, should repair to the colony on the Delaware with a number of emigrants, to join those already there; but before the expedition sailed from the Texel, May 24th of that year, the rumor was received that the little colony at Swanendale had been massacred by the Indians. The truth of this intelli- gence was established when De Vries entered the Delaware, after a circuitous passage, on the 5th of December following, and a careful exploration was made in a boat the next day. The fort was found a charred ruin, while the bones of the settlers and those of the horses and cows were discovered here and there bleaching in the sun. The adroit De Vries, however, managed to secure the confidence of the Indians, and induced one of the natives to remain all night on his vessel, from whom he learned the cir- cumstances connected with the massacre. The par- ticulars, as so related by the Indian, are thus recorded by De Vries :* “He then showed us the place where our people had set up a column to which was fastened a piece of tin, whereon the arms of Holland were painted. One of their chiefs took this off, for the purpose of making tobacco-pipes, not knowing that he was doing amiss. Those in com- mand at the house made such an ado about it that the Indians, not knowing how it was, went away and slew the chief who had doneit, and brought a token of the dead to the house to those in command, who told them that they wished that they had not done it; that they should have brought him to them, as they wished to have forbidden him not to do the like again. They went away, and the friends of the murdered chief incited their friends, as they are a people like the Indians, who are very revengeful, to set about the work of vengeance. Observing our people out of the house, each one at his work, that there was not more than one inside, who was lying sick, and a large mastiff, who was chained,— had he been loose they would not have dared to approach the house,— and the man who had command standing near the house, three of the stoutest Indians, who were to do the deed, bringing a lot of bear-skins with them to exchange, sought to enter the house. The man in charge went in with them to make the barter, which being done, he went to the loft where the stores lay, and in descending the stairs one of the Indians seized an axe and cleft his head so that he fell down dead. They also relieved the sick man of life, and shot into the dog, who was chained fast, and whom they most feared, twenty-five arrows before they could dispatch him. They then proceeded towards the rest of the men, who were at work, and, going amongst them with pretensions of friendship, struck them down. Thus was our young colony destroyed, causing us serious loss.” On Jan. 1, 1633, De Vries, who by divers presents had so won the good opinion and friendship of the Indians that they concluded a treaty of peace with him, sailed up the river, and on the 5th of the same month reached the abandoned Fort Nassau, where he was met by a few Indians, who seeing him approach- ing, had gathered there to barter furs. The Dutch 1 Voyages of De Vries.” New York Historical Society Collection {new series), vol. iii. page 23. captain told them he wanted beans, and that he had no goods to exchange for peltries, whereupon the sav- ages told him to go to Timmerkill (now Cooper’s Creek, opposite Philadelphia), where he could get corn. An Indian woman to whom he had given a cloth dress secretly informed De Vries that if he went there he would be attacked, for the natives had mur- dered the crew of an English boat which was ascend- ing the Count Earnest (Delaware) River. Thus fully on his guard, the next day when De Vries went to Timmerkill he permitted the Indians to visit his vessel, at the same time informing the savages that their evil designs had been revealed to him by Manitou, the Indian god. After making a treaty of permanent peace with them, being unable to obtain corn in any quantity on the Delaware, De Vries sailed to Vir- ginia, where he purchased provisions and received from the Governor a present of six goats for Swanen- dale, to which he returned, and subsequently taking the colonists on his vessel, sailed to New York and thence to Europe. Hence, in the summer of 1633 no settlement of Europeans was located at any point along the shores of Delaware Bay and River. In 1635 a party of Englishmen from the colony on the Connecticut River, consisting of George Holmes, his hired man, Thomas Hall, and ten or twelve others, attempted to make a lodgment on the Delaware, of which fact the Dutch authorities in New York seemed to have had information, and made preparation to thwart their design, for when the English squatters made an effort to capture Fort Nassau they found it garrisoned. The English party were taken prisoners and sent to Manhattan, where they were permitted permanently to settle. Thomas Hall, at the latter place, rose to some eminence, and was active in all the movements in the early days of New York while it was a Dutch province. In 1624, William Usselincx visited Sweden, and as as it was he who had drafted the first plan for the Dutch West India Company, he was invited by Gus- tavus Adolphus to remain in Sweden. A‘though ad- vanced in years, in 1626, Usselincx obtained from the king a charter for the Swedish West India Company, a commercial organization, whose project of forming a colony in “foreign parts” received the earnest sup- port of Gustavus Adolphus and Axel Oxenstierna, the great chancellor of Sweden. But nothing beyond the consent of Adolphus to the organization of the com- pany seems to have been done, and even the official royal signature to the charter was never procured. Hence after the death of the king the company was dissolved and the whole project apparently was aban- doned, notwithstanding a publication of the privi- leges granted by charter, although unsigned by the late monarch, was made by Chancellor Oxenstierna. This was the external appearance merely, for several persons were still earnest in the effort to establish the Swedish West India Company. It is a peculiar cir- cumstance that as late as the middle of the year 1685 4 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the objective-point of the proposed expedition seemed to have been undetermined, the coast of Guinea and that of Brazil being under consideration, while the eastern coast of North America apparently offered no attractions whatever. In the summer of 1635, Peter Minuit, who had some knowledge of the territory on the Delaware, entered into correspondence with the Swedish authorities, and early in 1637 he went to Sweden, where, after many difficulties, on Aug. 9, 1687, the Admiralty issued a passport for the ships “Kalmar Nyckel” and “ Gripen,” the former a man- of-war, and the latter a sloop, or tender, which vessels comprised Minuit’s fleet, the first Swedish expedition. It is stated in a Dutch state paper that Minuit’s col- onists were ‘‘Swedes, the most of whom were ban- ditti.”* Unforeseen delays followed, until the winter was near at hand before the expedition finally made sail for the New World, after having put into the Dutch harbor of Medemblik for repairs. It is stated by Professor Odhner,” of Sweden, that documentary evidence seems to establish the fact that the fleet ar- rived in the Delaware in March or early in April, 1688. Minuit about that time, it is known, purchased from the Indians a tract of land several days’ journey in extent, located on the west bank of the river, whereon he set up the arms of Sweden, and with a salvo of artillery christened the fort he began build- ing, near the present site of Wilmington, the “ Kris- tina,” in honor of the youthful queen whose flag he was the first to unfold on the American continent. The river Christiana retains the name thus bestowed on the fort—for Minuit called that stream the Elbe— to this day. Within the palisade were built two log houses, for the accommodation of the soldiers and for the storage of provisions. After the little settlement had been provided with all necessaries to sustain life, and for barter with the Indians, Lieut. Mans Kling was placed in command of the garrison, and Minuit, in July, 1688, sailed for Sweden, touching in his homeward voyage at the West Indies, where the sloop “ Gripen” had preceded him. At St. Christo- pher he sold all the merchandise on the “Kalmar Nyckel,” and in place of the cargo he had taken to the island loaded the vessel with tobacco. When ready to sail Minuit and the captain of his vessel were invited to visit a Dutch ship, “The Flying Deer,” and while on board of the latter a furious hur- ricane arose, compelling all the vessels in the road- stead to go to sea. Several of the ships were dis- masted, while others were lost, among the latter “The Flying Deer.” She was never afterwards heard from. The “ Kalmar Nyckel” made search for the missing Swedish officers, but, learning no tidings of them, after several days sailed for Europe. The sloop “ Gripen” subsequently returned from the West 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 236. 2“The Founding of New Sweden” (Penn. Mag. of History, vol. iii, p. 279) is a mine of interesting information on the early settlements of the Delaware River. Indies to the Delaware, where she was loaded with furs, and sailed for Sweden, reaching there in the latter part of May, 1639, having made the passage in five weeks. The same year Cornelius Van Vliet, a Dutch cap- tain, was ordered to proceed in the ‘‘ Kalmar Nyckel” to New Sweden, learn the condition of the colony, and make report of the country, no report having been made by Minuit, as it was the purpose of Queen Christina to people the land with Swedes. To the latter end an effort was made to obtain willing emi- grants, but failing in that, the government ordered the Governors of Elfsborg and Varmland ‘to lay hands on such marriaged soldiers as had either evaded ser- vice or committed some other offence, and transport them, with their wives and children, to New Sweden, with the promise to bring them back, if required, within two years ; to do this, however, ‘justly and dis- creetly,’ that no riot might ensue.” ® The “ Kalmar Nyckel” on her second voyage to the colony sailed for Gottenburg, where she arrived in June, 1639. There she was detained more than three months, occasioned by the difficulty of procuring emi- grants, cattle, horses, swine, implements for hus- bandry, and partly because of the negligence of the new commander of the second expedition. Rev. Reo- rus Torkillus, the first Swedish clergyman in New Sweden, is believed to have been one of the passengers on the vessel, which left Gottenburg in the early autumn of 1639. The ship was obliged to stop at Medemblik to be overhauled, she having sprung a leak, and, afterward, when having put to sea, she was twice compelled to return for repairs, until the crew stated they were not willing to sail in such a vesse] and under such a captain. Van Vliet was thereupon discharged, a new crew procured, and Capt. Pouwel Jansen, a Dutchman, given charge of the ship. The “Kalmar Nyckel,” after encountering a remarkable storm, that intercepted all navigation in the Zuider-Zee, finally, on Feb. 7, 1640, sailed from the Texel for New Sweden. Lieut. Peter Hollandare, who had been appointed Governor of the province, accompanied the expedition, which, after a voyage of over two months, landed at Christiana on the 17th of April of the same year, where they found the colony planted by Minuit in good condition.t | The emi- grants who accompanied the second expedition were of the most unpromising character, since Peter Hol- landare records that ‘‘no more stupid, indifferent peo- ple are to be found in all Sweden than those who are now here,” and the domestic animals transported in the ship were few and of poor quality. On Nov. 2, 1640, 8“ The Founding of New Sweden,” by Professor C. T. Odhner. Trans- lated by Professor G. B. Keen, Penn. Mag. of History, vol. iii. p. 396, 4 This statement, which appears from Swedish documents, is in marked contrast to the assertion of Director Kieft, whose letter, dated in the latter part of May, 1640 (“New York Colonial Documents,” vol. i. p. 593), states, “The Swedes in the South River were resolved to move off and to come here” (New York). “A day before their departure a ship arrived with a reinforcement.” EARLY SETTLEMENT. 5 the ship ‘“‘ Friedenburg,” under the command of Capt. Jacob Powellson, having on board a number of Dutch colonists, with Jost Van Bogardt, who emigrated under the auspices of the Swedish crown, cattle, and “ other things necessary for the cultivation of the country,” arrived in New Sweden. These emigrants occupied land three or four Swedish miles below Christiana. Very little is known of the history of the colony from 1640 to 16438, saving that in 1642 a general sickness prevailed among the Swedish settlers on the Dela- ware.! The “ Kalmar Nyckel” returned to Sweden in July, 1640. The home government, in its anxiety to obtain settlers for its American colony, had ordered the Gov- ernor of Orebro to prevail upon the unsettled Finns in that province to emigrate with their wives and children to New Sweden, while Mans Kling was in- structed from the mining classes, and particularly from among the roaming Finns, who lived free of charge in the houses of the inhabitants of the Swedish forests, to procure settlers to be sent abroad. The third ex- pedition, in the ‘“ Kalmar Nyckel” and the ‘“ Chari- tas,” sailed for New Sweden in 1641, and a number of the Finns came hither in those vessels. Hence many of the early Swedish settlers were not of a class to be desired as founders of a new empire, for the ar- chives of Sweden disclose the fact that quite a number of criminals and forest-destroying Finns were trans- ported to the Delaware River settlements to rid the mother-country of their presence. The Finns men- tioned had, in violation of the mandates of the royal government, set fire to the forests in Varmland and Dal, that they might free the ground of trees to sow grain in the ashes, and for this act they were banished to the New World. Professor Odhner directly asserts that in the province of Skaraborg, a trooper, who was condemned to death for having broken into the monas- tery gardens at Varnhem, was permitted to make his selection between being hanged or embarking for New Sweden, and as late as 1653? a criminal who had been convicted of killing an elk on the island D’Auland was sentenced to transportation hither. The fourth colony, and the one whose history most intimately connects itself with Delaware County, was that which left Gottenburg on Nov. 1, 1642. This expedition, composed of the ships “Fama” and “Swan,” was under the command of Lieut.-Col. John Printz, who had been commissioned Governor of New Sweden, Aug. 15, 1642, with an annual salary of one thousand two hundred dollars in silver and an allowance of four hundred rix-dollars for his ex- penses. The journey was a long one; “the watery way to the West was not yet discovered, and therefore, for fear of the sand-banks off Newfoundland, the ships which went under the command of Governor 1 Winthrop, vol. ii. p. 76. 25 Penna. Archives, 2d series, p. 780, where is given Queen Chris- tina’s order of Aug. 11, 1653, directing that Henry D’Oregrund, a male- factor under sentence of death, be sent to New Sweden. Printz sailed along the coast of Africa until they found the eastern passage, then directly over to Amer- ica, leaving the Canaries high up to the north.’’? They landed at Antigua, inhabited at “that time ‘ by Englishmen and negroes, with some Indians,’ where they ‘spent their Christmas holidays, and were well entertained,’”’ says Mr. Holm, “‘at the Governor’s house.’ After quitting this seat of ‘perpetual sum- mer’ (as the same gentleman depicts it) they en- countered ‘a severe storm,’ accompanied at the last ‘with snow,’ which ‘continued about fourteen days,’ by which they ‘lost three large anchors, a spritsail, and their mainmast, and the ship was run aground; but on the 15th of February, 1643, by God’s grace, came up to Fort Christina, in New Sweden, Va.,’ in the precise phrases of the historian, ‘ at two o’clock in the afternoon.’ Here the first three Swedish expe- ditions had established their chief settlement, under Minuit and Hollandare, and here remained a short time also this fourth and greatest of the colonies, enjoying friendly intercourse with fellow-countrymen most glad to welcome them, and happily reposing from the distresses of their long and perilous voyage.’ ”’ * Under the instructions he had received from the home government, Printz, in the exercise of his dis- cretion, located the seat of government at Tinicum Island, where he built a fort, which he called New Got- tenburg, and resided for a time in the fortress, until he built his mansion-house, known in our annals as Printz Hall. On this island the principal inhabitants then had their dwellings and plantations.» With the fort at that place, Printz controlled the passage of the river above Tinicum, and when he, shortly afterward, built Fort Elsenburgh, at Salem Creek, placing therein four brass and iron twelve-pound cannon and one “ nots-hooft,” ® manned by twelve soldiers in command of a lieutenant, he rendered the Dutch fortress on the east side of the river above the mouth of the Schuyl- kill almost useless to the Holland colony, as was fully recognized by Hudde, who reported that Printz had closed “ the enterance of the river.” We are told by Campanius that “In the be- ginning of Governor Printz’s administration there came a great number of those criminals, who were sent over from Sweden. When the European inhab- itants perceived it they would not suffer them to set their foot on shore, but they were all obliged to re- turn, so that a great many of them perished on the voyage. This was related to me, amongst other things, by an old, trustworthy man, named Nils Matsson Utter, who, after his return home, served in His Majesty’s life-guards. It was after this for- bidden, under a penalty, to send any more criminals to America, lest Almighty God should let his ven- 3 Acrelius, “‘ History of New Sweden,” p. 41. 4 Professor G. B. Keen’s summary of Printz’s voyage, in “ Descend- ants of Jéran Kyn,” Penna. Mag. of History, vol. ii. p. 326. 5 Campanius, “ History of New Sweden,” p. 79. 6 Hudde’s Report, Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 104, 6 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. geance fall on the ships and goods, and the virtuous people that were on board.”! This statement is in direct conflict with the report of Governor Printz in 1647, for therein he asked in- struction from the home authorities ‘how long the criminals must serve for their crimes,”? and is told that nothing definite can be prescribed respecting that matter, that it is left to his discretion, but those who reform and perform their duty satisfactorily may be allowed the same wages as other free people. “But those who go on in the same wrong way as be- fore and do not exhibit any improvement may have their punishment increased by you, Sir Governor, or may continue to serve without wages.’’? The voluntary emigrants to New Sweden were» of two classes, the freemen, those who were privileged to settle where they chose in the colony and to return to the mother-country at pleasure, and the company’s servants, those who were employed at stipulated wages for a designated term. “There was a third, consisting of vagabonds and malefactors; these went to remain in slavery, and were employed in digging the earth, throwing up trenches, and erecting walls and other fortifications. The others had no intercourse with them, but a particular spot was appointed for them to reside upon.‘ The first. year under Printz’s administration many of the settlers died, which the Governor states was due to hard work and the scarcity of food.’ In four years thereafter (1647) we learn from the report fur- nished the home government that the total number of whites in the Swedish settlements on the Delaware was one hundred and eighty-three souls. Twenty- eight of the freemen had made settlements, and part of them were provided with oxen and cows. Tobacco seems to have been chiefly the crop grown, for in the return cargo of the “Golden Shark,” in that year, 1 Campanius, “ New Sweden,” p. 73. 2 Penna. Mag. of History, vol. vii. p. 277. 3 Count Oxenstierna’s reply to Printz, Penna. Mag. of History, vol. vii. p. 283, In fact, we have reason to believe that during all our colo- nial history criminals were sent to the American plantations. In a series of articles on crimes and criminals, published in the New Castle (England) Weekly Chronicle, in 1883, the author says, “The statute of 89 Elizabeth was converted by James I. into an Act of Transportation to America, by a letter to the treasurer and council of Virginia, in the year 1619, commanding them ‘to send 100 dissolute persons to Virginia, which the Knight Marshall would deliver to them for the purpose.’ Transportation is not distinctly mentioned by any English statute prior to Charles II., which gives a power to the judges, at their discretion, ‘either to execute or transport to America for life the mosstroopers of Cumberland.’ This mode of punishment, however, was not commonly practiced until the reign of George I. The courts were then, by Act of Parliament, allowed a discretionary power to order felons to be trans- ported to the American plantations. This lasted from 1718 to the decla- ration of American independence in 1776.” The importation of crimi- nals into this colony in the character of redemption servants, who were purchased from the officers in England, became such a public evil that on Feb. 14, 1729-30, the General Assembly by statute forbade masters of vessels, under heavy fines, landing such persons in the province, and extended the penalties to merchants who should import, sell, or dispose of such convicts in the province in violation of the act. 4 Campanius, “ New Sweden,” p. 73. 5 Printz’s Report, Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vii. p. 272. ‘ was six thousand nine hundred and twenty pounds of tobacco, grown in New Sweden, the rest having been purchased from Virginia. To stimulate this project those persons who cultivated land were exempted by the home government for ten years from taxation. A grist-mill had been erected by Printz in 1648, about a quarter of a mile in the woods at “ Kara Kung,” other- wise called the Water-Mill stream, ‘‘a fine mill, which ground both fine and coarse flour, and was going early and late. It was the first that was seen in that coun- try.”® This mill was located on Crum Creek, and the holes sunk in the rocks to receive the posts sup- porting the frame-work are still to be seen, near the Blue Bell Tavern, on the Darby road.” Townsend Ward tells us that in front of the old portion of the Blue Bell Tavern “is a carriage stepping-stone of considerable historical interest, for it is, perhaps, one of the first millstones used in what is now the terri- tory of Pennsylvania, and was in use before Penn’s arrival. The stone is circular in form, with a square hole through its centre. Not far from the inn, and in the bed of the creek, only a few feet west of the old King’s (Queen’s) road bridge, may be seen the holes, drilled in the rocks, in which were inserted the sup- ports of the ancient mill wherein the stone was used. Mr. Aubrey H. Smith remembers finding, when a boy, a piece of lead weighing seventeen pounds, that had evidently been run, when melted, around an inserted post.” Printz was much pleased with the mill, ‘t which runs the whole year, to the great advantage of the coun- try, particularly as the windmill, formerly here before I came, would never work, and was good for nothing.” 9 Not only had he built this needed public improvement, but had caused some waterfalls to be examined as a site for saw-mills below the dam of the grist-mill, as well as three other places where oak-timber grew plen- tiful. But as he was without the saw-blades, and no person in the colony understood the management of such an establishment, Printz suggested to the home government that it would be worth considering, as a good trade in planking, pipe-staves, and timber could be made with the West Indies and other points, pro- vided a proper vessel was kept in New Sweden to transport those articles to market.’ It is not my purpose to relate the history of the dif- ficulties and trials which Printz had to contend with from the encroachments of the Dutch and English in their efforts to make a lodgment on the Delaware. That he was insolent in his manner to those whom he regarded as intruders on the Swedish territory cannot be questioned, if the statement of his enemies is to be credited. Hudde tells us that Printz replied to his ®Campanius, p. 81. Of course the statement applies to the first mill run by water. We know, from Printz's report, that a windmill had preceded it. 7 Record of Upland Court, p. 88. 8“ A Walk to Darby,” Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. iii. p. 262. ® Report for 1647, Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vii, p. 274, 10 Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vii. p. 279, EARLY SETTLEMENT. 7 suggestion that the Dutch were the earliest settlers on the Delaware, “that the devil was the oldest pos- sessor of hell, but he sometimes admitted a younger one.” That on another occasion, Printz treated con- temptuously a letter he had sent him by a sergeant, in that he threw it towards one of his attendants who stood near him, saying, “There, take care of it,” and that when the sergeant insisted on seeing the Gov- ernor, who left him to meet some Englishmen, he, the sergeant, was thrown out of doors, ‘‘ the Governor taking a gun in his hand from the wall to shoot him, as he imagined, but was prevented from leaving his room,” and that when the servants of the Dutch Company went to Tinicum, Printz unreasonably abused them, “so that they are often, on returning home, bloody and bruised,” while John Thickpenny,! of the New England colony on the Delaware, de- posed that, at Tinicum, Printz cursed and swore at the Englishmen, calling them renegades, and threw John Woollen, the Indian interpreter for the English settlers, into irons, which Printz himself fastened on his legs, and that he stamped with his feet in his rage. Despite all these statements, Printz was true to his sovereign’s interest in the colony, even if he had failed in that respect in the Old World? On Feb. 20, 1647, when the ship “Golden Shark,” which had arrived in New Sweden on the 1st of Oc- tober of the preceding year, left the colony on the return voyage to Europe, Printz dispatched Lieut. John Pappegoya, as a special messenger to orally make a report of the growth and need of the settlement. Pappegoya had been one of the early Swedish settlers on the Delaware and had returned home, but de- siring to revisit New Sweden, he came back in 1644, particularly recommended to the favorable considera- tion of Printz by the home government. It is be- lieved at the time Pappegoya was sent to Sweden as bearer of dispatches he was then married to Ar- migart, Governor Printz’s daughter, who figured prominently in our early annals. He returned to New Sweden in a short time (in those days of long voyages), for about in the middle of June, 1648, Hudde* mentions that the committee of the Dutch Council, after completing the purchase of land on the Schuylkill from the Indians, ‘ with a becoming suite, sailed to Tinne Konck, and was received there by the commissay, Huygen and Lieut. Passegay (Pappe- goya), who left them about half an hour in the open 1 Deposition of John Thickpenny, “ New Haven Colonial Records,” vol. i. pp. 97-99. 2 John Printz was well educated, and after he entered military life he rose rapidly during the Prussian and German war. In 1638 he was pro- moted lieutenant-colonel of West Githa Cavalry. In 1640 he shamefully and disgracefully surrendered the fortress of Chemnitz, and returned to Stockholm without the consent of the field-marshal. He was put under arrest, tried, and broken of his rank in the army. He was subsequently (Aug. 16, 1642) appointed Governor of New Sweden. On his return to the Old World he was made a general, and in 1658, Governor of the dis- trict of Jonkoping. He died in 1663, leaving no male issue to succeed to the title conferred on him in 1642. 3 Hudde’s Report, Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 115. air and constaint rain,” before they could obtain an interview with Governor Printz. When the latter, after administering the affairs of the colony on the Delaware for twelve years, sailed for Sweden in the latter part of the year 1653, he left the government in charge of his son-in-law, John Pappegoya. May 21, 1654, the ship “ Eagle” arrived at New Castle, having on board John Claudius Rising, who had been appointed commissary and Governor’s as- sistant counsellor,—an office equivalent to Lieutenant- Governor; but Printz having sailed before Rising came, the full charge of the colony devolved upon him. His first official act was not only a violation of his instructions, but an error which was disastrous in its results to the colony. As the vessel came to at Fort Cassimir two guns were fired as a salute to the fortress, after which Rising demanded the surrender of the stronghold. The Dutch commander desired time to consider, but Rising ordered a force of thirty men to land and take the place by assault, refusing, as the Dutch alleged, “to give one hour’s delay.” Acrelius tells us, “A correct inventory was made of everything in the fort, and every one was allowed to carry off his property, whether belonging to the com- pany or to private individuals ;” * while Gerrit Becker, the Dutch commander, deposed, ‘‘I could scarcely induce him (Rising) by prayer not to be turned out naked, with his (my) wife and children, and all the property in this fort was confiscated by them.”*® The capture of this fortress having taken place about noon on Trinity Sunday, the Swedes called it the “ Fort of the Holy Trinity ;’ and subsequently, under the su- pervision of Peter Lindstrom, the engineer, it was repaired, enlarged, and “as good as built anew.” On the 17th of June, 1654, Vice-Governor Rising held a council with the Indian sachems at Printz Hall, at Tinicum, and although the savages stated that the Swedish vessel had introduced among them diseases, of which many of their people died, the gifts which Rising laid before them were too tempt- ing to be resisted, and a treaty of friendship was then “made between the Swedes and the Indians, which has ever since been faithfully observed on both sides.” ® When the news of the capture of Fort Cassimir was received in Holland it excited much indignation among the directors, and although previous to that event the home government had not approved fully of Stuyvesant’s action in erecting the fort at New Castle, all differences of opinion were swallowed up in the indignation and anger the seizure of the fortress aroused. Hence, Stuyvesant was ordered “to exert every nerve to revenge that injury, not only by re- storing affairs to their former situation, but by driving the Swedes from every side of the river, as they did with us, provided that such among them as may be 4 Acrelius, “‘ New Sweden,” p. 63. 5 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 253. 6 Campanius, p. 78. 8 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. disposed to settle under and submit to our govern- ment may be indulged in it.”! In conformity with the spirit of these instructions, Stuyvesant silently but promptly made preparation for an aggressive move- ment against the Swedish settlement on the Delaware. To that end he gathered an armament and fleet, while the Swedes, unaware of the danger that lowered over them, made no unusual provision for defense. On Sunday, Sept. 4, 1655, the expedition under Stuyve- sant, in seven vessels, with about six hundred men, set sail for the Delaware, and on the morning of the 9th of September anchored a short distance from Fort Cassimir, when Stuyvesant sent a lieutenant ashore to demand the restitution of the stronghold. Lieutenant Schute, the Swedish officer, desired time to communicate with his superior, which was refused. In the mean while thé Dutch commander had landed a force which occupied all the approaches in rear of the fort, and, after some negotiation, the Swedish gar- rison capitulated on the morning of the 11th of Sep- tember. After the reduction of Fort Cassimir the Dutch forces laid siege to Fort Christiana, and from Governor Rising’s official report? we learn that the enemy made regular approaches until, having their guns in position in rear of the fort, Stuyvesant form- ally demanded the surrender of the post within twenty-four hours. The Swedish Governor, after a general consultation with the whole garrison, decided to accede to the demand he was powerless to resist. The articles of capitulation, among other matters, provided that the Swedish forces should march out of the fort with the honors of war,—drums and trumpet playing, flags flying, matches burning, and with hand and side arms. That they, as prisoners of war, were first to be conducted to Tinicum Island, and placed in the fort at that place until they could be taken to New Amsterdam.’ Campanius asserts that “The Dutch then proceeded to destroy New Gottenburg, laying waste all the houses and plantations without the fort, killing the cattle, and plundering the in- habitants of everything that they could lay their hands on; so that after a siege of fourteen days, and many fruitless propositions to obtain more humane treatment, the Swedes were obliged to surrender that fortress for want of men and ammunition.’’* 1 Hazaril’s Annals, p. 168, . 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 224. 3 Acrelius, ‘‘ Hist. of New Sweden,” p. 76. 4 Campanius, “ New Sweden,” pp. 85, 86. Smith, in his ‘‘ History of New Jersey,” page 34, says the Dutch “destroyed New Gottenburg, with such houses as are without the fort, plundering the inhabitants of what they had, and killing their cattle.” From his account it also ap- pears that the fort at Tinicum was defended fourteen days, and that the pillaging took place before the fort was surrendered. The statements of both Campanius and Smith were doubtless based on tradition- ary recitals, which, in descending from one generation to another, had confused two separate matters into one. Campanins’ work was not published until 1702, nearly forty years after the circumstances nar- rated took place, while that of Smith was issued long subsequent to that date. To show how soon confusion may take place in matters connected with historical events it is only necessary to cite ‘An Account of the Seditious False Konigsmack in New Sweden” (Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. From the fact that the articles of capitulation at Fort Christina stipulated for the detention of the Swedish prisoners of war at the fort at Tinicum, and that there is, so far as known, an absence of all documentary evi- dence to support the assertion made by Campanius, the conclusion seems irresistible that that author has con- fused his account of the doings at New Gottenburg with those occurring on the siege of Fort Christiana. Vice- Governor Rising, in his report,> already mentioned, when relating the pillaging of ‘‘the people without sconce of their property, and higher up the river they plundered many and stripped them to the skin,” thus briefly narrated the outrages of the Dutch in- vaders at Tinicum. “‘ At New Gottenberg they robbed Mr. Papegoija’s wife of all she had, with many others who had collected their property there.” Not a word has this man, who pictured the minutest incident of the siege of Fort Christiana, and the killing of Swedish “cattle, goats, swine, and poultry,” to say about the investment of Fort Gottenburg, the resistance of its slender garrison for fourteen days, or the laying waste of all the houses and plantations without the forts. Certain it is, that the Swedish Church at Tinicum, Printz Hall, and other buildings stood uninjured long years after the Dutch power in North America had waned before the conquering standard of Great Britain. In 1680 “the remains of the large block- house, which served them (the Swedes) in place of a fortress,” was on the island, together with “three or four houses built by the Swedes, a little Lutheran Church made of logs, and the ruins of some log huts.”® In Rising’s reply to Stuyvesant,’ only thirty- four days after the capture of Fort Christiana, he does not mention the destruction of the post at New Got- tenburg, but sets forth the following outrages com- mitted by the Dutch in their conquest of New Sweden: “Your Honor’s troops have behaved here as if they were in the country of their bitterest enemy, as the plundering of Tornaborg, Uplandt, Finland, Prince- dorp, and other places more clearly proves (not to speak of the deeds done about Fort Christiana), where the females have partly been dragged out of their houses by force; whole buildings torn down, even hauled away; oxen, cows, pigs, and other animals daily slaughtered in large numbers; even the horses were not spared, but shot wantonly, the plantations devastated, and everything thereabouts treated in such a way that our victuals have been mostly spoiled, carried away, or lost somehow.” So, too, on Dec. 19, 1656,° the directors instruct Stuyvesant to occupy the vii. p. 219), where is given, by an unknown writer, in 1683, an account of the attempted insurrection of the Long Fin, which occurred in 1669, The writer states, “ These are the particulars which I received from the oldest Swedes,” and yet he relates that the conspirators “ went to Phila- delphia and bought powder, balls, shot, lead, and so forth,” nearly four- teen years before that city had an existence. 5 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 227. 6 Journal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-80, Memoirs of the Long Island Hist. Soc., vol. i. p. 177. 7 Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 487. 8 Ib., 496. EARLY SETTLEMENT. 9 fort at New Gottenburg with eight or ten soldiers pro- visionally, “as well for the safety of the Swedes, now our subjects.” The Dutch had conquered, and the Swedish flag no longer floated over the disputed territory on the Dela- ware. But the triumph was a costly one, the expenses of the expedition swelling so largely the debt of the Dutch West India Company that in the summer of 1656, to relieve itself from liability to the city of Am- sterdam, the company ceded to the burgomasters of that municipality a portion of the Delaware River territory, extending from Bombay Hook to Christiana Creek, which subsequently was: known as “the City’s Colony,” while the land north of that creek was termed “the Company’s Colony.” Before intelligence of the conquest of New Sweden had reached the mother-country, on March 24, 1656, the Swedish ship “ Mercury,” with a hundred and thirty emigrants on board, entered the river. John Paul Jacquit, the Dutch Governor, prohibited the captain of the vessel to land the crew or passengers, as well as refusing to permit him to ascend the river beyond Fort Cassimir. John Pappegoya, who had not yet returned to Sweden, together with Capt. Huygen, on March 30th wrote to the Council in New Amsterdam, requesting that these emigrants who came from Sweden should be permitted to settle in ' the colony, urging as reasons “ the immense loss they would suffer, many good farmers would be ruined, parents separated from children, and even husbands from wife,” but their appeals only made the Council hold more firmly to their resolution that the Swedes should settle at New Amsterdam, where their number could not be a constant menace to the authorities. Much time was consumed in tedious negotiations, until at length the patience of the Swedish colonists was exhausted, and through the influence of Pappe- goya with the savages, a number of the residents, Swedes and Indians, went aboard the vessel, when, in spite of the guns of the fort or the command of Gov- ernor Jacquit, the anchor was weighed, the “ Mer- cury’’ sailed up the river, and landed her cargo and passengers at Christiana.1 The Dutch, fearing that some of the Indians on board might be injured, re- frained from firing on the vessel in her passage by the fort. After the Dutch had acquired absolute sway on the Delaware the ancient Swedish capital at Tinicum seems to have been abandoned, possibly because of the grant of that island to Governor Printz, hence in the early records only occasionally, at this period, do we find allusion to any places lying within the boun- dary of the present county of Delaware. Georan Van Dyck, who had been appointed sheriff of the company's colony, requested permission to establish 1 Acrelius, “ Hist. of New Sweden,” p. 90. Vincent says (Hist. of State of Delaware, vol. i. p. 276) that the passengers and cargo of the “ Mer- cury” were landed at Marcus Hook. On what authority that statement is based is not given. the Swedish settlers in villages, and on June 12, 1657, the Council responded that he was ‘‘ not only author- ized and qualified, but also ordered and directed, to concentrate their houses and dwellings, but henceforth to erect them in shape of a village or villages, either at Upland, Passayonck, Finland, Kinghsessing, on the ‘Verdrietige hoeck,’ or at such places as by them may be considered suitable, under condition that previous notice be given to the Director-General and Council, in case they should chose some other places than those specified above.”? This effort to gather the Swedish residents into villages failed, and it seems not to have been pressed earnestly until after Wil- liam Beekman was appointed, Oct. 28, 1658, vice- director of the company’s colony on the Delaware, and even not then until the directors in Holland, under date of Oct. 14, 1659,? recommend that the Swedes should be separated and scattered among the Dutch, since they, the directors, had reason to believe that the English may undertake “something against us there under the Swedish flag and name.” In fur- therance of this recommendation, Beekman, in March following, attempted to execute the order, but found that he could not get the Swedish settlers to choose a location for the village, every one asserting that he would keep his entire lot and fields.‘ Miss Printz “objected to moving because the church was located at Tinicum, on her plantation, that her buildings were heavy, that she had offered her land rent free, but no one would live with her.” Beekman also informed Stuyvesant that to enforce the edict then would result in great loss, as it would prevent the planting of spring crops, and he, therefore, had granted the Swedes five or six weeks longer before compelling compliance with the order. Thus the matter rested, for the Dutch authorities could not convince the Swedes of the advantage of the proposed change, and they had not sufficient force at hand to compel obedience therewith.> Beekman, however, constantly endeay- ored to prevail upon them to settle at Passayunk, but when the Swedes intimated that “they would rather go to Maryland than to remove to another place here and sponge upon the others,” the project was finally abandoned by the authorities. The affair of the Delaware’s having been so mis- managed that many complaints had been lodged with the authorities in New Amsterdam, Council on April 20, 1658, determining that these matters “as well as some necessary arrangements to be made among and regarding the Swedes, cannot well be attended to by a letter,” ordered that Stuyvesant and Pieter Tonne- man should personally visit the Delaware River set- tlements “for the special service and advantage of the company.” On May 8th Stuyvesant was at Tini- cum, for on that day Georan Van Dyck, Orloff Stille, 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 511. 3 1b., p. 698. 5 Acrelius, ‘‘ Hist. of New Sweden,” p. 96. 4b, p. 628. 10 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Malthys Hanson, Peter Rambo, and Peter Kaik, the Swedish magistrates,! presented a petition to the Gen- eral Director, asking for the appointment of a court messenger to serye summons, make arrests, and “the carrying out of sentences,” and that they be allowed “free access to the commander at Fort Altona to get assistance from the soldiers in case of emergency.” The third request was ‘that an order be made that nobody shall leave these boundaries without knowl- edge of the magistrates, much less, that the servants, man or woman of one, when they leave or run away without their masters’ or mistress’ permission, shall be concealed by the other.” From this petition, which was favorably received and acted on, we learn that Fort Gottenburg had at this time ceased to be a military post. This was per- haps due to the fact that the Dutch officers were doubtful of the loyalty of the Swedes to the new ad- ministration, and thought it judicious to concentrate their forces at the most available and strongest fortifi- cation; that at Tinicum, being merely a block-house, was abandoned. We also gather from the same doc- ument that the system of redemption servitude at that early stage of our history was recognized in this locality.? From the report of Jacob Alricks to the commis- sioners of the city’s colony, Oct. 10, 1658,> we ascer- tain that children from the almshouse at Amsterdam had been sent over to the Delaware River settlements and had been bound out among the residents there, the eldest for two, the major portion for three, and the youngest children for four, years. He suggested that from time to time more of these young people should be dispatched hither, “but, if possible, none ought to come less than fifteen years of age and some- what strong, as little profit is to be expected here without labor.” -In a letter from Beekman to Stuyvesant, April 28, 1660,* the former states ‘‘ that among the Fins at Op- land there is a married couple who live very wretch- edly together, and the wife is often fearfully beaten, and daily driven out of the house like a dog, which was continued through several years. Nothing is heard of the wife, but he, on the contrary, has com- mitted adultery. Therefore the priest, the neighbors, the sheriff, and commissaries, and others besides, have appealed to me, at the request of the man and the woman, that they might be divorced, and the few ani- mals and personal property be divided among them. I answered that I would inform your Noble Worship of it and await orders.” What was done finally in this case is unknown. On the night of Sept. 20, 1661,° the wite of Rev. 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 531. 2 As to the latter statement, see Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 716. 8 Ib., vol. v. p. 300. 4Ib., vol. vii. p. 634. 5 Ib., 5th series, vol. vii. p. 668. Laurence Charles Laers, the Swedish priest at Up- land, eloped with Joseph Jongh (Young), the fugi- tives leaving the settlement in a canoe. Director Beekman, the next day, as soon as he was informed of the occurrence, dispatched an express to the Goy- ernor of Maryland and the magistrates at Sassafras River, requesting that should the parties come there they might be detained, and he notified of the fact, Four days afterwards Beekman came to Upland to look after the property there of Jacob Jongh. It ap- pears that in his hasty flight Jongh had left his per- sonal effects at Upland, and the next day the Rev, Mr. Laers went to the house of Andreas Hendriexson, a Finn, where his wife’s paramour had lived, and without notifying the authorities forced open the door of Jongh’s room with an axe.® The keys to the chest belonging to the fugitive being found in the apartment, the clergyman opened the luggage and appropriated some of the contents. The Dutch au- thorities supposed, as they learned nothing from Maryland, that the runaways had gone to New Eng- land, whereas it is now almost conclusively estab- lished that this Jacob Jongh or Young made his way to Maryland, where he subsequently figured promi- nently in the early history of that colony.” The abandoned husband, however, did not appear to be crushed by his wife’s desertion, for in less than a month (October 15th) he asked Vice-Governor Beek- man to be allowed the next day to make the first proclamation of the banns of his intended marriage with a girl of seventeen or eighteen years, which con- sent the former withheld until he could hear from Stuyvesant.’ The authorities in New Amsterdam ap- parently acted too slowly for the reverend lover, for November 8th® he again asked for advice “ whether he may now marry again, as his household requires it.” On December 15th” he was granted a provis- ional divorce, the decree being subject to Stuyvesant’s approbation ; but without tarrying until the latter signified his approval, the reverend gentleman, on Sunday, Jan. 26, 1662, entered anew into the married relation, which act aroused the indignation of Beek- man, and prejudiced him against “this fine priest.” On April 14, 1662, the case against the Rev. Mr. Laers was tried at Fort Altona. He was prosecuted on behalf of the company for having broken into the room and making an inventory of the goods left by the absconding Joseph Jongh. In the crude system of justice then in vogue on the Delaware, the court sentenced him to pay two hundred guilders, which had been advanced to Jongh to purchase grain for the company, forty florins in beavers which were due from Jongh to Director Beekman and Mr. Decker, and was also fined forty guilders for usurping the author- ity of the court. The unhappy defendant was in ad- 6 Ib., 669. 7 Johnson's “ History of Cecil County, Md.,” pp. 80-130. 8 Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 670. 9Ib., 671. 10 Tb., 672. EARLY SETTLEMENT. 11 dition informed that “his new marriage was declared illegal.”? The clergyman thereupon petitioned Gov- ernor Stuyvesant, setting forth that he broke the door open in the search for his wife, whom he imagined was concealed in that place; that he had found among Jongh’s goods a few pairs of his (the petitioner’s) wife’s stockings; that he had no intention “to vilify the court;” that his acts were committed through ignorance, and that in his marriage “he did not sup- pose it should have been so unfavorably interpreted ;” he therefore, to save his “‘ reputation as a minister,” prays that the Governor will disapprove of the sen- tence of the court, and “ not inflict any further pun- ishment” than that he has already undergone, since, independent of the fine of two hundred and eighty guilders, the desertion of his wife had cost him nearly two hundred guilders.2 What was done with this petition does not appear. From the report made by the commissioners and directors of the city’s colony,’ on Aug. 10, 1663, we learn that on the Delaware River it was found that “the Swedes, Fins, and other natives” had “ made and erected there 110 good bouweries, stocked with about 2000 cows and oxen, 20 horses, 80 sheep, and several thousand swine.” This was comparatively a good showing, and it induced the city of Amsterdam to accede to the proposition of the Dutch West India Company, that the former should, in discharge of the debt owed by the company, accept a deed for “‘all] the country on the Delaware.” In furtherance of this agreement a formal deed was executed Dec. 22, 1663, and the sway of the authorities at New Amsterdam ceased on the Delaware River. On the day after the date of this conveyance Beekman wrote to Stuyves- ant that fifty farm laborers who had arrived in the ship ‘St. Jacob” during June of that year had been hired out to farmers, and that six or seven girls had been sent on the same vessel to cook and wash for the emigrants. He informed the director-general that “this is almost the same method as that of the English trade in servants.’’* The authority of the city of Amsterdam over the entire Delaware River settlements was only of brief duration, and destined in a few months to be wholly overthrown. The crown of Great Britain had never acknowledged the right which the Dutch and Swedes maintained they had acquired by occupancy to the territory, and it was merely due to the intestine dis- cord at home that the former nation had not earlier brought the mooted subject to the arbitrament of arms. Charles II., then firmly seated on the throne of England, on March 12, 1664, granted to his brother James, Duke of York and Albany, the territory now comprising the State of New York and New Jersey, and, by a subsequent grant, that of Delaware. With 1 Penna. Archives, 2d serics, vol. vii. p. 680. 2 Hazard’s Annals, p. 332. 3 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 470. 4Ib., vol. vii. p. 716. unusual promptness the duke fitted out an expedition, consisting of four vessels of war and four hundred and fifty men, including sailors and soldiers, which, under the command of Col. Richard Nicolls, sailed from Portsmouth, England, on May 25, 1664,° to reduce and occupy the Dutch possessions in North America. Sir Robert Carr, George Cartwright, and Samuel Maverick, Esquires, accompanied the expedition as commissioners appointed by the king, with power to hear and determine all military, civil, and criminal matters, and to proceed in all things for “settling the peace and security of the country,” as also to adjust “boundaries between neighboring colonies and dis- putes between the Indians and the English.”® The Governors of New England were instructed by the king “to join and assist them vigorously in recovering our right to those places now possessed by the Dutch, | and reducing them to an entire obedience and submis- sion to our government.”’ On the 25th of August the frigate “‘ Guinea,” the first vessel of the expedition to reach the point of destination, entered the lower bay of New Amsterdam, and a proclamation was issued guaranteeing protection to those persons who should submit to the English authority. The other vessel having arrived, after considerable negotiation, on the 9th of September, the Dutch authorities sur- rendered New Amsterdam to the English, the latter permitting the garrison to march out of the fort with all their arms, drums beating and colors flying. The English commissioners, when they had acquired pos- session of the settlement, changed the name of the place to New York, in honor of the duke. To secure control of the Delaware River territory, on the 3d (18th) of September, 1664, Sir Robert Carr was or- dered to proceed thither with the frigates “ Guinea” and “ William” and ‘“‘ Nicholas” and ‘to reduce the same” ® toan English province. The instructions given him, among other things, required that all planters were to retain their real and personal property un- molested by the conquerors, and Carr was particularly directed to conciliate the Swedes; that all persons were to be permitted liberty of conscience ; the magis- trates were to be continued in office for six months on subscribing to the oath of allegiance ; the settlers were to be protected from violence in persons or estates ; and the system of jurisprudence there is urged not to be disturbed for the present. After a long and troublesome passage, the expedition arrived in the Delaware on the last day of September, and passed the fort at New Amstel without an exchange of shot, which was done, as Carr states, “‘ the better to sattisfie the Sweede, who, notwithstanding the Dutches p*- 5 Old style; England at that time had not accepted the modern com- putation of time. 6 Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. v. pp. 507-512, 7Ib., 513. 8 Hazard's Register, vol. i. p. 36; Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 536. © Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. v. pp. 536, 537. 12 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. wasions to y® contrary, were soon our frinds.” Carr then summoned the fort to surrender, and for three days negotiations were had between the opposing forces, which resulted in the magistracy of the place agreeing to surrender the town, a conclusion in which D’Hinoyossa and his soldiers declined to concur. “Whereupon,” states Carr, in his official report,’ “I landed my soldiers on Sunday morning following, & comanded ye shipps to fall downe before y® Fort win muskett shott, w directions to fire two broadesides apeace upon y* Fort, then my soldiers to fall on. Which done, the soldiers neaver stoping untill they stormed y? fort, and soe consequently to plundering ; the seamen, noe less given to that sporte, were quickly win, & have gotten good store of booty; so that in such a noise and confusion noe worde of comand could be heard for sometyme; but for as many goods as I could preserve, I still Keepe intire. The loss on our part was none; the Dutch had tenn wounded and 3 killed. The fort is not tenable, although 14 gunns, and w“out a greate charge w unevitably must be expended, here wilbee noe staying, we not being able to keepe itt.” We learn from Col. Nicolls’ report to the Secretary of State? that the storming-party was commanded by Lieut. Carr and Ensign Hooke; and, notwithstanding the Dutch fired three volleys at them, not a man in their ranks was wounded in the assault.. Sir Robert Carr, it seems, stayed aboard the “Guinea” until the fort was captured, when he landed and claimed that the property in the fort, having been won by the sword, was his and his troops. All the soldiers and many of the citizens of New Amstel were sold as slaves to Virginia by the English con- querors, and most of the negroes belonging to the Dutch settlers were distributed among the captors, as were also one hundred sheep, forty horses, sixty cows and oxen.* Lands and estates were confiscated, and granted by Sir Robert Carr to his officers, as well as the commanders of the vessels which took part in the expedition to the Delaware. When the standard of Great Britain floated from the flag-staffs over the captured Dutch forts on the Hudson and the Delaware it marked the supremacy of the Anglo-Saxon race on the North American continent, and as authority was then exercised from Maine to Florida, on the Atlantic coast, by a homo- geneous people, it made possible the great nation that was born to the world a century later. It was singu- larly fortunate, at this juncture, that the unbridled executive power in the new province was confided to so prudent and able a man as Col. Richard Nicolls proved to be, whose “administration was so wise and impartial that it enforced universal peace.”* On the Delaware the Swedes, who had heretofore been held as a subjugated people, were in every respect benefited by the change, and even the Dutch settlers had reason 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 550. 2 Ib., 541. 8N. Y. Colonial Doc., vol. iii. p. 345; Vincent’s Hist. of Del., p. 432. 4 Gordon’s “ History of Pennsylvania,” p. 30. to be glad that the tyrannical sway of Stuyvesant had ended. In May, 1667, Col. Francis Lovelace suc- ceeded Col. Nicolls, and, as has been said by an able writer, ‘under Governor Lovelace the work of ad- justing the government of the Delaware, so as to bring it slowly but steadily into conformity with English law, progressed systematically year by year, until it received an unexpected check in 1673 by the total, but temporary, suspension of English authority inci- dent to the second conquest of the country by the Dutch.”’® Late in the summer of 1671 the Indians had com- mitted several atrocious murders, and it became neces- sary for Governor Lovelace to act cautiously but firmly to check further outrages, and to punish the culprits for the crimes already perpetrated. As pre- liminary to an Indian war he ordered that persons living in the outer settlements should thrash their grain and remove it and the cattle to a place of com- parative safety; that no person, on pain of death, should sell powder, shot, or liquor to the savages, as also recommending the strengthening of garrisons and fortifications. Lovelace prudently had a confer- ence with the Governor of New Jersey, to secure, if war should result, the co-operation of that province, since the murderers were said to be under that juris- diction, and a meeting was held at New York, Sep- tember 25th, and ancther at Elizabethtown, N. J., Noy. 7, 1671, when it was determined that it was in- judicious at the then late season to begin an offensive movement against the savages, but that several com- panies of soldiers should be organized on the Dela- ware; that every man capable of bearing arms (be- tween the ages of sixteen and sixty) should always be provided with powder and bullets fit for service, under a penalty ; that block-houses should be erected at sey- eral places on the river; and also forbidding the ship- ment of grain unless a special license should be granted therefor. In the latter part of November the Indian sachems and William Tom, clerk of the court on the Delaware, held a council at Upland, at the house of Peter Rambo, at which the savages promised to bring the murderers to the whites within six days thereafter that they might be punished for their crimes, and if they could not bring them alive they agreed to deliver their dead bodies, as an earnest of their purpose to prevent a war between the races. It afterwards appeared that one of the guilty men escaped from his people, and could not be delivered as promised, but the other was captured. It is stated by Tom?’ that the smaller Indian, learning of the purpose of the sachems, went to the other and advised him to flee. The latter said he would go the next morning. Of the two Indians who had been dis- patched to take the culprits one was a personal friend, and was loath to kill his captive, but when the latter learned that the sachems had determined he must 5 Appendix B, Duke’s Book of Laws, p. 447, 6 Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 610, EARLY SETTLEMENT. 13 die he placed his hands on his eyes and said, “ Kill me.” The other savage, not his friend, thereupon shot two bullets into his breast. The body was taken to Wiccaco and delivered to the whites, who trans- ported it to New Castle, where it was hung in chains. The other murderer escaped by flight. The sachems faithfully notified the tribes that any of their people who should murder a white person would be similarly dealt with, and with this annunciation the cloud drifted by, greatly to the satisfaction of the magis- trates on the Delaware, who were opposed to the war, because among other things they proposed to “‘ make towns at Passayvncke, Tinnaconck, Upland, Verdrie- ties Hoocks, whereto the out plantacions” must retire in the event of a struggle.' The proscription on trade, which prevented vessels from ascending the Delaware River beyond the fort at New Castle, remained in force until the latter part of the year 1672, after which date no record re- mains, so far as known, of special licenses being given to trade above that point. On Sept. 29, 1671, Gov- ernor Lovelace authorized Capt. Thomas Lewis, of the sloop “ Royal Oak,” ‘‘to trade and Trafic, as the said masters occasion shall require,” on the Delaware above Newcastle, and no other vessel was permitted there to ship corn or provisions for exportation.’ But pre- vious to this Capt. Martin Crieger, who seems to have run a packet-sloop regularly from New York to New Castle, had license to go to the latter point, and Mrs. Susanna Garland was authorized to trade between those places.* In about three weeks subsequent to the issuing of this license, permission was given the wife of Lawrence Holst to go in Capt. Martin Crieger’s sloop to New Castle, and “from thence to go up the River in some boat or Canoe to the Sweeds Plantations with shoes & such other of her Husband’s Trade, & to return again without any maner of Lett, hinderence or molestation whatever.”* March 20, 1672, John Schouten, in the sloop “ Hope,’ was authorized to trade at New Castle and parts adjacent, while the same day John Garland, of New York, and Susanna, his wife, were licensed to “ Traffick with the Indyans” on the river above New Castle.» Mr. Christoph Hoog: land, Sept. 28, 1672, was licensed to go on Criegers’ sloop to New Castle, with the privilege to trade on the river. Capt. Crieger, who was a “‘ Dutchman,” seems to have run the packet between the places named for more than ten years, for in July, 1682, Deputy Gov- ernor Markham complained that Capt. Crieger at New Castle had permitted Lord Baltimore the use of astronomical instruments, which were shipped by Markham at New York and intended only for him.® War having been declared in 1672 by England and France against the United Belgic Provinces, on the 30th of July, 1673, the colony of New York, with its 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 756. 2Ib., vol. v. pp. 605-607. 3 Ib., pp. 611, 612. 4Ib., p. 613. 6 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 429. 5 Ib., 628. dependencies on the Delaware River settlements, was recaptured by the Dutch fleet under Admiral Evert- sen, and Capt. Anthony Colve was commissioned Governor-General of ‘‘ New Netherlands with all its Appendencies.” Peter Alricks was appointed com- mander on the Delaware, with instructions that the right of private property should not be disturbed, nor should that belonging to persons holding office under the Duke of York be confiscated where the party took the oath of allegiance to the Dutch government. Freedom of conscience was assured to those who were followers of the true Christian religion according to the Synod of Dordrecht, but the new commander was instructed not to permit ‘any other sects attempting anything contrary thereto.”’ By the terms of the treaty of peace, Feb. 9, 1674, the province reverted to the Duke of York, and English authority was re- established on Oct. 1, 1674, when Maj. Edmund An- drosse, as governor, received possession of Fort James at New York, and appointed Capt. Edmund Carr commander on the Delaware. On Sept. 25, 1676, the Duke of York’s laws were promulgated as the rule of conduct on the Delaware River, and courts in con- formity therewith were established; one of which was “above att Uplands,’ where quarterly sessions were directed to be held on the second Tuesday of the month. Early in the year 1675 the first member of the So- ciety of Friends known to have resided within the boundaries of Delaware County purchased an estate at Upland. Robert Wade, on March 21, 1675, bought the tract of ground known as Printzdorp from “ Jus- tina Armguard, alias vpo Papegay,” for eighty pounds sterling,® whereon he subsequently erected the famous “Essex House.” 7 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. v. p. 636. 8 Recital in Deed from Jonathan Dickinson Sargeant and William Rotch Wister, trustees under the will of Albanus C. Logan, deceased, to John M. Broomall, Deed Book E, No, 2, page 673, etc., Recorder's office, Media, Pa. The date of the conveyance to Wade is of record, 1673, but that there is a clerical error is evident from the following let- ter, which is published in ‘‘A Further Account of New Jersey, in an Abstract of Letters written from thence by Several Inhabitants there Resident. London, Printed in the year 1676,” pages 6 and 7: “Dear AND Lovina WIFE “Having now an opportunty to let thee understand of my welfare, through the great mercy of God &c, and as to the other place it is as good or healthful place as man can desire to live in, and here is plenty enough of all provisions, and good English Wheat and Mault, plenty of Fish and Fowl]; Indeed here is no want of anything, but honest people to Inhabit it; there is Land enough purchased of the Indians for ten times so many as we were and these Indians here are very quiet and Peacable Indians ; In New England they are at Wars with the Indians, and the news is, they have cut off a great many of them; but in this place, the Lord is making way to exalt his name and truth; for it is said by those that live here abouts, that within these few years, here were five Indians for one now, and these that be are very willing to sell their Jand to the English; and bad John Fenwick done wisely, we had not been disperst, but I hope it may all work for the best; And dear Wife, I hope thou will be well satisfied to come and live here, where we may live very quietly and Peacably, where we shall have no vexation, nor tearing nor rending what we have from us; I have bought a plan- tation by the advice and consent of some Friends, upon which there is a very good house, a great deal of Out-housing, Orchards, and Gardens ready planted, and well-fenced; I do intend (if God permit) after the 14 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. The Essex House? stood on the site of the present brick dwelling at the northwest corner of Second and Penn Streets, Chester. It was a story and a half in height, its southeast gable fronting the river, the rear or southwest side facing Concord Avenue, and its front, with a commodious porch, extended the entire length of the building to Chester Creek. Almost one hundred and ten feet southeastwardly from it stood the noted trees under which Penn landed, seven years after Wade became the owner of the estate. In the journal of the Labadists, Dankers and Sluyter, in 1679, particular mention is made of these trees. “We have nowhere seen,” they record, ‘‘so many vines together as we saw here, which had been planted for the purpose of shading the walks on the river side in between the trees.”* It seems that Wade, after the purchase of the estate from Mrs. Pappegoya, re- turned to Great Britain, whence, accompanied by his wife, Lydia, he sailed in the ship “ Griffin,” which arrived in the Delaware on the 23d of Ninth month (November), 1675. It was in that year, we are told, that William Edmundson, a public Friend from Ire- land, made a second visit to America, and while he and his party journeyed, swimming their horses across the river at Trenton and the intermediate creeks, and camping out in the woods at night, when on the way to ‘‘Delaware Town, on the west side of the river Delaware,” ... “there came up a Finland man, well-horsed, who spoke English. He soon perceived what they were, and gave them an account of several of their friends. His house was as far as they could Harvest is gotten in, to come to England for thee, and I hope thou wilt be willing to come, seeing here are several of thy Neighbours whom thou knowest well, as Richard Guy and his Wife and William Hancock and his Wife, and many others; and here is an honest Friend with me, that would have a fourth part of the Land &c., And so hoping these lines may find thee in good health, as throngh the great mercy and goodness of God I have never been better in health. “ My love to Richard Green, he desired me to send him some account of the Country, which to the best of my knowledge I will do; as to Buildings here is little until more People come over, for the Inhabitants that were here did generally Build their own houses, though after a mean manner, for they fell down Trees, and split them in Parts, and so make up a sorry House, &c. But here is Earth enough that will make very good Bricks, and Stone enough of severall sorts, as four that will stroke fire, which may make millstones, or what a man will put them to; they make their Lime of oyster shells; here isa good Land anda Healthful and Plentiful Country, here is no Tanner in all the River, but some Tann their Hides themselves, after their own manner. Here is good Oak enough, bere is Hemp and Flax, good Water, and the Ground will bear anything that Groweth in England, and with less Pains and trouble ; with my dear Love to thee I rest thy loving Husband. “Ropert WADE. “ Delaware River, the place called Upland, the 2d of the 2d month, 1675.” 1Jn “A Journal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-80,” Memoirs of Long Island Historical Society, vol. i, p. 183, it is recorded: “It was late before we left here and we therefore had time to look around a little and see the remains of the residence of Madame Popegay, who had her dwell- ing here when she left Tinekonk.” The diary the preceding day mentions that Robert Wade had brought the travelers to Upland after dark, and “we went to the house of the Quaker who had brought us down.” So that there can be no doubt that the Essex House was never owned by Mrs. Pappegoya. 2 Journal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-80.” Memoirs of Long Island Historical Society, vol. i. p. 183. 4 ride that day; there he conducted them and lodged them kindly. The next morning being the first day of the week, they went to Upland (since named Chester), where a few Friends were met at Robert Wade’s house. After meeting was over they took boat and went to Salem, where they met with John Fenwick and several families of Friends, who, with those at Chester, had come from England in that year with John Fenwick.”* It is, however, nowise certain that the Essex House had been built when the first recorded meeting of Friends in Pennsylvania was held at Wade’s dwelling at Upland, but that it had been erected before 1679, the statement of the Labadist ministers, already quoted as a note, conclusively estab- lishes. Governor Andross, on Sept. 25, 1676, promulgated the Duke of York’s laws by proclamation, declaring that they ‘“ Bee likewise in force and practiced in this River and Precincts,” excepting such ordinances as were peculiarly applicable to Long Island. At the same time he ordered courts to be held at three places on the river. That at Upland to be a Court of Quar- ter Sessions, and to begin on the second Tuesday of the month.* The records of these early courts are historically interesting, for in them is found the story of the gradual growth of the English system of jurispru- dence in the State, which will be related elsewhere in this work. On March 4, 1681, Charles II. of England signed the great charter which conveyed to William Penn, in lieu of the sum of sixteen thousand pounds, which the king owed to Admiral William Penn, the enor- mous tract of land now known as Pennsylvania, and from that period our early annals become more inter- esting, for from that time we may date the actual founding of this great commonwealth. Almost im- mediately thereafter Penn sent his first cousin, Wil- liam Markham, to the colony as his Deputy Governor. It is presumed that he came over in the ship ‘‘ John and Sarah,” from London, commanded by Henry Smith, which was the first to arrive here after the grant was made to Penn. Certain it is that Markham was in New York about June 15, 1681, and previous to the 21st of that month he had presented his com- mission to the authorities at New York, for on that date the Governor and Council issued a proclamation announcing the royal grant and commanding all per- sons to recognize Markham as Governor of Pennsy]- vania. On August 3d following he was at Upland and had assumed the reins of power on the Delaware, for on the date last mentioned his Council took and subscribed to the oath of office. The members of the 8 Smith’s “ History of the Province of Pennsylvania.” Hazard’s Regis- ter, vol. vi. p. 182. 4 Pennna, Archives, 2d series, vol. iii. p. 783. 5 A letter to William Penn from New York, dated June 25, 1681, says, “This is to acquaint thee that about ten daies since here arrived Francis Richardson with thy Deputy.”—Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 1'75. THE CIRCULAR BOUNDARY LINE. 15 Governor’s Council were Robert Wade, Morgan Drewt, William Woodmanse, William Warner, Thomas Fairman, James Sandilands, William Clayton, Otto Ernst Cock, and Lasse Cock, almost every one resi- dents of the territory now Delaware County. ‘The proceedings of their first session were kept secret and little is known, except that the government of the new province was established with the capital at Up- land, where we find Markham holding court on the 380th of November, 1681." Markham made his resi- dence at the Essex House,” and there the first sum- mons from Penn, calling a General Assembly, were written and proclaimed, for, as is well known, the proprietary was Wade’s guest on his first coming to the province in 1682. CHAPTER III. THE CIRCULAR BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN DELA- WARE COUNTY AND THE STATE OF DELAWARE. THAT Lord Baltimore, long before the royal grant to Penn, during the Dutch ascendency on the Dela- ware, had made demand upon the Hollanders for all the land lying to the south of the fortieth degree north latitude is fully attested by the published records, but inasmuch as his representatives never, so far as we have knowledge, personally came to any locality in Pennsylvania, the story of that disputed territorial authority at that time is properly the subject-matter of the history of the State of Delaware, and does not come within the scope of this work. The controversy respecting the proper adjustment of the boundary line between the territories of Lord Baltimore and William Penn was a long and bitter struggle, which, descending from father to son, cov- ered nearly a century in tedious and expensive litiga- tion before it was finally set at rest by the decree of Lord Chancellor Hardwick and the establishment of the noted Mason and Dixon line in conformity there- with. While the southern boundary of Delaware County presents a circular course extending the State of Delaware several miles at its northern limit beyond the straight line which elsewhere forms the southern boundary of Pennsylvania, that circle constitutes historically no part of the Mason and Dixon survey, which, during the Missouri Compromise debates in 1820, was made so familiar to the nation by John Randolph, who, in his remarks, constantly referred to it as the imaginary geographical line which marked the division between the free and slave States. Nearly four years previous to the grant of the territory to Penn, for the convenience of the then settlers on the 1 Duke of York's Book of Laws, p. 471. 2 Sept. 23, 1682, Markham lived there, for he says, “ Lord Baltimore was at my lodging at Robert Wade’s."—Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 430, Delaware, an amicable adjustment of the line dividing New Castle and Upland (afterward Chester County) was made. Ata court held at Upland, Nov. 12, 1678, this proceeding is recorded as follows: * “The Limits and Division between this and New Castle county, were this day ugreed upon and settled By this Court and Mr. John Moll president of New Castle Court To be as followeth, vizt. “This County of Upland to begin from ye north syde of oele fransens Creeke, otherwise Called Steenkill Lying in the boght above ye verdrie- tige hoeck, and from the said Creek over to ye singletree point on the East syde of the River.” This division, Edward Armstrong, in his valuable note to the “Record of Upland Court,” has made intelligible to the modern reader. The creek, he tells us, at the time when the boundary line between the two counties was adjusted, known as Oele Francens, was at a late date called Streen or Stoney Creek, and is now recognized as Quarryville Creek, crossing the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad three and three-quarter miles below the mouth ot Naaman’s Creek, in Brandywine Hundred, New Castle Co., Del. “ Verdrietige hoeck,” or corner of land, was also called Trinity Hook, lying between Shellpot (a corruption of “Skelldpadde,” the Swedish for “turtle’) and Stoney Creeks. “ Verdrietige” was a term derived from the Dutch “ verdrietigh,” signify- ing ‘ grievous” or “‘ tedious,” owing to the character of the navigation in approaching that point, while “Singletree Point” is now ‘‘Old Man’s Point,” on the New Jersey shore, one mile below the mouth of “Old Man Creek.” The charter or patent of Charles II. to William Penn, bearing date the 4th day of March, 1681, as also in the proclamation of the king, April 2d of the same year, in defining the territorial boundaries of Penn’s provinces, mentions the circular line as “on the South by a circle drawn at twelve miles distance from New Castle northwards and westwards into the beginning of the fortieth degree of northern latitude and then by a streight line westwards to the limits of longitude above mentioned.” After Penn had acquired jurisdiction of the territory by virtue of the royal grant, he dispatched his cousin, Capt. William Markham, as his Deputy Governor, to represent him in the province. The latter, in a letter to Penn, dated New York, June 25, 1681, says, “This is to acquaint thee that about ten daies since here arrived Francis Richardson with thy Deputy,” and on the 8d day of August, 1681, Markham was in Upland, as stated in the preceding chapter. In the latter part of August, 1681, Capt. William Markham, Deputy Governor of Pennsylvania, who had been intrusted by the king with a letter to Charles, Lord Baltimore, requesting the latter to “ ap- point with all convenient speed some person or per- sons who may in connection with the agent or agents of ye said William Penn make a true division & sepa- ration of ye said Province of Maryland and Pennsil- 3 Record of Upland Court, page 119. 16 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. vania according to the bounds and degree of northern latitude expressed in our letters patent, &c.,” went to Maryland in order to settle as quickly as might be the controversy respecting the boundary line between the two provinces. Markham also took with him a letter from William Penn to Lord Baltimore, urging the prompt adjustment of the vexatious dispute. The lord proprietary of Maryland received Penn’s repre- sentative with marked kindness ; and as the latter was suffering from indisposition, induced by the in- tensely warm weather, Baltimore invited Markham to his house on the Patuxent River, where the latter became dangerously ill, and for nearly a month was incapable of being moved. On his recovery he de- termined to return to Pennsylvania, but before his departure Baltimore and he arranged to meet at Up- land on the 16th of Ottober following, where observa- tions should then be taken to ascertain precisely where the fortieth degree of northern latitude was, and thus adjust the disputed point of territorial boundaries. Markham also promised to borrow from Col. Lewis Morris, of New York, the necessary instruments for making the astronomical observations. Unexpected, the passagé of the vessel up Chesapeake Bay to its head was long and tedious, so that much of the time Markham had intended for his journey to New York was thereby consumed. Hence, from the head of the bay, he addressed a letter to Lord Baltimore, Sept. 25, 1681, requesting that the meeting should be deferred until the 26th of thesame month. When the Deputy Governor reached Upland he was again taken ill, and thereupon he wrote to Lord Baltimore, this time in- forming him that his physical condition was such that it would be impossible for him to attend to the adjust- ment of the boundary line until the following spring. This letter was forwarded, but before it reached its destination Markham received a communication from Lord Baltimore, dated Oct. 10, 1681, in which the latter stated that he could not come to Upland that year “for fear of the frost,” which might intercept navigation, but inasmuch as the king’s wishes in this matter have not been complied with, his lordship would place on Markham the responsibility of not meeting that year. Inthe mean while both parties to the controversy maintained that his adversary was trespassing on his domain, and so convinced was Wil- liam Penn that this was the case, that on Sept. 16, 1681, he addressed letters to six of the most extensive land-owners in Maryland, whose possessions were lo- cated within the debatable territory, stating that he had no doubts that their estates were within his prov- inces, under his grant from the crown, and notified them to pay no taxes or assessments in obedience to any order of the lord proprietary or laws of Mary- land, This claim on the part of Penn caused many of the residents of the latter colony to resist the pub- lic levies, and so general was this sentiment in Balti- more and Cecil Counties that the military was ordered to assist the sheriffs in collecting the taxes. Lord Baltimore, in his account of the difficulty respecting the boundaries, states that one of Penn’s commission- ers, William Haige, a Quaker, had taken astronomi- cal observations at the head of the bay (Chesapeake), © and that he was very much dissatisfied at the result he obtained. Haige afterward went to Patuxent, where, in an interview with Baltimore, the latter charged him with having “taken some observations at Elk river, for his private satisfaction,” which Haige acknowledged he had done, but said the instrument he had used was so small that nothing decisive could be arrived at. The winter of 1681 passed without any definite ac- tion being had until May 14, 1682, when Lord Balti- more wrote to Markham, desiring to meet him at Augustine Herman’s plantation’ on June 10th, to adjust boundaries. Markham, who was compelled to meet the Indians, to make payment for lands he had purchased from them, could not meet the Maryland commissioners at the time Baltimore had designated, since the Indians had deferred their annual hunt, nor was he ready, inasmuch that he was unable to pro- cure the use of Col. Morris’ instrument until he had personally visited New York and entered security for its safe return. For the latter purpose he went to New York on the 26th of May, 1682, and before he started he sent a message to Lord Baltimore, ap- prising him of his journey thither, and requested that the proposed meeting might be deferred until his re- turn. Baltimore, however, dispatched commissioners to represent him at the time fixed by him, and by them sent a letter to Markham, stating that they were fully qualified to act in his behalf, and trusting that they would be met by parties similarly commissioned on the part of Penn. The Maryland commissioners, when they reached Herman’s plantation, feigned to be surprised at not meeting Markham’s representa- tives, and on the day designated by Baltimore (June 10, 1682) addressed a letter to Markham, which was delivered to the Deputy Governor, then in New York, by George Goforth. In‘the communication the writers requested Markham to send the instrument he had promised to borrow from Col. Morris, as also to dis- patch duly qualified persons to meet with them. The Maryland commissioners tarried several days at Her- man’s, ostensibly to await the coming of Markham’s representatives, but in the mean while employed them- selves in making astronomical observations. 1 A tract of four thousand acres, still known as Bubemia Manor, Cecil Co., Md., on the east bank of Elk River, which was patented June 19, 1662, by Lord Baltimore to Augustine Herman, in consideration of the latter having undertaken to Prepare a map of Maryland. This chart was engraved and published by Faithorne, in London, in 1672, and is very accurate so far as it delineates the western shore of the Chesapeake and the peninsula lying between the Chesapeake aud Delaware Bays. (Johnston’s “ History of Cecil County, Md.,” page 37.) 2 Extract of a letter to the Ld Baltimore from the commissioners appointed by his lordship to settle the bounds between Maryland and Pennsylvania, June 17, 1682 (published in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. vi. p. 418, note): “Wee have taken three severall observations & in all of them have not THE CIRCULAR BOUNDARY LINE. 17 The letter from the commissioners to Markham, as before stated, was delivered to him in New York, and he immediately procured the instrument, which he sent in a sloop to New Castle, and made his way homeward by land to Burlington, where he took a boat for the remaining distance. Pending these move- ments on the part of the Deputy Governor of Penn- sylvania, the Maryland commissioners had gone to New Castle,—out of “a curiosity to see yt Towne,” as they said,—and when they got there they learned that the sloop having Col. Morris’ astronomical in- strument was at the landing. They, aided by the entreaties of the Dutch inhabitants of the place, per- suaded Capt. Criger, himself a Dutchman, to permit them to make use of the instrument. On Tuesday, June 27, 1682, it being a very clear day, the commis- sioners made several observations, and found that town was in thirty-nine degrees forty odd minutes north latitude. The next day Markham went to New Castle, where he learned that the Maryland commis- sioners had left the place the very night of the day they had used the instrument which the Governor of Pennsylvania had had so much trouble to procure. The following morning Markham sent William Haige to Herman’s plantation, trusting that the Marylanders had gone thither, but before he got there they had renewed their journey southward. Markham there- upon wrote to Baltimore explaining his absence, and received in reply an intimation that in September he (Baltimore) proposed tosend his commissioners again to meet him, and perhaps he might personally accom- pany them. On September 12th, Lord Baltimore sailed from Patuxent, reaching the Elk River on the 19th of the same month. There was no accommoda- tion for his suite at Herman’s, and after he had dis- patched a message to Markham, who was then at Burlington, Lord Baltimore, with a number of per- sons, went to New Castle, from which place, on the evening of the 238d of September, he embarked in boats for Upland, reaching the latter hamlet that night. He lodged at the dwelling of Robert Wade, where Markham then dwelt. The following morning (Sunday): Markham (who had been informed that Baltimore was at New Castle, had hastened his return to meet him, and had reached home the same night that the Marylanders came to Upland) called on Lord Baltimore. The latter was accompanied by Col. Corsie, Maj. Seawell, Maj. Sawyer, four commission- ers, and forty men ‘‘ armed with carbines, pistols, and differed two minutes & wee find Mr. Augustin Herman’s house to lye in the latitude of 39d & 45m so that your Lordship has 16m. yet from hence due North which will go not farr short of Upland & this differs very little from their own observation lately taken as wee are credibly informed wee have used our endeavors in letting all here know of your Lordship’s Desire to have the bounds determined & all seem much satis- fied with your Lordship’s proceedings much blaiming Mr. Markham that after so many flourishes he should bee thus backward; Wee ques- tion but ye Lines will fall to answer yor Lordship’s expectacons & our true endeavors shall not be wanting to give your Lordship satisfac- tion.” 2 swords.” The lord proprietary of Maryland, al- though Markham stated that it was the Sabbath, and not a day for the transaction of business, requested that his own as well as Col. Morris’ instruments should be set up, so that it would be known how they agreed. Markham at length consented, it being un- derstood that the degree of latitude should be ascer- tained the following day; but while the Pennsylva- nians were absent one of Lord Baltimore’s attendants took an observation, and reported that he found the latitude of Upland was thirty-nine degrees forty-five minutes. Next morning Baltimore desired to go far- ther up the river, as far as the fortieth degree, and, that ascertained, to follow that line westward as the boundary of the province. Markham, however, de- clined this proposition, stating that he (Baltimore) could have no claim on the river twelve miles north- ward of New Castle, because the king’s grant to Wil- liam Penn fully covered all the land on the Delaware above that point. Baltimore replied that he had nothing to do with the grant to Penn, but would be guided by the grant the king had made to him, many years before Penn’s charter. The dispute thereupon waxed warm, during which Baltimore deciared that he did not propose to bring the matter before the king and his Council, but designed to take his own wherever he found it; that if, as Markham asserted, New Castle was the centre of the circle, and a sweep therefrom must be had before the beginning of the direct line westward was established, “his Majesty must have long compasses.” The interview terminated by Markham refusing to permit Lord Baltimore to ascend the river to make observations, and a demand from the latter that the Deputy Governor of Pennsy]- vania should furnish his reasons for his action in writing, a request which the latter immediately com- plied with.!. The two Governors, however, agreed to meet at New Castle the next day, so that the point of forty degrees might be determined at the head of _Chesapeake Bay. In the afternoon of the 20th of September Lord Baltimore left Upland for New Castle, but before he stepped into the boat at the landing he spoke in a 1 This letter is published in 6 Penn. Mag. of History and Biography, p. 432: “To His Excell'y My Lord Baltimore : “Whereas your lordship hath been pleased to Desire a reason of me under my Hand why I concurr not with your lordshipp in Laying out the bounds of this province Pennsilvania upon Delaware river: My Lord This is my reason: that as I received all yt part of The river Delaware beginning 12 Miles above New Castle Towne and so Upwards, ffrom The Government of New York which is according to The Express words of his Majesty’s Letters Patent To our Proprietory Wm. Penn Esqr I most humbly Conceive That I am not to be accoumptable to any other person Than his Majesty or Royall Highness ffor any part of This Province lay- ing upon Delaware River & soe bounded but if your Lordshipp be willing to lay out ye bounds betwixt This Province and your Lordshipp’s Laying towards Chesapeake Bay and The rivers on That side I am ready and willing to wayte upon your Lordship for yt end & purpose, “Upland in Pennsylvania 7ber 29th 1682. “Tam my Lord your Lordshipps most Humble Servt “Wm. Markgam,” 18 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. loud voice to Markham, who was present, together with a number of the residents of the place. “ You are sensible, Capt. Markham, that by an observation taken yesterday that this plantation is in thirty-nine degrees forty-seven minutes and some seconds, and must therefore be sensible that I am here about twelve miles to the southward of the degree of forty, which is my north bound as the same is Mr. Penn’s south bound. Therefore, afore you and all the rest here present, I lay claim to this place and as far further as the degree of forty will reach.” To this claim of Lord Baltimore, Markham made no response, but with courteous attention conducted the former to the boat, and thus they parted. Baltimore, as he descended the river, halted at Marcus Hook, where he landed, and, going to each of the dwellings at that place, pro- hibited the residents from paying any more quit-rents to Penn, as the land did not come within his territory, but was part of Maryland, and that he, Baltimore, would return suddenly and take possession of his own. This notification, particularly as the one who made it was attended with the pomp and circumstance of power, caused the utmost consternation among the settlers, who repaired to Upland the next day, just as Markham—the instrument being placed on board a boat—was about starting on horseback with his at- tendants for New Castle, and so great was the excite- ment consequent on Lord Baltimore’s unexpected claim that Markham called his Council immediately together, and they decided that the Deputy Governor must remain at Upland “to quiet the disturbed peo- ple.” Whereupon Markham wrote to Lord Baltimore that he could not meet him at New Castle under the circumstances.! Although the proprietaries of the two provinces could not adjust their dispute, for the expediency of the inhabitants the court at Chester, on March 14, 1683, declared that Naaman’s Creek should be the boundary line between the two counties; and so - generally was this recognized, that Thomas Holme,, surveyor-general under Penn, in his “map of the improved part of the Province of Pennsylvania in | America,” observes this division. Nevertheless there was some confusion still exist- ing, hence ten years later, in 1693, a petition was pre- sented by some of the inhabitants of Chester County to the Governor and Council, stating that they were seriously inconvenienced because of there being no authoritatively recognized line between that county and New Castle. The Council after discussing the topic, on the 9th of August, 1693,— “ Resolved, That for the present convenience of the government, and not for an absolute and final proprietarie division, but that the inhabit- | branch (excluding the townships of Concord and Bethel), and not to ex- tend backwards of the said northmost branch above the said two town- ships.” & For eight years the boundary thus established seemed to meet in a measure the demands of the sparsely-settled country immediately effected thereby, although the constantly-growing disposition on the part of the inhabitants of the three lower counties (now the State of Delaware) to separate from the ter- ritory comprising the commonwealth of Pennsyl- vania was often manifested during the interval, and at length culminated in a petition from the Assembly to Penn, 20th of Seventh month, 1701, in which they urge “that the division line between the counties of New Castle and Chester be ascertained allowing the boundary according to the proprietary’s letters patent from the King.” Penn, then in Philadelphia, in response to this petition, replied, “It is’ my own inclination, and I desire the representatives of New Castle and Chester Counties forthwith, or before they leave town, to-attend me about the time and man- ner of doing it.” In conformity with the wish of Penn a conference was held, which resulted in a warrant being issued 28th of Eighth month, 1701, to Isaac Taylor, surveyor of Chester County, and Thomas Pierson, surveyor of New Castle County, requiring them to meet the magistrates of the two counties, or any three of them, and,—“ In their presence to ad- measure and survey from the town of New Castle the distance of twelve miles in a right line up ye said river and from ye said distance according to ye King’s letters patent and deeds from the Duke and ye said circular line to be well-marked two-thirds parts of ye semi-circle.” The surveyor designated made report that, on the 4th day of Tenth month (December), 1701, in the presence of Cornelius Empson, Richard Halliwell, and John Richardson, justices of New Castle County, and Caleb Pusey, Philip Roman, and Robert Pyle, justices of Chester County, they ran the division lines, beginning at the point of the radial line, which was selected by the magistrates “at the end of the horse dyke next to the town of New Castle.” Thence they measured due north twelve miles, the termination of that distance being “a white oak marked with twelve notches standing on the west side of Brandywine Creek, in the lands of Samuel Helm ;” thence, east- wardly, “circularly changing our course from the east southward one degree at the end of every sixty-seven perches, which is the chord of one degree to a twelve miles radius; and at the end of forty-three chords we came to the Delaware River, on the upper side of Nathaniel Lampley’s old house at Chichester.” The ants on the borders of both counties may Know to which of the two to | surveyors then returned to the marked white oak on pay their levies, taxes, etc., and perform their other countie services, the bounds of New Castle county shall extend northward to the mouth of Naaman’s creek and upwards along the southwest side of the Northmost Helm’s land and ran a westwardly course, changing, as before, ‘‘our course one degree from the west-south- ward at the end of every sixty-seven perches, . . . until 1 For fuller particulars of the interview between Baltimore and Mark- | we had extended seventy-seven chords, which, being ham, see 6 Penn. Mag. of History and Biography, }. 412. added to the forty-three chords, make two-thirds part THE CIRCULAR BOUNDARY LINE. 19 of the semi-circle to a twelve-mile radius, all which | uncertain traditions, and as the story that on the re- said circular lines being well marked with three notches on each side of the trees to a marked hick- ory standing near the western branch of Christiana Creek.” The cost of the survey to the county of Chester is exhibited in the annexed interesting report of the | Grand Jury : “ CuesTeR the 24 of the 12 month 1701-2. “We of the Grand Jury for the county having duly considered and carefully adjusted an account of charges contracted by running a cir- cular line dividing this county from the county of New Castle and set- tling the boundaries and having duly and deliberately debated every article of the said account, do allow of the sum of twenty-six pounds nine shillings due to be paid by the county for said work. “James Cowper, Foreman.” Although there is a general impression that Mason and Dixon afterwards ran the circular line, that is a popular error; nor is it true, as stated in an excellent article published in a leading American periodical, that “in the difficulty of tracing this circle was the | origin of the work of Mason and Dixon.”! The sur- vey of Isaac Taylor and Thomas Pierson, in 1701, be- fore described, is the only one ever made of the cir- cular boundary between Pennsylvania and Delaware. The act of May 28, 1715,’ providing “for corrobo- rating the circular line between the counties of Ches- ter and New Castle,” seems to have been a dead letter from its passage, and was repealed July 21, 1719. It is an interesting fact, in view of the ease with which the justices, in 1701, arrived at the point in New Castle where the twelve-mile radius should begin,—“ the end of the horse dyke next to the town of New Castle,” —to recall the manuer in which the commissioners of Maryland, in 1750, attempted to reach a like starting-point. In the diary of John Watson,’ one of the surveyors on behalf of Pennsyl- vania on that occasion, he mentions that the map of the Maryland officials had a puncture in it at a desig- nated place within the limits of the town of New Castle from which they contended the radius of twelve miles should be measured. Watson subsequently learned that this point had been ascertained in this wise: ‘The commissioners of Maryland had con- structed an exact plan of the town of New Castle upon a piece of paper, and then carefully pared away the edges of the draught until no more than the draught was left, when, sticking a pin through it, they suspended it thereby in different places until they found a place whereby it might be suspended hori- zontally, which point or place they accepted as the centre of gravity,” hence the centre of the town. As the notches made by Taylor and Pierson to mark the circular line in the lapse of time were ob- literated, thereafter to be recalled only in vague and 1 Harper's Magazine, vol. liii. p. 549. 2 Dallas’ “ Laws of Pennsylvania,” vol. i. p. 105. 8 This diary in good preservation is owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, to whom it was presented by the late William D. Gil- Pin, of Philadelphia. Gilpin stated that he found it among some old papers which had been seut to his mill as waste. \ \ I | examination, in 1768, by Mason and Dixon, of the line surveyed in 1751 by Emory, Jones, Parsons, Shankland, and Killen, that the “middle stone,” planted by the latter surveyors at the southwestern boundary of the State of Delaware, was found over- thrown by money-diggers, who believed because of its armorial bearing that it had been set up by Capt. Kidd to mark the spot where part of his ill-gotten treasures were secreted, had shifted its location many times, the impression became general that the stone planted by Mason and Dixon to mark the intersection of the three States had also been removed. Hence, in 1849, the Legislature of Pennsylvania authorized the Governor to appoint a commissioner to act in con- junction with similar commissioners representing the States of Delaware and Maryland to determine the points of intersection, and to place a mark or monu- ment thereon to indicate its location. On behalf of Pennsylvania, Joshua P. Eyre, of Delaware County, was appointed commissioner. George Read Riddle represented Delaware, and H. G.S. Key, Maryland. The commissioners made application to the Secretary of War to detail Lieut.-Col. James R. Graham, of the corps of Topographical Engineers, who had acquired considerable prominence in adjusting the boundary of the United States and Mexico, to make the neces- sary surveys. On Oct. 30, 1849, the commissioners assembled at Annapolis, Md., where they had access to the notes of Mason and Dixon, as well as the agreement dated May 10, 1732, between Charles, Lord Baltimore, and the heirs and successors of William Penn, as also the subsequent agreement between Frederick, Lord Baltimore, and Thomas and Richard Penn, surviving heirs of William Penn, dated July 4, 1760, and the decree of Lord Chancellor Hardwick, May 15, 1750, which was the basis of the final settle- ment of the long controversy. The commissioners, we are told by the accomplished historians of Chester County, at the northeast corner of Maryland—the commencement of the Mason and Dixon east and west line—found that the stone planted in 1768 to designate the spot, in a deep ravine, on the margin of a small brook near its source, was missing. That several years before the commissioners visited the place it had fallen to the earth, and had been taken away and used as a chimney-piece by a resident in the neighborhood, who, with some slight propriety, had driven a stake into the ground to mark the spot where the stone once stood. The commissioners at that point erected a new stone with the letter P on the north aud east sides, and M on the south and west sides. At the junction of the three States the com- missioners set up a triangular prismatic post of cut granite, eighteen inches wide on each side and seven feet in length. It was inserted four and a half feet in the ground, and occupies the exact spot where the 4 Futhey and Cope ’s “History of Chester County, Pa.,” p. 160. 20 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. old unmarked stone placed there by Mason and Dixon was found by Col. Graham in 1849, who had the old boundary mark buried alongside of .its more modern and pretentious fellow. This new stone is marked with the letters M, P, and D, on the sides facing re- spectively towards the States of Maryland, Pennsyl- vania, and Delaware. On the north side, below the letter P, are the names of.the commissioners in deep- cut letters, with the date 1849. Col. Graham, in his report, says,— “At the meridian or middle point of the arc, corresponding to the length of the chord as we actually found it, and at the distance of one hundred and eighteen and four-tenths feet perpendicular from the middle point of said chord, a post of cut granite six feet long was inserted in the ground four anda half feet of its length. This stone squares seventeen by fourteen inches. It is rounded on the west side to indicate that it is on the curve, and on the east side the date 1849 is cut in deep figures. “The circular boundary between Pennsylvania and Delaware from the point of junction of the three States to river Delaware being yet un- marked, anda number of citizens residing near the common border being in doubt whether as to which State they belonged, the survey was con- ducted with such precision as to enable us to describe that boundary correctly, as will appear upon our map, for a distance of about three and three-quarter miles northwestward from junction. We have determined the distance by computation at which a due east line from northeast corner of Maryland will cut that circular boundary, and find it to be four thousand and thirty-six feet, or seven sixty-six of a mile. We have also computed the angle with the meridian at the said northeast corner made by a line drawn from thence to the spire of the court-house at New Castle, and find it to be 70 degrees, 20 minutes, and 45 seconds east of south. At the distance of 3786 feet, measured by the said line from the aforesaid northeast corner, this line will intersect the circular boun- dary.” 1 As stated before, no survey of the circular line be- tween Delaware and Pennsylvania has ever been made since that run by Isaac Taylor and Thomas Pierson, in 1701, and it may be asserted without fear of contradiction that no person at this time knows exactly where the line dividing New Castle County, Del., and Delaware County, Pa.,is, and where it en- ters the river. CHAPTER IV. WILLIAM PENN’S FIRST VOYAGE TO HIS PROVINCE IN 1682--THE CHANGE OF THE NAME UPLAND TO CHESTER, AND THE REASON IT WAS MADE. As stated in the preceding chapter, as soon as Penn had acquired title to the three lower counties,’—the 1 Col. Graham states that the want of a proper demarkation of bound- aries between States is always a source of inconvenience and frequently of great trouble to parties residing therein, who are uncertain as to which State their taxes and personal services, jury duty and the like, are due. He tells us that they found that William Smith, who had served asamember of the Legislature of Delaware, resided fully half a mile within Pennsylvania, measured on the shortest direction from his dwell- ing-house to the circular boundary. 2 Futhey and Cope, in a note to their History of Chester County, page 20, state, “ Although the territory west of the Delaware had been gov- erned by the Duke of York, he at the time held no valid title to any part of it. King Charles II. madea regular conveyance to him of the country comprised within the present territorial limits of the State of Delaware | present State of Delaware,—he made his arrangements to visit his colony, and so energetically did he act that in less than one week after the execution of the deeds by the duke on the 80th day of the Sixth month (August,—for the Friends of those days computed the year as beginning on the Ist of March), he sailed for Pennsylvania from Deal in the ship ‘‘ Welcome,” of three hundred tons burden, Robert Greenaway, com- mander, accompanied by about one hundred com- panions, mostly Friends, from Sussex, England. The voyage was lengthy (smallpox having broken out on the vessel, of which disease thirty of the emigrants died on the passage), and on the 27th day of October, 1682, the ‘‘ Welcome” stopped at New Castle, where Penn landed, and took possession of the three lower counties with all the pomp and circumstance usual at that time in the formal transfer of estates. It is known he stayed at New Castle all night, and the next day the vessel stood up the river and cast anchor off the mouth of Chester Creek, opposite the house of Rob- ert Wade, for, as is stated in the manuscript book of Evan Oliver, a passenger on the “ Welcome,” “ We arrived at Upland in pensilvania in America, ye 28th of ye 8th month, ’82.” * Dr. Smith, in referring to the landing of Penn, says, “ He landed at Upland, but the place was to bear that familiar name no more forever. Without reflection, Penn determined that the name of the place should be changed. Turning round to his friend Pearson, one of his own society, who had accompanied him in the ship ‘Welcome,’ he said, ‘Providence has brought us here safe. Thou hast been the companion of my perils. What wilt thou that I should call this place?’ Pearson said, ‘ Ches- ter,’ in remembrance of the city from whence he came. William Penn replied that it should be called Chester, and that when he divided the land into counties one of them should be called by the same name. Thus for a mere whim the name of the oldest town, the name of the whole settled part of the prov- ince, the name that would have a place in the affec- tions of a large majority of the inhabitants of the new province, was effaced to gratify the caprice or vanity of a friend. All great men occasionally do little things.” + Although Dr. Smith cites Clarkson’s Life of Penn and Hazard’s Annals in support of this statement, it will not bear investigation. We know that Penn is sued his proclamation three weeks after his arrival at Chester to the several sheriffs of the counties of Ches- ter, Philadelphia, and Bucks, as well as the three lower counties, to hold an election for a General As sembly, to convene at “Upland.” The original letter of Penn, now in the Historical Society of Pennsyl- a ee on the 22d of March, 1683; the deeds from the duke to Penn for the same country were executed on the 24th of August, 1682. See Hazard’s Register, vol. i. p. 429, 430; vol. ii. p. 27. 3 Note in Martin’s “ History of Chester,” p. 62. 4 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 139, WILLIAM PENN’S FIRST VOYAGE TO HIS PROVINCE IN 1682. 21 vania, addressed to several gentlemen requesting them to meet him on the following ‘‘ so-called Thursday, No- vember 2, 1682,” is dated “ Upland, October 29, 1682,” the day after his arrival, clearly indicating that he did not change the name of this city in the dramatic manner tradition has stated. There is no authentic list of the passengers on the “ Welcome” extant, although Edward Armstrong has gathered the names of several of Penn’s companions in the ship, which are generally accepted as well established by evi- dence, excepting that in that list the name of Pearson appears, to which is added, “‘ supposed to be Robert,” a statement that may well be questioned. As this mythical personage is represented to be an eminent member of the society of Friends, the rec- ords of meetings ought to disclose his Christian name, but it has never been found among the list of the early settlers. Hence we have reason to believe that the first person of the name of Pearson in this prov- ince was Thomas, and we know that neither of the Thomas Pearsons—for there were two of that name— came here until the following year, 1683.' The second of that cognomen in a diary memorandum written by himself, also in the Historical Society’s collection, clearly states when he came. To quote his own words, after setting forth his various adventures, he says, “On ye 25th day of July, in ye year 1683, I set sail from Kingroad, in ye ‘Comfort,’ John Reed, Master, and arrived at Upland in Pennsylvania ye 28th of September 1683,” almost a year after Penn’s arrival. In the report of the vestry of St. Paul’s Church, Chester, to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, in the year 1704, occurs this sentence: ‘‘ The people of Chester County showed very early zeal to have the Church of Eng- land worship settled among them. This county is so called because most of the inhabitants of it came from Cheshire, in England. Chester, the chief town of the county, is finely situated on the river Dela- ware.” 1 Martin’s “ History of Chester,” page 499. See“ Queries,” Penna. Mag. of History, vol. iii. page 358, where the ubiquitous Mr. Pearson presents himself once more in a new light and demanding unexpected honors. The statement in the volume just cited is that in a recent life of Ben- jamin West it is said, “In the year 1677 or 1678, one Thomas Pear- son, from England, settled in a cave on the west bank of the Delaware River, now below Philadelphia. He was a blacksmith by trade, and, it is said, wielded the first smith’s hammer in Pennsylvania. About the first work done was to make small axes for his Indian neighbors, who in their short way termed him Tom or Tommy. In their language the word hawk signifies any tool used for cutting, hence the origin of the word tomahawk.’ That this was “ the Pearson” is settled by the state- ment in the same book quoted from that he was the grandfather of Ben- jamin West. Here then is the man who, before Penn came, was the only blacksmith in Pennsylvania making “little hatchets” for the In- dians, and from his Christian name and that of the article he produced caused the savages to coin the word “tomahawk.” -—— Pearson (sup- posed to be Robert) turns up in 1682 a passenger on the ship “ Wel- come,” and the proprietary, especially for this —— Pearson’s benefit, changes the name of ‘' Upland” to “ Chester” instantly and without re- flection. In the future some enterprising historian may yet discover the man who swallowed the first oyster, and I have no doubt that Friend Pearson will have his claims preseut for that noteworthy act, and in all probability have that claim allowed. Bampfylde Moore Carew, the celebrated ‘“ King of the Mendicants,” who, while escaping from banish- ment in Virginia, passed through Chester in 1739, in relating his adventures, records that he came ‘“‘to Chester, so valled because the people who first settled there came for the most part from Cheshire. . . . The place is also called Upland.” Thirty years previous to Carew’s coming, Oldmixon stated, in 1708, when mentioning the town of Chester, “This place is called Upland,” and when he alludes to Chester County he gives the like and true reason for the name that Carew did: “‘so called because the people who first settled here came for the most part from Cheshire in Eng- land.”? The Labadist missionaries, Danckers and Sluyter, record, nearly three years before Penn’s coming, in describing their journey down the Dela- ware in 1679, that “It clearing up towards evening we took a canoe and came after dark to Upland. This is a small village of Swedes, although it is now over- run by English.” 3 In a letter from Penn, Nov. 1, 1682, the epistle is dated from Upland; but subsequently, Dec. 16, 1682, from West River, Md., Penn writes, “That an As- sembly was held at Chester, alias Upland.” These circumstances clearly establish that the official change of name had taken place previous to the last date and subsequent to the preceding one. In the letter of December 16th is the first time we have record of the name of Chester as applied to the old Swedish settle- ment at Upland. The most rational conclusion is that Penn, when he changed the name of the town, doubtless within a few weeks after his arrival, and also designated the county of the like name when he divided the settled parts of Pennsylvania into three divisions, he did so in deference to the desire of the English settlers who had “ overrun” the town, the major part of whom had come from that locality in England. As stated in the extracts quoted, the name of the shire-town soon became Chester, although its ancient name did not entirely disappear from familiar use until nearly three-quarters of a century had elapsed after William Penn’s first visit to the province. The Pearson story for the first time appeared in our annals in Clark- son’s “ Life of Penn,” a work which was not published until more than a century had elapsed after the inci- dents therein first recorded are said to have occurred. Until the publication of the work just alluded to, no writer makes any mention of the change of name having been suggested to Penn by “his friend Pear- son.” The Swedes, we are told by Acrelius, received the English proprietary and his companions with great friendliness, carried up their goods and furniture from 2“The British Empire in America,” etc., by J. Oldmixon, in Hazard’s Register, vol. v. p. 180. 3 Journal of a Voyage to New York in 1679-80,” by Peter Sluyter and Jasper Danckers; Memoirs of the Long Island Historical Society, vol. i. p. 183. 22 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the ships, and entertained them in their houses with- out charge, ‘‘as many aged Quakers still relate with great pleasure.”’! Penn, when he landed, resided temporarily at the dwelling-house of Robert Wade, and that fact has rendered the “ Essex House” famous in our State annals. Penn remained but a short time there as the guest of Wade, for after his return to Chester from New York, whither he had gone to ‘pay his duty” to the Duke of York by a visit to the latter’s repre- sentative in that place, as well as from his visit to Maryland, he lodged, according to tradition, at the Boar’s Head Inn, a noted public-house at Chester in ’ the early days, which stood until March 20, 1848, when it was destroyed by an incendiary fire. e CHAPTER V. THE FIRST ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND THE HOUSE WHEREIN IT MET. On the 18th day of November, 1682, three weeks after his arrival in the colony, William Penn issued his writs requiring the sheriffs of the several counties, in their respective bailiwicks, “to summon all the freeholders to meet on the 20th inst and elect out of themselves seven persons of the most note for wisdom, sobriety and integrity to serve as their deputies and representatives in General Assembly to be held at Upland, in Pennsylvania, December 6th (4th) next.” In pursuance of this proclamation the Assembly met at Chester on the day designated, Dec. 4, 1682, and organized by the election of Nicholas Moore, of Philadelphia County, president of the “ Free Society of Traders,” as chairman of that body. After the appointment of committees, four of the members were selected to apprise the Governor that the Assembly “humbly desired him to honor the House with a trans- mission of his constitutes.” It is an interesting historical fact that the very first record in the commonwealth regarding the meeting of a legislative body discloses that then, as now, “ways that are dark” were resorted to in the effort to secure the election of members in the interest of par- ticular individuals, On that occasion Edmund Cant- well, the sheriff of New Castle County, was charged with “ undue electing a member to serve in Assembly from that county,” in which effort he was ultimately thwarted, for the Committee on Elections and Priy- ileges reported adversely to Abraham Mann, the 1 Acrelius, “History of New Sweden,” p.111. That author returned to Sweden in 1756, and doubtless he might have talked to old persons who could reca]l the incidents connected with the arrival of the pro- prietary, as such an event would make a lasting impression on their young minds. sheriff’s candidate, and in favor of John Moll, who was contesting his seat, in which conclusion the House concurred. The first two days of the session were consumed in hearing the case of contested election just mentioned, the adoption of rules governing the meeting, passing the act of union, which annexed “the three lower counties” (those comprising the present State of Del- aware), and providing for the naturalization of the inhabitants thereof, as well as the Swedes, Finns, and Dutch settlers in Pennsylvania. On the third day they received from William Penn the “ Printed Laws” and the “ Written Laws, or Constitutions.” The “ Printed Laws” were “the laws agreed upon in England,” which had been prepared by learned coun- sel there, at Penn’s desire, and printed in that country, and the “ Written Laws, or Constitutions,” were the ninety bills presented to the Assembly by the propri- etary, out of which the meeting passed the sixty-one chapters of “the great body of the laws.”* A strange fact is that not one of those enactments, as adopted, is now in force in this commonwealth. As soon as the statutes had been acted on, the members from the lower counties particularly became anxious to return to their homes, and so intimated to the Assembly. The Speaker considered this desire to adjourn as un- becoming in the members, and bordering on an insult to the Governor. A committee of two of the deputies was appointed to wait upon Penn respecting it, and he consented “that the Assembly be adjourned for twenty-one days, which was accordingly ordered by the Speaker.” The body failed to meet again at the time designated by adjournment, and at the next reg- ular Assembly in Philadelphia it is recorded that the Speaker “ reproves several members for neglecting to convene at the time appointed when the House last adjourned.” Nearly forty years ago an old structure stood on the western side of Edgmont Avenue, north of Second Street, which was commonly termed “The Old As- sembly House,” because of the popular belief that it was in this building that the first Assembly convened in Pennsylvania, Dec. 4, 1682. Dr. George Smith, in his valuable “ History of Delaware County,” conclu- sively established the fact that this building was the first meeting-house of Friends in Chester, and was not erected until 1698, hence the first Assembly, which held its session more than ten years before that date, could not have met in that structure. We know that on the 6th day of the First month, 1687, Jéran Kyn, or Keen, made a deed conveying a lot in Chester, ad- joining his “lot or garding,” to certain persons in trust, “to use and behoof of the said Chester meeting of the people of God called Quakers, and their successors for- ever,” and on this lot, now included in William P. aa ee ee 2 For a most interesting disqnisition on the subject of the laws, the number enacted at the session of the Assembly, and other valuable in- formation in relation thereto, see “ Historical Notes, Part II., Appendix to the Duke’s Book of Laws,” pp. 477-482, THE FIRST ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA. Eyre’s ground, on Edgmont Avenue, the ancient meet- ing-house was built. Dr. Smith thereupon argues that the Assembly must have met in the court-house, or, as it was then known, “The House of Defense,” which stood on the eastern side of Edgmont Avenue, above Second Street, and so projected into the roadway that, when Edgmont Avenue was regularly laid out as a street, it had to be removed. The doctor rightly thinks, “It was the only public building in Upland, at the time, of which we have any knowledge.” Martin, in his ‘ History of Chester,” accepts the doctor’s conclusions as un- questionably accurate. Nevertheless, both of these able historians are in error in this. The thought es- caped them that perhaps Penn saw that the “ House of Defense” was too small for the purpose intended, and therefore a private dwelling was used for the meeting of the members.’ Mrs. Deborah Logan informs us in her notes to the “Penn and Logan Correspondence,’’? that the Assem- bly convened in the large, or, as then termed, “ The Double House,” by way of distinction, which James Sandilands, the elder, had erected for his own dwell- ing which stood near the creek, and subsequently, when the road to Philadelphia was Jaid out, near that highway. On anold plan of the borough of Chester, made about 1765, now owned by William B. Broomall, Esq., of that city, the lot on which “The Double House” stood is designated as beginning about one hundred and thirty feet southerly from the intersection of the present Edgmont Avenue and Third Street. The lot itself was about one hundred and twenty feet front on the west side of Edgmont Avenue. This house, which was spacious and pretentious for those times,— and would even now be regarded as an unusually large dwelling,—had unfortunately been built with mortar made of oyster-shell lime, which proved utterly value- less. In a few years the building showed signs of decay, then became a ruin, and as such continued until the be- ginning of the present century, when its foundations were removed. In time its very existence was gen- erally forgotten, so much so that, as is mentioned, some of our most accurate and painstaking historians were unacquainted with the fact that it had ever per- formed the important part it did in our early colonial annals, In considering the location of the house wherein the Assembly convened, it is unnecessary to refer to the first meeting-house of Friends. The fact that it was not built previous to 1693 is proved conclusively from the original minutes of the Society, which takes 1The “House of Defense,” we are told by Edward Armstrong, in his admirable notes to “The Record of Upland Court,” p, 202, “ was rectangular in shape, its size was 14 by 15 feet, and, according to meas- urement, its S. E. corner stood about 84 feet from the N. EH. corner of Front and Filbert. The northern portion of the house of Mrs. Sarah P. Combe occupies about eleven feet of the south end of the site of the House of Defense.” 2 Vol. i. p. 46; “ Descendants of Jéran Kyn,” the founder of Upland. By Professor Gregory B. Keen, Penna. Mag. of History, vol. ii. p, 446. 23 it entirely oat of the controversy. After standing one hundred and fifty-two years it was torn down in April, 1845, by Joshua P. and William Eyre, the then owners of the property. I believe that the Assembly met in the double house and not the House of Defense, and my reasons for this opinion are briefly these. The first record we have of the site of the Assem- bly building will be found in “ The Traveller’s Di- rectory,” * wherein it is stated in the notice of Chester that “ The first Colonial Assembly for the province was convened in this place on the fourth day of December, 1682. ‘A part of the old wall of the room still remains.’” This wall could not have been part of the old House of Defense, for July 18, 1728, George McCall and Ann, his wife (Jasper Yeates’ eldest daughter), and John Yeates conveyed to George Ashbridge the house now owned by the heirs of the late Sarah P. Coombs, which dwelling, according to Armstrong, on the north side occupies about eleven feet of the south end of the site of the House of Defense. On May 5, 1797, George Ashbridge, the grandson of the grantee just mentioned, sold the property to Dorothy Smith and Zedekiah Wyatt Graham as joint tenants. In 1798, Mrs. Smith and Mr. Graham, brother and sister, both died of the yellow fever, and the property passed to their nephew and four nieces in equal shares. At that time the passage-way on the north side of the house was paved, and rose-bushes and other shrubbery grew in a bed alongside of the fence which divided the Smith and Graham property on the north from that of Henry Hale Graham. No part of a wall was to be seen at the point designated several years before the beginning of this century, and it must have been there in 1802 had it been the site of the Assembly House. Official evidence, however, tells us that almost a hundred years before the ‘ Traveller’s Directory” was printed, the House of Defense was destroyed, for at the November court, 1708, the grand jury pre- sented “ the old Court hous, being a nuisance to the town in case of fire, and also the chimney of Henry 8“The Traveller's Directory or Pocket Companion. By 8.8. Moore and T. W. Jones, Philadelphia. Published by Mathew Carey, 1802.” An exceedingly rare volume, in library of Pennsylvania Historical Society. Fifteen years subsequent to the publication of the Directory a correspondent of the West Chester Federalist visited Chester and re- cords that, “On the bank of Chester Creek, which passes through the town, there is still shown an old wall, now making a part of a dwelling house, which formed one side of the first hall of justice in Pennsyl- vania—answering for the sessions of the Legislature aud the Court of Justice, in both of which W™ Penn occasionally presided.” (Martin’s “ History of Chester,” p. 122.) The extract just quoted is of course full of historical misstatements, the narrative being based on perverted tra- ditions related to the writer by the people of Chester of that day. The old Assembly House is confused with the fourth court-house of Chester County, built by John Hoskins in 1695, and the wall mentioned still remains in the dwelling-house to this day (1884). It shows, however, that tradition at that time never located the siteof Assembly House on the east side of Edgmont Avenue, where the House of Defense stood, —a species of negative proof. 24 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Hollingsworth, in Chester Town,” and, thereupon, “The Court on deliberate consideracon orders the s# hous to be pulled down, and that Jasper Yeats, chief burges of ye borough of Chester, shall see ye order Pformed.” Martin is of opinion that this order had reference to the House of Defense, and there seems to be no doubt but that the authorities were alarmed lest the great pile of logs, dry as they must be, would burn the small cluster of houses at Chester. The site of the House of Defense subsequently became the property of Jasper Yeates, and he doubtless saw that the order of court was executed. We certainly learn nothing further from the records of the old nuisance, hence the presumption is that it was abated. On the other hand, it is known that on the double- house lot the ruins of the dwellings remained for several years after the beginning of this century, and as it adjoined the lot to the south, where the Friends’ meeting-house stood when the foundation of Sande- land’s dwelling was removed to be used in other build- ings, the tradition that the first Assembly had met there attached itself to the antiquated structure on the adjoining lot, and in time the fact that the double house had ever existed was generally forgotten. So quickly did the tradition link itself to the meeting-house that John F. Watson, in 1827 (only a quarter of a century after the “ Traveller’s Directory” had correctly located the place where the Assembly met), refers to it as the “old Assembly House,” and Stephen Day, in 1848, in his “‘ Historical Collections of Pennsylvania,” follows with the same statement, until the error had made permanent lodgment in the popular mind, and is now difficult of eradication. CHAPTER VI. THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. THE only hamlet in Pennsylvania which had re- ceived a distinctive name that was known to persons in England at the time Penn acquired title to the ter- ritory was Upland, and that that had done so was doubtless due to the fact that Robert Wade had al- ready made it his home. He being a Friend in com- munication with members of that religious sect in the mother-country, that circumstance directed the atten- tion of the Quakers, ‘“‘a society,” says Acrelius, “that the realm could well spare,” to the little cluster of rudely-fashioned dwellings on the banks of the Dela- ware. Hence Friends (whom, fortunately for the United States, could be spared from Europe to plant on this continent those seeds of political truths and re- ligious liberty which, germinating, have grown into a nation on the maintenance of which the future contin- uance of constitutional representative government on the earth largely depends), or Quakers, as popularly | known, desiring to flee from persecution and ignominy at home, gladly availed themselves of the liberal conditions which Penn offered to persons anxious to leave England, and particularly did the latter meet the approval of those people whose poverty had been largely produced by reason of the heavy fines im- posed on them simply because of the religious senti- ments they maintained. That Penn originally in- tended to locate his proposed capital city at Upland can hardly be questioned, for his instructions to his commissioners, Crispin, Bezer, and Allen, particu- larly directing them ‘‘that the creeks should be sounded on my side of the Delaware River, especially Upland, in order to settle a great toune,” will bear no other legitimate construction. That this was his purpose is evident from all the surrounding circum- stances, and he only abandoned it when he learned that Lord Baltimore, by actual observation, had dis- covered that the site of the hamlet was in the debata- ble land as to ownership. That the proprietary, after he had been informed of Lord Baltimore’s persistent claims, had resolved to build a city farther up the river, before he first came to his province, will not admit of doubt; hence the result of the visit of William Penn to James Sandelands, mentioned as having taken place almost as soon as the former landed at Upland, when it was “talkt among the people that it was with Intent to have built a City” at that place, “but that he and Sanderlin could not agree,”! may perchance have interfered with some proposed improvement at the old Swedish settlement, but even had Sandelands assented to all that Penn may have required, it would not have eventuated in locating the contemplated “great town” at that point.” Under the circumstances the risks, owing to the disputed ownership of that part of his territory, were too great for Penn to assume. Martin informs us on the authority of Mrs. Sarah Shoemaker, aged ninety-two years, who died in Ches- ter in 1825, and who had heard her grandfather, James Lownes, often speak of the times of which I am now writing, that during the winter of 1682-83, Upland presented a very animated appearance. It was the only place then in the province, as stated, known to English ship-owners, and consequently, as the destination of all vessels was this port, most of the emigrants landed here, and several ships often rode at anchor at the same time off the hamlet. Itis said that the water was deep near the western shore, and vessels could approach so closely to land that the trees would often brush their upper rigging. The great influx of emigrants in the hamlet caused nearly every dwelling in it to be a house of entertain- ment, and as the people of that day, in the majority of instances, used beer instead of tea or coffee, that fact may account for the number of presentments by the 1 The Breviate, Penn vs. Lord Baltimore, folio 105; Professor G. B. Keen’s “ Descendants of Jéran Kyn,” Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. ii. p, 445. 2 Latrobe’s “ History of Mason and Dixon’s Line.” THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 25 grand juries of the residents along the Delaware “ for | cious metals are supposed to yield almost certain for- selling beer, etc., without license, contrary to law.” The proprietary himself is believed to have made his home at Chester during the greater part of the winter of 1682-88, and while here, it is said (on Nov. 25, 1682), he divided the territory theretofore known as Upland into the three counties,—Chester, Philadel- phia, and Bucks. William Penn, having called the city of Philadel- phia into being,—he had named it before it had any actual existence as a town,—summoned the freemen throughout the province to hold an election on the 20th day of the Twelfth month, 1682 (February, 1683), to chéose seventy-two persons of most note for their wisdom, virtue, and ability to serve as members of a Provincial Council, to meet on “the 10th day of the First month next ensuing” (March, 1683), at the new capital. under this order, but the several sheriffs also pre- sented petitions from the people in their bailiwicks praying that only three of the twelve men returned as councilors be vested with the duplex character of councilors and assemblymen, and the remaining nine as simply assemblymen. The petition presented by the people of Chester County was as follows:' “To WILLIAM PENN, proprietary and governor of the province of Pennsyl- vania and territories thereof. “The petition of the freeholders of the County of Chester respect- fully showeth, That in obedience to the writ sent to our Sheriff wo have chosen twelve persons for our delegates to serve in the provincial Council, but considering that the numbers of the people are yet small, and that we have few fit for or acquainted with such public business, and also that we are unable to support the charge of greater elections and Assemblies. After our humble acknowledgments of the favor in- tended us therein, we take leave humbly to request that three of the twelve we have chosen may serve as provincial Councillors, and the other nine for the Assembly, which provincial Councillors are John Symcock (for three years), Ralph Withers (for two years), and William Clayton (for one year), leaving it to thee to increase the number, as occasion may serve, hereafter. [Signed] The assemblymen thus designated from Chester County were John Hoskins, Robert Wade, George Wood, John Blunston, Dennis Rochford, Thomas Bracy, John Bezer, John Harding, Joseph Phippes. These petitions, although in direct violation of the charter, were favorably acted on, but in the formation of Council Ralph Withers appeared as credited to Bucks County, while Christopher Taylor represented Chester. It is not my purpose to make extended ref- erence to the proceedings of the second Assembly further than to notice that the seal of Chester County at that session was established, bearing as its dis- tinctive design a plow. The influx of immigrants into Pennsylvania for the few years immediately after Penn acquired own- ership of the territory is unequaled in the history of the British colonial possessions in North America, and can only be likened in recent years to the mar- velous growth of settlements in the oil region of this State, or localities west of the Mississippi, where pre- “James Brown & Co.” From each county twelve men were returned | tune to adventurers who locate there. Within the limits of the present county of Delaware, before the close of the year 1683, the population began to pre- ponderate largely of members of the Society of Friends, and at Chester, Marcus Hook, Darby, and Haverford permanent settlements of Quakers had been made, from which centres their influence ex- tended outwards, giving tone and character to the whole people. The few Swedes and Dutch who had preceded these Friends were soon absorbed in, and their individuality of thought and action was merged into that of the more intelligent majority, greatly to the benefit of the former. The Welsh immigrants, who had secured a tract of forty thousand acres in a whole from Penn previous to leaving the Old World, found, on arriving in the colony, that they could not locate it within the city limits of Philadelphia, and were forced to push out into the then wilderness; and we find, in 1682, that their first lodgment with a few settlers was made in Merion and Haverford, from which they rapidly spread into Radnor, Newtown, Goshen, Tredyffrin, and Uwchlan. It was the fixed policy of William Penn, in order to avoid all causes of trouble with the Indians grow- ing out of disputed rights to the soil, to purchase from the aborigines, and extinguish the title to the territory as rapidly as civilization pushed outward into ‘the backwoods.” The ownership of the land within Delaware County was released to William Penn by the Indians in two deeds, both of which are interesting because of the consideration mentioned as having been paid to chiefs. The first deed was exe- cuted over a year before William Penn returned to England, in 1684. The old document is as follows: “We, Secane & Icquoquehan, Indian shackamakers, and right owners of ye Land Lying between Manaiunk, als Sculkill and Maco- panachan, als Chester Rivers, doe this 14th day of ye fift month, in ye year according to English account 1683, hereby graunt and Sell all ovr Right & Title in ye s1 Lands Lying between ye s4 River, begining on ye West side of Manaiunk, called Consohockhan, & from thence by a Westerly Line to ye s4 River Malopanackhan, unto William Penn Pro- priet® & Govern' of ye Province of Pennsilvania &c., hiss heires & As- signes, for Ever, for and in Consideration of 150 fathom of Wampum, 14 Blavketts, 65 yds. Duffills, 28 yds. stroud watrs, 15 Gunns, 3 great Kettles, 15 small Kettles, 16 pr. Stockins, 7 pr. Shoes, 6 Capps, 12 Gimb- letts, 6 Drawing Knives, 15 pr. Sissors, 15 Combes, 5 Papers needles, 10 Tobacco boxes, 15 Tobacco Tongs, 32 Pound Powder, 3 papers Beads, 2 papers Red Lead, 15 Coats, 15 Shurts, 15 Axes, 15 Knives, 30 barrs of Lead, 18 Glasses, 15 hoes, unto us in hand paid, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged have renounced all Claims & Demands for ye future from us of heires or Assignes, in or to y® prmiscs. In witness whereof we have hereunto sett ot hands and seals ye day & year first above written. “The mark of “The mark of x x SECANE. Tcquoquenan. “Sealed and delivered in presence of “ PISERICKEM. “The mark of X Peter Ramo, “The mark of Swan Swanson, “Pune Tu. LEHNMANN, “Jos. CurRTEIS, “Caremus, an Indian king.” 2 1 Hazard’s Annals, p. 603. 2 Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. i. p. 65. 26 HISTORY OF DELAWARE The second deed was made after Penn had returned to England. The Provincial Council, on the 22d of the Seventh month (September), 1685, was notified by Capt. Lasse Cock that the Indians were anxious to dispose of their land between Upland and Appoqui- nomy. Council immediately appointed Thomas Holme, surveyor-general, John Simcock, and Col. William Markham, the then secretary of the body, to meet the Indians and purchase from them the terri- tory named. The following deed, executed in ten days after the date given, shows how expeditiously the authorities acted in carrying out the original in- tention of Penn, the extinguishment of Indian titles ; but the indefinite bounds, ‘so far as a man can ride in two days with a horse,” clearly shows the superior bargaining abilities of the white man, and the success which attended this transaction might have prompted the noted “ walking purchase” of a later date. “Tunis INDENTURE WrrnesseTH That We Lare Packenah Tareek- ham Sickais Pettquessitt Tewis Essepenaick Petkhoy Kekelappan Feomus Mackalohr Melleonga Wissa Powey Indian Kings Sachemak- ers, Right Owners of all the Lands from Quing Quingus Called Duck Creek unto upland Called Chester Creek all along by the West Side of Delaware River and So between the Said Creeks Back wards as far as a man can Ride in two days with a horse for and in Consideration of these following good to Vs in hand paid and secured to be paid by W™ Penn Proprietary and Gouvnour of the Province of Pennsilvania and Territo- ries Thereof, Viz Twenty Gunns Twenty fathom Matchcoat twenty Fathom Stroudwaters, twenty Blankets twenty Kettles twenty pounds Powder One hundred Barrs Lead forty Tomahawks One hundred Knives Fourty pare Stocking One Barrel of Beer twenty pound red Lead One hundred Fathom Wamphum thirty Glass Bottles thirty Pewter Spoons one hundred Awl Blades three hundred tobacco Pipes One hundred hands of Tobacco twenty Tobacco Tongs twenty Steels three hundred flints thirty pare Sissers thirty Combs Sixty looking Glasses two hun- dred Needles one Skiple Salt thirty pounds Shuger five gallons Mollas- sis twenty Tobacco Boxes One hundred Juise Harps twenty Hows, thirty Guimlets thirty Wooden Screw Borers & One hundred Strings Beeds Wee hereby Acknowledge in behalfe of Our Selves as Only Rright Own- ers of the aforesaid Tract of Land to Bargain and Sell And by these Presents doe fully Clearly and Absolutely Bargaine & Sell Unto the said ‘W Penn his heirs and Assignes for Ever without any mollestation or hindrance from or by Us and from or by any other Indians whatsoever that Shall or may Claime any Right Title or Interest in or unto the Said Tract of Land or any Part thereof. In Witness Whereof Wee have hereunto Set our hands and Seals at New Castle the 24 day of the Lighth month 1685. “Signed sealed and delivered unto Capt Thomas Holme Survey Gen! of ye Province of Pennsylvania to & for ye use of William Penn Esqr Proprietary & Governt of ye afores? Province & Territories thereunto belonging in the presence of us. “PIETER ALRIOKS The Mark of “Lasse Cock OWEG Ham “Puitrp Tu LEHNMANN The Mark of “JaMES ATKINSON Owre & Ham “OpRISTOPHER Gorn The Mark of “The Mark of Lix X Hamu “Jonn XK WALKER The Mark of “Epwarp LARE Patasko X “Joun Manpy. The Mark of “The Mark of “Tamma X GWARAN Mack X Rasnure.”1 The general history of our county is very meagre of interesting incidents in the early days of the province other than the happenings which became matter for the intervention and adjudication of the courts; and as these subjects will be found collated and treated of 1 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. i. p. 95. COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. in a distinctive chapter, no allusion will be made to them at this time. The absence of William Penn from England af- forded an opportunity to his enemies and for the friends of Lord Baltimore in the mother-country to press with earnestness objections to the former’s title to the “three lower counties,” now Delaware, as also to seriously menace his ownership of the greater part of the present county of Delaware (as well as others) in Pennsylvania. Hence it became imperatively es- sential that he should return to Great Britain; and preparatory to his departure he appointed .Thomas Lloyd, James Harrison, and John Simcock—the former to be Deputy Governor, and, in the event of death, the others to succeed to that position in the order mentioned—to represent him in the province, and, in the contingency of his (Penn’s) death before other officers were selected, empowered them to be r “Commissioners & Guardians in Government to my dear Heir, Sprigett Penn.” As the record shows that on Aug. 14, 1684, Penn presided for the last time in Council until he returned, nearly sixteen years subse- quently, it is thought that he sailed not long after the date above mentioned. At a Council held at Philadelphia, April 1, 1685, Thomas Lloyd presiding, the boundaries of the county of Chester were officially prescribed, as follows: “The county of Chester to begin at ye Mouth or Entrance of Bough Creek, upon Delaware River, being the upper end of Tinicum Island, and soe up that creek, dividing the said Island from ye Land of Andros Boone .& Company; from thence along the several courses thereof to a Large Creek Called Mill Creek: from thence up the several courses of the said creek to a W.S.W. Line, which Line divided the Liberty Lands of Philadelphia from Several Tracts of Land belonging to the Welsh and other Inhabitants; and from thence E.N.E. by a line of Marked Trees 120 perches, more or less; from thence N.N.W. by the herford (Haverford) Township 1000 perches, more or less; from thence E.N.E. by ye Land belonging to Jno. Humphreys 110 perches, more or less; from ‘thence N.N.W. by ye Land of John Eckley 880 perches, more or less; from thence continuing ye said Course to the Scoolkill River, weh sd Scoolkill River afterwards to be the natural bounds.” ? Many complaints having been made respecting the manner in which Charles Ashcom, the deputy sur- veyor for Chester County, had encroached on the forty thousand acres which Penn had ordered set apart as the Welsh tract® (including Radnor and 2 Colonial Records, vol. i. p. 126. Dr. Smith (“History of Dela- ware County,” p. 165), says, “This line continues to be the eastern boundary. of Delaware County to the north line of Haverford. The resolution of the Council makes the next course run easterly instead of westerly, and is probably a mistake, as Radvor township never extended farther easterly than it now does,” 8 The survey of the Welsh tract was authorized by the following warrant from the proprietary : “Whereas divers considerable persons among y* Welsh Friends have REPERENOEA £0 PHH ABPPLEBMENTS OF SEVERAL Phil. Roman. Ww. Iicheot. Pet. Loundor. Jno. Simcock. Rich. Far. Wm. Collet. Jos. Philps. Wm. Clayton. Jo. Beale. Mos. and Ben. Mendinhall. Wm. Hichcot. Rob. Chamberlain. Wm. Brampton. Tho. King. Tho. Moor. Nat. Park. Jno. Hannam. Godin Walter. Tho. Hall. Jno. Palmer. Wm. Ouborn. Juno. Brazor. Adam Roads. Jno. Kerk. J. Bluntston. Cha. Lee. Sam. Sellers. 16 DWH eo DOD Wor bo yo to wnwnwwy ww Wor Oe Ss So Be be be vs om Gibbons Hobbs. J. Biuntston. Jos, Fern. Geo. Wood. Wm. Wood. Pet. Ellet, Jno. Bluntston. Sam. Bradshaw. Tho. Bradshaw. Jam. Stanfield. Ant. Sturgis. Edw. Cartledze. Jos. Pottor. Tho. Hood. Jos. Slayton. Pet. Lester. teo. Gleave. Geo. Mearis. Fra. Yornel. Jae. Steedman. Jno. Steedman. Jno. Steedman, Jno. IHolwel. Cha. Wheetaker. Edm, Cartledg. Jos. Potter. Tho. Hood. INHABITANTS IN THE 33 Smith. 34 Jno. Batrain, 35 Edw. Gibbs. 36 Amb. Boon. 37) Wim. Wood. 38 Rich. Tucker. 39 TIar. Johnson. 40 Col, ook. {1 -Tlansunin. {2 Mer. Morten. 3 Mountstoker. 44. Jno. Ienrickson. 45 Tho. Nerbury. 46 Jno. Simeock. 47 Jno. 48 Jno. Kingsman. 49 Jno. Hdg. 50 Rob. Iarding. Cawdwell. 1 Wal, Fosset. 52 Jno, Nixon. 52a Jno, Simeock. 54 Sar. Baker. 55 Cha. Whitaker. 56 Tho. Rawlins. 57 Fra. Cook. 58 Tho. Ducket. 60° Joel Baloy. OOUNTY OF CHESTE. 61 Tho. Taylor, 62 Jno. Duckley. 63 Jos. Bushell. 61 Rob, Piles. 65 Jno, Gibbons. 66 Rob, Southrey. 67 Widdow. 69 Jam. Swarfar. 70 Jno. Toulson. 1 Wm. Gregory. 2 Boweter. 3) Will. Edwards. 74 Oswin Musgrave. 75 Cburchman. 76 Free Schoole. 77) Dav. Oadon, 7S Jno. Hodskinson, 79 Jae. Chanler. 80. Fra, Harrison. 81 Jno. Peusey. S82. Jno. Prisner. 83. Gil. Woolam. 85 Jno, Prisnor. 86 Win. Woodmans¢ S87 Jno. Gibbons. S88 Fra. Warrison. Fac-slmile of a part of Holme’s Map, showing Settlers of ian LEFT a or etitia Penns ~ 0 harlow Yy ee BaTiars ey ae “h—> wand Sz ‘ ae atalbe Rina ¥ 17 Fail, %h ) got LG gt ds, of - an 4 x8 M7 OR emery ae ae : ee oe eae I Mace: oe ot a) Prey ( ; XN berry \. from an original in the possession of Sami, L. Smedley, Phila,, Pa» THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 27 Haverford townships, in this county), in laying out lands for other purchesers, not recognized as distinc- tively Welsh settlers, in such a way as to interfere with the continuity of “the Barony,” and because the inhabitants of that territory were summoned to do jury and other public duties in both Philadelphia and Chester Counties, in 1688 a lengthy petition was prepared by them and forwarded by Col. William Markham the same year to Penn in England. It is not known whether the letter was ever received by Penn; at least so far as the writer has information no notice was ever taken by the proprietary of the communication. The Welsh settlers in Radnor and Havertord, how- ever, declined to recognize the division of the coun- ties of Philadelphia and Chester, and silently refused to pay their proportion of the public taxes to the treasury of Chester County or to serve on juries. The authorities of the latter at length, having exhausted all means at their command to compel recognition of their jurisdiction, presented a petition from the jus- tices and inhabitants of Chester County to the Goy- ernor and Council, March 25, 1689, in which they represented that the county was at first small, “ not above 9 miles square & but Thinly seated, whereby y° said County is not able to Support the Charge thereoff,” and that the Governor in “ his Serious Con- sideration of our Weak Condition was pleased, out of Compassion to us, to grant an Enlargement of y® same,” which was subsequently done in the official boundaries before mentioned. To support the allega- tion that these limits had been approved by William Penn, John Blunstone testified ‘‘that a ffew days be- fore Gove™ Penn left this Province that upon y® bank by John Simcock’s house I moved him to Deside this matter that had been so long Discoursed, who then, before me and Others did Declare that y* bounds Should thus runn from the mouth of Bow Creek to Mill Creek, w* should be y® bounds until it come to y® Land of Herford, and then to take in the Townds of Herford & Radnor; from thence to the Skoolkill, and take in his mannour of Springtowne, .. . then I asked him if he would be pleased to give it under requested me yt all ye Lands Purchased of me by those of North Wales and South Wales, together with ye adjacent counties to y™, as Haver- fordshire, Shropshire, and Cheshire, about fourty thousand acres, may be lay4 out contiguously as one Barony, alledging yt ye number allready come and suddenly to come, are such as will be capable of planting y° same much wtbin ye proportion allowed by ye custom of y¢ country, & so not lye in large and useless vacaucies. And because I am inclined and determined to agree and favour y™ wth any reasonable Conveniency & priviledge: I do hereby charge thee & strictly require thee to lay out ye si tract of Land in as uniform a manner, as conveniently may be, upon y° West side of Skoolkill river, running three miles upon y* same, & two miles backward, & then extend ye parallell wt) yc river six miles, and to run westwardly so far as till ye s4 quantity of Jand be Com- pleately surveyed unto y™. Given at Pennsbury, ye 13th 1st mo. 1684. “WiLL, PENN. “To Tus. Hotmrs, Surveyor General.” In pursuance of this warrant the Surveyor General, on the 4th of the 2d month (April), 1684, issued an order to his deputy, David Powell, he directing him to execute it. The survey was probably made before the end of 1684. See Smith's ‘‘ History of Delaware County,” pp. 164-65. his hand, to avoyd ffurther Trouble, who answered he would, if any of vs would Come the next day to Philadelphia, in order thereunto; one was sent, but what then obstructed I am not certaine, but y’ y° Gover" Departed about two days after.” Randall Vernon testified that William Howell, of Harford, “Signified unto me” that he had “asked y* Gover" to what County they should be joined or belong unto, & The Gover" was pleased to answer him that they must belong to Chester County.” Thomas Usher, sheriff of Chester County, testified that Penn said to him, “Thomas, I perceive that the Skoolkill Creek Comes or runs so upon the back of Philadelphia that it makes y® City almost an Island, so that a Robbery or the like may be there Committed, and y* offender gitt over y® Creek, and so Escape for want of due persute, &c., therefore I intend that y* bounds of Philadelphia County Shall Come about 3 or ffour miles on this side of the Skoolkill, and I would not have thee to take notice or to oppose that Sheriff on y® Execution of his office, about Kingses or the like, but I intend to enlarge this County downwards to Brandywine.’’* The Deputy Surveyor-General produced the official map, showing the county lines as before given, and stated that ‘‘it’so is set out by order of the Governor and Provincial Council.” Governor Blackwell and the Council intimated that as the bounds had been pub- lished in the map of Thomas Holme, which had been distributed in England, and as land had been sold and located according to that map, to change the boundaries now might result in much confusion to purchasers. Besides, the Welsh settlers had refused to bear any part of the taxes or serve on juries in Philadelphia, as they had done in Chester County, claiming that they were a distinct “barony,” and although the Governor and Council intimated that clearly the Welsh Tract was a part of Chester Couuty,. yet they refused to announce their final conclusion until the next morning, when, if the Welsh settlers chose to show cause why they should not be part of Chester County, they would be heard. The next morning, Thomas Lloyd and John Eckley appeared on behalf of the Welsh, alleging that Penn had in- timated to them that they would form a county pal- atine; but as they had no written evidence to sub- stantiate that assertion, Council decided that the boundaries already shown to have been established must be confirmed. Thereupon the strong arm of the law was extended to compel the reluctant Welsh- men to yield obedience to the decree that had been made. The Court of Chester County appointed John Jerman constable for Radnor, and Jolin Lewis for Haverford, but these recipients of judicial favor fail- ing to present themselves, the justices determined that the dignity of the bench should be maintained. Hence we find that at court held “3d day of Ist week, 8d mo., 1689, ordered that Warrants of Con- 1 Colonial Records, vol. i. pp. 263, 265. 28 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. tempt be Directed to y® Sheriff to apprehend y® Bodyes of John Lewis and John Jerman for their Contempt of not entering into their respective offices of Constables (viz.) John Lewis for Harfort, and John Jerman for Radnor, when thereunto required by this Court.” At the same session, David Laurence, who had been returned as a grand juror from Haverford, failed to attend, and for his neglect or refusal to appear was presented by the grand inquest. The court fined Laurence ten shillings. The jury also presented “ the want of the inhabitants of the townships of Radnor and Hartfort, and the inhabitants adjacent, they not being brought in to join with us in the Levies and other public services of this county.” The move- ment to compel the Welsh to submit to the consti- tuted authority did not cease, for at the following (June) court the commission of William Howell, of Haverford, was read, and he afterwards assumed the office and subscribed ‘‘to the solemn declaration” required. William Jenkins, of Haverford, at the same court, served as ajuror. Haverford had yielded, but the court deemed it wise that public proclamation, as was then customary with all laws, should be made respecting this decree, hence we find this entry in the old record of the county: That at court, on Wednesday of the first week in June, 1689, “the Division Lyne between this County and Philadelphia was read, dated ye Ist of y® 24 mo", 1685.” At the December court following, John Jerman was qualified as constable of Radnor, and thereafter the two townships made no further objection to act with and pay taxes to the authorities of Chester County. In 1688 the inhabi- tants of the province were greatly alarmed by reason of a rumor diligently circulated that two Indian women from New Jersey had informed an old Dutch resident near Chester that the aborigines had deter- | mined, on a designated Thursday, to attack and mas- | sacre all the white settlers on the Delaware. To add to the general consternation, about ten o’clock at night of the evening fixed upon by the savages to begin the attack a messenger “out of the woods” came hurriedly into Chester with the report that | three families, residing about nine miles distant, had been murdered by the Indians. The people of the town gathered to consider the startling intelligence, and at midnight a Quaker, resident at Chester, ac- companied by two young men, went to the place named, where they found the three houses empty, but no signs of murder. The dwellers therein, alarmed by the rumor, had fled to the homes of their parents, about a mile distant on Ridley Creek. The further | particulars of this alarm are thus given by Proud :! “The master of one of these families being from home, had been informed five hundred Indians were actually collected at Naaman’s Creek, in pursuit of their design to kill the English; and as he was hastening to his home, he thought he heard his boy crying out and say- ing, ‘What shall I do, my dame is killed!’ Upon which, instead of 1 Hist. of Pennsylvania, vol. i. page 336. going home to know the certainty of the affair, he ran off to acquaint the government at Philadelphia, but being met by a person of more prudence than himself befure he gut to the city he was persuaded by him to return. “The report, notwithstanding, soon arrived at the city, and was told with such alarming circumstances that a messenger was immediately dispatched to Marcus Took, near the said Naaman’s Creek, to enquire the truth of it. He quickly returned and corfirmed the report, but with this variation, that it was at Brandywine Creek, at an Indian town, where the five hundred Indians were assembled, and that they, having a lame king, had carried him away, with all their women and children, These circumstances rendered the affuir still more alarming, and with many amounted to a certainty. “The Council were, at that time, sitting at Philadelphia on other affairs, when one of them, a Friend, supposed to be Caleb Pusey,? who lived in Chester County, voluntarily offered himself to go to the place, provided they would name five others to accompany him, without weapons; which, being soon agreed on, they rode to the place ; but, in- stead of meeting with five hundred warriors, they found the old king quietly lying with his lame foot along on the ground, and his head at ease on a kind of pillow, the women at work in the fields, and the chil- dren playing together. “ When they had entered the wigwam the king presently asked them very mildly, ‘ What they all came for?’ They told him the report which the Indian women had raised, and asked him whether the Indians had anything against the English. He appeared much displeased at the report, and said, ‘ The woman ought to be burnt to death, and that they bad nothing against the English,’ adding, ‘’Tis true there is about fifteen pounds yet behind of our pay for the land which William Penn bought, but as you are still on it and improving it to your own use, we are not in haste for our pay; but when the English come to settle it we expect to be paid.” This the messengers thinking very reasonable, told him they would undoubtedly be paid for their land. “One of the company further expressed himself to the Indian King, in the following manner: ‘That the great God, who made the world, and all things therein, consequently made all mankind, both Indiansand English ; and as he made all, so his love was extended to all; which, was plainly shown, by his causing the rain and dews to fall on the ground of both Indians and English alike; that it might generally pro- duce what the Indians, as well as what the English sewed or planted in it, for the sustenance of life; and also by his making the sun to shine equally on all, both Indians and English, to nourish them all, extend- ing his love thus to all, for they were naturally bound to love one another.’ “The King answered, ‘ What they had said was true; and as God has given you corn, I would advise you to get it in (it being harvest time); for we intend you no harm.’ They parted amicably, and the messengers returning put an end to the people’s fears.” The Revolution of 1688 in England was a serious obstacle to the rapid development of this province. William Penn was known to be a warm personal friend of the deposed king, from whose hand he had received many favors; hence, when the new mon- archs were told that Penn was a Jesuit of St. Omers, a self-devoted slave to despotism, and even charged with conspiring for the restoration of James II., the royal ears hearkened attentively to the wildest rumors circulated by his enemies. Penn was twice exam- ined before the Privy Council, and he was even held to bail for his appearance, but the Court of King’s Bench discharged him, as no evidence was presented substantiating the charges lodged against him ; there- 2Dr, Smith has correctly shown that Pusey was not a member of the Council that year. It is to be regretted that the uame of this member of Council is not recorded, for his act was one of rare heroism, In all probability Proud has confused the incidents, in that he makes Pusey visit the Indians from Philadelphia, when doubtless—for he was of that stamp of noble men—the Quaker who at midnight rode from Chester, | accompanied by two young men, to the scene of the alleged violence was ' Pusey, THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 29 upon he decided to return immediately to his colony, and to that end had gathered about five hundred per- sons to accompany him, the government had even ordered a convoy for the protection of the emigrants, when an infamous wretch accused him under oath of attempting to incite a treasonable outbreak in Lan- cashire, and Penn escaping arrest, was compelled to abandon his proposed colony, entailing on him serious loss. Meanwhile in the province faction feelings and dissensions had been aroused until the three lower counties, now comprising the State of Delaware, actu- ally separated from the three upper counties of Penn- sylvania, their representatives refusing to act in con- junction with the authorities in Philadelphia. At last Penn, in the hope of maintaining order, was , compelled to appoint, in the beginning of 1692, Thomas Lloyd to be Governor of the province, and William Markham to be Governor of the territory (Delaware). The new order of things, however, failed to produce the harmony desired, so that reports of the confused condition of affairs in the province which went abroad supplied the crown of England with an excuse for suspending the proprietary rule, which was done by a commission from William and Mary, dated Oct. 20, 1692, to Col. Benjamin Fletcher to be Captain-General and Governor-in-Chief of Pennsyl- vania. The commission to Fletcher set forth three reasons for the act of suspension, but the real in- centive was the doubt of Penn’s loyalty, which the latter’s enemies had awakened in the royal breasts. But whatever was the motive, the whole system of Jaws which bad been enacted were revised, modi- fied, and repealed by the throne in the authority vested in Fletcher. There is little of interest, speci- ally in reference to the radical changes thus made, connected with the annals of Delaware County, apart from that of the State at large, but among the seven members of the late Governor Lloyd’s Council who protested so earnestly against any and all measures in contravention of Penn’s charter this county was ably represented. Governor Fletcher’s understand- ing of the situation was made clear in his reply to a subsequent address by the Assembly, that “These Lawes and that model of government is desolved and at an end.” William Penn, than whom no more adroit politician (in the legitimate, not the conventional use of that word) appears on the pages of English history, waited for the royal distrust to subside in time, and by degrees the antagonistic feelings of the crown died away to such an extent that their Majesties themselves at last desired to restore Penn to the enjoyment of those rights of which they had arbitrarily deprived him. Hence, on Aug. 20, 1694, the commission of Governor Fletcher was annulled, and letters patent granted to Penn fully restoring to him the Province of Pennsylvania and its territories. The proprietary not having matters arranged that he could leave Eng- land at that time, commissioned William Markham | Governor, which office the latter discharged until late in the spring of 1698, when he received a new com- mission as Lieutenant-Governor. In the fall of 1699 the yellow fever visited Phila- delphia asa pestilence. Many of the inhabitants died of the disease, and the utmost alarm prevailed through- out the province. Although we have no direct record that the malady made its appearance at Chester, that such was the case may be inferentially concluded from the fact that the September court adjourned without transacting any business, an incident without a par- allel in our county’s history. Later on, in November of that year, William Penn came for the second time to his colony, and before leaving England he an- nounced that it was his intention to make his perma- nent residence in the province. As the vessel sailed up the Delaware the proprietary caused it to be an- chored off Chester, and, coming ashore, he for a second time became an honored guest at the Essex House. Robert Wade, his friend, was dead, but Lydia, his widow, welcomed Penn, and here he met Thomas Story, who had recently returned from a religious journey to Virginia. The next morning, as is related by Clarkson,'! Penn was rowed across the creek in a boat to the eastern side, ‘‘and as he landed, some young men officiously, and contrary to express orders of some of the magistrates, fired two small sea pieces of cannon, and being ambitious to make three out of two, by firing one twice, one of them, darting in a car- tridge of powder before the piece was sponged, had his left arm shot to pieces; upon which, a surgeon being sent for, an amputation took place.” The young man, Bevan, thus injured died the following April, and the expenses attending the nursing and ultimate burial of the wounded lad were discharged by Penn. The proprietary was not destined to end his days in his colony. William III., after the death of Mary, is believed to have regarded him in no friendly spirit, and when the proprietary learned that the ministry, with the intention of converting the provincial gov- ernment into a regal one, had introduced a bill to that effect in Parliament, the consideration of which had been postponed until he could be present, the urgency of affairs compelled his prompt return to England. He sailed from Philadelphia, Nov. 1, 1701, never again to visit the commonwealth he had founded. Before his departure he established a Council of State, and appointed Andrew Hamilton as Deputy Governor. The general history of our county, saving such in- cidents as relate to court proceedings, religious asso- ciations, organization of townships, and similar mat- ters, which will be considered hereafter, is very meagre until the approaching struggle of the colonists with Great Britain threw the country into a commotion that tore asunder family ties, and strained the social and political fabric to its very foundation. Ina great measure previous to that period, year had followed 1 Life of William Penn, vol. ii. p. 163. 30 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. year without leaving any impression that has remained to our day. Even the absurd farce, on May 16, 1706, of the French invasion, in which Governor Evans played such a ridiculous part, seems to have made no lasting trace on our county’s records, yet doubtless the messenger who rode with such hot haste to Philadel- phia, and whose tidings caused such widespread con- sternation in the latter place! as he passed through Marcus Hook, Chester, and Darby, gave forth intima- tions that he was the bearer of momentous intelli- gence, for such a course would have been in full accord with the preconcerted scheme of the Governor to arouse general alarm in the province, and yet there seems not to be the faintest reference to this in our local annals. 3 On May 16, 1712, to the Provincial Council was presented “ A Petition of a great number of the In- habitants of the county of Chester, praying that y° Burrough of the Town of Chester, in this Province, may be made a free Port, was read & Considered ; And it is the opinion of the board that the matter may be presented to the Propry., that he may take proper methods Concerning the same & Consult the Courts of the Queen’s Customs therein.”? In all prob- ability William Penn, whose energy was beginning to yield under the weight of years and constant pecu- niary embarrassments, never gave this petition any serious consideration, his chief desire at that period appearing to be to rid himself of the trouble, vexa- tion, and expense of the colony by its sale to Queen Ann for twelve thousand pounds. This transfer would doubtless have been effected had not a stroke of par- alysis rendered Penn unable to formally execute the contract. During all the last century, as will be shown as we proceed in this narrative, Chester was a place where outward- and inward-bound vessels stopped for days together. On the 4th of Fifth month, 1780, at noon, James Logan dispatched a letter to his son, William, “on his voyage to Bristol, sent to him at Chester,” and during the British occupation of Phila- delphia almost all their transports and men-of-war lay off the former town. As just stated, William Penn’s health became so impaired that he was unable to carry to an end his contemplated sale of the province to the crown, and from that time he never wholly rallied, his mind gradually becoming more and more feeble until his death, July 30, 1718. The disputes respecting the northwestern boundary of the county of Chester, which had been, as supposed, officially determined in 1685, and after a protracted resistance had finally been accepted by the Welsh in 1689, in the early spring of 1720 again engaged the attention of Council, when at that time a petition of the inhabitants of the west side of Schuylkill was presented, setting forth that the commissioners of Chester County had compelled the payment by them 1 Gordon’s “ History of Pennsylvania,” p, 138. 2 Colonial Records, vol. ii. p, 546. of taxes levied by the assessors of that county, al- though they stated that ever since their first settle- ment they had paid their taxes to Philadelphia; that they had no trade with Chester, “seeing it is impos- sible for us to have any tolerably convenient road to Chester by reason of Rocks and Mountains,” and also urged other arguments, all concluding with a prayer that the counties might be so divided as to place them within Philadelphia.* On Feb. 1, 1721, Council re- ported ‘ that the General Assembly had acted on the matter, and that the secretary had made full examina- tions as to the official boundaries as theretofore estab- lished, but that he expressed his belief that the line then run “ was done arbitrarily by the Surveyor-Gen- era], and that in his opinion it would have been more regular to carry the Division Line along the side o¢ Radnor and the upper part of that called the Welch Line, laying all those Tracts called Manors to Phila- delphia County.” Council thereupon concluded that until the matter could “be more fully and effectually settled, the Commissioners and Assessors of Chester County should forebear to claim those Inhabitants . and that the said Inhabitants be permitted to pay their Taxes and do all other Duties to the county of Philadelphia as formerly.” Chester County, how- ever, declined to accept this decree without resist- ance, for on March 28, 1722,° David Lloyd (who at the time was chief justice of the province) and Nathaniel Newlin, in behalf of themselves, and the other com- missioners appointed by the act of Assembly for Chester County, presented a petition to Council pray- ing relief “ from the unrighteous Attempts of the said persons to sever themselves from the said County of Chester.” Council called the attention of David Lloyd to the fact that no regular division of the coun- ties, so far as known, had been made, and the inter- diction of the commissioners of Chester County from levying taxes only applied to cases where persons had been assessed in and had paid taxes to Philadelphia County, for it would be unreasonable to require on the same estate taxes in both counties, and, besides, those who had thus paid their assessments to Philadelphia County were only six in number, but they were of opinion that it was of great importance that the divi- sion-lines should be adjusted without delay. David Lloyd replied that there were persons yet living who remembered the running of the division-line, which was done, he believed, about the year 1688, under the administration of Governor Blackwell, but the com- missioners of Chester County did not know where to apply for the record “ or written proofs of it, except to the secretary, in whose custody all things of that kind should be kept.” After an interesting statement relative to the custody of the papers of the former secretary, Patrick Robinson, Council instructed the 8 Ib,, vol. iii, p. 111. 4 Futhey and Cope's “ History of Chester County,” p. 41, 5 Colonial Records, vol. iii. p. 158, THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 31 then secretary, James Logan, and Attorney-General Andrew Hamilton, without delay, to make search for the missing documents belonging to the records of Council, and the secretary was “ordered to make further search for the proofs that have been mentioned of the Division Line between the Counties of Phila- delphia & Chester.” With this announcement, so far as the minutes of Council are concerned, the whole matter dropped out of public notice, and adjusted itself in the manner suggested by Secretary Logan, by “laying all those Tracts called Mannors to is delphia County.” At a meeting of Council held Feb. 6, 1728-29, a pe- tition was presented by the inhabitants of the upper part of Chester County, setting forth that “‘ by Reason of their Great Distance from the County Town, where the Courts are held, Officers are Kept and Annual elections made,” the inconvenience of attending court or obtaining writs and other legal process, being compelled to travel one hundred miles for such purposes, the want of a jail to imprison “ Vagabonds and other dissolute People’ who harbored among the frontier settlements where they believed themselves “safe from justice in so remote a Place,” a division of the county should be made between the upper and lower parts, and that the upper portion should be erected into a county.’ It is not within the scope of this work to follow the particulars of this movement, which finally resulted in the county of Lancaster being erected by the act of May 10, 1729. We learn from the minutes of Council of Dec. 16, 1728,? that the propriety of again making Chester the seat of the Provincial Government was seriously con- sidered. It seems that a resolution had been carried in the General Assembly which set forth, “that inas- much as there has been of late several Indecencies used towards the Members of Assembly attending the Service of the Country in Philadelphia by rude and disorderly Persons unknown to this House,” the Gov- ernor and Council were requested to select a place which they shall deem “more safe for the Members of Assembly and most convenient for the Dispatch of the Business of the Country.” The Provincial Coun- cil, on their part, after considering the inconvenience of removal at that season of the year and setting out other difficulties, concluded that “if on further Ex- perience the House shall continue in the same Senti- ments that a Removal is necessary, the Board are of opinion that the same out [ought] to be adjourned to Chester, as the most convenient place for their meeting next to Philadelphia.” The sober second thought of the indignant legislators, or the penitent petitions of the inhabitants of the Quaker city pre- vailed over the anger of the Assembly, and, on “further experience, the House’ neglected to press the subject of removal, and thus Chester did not grasp the prize she was so willing to secure. 1 Colonial Records, vol. iii. p. 343. 2 Tb., p. 340. About 17380, the first mission of the Roman Catholic Church within the territory now comprising the present county of Delaware was located at the resi- dence of Thomas Willcox at Ivy Mill, in Concord, to which fuller reference will be made in the history of that township. This religious sect did not progress very rapidly, for in 1757, in the census of Roman Catholics in Pennsylvania,’ the following return shows that in Chester County there were Men. Women. is Under care of Robert Harding. ww 18 22, “Thomas Schneider....... «= 13 9 “ Mi “s aa (Irish)... 9 6 ee he Ferdinane Farmer (Trish).. a 23 17 * figurines 3 a9 “These were all who took the sacrament above twelve years of age or thereabout.” On the afternoon of Aug. 11, 1732, Thomas Penn, the son of the proprietary, landed at Chester, and a messenger was dispatched to Philadelphia to apprise the Council and Assembly, then in session, of his arrival. The secretary of Council immediately came to Chester, with the congratulations of the authori- ties, and “to acquaint him—Penn—that to-morrow they would in person pay their respects to him.” The following day the Governor and Council, accom- panied by a large number of gentlemen, visited the borough, and “ waited on the Honorable Proprietary and paid him their compliments. After dinner the Proprietary with his company, now grown very num- erous, sett out for Philadelphia.” On September 20th of the following year, John-Penn arrived at Chester, from England, and was there met and welcomed by his younger brother, Thomas, who, with a large num- ber of gentlemen, had come from Philadelphia to greet the eldest son of the founder. After passing the night at Chester, the next morning the party rode to the city, where they were received with manifesta- tions of popular rejoicing. In 1739, when England declared war against Spain, an expedition was proposed from the colonies to in- vade the West Indies, and the Governor, in a procla- mation calling for recruits “to inlist in the important Expedition now on Foot for attacking and plundering the most valuable Part of the Spanish West Indies,” notified the people of Chester and vicinity that those who proposed to recruit should call on James Mather in the borough, while Henry Hockley, Robert Fin- ney, and Lazarus Finney were designated for like service in other localities throughout the then county of Chester. It seems that in this enterprise a num- ber of redemption servants were enlisted, and not- withstanding the attention of Governor Thomas was drawn to that fact, he took no official action to pre- vent such recruiting, and the parties aggrieved were compelled to seek redress from the Assembly. That body promptly provided for the payment by the prov- ince of all losses sustained by masters whose servants had been accepted into the military forces, and ac- cordingly, on June 3, 1741, to James Gibbons and 3 Penna. ntitees: 1st series, vol. iii. p. 144. 32 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Samuel Levis was issued an order on the loan-office for £515 11s. 9d., in payment for fifty-eight servants mustered by the officers in Chester County. Other claims for damages suffered by similar enlistments were urged and paid; in one instance it was alleged that ten servants were taken from the iron-works at Coventry and Warwick, and those establishments were obliged to cease operation for a time, because their skilled labor had been marched away as recruits. On Dec. 22, 1741, the Governor presented to Coun- cil a petition from the justices of the county of Ches- ter, setting forth that great abuses had been ‘t com- mitted” in the county by the use of defective weights and measures, and that they, the justices, at the in- stance of some of ‘‘the substantial Inhabitants,’’ as well as an address from the Grand Inquest, had ‘di- rected the purchasing of Standards of Brass for Weights & Measures, accordingly to his Majesty’s Standard for the Exchequer.” They therefore prayed that “the Governor would be pleased to appoint an Officer to keep the said Standards, and to Seal and Mark all Weights and Measures within the said County.”! Isaac Taylor was the favored one who re- ceived the appointment, and the standards, we learn, cost the county £17 12s, 11d? On March 29, 1744, war was declared between Great Britain and France, and on the 11th of June of the same year Governor Thomas issued a procla- mation * in which he not only announced the hostile position of the two nations, but strictly enjoined and required all persons in the province capable of bear- ing arms “forthwith to provide themselves with a Good Firelock, Bayonet, and Cartouch-Box, and a sufficient Quantity of Powder and Ball,” that they might be prepared to attack the enemy or defend the province from invasion. The Governor also urged the fitting out of privateers, not only as a war meas- ure highly beneficial to the State, but “may bring great advantages to the Adventurers themselves.” The Assembly, however, in which the Society of Friends largely predominated, took no step of a de- cided military character; but Franklin, by his pam- phlet, “‘ Plain Truth,” aroused the public to a knowl- edge of the defenseless condition in which the province then stood. A meeting of citizens was called, a regiment was formed in Philadelphia, and money was raised by a lottery to erect a battery below that city, on the river. “These military preparations were necessary to intimidate a foreign enemy, and to curb the hostile disposition of the Indians, which had been awakened by several unpleasant rencontres with the whites.” * The crown having, on April 9, 1746, ordered that four hundred men should be raised in the province of Pennsylvania, to be part of the forces designed for 1 Colonial Records, vol. iv. p. 507. 2 Futhey and Cope’s “ History of Chester County,” p. 49. 8 Colonial Records, vol. iv. p. 696. 4 Gordon's “ History of Pennsylvania,” p. 245. the immediate reduction of the French Canadian colonies, Governor Thomas, on June 9th of the same year, issued his proclamation’ to that effect, and under it four companies were recruited, commanded respect- ively by Capts. Trent, Perry, Deimer, and Shannon. The latter, John Shannon, of New Castle County, Del., was commissioned June 25, 1746, as captain, and authorized to enlist one hundred men.® Professor Keen informs us that the company was to be recruited on the Delaware River.’ That the men were collected in New Castle and Chester Counties the names on the roll fully establish, and aside from that inferential proof, we have positive evidence that the organization was quartered in the borough of Chester, for in January of the following year the petitions of James Mather, David Coupland, John Salkeld, and Aubrey Bevan, then tavern-keepers in that town, were presented to the Assembly, asking payment “for the diet of Captain Shannon’s company of soldiers,” while Dr. Gandouit, a practicing physi- cian in Chester at that time, also petitioned for pay- ment for medicine furnished by him, as well as pro- fessional attendance on the sick soldiers. These companies were ordered to Albany, where they went into winter quarters. From a letter from Capt. Trent to Governor Thomas, written from Albany, Oct. 21, 1746,° we learn that the troops were badly provided with blankets, and that the officers had been com- pelled to purchase a number for them, paying there- for in a draft on the Governor. He stated that had they not supplied the troops with those articles the whole body would have deserted. The weather was extremely cold, and as many as thirty men had al- ready deserted from Capt. Shannon’s company, giving as their reason the want of proper covering, and that they might as well take the chance of being killed in trying to make their escape as by remaining to surely die. He related that one of Shannon’s men, ‘* when the snow was knee-deep, in attempting to make his escape, got frost-bit, and his companions, fearing to undergo the same fate, left him, when he miserably perished.” The following month the captains of the four Pennsylvania companies united in an appeal to the Governor to supply the troops with necessaries, for ‘‘we have been making as near a calculation as possible of our provisions, & find, with the utmost frugality, we have not more meat than sufficient to serve till the 19th January, & as to our Bread & Rum, it falls far short of that time.’ The troops, after being kept in cantonment until Oct. 31, 1747, were discharged by proclamation of the Governor, wherein he declared the reason that “the late in- 5 Colonial Records, vol. v. p. 39. ®See his commission and instructions, Pennsylvania Archives, vol. i. p. 688. 7* Descendants of Jéran Kyu,” Penna, Mag. of Hist., vol. iv. p. 108. 8 Futhey and Cope’s “ History of Chester County,” p. 49. * Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol, ii. p. 680, 10 Ib., p. 681. THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 33 tended expedition against Canada having been by his Colonels, William Moore, Andrew McDowell. Lieutenant-Colonels, Samuel Flower, John Frew. Majors, John Mather, John Miller. Majesty laid aside for the present.” ! During the early summer of 1747 a French pri- vateer entered Delaware Bay, and captured several inward- and outward-bound vessels.? The intelligence of these acts reaching Philadelphia on July 4th, pilots were forbidden by proclamation “‘ to conduct, Pilot, or bring up any foreign Ship or Vessel carrying a Flag of Truce. . to any Port or place within this Prov- ince above that Tract of Land lying in Chester county, commonly called and known by the name of Marcus Hook,”5 unless special license was issued by the Governor. The following summer the Spanish and French privateers showed the utmost daring in cruising off the mouth of and in Delaware Bay. On May 25, 1748, George Proctor, a prisoner of war, succeeded in escaping by swimming from the “St. Michael,” a Spanish privateer, carrying twenty- two guns and a crew of one hundred and sixty men, which was at the time moored off Salem Creek. The deposition of the Proctor was taken, and an express sent immediately to Philadelphia with the intelli- gence, which threw the city into the utmost conster- nation, a condition of affairs which was in no wise allayed when on the following day the escaped sailor was himself sent to Philadelphia, the bearer of a let- ter from the authorities, stating that the Spanish ves- sel, about ten o’clock that morning, came up within gunshot of New Castle, and there anchored, with a spring on her cable. The tide, together with a calm, being against her, she was prevented getting nearer to that town, and as the people opened fire upon her, she weighed, and by her boats was towed “stern foremost, giving three Huzzas & one Gunn, hoisted Spanish Colours, & went down the River again.” Council desired Capt. Ballet, commander of the sloop- of-war “Otter,” to go down the bay and engage the privateer, but that officer stated that he had an en- counter with a large French ship, in which his vessel had received such damage that required her to be hoved down for repairs.*. The Spanish privateer, un- molested, remained in the bay for some time, during which she made prizes of a number of vessels. The result of the alarm, however, was to arouse the public to the necessity of organization; hence the bodies known as Associators, which had been called into existence during the previous December by the vol- untary action of the people throughout the province, became firmly established, and the military education imparted thereby to the populace was of the utmost consequence to the patriot cause when, a quarter of a century later, the Revolutionary contest was forced upon the colonies. The following is the list of the officers of the two Associate Regiments of Chester County in 1747-48 :° 2Ib., p. 234. 1 Colonial Records, vol, v. p. 127. 3 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. ii. p. 682. 4 Colonial Records, vol. v. pp. 248, 252, 253, 256, 260, 261, 263, 264. 5 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. ii. p. 506. 3 Captain David Parry. Lieutenant Isaac Davy. Ensign Nathaniel Davies. Captain Roger Hunt. Lieutenant Guyon Moore. Ensign William Littles. Captain George Ashton. Lieutenant Robert Morrell. Ensign Edward Pearce. Captain William McKnight. Lieutenant Robert Anderson. Eusign Samuel Love. Captain Moses Dickey. Lieutenant John Boyd. Ensign James Montgomery. Captain Richard Richardson. Lieutenant John Cuthbert. Ensign John Hambright. Captain John Williamson. Lieutenant James McMakin. Ensign John Johnson. Captain John Mathers. Lieutenant James Mathers, Ensign Joseph Talbert. Captain James Hunter. Lieutenant Charles Moore. Ensign Benjamin Weatherby. Captain John Miller. Lieutenant George Bently. Ensign Thomas Brown. Captain William Clinton. Lieutenant Morris Thomas. Ensign William Carr. Captain Thomas Hubert, Jr. Lieutenant John Rees. Ensign Anthony Richard. Captain George Leggitt. Lieutenant Thomas Leggitt. Ensign Archibald Young. Captain Job Rushton. Lieutenant Joseph Smith. Ensign James Dysart. Captain Andrew McDowell. Lieutenant John Cunningham. Ensign George McCullough. Captain John McCall. Lieutenant John Culbertson. Ensign James Scott. Captain George Taylor: Lieutenant John Vaugn. Ensign Robert Awl. Captain James Graham. Lieutenant William Darlington. Ensign Francis Gardner. Captain Robert Grace. Lieutenant John Kent. Ensign Jacob Free. Captain Hugh Kilpatrick. Lieutenant William Buchanan. Ensign William Cumming. Captain William Bell. Lieutenant Robert McMullen. Ensign Rowland Parry. Captain Joseph Wilson. Lieutenant James Cochran. Ensign Joseph Parke. Captain Henry Glassford. Lieutenant Robert Allison. Ensign John Emmitt, Captain William Boyd. Lieutenant John Culbertson. Ensign John Donald. Captain William Reed. Lieutenant Thomas Hope. Ensign Thomas Clarke. Captain William Porter. Lieutenant Robert Mackey. Ensign John Smith. In the autumn of the year 1748 a general sickness prevailed throughout the province. Kalm records that ‘‘ the disease was so violent that when it attacked a person he seldom lived above two or three days, and of those who were taken ill with it very few recovered. It was a true pleurisy, but it had a peculiarity with it, for it commonly began with a difficulty of swallow- ing.” ... “The physicians did not know what to make of it, nor how to remedy it.”® In 1751 the act of Parliament,’ which, as its title stated, was to regulate the commencement of the year and to correct the calendar then in use, was adopted. By its provisions Wednesday, the 2d day of Septem- ber, 1751, was followed by Thursday, the 14th day of the same month, and as the act was intended to equal- ize the style in Great Britain, Ireland, and the colo- nies with that used in other countries in Europe, it was necessary that the Society of Friends should take action on so important a change. Hence the records of Chester Monthly Meeting respecting this altera- tion in style, as transcribed by Dr. Smith,® are here given entire: 6 Kalm’s Travels, vol. i. pp. 376, 377. 8 Hist. of Delaware Co., pp. 261, 262. 7 24 Geo, IT., vu. 23,1751. 34 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. “ Agreed that as by the late Act of Parliament for regulating the com- mencement of the year, that it is ordered that the first day of the Elev- euth month next shall be deemed the first day of the year 1752, and that the month called January shall be successively called the first month of the year, and not the month called March, as heretofore hath been our method of computing. “That from and after the time above mentioned, the Eleventh month, called January, shall thenceforth be deomed and reckoned the First month in the year, be so styled in aJl the records and writings of Friends, instead of computing from the month called March, according to our present practice, and Friends are recommended to go on with the names of the fullowing months, numerically, according to our practice from the beginning, so that the months may be called and written as follows: That Janu&ry be called and written the First month, and February called and written the Second month, and soon. All other methods of com- puting and calling of the months unavoidably leads into contradiction. “And whereas, for the more regular computation of time, the same act directs that in the month now called September, which will be in the year 1752, after the second day of the said month, eleven numerical days shall be omitted, and that which would have been the third day shall be reckoned and esteemed the 14th day of the said month, and that which otherwise would have been the fourth day of the said month, must be deemed the 15th, and so on. It appears likewise necessary Friends should conform themselves to this direction, and omit the nom- inal days accordingly.” In 1758 the French and Indian war was actually begun by a direct violation of good faith on the part of the French, and the struggle then inaugurated, although Great Britain did not declare war until 1755, finally terminated in the white standard of France giving place to the red-crossed banner of St. George throughout that vast territory now known as British North America. When, in the summer of 1755, Gen. Braddock took up the line of march for Fort Du Quesne, there was but one impression in all the Eng- lish provinces, and that was that victory was already assured to his arms. We know that on May 28, 1755, the justices, sheriffs, and constables of the counties of Philadelphia, Chester, Berks, and Bucks were notified that sixty wagons were required for the use of Brad- dock’s army, and that, if possible, they should be pro- cured without harsh measures before the 8th day of June following, but if they were not willingly fur- nished they must be impressed. It is, however, very doubtful whether any soldier from the then county of Chester was present at the fatal field of the Monon- gahela,’ but when the news of the crushing defeat 1 Andrew Wallace (better known as Sergt. Wallace, of Wayne’s Bridge), in a sketch of his life published in Hazard’s Register, vol. xiii. p. 53, says, ‘ About the 1st of May, 1754, I entered as a volunteer at Chester, and was appointed orderly sergeant in a company commanded by Capt. Jobn Hannum.” (This was about the commencement of what was termed the French war.) The company before referred to became a part of the regiment under the command of Col. Charles Dack, of Virginia. “We were afterwards marched from Chester to the Gum-Tree Tavern, in Chester County, and from thence to Carlisle, where we were placed under the command of Maj. Samuel Hughs. From the last-mentioned place we were marched to Fort Chambers, now Chambersburg ; from thence to Fort Louden, to join the troops raised, and to be commanded by Gen. Forbes, whose division was a part of the army commanded by Gen. Braddock, in the year 1755, as no part of the immediate command of Gen. Forbes was in that engagement.” This statement was made by Wallace in 1833, when he was a petitiouer for a pension, and he stated he was one hundred and four years old. The aged veteran was possibly in error in his date. He may have been in Forbes’ expedition in 1758, but Forbes was not with Braddock in 1755, At the time Wallace places Hannum in command of a company the latter officer was not fourteen years of age. which made famous the rash, overbearing English gen- eral, who purchased with his life posthumous renown, came to astound the colonists as greatly as it amazed the English nation, many a young man from this locality enrolled himself in the hastily-recruited com- pany which, commanded by Capt. Isaac Wayne, was sent into Northampton County to guard the frontier inhabitants from threatened Indian attacks,’ as also in that commanded by Capt. George Aston.? When, in the summer of 1758, Brig.-Gen. John Forbes took command of the troops collected to reduce Fort Du Quesne, in not a few instances the garb of the peaceful Society of Friends gave place to the dark-scarlet coat, faced with blue, the uniform of the Royal Americans, or the fringed huntirg-shirt of the Pennsylvania Pro- vincial. Dr. Smith* records that no less than eight young men in full membership with Radnor Meeting went into active military service in 1756, and were disowned by the society because of that open viola- tion of its rules. After Braddock’s defeat, so in- tense was the feeling in Chester County * among the masses that on Nov. 24, 1755, a letter was read in Council from Col. William Moore, informing the Gov- ernor that two thousand of the inhabitants of that locality were prepared to march to Philadelphia to compel the Assembly to pass laws providing for the defense of the province. As at the same meeting a letter from Mr. Weiser, of Berks County, of a like import, was read, the Governor issued orders to the authorities in Philadelphia to take proper precautions to preserve the public peace. Subsequently Moore’s letter played a prominent part in the legislative and gubernatorial quarrels of that day, which, being more particularly the history of the State, requires no further mention in this work. In 1755 the English nation suffered a disgrace far greater than defeat to her arms, and that was the vio- lent expatriation of the French Neutrals, or, as after- wards called, ‘“ Acadian exiles,” from Nova Scotia. These unfortunates were the descendants of French parentage, and by the treaty of Utrecht, in 1718, Great Britain had stipulated that these people should retain their lands on taking the oath of allegiance to the English king, and were not to be required to bear arms against the Indians or the French. For nearly half a century both parties adhered to the terms of the treaty, but in 1755 the love of their ancient country animated a few of the Acadian young men to enlist under the standard of France, and at the capture of Beau Sejour three hundred were found in arms. A number of these, however, were unwilling soldiers, forced into the ranks. Governor Lawrence, of Nova Scotia, thereupon demanded of the whole population, amounting to over seven thousand souls, including 2Col. Samuel Miles’ Manuscript, Feb. 4, 1802: Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. ii. p. 517. 3 Futhey and Cope's “ History of Chester County,” p. 51. 4 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 264, 5 Colonial Records, vol. vi. p. 729. THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 35 those who had not been in arms, to take the oath of allegiance to the British monarchy unconditionally. This being refused, because it was a violation of the treaty, Lawrence expelled the Acadians from Nova Scotia, confiscated their property (excepting their money and household goods), burned their dwellings, and wasted their estates. In this wantonly cruel act husbands and wives, parents and children, were torn apart and transported to different parts of the British American colonies, while the vessels which carried them were so crowded that many died on the voyage. On Aug. 11, 1755, Governor Lawrence wrote to Gov- ernor Morris, of Pennsylvania, that he had shipped one hundred and sixty-eight men, women, and chil- dren to the latter province.! This letter, which was brought by the vessels on which the Acadians came, was received November 19th, and Council immedi- ately commanded that a guard should be placed over the ship to prevent the landing of the exiles, but fresh provisions and necessaries were ordered to be delivered on board, and continued to be sent until Council de- termined what should be done with these people. On the 25th of the same month Governor Morris, by message, informed the Assembly that he had the French Neutrals landed at Providence Island, as the doctor had reported that it would be dangerous to have them remain longer in the crowded vessel.® Early in December it was officially reported that in the ships ‘“‘ Hannah,” “‘ Three Friends,” and “Swan” four hundred and fifty-four out of the five hundred French Neutrals assigned to Pennsylvania had been received at Providence Island. Governor Morris, touched at the wrongs these unhappy exiles had suf- fered, strove earnestly to reunite those families which had been separated in transportation. On Feb. 20, 1756, the Assembly passed an act dispersing the Aca- dians in the several counties of Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, and Lancaster, and making provision for their maintenance.° By the act three commissioners were appointed in each of the counties named to dis- tribute the Acadians among the people, locating only one family in a township, and to have a supervisory care over them. Nathaniel Pennock, Nathaniel Grubb, and John Hannum were the commissioners named for Chester County. The Governor failing to approve the bill promptly, on March 3d a committee from the Assembly waited on him to know what “ he had done” with it, and on the 5th he signed it. When the law was attempted to be enforced, the Neutrals claimed to be prisoners of war, but Governor Morris and Council, after considerable delay, decided, six months subsequent to the promulgation of the act, that under the treaty of Utrecht they were subjects of Great Britain. Jan. 14, 1757, an additional act was approved, empowering the binding out and settling of 1 Colonial Records, vol. vi. p. 711. 3 Ib., p. 729. 5 Ib,, vol. vii. pp. 14, 15. 2Ib., p. 713. 4Ib., p. 45. 6Ib., pp. 239, 240, 241, the Acadians under age, and providing for the main- tenance of their aged, sick, and maimed at the ex- pense of the province. The unfortunate people, feel- ing the injustice that had been visited on them, having lost heart and refusing to work, were soon in the utmost want. One week subsequent to the passage of the law just mentioned, William Griffith informed Council that unless something was immediately done many of the French Neutrals would perish. Already death had been busy among them, for shortly after they landed more than one-half of them had died." On March 21, 1757, Governor Denny caused the arrest of five of the Neutrals at the request of Lord Low- doun, two in the city of Philadelphia, one in Frank- ford, ‘‘ Paul Bujaud in Chester, and Jean Landy in Darby,” because they were ‘suspicious and evil- minded persons, and have and each of them hath at divers Times uttered menacing speeches against his majesty and his liege subjects, and behaved in a very disorderly manner.”* No wonder; for surely the poor men who were thrown in jail in Philadelphia had every reason to utter menacing speeches against the Hanoverian scoundrel who then sat on the throne of Great Britain. In Chester, before the act author- izing the overseers of the poor in the several townships to bind out the children of the Acadians, the former officials had in many cases refused to receive the ex- iles or minister to their wants, hence many of the latter had died with smallpox; but after the law of Jan. 14, 1757, became operative the condition of the Neutrals was considerably improved. The burden of their support, however, aroused the taxpayers of that day, and when four years later it was found that seven thousand pounds had been expended in the support of the exiles, a committee of the Assembly was appointed to inquire into the condition of these people, and to ascertain whether the cost of their maintenance could not be lessened. It was, after investigation, reported that the reason their children had not been bound out to service was mainly owing to the religious opinions of their parents, who feared that their offspring might be surrounded with objectional influences in the fami- lies of the English settlers or their descendants. The result of the report was finally the repeal of the law providing for the support of these exiles. The glamour of Longfellow’s genius has made the wrongs of these Acadians more familiar to the popular mind than any of the many harsh and unjustifiable acts of ministerial minions in American colonial history, but to the stu- dent, the story of the banishment of these ignorant French people is a mere incident, the happening of which had little or no influence in shaping the direc- tion of events. Even at that time among the Northern colonies the impression was being made on some thoughtful minds that at no distant day there would be an absolute separation from the mother-country. 7 Gordon’s “ History of Pennsylvania,” p. 500. 8 Colonial Records, vol. vii. p. 446, 36 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. In the summer of 1758, Brig.-Gen. John Forbes, as before stated, with three hundred and fifty Royal Americans, twelve hundred (thirteen companies) of Montgomery’s Highlanders, twenty-six hundred Vir- ginians, and twenty-seven hundred Pennsylvania Pro- vincials, besides a thousand wagoners,' set out from Philadelphia intending the reduction of Fort Du Quesne. Capt. John Hasslet, of New Castle County, recruited a company on the Delaware River, and the roll shows that Chester County contributed at least the following persons to the ranks? of this organiza- tion: Peter Allen, enlisted May 7, born in Chester Co., aged 22, and by oc- cupation a saddler. William Boggs, enlisted May 6, born in Chester Co., aged 40. James Brieslin, enlisted May 12, born in Chester Co., aged 17. ‘6 Edward Gallagher, enlisted May 12, born in Chester Co., aged 17, Thomas Harvey, enlisted May 12, born in Chester Co., aged 17. John McAfee, enlisted May 8, born in Chester Co., aged 21, and by occupation a laborer. James Thomas, enlisted May 8, born in Chester Co., aged 22, and by occupation a laborer. Samuel White, enlisted May 10, born in Chester Co., aged 26. In the same month and year Capt. John Singleton enlisted a company of soldiers for Forbes’ expedi- tion. The list of that organization shows that the following men were certainly from Chester County, and probably the number from this locality was greater than here represented :* William Henry, aged 22, resident of Chester, Pa., drummer. Samuel Armitage, aged 27, resident of Chester, Pa. William Bevard, aged 28, resident of Chester, Pa., weaver. Thomas Callican, aged 20, resident of Chester, Pa. Thomas Connolly, aged 17, resident of Chester, Pa. John Cross, aged 25, resident in Chester, Pa., cordwainer, “ pock- pitt’d,” “stout made.” John Cruthers, aged 16, resideut of Chester, Pa. Hugh Davis, aged 20, resident of Chester, Pa., smith. William Foster, aged 25, resident of Chester, Pa. William Kennedy, aged 25, resident of Chester, Pa., weaver. John Long, aged 24, resident of Chester, Pa. Edward McSorley, aged 22, resident of Chester, Pa. Terence Kealy, aged 35, residing in Chester, Pa., “ pock-pitt’d.” John Richeson, aged 27, residing in Chester, Pa., “cocke nose and smooth faced.” Patrick Roe, aged 22, residing in Chester, Pa., ‘‘ bold looking.” John Shannon, aged 23, residing in Chester, Pa., chandler, “ Irish- man.” Edward Sheppard, aged 21, residing in Chester, Pa., “red hair and thin visaged.”” David Way, aged 24, residing in Chester, Pa., tanner. Coupland David. Besides these organizations there was a company of Pennsylvania Rifles under Capt. West, an elder brother of Benjamin West, the painter,‘ who was present with his command when, on Nov. 25, 1758, the standard of Great Britain floated over the blackened | 1 Penna. Gazette, 1758, No. 1553. Winthrop Sargent, in his“ History of Braddock’s Expedition,” page 270, make a difference in the number of men in Forbes’ command. He places the Virginia troops at sixteen hundred men. 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. ii. p. 551. 3 Ib., p. 553. 4 Sargeut’s “ History of Braddock’s Expedition,” p. 274. Mr. Sargent cites, in reference to the search of Sir Peter Halket for the remains of his father, slain in Braddock’s defeat,a statement that the English nobleman was accompanied by Capt. West. Galt’s “ Life of West,” p. 65, and charred remains of the Fortress Du Quesne, and when the general, who had sworn the day previous to carry the works or leave his body beneath its walls, christened the heap of ruins Fort Pitt. The army having retraced its steps, the government the follow- ing year determined to rebuild the dismantled fortifi- cation, or to erect a new one on its site. Brig.-Gen., John Stanwick was placed in charge of this expedi- tion, he having, on the death of Gen. Forbes, suc- ceeded to the command. Troops were ordered to be enlisted, and on May 4, 1759, Gen. Stanwick gave notice that a number of wagons would be required, and in order to avoid the impressment of horses or wagons, a certain rate of compensation had been fixed by the authorities, which would be paid to those persons who would willingly furnish teams. From the county of Chester sixty-four wagons and four times as many horses were required.® In the same locality a number of men enlisted, and doubtless the whole company recruited by Capt. John Mather, Jr.,® was credited to Chester County, because Mather him- self was a resident of the borough of Chester, and the following men certainly resided in that neighbor- hood: John Gorsel, aged 16, of Chester, Pa., enlisted June 8, 1759, laborer. Evan Jones, aged 38, of Chester, Pa., enlisted May 27, 1759, laborer. Jacob Kirgan, aged 19, of Chester, Pa., enlisted May 27, 1759, weaver. Hugh Wallace, aged 17, of Chester, Pa., enlisted June 12, 1759, shoe- maker, In Capt. Robert Boyd’s company appear the fol- lowing persons who were undoubtedly residents of Chester County : James Campbell, aged 22, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted June 13, laborer. James Darragh, aged 20, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 11, laborer. Samuel Fillson, aged 18, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted June 6, tailor. James Hamilton, aged 21, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 21, laborer. George Matthews, aged 18, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted June 2, laborer. Robert Sandford, aged 23, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 25, laborer. John Small, aged 22, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 1, laborer. John Travers, aged 20, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 14, tailor. John Willson, aged 20, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 7, tailor. In Capt. James Armstrong’s company from Chester County were William Moore, aged 17, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted May 9, hatter by trade. : James Parr, aged 16, resides in Chester, Pa,, enlisted May 9, laborer. In Capt. Jacob Richardson’s company, Third Bat- talion provincial service, under command of Gover- nor William Denny, appears the following : William Cassiday, aged 21, resides in Chester, Pa., enlisted Aug. 20, carpenter, These are all the persons which can absolutely be designated as belonging to Chester County, but the 5 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. iii. p. 628. 6 Ib., 2d series, vol. ii. p, 588. THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 37 foregoing is but a very small part of the men who en- listed from this locality. The wagons required by Gen. Stanwix, so far at least as Chester County was concerned, seem not to have been forthcoming, for on Aug. 18, 1759, he wrote to the Governor from Bedford, complaining that Lan- caster County was the most backward, but that “ Bucks and Chester have given us only Nominal Assistance, by sending us impressed Waggons, unfit for this Ser- vice, by the Weakness of the Horses and Carriages. The Managers meet with more opposition in these two Counties than in any of the others, as the Magis- trates seem unwilling to disoblige them; and unless they are spurred by the fear of incurring your Dis- pleasure, I am afraid they will not exert their Au- thority in such a manner as will Answer the Pur- pose.” Notwithstanding the constant assertion of Gen. Stanwix, the number of horses and wagons furnished by Chester County, according to the account-book of Roger Hunk,’ was not inconsiderable, particularly when we consider that the expedition really was of little moment in the shaping of events, and was use- ful only in that it made permanent the settlement then first called Pittsburgh. The history of the province at this period is exceed- ing interesting, but, strange as it may appear, for almost a decade no event of sufficient importance to impress itself on the fleeting years seems to have oc- curred in our county. The French war, which was most honorable to the colonial arms, was approaching its conclusion, and in 1761, after the subjugation of Canada was complete, the whole of the provincial forces raised by Pennsylvania were discharged, except- ing one hundred and fifty men. Considerable alarm was felt along the Delaware and at Philadelphia when the intelligence was received that about the beginning of the year (January 4th) 1762 Great Britain had de- clared war against Spain. The defenseless condition .of the city of Philadelphia, its wealth and importance, it was feared would attract the combined naval power of France and Spain to attempt its capture, therefore the Assembly, which had been hastily convened, appro- | priated twenty-three thousand five hundred pounds, the parliamentary allotment for 1759,’ to the defense of the city, and also voted five thousand pounds to erect a fort mounting twenty guns on Mud Island, at the site of the present Fort Mifflin. However, the prov- ince breathed more freely when, in January, 1763, news was received that on the 3d of November, 1762, peace had been proclaimed with both France and Spain. In 1765 we find that no less than three lotteries were authorized by the Legislature for the benefit of churches within the territory of the present county of 1 Colonial Records, vol. viii. p. 376. 2 Futhey and Cope’s “ History of Chester County,” pp. 54-58. 8 Gordon's “ History of Pennsylvania,” p. 393. 4 Delaware, viz.: St. Paul’s, at Chester; St. John’s, at Concord; and St. Martin’s, at Marcus Hook. 1768 “was a year of jubilee* for our good people, for the commissioners and assessors, after inspecting into the affairs of the county, “find no necessity for raising a tax this year.” The power and wealth exhibited by the colonies during the French war amazed the home government, hence Mr. Grenville, in his desire to relieve the press- ure of taxation at home,—the result of that war,—as well as to personally acquire reputation as a shrewd financier, proposed to raise a revenue from the col- onies for the direct use of the British treasury. The scheme was not devoid of arguments to commend it to a debt-ridden people, yet the history of the prov- inces ought to have clearly demonstrated that such a measure would be met with determined resistance. The decided stand taken by the latter in 1754, when a plan for colonial taxation was suggested, should have fully indicated the temper of the people, who, when- ever called on, had freely contributed pecuniary aid to the king by a vote of the Assembly, but who had always denied the right of the English Parliament to levy taxes on the provinces unless the latter had rep- resentation in the home legislative bodies. And per- haps no more objectionable form could the duties be made to assume than that which levied a tax on colonial imports, which resulted in almost destroying the colonial trade with the Spanish and French West India islands. It is unnecessary for me to discuss further this topic of colonial taxation, the resistance to which finally culminated in the Revolutionary war, and subsequently the formation of the United States as a nation. It seems that Chester was the outpost where the customs officer was stationed to board vessels and pre- vent violations of the revenue laws. We learn that on Saturday afternoon, Nov. 23, 1771, about four o’clock, Alban Davis, who was attached to the cus- tom-house schooner then lying off Chester, noticed several vessels coming up the river, among the num- ber a light brig and a pilot-boat. Capt. Thomas Mus- kett, of the revenue cutter, boarded the pilot-boat, and signaled the schooner to come alongside. The crew on the pilot-boat then stated they wished to go down the river, which brought the inquiry from the officer what was their cargo, and the command to open the hatches or he would seize the vessel. Those in charge of the craft being insolent, the officer ‘ put the broad arrow on the boat’s mast.” Whereupon the captain of the latter said that, as he had no further business on the vessel, he would go ashore. The rev- enue cutter and her prize, lashed together, had sailed up abreast of Red Bank, when the ebb-tide compelled them to anchor. Shortly before ten o’clock that even- ing, a pilot-boat coming down the river stood directly for the government schooner, when Capt. Muskett 4 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 274. 38 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. ordered them to keep off or he would fire at them, and was answered that he might fire and be damned, the river was as free to them as the cutter. Bearing down, the pilot-boat came alongside, when a man leveled a blunderbuss at Capt. Muskett, and gave him the choice to surrender or have his brains blown out. Even be- fore the captain could make the selection about thirty men, armed with cutlasses and clubs, boarded the schooner, knocked down the captain and two of his men, and threw them into the hold, then fastened down the hatches. The captors ran the schooner ashore, cut her rigging and sails to pieces, and, un- lashing the prize, sailed away with it. On December 5th Governor Richard Penn issued a proclamation, offering a free pardon to any one who should give in- formation by whom the act was done.’ But nothing was learned of the men who had thus boldly set the law at defiance. The Navigation Act, which interdicted colonial trade with foreign nations, compelling the purchase of all goods from England directly, as before stated, aroused 1 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. iv. p. 445; Colonial Records, vol. x. pp. 8-14. To show the unpopularity with which the custom-house offi- cers were regarded, even among that class of the colonists whose feelings leaned towards the doctrine that the king could do no wrong, the fol- lowing case is a good example: On Wednesday afternoon, Feb. 8, 1775, Francis Welsh, in a boat with four men, boarded the schooner “ Isabella” off Gloucester Point, and was told that the vessel was in ballast from Portsmouth, New England, whereupon the officer ordered the hatches to be removed. Capt.John Ritchey drew a pistol, declaring the first man who should attempt to search the schooner “he would blow to h—1l.” The pilot wanting to be put ashore, Officer Welsh remarked that no man should leave the vessel, but Ritchey ordered a boat manned, and the pilot was landed. Ritchey subsequently told Welsh that the schooner belonged to Capt. David Campbell, who was the sole owner, and every dollar he had in the world was in her and the cargo, which consisted of dry goods and other dutiable or contraband articles from Dunkirk, France. Welsh was permitted to look around the cabin, and saw, among other things subject to impost duties, thirty pounds of tea. That night, about nine o’clock, Capt. Campbell, the pilot, and two gen- tlemen came aboard, but the latter went away, and about an hour later three other gentlemen boarded the boat, who told the officer that he ought not to pursue Capt. Campbell, for it would ruin him. They of- fered Welsh twenty-five guineas, and promised him more if he would let the vessel go. About two o’clock at night Welsh formally seized the “Isabella” in the king's name, and ordered his men to take the helm. Upon this Campbell said the king never paid for her, aud, drawing a pistol, put it to the pilot's head, swearing that if he did not run the ves- sel down the river without putting her ashore he would killhim. On the next ebb-tide the schooner was abreast of Chester. Welsh aud Campbell went ashore to get something to eat, and while in the town the officer inquired for a justice of the peace. He went to Francis Rich- ardson, but he was ill, and afterwards to Henry Hale Graham, whose sympathies leaned towards the crown, but he told Welsh that he had no authority to go on board any vessel. Welsh then called on Sheriff Ver- non, the most pronounced loyalist in the county, and the latter stated he would go and summon some men to aid him, but he never came with the posse comitatus, and Welsh again boarded the boat, which, on the ebb, weighed anchor and got to New Castle before the tide changed. Here the officer tried to get assistance, but all the local authorities there begged to be excused. Welsh clung to the “Isabella” until she got within five miles of the Capes, when Capt. Ritchey ordered him and his men into their buat, and they were compelled at midnight to row for shore, which they reached after three hours’ constant work. The col- lector of customs complained to the Governor and Council against the magistrates who had refused to aid his officer, but he was informed that the jurisdiction of any county in the province did not extend to the river, and magistrates therefore could not legally give any assistance in these cases. See Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 230, a storm of indignation, but the right of Parliament to regulate commerce was not questioned ; hence the colonists could only retaliate by adopting the noted non-importation agreement. The Stamp Act and its subsequent repeal, in this locality as elsewhere, in- voked popular resentment, and the line of demarka- tion between the ultra Whigs and the Loyalists became every month more distinct. In 1770 the act of 1767, imposing a duty on glass, paper, painters’ colors, and tea imported into the colonies, was repealed, save the threepence per pound tax on tea. The colonists, strictly adhering to their determination to use no goods on which the detested duty was collected, modi- fied the non-importation agreement so that it applied to tea only. In 1773 but little had been imported into America, and the East India Company, which had then on hand nearly seventeen million pounds of tea, was permitted to export that commodity into any part of the world free of duty ; hence, to the colonists, tea, even with the threepence tax, would be much cheaper than ever before, since the export duty of sixpence per pound was removed. The principle, however, of taxation without representation was still involved, and the colonists were violently excited, particularly when it was learned that the East India Company consented to ship cargoes to America only on the as- surance of the British government that they should at least suffer no loss. The indignation consequent on this new attempt of Lord North to enforce the ob- noxious duty was resisted at every port where tea-ships were consigned, and while in New England the de- struction of the tea in the harbor of Boston on the night of Dec. 16, 1773, was more dramatic in its cir- cumstances than the action taken by Philadelphia and the Whig populace along the Delaware River, the feel- ing of resistance was not more intense than at the latter place. In Philadelphia a public meeting of citizens was held in State-House yard on Oct. 16, 1778, when it was declared ‘“ that whoever shall directly or indi- rectly countenance this attempt (to send out the tea), or in any way aid or abet in unloading, receiving, or vending the tea sent . . . while it remains subject to the payment of a duty here, is an enemy to the coun- try,” and strong measures were determined on to re- sist the landing of any tea in Philadelphia. On Nov. 29, 1778, Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet announced,— “The ship ‘ Polly,’ Capt. Ayres, from London for this port, left Graves- end on the 27th of September with the detested Tra on board, and is hourly expected.” The excitement consequent on this brief news item was intense. On December 5th a committee was appointed to inquire the cause of the sudden and extraordinary rise in the price of tea, and the report made eight days after was not calculated to appease the popular indignation. The air was filled with rumors of the arrival of the “Polly,” which proving prema- ture, only added to the public anxiety and suspense. On Saturday (Christmas) the tea-ship “Polly” ar- rived at Chester, she having followed another ship up THE COLONIAL HISTORY TO THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 39 the river, for no pilot would dare, in the heated con- dition of the people’s mind, to bring that vessel to the city. The Whigs of Chester, as soon as they were convinced that the ship was lying off that town, dis- patched a messenger post-haste to Philadelphia to announce the long-expected but unwelcome news. When he arrived, during the evening of that day, Gilbert Barclay, one of the consignees of the ship, who was a passenger in the vessel, had also gone to Philadelphia by post, and early the next morning he was waited on by acommittee, who urged his renuncia- tion of the commission so warmly that he deemed it the wisest plan to accede to their demands. This being accomplished, the committee appointed three of their number to go to Chester, and two others to Gloucester Point, to have an interview with Capt. Ayres, and acquaint him with the public feeling re- specting his voyage and the cargo with which the vessel was ladened. The three gentlemen who had set out for Chester, when some distance below the city, were informed that the “Polly” at noon had weighed anchor, and was on her way to her port of destination. They, therefore, returned to the city. About two o’clock she appeared in sight at Gloucester Point, where, as the news had spread in all directions, a large crowd had gathered. When the vessel came sufficiently near she was hailed, and Capt. Ayres re- quested to come on shore. This he did, and, the people dividing so as to form a lane, he was con- ducted to the members of the committee, who repre- sented to him the general feeling and the danger to him personally if he refused to comply with the pop- ular demand. They also requested him to go with them to Philadelphia, where he could learn fully the temper and resolution of the masses. The next morn- ing eight thousand people gathered in the State-House yard, when it was resolved that the tea should not be landed; that the vessel should not be reported or entered at the custom-house; that the tea must be taken back to England immediately; that a pilot must take charge of the ‘ Polly,” and on the next high-water take her to Reedy Island; that Capt. Ayres could stay a day in town to procure supplies for his return voyage; that he then should go to the vessel and put tosea immediately. On Tuesday, after being in the town forty-six hours, Capt. Ayres left the city where he had been so inhospitably received, and like a prudent man sailed for London, where he re- ported the unsatisfactory result of his voyage. On Feb. 5, 1774, Earl Dartmouth wrote to Governor Penn, that “the Insult that has been offered to this Kingdom by the Inhabitants of Philadelphia, in the Case of the ‘Polly,’ Capt. Ayres, is of a very serious nature, and leads to very important consequences.” In conclusion, the earl demanded that “a Circum- stance, which at present Appears so extraordinary, should be fully explained.”? If it was, no record seems to have been preserved of that fact. 1 Penna. Archives, 1st scries, vol. iv. p. 480. In 1774, when the news of the determined resist- ance made by the colonists to the landing of the tea was received in Europe, England was greatly excited at the intelligence, and Parliament hastily enacted several bills relating to colonial matters extremely offensive in their provisions. Because of the destruc- tion of the tea in Boston harbor, the vengeance of © the ministry was particularly directed against that town, hence the law which was known as the Boston Port Bill was passed, interdicting all vessels from landing and discharging, or of landing and shipping wares and merchandise at that port. As soon as these acts were promulgated in the colonies, a storm of de- nunciation and defiance swept across the land. Staid, dignified Philadelphia even yielded to the tempest, and on Saturday, June 18, 1774, at a large meeting of the leading citizens of that city, was passed a series of resolutions, among which was a call for the holding of a Continental Congress, and instructing the com- mittee thus appointed to take steps necessary to have the province of Pennsylvania represented in the pro- posed assemblage. Rev. Dr. William Smith, Provost of the University of Pennsylvania, who addressed that gathering, in his calm, dispassionate remarks, with prophetic vision saw that the business’ they were then about meant “ perhaps nothing less than whether the breach with the country from which we descended shall be irreparably widened.” On June 28th, the com- mittee sent a circular letter to every county in the province, particularly urging the appointment of a committee in the several counties to assemble in Phil-. adelphia on Friday, the 15th of July, to meet the com- mittee from the whole province. This letter was ad- dressed to Francis Richardson, Elisha Price, and Henry Hayes, of Chester County, who by a peculiar coincidence issued the following call for a meeting of the people of the county on the day which two years afterwards was to become one of the most memorable in the world’s history : “ To the Freeholders and others, inhabitants of the County of Chester, qualified by lew to vote for Representatives in General Assembly. “GENTLEMEN : “The large and very respectable committee for the City and County of Philadelphia have wrote to us, the subscribers, requesting that a committee might be chosen for this county as soon as possible, to meet the committee from the otber Counties of this province, at the city of Philadelphia on the 15th day of this instant, to deliberate on matters of the greatest weight and importance, not only to us, but to all America. And we are now assured, that on the account of the Indian disturbances his Honor—the Governor—has found it necessary to call the Assembly to meet, in their legislative capacity, on Monday the 28th of this instant ; and we also find, that it is not only the opinion and request of the said committee for Philadelphia, but also the opinion and desire of a number of respectable persons of this county coinciding with our own opinions, as lovers of civil and religious liberty, that the committee of the several counties of this province should meet at Philadelphia, on the said 15th of this instant, in order to assist in framing instructions, and preparing such matters as may be proper to recommend to our representatives, at this meeting the Monday following. “We have therefore thought proper on mature deliberation and by the advice of a number of gentlemen of this county, to appoint Wed- nesday, the 13th instant. at one o'clock in the afternoon, asa proper time for the inhabitants of this county to meet at the Court-House in Chester, to choose a number of our best and wisest men as a committee for this 40 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. county, as shall be judged necessary to meet the other committees, at | the time and place above mentioned, for the purpose aforesaid, and for such other purposes as may then be deemed useful and necessary. And | we sincerely hope that the good people of this county will give their | attendance on that day, and calmly and heartily join with [us] in doing the business proposed, which we earnestly wish and desire may answer the good proposed, and the good purposes intended by it. “ CuesTER, July 4, 1774.” The following is the record of the proceedings of the meeting: “At a meeting of a very respectable number of the freebolders and others, inhabitants of the county of Chester, at the court-house, on Wednesday, the 13th of July, 1774, in consequence of public notice for that purpose given, Francis Richardson, Esq., chairman,— “This Assembly, taking into their serious consideration the present critical aud alarming situation of American affairs and the unhappy differences now subsisting between Great Britain and her colonies, do agree and resolve, as follows, viz.: “1, That the inhabitants of this county do owe and will pay all due faith and allegiance to our lawful and rightful sovereign lord, George the Third, king of Great Britain and the dominions thereunto be- longing. _ “2, That it is an absolute right, inherent in every English subject, to have free use, enjoyment, and disposal of all his property, either by him- self or representatives, and that no other power on earth can legally divest him of it. “3, That the act of Parliament lately passed for shutting up the port of Boston is unconstitutional, oppressive to the inhabitants of that town, in its consequences dangerous to the liberties of the British colonies; and that, therefore, we consider our brethren at Boston as suffering in the common cause of America. “4, That the protection of the liberties of America is an indispensable duty, which we owe to ourselves who enjoy them, to our ancestors who transmitted them down, and to our posterity who will claim them at our hands, as the best birthright and noblest inheritance of mankind. “5. We do agree with the Committee of the City and County of Phila- delphia, that a Congress of Deputies from the said colonies is the most profitable and proper mode of procuring relief for our suffering brethren, obtaining redress, preserving our rights and liberties, and establishing peace and mutual confidence between our mother country and her colo- nies on a constitutional foundation. ‘ “6. The inhabitants of this county ought and will cheerfully adopt, adhere to, and assist in executing all and singular such peaceable and constitutional measures, which may hereafter be agreed upon and de- termined by the said general Congress. “7, Itis our opinion that it would conduce greatly to the restoration of the liberties of America, should the colonies enter into asolemn agree- ment not to purchase any goods, wares, or merchandise imported from Great Britain, under such restrictions as be agreed upon by the Congress. We, for our parts, sensible of the great advantages which must arise from promoting economy and manufacturing among ourselves, are determined to use as little of foreign manufactures, of what kind or quality soever, as our necessities will permit, until the several acts of the British Parlia- ment, injurious to American liberty, be repealed. “8. That, as our brethren at Boston are now suffering in the cause of America, it is the duty of the inhabitants of this county, in common with the neighboring colonies, generously to contribute towards their support; and, therefore, the Committee hereafter appointed are re- quested immediately to open and set on foot a subscription for the said sufferers, and the money arising therefrom to be laid out and expended as the said committee, or a majority of them, shall judge best to answer the benevolent intention. “9, That the fullowing persons, to wit: Francis Richardson, Elisha Price, John Hart, Anthony Wayne, John Sellers, Hugh Lloyd, William Montgomery, Francis Johnston, William Parker, Richard Riley, Thomas Hockley, Robert Mendenhall, and John Fleming, or a majority of them, be aud they are hereby appointed a committee for this county to meet and correspond with the committees of the several counties of this and the other colonies, and to join in such measures as to them shall appear necessary for the public good. “FRANCIS JOHNSTON, Clk. Com.” The provincial meeting of deputies chosen by the several counties in Pennsylvania was held at Phila- delphia, July 15, 1774, and Chester County was rep- resented thereat by Francis Richardson, Elisha Price, John Hart, Anthony Wayne, Hugh Lloyd, John Sel- lers, Francis Johnston, and Richard Riley. On the conimittee appointed to prepare and report a draught of instructions to be presented to the General Assem- bly asking that body to appoint delegates to the Con- tinental Congress, then in session, Chester County ' was represented by Elisha Price. The Assembly unani- mously concurred in the instructions and promptly appointed Joseph Galloway (their Speaker), Daniel Rhoads, Thomas Mifflin, John Morton, Charles Hum- phreys, George Ross, Edward Biddle, and (at a subse- quent meeting) John Dickinson the delegates from Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress to be held at Philadelphia on the 5th day of September follow- ing. Of these, two—Morton and Humphreys—were resident within the present county of Delaware. After agreeing to the Declaration of Rights Con- gress remained in session nearly eight weeks, having, on October 18th, adopted articles of confederation, signed two days thereafter, which date, Oct. 20, 1775, the late distinguished orator, Henry Armitt Brown, maintained should be accepted as the commencement of the American Union, based upon freedom and equality. On the 26th of October, after adopting an address to the people of Great Britain, a memorial to the inhabitants of British America,—the Canadian provinces,—and a loyal address to the king, the body adjourned to meet at Philadelphia, May 10, 1775. Before that Congress again assembled, in less than six months after it had adjourned, the April gales, as Patrick Henry had foreseen, sweeping from the North carried to the ears of the long-suffering colonists the clash of resounding arms, the last appeal had been made, and the Revolutionary struggle had actually begun. CHAPTER VII. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. THE thoughtful men of that period who stopped in the midst of the popular clamor to consider the probable termination of the controversy between the mother-country and her colonies began to be alarmed at the excited temper of the public mind in both hemispheres, hence many of those persons who had been prominent in advising resistance to the arbitrary acts of Parliament, now when their reason | taught them that the absolute overthrow of the power of Great Britain in the provinces, or the abject sub- mission of the colonies, could alone set at rest the long dispute, hesitated, some retraced their steps, casting their lots with the established authority ; others, shrinking from public view, ceased to be active on either side; while yet others, believing that THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 41 man, mentally and socially, was but partially devel- oped, picturing to themselves the possibilities of a free representative government, comprehending fully the lesson of the hour, braved the issue, and boldly advocated the adoption of a then untried Utopian scheme. The great mass of the people—the majority uneducated—drifted with the day until events made them bitter partisans either for crown or Congress. When sides became radical, as a general rule, the wealthy and cultured few, afraid of change, were loyalists, while the middle classes and the poor were Whigs. The direct result of the meeting of the Continental Congress of 1774 was to intensify the feeling of the masses in opposition to the ministerial powers, the address issued by that body being so calm and dis- , passionate, but so convincing, that it found ready re- sponse in popular approval. Especially was this true of the resolution that all importations of English goods should be prohibited, and that no articles should be exported from the colonies to Great Brit- ain after December, 1776, unless béfore that time Parliament had removed the obnoxious law against which the people in America complained. In all parts of the colonies meetings were held to ratify and carry into execution the association recommended by Congress, and on Dec. 20, 1774, ‘‘a very respectable number of the inhabitants of the County of Chester convened at the Court-house in the Borough of Ches- ter,” at which the following persons were named as a committee to act for the county to that end, viz.. An- thony Wayne, Francis Johnston, Richard Riley, Evan Evans, and James Moore, Esqs.; Hugh Lloyd, Thomas Hockley, David Coupland, John Hart, Sketchley Mor- | ton, Samuel Fairlamb, David Coupland, John Crosby, Nicholas Diehl, Jesse Bonsall, Aaron Oakford, Ben- jamin Brannan, John Talbot, Joseph Brown, Samuel Price, John Crawford, John Taylor, Lewis Gronow, Ed- ward Humphreys, Henry Lawrence, Richard Thomas, William Montgomery, Persifor Frazer, Thomas Tay- Jor, John Foulke, Robert Mendenhall, Joseph Pen- nell, George Pierce, Nicholas Fairlamb, Samuel Trim- ble, Charles Dilworth, John Hannum, George Hoops, Joel Bailey, John Gilliland, Joseph Bishop, Jr., John Kerlin, Edward Jones, William Lewis, Patrick An- derson, Joshua Evans, Thomas Hartman, Dr. Bran- son van Leer, William Evans, Joseph Cowan, Thomas Haslep, Patterson Bell, Dr. Jonathan Morris, Andrew Mitchell, Thomas Buffington, James Bennett, Joseph Musgrave, William Miller, Richard Flower, Walter Finney, James Simpson, David Wherry, James Ev- ans, Thomas Bishop, William Edwards, Jonathan Vernon, Jr., Lewis Davis, Sr., Joseph Gibbons, Jr., and Thomas Evans; which committee were ‘‘to be and continue from this time until one month after the rising of the next Continental Congress, with full power to transact such business, and enter intv such associations as to them shall appear expedient.” Immediately after the committee had been selected | that body organized by the appointment of Anthony Wayne, chairman, and Francis Johnston, secretary. The following resolutions were then unanimously adopted : “1st. That any twelve or more of the said Committee, meeting upon due notice, be empowered to enter upon and transact all such business as shall come under their consideration ; provided, the majority agreeing shall not be less than twelve. “2d. That the present unhappy situation of public affairs in general, and of this province in particular, renders it highly necessary that a Provincial Convention should be held as soon as possible, for which pur- pose twelve persons shall be appointed out of the said committee as dele- gates to attend the said Convention, at such time and place as shall be generally agreed on.” As there were no further matters requiring imme- diate attention, after the delegation of twelve to the Provincial Convention had been named, the commit- tee adjourned to meet on Jan. 9, 1775, at the house of David Coupland in the borough of Chester. In the mean while, in furtherance of the resolutions passed by the convention of the people of Chester County, held on July 15th, heretofore mentioned, as well as the similar resolution adopted by Congress, calling on the other colonies to aid with contributions the necessities of the inhabitants of Massachusetts, so long as the enforcement of the Boston Port Bill rendered such assistance needful, the people of Chester County made generous contributions to the fund. Dr. Smith shows that the purse-strings of Friends were unloosened liberally to this end: “Chester monthly meeting contributed £70 for the relief of Necessitous inhabitants of Massachusetts Bay and Provinces ad- jacent. Darby meeting paid £33 14s. for the relief of the poor and distressed in New England, while Hav- erford meeting responded to the request of the meet- ing for suffering, ‘that Friends should contribute liberally for the relief of friends or others (in the New England Government), who are or may be reduced to indigent circumstances in this time of public calamity, and in a short time had the satisfaction to receive an affecting account of the state of the poor of these provinces, and of the distribution of the donations sent from hence.’”’! On Jan. 23, 1775, the Provincial Convention assem- bled at Philadelphia, and continued in session for six days. Chester County was represented in that body by Anthony Wayne, Hugh Lloyd, Richard Thomas, Francis Johnston, Samuel Fairlamb, Lewis Davis, William Montgomery, Joseph Musgrave, Joshua Evans, and Persifor Frazer. Thomas Hockley and Thomas Taylor, who had been appointed delegates, failed to attend. The proceedings of this body show that the men who composed it had carefully weighed the means necessary to build up and sustain a nation, while at the same time they comprehended that slav- ery, which then existed throughout the colonies,— largely due to the fact that Great Britain had always interdicted any restriction in the traffic,—was an ob- 1 Dr. Smith’s “History of Delaware County,” p. 282. 42 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. stacle which intruded itself in carrying out the idea of a free constitutional government, and should be done away with. Hence, to that end they resolved that the members of the General Assembly should be urged to pass a law prohibiting the future importation of slaves into the province. On March 20th a meeting of the committee of Chester County was held at the house of Richard Cheyney, in East Calm, where Messrs. Hockley, John- ston, Gronow, Lloyd, Frazer, Moore, and Taylor were appointed a committee to draft a petition to the As- sembly, “with regard to the manumission of slaves, especially relating to the freedom of infants hereafter born of black women within this Colony,” and report at the following meeting, while each committeeman was instructed to “use his utmost diligence in collect- ing the several sums of money subscribed for the use of Boston, and pay the same” to Anthony Wayne, “treasurer,” at the next meeting, after which the committee adjourned to meet on Wednesday, May 31st, at the house of David Coupland. But before that date had come, the reverberation of the musketry volleys at Lexington and Concord had stirred the blood of the Whigs throughout the colonies, and nothing was considered but how preparation should be made to meet the storm which had now broken on the country. Hence, in Chester County the commit- tee met at an earlier day than that named when they adjourned in March, and published the following extract from the proceedings then had: “In CommitTEE, CHESTER, May 22, 1775. “ WHEREAS, it appears very necessary in order to avert the evils and calamities which threaten our devoted country, to embody ourselves and make all the military preparation in our power; and it appears ab- solutely impossible to carry this laudable design into execution without observing the greatest order, harmony, and concord not only under the Jaws of civil government, but also while under arms and in actual duty, we therefore unanimously recommend the following Association, to be entered into by the good people of this County : ‘“ We, the subscribers, do most solemnly resolve, promise, and engage under the sacred ties of honor, virtue, and love to our country, that we will use our utmost endeavors to learn the military exercise and pro- mote harmony and unanimity in our respective companies ; that we will strictly adhere to the rules of decency during duty; that we will pay a due regard to our officers; that we will, when called upon, sup- port with our utmost abilities the civil magistrate in the execution of the laws for the good of our country, and that we will at all times be in readiness to defend the lives, liberties, and properties of ourselves and fellow-countrymen against all attempts to deprive us of them. “ Extract from the minutes. “ By order of the Committee, “ FRANCIS JOHNSTON, Sec’y.” The enlistment of soldiers was at once begun, for on June 29, 1775, at a meeting of several officers of the militia of Chester County, it was determined that for the better regulation of the military in this dis- trict it was advisable that a meeting of all the officers in the companies should be held at the public-house of Richard Cheyney, in East Calm, on the 21st day of July next, the day immediately after the Continental Fair, at which meeting it was proposed to divide the county into the most proper and convenient military districts, to form several battalions, and to elect field- officers. The next day, June 30th, the Assembly by resolution recommended to the boards of commission- ers in all the counties in the province, “as they re- gard the Freedom, Welfare, and safety of their County immediately to provide a proper number of good new Firelocks with Baynets fitted to them, Cartridge Boxes with Twenty-three Rounds of Cartridges in each box and Knapsacks,” and in the apportionment five hun- dred of each of these equipments was the number the county of Chester was directed to procure.’ By the same act the Assembly appointed a Committee of Safety, consisting of twenty-four members, those named from Chester County being Anthony Wayne, Benjamin Bartholomew, Francis Johnston, and Rich- ard Riley, only the latter residing within the territory: now comprising Delaware County. On July 10th, for the first time, was any of the committee from Chester County present at the meetings of the body, and on that oceasion Francis Johnston and Anthony Wayne both took part in the proceedings. In a letter dated at Philadelphia, July 10, 1775, the writer says, “Travel through whatever part of this country you will, you see the inhabitants train- ing, making fire-locks, casting mortars, shells, and shots, and making saltpetre, in order to keep the gun- powder-mills at work during the next autumn and summer. Nothing, indeed, is attended to but pre- paring to make a defence that will astonish the whole world.” : On July 17th the Committee of Safety determined that eight good rifles should be assigned to each boat now building, a part of which were to be put into the hands of such men as Capt. Francis, of Philadelphia, and Col. Wayne, of Chester County, should engage to go as minute-men on the boats when required. At this time Wayne was colonel of militia only. The same day the committee requested ‘‘ the good women” of the province to supply their family doctors “‘ with as much scraped Lint & old Linen for bandages as they can conveniently furnish, that the same may be ready for the service of those that shall happen to be wounded in the defence of the country.” Considerable apprehension having been aroused among the members of the Society of Friends as to their position amid all this din and clash of approach- ing war, Congress, on July 18, 1775, by a resolution stated to those people ‘‘ who from Religious Principles cannot bear Arms in any Cause, this Congress intends no Violence to their Conscience, but earnestly recom- mend it to them to Contribute Liberally in this time of universal calamity to the relief of their distressed brethren in the several colonies, and to do all other services to their oppressed country which they can consistently with their Religious principles.” The allusion to riflemen to be placed on the boats,. who were to be men selected by Capt. Francis and Col. 1 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 279. 2 Hazard’s Register, vol. iii. p. 248. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 43 Wayne, related to the defense of Philadelphia from a threatened attack by British vessels of war; hence a brief account of those defenses, so far as they refer to the history of Delaware County, should not be omitted from this work. The obstructing of the Delaware River by vaisseaux- de-frise was the suggestion of Dr. Franklin, who also strongly urged the building of galleys,—vessels of considerable size, propelled by oars, and intended to be armed with heavy guns, besides carrying a number of marines,—as well as locating fortifications at cer- tain places on the banks. The chevaua-de-frise, as the obstructions were popularly termed, consisted of large frames of timber, filled in with stones to cause them to sink, and from these frames huge beams shod with iron extended to the surface of the water. So ener- getically did Franklin labor, that although he had returned, May 5, 1775, after many years’ absence in Europe, in four months he had three rows of these ob- structions laid, the fort at Red Bank completed, and seven of the galleys afloat. One of the rows of wis- seaux-de-frise was sunk within the territory now of Del- aware County, and extended across the main channel of the Delaware, opposite the upper end of Hog Island, and a mile and‘a quarter below Red Bank. Subse- quently a row was laid to Billingsport, N. J. On Sept. 18, 1775, Richard Riley, from Marcus Hook, wrote to George Gray,’ of the Committee of Safety, arguing that, as the provincial galleys would soon be finished, the entire fleet, in his opinion, should be stationed at the boundary of the province on the river, below the “shiver de fress’s,” and then, if they—the boats—“ are any Protection, every Person above them will Receive a Benefit ;” that as there was a large island opposite Marcus Hook, it would afford a harbor to the galleys; while if the fleet was stationed above the obstructions at the forts, ‘‘Chester and Marcushook may be re- duced to ashes before any Relief can be obtained, which would be a Considerable Loss, as all the Rec- ords & other public papers of the county is their.” This matter of the defenses at Marcus Hook seems to have been presented to Council; for on Nov. 16, 1775, it was resolved “that two tier of Chivaux de Frize be sunk, for the further Security of this province, in the Channel opposite or near to Marcus Hook.”? That this resolution as to locating obstructions at Marcus Hook was never carried into effect is apparent, for the proceedings of the Committee of Safety show that on Jan. 18, 1776, Col. Wayne states to the committee that as large vessels must come within musket-shot of the shore at and near Marcus Hook, iv his opinion “a Line or two of Chevaux de Frize placed there would be of considerable Service. The Shore near this narrow channel is nearly as high as Red Bank, and a battery of Cannon there would greatly annoy an Enemy.”® On Feb. 15, 1776, Richard Riley again 1 Pennsylvania Archives, 2d series, vol. i. p. 550. 2 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 404. § Pennsylvania Archives, 2d series, vol. i. p. 471. wrote to George Gray,‘ calling attention to the ex- posed condition of Marcus Hook, where, should the enemy come up the river, they would certainly land. He therefore urged erection of a battery on the shore, or the stationing of a floating one there, together with one or two companies of riflemen, to protect that part of the province, “now Intirely exposed, without the least defence or the least means for defence, being without Battery, arms, or ammunition, & of course, if left to continue, will be obliged to abandon their Habitations.” In addition, as confirmatory proof that the obstructions did not extend below Chester, as late as July 24, 1777, Council ordered that before a master of a vessel could obtain an order for a ‘‘ Chevax De Frize Pilot” he was compelled to swear that he would not permit such pilot to remain on the vessel from “the time she leaves the town of Chester.”® The purpose of this order was to prevent any person knowing the unobstructed channel from getting ac- cess to British vessels, and for a reward imparting that knowledge to the enemy. Early in the fall of the year the galleys were ready, as already stated, and, on Sept. 22, 1775, the Commit- tee of Safety appointed Capt. John Moulder, of Mar- cus Hook, commander of the armed boat “ Hancock ;” but the latter, on the 10th of October following, noti- fied the committee that he declined to act in that capacity. The Committee of Chester County seems to have had no meetings during the summer, but in pursu- ance of a notice of the chairman, Wayne, they met on Monday morning, September 25th, at the Turk’s Head Tavern,—now West Chester,—at which time the board of commissioners and assessors of the county were present. At this meeting the following dis- claimer of all treasonable intentions on the part of the colonies was adopted and published in the Phila- delphia newspapers of that day. The ignorance dis- played in that resolution of the tendency of public affairs might be pardoned in Wayne, who was an ad- mirable soldier but a wretched politician; but the committee certainly had among its members some men who could read the signs of the times better than to have issued such a document as that, particularly when it was known that statesmen like John Adams were openly advocating the independency of the colo- nies. The disclaimer was as follows: “ WHEREAS some persons, evidently inimical to the liberty of America, bave industriously propagated a report, that the military associators of this County, in conjunction with the military associators in general, in- 41b., p, 572. 5Ib., 5U1. Nearly two years before the order, Noy. 7, 1775, the Com- mittee of Safety had ordered that five of the ten licensed pilots should be in readiness at Philadelphia to carry vessels down to Chester, and, having performed that service, were immediately to return by land or in skifts to the city. The other five were to be at Chester to bring ves- sels up the river, and are, immediately after piloting the vessel, to re- turn to Chester by skift or land. In Chester the pilots were directed to be at the house of Mrs, Withy, to receive applications from owners or masters of vessels, every day from 10 to 1 o’clock, and none are to be absent except when on duty.—Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 396.' 44 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. tend to overturn® the Constitution, by declaring an Independency in the execution of which they are aided by this Committee and the board of Commissioners and Assessors with the arms now making for this County ; and as such report could not originate but among the worst of men for the worst of purposes,—This Committee have therefore thought proper to declare, and they hereby do declare, their abhorrence even of an idea so pernicious in its nature; as they ardently wish for nothing more than a happy and speedy reconciliation, on constitutional princi- | ples, with that state from whom they derive their origin. “ By order of the Committee. “ ANTHONY Wayne, Chairman.” The committee, after adopting the foregoing docu- ment providing for an election by the people in the several townships on the 11th day of October follow- ing, for persons to serve on the committee for Chester County for the ensuing year, then adjourned to meet in the borough of Chester on that date. The next day, September 26th, the Council of Safety di- rected that an order for five hundred pounds should | be drawn in favor of Chester County, the money to be expended in the purchase of arms and other munitions of war. The Assembly, Oct. 19, 1775, reappointed’ the then Committee of Safety, and added new members thereto. So far as Chester County was concerned, the repre- sentation remained unchanged, excepting that it was increased by the appointment of Nicholas Fairlamb,’ the latter a resident of the present county of Dela- ware. The new committee of the county of Chester which had been selected on October 2d, by which some slight change was made in the personnel of that body, met shortly afterwards, and gave official publi- cation to the following proceedings : “ CHESTER, Oct. 23rd, 1775. “Pursuant to public notice given, the Committee met at the house pf David Coupland, in the borough of Chester. On motion ordered, that each member of this Committee do immediately make return to the Chairman, of the quantity of Powder which he already has or may col- lect within his district, together with the price and the name of the owner thereof, that the same may be paid for. “On motion resolved, that Anthony Wayne, Francis Johnston, and Elisha Price Esqrs., Mr. Richardsen, Mr. Knowles, Mr. Lloyd, and Mr. Brannan, be and they are hereby appointed a Committee of Correspond- ence for this County. “ By order of the Committee. “Francis JOHNSTON, Sec’y.” It may be doubted whether any of the muskets ordered for Chester County were delivered until this month, for on October 6th, Mr. Dunwicke, a gun- smith, “now employed in making the Provincial Muskets for Chester County,” asked Council for an order on the commissary for two pounds of powder, “to prove some of them now ready.” Which request was granted, and the commissary ordered to be present when the firearms were tried.’ The necessity for a more thorough organization in the several counties became so apparent that the As- sembly, on Noy. 25, 1775, adopted rules and regula- tions to that end, and at the meeting of the committee of Chester County, on December 26th, that body re- 1 Colonial Records, vol. x. pp. 373-74. 2 Tb., 356. organized in conformity with the suggestions of the Legislature. At the same meeting the committee “ Resolved, that Anthony Wayne, James Moore, Fravcis Johnston, Esq., Dr. Samuel Kenedy, Caleb Davis, William Montgomery, Persifor Frazer, and Richard Thomas, Gentlemen, or any five or more of them, be appointed, and they are hereby appointed to represent the county (if occasion be) in Provincial Convention for the ensuing year.” The provincial authorities were very active in pushing forward military organizations, for Wash- ington was constantly drawing the attention of Con- gress to the fact that in a short time the term of ser- vice of many of the troops with him, besieging Boston, would expire, and the army must be filled with fresh men. On Dec. 9, 1775, Congress resolved that four battalions should be raised in Pennsylvania, and on the 15th provided that the Committee of Safety should be requested to recommend proper persons as field- officers, from which names Congress would select and commission the colonels, lieutenant-colonels, and majors. Of all officers below the rank of major, the Committee of Safety were to make the appoint- ments. On Jan. 2, 1776, the Committee reported the name of Anthony Wayne as colonel of the Fourth Battalion, which nomination was confirmed by Con- gress. On the 3d of January the Committee nomi- nated Francis Johnston as lieutenant-colonel, and on the 4th, Nicholas Haussegger as major of the same battalion, which nominations were promptly con- firmed. The next day the Committee of Safety ap- pointed Persifor Frazer, Thomas Robinson, Jobn Lacey, Caleb North, Thomas Church, Frederick Ver- non, James Moore, and James Taylor captains of the several companies of the Fourth Battalion, and they were commissioned as of that date.® The battalion rendezvoused at Chester on February 9th, and on the 17th, Col. Wayne reported that five hundred and sixty officers and men were present at camp, and that ten commissioned officers were absent, with recruits, the number of which was sufficient, he believed, to make the battalion complete. At that date he stated he “had only twelve rifles and twenty muskets,” and was in want of every other article. On January 22d, Congress ordered the companies, as fast,as they were equipped, to march to New York. Robinson’s, Church’s, and Lacey’s companies, under the command of Maj. Haussegger, reported at New York on the 28th. The troops must have been housed even as far away from Chester as Darby, for on April 26th, Wayne arrived at New York, assumed command of his regi- ment there, and dispatched Maj. Haussegger to Phil- adelphia to immediately bring on the other five com- panies, and we find that the next day he ordered Capt. Lacey to return to Darby and settle for the board of his (Lacey’s) men. Capt. Lacey always asserted that Wayne had promised to settle that account himself, and he sent him (Lacey) back simply to have an op- 3 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. x. p. 119-136. Fourth Pennsylvania Battalion, Col. Anthony Wayne. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 45 portunity “to give the command of his company to his ‘ pet,’ Capt. Moore.” On Jan. 17, 1776, five days before Congress ordered Wayne’s battalion to New York, the Committee of Safety resolved: ‘‘That Col. Wayne, Col. Johnston, Mr. Bartholomew, & Mr. Riley be a Committee to Ex- amine the Fire-locks, Cartridge-Boxes, Knapsacks, &c., as ordered by Assembly to be provided for Ches- ter County . . . and make return of the same to this Board.” The following day, January 18th, a member of the committee suggested that a thousand chosen riflemen should be recruited for the provincial service, which body should be stationed near Chester to harass the enemy in their march to Philadelphia, should they at- tempt the capture of that city.|. At that time the gen- eral confidence in the efficacy of the obstructions in the river was such that the thought of an attack by water was rarely entertained. The suggestion was adopted, and in the spring of 1776, Col. Samuel Miles was appointed to the command of a regiment of one thousand riflemen, formed in two battalions. This body of men must have begun to assemble at Marcus Hook and Chester early in April, 1776, for on the 13th of that month the Committee of Safety had a report from Col. Miles that there was not sufficient ‘‘ houses or other buildings” in or about the towns mentioned to quarter the troops then being raised, and Council authorized Col. Miles to purchase one hundred good tents on the most reasonable terms he could.? On April 17th, Caleb Davis made application to the com- mittee for money to pay for fire-locks made in Chester County for the use of the province. He received fifteen hundred pounds for that purpose, to the order of the commissioners and assessors of the county, and | also one hundred pounds for saltpetre, and two quarter-casks of gunpowder were ordered to be de- livered to him.? Om March 25, 1776, Henry Fisher, at Lewes, Del., by express, notified the Committee of Safety that a sloop-of-war was coming into Whorekill “‘ Road with a Small Tender,” and it being night, he could not state whether she was bound up the bay or not, but every effort would be made to pre- vent her procuring a pilot. The express was started at seven o’clock on Monday evening, and reached Ches- ter by half-past two o’clock on Tuesday afternoon, where, after stopping forty minutes, Richard Kane, the messenger, left that place for Philadelphia. On the receipt of the dispatch, Council ordered Commo- dore Caldwell to send four well-manned and armed boats down the river to Reedy Island, which galleys were directed to act with Capt. Barry of the brig “Lexington,” and endeavor to capture the English © vessel. Caldwell subsequently returned, for Council on April 30th ordered the fleet to go down the river again, if Mr. Mease and Mr. Morris thought it neces- 1 Pennsylvania Archives, 2d series, vol. i. p. 471. 2 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 540. 3 Ib., 545. sary. It was ordered down, and in the mean time, as constant reports were being sent to the committee of the daily progress up the river of the British men-of- war, on May 7th, Robert Towers was directed to de- liver to Col. Miles one thousand pounds of gun- powder and two thousand pounds of lead, ‘‘or as great a part thereof as is in store, and for the use of the Associators of Chester County, to be consigned there agreeably to Col. Miles’ direction, 20,000 Car- tridges for Muskets.” At the date just mentioned the “Roebuck” of forty-eight, and the “ Liverpool” of twenty-eight guns, were off New Castle, bound up the river, and the galley fleet was ordered to attack them, while at the same time Col. Miles, who was at the meeting of the Council, went at once to Marcus Hook with some powder and lead for his riflemen, and the next morning marched one hundred and fifty of his men—all of his troops for whom he had equipments—to Wilmington, which place he reached in time (two o’clock in the afternoon) to see the action between the galleys and the British ships. ‘“ Iam con- vinced,” he stated in his journal,* “that had the gal- leys been sufficiently supplied with ammunition in due time (although one-half of them appeared very shy, and never came within point-blank shot of the ships) that these vessels, at least the ‘Roebuck,’ would have fallen into our hands.’’ Council, on June 12th, ordered Col. Miles to furnish from the provincial troops under his command guards over the powder- house, over the military stores deposited at the State- House, as well as the materials collected for fire-rafts at Philadelphia, stating the reason for this order was that the Continental troops had been withdrawn. Col. Atlee, on June 13th, from Chester, wrote to John Morton® that, under Col. Miles’ order, he had de- tached four companies of “ musquetrey,” under Col. Parry, to Philadelphia, and would be pleased if the remainder of his battalion could be ordered there, “that they might jointly be properly Disciplined.” On the 17th, Atlee was directed to move his whole battalion from Chester to be quartered in the barracks at Philadelphia. On July 3, 1776, Congress desired the Committee of Safety to send as many troops as they could spare immediately to Monmouth County, N. J., and the same’ day it is noted that “In Conse- quence of the following Resolve of Congress, a Letter was wrote to Colo. Miles, requesting he would give orders forthe most Speedy March of the Rifle Bat- talione to this city.”° From a letter written by Col. Miles to Richard Riley, dated July 10th, it appears that when the troops left Marcus Hook, in obedience to the foregoing order, a number of men inoculated for 4 Pennsylvania Archives, 2d series, p.519. (See Pennsylvania Ar- chives, 1st series, vol. iv. p. 748, for Col. Miles’ report. From some of the reports made by the commanders of the galleys and Pennsylvania vessels of war, it is evident that they had no great longing for the allotted task, that of capturing the British men-of-war.) 5 Ib., 1st series, vol. iv. p. 772. 6 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 628. 46 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the smallpox had been left there under charge of Dr. Davis, who was afterwards ordered to join his com- pany in the Jerseys, and the sick men “ still remained at the Hook under the notice of Doct?r Chapman.” Col. Miles therefore desired Mr. Riley to see that these sick men were served with every necessary pro- vision As stated in the letter hereinbefore quoted, giving an account of the activity in military affairs in the provinces as early as July, 1775, the people were busy ‘“‘in making saltpetre.” Grave apprehensions were entertained early in the war that possibly that commodity could not be had in sufficient quantity to meet the demand in making gunpowder. To prevent such a disaster the Committee of Safety made extraor- dinary efforts to instruct the people in the manner of preparing the necessary article. Hence the following advertisement appeared in the Pennsylvania Packet in February, 1776: “To THE INHABITANTS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTER: “ Pursuant to the recommendation of the Committee of Safety for the Province of Pennsylvania to the Committee for Inspection for the Couuty of Chester, Benjamin Brannan, Walter Finney, and John Beaton were appointed to attend the saltpetre manufactory in the City of Philadel- phia, in order to perfect themselves in said art, We having complied therewith, do hereby give notice to all those whose public virtue and patriotic spirit would excite them to such a valuable and necessary un- dertaking at this crisis of time; that attendance will be given at the house of Benjamin Brannan, in Darby,? on the 23d and 24th of Febru- ary; at the house of Mr. Cochran, in East Fallowfield, on the 27th and 28th ; at the house of Mr. Whithy (Withy), in the borough of Chester, on the 1st and second of March; at the house of Mr. Hood, in Oxford, on the 4th and 5th ; at the house of Mr. Miller, in Birmingham, on the 6th and 7th; at the house of Mr. Bell, in Kennet, on the 12th and 13th; and at the house of Walter Finney, in New London, on the 14th and 15th of said month, iv order to teach and instruct all persons who may please to apply at the times and places above mentioned. “BENJAMIN BRANNAN, “WaLTeR FINNEY. “N.B.—The times and places in the North West district are not yet appointed.” The Council next turned its attention to the erec- tion and operation of powder-mills. On Feb. 3, 1776, Dr. Robert Harris proposed to the committee to build a mill on the Valley Stream, about twenty-five miles from the city, and stated that he would engage to be ready by the 1st of March to make one ton per week, on the same terms as the Committee of Safety would make with other parties.? Dr. Harris and the com- mittee entered into the agreement, but he did not locate his powder-mill at the place where he first in- tended to have built it, for in John Ladd Howell’s report to Owen Biddle, dated June 38, 1776,* he de- scribes his works thus: “ Doctr. Robert Harris’s,on Crum Creek,about three miles from Ches- ter, begun to Work about the 23d ult. The dimensions of the Mill House 30 ft. by 20 ft., Head of Water about 214 feet fall, about 6 ft. Water Wheel 12 ft. “The Shafts that Worke (Eighty Stampers of 234 by 334 Inchs & 1 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 783. 2 Dr. Smith states (Hist. of Delaware County, p. 288) that at that time Brannan lived in Upper Darby. 8 Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. iv. p. 709. 41Ib., p. 765. eleven ft. Length) is thirty-two ft. Long, five Mortars made of Two Inch Plank, about five foot each, one Stamper & Mortar for preparing Sulphur. “Drying House, 20 ft, by 15 ft., neither floor’d nor plastered. He has received one Ton of Salt Petre and five Hundred wht of Sulphur, or thereabouts, expected to deliver one Ton of Powder on the first Inst. & the same Quantity Weekly. “The sides of the Mill House & Gable Ends of that & the Drying House being enclosed by Boards not sufficiently seasoned, are very open & must have a bad effect on the Powder, yet the Doct is of a Different Opinion.” This mill was located in Springfield township at Strath-haven, on Crum Creek. In the same month, June, 1776, as the enlisted troops would be in all probability ordered away from Chester County, it was necessary to put the militia in such a condition that they could be called on in an emergency. Hence we find that on June 1st Col. Wil- liam Montgomery was ordered to purchase a quantity of lead for the use of the Associators of Chester County,® and shortly after an estimate was made of the number of firearms in the county, and the follow- ing return was made :® 1st Battalion, Col. James Moore 2nd Battalion, Col. Thomas Hockley.. 3d Battalion, Col. Hugh Llvyd......... 4th Battalion, Col. William Montgomery 5th Battalion, Col. Richard Thomas 380 400 300 450 300 1830 The dread that the enemy—whom it was known was preparing an expedition at Halifax—intended to make an attack on Philadelphia was so general that every means in the reach of the colony was employed to defend the city from the threatened assault. To that end, on June 19, 1776, Abraham Kinsey, the tenant of Samuel Galliway’s estate on Hog Island, was notified that it might be necessary to “ lay that island under Water on the near approach of the Enemy,” but whatever injury he should sustain would be made good to him by the public. On June 20, 1776, George Bryan, the naval officer, was also in- structed that no application for a cheveaux-de-frise pilot should be allowed unless the captain on oath declared that he would not take the pilot farther ‘down the river than Chester, except in cases where the vessels should go down the bay under convoy of Continental sloops-of-war. On June 22d the committee ordered Robert Towers, commissary, to deliver to the colonels of the Battalions of Associators in Chester County the following quan- tities of ammunition: “To Colo. James Moore: 2300 Cartridges for Provincial Muskets. 2070 do., sorted, for the other different Bores of Firelocks. 1500 flints, To Colo. Thom’s Hockly: 2300 Cartridges for Provincial Muskets. 2300 do., sorted, for the other different Bores of Firelocks. 1600 flints, To Colo. Hugh Lloyd: 1840 do. for Provincial Muskets. 1610 do., sorted, for the other different Bores of Firelocks. 1200 flints. § Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 592. 6 Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. iv. p. 776. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 47 To Colo, W™ Montgomery : 2760 Cartridges for Provincial Muskets, 2415 do., sorted, for the other different Bores of Firelocks. 1800 flints. To Colo. Rich’d Thomas: 1840 Cartridges for Provincial Muskets. 1610 do., sorted, for the other different Bores of Firelocks. 1200 flints. “And to each of the said Colonels, the same proportion of loose pow- der and Lead, equal to the Quantity of Cartridges.” 1 By this time almost unconsciously the public mind in the colonies had been rapidly educated to an ac- ceptance of the idea of absolute independence from the kingdom of Great Britain. The stirring sentences of Paine’s ‘Common Sense” had rung through the provinces like the blare of a trumpet, giving direction to the thoughts and ideas of the struggle, and “crys- tallized into fixed purpose the wishes and hopes for independence,” until those persons who, as members of the committee of Chester County, had only a few months before declared ‘‘their abhorrence even of an idea so pernicious” now gave support freely to the movement for the establishment of a new nationality on the earth. Congress, on May 15, 1776, recommended “the re- spective Assemblies and Conventions of the United Colonies, where no government sufficient to the exi- gencies of their affairs has been hereunto established, to adopt such government as shall, in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduce to the happiness and safety of their constituents in particu- lar, and America in general.” In Pennsylvania, where the legislative power had (by popular consent or obedience) been transferred to the Committee of Safety, the people were unwilling to submit the matter to an Assembly which had become simply the empty form of authority. Thereupon the Committee of Correspondence for Philadelphia communicated with all the county committees, appointing June 18th as a day for the meeting of a provincial confer- ence to be held in Philadelphia. On that day the body thus summoned assembled in Carpenters’ Hall, and elected Col. Thomas McKean president; Col. Joseph Hart, vice-president; and Jonathan B. Smith and Samuel C. Morris, secretaries. The county of Chester, in that body, was represented by Col. Richard Thomas, Maj. William Evans, Col. Thomas Hockley, Maj. Caleb Davis, Elisha Price, Samuel Fairlamb, Capt. Thomas Levis, Col. William Montgomery, Col. Hugh Lloyd, Richard Riley, Col. Evan Evans, Col. Lewis Gronow, and Maj. Sketchley Morton. The conference unanimously resolved that the then form of provincial government was “not competent to the exigencies of our affairs,” and that it was necessary that a convention should be called for the purpose of forming “a new government in this Province on the authority of the people alone.” Thereupon the confer- ence made provision for representation of every county in the province, and for an election of members to 1 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 613, the proposed Constitutional Convention. On the 24th of June, 1776, the meeting adjourned, after each deputy had signed a declaration which stated their “willingness to concur in a vote of the Congress declaring the United Colonies free and independent States.” The momentous event which made the year 1776 one of the most noticeable in the history of the world was at hand. For some time the fact that a separa- tion was inevitable between the United Colonies and the mother-country was apparent, and the declaration of the deputies to the conference at Philadelphia, just mentioned, exhibits how popular the movement had already become, Hence, when the committee of Congress appointed to draft a formal Declaration of Independence reported to that body on the 28th of June, it needed no prophet to foretell the fate of the measure when the question as to its adoption should be submitted to the members, and it occasioned no surprise when, after some alterations had been made in the document, on July 4, 1776, it was sanc- tioned by the vote of every colony. Of the eight members from Pennsylvania on the day of its adop- tion, Robert Morris, John Dickinson, and Andrew Allen were absent; Benjamin Franklin, John Martin, and James Wilson voted in the affirmative, while Thomas Willing and Charles Humphreys recorded their voices against the Declaration. Of these men deemed worthy to represent the then wealthiest prov- ince in the colonies in a Congress of the leading minds of the continent, it is a highly honorable record that there were two who were natives of the territory now Delaware County,—John Morton, of Ridley township, who voted in the affirmative, and Charles Humphreys, of Haverford township, who voted in the negative on the final question of the adoption of the Declaration. The convention which had been called to prepare a constitutional form of government for the republic of Pennsylvania met in Philadelphia July 15, 1776. Dr. Benjamin Franklin presided over the assemblage. The representatives from Chester County were Ben- jamin Bartholomew, John Jacobs, Thomas Straw- bridge, Robert Smith, Samuel Cunningham, John Hart, John Mackey, and John Fleming. This con- vention absolutely assumed the chief legislative and executive power in the province, appointed a Council of Safety, ratified the Declaration of Independence, and filled all the offices under the new order of things. The body continued in session until Sept. 28, 1776, when it adopted the constitution it had made, which went into effect immediately without being submitted to a vote of the people. By its pro- visions the legislative power was reposed in a Gen- eral Assembly acting as one House, the executive authority was vested in a president, who was to be chosen annually by the Assembly and Council in joint ballot, the Council consisting of twelve persons who were elected in classes for a term of three years. 48 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. A council of censors was provided consisting of two persons from each city and county, the first members of which were to be chosen in 1783 and elected every seven years thereafter, whose province was to see that the legislative and executive branches had performed their duties properly, neither failing in nor exceeding their powers. On Nov. 18, 1788, the only council of censors ever chosen in pursuance of this constitution met at the State-House, Philadelphia, and continued its session until Sept. 25, 1784. Chester County was missary Towers was ordered to deliver these articles to the colonel. At this time there must have been an encampment of troops at Chester, for on August 5th, Council ordered £4 63. 3d. to be paid James Pen- nell for wood delivered at that place “ for the use of the Pennsylvania Musketry.”® The report that the British fleet had rendezvoused off Sandy Hook on the 28th of June had allayed somewhat the dread of an attack on Philadelphia, but the long delay in disem- barking the troops and the constantly receiving represented in that body by Anthony Wayne and ! tidings that daily reinforcements were being made by John Evans. The latter dying while a member of the | transports and vessels of war to the armada that was council, James Moore was chosen in his stead, being present Dec. 30, 1783, for the first time. After the Declaration of Independence, the men who had led the people forward to that step, now that the bonds that held them to the mother-country had been severed, put forth additional energy. It was the days when the bullets used in the chase and in war, at least in America, were cast of lead, and gen- erally by those who used them ; hence the authorities were anxious to gather material which could at once be utilized for that purpose. On July 8, 1776, the Com- mittee of Safety ordered certain gentlemen to collect “all the Leaden Window-weights, clock-weights, and other Lead in Germantown and its Neighborhood, for which the Liberal price of six Pence per pound will be allowed.”’ I do not find that the county of Ches- ter was distinctly named so far as gathering lead is concerned, but on July 17, 1776, the Committee of Safety made a general demand as follows: “The Families who have leaden Window- or Clock-Weights are earn- estly requested to give them up immediately to the Persons appointed to Collect them. Such Families may be assured that they will be sup- plied as soon as possible with Weights of Iron, and it is hoped the tri- fling Inconvenience of being for a few days without them will not be put in Competition with the Danger that may Arise to this Country from the want of a sufficient quantity of Lead for our Defence.” 1 Guard boats were stationed in Darby Creek,” for on July 26th, Capt. Charles Lawrence, William Watkin, and Robert Tatnall represented to Council that the inconvenience of going to the fort for provisions was such that they desired Sketchley Morton might be appointed to furnish their supplies, which order was made.’ The uncertainty as to the destination of the English expedition still hung over all the provinces, and extraordinary efforts were made to meet the storm when it should burst. On July 29th, Council ordered that fifty muskets should be delivered to Col. James Moore, of Chester County, for the use of his battalion,* and on August 1st, Col. Moore made application for “50 Bayonets or Tomhawks, 30 Hatchets, 100 screws, & 100 worms, for the use of his Battalion,” and Com- 1 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 649. 2Ina letter from David Joy to Samuel Howell, Jan. 16, 1776 (Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. v. p. 700), the former suggested that a few fire- rafts should “be kept in some creek below the Chevee de Frizes, in order to sett them on the Enemy on the flood. Darby, Chester, or Ra- coon creeks will do.” 8 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 656. 4Ib., p. 659. to subjugate the colonies kept alive the apprehension that at any moment the fleet might weigh, and almost before the news could be carried to Philadelphia the guns of the hostile vessels would announce their pres- ence in the Delaware. Hence the alarming condition of the time demanded constant vigilance and prepa- ration on the part of those men who, advocating in- dependence, must do everything to resist the capture of the foremost city of the colony. August 6th, one hundred stand of arms was delivered to Co]. Richard Thomas, of Chester County, for his battalion, and the following day thirty stand of arms was sent to Col, Moore. The same day the muster-master, Davis Bevan, of the borough of Chester, was instructed “to Pass Col. R’d Thomas’s Battalion of Chester County with the Present number of Officers and Men,” and the com- missary was directed to supply the battalion with accoutrements, as also to immediately deliver to Col. Thomas sixty stands of arms.’’ The alarm increasing, as news of unusual activity in the British fleet was received by express, the militia was hastily armed and mustered into the service, hence we find that on Au- gust 8th the muster-master was ordered to pass Capt. Thomas Heslep’s company of the First Battalion of Chester County, commanded by Col. Moore, with the number of officers and men then recruited. There was intense anxiety in the county of Chester at that time and unusual activity, as is evidenced from the minutes of the Council of Safety. On August 12th, Col. Richard Thomas received £196 8s., the price he had paid for eighty-one firelocks, bought of non-asso- ciators,* and on the 14th of the same month fourteen pounds was paid for cartridge-boxes and bayonet-belts for Col. Thomas’ command, while the same day £75 4s. 6d. was paid for like articles for the use of Col. Moore’s battalion.? On the 20th of August the news, borne by express, reached Chester that the British fleet, under Sir Peter Parker, had been signally re- pulsed at Fort Moultrie, and a few days subsequently that the English army had disembarked on Long Island, and hence the “ Flying Camp” was dispatched immediately to New York. On August 23d, the day following that of the landing of Gen. Howe's 5 Ib,, p. 665. 8 Ib., p. 681, . 6 Ib., p. 670, STb., p. 685. 71Tb., pp. 672-73. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 49 army on Long Island, Maj. Caleb Davis was paid £202 10s. for necessaries for the Chester County quota of the Flying Camp, and the same day John Hart was paid £5 14s. 38d. mileage for his company of Col. Lloyd’s Chester County battalion, and Capt. Pierce of the same organization received £6 8s. 7d. for mile- age. The next day, August 24th, Capt. Andrew Boon of the Second Battalion received £6 2x. 6d. to pur- chase drums, fifes, etc., for his company. Many of these men who marched from Chester County with the Flying Camp never returned, but in the early gray light of the morning of the 27th of August, 1776, their ghastly faces stiffened in death, when the first pitched battle of the war was begun by an attack on the Pennsylvania “Flying Camp” on Long Island. How severely the troops from Chester County suffered on that disastrous day can be inferred from the letter of Capt. Patrick Anderson to Benjamin Franklin, dated from West Chester County, N. Y., Sept. 22, 1776, and how bravely the women of Chester County acted at that time is shown by the following extract from the New England Courant of Sept. 5, 1776 :* “ Philadelphia, August 27, 1776—TuHE Women or Cuesrer County, Penna. Since the departure of the able-bodied men from the forks of the Brandywine, in Chester County, in the service of their country, the patriotic young women, to prevent the evil that would follow the neglect of putting in the fall crop in season, have joined the ploughs, and are preparing the fallows for seed; and should their fathers, brothers, and lovers be detained abroad in defense of the liberties of these States, they are determined to put in the crops themselves,—a very laudable example, and highly worthy of imitation.” The Council of Safety, on September 16th, resolved that the members of the Constitutional Convention, then in session, should recommend proper persons in their respective counties, to be appointed by Council, to purchase “blankets, coarse Woolens, Linens, & Stockings for the use of the Troops belonging” to Pennsylvania, and on the 4th of October, William Evans was desired ‘‘ to purchase all the Coarse Cloths, Blankets, & Stockings in Chester County for the use of y* State, and draw on the Board for the Cost:” ° The following summons from the Council of Safety to the justices of Chester County* explains itself so far as known, for there appears no further reference to the matter in the official records of Council: “In CounciL oF SAFeTY, “ PHILADELPHIA, Oct’r. 9th, 1776. “ GENTLEMEN: “You are hereby required to appear before this Council at Ten o’clock on Saturday morning, then and there to answer for your conduct in holding an Election on Tuesday of the first Instant, at the Borrough of Chester, apparently with a view of supporting the late Government of the King of Great Britain, in direct Violation of the resolves of Con- gress and of the late Convention of this State. “ By order of the Council. “THos. WHARTON, JUN., Pres’t.” 1 Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. v.p. 26. See, in addition, Col. Atlee’s journal, as well as that of Col. Miles, 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. i. pp. 512 to 522. 2 ¥Futhey and Cope’s ‘‘ History of Chester County,” p. 66. 3 Colonial Records, vol. x. p. 741. 4 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. i. p. 652. 4 On the 8th of November, 1776, Council order the sergeant-at-arms “to arrest Richard Swanwick, of Chester County,” and bring him before that body, for what offense does not appear;® and the next day an order was made that Rev. Mr. Rodgers be “‘ paid £70, being part of his wages as Chaplain to late Miles’s and Atlee’s Battalion.” On the 8th, too, we learn that Council gave orders requiring ‘“ Provisions to be made at Chester for Troops to Rendevous there.” That such an encampment was located at that place at that time is inferentially established by the fact that on November 14th, “Intelligence was rec’d by Express that several hundred Transports had sailed from New York & steered their Cource to the South- ward, & expected to be intended for this City ; where- upon the Council wrote a Circular Letter to the Com- manding Officers of the Battalions of Militia, earnestly requesting them to march their respective Battalions to this city Immediately.” ® The next day Col. Bayard was paid fifty-seven shil- lings for expenses going to Chester with Gen. Arm- strong,” and on the 21st, George Weiss received £5 for riding express to Chester County to order the militia to be in readiness to march at short notice.6 On the 23d, Council determined that the salt then in posses- sion should be divided among the committees of the several counties, the proportion allotted to Chester being eighty bushels, which was to be sold to the people at the rate of fifteen shillings per bushel, and in no greater quantity than half a bushel to any one family. The salt was to be distributed equally ac- cording to the necessities of the people, “for which purpose they are to require a declaration of what quantity they are possessed of more than their just proportion of the necessary article at a time of such very great scarcity of it.”® On the 28th, Council de- clared that the salt sent to the various counties, as mentioned, should be sold only to the militiamen who entered the service, or to their families ! and reiterated the like order on November 380th. On Noy. 27, 1776, Dr. Thomas Bond wrote from New Brunswick, stating that he had obtained permis- sion to carry the sick American soldiers under his care, and stated that it would be well to consult Gen. Mifflin on the desirability of locating hospitals at Darby, Chester, Marcus Hook, Wilmington, and New Castle. “I think the Water Carriage from Trenton to these Places would save much Carting, & this plan much better than one propos’d, of sending the Sick to East Town, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Reading, etc.” 4 The times were unpropitious for the American col- onists. The battle of Long Island had been fought and lost, New York had fallen, and Washington, ap- parently driven from post to post, was retreating across New Jersey, followed by the victorious foe. It was to 5Ib., p. 644. 6 Colonial Records, vol. xi. p. 3. TIb,, p. 5. 8Ib.,p. 11. 9Ib., p. 13. 10 Ib, p. 20. 11 Penna. Archives, 1st serie, vol. v. p. 79. 50 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. prepare for the attack which threatened Philadelphia, alike by sea and land, that Council issued the order of Nov. 14, 1776, for all owners of cattle along the Delaware River to make arrangements to remove their stock inland at least five miles, notifying the owners that if they failed to act promptly in carrying out the order when required, the board “may be under the disagreeable necessity of giving the most peremptory order for the removal and to see that the same be punctually and suddenly complied with.”! At the same time the minutes of Council show that the ut- most anxiety prevailed, and the activity displayed in collecting troops, for that time, was proportionally as great as when, ninety odd years later, the Confederate forces, under Lee, invaded Pennsylvania. As Wash- ington drew nearer to Philadelphia, retiring before the exulting enemy, his army dwindled to a mere handful of war-worn, ill-clad, ill-fed, ill-armed troops, fleeing across New Jersey, sorely pursued by Lord Cornwallis’ overpowering force of twenty thousand men, the flower of the English soldiery, the na- tion’s fate trembled on the verge of ruin. On No- vember 30th, Council resolved “that in the present alarming situation of affairs” no vessel should be per- mitted to leave the port of Philadelphia, and all ship- ping was interdicted passing through the chevaus- de-frise. Money was immediately dispatched to the colonels of the militia organizations in the counties of Chester, Philadelphia, Bucks, Northampton, and the city of Philadelphia to furnish support to ‘the families of such associators as go into actual service and may stand in need of the same,” which money was to be distributed among the families requiring supplies, “from time to time, according to their need, in the most discreet manner.”* On December Ist dispatches were sent by expresses to Chester, Phila- delphia, Bucks, and Northampton Counties to hasten the march of militia to reinforce Gen. Washington in New Jersey. On the 3d, Council desired the members of Assembly from the counties of Philadelphia, Ches- ter, Bucks, and Lancaster to recommend immediately in the respective counties, proper persons to be ap- pointed by the board to hire all the wagons in those counties. On the 4th, Dr. Robert Harris was paid fifty-eight pounds for making powder at his mills, at Strath-haven, on Crum Oreek, and the same day Mr. Towers was ordered to deliver to Dr. Harris a ton of saltpetre and sulphur, in proportion to make gun- powder. The same day John Morton was paid £3 6s. for wharfage of the floating-battery ‘‘ Arnold,” in the preceding March. This, doubtless, must relate to ex- penses incurred while the war-boats and galleys lay in Darby Creek. On the 8th of December the American army crossed the river from New Jersey to the west bank, and so eager were the pursuing enemy that they came in sight 1 Colonial Records, vol. xi. p. 4. 2 Ib., p. 23. 3 Tb, p28. 4 Ib. p.30. but a few moments after the rear-guard had passed over and destroyed the bridges. The English com- mander was so assured that the armed resistance of the colonies was virtually at an end, that leave was given Lord Cornwallis to return to England, and he had gone to New York with the intention of embark- ing for Europe. The hopes of the colonists were over- clouded with doubts. The Council, however, hurried forward the raw levies of militia to reinforce the wasted ranks of the Continental army. On December 11th, Col. Evan Evans, of Chester County, was paid £2 9s. 4d, for the transportation of the baggage of his company, as well as £2 0s. 5d. for flints and lead for his battalion. Col. James Moore received one hundred pounds to advance a month’s pay to his battalion,® and on the 14th, Col. Evans received “1000 dollars to pay his Battalion of Militia a month’s wages advance.” ® On Dee. 11, 1776, Capt. Hammon, of the British vessel-of-war ‘‘ Roebuck,” landed Davis Bevan and Benjamin Canby at Lewes under parole, with instruc- tions to proceed to Philadelphia and make arrange- ment for an exchange of prisoners of war. It seems that the schooner “Nancy,” of which vessel Davis Bevan was master, had been captured by the “ Roe- buck,” and he, Canby, and other Americans, prison- ers of war in the hands of the commander of the British vessel, were exchanged Dec. 30, 1776. The cause of the united colonies seemed, previous to the holidays of 1776, almost beyond hope; only the most patriotic citizens could bear up against the constant reverses which attended the Continental arms, and it is not surprising that less than a week before the brilliant affair at Trenton Col. Francis Johnston, in a letter dated from New London Cross- Road, December 21st, should present the following gloomy picture of the uncertainty that maintained among the inhabitants of Chester County respecting the outcoming of the struggle, and their hesitancy to part with any commodities in exchange for Continen- tal currency. He says,— “T think it my Duty to inform you of the strange and perverse Change in Politicks which hath taken place through a great part of this County. “Even some quondam associators, as well as conscientiously scrupu- lous men, totally refuse to accept Congress money as payment for old Debts, And there are some so maliciously averse to our support of Lib- erty that they refuse to part with any commodity whatsoever, even the Necessaries of Life, unless they can get hard money or the old Paper Currency of this Province. Most of the Tavern Keepers who are friends on the Lancaster Road have pull’d down their Signs, & refuse the Soldiery Provisions or drink—they will assign you no reason for such conduct; the reason, however, is too evident, they are afraid to receive Congress Money.”7 F Col, Johnston was not only incensed at the conduct of the people of Chester County, but on Jan. 7, 1777, he gave Council to understand that the appointment of junior officers over his “ head” was objectionable; particularly the case of Lieut.-Col. Penrose brought 5 Ib., p. 44. 6 Ib., p. 50. 7 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 100; see also 2d series, vol. i. p. 657. Ib., 1st series, vol. v. p. 125. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. forth his indignation, but his wrath was mollified when, on Feb. 21, 1777, Congress promoted Col. An- thony Wayne to the rank of brigadier-general, and he (Johnston) was made the colonel of the Fifth Pennsylvania Regiment, Persifor Frazer its lieuten- ant-colonel, and Thomas Robinson its major. The term of the Fourth Pennsylvania Battalion had ex- pired on Jan. 5, 1777, but it remained over until Jan- uary 24th to allow other troops to be enlisted and forwarded to take its place. It is, however, not to be inferred from the foregoing remark that the Fourth Battalion marched away from the field in a body, for the fact is that the greater number of Wayne’s men, being of Irish birth or descent, re-enlisted, under their old officers, in the Fifth Regiment of the Penn- sylvania line! Those who did not re-enter the ser- vice were ordered to Chester, where the battalion was mustered out Feb. 25,1777. On the same day John Evans, of Chester County, was notified that he had been elected a member of the Council of Safety, the duties of which office he assumed shortly afterwards. Although early in the year the storm of war, owing to Washington having assumed the offensive, had rolled away from Philadelphia, the Council did not lessen its efforts to place the Continental army in as efficient condition as possible, and to that end, on Jan. 18, 1777, it required the commissioners in the several counties in the State to furnish thirty-eight thousand bushels of horse feed, and of that total, four thousand bushels were required for Chester County. At this time the prevalent idea was that Gen. Howe proposed to make an attempt to capture Philadelphia by water, and this impression was confirmed when, on March. 25th, James Molesworth, who bore a lieutenant’s com- mission from Gen. Howe, was arrested in Philadelphia, charged with attempting to obtain a chevaua-de-frise and two bay pilots, to bring the British fleet up the Delaware. Not only did he attempt to corrupt pilots to that end, but he strove to have accomplices, whose duties it should be to spike the guns at Fort Island (Fort Mifflin), and to destroy the posts and ropes at the ferries. Molesworth was tried by court-martial, on the charge of being a spy, was found guilty, and hung March 31,1777. Previous to his execution he 1 In Gen. Henry Lee’s “ Memoirs of the War in the Southern Depart- ment,” vol. ii. p. 203, the personnel of the Pennsylvania Line is thus de- scribed: ‘‘ Wayne had a cunstitutional attachment to the decision of the sword, and this cast of character had acquired strength from indulgence, as well as from the native temper of the troops he commanded. They were known by the designation of the Line of Pennsylvania, whereas they might have been with more propriety called the Line of Ireland. Bold and daring, they were impatient and refractory, and would always prefer an uppeal to the bayonet toa toilsome march. Restless under the want of food and whiskey; adverse to absence from their baggage, and attached to the pleasures of the table. Wayne and his brigade were more encumbered with wagons than any equal portion of the army. The general and his soldiers were singularly fitted for close and stubborn action, hand to hand, in the centre of the army. Cornwallis, therefore, did not miscalculate when he presumed that the junction of Wayne would increase rather than diminish his chances of bringing his antago- nist, Lafayette, to action.” 2 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p, 282; Colonial Records, vol. xi. p. 197. 51 made a confession, and accused a number of persons as being implicated in the design to restore the royal authority in Philadelphia. Council hastened its preparation to meet the threatened invasion, and on April 3d a hundred wagons drawn by four horses was called for by the Board of War, to remove public stores from Philadelphia to the west side of the Schuylkill. Col. Caleb Davis, Maj. Evans, Col. Wil- liam Dewees, and Isaac Webb were designated to hire such wagonsin Chester County. On April 21st Coun- cil instructed the committees of the counties of Bucks, Philadelphia, and Chester ‘“‘to take an Inventory of all the Flour, Wheat, Rye, and Indian Corn, Oats, Beef, Pork, Horses, Neat Cattle, Sheep, Hogs, &c., also Wagons, Carts, &c.,” in each county, and make re- turn as quickly as possible, so that in the event of sudden alarm the provender and live stock might be removed to a place of safety. This was the osten- sible reason for this order, but in all probability the purpose was to ascertain how much and where located were the articles enumerated, so that, if necessary, they might be impressed for the use of the American army. Robert Smith had been appointed lieutenant of Chester County on March 12, 1777, which office gave him the rank of colonel, and devolved on him the duties of raising, arming, and provisioning the mili- tary contingent in his district, and preparing the troops when called into service. They remained under his command until ordered to take the field. On April 12th, Col. Smith reported that Chester County then contained five thousand men capable of bearing arms, and he promised to use his utmost ex- ertions to get his contingent in the greatest possible state of forwardness.* On April 24th, Congress re- quested that three thousand of the militia of Penn- sylvania, exclusive of the militia of the city of Phila- | delphia, should be called, one-half of the ‘‘ troops to rendezvous at Chester, on the Delaware.” The fol- lowing day Council ordered the lieutenants in the several counties to furnish men, although the number from Chester County was not designated. Each man was to be provided with a blanket, which was to be purchased; if that could not be done blankets were to be impressed, but in a way that should give the least offense to the public. The troops from the 3 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. iv. p. 84: ‘‘The onerous duties of his office were discharged in au active, untiring, self-sacrificing spirit, and much of his property melted away during the war, partly from direct gifts to the army and to the needy families of the soldiers, and partly because his public duties gave him no time to attend to his private business. On one occasion when foragers were sent into Uwchlan to procure supplies for the famishing army at Valley Forge, Col. Smith assisting to load corn from his own stores into the wagon, was urged by his wife to keep enough to subsist his own family through the winter. He replied, say- ing that the soldiers’ needs were greater than their own, and continued his work till the wagons were filled and his granary was almost empty. He spoke with feeling in his latter life of taking, on another occasion, unthreshed wheat to Valley Forge, and being met on his-arrival at the edge of the encampment by numbers of hungry men, who seized the sheaves and mitigated the pangs of hunger by eating the grains, which they rubbed out with their hands.” Ib., p. 85. 52 HISTORY OF DELAWARE counties of Chester, Lancaster, and York were ordered to form a camp “at or near Chester.”! Col. Smith acted promptly, as did the other counties’ lieutenants, for May 80th Council notified Congress that the militia called out by the recommendation of that body was encamped at the places named, part of the troops being already there and the remainder pre- paring to march; that as Council had but few arms fit for service, Congress was requested to furnish arms, tents, and camp equipage. On June 11th, Benjamin Brannon, sub-lieutenant of the county of Chester, ap- plied to Council for a cannon, that several companies of artillery had been formed in the county, hence he desired that the men might practice with the gun, and to that end also asked for a few pounds of powder. On the 14th, Council ordered that the first class of militia should be immediately forwarded to camp, and the second class be ordered to march, and the third class be held in readiness to move on short notice. The same day Col. Robert Smith received one thousand pounds to equip the militia of Chester County, and he was also instructed to send to Phila- delphia thirty wagons. This activity was due to the intelligence Congress had received that Gen. Howe proposed marching to and reducing Philadelphia. When the British army, on June 138th, actually made an advance in two columns from Brunswick, the news was dispatched by Washington to Congress, and being received the next day, prompt measures were taken to meet the threatened attack. On the 17th, Lewis Granow, sub-lieutenant of Chester County, received four thousand dollars to purchase substitutes, blankets, etc., and op the 20th four hundred stand of arms was delivered to Col. Smith. The next day he received a like number each of canteens, knapsacks, priming- wires, brushes, and cartouch-boxes. John Beaton was appointed paymaster of the Chester County militia. On the 21st two thousand dollars were appropriated for paying substitutes in Chester County, and on the 24th a like sum for the same purpose. On July 12th Col. Smith reported that notwithstanding repeated orders only three hundred and twenty men of the Chester County militia had arrived at Chester, and two hundred of these were substitutes. Hannum was then commanding officer at that sta- tion. The alarm having passed away on the return of the British army to Brunswick on the 25th, Coun- cil, considering “the extreme inconveniency arising from the march of the militia in the time of Har- Col. John ! COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. account of all flour, wheat, grain, and other stores in the several counties, so that it might be removed “‘in case the Enemy’s movements should make it neces- sary,” and on the 29th Council] appointed John Pear- son, Nicholas Deih], Isaac Hendrickson, Isaac Serrill, Harvey Lear, and Jacob Richards, to be added to a committee consisting of Samuel Levis, William Ker- lin, and Sketchley Morton, which had been appointed to drive off the stock in the county of Chester on the approach of the British forces. On July 20, 1777, Congress received information that a British fleet of one hundred and sixty sail was in the Narrows, on the way to Sandy Hook. On the 22d, Washington, perplexed as to the destination of Howe, requested that trustworthy persons should be stationed at the Capes of the Delaware to give prompt notice if the fleet should appear in that quarter. In the eurly morning of July 23d the expedition sailed, but owing to light winds and fog the fleet did not get in sight of the Capes until the 30th, when expresses from both Cape May and Lewes were sent to Council apprising that body that the fleet of two hundred and twenty- eight vessels was in sight. Gen. Mifflin was at the time in Chester, for he signed for and indorsed the time of departure from that place on the dispatch from Lewes. Late on the 31st the hostile vessels bore away to the southward. Gen. Howe, in his narrative, states, “that finding it hazardous to sail up the Dela- ware, he agreed with the admiral to go to Chesapeake Bay, a plan which had-been preconcerted in the event of a landing in the Delaware proving upon our arrival there ineligible.” ? On July 9th, Gen. Washington had requested Council to have a plan of the shore of the Delaware River made, and on the 18th that body notified the commander-in-chief that General Du Coudray had produced a plan of a fortification to be erected at Bil- lingsport to prevent the enemy removing the chevauz- de-yrise at that place, and the chart would be made of the shore of the river as soon as proper surveyors could be procured. On the 24th the ‘ proper sur- veyors” were procured, for four persons were directed to make “ A Survey of the Shore of the River Dela- ware and of the land for about four miles to the Westward, taking in the Great Road leading to the Southward, when they may extend further than that distance from the river, and remarking the several places where an enemy may land and the kind of ground adjoining, whether marshy, hilly, open, or vest,” countermanded the order for the levies to go to | covered with woods, and when there are several camp, but instructed the lieutenants of the counties heights near each other remark’g their altitudes and of Philadelphia and Chester that it was unnecessary | distances apart, remarking particularly the several to move the second class of militia, but that it should | Creeks and streams of water as high up, at least, as be held in readiness to march at the shortest notice. On July 9th, Council requested the magistrates of the counties of Philadelphia, Chester, and Bucks to re- turn the names of persons well qualified to take an 1 Penna, Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 321. | | the tide flows, and the places where they may be * George H. Moore, a gentleman whose assertion on any historical topic is always worthy of consideration, states in his work, “The Trea- son of Charles Lee,” that this movement was made by Gen. Howe, at the treasonable suggestion of Gen. Lee, the English soldier who had re- ceived so many honors at the hands of the American Congress. THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE TO THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 53 forded or passed by bridges. Where there are Swamps near the river, or roads, not’g particularly their kinds & size nearly. Passes of difficulty to an army to be accurately surveyed and well described.” Nathan Sellers was directed to make the survey from the Schuylkill River to Christiana Creek, which included all the territory now Delaware County, in which duty he was enjoined to use secrecy and dis- patch. When the news of the arrival of the British fleet at the cape of the Delaware was received, Council prepared to meet the threatening attack, and as many of the militia were without guns, it was ordered that those persons who had not taken the oath of alle- giance to the colonies should immediately be dis- armed, “and their arms made use of by those who are willing to risk their lives to defend their liberties and property.” ? On August Ist the justices of Chester County returned the names of a number of citizens in the county who were, in their opinion, proper per- sons to take an account of the grain and other stores within twenty miles distant westward from the river Delaware, and also persons to provide for the poor who might be compelled to leave Philadelphia in the event of an attack on that city by the British forces. The major part, if not all, of the persons thus sug- gested resided without the present county of Delaware. Washington was at this time in Philadelphia, and on August 1st, in company with Lafayette,—whom the commander-in-chief had met for the first time the day previous at a dinner-party,—he inspected the for- tifications on the Delaware River,’ and proceeded as far as Chester, from which place Washington, on the date just mentioned, addressed a letter to Gen. Put- nam.* On Aug. 14, 1777, Col. Galbraith wrote from Lan- caster that he had dispatched nearly one thousand militia on foot for the camp at Chester, but they had neither arms, accoutrements, camp-kettles, etc.,— nothing except blankets. Two days subsequently, John Evans, member of Council, wrote from Chester that about one thousand militia was assembled at that place from Berks County, part of two classes; from Cumberland one company, and part of two companies from Lancaster; the Chester County class “ was about half completed, and when completed” would have arms sufficient for their own use, but several com- panies from other counties must be supplied. The quartermaster reports, he says, “‘ that it will be diffi- cult to find shelter for any more troops at this place, all the empty houses being now occupied. The next day, Col. Jacob Morgan wrote from Reading that the | greater part of the twelve companies from Berks | County—two battalions under Cols. Daniel Hunter 1 Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. v. p. 472. 2 Sparks’ “ Life of Wasbingtun,” p. 232. 8 Sparks’ “ Correspondence of Washington,” vol. v. p. 2. 4 Penna, Archives, lst series, vol. v. p. 521. 5 Ib., p. 529. and Daniel Udree, comprising six hundred and fifty- six men—had marched for Chester, and by that time were doubtless at that place. On the 18th, Col. Ben- jamin Galbraith notified Council that the third class of Lancaster County had marched to Chester, and re- quested that commissions for the officers of the three classes of militia from that county be sent there.’ In the mean while no further intelligence being received of the movements of the British fleet, the opinion became general that one of the Southern seaports was the point of destination, and as the expense of massing the militia bore heavily on the indigent commonwealth, on Aug. 20, 1777, Council called the attention of the Pennsylvania delegation in Congress to the fact that the militia called into service had encamped at Chester, and were still reporting there; that as it was the season for sowing winter wheat, on which the country largely depended, it would be a relief to industrious people if public affairs would permit the discharge of part of the militia at Chester, “particularly as they were defi- cient in arms and blankets and wholly unprovided with tents.” § The following day a dispatch was received in Phila- delphia, stating that on the night of the 14th instant the British fleet had been seen standing in between the Capes of Chesapeake Bay. Washington, who was rest- less in his encampment on the Neshaminy, had that very day apprised Congress that he would move his army to the Delaware the next morning, proposing to march thence to the Hudson River, which proposition on his part, notwithstanding the reported news from the fleet, was approved by Congress. The commander- in-chief, however, determined to halt until further intelligence was received, which came the next day confirmatory of the enemy’s presence in Chesapeake Bay. Washington at once ordered Gen. Nash, then at Trenton, N.J.,to embark his brigade and Col. Proctor’s corps of artillery, if vessels could be pro- cured for the purpose, and proceed to Chester; or, if vessels could not be had, to hasten towards that place by land with all possible speed.2 On the 23d the Continental army broke camp and moved for Philadel- phia, through which city it passed early the next day, August 24th (Sunday), marching down Front Street to Chestnut, and up Chestnut to the Middle Ferry, Washington himself riding at the head of the column and Lafayette at his side. That evening the army encamped in and about Chester, and the next even- ing (the 25th) they reached Wilmington.” On the 6 Tb., p. 530. 7Ib., p. 532. 8 Ib., p. 536. ® Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. i. p. 282. 10“ Washington’s Encampment on the Neshaminy,” by William J. Buck ; Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. i. p. 284. Irving says, in speaking of the 25th of August, “The divisions of Gens. Greene and Stephen were within a few miles of Wilmington ; orders were sent for them to march thither immediately. The two other divisions, which had halted at Chester to refresh, were to hurry forward.”—Irving’s “ Life of Wash- ington,’’ Riverside edition, vol. iii. p. 205. In Townsend Ward’s most interesting ‘‘ Walk to Darby” (Penna. May. of Hist., vol. iii. p. 262) it is 54 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. morning of that day the British army landed at the head of Elk,! or, rather, some distance above the mouth of the Elk River.? The effect of the news of the approach of Gen. Howe’s expedition aroused Congress and Council to renewed exertion. The former, on August 22d, re- quested the State of Pennsylvania to keep four thou- sand militia in readiness to assist in repelling the threatened attack. The following day Council or- dered Col. Henry, of the city and liberties of Phila- delphia, to complete the third class of Philadelphia militia, which was ordered to march to Downingtown, while the artillery of the same locality was to assem- ble in numbers equal to three-eighths of the whole corps, which (with cannon) were ordered one-half to Chester and the other half to Downingtown, there to await the commands of Washington. Maj.-Gen. John Armstrong, the veteran Indian fighter, was placed in command of the forces at Chester. On the 26th Deputy Wagonmaster-Gen. Thomas Hale applied to Council for wagons for Gen. Nash’s brigade, and the justices of Chester County were ordered to furnish seven wagons, which, if not immediately forthcoming, were to beimpressed. The following day the justices were required to send to Philadelphia twenty-five wagons, On August 29th Gen. Armstrong wrote from Chester stating that matters there had “ been that of a chaos, a situation more easy to conceive than describe.” He had, however, forwarded at least eighteen hun- dred men, and also, in concert with Gen. Potter, he had formed a rifle regiment of three hundred men, had given Col. Dunlap, who was ‘ not unacquainted with the business of a Partisan,” command of it, and it would march to Marcus Hook the next day. The three hundred men, as well as the one hundred and sixty which he would send to Wilmington that day, were not included in the number he had mentioned as already forwarded to Washington’s army. He stated that the want of arms was the “ great complaint at a crisis like this.”* On August 31st Council au- thorized Gen. Armstrong to buy blankets for the use of the troops, but if purchasing was impracticable to make as equal and moderate a levy of blankets as circumstances would permit upon the inhabitants of Chester County, * confining the same to persons who refuse to bear arms or take an active part in the defence of their bleeding country, now invaded by a said, “It was here, along the higher ground on the left bank of the Kakari Konk (Cobb's Creek), that Washington, when moving towards the field of Brandywine, was forced, by rains so heavy as to swell the stream almost beyond precedent, to remain three days inactive.” Did not the incident thus described occur when the army was moving southward to meet Cornwallis in Virginia? 1“ Journal of Capt. John Montressor,” l’enna, Mag. of Hist., vol. v. p. 409, There is an error in the day of the week on which the landing was made, as recorded in the journal. Capt. Montressor notes Aug. 25, 1777, as falling on Sunday, while the minutes of the Supreme Executive Council record Saturday as Aug. 23, 1777. 2 Johnson’s ‘‘ History of Cecil County, Md.,” p. 327. 3 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. v. p. 563. cruel enemy.” He was instructed to employ proper and discreet persons to make the levy, to appraise the blankets, certify the number and value of the articles, from whom taken, as well as the townships wherein the levies were made. The general was recommended to keep account of the blankets collected that they might be returned to the militia, so that the troops subsequently called into service could be supplied therewith.* The two days immediately succeeding the landing of the British at Elk were stormy, with lightning and thunder, which delayed the advance of their army. On the morning of October 27th, two divisions of light infantry, under Howe, moved forward, and the army of invasion thus began its march in the direction of the city of Philadelphia. The lines of the royal troops, who had proceeded slowly and cautiously on Wednesday, the 3d day of September, extended from Aikentown (now Glasgow) to a point some distance northwest of the Baptist Church on Iron Hill, in Pencader Hundred, Del., when at the latter place their vanguard was encountered by Gen. Maxwell’s brigade, consisting of a detachment of Continental and the Maryland and Delaware militia. An English officer records, “ The Rebels began to attack us about nine o’clock with a continued smart irregular fire for near two miles.”®> The American sharpshooters as usual did good service, but being inferior in number and without artillery, were pushed backward and finally compelled to retreat across White Clay Creek with a Joss of forty killed and wounded. The English claimed that their loss was three killed and twenty wounded,’ but a woman who the following day had been in the British camp declared she saw nine wagon- loads of wounded brought in. On September Ist, Gen. Armstrong had forwarded almost all the troops at Chester to Washington’s com- mand, and proposed following them himself the next day after he had adjusted some matters requiring his personal supervision. Three days later Council wrote to Gen. Armstrong stating that a part of the militia of Chester belonging to a class which had not been called into service had formed themselves into companies and had applied for ammunition and rations at headquarters, and had been refused. Council was willing to encourage those people “at this juncture,” and if they could be of use in the field, would “ consider their two months service at this time as if they had served in future classes.”” These men were from the southern part of Chester County, and Col. Smith the same day was directed to extend the like terms “‘ to all other volun- teers that may go forth in this common cause, they first accommodating their services to the ideas of Gen. A.” On September 5th the American army was encamped 4 Colonial Records, vol. ix. p. 285. 5 Capt. Montressor’s Journal, Penna. Mag. of History, vol. v. p. 412. 6 Ib., p. 413. THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 55 on the east side of Red Clay Creek, and all the troops in Wilmington were ordered to march to Newport, excepting Gen. Irwin’s brigade, which was to remain in Wilmington, at work on the intrenchments at that place. “The enemy,” writes Gen. Armstrong, “as far as we yet learn, appear to spread over some con- siderable space of Country, but in a detached way from Couches Mills to some part of Nottingham.”! The same day the Navy Board recommended to Council that as there were reasons to believe that some vessels of the English fleet would attempt to approach the city, a certain number of persons should be assigned to flood Hog Island, and that ninety or one hundred men should garrison the fort at Darby Creek. Council requested the Navy Board to see to the flooding of the Island, and ordered a company of artillery and a com- pany of ‘‘ Musqueters,” under the command of Col. Jehu Eyre, to the works at Darby Creek. Congress having recommended, on September 5th, a call for five thousand militia of Pennsylvania, the following day Council directed the several lieutenants of the counties to order the militia to immediately march to Darby, where they were “to rendezvous on the heights,” and to “appear with what arms they have, or can procure, and otherwise equipped in the best manner they may be able.” These equipments, including blankets, Council assured the troops, would be paid for by the State in the event of their being ‘‘ taken by the enemy or otherwise unavoidably lost.” ? This ca]] for militia only included those of the counties of Philadelphia, Chester, York, Cumberland, and Northumberland.2 Why Lancaster was omitted does not appear on the records of the Executive Council. We also learn from the journal of Capt. Montressor, chief engineer of the British army, that three fugitives came into Howe’s camp on the 5th of September and reported that Gens. Mifflin and Cadwallader were, “with what militia they have and can collect, at Chester, with an intention to harass our rear.” * Deputy Quartermaster-Genera] Mifflin, on Septem- ber 7th, wrote to Council from Newport, stating that the English army had disencumbered itself of all heavy baggage, and was then in light marching order. Washington, thereupon, had directed all baggage, ex- cepting blankets and “a few small clothes,” to be sent away from the army, and for that purpose Quarter- master Mifflin desired a hundred wagons be at once ordered to headquarters. These teams were “to be placed in the rear of the divisions, and immediately on an alarm the tents and small packs left with the men were to be sent over Brandywine.” The follow- ing day Council directed one hundred wagons from Berks, and a like number from Lancaster County, to report to Mifflin. Gen. Armstrong, on the 8th, stated that the night 1 Penna, Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 587. 2 Tb., p. 592. 2 Colonial Records, vol. xi. p. 293. 4 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. v. p. 414. previous he had told Washington that in his opinion Howe’s intention was to re-embark on the Delaware, cross to the New Jersey side, march up to the “Shevar ‘de frize,” clear the way for the fleet, and then bombard Philadelphia. .He, therefore, was urgent for an attack on Howe in his camp. The commander-in-chief, however, had strengthened his position, intending to offer battle on Red Clay Creek, but on the very day on which Gen. Armstrong wrote to Council, Howe advanced in two columns, one as if threatening an immediate attack, while the other, extending its left, halted at Milltown. At once Washington detected the intention of the British general, which was to vaarch by his right, throw his army suddenly across the Brandywine, occupy the heights on the north of that creek, and thus cut the Continental arms abso- lutely off from communication with Philadelphia. Had Howe succeeded in that movement it is not probable that anything other than the total surrender of the American forces could have followed its con- summation. That evening Washington held a coun- cil of war, at which it was decided at once to change position. At two o’clock in the morning the army was on the march, and had already crossed the Brandy- wine. On Tuesday afternoon, September 9th, in pur- suance of the enemy’s plan, Lieut.-Gen. Knyphausen, with the Third Division and two British brigades, marched for Kennett Square via New Garden. That afternoon, at half-past five o’clock, Gen. Howe as- certained that Washington had “ evacuated Newport and Wilmington, and had taken post at Chad’s Ford on the Brandywine Creek.”’® Washington having moved almost due north from Newport on the after- noon of the 9th, was intrenched on the high ground immediately north of the present Chad’s Ford Hotel. During the night of the 10th, Maxwell’s Light Infan- try, which had the advanced posts, dug intrenchments on the west side, covering the approaches to the ford, and at this point Washington decided to deliver battle in defense of Philadelphia. CHAPTER VIII. THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. “THE Brandywine Creek, as it is called, com- mences with two branches called the East and West branches, which unite in one stream, flowing from West to East about twenty-two miles, and emptying itself into the Delaware about twenty-five miles below Philadelphia.”’ The union of these branches takes place over four miles above where the stream crosses the circular boundary-line dividing Delaware County 6 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 598. 6 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. v. p, 415. 7 Irving's “ Life of Washington,” vol. iii. p. 213. 56 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. from the State of Delaware. The banks of the creek were steep, uneven, and covered with a heavy growth of forest trees at the period of which I am writing, and for the accommodation of public travel, roads had been cut and graded at convenient points to reach the fords of the Brandywine; that most gen- erally used being on the direct road to Philadelphia and known as Chad’s Ford. The topography of that section, in a military aspect, impressed the English chief of engineers as “‘an amazing strong country, being a succession of large hills, rather sudden with narrow vales, in short an entire defile.”’? Washington, as before stated, at Chad’s Ford, the centre of his position, where he anticipated the prin- cipal attack would be made, had stationed the main body of his army under command of Maj.-Gen. Greene, and comprising the brigades of Gens. Wayne, Weedon, Muhlenberg, and Maxwell’s Light Infantry. Slight earthworks and a redoubt had been constructed, and Col. Proctor, with his Pennsylvania Artillerists, was in charge of the battery of six guns, which com- manded the usual crossing of the stream at that place. Wayne’s brigade, with Proctor’s men, occupied the intrenchments, while Weedon’s and Muhlenberg’s brigades of Virginia troops were stationed some dis- tance in the rear as a reserve. The Pennsylvania militia, under Gen. John Armstrong, constituted the left wing and extended through the rough ground— then known as Rocky Field—to Pyle’s Ford, two miles below Chad’s, and there Col. Jehu Eyre, with Capt. Massey’s and McCullough’s companies of the ar- tillery militia of Philadelphia, had placed his cannons so as to prevent the crossing of the stream at that point by theenemy. The right wing of the American army was composed of six brigades, in three divisions, that of Gen. Sullivan’s on the left, Gen. Lord Stirling on the right, and Gen. Stephens in the centre, reach- ing about two miles up the creek beyond Washing- ton’s headquarters, while the pickets were extended well up the stream, Maj. Spear being stationed at Buffington’s Ford, now Brinton’s, five miles beyond Chad’s Ford. On the evening of the 9th of September the two divisions of the British army under Lord Cornwallis and Maj.-Gen. Grant marched from Howe’s head- quarters, in Mill Creek Hundred, Del., to Hock Hossing Meeting-House, and the following morning moved to Kennett Square, reaching that place about noon, where Lieut.-Gen. Knyphausen’s division was already encamped. At daybreak next morning, the 11th of September, 1777, Gen. Howe marched his army in two columns against the American forces. The left wing, consist- ing of mounted and dismounted chasseurs, the first and second battalions of grenadiers, the guards, two squadrons of the Queen’s Light Dragoons mounted, 1 Journal of Capt. John Montressor, Penna, Mag. of History, vol. v. p. 415. and two squadrons dismounted, and four brigades of infantry, comprising, according to English reports, seven thousand men, commanded by Lord Cornwallis and accompanied by Howe himself, who, on that oc- casion, we are told by Joseph Townsend, rode a “large English horse, much reduced in flesh,” the result of the long voyage from New York and the scarcity of provender on shipboard. The American accounts, on the other hand, insist that this column amounted to thirteen thousand men. On that sultry autumn morn- ing a thick fog hung like a curtain shutting out this movement from the eyes of the Continental scouts, and for miles the British troops, in light marching order, even their knapsacks laid aside, threaded their way along the road that ran northward almost par- allel with the Brandywine for several miles without a whisper of their coming being borne to the ears of the American generals. The column under Cornwallis having marched away, Knyphausen was not hurried in his move- ment, as his purpose was merely to amuse the Conti- nental force in front of him until the left wing of the British army should have time to gain their right flank and rear. Hence it was about nine o’clock, four hours after Cornwallis had gone, that the Hes- sian general began to advance on the’ direct road to Chad’s Ford. Early on the morning of the day of battle, Gen. Maxwell crossed at Chad’s Ford, and with his riflemen had gone as far as Kennett Meeting- House to feel the British force, while small scouting- parties were extended even beyond that place, A graceful historical wsiter tells us that, as tradition has preserved the incident, a party of scouts had ven- tured to John Welsh’s tavern, within the very clutches of Knyphausen, and there hitched their horses at the front of the inn, while they comfortably sampled the New England rum and apple whiskey in the bar- room. The Hessians, who ‘“‘wore their beards on their upper lip, which was a novelty in that part of the country,” advancing, cut off the retreat of the American party by the front of the house, so that, abandoning their horses, they ran from the back door, turning, however, as they “fled, to discharge a spluttering volley that wounded -one of their own horses left in the hands of the enemy.” ? The riflemen began to harass the advancing troops, and, by resorting to trees, fences, and every available shelter, Maxwell thus maintained an efficient skir- mish, sustaining ‘himself well as he retired slowly be- fore the heavy column moving against him. From behind the building and graveyard walls at Kennett Meeting-House a number of the sharpshooters in- flicted much loss on the British troops, but were com- pelled to retreat before the overwhelming body ar- rayed against them. By ten o’clock Maxwell had by the pressure of superior numbers been forced back- 2“ Brandywine, 1777,” by Howard M. Jenkins, in Lippincott’s Magazine for September, 1877. THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 57 ward to the high ground on the west of the creek, and, after a bitter contest, to the ford itself. Some troops being sent over to his assistance, he renewed the struggle, even regaining the heights. Capt. Por- terfield and Waggoner, with their commands, crossed the ford, moved to the left of Maxwell, where they began a vigorous attack on Ferguson’s Corps of Royal Riflemen, who at the time, together with a portion of the Twenty-eighth British Regiment, were engaged in throwing up light works, to put two guns in po- sition on their right, to respond to Proctor’s artillery, which had opened fire from the opposite bank. The troops under Porterfield and Waggoner fought their way up a narrow, thickly-wooded valley, and forced a company of the enemy, supported by a hundred men from Gen. Stern’s Hessian brigade, to seek protection back of the stone house of William Harvey, the elder, who lived on the west side of the creek, until addi- tional troops had hastened to their assistance. Proc- tor, from the other side of the stream observing this, trained his guns on the advancing Britons, and the house came directly in the line of his fire. William Harvey, then in his sixtieth year, had sent his family away from the dwelling, but, being a man of great personal courage, determined to remain to protect his property as far as he could from plunderers. When the American guns opened, Harvey sat on his front porch, when a neighbor, Jacob Way, seeing him there, called out, “Come away; thee is in danger here! Thee will surely be killed!” The old gentle- man merely shook his head, while his friend urged him in vain. As they exchanged words a twelve- pound cannon ball from Proctor’s battery passed through both walls of the kitchen, and plunged along the piazza floor, tearing up the boards and barely avoiding William’s legs, until, a little farther on, it buried itself six feet deep in the earth. It is recorded that William hesitated no longer, but soyght a safer locality. His house was thoroughly despoiled when the British came up.”' He, however, lived nearly forty years after that trying ordeal. The pertinacity of the attack of Maxwell’s brigade, as well as the audacious action of Porterfield and Waggoner, made it necessary for Knyphausen to send forward two brigades, supported by artillery, while at the same time a heavy column was marched toward Brinton’s Ford, thus outflanking Maxwell, who was compelled to recross the Brandywine. Simultaneously with these movements the Queen’s Rangers, under Capt. Weyms, of the Fortieth British Regiment, poured so hot a fire down the valley that Porterfield and Waggoner were also forced hastily to retire across the creek. The high ground about half a mile back from the Brandywine, vacated by Maxwell, was im- mediately occupied in force by the enemy, and guns were placed in position by Knyphausen to command 1 Lippincott’s Magazine for September, 1877: “ Brandywine, 1777,” by Howard M. Jenkins. the ford. From these occasionally a few shots were discharged, and responded to by Proctor’s cannons, which desultory firing inflicted but little damage. The casualties on the American side thus far had not exceeded sixty, while those of the British and Hes- sian troops were about one hundred and sixty. Hence, at half-past ten o’clock in the morning, when the enemy at Chad’s Ford seemed disinclined to make any vigorous attack, Col. Harrison, Washington’s secretary, might be well excused for having dispatched a hurried note to Congress, stating that he had no doubt but that the enemy would be repulsed. Major Ferguson, the commander of the rifle corps in the English army, in a letter describing this battle, stated that while his men were lying concealed in a clump of woods, he noticed “a rebel officer in a hus- sar dress” pass in front of the American line, followed by another officer in dark green and blue, who was “mounted on a good gray horse, and wearing a re- markably high cocked hat.” Ferguson ordered three of his men to creep towards and fire at them, but hardly had he done so when he recalled the command, for the Americans were so near that he felt to shoot at them would be little less than deliberate murder. After the officers had passed some distance, they re- turned, and were again within easy reach of his sharpshooters. The following day Ferguson, in con- versation with a wounded American, learned “ that Gen. Washington was all the morning with the light troops, and attended only by a French officer in a hussar dress, he himself mounted and dressed in every respect as above described.” On the morning of the battle Gen. Washington ascertained that Cornwallis had moved northward to some of the upper and unimportant fords, designing thus to turn the right flank of the American army. The commander-in-chief, fully aware that Maj. Spear was posted at Buffington’s Ford, whence he could dispatch intelligence of such a movement to Gen. Sullivan, who would promptly communicate with him, had resolved to strike Knyphausen, while be- yond the reach of the support of Cornwallis’ division, and overwhelm him by numbers, and thus crush the British army in detail. The Hessian general, it is known, did not begin his advance until nine o’clock in the morning, and it was rightly believed that Cornwallis would have to march twelve miles before he could cross the creek, even if he effected a pas- sage at Buffington’s Ford. Between nine and ten o’clock Col. Bland, with a few light-horsemen,-crossed to the west side of the stream at Jones’ Ford, three miles above Chad’s, and, observing that Cornwallis’ column was then approaching Trimble’s Ford, on the west branch, he immediately dispatched a messenger with the tidings to Gen. Sullivan. Col. Hazen also made a report of likeimport. The following dispatch, which Col. Carrington’ states is a model for clearness 2 Carrington’s “ Battles of the American Revolution.” 58 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. in all details then needed, was sent by Lieut.-Col. Ross, of the Eighth Pennsylvania, to Gen. Sullivan, and by him in turn forwarded to Gen. Washington : “Great VALLEY Roap, “11 o'clock a.m. “DEAR GENERAL,—A large body of the enemy, from every account 5000, with 16 or 18 field-pieces marched along this road just now. The road leads to Taylor’s Ferry & Jeffries’ Ferry on the Brandywine, & to the Great Valley, at the Sign of the Ship, on Lancaster road to Phila- delphia. There is also a road from the Brandywine to Chester, by Dil- worthtown. We are close in their rear, with about 70 men. Capt. Simpson lay in ambush with 20 men & gave them 3 rounds within a small distance, in which two of his men were wounded; one mortally. I believe General Howe is with this party, as Joseph Galloway is here known by the inhabitants with whom he spoke, & told them that Gen. Howe was with them. Yours, “James Ross, Lieut-Col.” * ‘Washington at once ordered Gen. Sullivan to cross the Brandywine and engage this division, to keep it. employed, as it was the purpose of the commander- in-chief to attack the Hessian general immediately, shatter his command, and capture his baggage-train before the left wing, comprising the greater part of the British army, could retrace their steps and come to his relief. Gen. Greene was also directed to cross above Chad’s Ford, in order to strike Knyphausen on the left flank. That officer, with the celerity of movement that was a conspicuous trait in his military character, promptly sent his advance guard across the stream at Brinton’s Ford, where Sullivan’s command lay, and was prepared to follow with his command. The commander-in-chief was to remain with Wayne, who was to cross the Brandywine at Chad’s Ford in the face of the enemy. The fog which had clung to the earth in the early morning had vanished before the scorching sun, not yet midday high, and by noon this decisive movement would have been made, when the following note was delivered to Washington: “BRENTON Forp, “Sept. 11. “DEAR GENERAL :—Since I sent you the message by Major Moore, I saw Major Spear of the militia, who came this morning from a tavern called Martin's, at the fork of the Brandywine. He came from thence to Welch’s Tavern, & heard nothing of the enemy about the fork of the Brandywine, & is confident they are not in that quarter; so that Col. Hazen’s information must be wrong. I have sent to that quarter to know whether there is any foundation for the report, & shall give your excellency the earliest information. “Tam, etc, “JoHNn SULLIVAN.” The bearer of this dispatch was followed by Maj. Spear, who was sent by Gen. Sullivan to Washington to verbally make his report to the commander-in- chief, and this intelligence was speedily supplemented by a similar statement made by Sergeant Tucker, of the Light-Horse. These tidings were of the utmost consequence to the American general, for they argued that Cornwallis had merely moved off as a ruse de guerre, and that both wings of the British army were in supporting distance of each other. Hence the orders for crossing the creek were countermanded, Gen. Greene’s advanced detachment was withdrawn, and the American army again resumed its former po- sition. Washington, however, instructed Col. Bland to proceed to the extreme right and reconnoitre above the forks. When the British invaded Chester County, Justice Thomas Cheyney, who was an outspoken Whig, was advised to absent himself from his dwelling in Thorn- bury, and to avoid personal danger he withdrew to the home of his relative, Col. John Hannum, at “ Cen- tre House,” now the village of Marshallton, located between the East and West Branches of the Brandy- wine. Here Cheyney had passed the night of Sept. 10, 1777, and the next morning he, with Hannum, started to visit the American camp at Chad’s Ford. As they rode along the highway near Trimble’s Mill and Ford, on the West Branch, in descending the hill they saw a large body of soldiers, their scarlet uni- forms designating them as British troops, descending the hills opposite. Halting, they watched the direc- tion in which the column moved, and saw that it was making towards Jefferies’ Ford, on the East Branch, their polished arms flashing and glittering in the sul- try September sun. Having ascertained that fact, for a moment the two men consulted as to the course they should pursue, and finally it was decided that imme- diate intelligence of the presence of the British force at this point must be conveyed to Washington. Cheyney being mounted on a fleet hackney,—Dr. Harvey tells me it was a sorrel pacing mare,—started off in the direction of the American headquarters at a rapid pace, followed by Hannum, whose horse being less speedy was soon distanced, notwithstanding the squire turned the scales at two hundred pounds.’ Washington was seated under a cherry-tree which then stood—now blown down years ago—on the gentle declivity south of the road which leads to the crossing at Chad’s Ford, when he saw a stout- built man without a hat, riding a sorrel horse, which jumped the fences that stood in the direction he was coming across the fields to where Washington was. It was Cheyney, who, having first reported to Sullivan his tidings, had been so discourteously received that he inquired and was told where Washington himself was to be found. The latter listened as the squire related what he had seen, and, as the chieftain seemed to hesitate, Cheyney exclaimed, “ By h—l, it is so!” and dismounting, he picked up a twig, drew a sketch on the ground of the upper roads, describing how the British passed the fords of the forks of the Brandy- wine, and where the enemy would probably be at that time. So accurately was this information imparted, that notwithstanding it was most unwelcome news, the general was reluctantly convinced of its truth. Some of his staff-officers, however, spoke sneeringly of the report made by the justice, and the excited man with an oath said to Washington, “If you doubt my word, sir, put me under guard till you ask Anthony 1 Futhey and Cope’s “History of Chester County,” p. 686. THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 59 Wayne or Persie Frazer if I am a man to believed,” and then, turning to the smiling officers, his indigna- tion found utterance: “I would have you to know that I have this day’s work as much at heart as e’er a Blood of you!”? The delays that had attended Squire Cheyney’s at- tempt to apprise the Americans of the danger that threatened them had consumed considerable time, and hardly had Washington acknowledged the accuracy of the intelligence brought to him, when an orderly galloped hastily to the group and delivered a dispatch. It read as follows: “Two O’CLock P.M. “DEAR GENERAL:—Col. Bland has this moment sent me word that the enemy are in the rear of my right and coming down. They are, he says, about two brigades of them. He also says he saw a dust, back in the country, for about an hour. “Tam, &e., “JouNn SULLIVAN.” Inclosed in this note was one addressed to Gen. Sullivan, as follows: “A QUARTER-Past 1 O'CLocK, “Srr,—I have discovered a party of the enemy on the height, just on the right of the two widow Davis’, who live close together on the road called the Forks road, about one-half mile to the right of the meeting- house. There is a higher hill on their front. “THEODORE BLAND.” By this time Washington knew that Gen. Sullivan, a brave and patriotic officer, had permitted Howe once more to play with success the stratagem which had given him victory on Long Island, and for the like reason, Sullivan’s neglect to make a proper reconnois- sance. It was a brilliant but dangerous movement of the English commander, separating his army into two divisions, seventeen miles asunder; and had not the second dispatch been sent by Sullivan, declaring on Maj. Spear’s assertion, that Cornwallis’ division had not moved northward in the manner reported by Col. Ross, the attack determined on by Washington could have been made on Knyphausen’s division in over- whelming numbers, and in all likelihood would have been wholly successful. Never in all his military career did Washington display greater capacity as a commander, than when he had decided to recross the Brandywine and engage the Hessian general. No wonder was it then that the American chieftain ever after disliked to discuss the stragetic movements of that day. Gen. Washington, knowing that his presence was necessary at the point menaced, was anxious to reach that part of the field as soon as possible, and desired to go thither by the shortest way. To that end an elderly man of the neighborhood, Joseph Brown, who was well acquainted with the locality, was found and asked to act as guide. The latter was loath to under- take this duty, and only consented to do so when the 1 Persifor Frazer was lieutenant-colonel of the Fifth Pennsylvania Line, recruited in Chester County. He was born in Newtown township, and was a partner in the noted Sarum Iron-Works, in Thornbury. 2Dr. William Darlington's sketch of Thomas Cheyney iu Note Cestri- enses. Newspaper clippings in Library of Historical Society of Pennsyl- vania. request assumed such a form that it could not with safety be refused. One of the general’s staff, who rode a fine horse, dismounted, Brown was lifted into the saddle, and the party started in the most direct route for Birmingham Meeting-House. The mettle- some beast the guide rode cleared the fences as they dashed across the fields, the officers following at his heels. So great was Washington’s anxiety that he constantly kept repeating the command, “ Push along, old man; push along, old man.” Brown subse- quently, in relating the incidents of this wild scamper across the country, stated that when they were about half a mile west of Dilworthtown, the bullets were flying so thickly that, as the noise of battle was now a sufficient guide to the American officers, and no no- tice was taken of him, he, unobserved, dismounted and stole away. Cornwallis, accompanied by the commander-in- chief, Sir William Howe, had marched his column from five o’clock in the morning through the woods that skirted almost his entire route on the west bank of the Brandywine. During the first four hours a heavy fog clung to the earth, and a trying march it was that sultry day, with the dust rising in clouds under the feet of a moving army and the wheels of the parks of artillery and trains of baggage-wagons. It was past the midday hour when the British column reached the west branch of the creek at Trimble’s, and it was here, while making directly for Jefferies’ Ford, that Cols. Cheyney and Hannum watched it on the march, as heretofore related. On the west side of Jefferies’ Ford Emmor Jefferies owned a fine farm, the home of his ancestors, and from his father’s ownership of the real estate on both sides of the branch the crossing had received its name,—Jefferies’ Ford. When the British army first landed at Elk and moved in the direction of Wil- mington, a number of the storekeepers, as well as other residents of that town, sent their goods to Ches- ter County, near the forks of the Brandywine, whose peaceful quiet at that time it was supposed the march of armies never would disturb. In the house of Em- mor Jefferies, who leaned somewhat to the royal side, it was thought goods could be safely kept. But when the British soldiers learned that in his cellar a large quantity of liquors were stored, the thirsty, hungry men rolled out the barrels and casks, knocked in the heads, and drank freely, without asking the approval of the reputed owner. Nor was that all. Emmor Jefferies was himself pressed into service by Sir Wil- liam Howe as a guide. It was not one o’clock when the vanguard of the Brit- ish army passed the ford and pressed onward towards Osborne’s Hill, near Sullivan’s right. Almost half a century ago Joseph Townsend (who, as a young man of twenty-one, was a witness of much appertaining to the battle) published his recollections of that day. He was attending that Thursday morning a mid-week meeting of Friends in the wheelwright-shop at Scon- 60 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. nelltown, for Gen. Washington had taken the Bir- mingham meeting-house as a hospital for his sick and wounded soldiers, even before he moved his army to Chad’s Ford, and hearing a disturbance outside, the meeting was brought to a close. While endeay- oring to quiet several of the women of the neighbor- hood, who were alarmed at the approach of the Brit- ish troops, Townsend relates: “ Our eyes were caught, on a sudden, by the appearance of the army coming out of the woods into the field belonging to Emmor Jefferies, on the west side of the creek, above the fording-place. In a few minutes the fields were lit- erally covered over with them, and they were hasten- ing towards us. Their arms and bayonets, being raised, shone bright as silver, there being a clear sky and the day exceedingly warm.” This eye-witness records how “the space occupied by the main and flanking parties (of the British army) was near half a mile wide ;” that Cornwallis “on horseback appeared very tall and sat very erect. His rich scarlet cloth- ing, loaded with gold lace, epaulets, etc., occasioned him to make a brilliant and martial appearance, and that most of all the officers who conversed with us were men of the first rank, and were rather stout, portly men, well dressed, and of genteel appearance, and did not look as if they had ever been exposed to any hardship; their skins were as white and delicate as is customary for females brought up in large cities or towns.” The entire column of British troops had crossed Jefferies’ Ford by two o’clock, its advance having reached the vicinity of Osborne’s Hill, and in half an hour thereafter the whole body of men halted to re- fresh themselves, for they had not eaten since the early morning, and had marched about seventeen miles almost without a halt. Many of the soldiers on that weary tramp had fallen out of ranks, and ex- hausted remained along the road. When Washington first learned that the lost column of Cornwallis had been found, unfortunately for the Continentals in such a position that the inferior American force—in numbers, in discipline, and arms —would have to fight at great disadvantage, or, as Capt. Montressor states it, ‘‘ were instantly obliged to divide their army, leaving part to oppose our right,” Gen. Sullivan was ordered to bring his division to bear upon the British, and this compelled a forward movement of the whole right wing up the Brandy- wine. The American troops formed in a strong posi- tion above Birmingham meeting-house on a hill about a mile and a half removed from the British column, the ground falling gradually for more than half a mile in their immediate front ‘a natural glacis,” and a thick woods covered their rear. As the divisions of Gens. Stirling and Stephens formed, Lord Corn- wallis, on horseback,—Sir William Howe and his gen- erals gathered about him,—sat watching the Ameri- 1“ Journal of Capt. Montressor,” Pena, Mag. of History, vol. v. p. 416. can officers arrange their line of battle, and as his glass showed him the disposition they were making, his eminent military abilities, never excelled in Eng- land’s history during the last three hundred years, except by Marlborough, compelled him to pay this tribute to their merit, “‘The damned rebels form well!” Cornwallis, under the immediate supervision of Sir William Howe, formed his battle array in three lines, The Guards were on the right of the advance, the First British Grenadiers to the left, the centre of the latter organization, supported by the Hessian Grena- diers, formed in a second line. “To the left of the Second Grenadiers, who held the centre, were two battalions of light infantry, with the Hessian and Anspach Chasseurs, supported by the fourth brigade, for a second line.” The third brigade, consisting of the Fifteenth, Forty-fourth, and Seventeenth Regi- ments, was held in reserve, and was not called into action during the day. Both flanks of the British army were covered by very thick woods, and the ar- tillery was advantageously disposed so that its fire might most seriously affect the American lines, and sustain the advance in its attack on the Continental troops. Gen. Sullivan seems to have questioned his own judgment and hesitated to decide what was best to be done, when the true situation of the two armies was clearly presented to his mind. He had command of the entire right wing, hence the command of his im- mediate division devolved on Gen. DeBorre, his brig- adier, a French officer of thirty-five years’ experience in service, but a martinet, insisting on every little punc- tilio of military etiquette, even where such trifling matters might jeopardize the whole army. Hence when the latter marched his division to form, because it had laid along the Brandywine, fronting across, he insisted on moving his command on the right of Stephens and Stirling, which determination on his part made disorder in the division and occasioned an interval in the American line of over half a mile, It should be remembered that Stirling and Stephens as soon as they learned that the enemy were on their flank moved promptly, without waiting for orders from Sullivan, to the nearest good position from which they could resist the advancing British columns. Sullivan, thereupon leaving his old division in disorder, rode forward to where the other general officers were, and it was their unanimous opinion, he tells us in his report, “that his division should be brought on to join the other and the whole should incline further to the right to prevent our being out-flanked.” Even the graphic account of the battle furnished by Gen. Sullivan shows that he lost that self-control which in Gens. Greene and Washington showed conspicuously during that afternoon of disaster to the American arms. “ At half-past two,” he says, ‘‘I received orders to. march with my division to join with and take com- THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 61 mand of that and two others to oppose the enemy who were coming down on the right flank of our army. I neither knew where the enemy were, or what route the other divisions were to take, and of course could not determine where I should form a junction with them. I began my march in a few minutes after I received my orders, and had not marched a mile when I met Col. Hazen with his regi- ment, which had been stationed at a ford three miles above me, who informed me that I might depend that the principal part of the British army was there, although I knew the report sent to headquarters made them but two brigades. As I knew Col. Hazen to be an old officer, and a good judge of numbers, I gave credence to his report in preference to the intelligence before received. While I was conversing with Col. Hazen and our troops still on the march, the enemy headed us in the road about forty rods from our ad- vance guard. I then found it necessary to turn off to the right to form, and so got nearer to the other di- visions, which I at that moment discovered both in the rear and to the right of the place I was then at. I ordered Col. Hazen’s regiment to pass a hollow way, file off to the right, and face to cover the artillery. The enemy, seeing this, did not pass on, but gave me time to form my division on an advantageous height in a line with the other divisions, about almost a half mile to the left.” This gap of half a mile must be closed, and while this was being attempted at about half-past three o’clock,! the English commander hurled his well-dis- ciplined soldiers full at the unformed Americans’ right wing, and a half-hour previous to this assault the British guns had opened fire.” The distance sep- arating the combatants was about a mile and a half, the assaulting party being compelled to cross a valley and ascend a hill slope before they came to close quarters with their enemy. According to Joseph Townsend, an advance com- pany of Hessians, when they reached “ the street- road were fired upon by a company of the Americans who were stationed in the orchard north of Samuel Jones’ brick dwelling-house,” and the mercenaries scrambled up the bank of the road alongside the orchard, and resting their muskets on the upper rails, discharged them at the small body of Continentals. This was merely an episode in the engagement, and was one of many similar incidents alluded to by Capt. Montressor, in the remark, “ Some skirmishing began in the valley in which the enemy was drove.”* The American artillery Sullivan had placed in the centre of the line, where he had taken his position, and he ordered the guns discharged as quickly as possible to stop the progress of the British and to give the brigade 1 At half-past three the whole moved toward the enemy in three columns,—Journal of Capt. Montressor, Pennu. Mag. of Hist., vol. v. p. 416. 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. a. p. 316. 3 Penna. Mag. of History, vol. v. p. 416. under DeBorre time to form, for that body had been thrown “into the worst kind of confusion” before the assaulting party was upon them, and although Sulli- van sent four of his aids, two of whom were killed in the effort to adjust the disorganized division, and had gone himself to rally the men who had fallen out of ranks, he succeeded only in partly forming there a line of battle. Conscious that the artillery on the centre com- manded both the right and left of the ‘line, he re- turned to that point, determining to hold the position as long as possible, knowing that if it was carried “it would bring on a total rout, and make a retreat very difficult.” The right, however, was demoralized, and though some of the troops in that division were ral- lied and made a show of resistance, the greater por- tion could not “be brought to do anything but fly.” In front of the American left was a plowed field, and the attack at this point was made by the Guards, the First British Grenadiers, and Hessian Grenadiers; and although it was claimed by Gen. Howe that, notwith- standing a heavy fire of artillery and musketry, his troops pushed the rebels at once from the position they had taken, the fact is that for nearly an hour the struggle for the possession of the summit was con- tinued, and although five times did the British sol- diers drive the American troops from the hill, as often was it retaken. The regiments of Drayton, Ogden, and Hazen’s “ Congress’ Own” stood firm on the left, while the resistance of Stirling and Stephens was highly creditable, the main defense being made by the centre, where Sullivan exhibited great per- sonal courage, and doubtless by his example ani- mated his men in their contest with an overwhelming force. At length the left wing broke and fled, pur- sued by the Guards and Grenadiers into a thick woods, whence the larger part of the American troops * escaped, while the English were “entangled, and were no further engaged during the day.” The centre still remained firm; and here Gen. Conway, by the good conduct of his brigade, gained consider- able reputation for himself (which he subsequently tarnished at Valley Forge), the Twelfth Pennsylva- nia, under his command, suffering very heavy loss. Cornwallis now turned the whole fire of his artillery on the small body of men who still stood in line, and they were soon compelled to retire, a movement which was effected with some degree of steadiness and an occasional resumption of the offensive, since they took with them their artillery and baggage. The noise of heavy ordnance almost due north from Chad’s Ford apprised Knyphausen that Gen. Howe had succeeded in turning the right wing of Washing- ton’s army, and, although the musketry firing could be distinctly heard, it was not until an hour before the sun’s setting that the Hessian commander made the attempt to cross at the ford.* It is doubtful whether 4 Penna, Archives, 2d series, vol. x. p. 316. 62 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Wayne had more than a thousand men who before that day had been under fire to resist the passage of the creek by the enemy. Knyphausen, taking ad- vantage of the smoke from his own and the American cannon, for they had been firing forsome time, marched his column, under the immediate command of Maj.- Gen. Grant, into the stream, and, notwithstanding Proctor’s guns and the artillery with Wayne, plowed gaps in the advancing ranks, so that for days after- wards “the farmers were fishing dead bodies from the water,” ' the crossing was made, and the redoubt cap- tured. ‘Mad Anthony” knew that a retreat was in- evitable, but his pugnacious nature, and that of the Pennsylvania line in his command, was loath to re- tire before an enemy, but the appearance of a large body of English troops from Cornwallis’ division, on his right, compelled a hasty and disorderly retreat, in which he and Maxwell were compelled to abandon the greater part of their artillery and stores. The handsome black horse which Col. Proctor rode that day was shot from under him, but subsequently the State of Pennsylvania, in consideration of his bravery on that occasion, remunerated him for the loss he had | sustained. The Pennsylvania militia, under Gen. Arm- | strong, which had taken no active part in the battle, | fled with the rest of the American soldiers, and joined the demoralized body, which then almost choked the Concord road with a struggling mass of panic-stricken men hastening wildly in the direction of Chester. Washington, when he received positive information that the British left wing had made its circuitous march from Kennett Square to Jefferies’ Ford, the first part of the route under the guidance of Joseph Parker, whom Sir William Howe had compelled to point out the most direct road to Trimble’s, and from Jefferies’ Ford by Emmor Jefferies, and had already ‘ turned Sullivan’s flank, started across the country for the scene of conflict, as already mentioned. He had immediately commanded Greene’s division, con- vance to the support of the right wing. With the promptitude ever noticeable in Greene’s movements, the latter immediately put his division in motion. Weedon’s brigade was on the advance, and at trail arms, the men, guided by the noise of battle, and knowing that Sullivan could have no line of retreat “but towards Dilworthtown, as the British right wing had outflanked it to the left, and intervened between it and Chad’s Ford,” double-quicked nearly to Dilworthtown, four miles in forty-five minutes, and then by a wheel to the left of a half-mile, he was enabled to occupy a position where, opening his ranks, he let the retreating, discomfited battalions pass through while he held the pursuing British in check and saved the American artillery. Previous, however, to Greene’s coming to their re- 1 Mr. Auge’s statement, published in Futhey and Cope’s “‘ History of Chester County,” p. 81. lief, a number of Americans were induced to make a stand, and rallied on a height to the north of Dil- worthtown, where, under the personal command of Washington, who had reached the field, accompanied by Lafayette, the latter for the first time under fire in America, a stout resistance was made. It was here that the marquis was wounded. He stated thata part of the American line had broken, while the rest still held its ground ; and to show the troops that he “ had no better chance of flight” than they, he ordered his horse to the rear, and dismounted, he was endeavor- ing to rally the disorganized column, when he was struck in the left foot by a musket-ball, which “ went through and through.” The fact that Lafayette was wounded was immediately carried to Washington, “with the usual exaggerations in such cases.” The surgeon endeavored to dress the injured foot on the battle-field, but the firing was so sharp that the at- tempt was abandoned, and the young Frenchman mounted his horse and galloped to Chester, where, becoming faint from loss of blood, he was “ carried into a house and laid on a table, where my (his) wound received its first dressing.”? Before he per- mitted his injuries to be cared for, Lafayette stationed a guard at the old decayed draw-bridge at Chester Creek (the site of the present Third Street bridge) to arrest stragglers and return them to their regiments, The Baron St. Ovary, who was aiding Lafayette in the endeavor to rally the American soldiers, was not so fortunate as the marquis, for he was captured by the English, and to be consigned to the tender mer- cies of that fiend, William Cunningham, provost- marshal of the royal army, was certainly less to be desired than a wound which healed kindly in two months. The enemy meanwhile pressed the Americans back- ward until Weedon’s brigade came in sight, and Sul- livan joining him with some of his men, the battle _ continued until many of the fugitives had succeeded sisting of Weedon’s and Muhlenberg’s brigade, to ad- . in effecting their retreat. At a place then called Dilworth’s Path, now known as Sandy Hollow, the American army made its final stand. It is said by Irving that Washington, when riding in the neigh- borhood previous to the battle, had called Greene’s at- tention to that locality, suggesting that if the army should be driven from Chad’s Ford there was a point well calculated for a secondary position, and here Greene was overtaken by Col. Pinckney, an aid of the commander-in-chief, ordering him to occupy that place. Be that as it may, Greene formed there; Weedon’s brigade, drawn up in the narrow defile, flanked on either side by woods, and commanding the road, while Greene, with Muhlenberg’s—the fight- ing. parson—brigade formed on the road on the right. The English troops, flushed with success, for it is idle to say they were not the victors of the day, came on, and were surprised at the unexpected resistance they * Poulson’s Advertiser, Philadelphia, Feb. 25, 1825, THE BATTLE OF BRANDYWINE. 63 encountered here. Charge after charge did they make, but were repeatedly driven back. Gen. Howe states, “ Just at dark the infantry, Second Grenadiers, and fourth brigade had a brief action beyond Dil- worth, between the two roads which run from Dil- worth to Chester.” Capt. Montressor tells us that here the heaviest fire during the battle for the time was poured on the British soldiers. Indeed, he re- cords, ‘‘ Late in the evening, when the action was near concluded, a very heavy fire was received by our grenadiers from six thousand rebels, Washing. ton’s rear-guard, when Col. Monckton requested me to ride through it to Brig.-Gen. Agnew’s brigade and his (4) twelve-pounders, which I did in time enough to support them; and by my firing the (4) twelve- pounders routed the enemy.”! The latter statement is not accurate, for Weedon, after holding his posi- tion until the demoralized troops had retreated down the Wilmington road to the Concord road, fell back in good order on Greene, and gradually the whole division drew off, showing their fangs to their enemy, who did not pursue the retiring Continentals. It is even stated that many of the American officers were so enraged at the result of the conflict that they de- manded to be led immediately against the enemy, | but Washington shook his head, replying, “Our only recourse is to retreat.”” Greene, whose blood was up from the conflict and defeat, asked how far they must retreat? America if I order you,” was the stern reply.” The American troops, considering the circum- stances, fought well. the Twelfth Pennsylvania, commanded by Col. Walter Stewart—said to have been the handsomest man in the Continental service—of Conway’s brigade; of the Fifth Virginians, Woodford’s brigade, commanded by Col. John Marshall, afterwards the great chief justice of the United States ; and the Tenth Virginia, under Col. Stevens, in Weedon’s brigade. The First, Third, and Sixth Maryland Regiments, and the First Dela- ware, under Gen. Smallwood, acquitted themselves with marked bravery, while the Second, Fourth, and Seventh Delaware and German Regiments, four com- panies recruited in Pennsylvania, and the like number in Maryland, were the first to give way, and retired in disorder from the field. This was largely due to the fact that Gen. DeBorre did not possess the confi- dence of his troops. The Eighth Pennsylvania, Col. Bayard, suffered greatly, and in the action Bayard was struck down by a cannon-ball, which broke the barrel of a rifle on the shoulder of Sergt. Wyatt, as well as the sergeant’s shoulder, and then struck Bayard on the head and shoulder, “turning him over on the ground for nearly two rods,” when Lieut. Pat- terson helped the colonel to his feet, who, the latter 1“Byelyns in America,” by Gideon D, Scull, Oxford, England, 1881 (privately printed), p. 266. 2 Headley’s “ Life of Washington,” p. 256, “ Over every hill and across every river in | y Particularly was this true of | the other two of iron of a new construction.” states, ‘was frantic” at his unceremonious treatment. The Eleventh Pennsylvania lost so heavily that it was subsequently consolidated with the Tenth. Capt. Thomas Butler, of the Third Pennsylvania, for rally- ing a detachment of retreating troops, was on the field publicly thanked by Washington. Capt. Louis de Fleury conducted himself with such gallantry that Congress presented him with a horse to substitute his own, which was killed in the battle, and Gen. Sulli- van’s horse, ‘‘the best in America,” was shot under him in the engagement. Count Casimir Pulaski, the Polish nobleman, highly distinguished himself that day, when, as a volunteer in the American Light- Horse, he rode within pistol-shot of the British lines to reconnoitre. This action and his conspicuous bravery won him troops of friends, so that when he was appointed brigadier-general, with a command of cavalry, it met fully the approval of public opinion. The actual loss of the American forces can only be approximated, since Gen. Washington never made a detailed report of this battle. The British claimed the loss was about a thousand killed and wounded and five hundred prisoners, together with nine “ Branfield pieces, one more of a composition,’ and one brass Howitzer, with several ammunition wagons.”’* Howe reported his own loss as only five hundred and seventy- eight killed and wounded, including officers, a state- ment that is not probably correct,? while Capt. Mon- ’“We took ten pieces of cannon and a howitzer; eight were brass, Materials for History, by Frank Moore, quoted in Penna. Mag. of History, vol. i. page 294, note. “Tn the war of the Revolution a singular cannon was made by a person who afterwards lived in the village (Mount Holly, N.J.). It was con- structed of wrought-iron staves, hooped like a barrel, with bands of the same material, excepting there were four layers of staves breaking joint, all of which were firmly bound together, and then bored and breached like other cannon. . William Denning (he died in the ninety-fourth year of his age) was an artificer in the army of the Revo- lution. He it was who, in the day of his country’s need, made the only successful attempt ever made in the world to manufacture wrought-iron cannon, one of which he completed in Middlesex, Pa., and commenced another and larger one at Mount Holly, but could get no one to assist him who could stand the heat, which is said to have been so severe as to melt the lead buttons on his coat. The unfinished piece is now (1844) in the Philadelphia Arsenal. The one completed was taken by the British at the battle of Brandywine, and is now in the tower of London. The British offered a stated annuity and a large sum to the person who would instruct them in the manufacture of that article, but the patriotic blacksmith preferred obscurity aud poverty in his own beloved country, though the country for which he had done so much kept her purse closed from the veteran soldier until near the period of his decease.” Barber and Howe’s Historical Collections of New Jersey, pp. 113-114. 4 Penna. May. of History, vol. vi. p. 297, 5In the Penna. May. of Hist., vol. iv. page 121, is given what purports to be a memorandum of the British forces at the battle of Brandywine, and the loss sustained by the several divisions. The document was, it is stated, found in one of the British officers’ marquet, at Germantown, Oct. 4, 1777, which, after being in possession of Col. Thomas Forrest, subsequently came to John F. Watson, the annalist. The total loss as given in the memorandum is nineteen hundred and seventy-six. In Headley’s Life of Washington, page 258, is published a paper found among those belonging to Gen. James Clinton, and in his handwriting, indorsed, “ Taken from the enemy's Ledgers, which fell into the hands of General Washington's army at the action of Germantown.” An ex- amination of the two statements shows that the one isa copy of the other, although there is a difference of ten in the grand total, the latter being nineteen hundred and eighty-six. This occurs in the loss of the Firat 64 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. tressor tells us that the British troops had sixty killed and three hundred wounded. Certain it is that the English not continuing the pursuit is some evidence that they were in no condition to do so. Thomas Paine declared that Brandywine, “excepting the enemy keeping the ground, may be deemed a drawn battle,” and that as Washington had collected his army at Chester, “the enemy’s not moving towards him next day must be attributed to the disability they sustained and the burthen of their wounded.”! The dead of both armies, it should be remembered, were left on the field and had to be burned, while the number of wounded was so great, that on the Sunday following the battle (September 14th) Drs. Rush, Leiper, Latimer, Way, and Coates, with Mr. Willet, a mate in the hospital, with their attendants, who had been sent by Washington, arrived at headquarters of the British army, or, as Capt. Montressor records the incident, came “‘to attend the wounded Rebels left scattered in the Houses about the field of Battle un- attended by their Surgeons until now.” To return to the army, which was drifting down the road to Chester in a confused mass. The artillery saved from the enemy’s clutches jolted and surged along as rapidly as the tired horses could be made to go'under the goading whip, while the baggage-wagons crowded to the front amid the oaths of the teamsters and the panic-stricken men who were forced to make room for the vehicles to pass. Fortunately the early evening was still and clear, and the moon looked down on the defeated, demoralized men, who tiring at length of their senseless flight, the disorder in a meas- ure ceased as the weary journeying came near an end, so that the guard at Chester bridge, placed there by Lafayette, succeeded in gathering the men into some- thing like company and regimental order without much difficulty. Greene’s division, as well as many of the men from other commands, preserved a mili- tary organization, and they marched from the field in columns becoming the brave soldiers they had proved themselves to be on the heights of Brandywine. In Chester the noise of the distant cannonading could be distinctly heard, like far-away mutterings of thunder, and after the battle had been lost, the bearers of ill tidings traveled fast with their unwelcome in- telligence. Before dusk the first of the discomfited American forces began to straggle in, spreading all kind of rumors regarding the results of the contest, and the ancient borough was never so aroused. In Philadelphia all was excitement. Paine states that he was preparing dispatches for Franklin ‘ when the report of cannon at Brandywine interrupted my (his) proceedings.” ” Hessians at the Upper Ford, under Cornwallis,—the Forrest memoran- dum making it sixty, while that of Clinton’s places it at seventy. The two papers differ somewhat in designating the numerals of the British regiments. The Clinton paper is probably the most accurate. 1 Paine’s letter to Franklin, Penna. Mag. of History, vol. ii. p. 283. 2 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. ii. p. 283. Irving (Life of Washington, vol. iii. p. 222) thus describes the excitement in Philadelphia: “The scene Far into the night the American army kept march- ing into Chester, and it is related that after the moon had get Col. Cropper, then a captain in the Ninth Vir- ginia Infantry,—a part of Greene’s command covering the retreat,—because of the darkness, and to prevent his men being crowded off the approaches to the bridge at the creek, fastened his handkerchief on a ramrod, and stood there holding it aloft as a signal until his command had filed by. Hon. William Darlington has recorded the escape of Col. Samuel Smith, of Maryland, from the field, as related to him by the old veteran, who subsequently defended Fort Mifflin so determinedly. Having be- come separated from his command in the retreat, and, apprehensive of falling into the hands of the enemy, the colonel rode to the house of a Quaker farmer, whom he desired forthwith to conduct him by a safe route to Chester. The latter protested against the undertaking, but Col. Smith drew a pistol, stating that if he did not get his horse at once and do as he asked, he was a dead man. The Quaker, in alarm, exclaiming, ‘“‘ What a dreadful man thou art!” did as he was told. ‘‘ Now,” said Col. Smith, “I have not entire confidence in your fidelity, but I tell you ex- plicitly that if you do not conduct me clear of the enemy, the moment I discover your treachery I will blow your brains out.” The terrified farmer there- upon exclaimed, “ Why, thou art the most desperate man I ever did see.” However, he brought the colonel safely to Chester and was rewarded for his services. At midnight Washington addressed a letter to Con- gress, apprising that body of the loss of the battle. The missive is dated Chester, and traditionally in the Kerlin family, it is said, he wrote the letter at the Washington House, on Market Street. It was pub- lished by the order of Congress, and is as follows: “ CHESTER, September 11th, 1777. “Twelve o’clock at night. “Srr:—I am sorry to inform you that in this day’s engagement, we have been obliged to leave the enemy masters of the field. Unfortu- nately the intelligence received of the Enemy’s advancing up the Bran- dywine and crossing at a ford about six miles above us, was uncertain and contradictory, notwithstanding all my plans to get the best. This prevented my making a disposition adequate to the force with which the enemy attacked us on our right; in consequence of which, the troops first engaged were obliged to retire, before they could be reinforced. In the midst of the attack on the right, that body of the enemy that re- mained on the other side of Chad’s ford, crossed and attacked the di- vision there under the command of General Wayne, and the light troop under General Maxwell; who after a severe conflict, also retired. The militia under the command of General Armstrong, being posted at a ford about two miles below Chad’s, had no opportunity of engaging. “But though we fought under many disadvantages, and were from the cause above mentioned, obliged to retire, yet our loss of men is not, I am persuaded, very considerable; I believe much less than the ene- my’s. We have also lost seven or eight pieces of cannon according to of this battle, which decided the fate of Philadelphia, was within six and twenty miles of that city, and each discharge of cannon could be heard there. The two parties of the inhabitants, Whig and Tory, were to be seen in groups in the squares and public places, awaiting the event in anxious silence. At length a courier arrived. His tidings spread consternation among the friends of liberty. Many left their homes; entire families abandoned everything in terror and despair and took refuge in the mountains,” CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. 65 the best information I can at present obtain. The baggage having been previously moved off all is secure; saving the men’s blankets, which at their backs, many of them doubtless are lost. “T have directed all the troops to assemble behind Chester, where they are now arranging for the night. Notwithstanding the misfortunes of the day I am happy to find the troops in good spirits, and I hope another time we shall compensate for the losses now sustained. “The Marquis La Fayette was wounded in the leg, and General Wool- ford in the hand. Divers other officers were wounded and some slain, but the numbers of either cannot be ascertained. “G, WASHINGTON. “P.S.—It has not been in my power to send you earlier intelligence ; the present being the first leisure moment I have had since the engage- ment.” The American army assembled to the east of Ches- ter along the Queen’s Highway, and Washington, after dispatching this letter, went to the present Leiperville, where, still standing on the north of the road, is the old stone dwelling, then the home of John MclIlvain, in which the chief of that retreating army passed the night after the ill-starred battle of Brandywine. Gen. Howe demonstrated in this battle his ability to command armies successfully, and the skill with which he manceuvred his troops in a country of hill and vale, wood and thicket, showed the accomplished, scientific soldier. The rapidity with which Washing- ton brought order out of disorder was shown when the American troops marched through Darby to Phila- delphia, on September 12th, in the soldierly bearing of that part of the army which the day before had fled from the field a panic-stricken mob. Taking all things into consideration, never was Washington’s wonderful command of men and extraordinary ca- pacity to recover from disaster more exhibited than at this period of our nation’s history, and that in this emergency the whole country turned to him as its fore- most man is evidenced in that Congress, while the thunder of the cannons of Brandywine was yet heard in Philadelphia, clothed the commander-in-chief with almost dictatorial power for two months. CHAPTER IX. FROM THE DEFEAT AT BRANDYWINE TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. Ow the afternoon of September 12th, the day suc- ceeding the battle, Maj.-Gen. Grant, with the First and Second Brigades of the English army, marched from Chad’s Ford to Concord meeting-house, whence he sent out foraging-parties to bring in wagons, horses, provisions, and cattle from the surrounding neighbor- hood. Early the following morning (Saturday, the 18th), Lord Cornwallis, with the Second Battalion of Light Infantry and Second Grenadiers, made a junc- tion with Gen. Grant and advanced to the Seven Stars, in Aston, within four miles of Chester. The day was very cold, as the noticeable equinoctial gale of the fol- lowing Tuesday was already threatening. It may be 5 that an advance party of the British troops that day went as far as Chester, for on Sept. 18, 1777, James Dundas wrote from Billingsport that “the people em- ployed here begin to be very uneasy, since we have heard that Chester is in possession of the enemy.” ? Notwithstanding this assertion, I doubt much whether the ancient borough was occupied by any of the com- manding army officers at that time, for on September 15th Capt. Montressor records in his journal? that “the Commander in Chief went with his Escort ouly of Dragoons to Lord Cornwallis’ Post } of a mile west of Chester,” and under the same date he states, ‘‘This night at 8, the body with Lord Corn- wallis moved from near Chester toward the Lancaster road.” The day following the battle of Brandywine, Coun- cil called for the militia in the several counties—the fourth class in Chester County—“ to turn out on this alarming occasion,” and to march to the Swede’s Ford, on the Schuylkill, unless Washington should command them to rendezvous elsewhere. On the 18th, Washington, whose army was resting at Ger- mantown, instructed Col. Penrose to overflow the ground upon Providence Island, which necessarily meant cutting the banks at Darby Creek, so as to pre- vent the English army, should it march immediately to Philadelphia, from erecting batteries in the rear of Fort Mifflin, or carrying it by a land force in that direction. On September 15th, Washington broke camp at Germantown and marched his soldiers along the Lancaster road. From the Buck Tavern, in Hav- erford township, he called the attention of Council to the pressing necessity for an immediate supply of blankets for the troops, stating that he had been “told there are considerable quantities in private hands, which should not be suffered to remain a moment longer than they can be conveyed away.’’$ The American commander had fully determined to meet the British army again in battle before the city of Philadelpbia should fall into the hands of the enemy. For that purpose he had turned his column westward, and that evening Washington was en- camped in East Whiteland township, Chester Co., in the vicinity of the Admiral Warren Tavern. Late in the afternoon of September 15th the report was received by Gen. Howe that the American army, as he supposed, in flight, was “ pursuing the road to Lancaster,” * and at eight o’clock that night, Lord Cornwallis moved from near Chester towards the Lan- caster road, following the Chester and Great Valley road, “by way of the present village of Glen Riddle, Lima, and Howellville and by Rocky Hill and Goshen Friends’ meeting-house.”*® The next morning Gen. Howe, who had remained at Birmingham for five days 1 Penna, Archives, 1st series, vol. v. p. 616. 2 Penna, Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 35. 3 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. v. p. 624. 4 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 35. 5 Futhey and Cope’s “ History of Chester County,” p. 78. 66 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. after the battle,’ on the morning of the 16th, marched towards Lancaster by the way of the Turk’s Head (now West Chester), Goshen meeting-house, and the Sign of the Boot, on the Downingtown road, and at eleven o’clock made a junction with Cornwallis’ division, the latter column moving in advance until it had gone about a mile and a half north of Goshen meeting- house, where, about two o’clock, the two armies con- _ fronted each other, and Wayne attacked the British right flank with so much spirit that in a few moments the action would have become general, when, doubt- less, owing to the discharge of musketry, the heavy, low-hanging, scudding clouds broke into a deluge of rain, accompanied by a tempest of wind, which re- sulted in separating the armies immediately. So far as the American troops were concerned, they were in a few moments wet to the skin. Their ammunition was ruined, owing to their cartouch-boxes and “‘ tum- brels” being so defectively constructed that they were no protection from the rain. About four o’clock, Washington retired to Yellow Springs, which place his army reached in the night, and the next morning the commander-in-chief retreated with the main army up the Schuylkill, crossing it at Parker’s Ferry. While the English forces lay at Birmingham, Jacob James, a loyalist of that neighborhood, re- cruited in Chester County a troop of light-horsemen, and when the army marched away, he and his com- pany followed the British standard. “The Chester County dragoons, under Captain James, subsequently took part in the surprise of Col. Lacey’s Militia Bri- gade, lying at Crooked Billett,” on April 30, 1778, and in March, 1780, Capt. James was captured in North Carolina. President Reed, on April 18th of the latter year, wrote to Governor Caswell stating that James had been ‘a distinguished Partizan here in the Winter 1777, & particularly active in Kidnap- ping the Persons in the Vicinity of the City who were remarkable for their Attachment to the Cause of their Country. He was also éxtremely troublesome to the County by stealing & employing his Associates in stealing Horses for the British Army.” President Reed therefore requested Governor Caswell “ that he may not be exchanged as a common Prisoner of War, but retained in close Custody untill a favorable Opp’y shall present to bring him to this State for Tryal.”? The regular British officers, however, were not over- scrupulous in this matter of appropriating horses to their use, for, on Sept. 19, 1777, Lieut.-Col. Harcourt, with a party of dragoons and light infantry, came from Howe’s encampment in Goshen, on the Phila- delphia road, and from Newtown Square brought a hundred and fifty horses to the enemy.’ The British not only had made these advances by land, but on September 17th Howe was notified that several of the English vessels of war had arrived in the river, *‘ and three vituallers, one at anchor, in the Delaware off Chester.”* The “Roebuck,” Capt, Hammond, whose presence in the river, as heretofore noticed, had made that officer familiar with the navi- gation of the Delaware River, at least as far as Wil- mington, was one of the advanced men-of-war. Ad- miral Earl Howe, after the battle of Brandywine, hastened with his fleet into the river and anchored his vessels along the Delaware shore from Reedy Island to New Castle. Washington, as well as Gen. Howe, when tbe latter by “doubling on his tracks” had crossed the Schuylkill and captured Philadel- phia, knew that the English commander must have uninterrupted water communication to maintain his army, and while the enemy were resolved to do every- thing they could to force the passage of the river, the American authorities were equally resolved to keep up, if possible, the obstruction. “If these can be maintained,” wrote Washington to Congress, ‘‘ Gen. Howe’s situation will not be the most agreeable ; for, if his supplies can be stopped by water, it may easily be done by land.”* When the city fell, on September 25th, Gen. Howe sent a messenger to notify the Eng- lish fleet, then at Chester, that his had taken posses- sion of Philadelphia. That communication by the river must be had was well understood by the Eng- lish officers, for, in a letter from Lieut.-Col. William Harcourt to Earl Harcourt, dated at Philadelphia, Oc- tober 26th, he remarks that “it was absolutely neces- sary we should open a communication with our fleet ;” ® and in the letter he narrates the attempts, up to that time, made by the British commander to that end, the defeat of Col. Dunop at Red Bank, the attack on Fort Mifflin, the repulse of the English forces there, and the destruction of the frigate “ Augusta” and sloop-of-war ‘“ Merlin,” classifying them as ‘ checks following so close upon the back of each other.” The enemy, however, had already made unwelcome visits to the section of country now Delaware County, for a resident of Philadelphia, under date of October 3d, records that “‘a foraging party went out last week towards Darby and brought in a great number of cattle to the great distress of the inhabitants.”’ We also learn that on October 5th (Sunday) a captain of the Royal Artillery, with thirty men, went to Chester to bring to Philadelphia two howitzers and a large number of mortars. A battalion of Grenadiers and the Twenty-third or Welsh Fusileers accompanied them as an escort.6 On September 29th, Col. Stirling, with two British regiments, crossed the river from Chester, and took possession of the fortifications at Billingsport, which was manned only by militia, who, 1 See “ A plan of the Operations of the British & Rebels Army in the Campaign, 1777,” under Descriptive Letter F, “The Evelyns in Amer- ica,” p. 252, 2 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. iii. p. 191. 3 Penna. Mag. of History, vol. vi. p. 38. 4Ib., p. 37. 5 Sparks’ “ Correspondence of Washington,” vol. v. p. 71. 5 “Phe Evelyns in America,” p. 246. 7 “Diary of Robert Morton,” Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. i. p. 12. 8“ Journal of Capt. Montressor,” Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 42. CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. 67 after spiking the cannons and setting fire to the bar- | death.* Gen. Armstrong, on the 14th, informed Coun- rack, withdrew without firing a gun.’ The force under Stirling is stated by Col. Bradford to have been Highlanders and marines from the man-of-war. Capt. Montressor says the troops were the Seventy-first Highlanders. On October 4th the enemy retired, excepting three hundred men, after they had made some unsuccessful efforts to remove the obstructions sunk in the river there, and on October 6th the British set fire to all the works and house, and the men who had been left to garrison the fort were withdrawn. The same evening Commodore Hazelwood of the Pennsylvania navy came down the river with the row-galleys, and attacked the British vessels of war between Fort Island and Chester. The firing ‘“ was almost a constant cannonade,” and resulted in the British vessels getting under way, retiring to Chester, where nine of his Majesty’s war ships were then lying? The same evening the Forty-second and Tenth British Regiments, with two howitzers and two mortars, marched to Philadelphia to protect a large quantity of provisions landed at Chester for the use of the army, which were then being transported to the city. In the evening of October 11th, about three hundred American militia entered the town of Ches- ter and captured the loyal sheriff of Sussex County, Del., who had sought shelter there under the British authorities. The night after the battle of the Brandy- wine, Governor McKinley, of that State, was taken from his bed and made aprisoner. In retaliation for that act the Governor offered a reward of three hun- dred dollars for the arrest of the sheriff, at whose in- stance it is said McKinley had been apprehended. The day previous to this bold movement of the milita, Col. Boyd, sub-lieutenant of Chester County, was instructed to call out the fifth class of the militia to defend the inhabitants from foraging parties, and that a troop of fifty horsemen should be organized for that purpose. The ammunition required for these has- tily-assembled forces was ordered to be placed at Col. Boyd’s immediate disposal. On the 13th of October it was reported that Gen. Proctor, with sixteen hun- dred men, was then in Newtown township, almost sixteen miles from Philadelphia.’ Potter had been ordered to keep a sharp lookout for parties of Eng- lish foragers, and if possible prevent any provisions from being taken from the west side of the Schuy]kill to Philadelphia for the use of the British troops. Congress had also by resolution declared that any one who should furnish provisions or certain other desig- nated supplies to the British forces, or who should be taken within thirty miles attempting to convey such interdicted articles to any place then occupied by his Majesty’s soldiers, would be subject to martial law, and if found guilty of the offenses, should suffer 1 Marshall’s “ Life of Washington,” vol. iii. p. 176. 2 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 648. 3 Penna. Mag. of Hist. vol. i. p. 18. cil that his division had been separated, that Gen. Potter with his brigade had been “sent to Chester County to annoy the Enemies’ small parties, whether Horse or foot, that may be found on the Lancaster or Darby roads, prevent provisions going to the Enemy, &c. I have heard,” he continued, “of a fifth class of the militia of that County being ordered to remain for its own defence, which is very proper, the Com- mander of that Class ought to communicate with General Potter & occasionally take his instructions.’’® On the 15th the British fleet moved up the river and joined the “ Roebuck” and “ Vigilant,” that then lay at anchor off Little Tinicum Island, the latter having the day before come up the Delaware sufficiently near to exchange shots with Fort Mifflin. The Americans were still confidently relying on the strength of the chevaua-de-frise, being entirely unaware of the fact that Robert White, who had been employed to sink the obstructions, was a traitor, as his subsequent base conduct showed, and had designedly left the channel near the Pennsylvania side open. Yet even after the forts were in the hands of the British, the approach to the city of Philadelphia was regarded as so hazard- ous that most of the English vessels lay in the river below the Horse-Shoe, making the town of Chester the port where they discharged supplies for the army. Richard Peters, as secretary of the United States Board of War, on Oct. 18, 1777, called President Wharton’s attention to information received, that a great number of the inhabitants of Chester County had furnished intelligence to and supplied the enemy with provisions while they were in that county, with- out which assistance it was believed the British would not have succeeded in the capture of Philadelphia. The authorities of the United States were determined to render such service impossible, and to that end urged upon the State that “the great principle of self Preservation requires that the most effectual means should be forthwith pursued to put it out of their Power to persist in their former Mal-Practices, by taking from them such Articles of Cloathing & Provisions, & of the former particulary shoes, stock- ings & Blankets, as might serve for the comfort & subsistence of the Enemy’s Army, & the Acquisition whereof is of absolute Necessity to the existence of our own.” The War Department, therefore, urged on Council that “spirited and determined militia,” com- manded by discreet and active officers, should be im- mediately sent to Chester County to collect blankets, shoes, and stockings from all of the inhabitants that had not taken the oath or affirmation of allegiance to the State of Pennsylvania, and that all provisions and stock which might be useful to the enemy should be removed to a point beyond the latter’s incursions. 4 Marshall’s “ Life of Washington,” vol. iii. p. 172. 5 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. v. p. 673. 6 Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 192, note. 68 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Gen. Washington, it was apprehended by Richard Peters, would order Gen. Potter to co-operate with the officers appointed for that purpose by Council.! On the 21st, which was possibly the day Council re- ceived the dispatch just mentioned, for it had been sent from York to Lancaster, Col. Evan Evans, Col. William Evans, Col. Thomas, Col. Gibbons, Col. Thomas Levis, Capt. William Brooks, and Capt. Jacob Rudolph were appointed to collect the articles enumerated from persons who had not publicly given in their adherence to the State of Pennsylvania, and were instructed to give certificates to owners whose goods were taken, allowing them three pounds for new single blankets. The articles thus taken were to be delivered to the clothier-general. Dr. Smith tells us that this order bore with unusual harshness on the Quakers, who were indeed a class peculiarly situated, their religious principles prevented them from taking the oath of allegiance and abjuration, for not only did they suffer from the inconvenience of parting with the necessaries for their family, but in addition, “their conscientious scruples would not permit them to re- ceive the proffered compensation.” ” At this time the British were making every effort to forward the siege they had begun of Fort Mifflin, where, under the supervision of Capt. Montressor, bat- teries had been erected on Providence Island in the rear of the fort and communication had also been es- tablished with the fleet by way of Bow Creek. On the 23d of October an unsuccessful attack was made on the fort, twenty vessels taking part therein, but in the action the frigate “ Augustas,”’ a new sixty-four gun ship, got aground, was set on fire, her magazine exploded and she was a total wreck, as was the “ Mer- lin” sloop-of-war, which ran on the chevaua-de-frise and sunk. The day before the attempt to carry Red Bank by assault had resulted disastrously for the British arms. On the 25th, Col. Joseph Reed, then at Darby, wrote to Council that a deserter from the Hessian Losberg regiment stated that the British army “must retreat in a few Days to Wilmington if they cannot get up their Provisions. Great Distress for Provisions in Town.” Hence, when the news of Burgoyne’s surrender was received in Philadelphia on October 31st well might Capt. Montressor record: ““We are just now an army without provisions, a Rum artillery for Beseiging, scarce any amunition, no clothing, nor any money. Somewhat dejected by Burgoyne’s capitulation, and not elated with our late manceuvres as Dunop’s repulse, and the ‘ Augustas’ and ‘Merlin’ being burnt and to complete all, Block- aded.” Gen. Potter was active in his efforts to harass the enemy and cut off their means of supply, for we learn from a letter to President Wharton, written on Octo- ber 27th, that when he first went to Chester County with his command the country people carried to the city all kinds of marketing, but that he had put an end to that trade, no one being suffered to go to Philadelphia without a pass, At the time he wrote, sixty ships of the enemy were lying at and below Chester. From the best information he could get he learned that provisions ‘‘ is very scarce and deer in the city,” and he also stated that he had moved all the beef cattle and the flour from that part of the county,— the territory now included within the present limits of Delaware County. : Two days after the date of this letter Gen. Wash- ington (Oct. 31, 1777) wrote to Gen. Potter: “ As soon as the Schuy!kill is fordable, I will send over a large body of militia to you, fur the purpose of executing some particular matters. The principal one is to endeavor to break up the road by which the enemy have a communication with their shipping over the islands (by Bow Creek) if practicable; and to remove the running-stunes from the mills in the neighborhood of Chester and Wilmington.” The commander-in-chief was very explicit in the orders to Gen. Potter, and the latter was ‘instructed to execute them at once, and, if he had no teams or insufficient means of transporting the stones, he was directed to impress wagons. The grist-mills from which the stones were to be taken he designated thus: “Lloyd’s, about two miles on this side of Chester (afterward Lapadie, Leiper’s, Snuff-mills); Robinson's, on Naaman’s Creek ; Shaw’s, about one mile back of Chester (now Upland), and the Brandywine mills. . . The stones should be marked with tar and grease, or in some other manner, that it may be known to what mill they belong, that they may be returned and made use of in the future, and they should be moved to such distance that the enemy cannot easily recover them. If there is any flour in the mills it should be removed, if possible, after the stones are secured. I am informed that there is a considerable quantity in Shaw’s mill, particularly, which there is reason to believe is intended for the enemy. It is very convenient to the navigation of Chester Creek, and should be first taken care of. I beg you may instantly set about this work for the reason above mentioned. That no previous alarm may be given, let a certain hour be fixed upon for the execution of the whole at one time, and even the officers who are to do the business should not know their destination till just before they set out, lest it should take wind.” In a postscript, Washington says, “I have desired Capt. Lee, of the Light-Horse, to give any assistance that you may want.”® That this order was carried into effect we learn from a letter dated Nov. 4, 1777, written by Maj. John Clark, Jr., to Washington, in which he informed the general that, ‘ Near Hook fell in with Capt. Lee with a few dragoons and about sixty of foot, among whom were a fewriflemen. . . . The mills are dismantled, and we drove off some fat cattle from the shore at Chester, which I believe were intended for the enemy.‘ I have been unable to find where the mill-stones were taken, or how long their owners were deprived of them. Certain is it that after the British evacuated Philadel- phia, the mills mentioned were in full operation. The service of light cavalry was indispensable in moving rapidly from place to place in order to inter- cept the enemy in their raids in the neighborhood of 1 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. v. p. 686. 2 §mith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 319. * Annals of Buffalo Valley, by John Blair Linn, p, 144. + Bulletin of Penna. Hist. Society, vol. i. No. 10, March, 1847, p. 34. CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. the city and in rescuing booty from their foraging parties or in driving cattle beyond their reach So important was it deemed to have such bodies of men in Chester County that Council, October 31st, ordered Cols. Cheyney and Granow, without loss of time, to form three or four troops of light-horse, particularly in the southeastern parts of the county—now Dela- ware County—and in the formation of such mounted troops the advice and direction of Gen. Potter was to be taken., The militia officers designated immedi- ately set about carrying out the orders they had re- ceived, for on November 8th, Gen. Potter, who then had his headquarters at Mr. Garret’s, in Newtown, wrote to President Wharton that considering the close approach of winter, he doubted whether the men could be raised and equipped sufficiently early to be of any service in the then campaign, and that he then had volunteers who were acquainted with the country, and answered every purpose of dragoons. If it was- necessary to have dragoons for an emer- gency, Washington would send any number that might be required. The reasons assigned by Gen. Potter seem to have fully satisfied Council, for nothing more appears in reference to the troops of light-horse- men from Chester County. Meanwhile the British forces were making regular siege to Fort Mifflin, for the scarcity of provisions was such that already many articles of food had so advanced in price in Philadelphia that they had thereby been banished from the tables of all but the wealthier classes, and provender for animals was difficult to procure. Although the city had fallen, on the whole, considering the repulse of the fleet at Fort Mifflin and the defeat at Red Bank, together with the stirring tidings from the North that Bur- goyne had been captured, the outlook for the enemy was in nowise promising. For a number of years before the war, the industrious residents of that part of Chester County bordering on the Delaware, at a considerable outlay of labor, time, and money, had constructed dikes or embankments of earth along the | river bank, so that much of the low and swampy ground had been converted into rich meadow land. As a means of defense, Council had determined to cut these banks when necessary, and flood the meadows. Hence we find that on November Ist, Capt. Montres- sor, who was constructing the batteries on Carpenter’s and Providence Islands, and who had effected com- munication with the fleet by the way of Bow Creek, . records on that day that ‘two hundred of the Rebels employed in cutting up the road to Bow Creek, and breaking down the dam to overflow us.”’ Previous to this, however, the meadows had been flooded, for ina letter to Gen. Potter, dated October 31st, Washington says, “I am glad to hear the flood had done so much damage to the meadows. Endeavor by all means to keep the breakers open.” Still the engineers strength- ened the batteries, the work of reducing the fort and opening the river continued. 69 The American army even then, before the winter at Valley Forge set in, was miserably deficient in clothing, and as the State authorities were highly in- dignant at the peaceable position assumed by the Society of Friends, on Nov. 8, 1777, Council ap- pointed collectors in the several counties in the State to collect from those persons who had not taken the oath of allegiance,' or who had aided the enemy, arms, accoutrements, blankets, woolen and _linsey- woolsey, cloth, linen, stockings, and shoes for the army. For Chester County, the following persons were named: Col. Evan Evans, Philip Scott, Esq., Elijah McClenaghan, Capt. John Ramsay, Patterson Bell, Esq., Thomas Boyd, Esq., Capt. Benjamin Wal- lace, William Gibbons, Col. George Pierce, Capt. McCay (Concord), Maj. Thomas Pierce, Capt. John Gardiner, Samuel Holliday, Col. William Evans, Capt. Israel Whellam, John Wilson, Capt. Samuel Vanlear, Thomas Levis, Esq., Capt. William Brookes, Capt. David Coupland, Col. Thomas Taylor, Capt. Allen Cunningham. At this juncture John James, a loyalist, seems to have been especially objectionable to Council, hence on Nov. 18, 1777, all the officers of the commonwealth, | both civil and military, were instructed to exert their | utmost endeavors to apprehend him, so that he might be dealt with according to law; and the following day | Col. Smith, lieutenant of Chester County, was notified | that John James had been clandestinely sent out from Philadelphia by Gen. Howe into his territory, and the | authorities were particularly desired to secure “ that dangerous emissary and to bring him to condign pun- ishment.” To that end Col. Smith was instructed to watch the quarterly meetings of the Society of Friends, where, it was believed, he would endeavor to promote the views of the invaders. That he might be more ' readily detected, Council furnished a personal descrip- | tion of James, setting forth that he was then about thirty-five years of age, five feet ten inches in height, slenderly made, with a stoop in his walk, leans side- wise, and his shoulders falling greatly. His eyes were dark, and his hair, for he wore no wig, was of a dark hue. His apparel, it is stated, was generally a light drab, in “the strictest Quaker fashion, being lengthy in the skirts aud without pockets,” while his hat was very plain. He was, so the instructions stated, a native of Chester County, and would be better known to the people there personally than by any description Council could give of him. “ For this man you have, 1 No wonder is it that the Society of Friends, as a body, were uot zeal- ous in the interest of the Continental authorities, a sentiment that the men most active in the Revolutionary war were mainly responsible for. Washington, usually so just in all his acts and deeds, was eminently un- just to Friends, Even at the time was this patent to careful observers, for in a letter written from Philadelphia by a British officer, shortly after the capture of that city, he says, in speaking of those who remained when it fell, “ Till we arrived I believed it was a very populous city, but at present it is very thinly inbabited, and that only by the canaille and the Quakers whose peaceable disposition has prevented their taking up arms, and consequently has engaged them in our interests, by drawing upon them the displeasure of their countrymen.” 70 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. under cover of this letter,’ the order to Col. Smith stated, ‘‘a warrant, tho’ it is expected that all agents of the Enemy will be industriously sought after and apprehended by you and many other friends of their country without such formalities.’”! The arrest of John James and many other Friends had been specially ordered by Council in the month of August preceding the battle of Brandywine.? On Monday morning, Nov. 10, 1777, the batteries opened on Fort Mifflin, which was bravely defended until the Saturday, when, about a half-hour before midnight, the garrison evacuated it, the enemy’s fire having rendered it no longer tenable. Before they retreated the Americans applied the torch, and when the royal troops took possession and hauled down the flag, which had been left flying at the staff-head, it was almost aruin. A noticeable incident of the siege, which shows the changes in the river, is thus mentioned in Howe’s dispatch : “On the 15th, the wind proving fair, the ‘ Vigilant’ armed ship, car- rying 16 twenty-four pounders, and a hulk with three 24-pounders, got up to the Fort through the Channel between Providence Island and Hog Island, those assisted by several ships-of-war in the Eastern channel, as well as by the batteries on shore, did such execution upon the Fort and collateral block-houses that the enemy, dreading our impending assault, evacuated the island in the night between the 15th and 16th and it was possessed on the 16th at daybreak by the grenadiers of the guards.” We are told by Marshall® that the water between Providence and Hog Islands had been deepened be- cause the obstructions in the main channel had forced a strong current in that direction, which fact was en- tirely unknown to the garrison. The sharpshooters from the round-top of the “ Vigilant” kept the Ameri- can guns silenced, for no sooner would a man show himself than he was fired at from the vessel with fatal effect. The American galleys endeavored to drive the English man-of-war away, but without success, and the evacuation of the fort became absolutely necessary. Lord Cornwallis, who was incensed at the stubborn resistance, and the loss its capture had occasioned to the British forces, with around army oath denounced it as “‘a cursed little island.” * Fort Mercer, at Red Bank, still floated the rebel colors, and it was determined by the invaders to effect its reduction. Hence, to that end, Gen. Howe, on the evening of the 18th,° dispatched Cornwallis from Philadelphia with three thousand men, comprising 1 Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. vi. p. 4. 2 Colonial Records, vol. xi. p. 342, 3 Marshall’s “ Life of Washington,” iii p. 178. 4 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. vi. p. 23. 5 John Clarke, Jr.,on Nov. 20,1777 (Penna. Archives, Ist series, vol. vi. p. 23), wrote to Paul Zantzinger, Esq., that at noon on the 17th, Cornwallis left Philadelphia for Chester with three thousand British and Hessian troops, but Gen. Howe in his report unequivocally asserts that the soldiers began their march on the night of the 18th, in which state- ment he is supported by Robert Morton (Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. i. p. 28), and by Capt. Montressor (Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 193). Clark in a postscript to this letter says, “I dined at Chester yesterday, caught a person supplying the enemy at the wharf with provisions, the boat pushed off, and about thirty pounds uf butter and an excellent cheese fell into my hands.” the Fifth, Fifteenth, Seventeenth, Thirty-third, and Fifty-sixth Regiments, exclusive of the Hessians and Light Infantry, with twelve pieces of cannon and several howitzers,® together with a number of baggage- wagons, which body marched across the Middle Ferry on their way to Chester. On the morning of that day a numerous fleet of British vessels sailed up to and anchored off Billingsport,” where was disembarked a large body of troops, estimated by the American scouts as nearly six thousand men. They had “ ar- rived a few days before from New York,’’ under the command of Maj.-Gen. Sir Thomas Wilson, with whom were Brig.-Gens. Leslie and Patton.® As the division under Cornwallis was on the march to Chester they drove in the American pickets on the Darby road, who, retreating, sought shelter in the Blue Bell Tavern, on Crum Creek, and from the win- dows fired at the advancing English. Two men of the Thirty-third Regiment were killed, one of the slain being the sergeant-major.* The Grenadiers, en- raged, broke ranks, rushed into the house, and there bayoneted five of the Americans who had taken ref- uge in the inn. They would have killed all the militiamen had not the British officer interfered, and the whole picket, which had numbered thirty-three including the killed, were captured. The column then resumed the march and encamped a few miles eastward of Chester, from which point marauding parties plundered the inhabitants. The next day they reached Chester, where the whole of Cornwallis’ command was embarked on transports by sunset, and it was conveyed across the Delaware to Billingsport, where he united his forces with those of Gen. Sir Thomas Wilson. Washington, who had been apprised of this move- ment, ordered Gen. Greene to repair to the support of Gen. Varnum at Red Bank, and Gen. Huntingdon was immediately detailed with a brigade to reinforce the garrison. It is not within the scope of this work to narrate the circumstantial story of the unnecessary abandonment of Fort Mercer, which was vacated on the evening of the 19th, and the destruction, two days thereafter, of eight American armed vessels and two © Bulletin Pennsylvania Historical Society, No. 10, March, 1847, p. 15. Robert Morton (Penna. Mag. of History, vol. i. p. 28) says the troops num- bered three thousand five hundred, Maj. John Clark, Jr. (Penna. Ar- chives, 1st series, vol. vi. p. 23) ina letter to Paul Zantzinger places the command at three thousand, and in his letter to Washington in the Historical Society’s Bulletin, the first citation of authority in this note, he makes the number five thuusand. Clark seems to have made a mistake of one day in the date he gives in the letters just quoted. He reports Cornwallis as coming from Philadelphia on the 17th instead of the 18th, and his crossing to Billingsport on the 18th instead of the 19th. 7 Penna, Archives, 1st series, vol. vi. p. 27. 8 Gen. Howe's report, dated Nov, 28, 1777. p. 288. 9 John Clark, already quoted, says there was a captain, a sergeant- major, and three privates killed on the part of the English. Morton says there were two grenadiers killed in the British forces, and Mon- tressor put the enemy’s loss a sergeant-major. I have followed Morton both as to the number of men under Cornwallis, and the number killed at the Blue Bell. > Havzard’s Register, vol. ii. CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. 71 floating batteries to prevent them from falling into the hands of the enemy. On the 20th, at mid-day, Cornwallis took possession of Fort Mercer, the force under his command amounting to six thousand men. Thus the great water-way—the Delaware—was opened to the British fleet, and supplies could easily and without opposition be forwarded to the city in vessels of light draught. Notwithstanding the river was cleared to the enemy their ships seemed not, in most instances, to have gone above Chester. The day that Cornwallis crossed the river to Billingsport, Maj. Clark, who was then at Mrs. Withy’s tavern, now the Columbia House, stated that ‘‘ eighty sail lie op- posite to Bridgeport.” Capt. Montressor’s journal shows that in most instances the British vessels as- cended the Delaware no higher than Chester. On Nov. 21,1777, he records: ‘‘ This morning sailed from Chester, dispatches for New York.” On April 8, 1778, he tells us: ‘Arrived the ‘ Brune’ frigate at Chester, having sprung her mainmast in the late Gale. Arrived also the ‘Isis,’ ship of war, with 8 transports, part of 12 separated in ye gale.” On the 22d: “ This day arrived at Chester a fleet of 35 sail from New York with forage, &c. Also arrived the ‘Eagle’ (the flag-ship) with Lord Howe.” On the 28th, ‘“‘The ‘Lord Hyde’ Packet only sailed from Chester this morning,” and on May 7, 1778, “The | ‘Porcupine’ sloop of war arrived at Chester this evening from England, where she left 25th of March last.” Joseph Bishop, an octogenarian resident of Delaware County, who died many years since, related that when a boy he stood on the porch of Lamoken Hall, now the Perkins mansion, in South Ward, and watched the fleet practicing, and on several occasions when receiving distinguished passengers, the yard- arms were manned and the vessels gayly dressed with many flags and streamers. Even Gen. Howe, when he sailed for Great Britain, was compelled to descend to the vessel by land, for on May 26, 1778, Montressor notes: “ Early this morning sailed from below Bil- lingsport for England the ‘ Andromeda’ frigate, Brine commander, in whom went General Sir William Howe.” The day before Montressor had gone with Howe to Billingsport. When it was determined that the Continental troops | should go into winter quarters, the English general must have been speedily apprised of that movement, for on the 11th of December, the very day the army under Washington began its march from Whitemarsh to Valley Forge, and a portion of his troops had crossed the Schuylkill at Matson’s Ford, Cornwallis was in force on the other side, where Gen. Potter met him, we are told by Washington, “ with a part of the Pennsylvania militia who behaved with great bravery, and gave them every possible opposition till he was obliged to retreat from their superior numbers.” Cornwallis had in all probability made this movement as a reconnoissance, for portions of his command had been in the townships of Radnor, Haverford, and ! Darby. On the 10th, the next day, from Matson’s Ford he returned to Haverford, his command en- camping for the night at the hillside on which Haver- ford meeting-house stands, and the next day he re- turned to Philadelphia. The residents of those town- ships had cause to remember the merciless plunderings of the British troops during that raid. We learn that at this period some of the militia of Chester County had organized as a troop of horse, for on December 19th, Council ordered that in addition to their pay as infantry they should be allowed all the expenses of forage, when it could not be supplied by the commissary. Inthe same month Lord Cornwallis had been sent to England by Gen. Howe as bearer of dispatches, and subsequent thereto the English com- mander-in-chief, on December 22d, with seven thou- sand men marched out from Philadelphia, leaving Gen. Knyphausen in command in that city, and encamped on the heights of Darby, his lines extending along the road from Gray’s Ferry to the heights below the vil- lage, extending along the Springfield road to the dwelling then of Justice Parker, while their pickets in that direction were at the intersection of Providence and Springfield roads, near the house then of Mr. Swain. This movement of the British general was made for the purpose of protecting the transporting, by water, of a large quantity of forage, which the enemy had collected from the islands and in the neigh- borhood of Darby. Gen. Howe states that about a thousand tons were secured in this raid, sufficient, he estimated, for the winter consumption of the British army.! On the 24th, Col. John Bull notified Presi- dent Wharton that “By Certain Intelligence Just Recd from Head Quarters the Enemy are in a Large Body in Chester County with Genl. Howe at their head,” and in consequence of that movement he had been ordered to march to Germantown or below, towards the enemy, with six regiments of militia. Gen. Pot- ter, in a letter dated from Radnor, Dec. 28, 1777,° wrote to President Wharton that to annoy Howe as much as possible, a detachment of Continentals with Morgan’s riflemen had been sent from the American encampment to operate in connection with the militia under his command, and that they had kept close to the enemy’s lines; that on Tuesday, the 23d, thirteen of the British light horses had been captured, and ten of their horsemen, while the next day two more of their horses and riders had been taken. The activity of the Americans had prevented the enemy from plundering the inhabitants, as they usually did, but there had been little skirmishing, and but one of the American soldiers had been killed and two wounded, while upwards of twenty of the English had been captured, and a number of deserters had made their way to his lines. On the other hand, Gen. Howe re- ported that “the detachment returned on the 28th of 1 Gen. Howe’s report, Jan. 19,1778. Hazard’s Register, vol. ii. p. 288, 2 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. vi. p. 141. 72 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. December without any further attempt from the enemy to retard the progress of the foragers, than from small parties skulking, as is their custom, to seize upon the straggling soldiers, One of these parties, consisting of two officers and thirty men, were decoyed by two dragoons of the Seventeenth Regiment into an am- buscade and made prisoners.” Potter, itseems, agreed with Howe in the results of this raid, for he stated that the English had carried off large quantities of hay, and had provided themselves with winter fuel and forage, “and will bless themselves, and sit down in peace this winter in the city.” Perhaps the militia- men captured by the British, mentioned by Howe, was the same party of whom Dr. Smith records, that, under the command of Capt. William Brooke, of Haverford, —who during the second war with England was a general of the Pennsylvania troops,—they were enjoy- ing themselves in a house a mile below Darby, when the enemy suddenly surrounded the house. Brooke jumped from a window and made his escape, but in getting over a fence found that in his leap he had partially dislocated his foot, to which he was subject. “ Putting his foot through the fence, and giving his leg a quick extension, the joint was brought into a proper condition,” and he continued his flight until he reached a place of safety.’ While the British forces held possession of the city and river, many acts of inhumanity are recorded of their foraging-parties. The marine service was more objectionable in that respect than the army, and many cases are recorded of this brutality. Notwithstanding his advanced years, David Coup- land, of Chester, was earnest in his advocacy of the cause of the colonies, and previous to the battle of Brandywine having entertained the Marquis de Lafay- ette at his home, he became very obnoxious to the Tories; hence, when the British authority was tempo- rarily supreme, he was held under suspicion of com- municating with the Continental authorities. In the spring of 1778, when the “ Vulture,”? a British man- , of-war, lay off Chester, in the middle of the night, a boat’s crew came ashore, and, going to David Coup- land’s dwelling, the present Stacey house, he was taken out of bed and conveyed to the vessel, where he was detained fur many weeks a prisoner. His age, as well as the anxiety consequent on his forced detention from home, his inability to learn aught of his family, the exposure and harsh treatment, induced a low, ner- vous fever. At length, when the disease began to assume alarming symptoms, the commander of the “Vulture” had him conveyed ashore and returned to his home, but without avail. He died previous to Aug. 26, 1778, for his will was admitted to probate at that date. About the same time Capt. John Crosby, of the militia in the Continental service, was captured at his home and taken on board the vessel of war, 1 Smith's “ History of Delaware County,” p. 325. 2 Martin’s “ History of Chester,” p. 175. sent to New York, and detained there in the old “ Jersey” prison-ship for six months. Soextreme were the privations and hardships he had to undergo, that for the remainder of his life he suffered from their effects. The incidents happening during the Revolutionary struggle within the territory now comprising Delaware County were few, and generally comprise the adven- tures of a resident seeking to save bis property from seizure, or an American soldier who, while on leave of absence, had had narrow escapes from being cap- tured by the British troops. Most of these events which have come to my knowledge will be related in the history of the townships wherein the incident happened. Still, it should be remembered that while the army lay at Valley Forge the authorities were active in preparation to place the forces in as effective condition as their limited means would permit, Hence, on Jan. 9, 1778, Col. Thomas Moore was appointed wagon-master of Chester County, and on the 30th of that month a requisition for sixty wagons was made on the county, and on February 17th, recruiting being enjoined to fill out the de- pleted regiments, Council, on Washington’s recom- mendation, ordered Lieut. James Armstrong, Lieut. John Marshall, and Lieut. William Henderson to Chester County in that service. On March 11th, Robert Wilson was appointed one of the sub-lieu- tenants of Chester County instead of Col. Thomas Strawbridge, and on the 23d of that month Col. An- drew Boyd, holding the like office in the county, re- ceived two thousand musket cartridges for the use of the militia, in all probability for the use of the men instructed to prevent the farmers of the county car- rying to Philadelphia and the enemy their produce, an act on their part which might call down upon them the severest punishment, since Council had au- thorized persons so violating their orders to be subject to military law, and if found guilty to pay the penalty with their lives. The collection of the militia fines was a frequent source of trouble in Chester County, and on several occasions we find that complaints were made to Council by the officers there that they were unable to execute the duties imposed by law upon them. On May 22, 1778, Col. Boyd, one of the sub-lieuten- ants, represented that in the townships in the south- easterly parts of the county,—necessarily part of the present county of Delaware,—many of the inhabit- ants were “disaffected,” and “in a riotous & seditious manner commit Treason & felony, & oppose the exe- cution of the Law.” The lieutenant of the county, Col. —— Smith, was thereupon instructed to select seventy-five men from the militia, with a captain, lieutenants, an ensign, and the proper number of non-commissioned officers, which company was to be employed in arresting all persons who should so re- sist the execution of the laws. This specially-detailed body was placed by Council in charge of Col. Boyd, CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. 73 who was expected to use the men only in making arrests, but “that nothing be done by them by way of Punishment,” which was to be reserved until trial and sentence, for any other course would ‘be dis- creditable not only to Counsel but to the cause of Freedom.” However, on June 4th, Cols. Hannum and Cheyney informed the authorities that there was no occasion for the guard of men mentioned in order to collect the fines for non-service in the militia; that the ravages made by the enemy in their march through and raids in the county, as well as the great quantities of provisions, forage, and other supplies furnished to the American army were such that the residents there had great difficulties in raising money for substitutes and militia fines. Council thereupon ordered the company of soldiers under Col. Boyd to report to camp, and directed that in all cases where the parties to whom the certificates for articles fur- nished the government tendered those certificates in payment of their substitute money or for fine, they should be accepted by the officers, but this tender was not to include any who had obtained a certificate by assignment. On May 6, 1778, Council appointed William Evans, Thomas Cheyney, Thomas Levis, Patterson Bell, and John Hannum to act as commissioners for Chester County in enforcing the act of attainder, and on July 15th the Supreme Executive Council issued a pro- clamation calling on a large number of persons ‘* who it is said have joined the Armies of the Enemy to render themselves & abide their legal trial for their Treasons, &c.,”’ and among the number were the fol- lowing persons formerly residents of that part of Chester County which is now included within the present boundaries of Delaware County: “ George Davis, Husbandman, now or late of the Township of Spring- field; John Taylor, Tavern-keeper; John Moulder, Waterman; John Talbot, wheelwright; & Thomas Barton, Sawyer, all now or late of the Township of Chichester; . . . Edward Grissil, Laborer ; & John Wilson, Taylor; both now or Jate of the Towuship of Thornbury ; William Mil- son, Taylor; Isaac Bullock, Laborer; Benjamin James, Cooper; & John Bennet, Jun’r, Laborer; all now or late of the Township of Concord ; ... William Maddock, Tavern-keeper ; William Dunn, Laborer; Joseph Edwards, Mason; George Dunn, Taylor; James Malin, Laborer, & Gideon Vernon, Husbandman; all now or late of the Townsbip of Provi- dence ; And Christopher Wilson, Husbandman, & John Taylor, Grazier, both now or late of the Township of Ridley ; . .. Joshua Proctor, laborer, now or late of the Township of Newtown; Aaron Ashbbridge, Water- man ; Joseph Gill, Malster; Elias Wernon (“ Vernon’’), Taylor ; all now or late of the Township of Chester; And David Rogers, Carpenter, now or late of the Township of Egmant; And John Supplee, William Cald- well & James Hart, Husbandmen ; John Musgrove, Trader ; and William Andrews, Fuller; all now or late of the Township of Darby; And Wil- liam Smith of Tinicum Island ; & William Anderson, Laborer, both now or late of the Township of Ridley; Henry Effinger, Junior, Hugh O’Cain, William Kennedy, Darby O’Cain & James McClarin, Laborer ; & Isaiah Worrell, Miller, All now or late of the Township of Springfield; And Isaac Buck, Abraham Talkenton, Thomas Burns, William Clarke & George Good, laborers; and William Henry Taylor; all now or late of the Township of Providence. And George Dunn & David Malis, Tay- lors ; & William Bell, Laborer ; all now or late of the Township of New- town ; and Robert Kissack, Weaver; James Brown, Wheelwright; James German & Enoch German, Cordwainers; & Michael Crickley, Laborer; all now or late of the Township of Haverford, all now or late of the County of Chester... . And Malin Duun, Taylor; now or late of the Township of Providence; have severally adhered to & knowingly & wil- « lingly aided & assisted the Enemies of the State & of the United States of America, by having joined their Armies at Philadelphia, in the County of Philadelphia, within this State.... We the Supreme Ex- ecutive Council . . . do bereby strictly charge and require the said George Davis &c. to render themselves respectively to sume or one of the Justices of the Supreme Court, or of the Justices of the Peace. . on or before the third day of August next ensuing & also abide their legal trial fur such their Treasons on pain that every of them the said George Davis &c, not rendering himself as aforesaid & abiding the trial afore- said, shall, from and after the said first day of August, stand & be at- tainted of High Treason, to all intents & purposes & shall suffer such pains and penalties & undergo all such forfeitures as persons attainted of High Treason ought to do. And all tho faithful subjects of this State are to take notice of this Proclamation & govern themselyes accord- ingly.” Gen. Benedict Arnold, after the British army had evacuated Philadelphia, June 18, 1778, was placed in command of that city. While there, as is well known, he used his official position to further his own personal ends, and one of his speculations finally re- 1 Colonial Records, vol. xi. pp. 513-18. Governor Guerard, of South Caro- lina, having applied for the name of all the persons who has been pro- claimed as traitors in Pennsylvania, on Nov. 28, 1783, Jolin Morris pre- pared a certified list from which are taken the following names of persons trom the present county of Delaware, and those who were then recorded as from Chester, without designating the townships where they resided: Aaron Ashbridge, Chester, discharged ; William Andrews, fuller, Darby ; William Anderson, laborer, Ridley ; Isaac Bullock, laborer, Concord ; Isaac Buck, laborer, Providence ; Thomas Burus, laborer, Provideuce; William Bell, laborer, Newtown; James Brown, wheelwright, Haver- ford; William Caldwell, husbandman, Darby ; William Clark, laborer, Providence ; Michael Crickley, laborer, Haverford; George Davis, hus- bandman, Springfield; William Dunn, laborer, Providence; George Dunn, discharged; Malin Dunn, tailor, Providence; George Dunn, tailor, Providence ; Henry Effinger, Jr., discharged ; Abraham Falkens- ton, laborer, Providence ; Samuel Fairlamb, yeoman, Chester; George Good, laborer, Providence; Joseph Gill, maltster, Chester; William Heury, tailor, Providence; Benjamin James, cooper, Concord; William Kennedy, laborer, Springfield; John Moulder, waterman, Chichester ; John (William) Millson, tailor, Concord; William Maddock, tavern- keeper, Providence; John Musgrove, trader, Darby ; David Maris, tailor, Newtown ; Hugh O’Kain, laborer, Springfield ; Darby O’Kain, laborer, Springfield ; Joshua Proctor, laborer, Newtown; John Taylor, tavern- keeper, Chichester; John Talbot, wheelwright, Chichester; John Tay- Jer, grazier, Kidley; Nathaniel Vernon, late sheriff; Nathaniel Vernon, Jr., laborer, Gideon Vernon, husbandman, Providence; Christopher Wilson, husbandman, Ridley, tried and convicted; Isaiah Worral, mil- ler, Springfield. Of Chester County—Thomas Bulla, husbandman; Tim- othy Hurst, gentleman; Henry Skyles, husbandman; John Swanwick, late of Custom-house ; Richard Swanwick, late of Custumi-house; Joseph Thomas, late sub-sheriff. A John Taylor, of Chester County, was par- doned May 30, 1783, on taking oath of allegiance and giving bonds for good behavior during the war. By the time this list was made out it became a question which of the John Taylors herein mentioned had received the Executive clemeucy, and the master of the rolls himself ackuowledges in a quere that he could not determine the controversy. Penna. Archives, lst series, vol. x. pp. 250-60. On June 3, 1783, John Briggs, who had been convicted uf harboring Gideon Vernon, “an at- tainted traytor,’’ was sentenced to a fine of fifty pounds and imprison- ment to the 14th of October following, appealed to Council, who miti- gated his punishment Ly remitting the imprisonment, on his entering security for payment of the fine, fees, and costs, and to be of good be- havior fur three years. On Sept. 13, 1783, President John Dickinson is- sued a proclamation offering a reward for the noted Doan brothers, and charging many others with being implicated in their crimes, among the number Gideon Vernon. The proclamation stated that any one who should kill any of these persons fleeing from arrest, “he or they so kill- ing shall be and hereby are justified, and in case of any prosecution shall be commenced against any person or persons for the same, he or they may thereto plead the general issue and give this act in evidence.” Moreover, any person who should kill any of the persons named in the proclamation, on proof of that fact produced to the president of the State should receive a reward of three hundred pounds in good money. Colo- uial Records, vol. xiii. pp. 687-90. 74 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. sulted in casting on his reputation and character, which seemed to have had only remarkable physical bravery as a redeeming trait, the suspicion that mur- der, as well as treason, was among the crimes of which he had been guilty. The circumstances are briefly these: Jesse Jordan, a deputy wagon-master | of Chester County, on Sept. 27, 1778, with a brigade of twelve wagons in his care, was ordered by Col. Andrew Boyd, the wagon-master of the county, to Philadelphia, there to load with provisions, and thence to New Windsor. Jordan was absent much longer than was expected. On his return Col. Boyd demanded the reason, and was told that when he reached Philadelphia, Deputy Quartermaster-General John Mitchell had ordered him, with his train of empty wagons, to Egg Harbor, N. J., then a harbor for American privateers, where he was instructed to load with merchandise belonging to private persons. This he did, and when he returned to the city the goods were delivered to stores kept by private indi- viduals. Col. Boyd immediately laid the matter be- fore Council, and on Jan. 18, 1779, that body de- manded an explanation of this transaction from Gen. Mitchell. On the 23d the latter replied that he had sent the wagons to New Jersey by order of Gen. Ar- nold, whereupon Council requested the general to in- form them whether the goods transported were public or private; if the latter, to whom they belong; also desiring Arnold to refer them to the authority by which ‘“‘public wagons of Pennsylvania were sent into another State to do business merely of a private nature.” On January 30th, Jesse Jordan was fully examined respecting the circumstances of this trip. While the matter was pending Arnold left the city, and Jordan aud his teamsters being then “in great ne- cessity,” the Council considered that “the board ou’t to relieve them, so far as to advance £450 until they can procure further redress.” On the 25th of Febru- ary, Deputy Quartermaster-General Mitchell ap- peared before Council, acknowledged that the blot in his memorandum book under date of Oct. 80, 1778, was done by his orders to conceal an entry of his clerk ‘of the return of Mr. Jordan’s Brigade of wag- gons from Egg Harbor, & that the obliteration was made after the charge against Gen. Arnold for having used the public waggons for his private business had come to his (Mitchell’s) knowledge.” He subse- quently, on March 1, 1779, in a lengthy letter to Pres- ident Reed, gave a circumstantial account of the matter, and on March 27th, Timothy Matlack, the secretary of Council, wrote to Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant, stating that Council had advanced Jordan four hundred and fifty pounds, to be repaid when he should recover compensation for the use of the wagons from Gen. Arnold, and the body was anxious to learn whether legal proceedings had been instituted. There , appears no reference to the subject until October 10th, when Mr. Sergeant informed Council that he had instituted suit for Jesse Jordan against Gen. Arnold, { | but the action had at that time abated by the plain- tiff’s death, for “ Jesse Jordan has been lately mur- dered in Chester County.” That Arnold personally did that deed no one believed, but there was a general impression that of all men he had the greatest inter- est in the wagon-master’s death, and after the former’s treason many there were who thought that perhaps he knew more of the particulars of Jesse Jordan’s “taking off” than he cared to tell. The privateer brig ‘“ Holker,” named in honor of the French consul at Philadelphia, was owned by Robert Morris, and it is related that on one occasion the vessel, in lead ballast, reached the city very op- portunely, for, at the time, the American troops were entirely out of bullets. Her owner immediately ‘turned her cargo over to the authorities for the use of the army. On July 20, 1779, the “ Holker” was lying at Chester, where a crew was being recruited for the privateer, and Maj. George Harvy was in- structed by Council to allow the then owner of the vessel, Mr. McClanachan, to have ten tons of disa- bled cannons for ballast. The price was not exactly stipulated, but the major, as some guide for him in adjusting that matter, was informed that when these disabled cannon were delivered at Chester the iron- master would give one ton of bar iron in exchange for four tons of the old metal. The brig, as before stated, was then lying at Chester, commanded by Capt. Matthew Lawler, and at that place, from July 17th to August 2d, a crew was recruited for the vessel by Davis Bevan, captain of marines, who had before been mustering officer for the county of Chester. The following list gives the names of the crew, as well as the sums paid each man at the time of enlisting :* Received as | Received as Bounty. Bounty. £ad £oad. John Bayley.......sececee 37 0 William Coulter... 18 15 0 William Mackey... . 37 10 0; John Virdine wae 15 0 Christopher Battnel...... 37 10 0 : John Hambright, Sr...... 18 15 0 George Trusk - 37. 10 0! John Cockshott............ 1 0 Joseph Marshall........0 37 10 0! Nathaniel Carr... eas 0 Nicholas Francis (lst)... 37 10 0 ' Patt Cain........... 0 William Smith . 37 10 0 | John Whitehead. 0 John Basset... 10 0 Matthew Penell. 0 William Swan: 10 0 William Webb. 0 Edward McDonagh....... 37 10 0: Roger Brown. 0 William Jobnson.. i 10 0 James McAlester... 0 John McGlocklin.... 37 10 0 ; George McCay... 0 Joseph Claterbuck... 10 0° George Wass...... 0 Frederick Waggoner. 10 0° Allen Mongomery... 0 David Kenedy.. 15 0 Thomas Burnel. 0 Joseph Bowdin 10 0°: John Plog...... 0 Eber Perry 10 0 David Bamiskay 0 John Aruy 10 0! David Harding... 0 Jobn Dunham.. 10 0, Patrick Shannon. 0 George Geddey. 10 0, John Slaughter. 10 Nathaniel Heath... 10 go David Cahill.. 6 Charles Orsonall... 10 U Charles Griffith..... 9 Joseph Hulings. 10 G! Matthew W. Murray. 0 i 10 0 George Parker... 0 2 6 Andrew Rowar. 0 2 6. Benedicteo Pida. 0 John Wallace... - 28 2 6: James Hambleto 0 Robert Loague (carpen- | Peter Abrams... 5 0 ter’s Mate)... cee 2 6 Jesse Hall..... 0 Peter Anderson 15 0° Richard Dickson... 0 John Harkins... 15 0, Patrick McCauld.. : 0 David Colemar. 15 0' John Crawford..........0+. 0 1¥From the manuscript receipt-book of David Bevans, captain of marines on the “ Holker,” now in the Delaware County Institute of Science, Media, Pa. CONCLUSION OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. 75 Received as Received as Bounty, Bounty. s. a / & 4 ad. John Neagle 15 0 Anthony Elton............18 15 9 James Harper.... 15 0° Blenkine Cornaickl 15 0 Thomas Henry (a mu- , Samson Moote..... 15 0 ACEO) veviensevacsanessuauseces 18 15 0+ Daniel Binckar. 15 0 William Smith (2d)...... 18 15 @ | Joseph Seilings 15 0 Thomas Apkin.. 18 15 O , William Poke... 15 0 Fraucis Brown.. - 18 15 9 | John Hoddy.... 15 0 - 18 15 0 | James Robertson. 15 0 - 18 15 0! Patrick McGinnis, 15 0 - 18 15 0 |; David Cahill. 15 0 -18 15 0 | Richard Cock 15 0 James Anderson -18 15 0!| Jeremiah Casey 15 0 Hugh Harris..... . 18 15 0 | Thomas Hornsby. 15 0 Robert Cornish. - 18 15 0 | Cornelius Bookly 15 0 Samuel Armitage. - 18 15 O | Samuel Clayton... 15 0 J. Bickham....... 18 15 0 | Stephen Green.... ae 15 0 Dennis Lynch... - 18 15 O | Thomas Forrest........... 15 0 Richard Bickerton - 18 15 0 (| David Buchanan Ralph Horn... -18 15 0 | cabin boy).... 10 0 Thomas Lee. - 18 15 0 | Joel Jones.... $100 Charles Rouff. 18 15 0 | Ekena Tessu 100 William McG - 18 15 0; Porpino 100 July 28, 1779, Barney Cuningham receipted for £11 As. for one hand- vice for use of brig “ Holker.” July 30,1779, Thomas Fell receipted for thirty-six pounds for two muskets for use of brig ‘ Holker.” Aug. 2, 1779, Thomas Lee receipted for fifteen pounds in part of prize money. Aug. 2,1779, George Geddey receipted for two hundred and four dol- lars by bounty paid David Forsyth and James McNeil, masters-at-arms. The April preceding the “ Holker” had captured a schooner of ten guns and forty men, and also two armed sloops early in the month of July, before she lay at Chester to refit and recruit her crew. In July, 1780, the ‘‘ Holker” had an engagement off the coast of New Jersey with the loyal privateer ‘‘ Lord Rod- ney,” in which the cutter, after an action of an hour and a half, was captured, her commander, Samuel Moore,! and five of her crew killed, and twenty wounded. The “ Holker” suffered severely in the engagement, her loss being six killed, including the first lieutenant, and fourteen wounded.’ The war-cloud had drifted away from Chester County, and never since that time have the good people of this section of the commonwealth been dis- turbed by the tread of hostile forces in martial array. But, although the husbandmen could resume their la- bors without the constant dread that inimical parties might gather the harvests and lay waste their fields, the State of Pennsylvania still made heavy demands on the public both for men and means to carry on the war. In the fall of the year 1778, when Sir Henry Clinton, in accordance with instructions from the ministry, had detached five thousand men to the West Indies and three thousand to Florida, the destination of these troops being unknown, the mysterious preparations aroused widespread apprehension as to the objective point of the expedition. Naturally the public dis- quietude was increased when the attack on Little Egg Harbor and the butchery of the sleeping, unarmed infantry attached to Pulaski’s brigade, was known. + Penna. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. p. 255. 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. i. p. 370,in note C, it is said that the captain of the “Holker” was killed. The captain of the ‘Lord Rod- ney” was, but Matthew Lawler, captain of the “ Holker,” lived to be On October 19th, Council ordered that the militia in the counties of Philadelphia, Chester, Bucks, and Lan- caster should be held in readiness to march at the shortest notice, but the minute-men were not further called out that year, nor were they in June, 1780, when Gen. Knyphausen crossed from New York and made an incursion into New Jersey. The purpose and extent of that movement being unknown, Council, on the 12th of that month, ordered the fourth class of the militia of the counties of Philadelphia, Bucks, and Chester to hold themselves in readiness to march to the support of the Continental army, should later intelligence indicate that such a movement was neces- sary. But orders to take the field were not issued. Not long afterwards, on July 28th, President Reed wrote a complaining letter to Col. Robert Smith, that Chester was lagging behind the other counties in for- warding volunteers, and urged him to exertion in fur- nishing the quota of militia, which must report, he said, according to Washington’s command, at Trenton, by the 12th of August. In September of the follow- ing year (1781), after the army had gone southward, ; and Benedict Arnold was making preparations to undertake his infamous expedition, under the British flag, against New England, on September 25th, Col. Smith was again ordered to hold the militia of the county in readiness to march on a moment’s notice to Newtown, Bucks Co., notwithstanding there was no recent tidings of the movements of the enemy at New York. The troops had assembled on the occasion, and had already begun to move as required, for, on Oc- tober 10th, Col. Smith wrote Council that, as ordered, the fourth class of the militia of Chester County had twice marched, but as often the orders had been countermanded, and the men were on furlough till further commands were issued. The order to march had been countermanded before the troops left the county, and as but few of the enrolled men failed to appear, the fines on the delinquents would amount toa very smallsum. The cost of supplying necessaries for the men was considerable, and hence, as the time was short, there was a general objection to assessing on the delinquents the ‘‘ whole costs of the tour.” No further particulars respecting the calling out of troops appear during the remainder of the war; although on Jan. 30, 1781, James Moore received five hun- dred pounds to enlist men into the Pennsylvania line from Chester County. The incidents happening in the county now became of little general interest. On March 30, 1780, Col. Robert Smith was appointed lieutenant of the county, with Col. Thomas Cheyney, Lewis Gronow, Andrew Boyd, Thomas Levis, and Robert Wilson as*sub- lieutenants. On June 8th the quartermaster-general stated that Col. Boyd had been instructed to send sixty wagons and teams from Chester County, but none had up to that time reported. Council, therefore, on the 21st, ordered a requisition on the several counties for mayor of the city of Philadelphia from 1801 to 1804, both years inclusive. | wagons, fixing the quota of Chester at forty, which, aT a HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. if “ cannot be procured in any other way, must be im- pressed.” On July 25th, Council made requisition for supplies for the army, and Chester County was re- quired to furnish eight hundred barrels of flour per month, two thousand bushels of forage per month, two hundred horses, forty wagons, and five hundred militia; and, on August 8th, David Denny for First; Owen Thomas, Second ; Joseph Luckey, Third; David Wilson, Fourth; Thomas Strawbridge, Fifth; John Crosby, Sixth; George Price, Seventh, and Joseph Spear for Eighth Battalion, to collect quota of horses in Chester County, under direction of Col. Andrew Boyd, wagon-master. On August 10th, John Beatan was appointed paymaster of the militia, with instruc- tions that Continental money was to be paid out at the rate of sixty dollars for one in that of State issues. As an illustration of the depreciation of Con- tinental money,—owing to the fact that Congress then could not levy a tax to provide for the redemption of these issues,—some of the payments made for cattle in 1780 are annexed : June 20, 1780, John Crozer received $6000 for 5 head of cattle. June 27, 1780, Gideon Gilpin £2400 for 6 cattle. June 27, 1780, Israel Gilpin £700 for 20 sheep. June 27, 1780, James Hannum £2000 for 5 cattle. June 27, 1780, Caleb Pyle £1240 for 5 cattle. July 12, 1780, Isaac Sewell £19,106 for 14 head of beef cattle. In the latter month, Commissary-Gen. Ephraim Blaine gave notice that William Evans was his rep- resentative in Chester County to receive live stock, and that “ the magazine” for such supplies was located in Philadelphia. Early in April, 1782,—for the vessel did not sail from Philadelphia until the 8th of that month,—occurred in Delaware Bay the remarkable engagement between the Pennsylvania vessel-of-war ‘Hyder Ali,” com- manded by Capt. Joshua Barney, and the British ship “General Monk.” teeu six-pound guns and a crew of one hundred and ten men, while that of the English had one hundred and thirty-six men and twenty nine-pounders. The vic- tory of the former was largely due to the fact that the understanding between Barney and his men was that every order should be executed as though an exactly opposite command had been given. Thus, while the two vessels were approaching each other, Barney cried out, ‘Hard a-port your helm; do you want him to run aboard of us?” The Englishman heard the order and made preparations to counteract the movement, as the American captain hoped, so that when Barney’s vesse] answered the helm, which had been clapped hard a-starboard by the men at the wheel, the enemy’s jib-Boom caught in the fore-rigging of the ‘“ Hyder Ali,” and there remained during the short engage- ment which followed, giving the latter a raking posi- tion. The same confusion of orders mystified the Brit- ish captain throughout the action, for, as understood, when Barney gave the command “ Board!” his men were to fire, and when he shouted “ Fire!” they were i . : 1 The American vessel carried six- to board. When the vessels ran together, as stated, Barney in a loud voice gave the order “ Board!” and the stubborn Englishmen crowded forward to repel the enemy, when a broadside was discharged at close range; and so rapidly did the American gunners load, that in twenty-six minutes, the time the action lasted, the “ Hyder Ali” had fired twenty broadsides. The English vessel kept her colors flying until she had twenty killed and thirty-three wounded. Among the former were the first lieutenant, purser, surgeon, boatswain, and gunner; among the latter Capt. Rogers and every officer on board, except a midshipman. The American loss was four killed and eleven wounded. Captain Barney left the “Hyder Ali” at Chester, at which place he took Capt. Rogers ashore to the house of a Quaker lady, who nursed him until he had en- tirely recovered from his wounds. The victor pro- ceeded to the city in his prize. In the latter part of 1782, Col. Hannum, Col. Fra- zier, and Dr. Gardner, as representatives of the Coun- cil in Chester County, seized a quantity of British goods while passing through the county, designed for the prisoners of war at Lancaster. The wagon-train was under a flag of protection granted by Washington. The seizure was made because of some alleged viola- tion of the passport granted to those having the goods in charge. Congress, immediately after receiving in- formation of the fact, took action in the matter, and it was presented to the attention of Council in sucha manner that the latter required the opinion of At- torney-General Bradford as to whether Council could summarily dispose of the case, and thus prevent a trial of the cause in Chester County. Bradford was clearly of opinion that Council had no authority to interfere, asserting that if the goods seized were ueces- sary for the prisoners of war and were covered bya passport issued by the commander-in-chief, they were not contraband or liable to condemnation; if the passports had been violated the offense was one against the law of nations, and punishable in our courts of judicature. On Jan. 17, 1788, Congress appointed a committee to confer with Council on the subject, and the following day President John Dickinson, in a special message, called the attention of the attorney- general to the matter. On the 2lst the committee of Congress, a committee from the General Assembly, and Council met in the chamber of the latter body, where the question was discussed, and the position of each fully understood, and adjourned to the 23d, when a representation of the case as agreed on was drafted, which, after being signed by Cols. Hannum and Fra- zier and Dr, Gardner, was referred to Congress, and thus the difficulty terminated; although on March 24, 1788, John Gardner, sheriff of Chester County, 4 brother of the doctor, was instructed by Council to proceed with the utmost diligence in securing such of the goods seized in the county which had not as yet been delivered to the person designated by the Sec- retary of War to receive the articles. THE ERECTION OF DELAWARE COUNTY. The surrender of Cornwallis on the afternoon of | Oct. 19, 1781, was virtually the last great struggle of the Revolutionary war, although some sharp engage- ments followed that decisive event, and, as will be no- ticed in the preceding narrative subsequent to that date, the public records demonstrate the belief so gen- eral that the end was at hand, that matters other than the preparation and march of troops occupied almost exclusively the attention of the authorities. On the 15th of April, 1783, Council issued a proclamation an- nouncing a cessation of hostilities, but the treaty of peace was not concluded until November 30th. The independence of the United States was announced by the king of Great Britain, in his speech on Dec. 5, 1783. CHAPTER X. FROM THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR TO THE EREC- TION OF DELAWARE COUNTY. WHEN the storm of war had subsided, Chester County, with the whole country, suffered severely in the process of adjustment from a warlike to a peaceful condition which naturally followed the recognition by the king of England of the independence of the con- federate colonies. The period between the cessation of hostilities until the establishment of the present form of Federal government was indeed dark and un- promising, when Washington himself could, express- ing the regret he felt at the death of Gen. Greene, pen these words, ‘I have accompanied it of late with a query whether he would not have preferred such an exit to the scene which it is more than probable many of his compatriots may live to bemoan.” This locality had, it is true, recovered greatly from the effects of the pilferings and exactions it had sustained at the hands of the British troops when five years before the invading army overran the territory, but it never- theless lost heavily in the fluctuation in values and general depression which followed the close of the war. Added to this, the constant manifestations of weakness in the crude system of State and confederated government which had maintained from the period of the Declaration to the conclusion of the struggle, were in nowise calculated to allay public anxiety. The war had for five years been carried on with Continental money, emanating from a body without authority to impose taxes, and absolutely dependent on the several State Legislatures for enactments regulating the law- ful value of the currency they put forth; hence, as the confederation was held together by a wisp of straw, necessarily the Continental notes depreciated until, in September, 1779, the aggregate sum of these bills in circulation amounted to two hundred millions of dollars. The discount became so great, and so rap- idly did the currency depreciate in value, that further 17 issues of these notes were impracticable, and in the beginning of the year 1781 they ceased to circulate, becoming worthless,—dying as a medium of exchange in the hands of their possessors. It was now abso- lutely essential that some new means should be pro- vided to carry on the war. In 1780, it will be remem- bered, the Bank of Pennsylvania was established, its purpose being to supply the army of the United States with provisions. On May 17, 1781, Robert Morris proposed the plan for a bank to Congress, which scheme met the approval of that body, and it recom- mended that the several States should interdict any other banks or bankers from carrying on business within their territory during the war. Congress, Dec. 31,1781, incorporated the Bank of North America with a capital of two million dollars, most of this being subscribed from abroad through the influence of Morris.!. The States of Massachusetts and Pennsyl- vania also granted charters of a similar character, and the first Bank of Pennsylvania having done its work was discontinued. The immediate effects of the Bank of North America were highly advantageous, and aided materially in furnishing the means to carry on the war to a successful ending, but the exclusive privileges granted it, as well as the manner in which its business was conducted, created considerable dis- satisfaction, until, in 1785, a petition, numerously signed by the citizens of Chester County, was pre- sented to the Legislature, and so earnestly did the friends of the measure press the public complaints on that body that it revoked the charter granted by the State to the bank. The institution, however, con- tinued to act under Congressional authority, and in 1787 the Legislature rechartered the bank. While the country was recovering from the extraordinary exer- tions consequent on the war, many estates changed owners, and the busiest man in the county was the sheriff; yet the pressure was beneficial, inasmuch as it compelled unusual exertion among the people, and the whole system of slovenly farming, which had theretofore been the rule, gave place to careful, intel- ligent husbandry, while enterprises were projected and carried on so that in a comparatively short time the public recovered from financial depression and made rapid strides in material improvements. Local matters now exercised in a large degree the attention of the people of the State in all sec- tions. In the county of Chester the project of re- moving the county-seat from the ancient town of Chester to a more central situation was revived, for the agitation of that question antedated the Revolu- tionary war, but during the latter struggle so much greater were the issues involved to the public at large, that the scheme was permitted to slumber by its most ardent friends. Seated as the borough was on the ex- 1 Judge Peters’ account of Morris, published in Brotherhead’s “ Sketch of Robert Morris” in “‘ Lives of Eminent Philadelphians now Deceased,” p. 708. 78 HISTORY OF DELAWARE treme southeastern edge of the county of Chester, it was doubtless a serious matter to those persons resid- ing in such remote townships as Coventry, Honey- | brook, or West Nottingham, when, as jurors, suitors, or witnesses, they were compelled to attend at court. It involved considerable labor to go and return in those days, and in winter time, when, ina warm spell, the roads would be wretched beyond expression, it was a journey such as no man of these modern times would contemplate calmly. It is a theme for wonder now that previous to Jan. 28, 1766, no earnest effort was made to procure legis- lation looking to a proposed removal of the county- seat to a more central location. At the date men- tioned a petition was presented to the Legislature, setting forth the grievances of a large number of peo- ple of the county because of the location of the court ; they were so far removed from the public offices that that fact alone increased the fees charged for mileage by the officials. A class of cases of peculiar hardship they stated were, “that many poor widows are obliged to travel thirty or forty miles for letters of adminis- tration, and are put to much trouble in attending Or- phans’ Court atso great adistance.” In consideration of these and other reasons, the petitioners urged the en- actment of a law providing for the erection of a court- house, and the holding of court therein, as near the centre of the county as could possibly be done. This was supplemented on May 7th by nine other petitions of a like tenor, and on the following day the anti- removalists submitted twelve petitions, which, after calling the attention of the Legislature to the estab- lishment of Chester as the shire-town during the first visit of William Penn to his province, in 1682,) as a further reason why the location of the county-seat should not be changed, they set forth “it is noto- rious” that those persons residing in the near neigh- borhood of the court attended its sessions three times 1“That in the first regulation of the said county, in the year One Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty-two, the Honorable William Penn, Esq., Proprietary and Governor of the Province of Pennsylvania, by virtue of the Royal Charter, did order that the Townsted or Village, then bearing the name of Upland, should be called Chester, and thereupon constituted it the Shire-Town of the County of Chester, and ordained and appointed all the Courts of Judicature for the Affairs of the County to be there held and kept, and the County Goal or prison to be and remain there forever; that the said William Penn, Esq., afterwards, to wit, on the Thirty-firet day of October, One Thousand Seven Hundred and One, did grant, by charter, unto the Freebolders and Inhabitants of the said Borough, that tbe Sheriff and Clerk of the Courts of the said County for the time being, if not Residents in the said Borough should appoint and constitute sufficient Deputies, who should from Time to Time reside, or constantly attend, in the said Town of Chester, to perform the duties of their respective offices; which said Privileges (with respect to the holding of the Courts of Judicature at Chester), were afterwards estab- lished by John Evans, Esq., Lieutenant-Governor of the said Province, by an Ordinance issued by him, under the Great Seal, bearing Date the Twenty-second Day of February, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seven and afterwards confirmed by an act of General Assembly, made perpetual, and passed in the Year One thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty-one.” This interesting paper, so far as I have been able to ascertain, was first recovered from the dust of nearly a century by Messrs. Futhey and Cope, and published by them in their “ History of Chester County,” p. 116. COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. | as frequently as those living at a distance, while the deputy register, in the discharge of the duties of his office, had no connection with the courts of justice at all, The war caused an absolute cessation of the move- ment until fourteen years had elapsed, when the in- habitants of the ancient shire-town stood aghast, in the face of an act of Assembly, passed March 20, 1780, which authorized William Clingan, Thomas Bull, John Kinhead, Roger Kirk, John Sellers, John Wil- son, and Joseph Davis, or any four or more of them to build a new court-house and prison in the county of Chester, and when the proposed buildings should be ready for public use to sell the old court-house and prison in the borough of Chester. It is believed that the majority of the commissioners named were ad- verse to the proposed change,—hence the law re- mained a dead letter on the statute-book. But in 1784, the representatives in Assembly from Chester County being largely composed of removalists, a sup- plement to the former act was passed on March 22, 1784, which empowered John Hannum, Esq., Isaac Taylor, Esq., and John Jacobs, or any two of them, to put the law into execution. As all of the persons named were uncompromising removalists, they imme- diately set about enforcing its provisions. By the wording of the act they were restrained from erecting the new county buildings at a greater distance than one mile and a half from the Turk’s Head Tavern in the township of Goshen. This location tradition as- serts—a statement which Judge Futhey and Gilbert Cope say may reasonably be questioned—was inserted in this bill through the influence of Col. John Han- num, an adroit politician who, with an eye to his personal advantage, desired to bring a tract of land he owned within the site designated. In this, how- ever, he made an error, for his premises subsequently proved to be more than two miles from the Turk’s Head. The commissioners, notwithstanding Han- num’s mistake, diligently began the erection of a court-house and prison adjacent, connected by a jail- yard. After the buildings had progressed until the walls were nearly completed, and while work was suspended thereon by reason of the severe winter and before the spring permitted its resumption, the people of old Chester succeeded, March 30, 1785, in having an act passed suspending the supplemental act under which the new structures were being erected. To render themselves absolutely assured of retain- ing the county-seat in the ancient borough, a number of the anti-removalists gathered in Chester under command of Maj. John Harper, then landlord of the present City Hotel, and provided with arms, a field- piece, a barrel of whiskey, and other necessary muni- tions of war, took up the line of march for the Turk’s Head, intent on razing the walls of the proposed court-house and jail to the earth. In the mean while Col. Hannum, learning of the hostile designs of the Chester people, dispatched couriers in all directions, THE ERECTION OF calling on the friends of removal to rally to the pro- tection of the half-completed buildings, and Thomas Beaumont is said to have ridden all night from farm- house to farmhouse in Goshen and Bradford town- ships, summoning the clan. The forces under com- mand of Maj. Harper marched toward the Turk’s Head, and at night were camped at the General Greene Tavern, a few miles east of West Chester, when Col. Hannum was first apprised of their approach. The latter collected his men within the building, the win- dows boarded on the out as well as the inside and the space between filled in with stones, loop-holes being arranged at convenient intervals through which the defenders could thrust their muskets, and each man had his place assigned him where, under designated officers, they remained awaiting the approach of the enemy. The next morning the Chester people came in sight of the fortification, when Maj. Harper planted his artillery on an eminence known as Quaker Hill, commanding the court-house. The absurdity of the matter dawning on the minds of some of the men in the ranks of Harper’s troops, they contrived to bring about a cessation of hostilities, and the whole affair ended in a jollification, during which the cannon was repeatedly discharged in rejoicing over peace restored. The invaders were thereupon invited to inspect the unfinished structure. During the time the troops from old Chester were in the building, one of the lat- ter, seeing the banner of the removalists floating from the flag-staff, struck it down, which so angered the defenders that it was with much difficulty their officers could restrain them from resenting the insult by im- mediately opening fire on their opponents. Peace, however, was maintained. The armistice was based on the agreement of the removalists that they would desist from further work on the building until the Legislature should take action in the mat- ter. Although the removalists suspended labor only until the anti-removalists were out of hearing,’ they would not, had they preserved faith, been long de- layed, for, at the next session, March 18, 1786, the following curiously-entitled act became a law: “An act to repeal an act entitled an act to suspend an act of the General Assembly of this Commonwealth, en- titled an act to enable Wm. Clingan, etc.,” and under its provisions the buildings at the new county-seat were finished. On the 25th of September, 1786, Wil- liam Gibbon, the then sheriff of Chester County, by law was empowered to remove the “prisoners from the old jail in the town of Chester to the new jail in Goshen township, in the said county, and to indemnify him for the same.” 1 Dr. Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 342, says, “It has come to the author traditionally that the attack of the Chester people was instigated by the removalists proceeding with the building after the passage of the Suspension Act... . The fact that they were allowed to escape with impunity is rather corroborative of the idea that the attack was not altogether unprovoked, and rendered it probable that the cause for it assigned by tradition is the true one.” DELAWARE COUNTY. 79 The old court-house and county buildings in Ches- ter were sold on the 18th of March, 1788, to William Kerlin for four hundred and fifteen pounds. A struggle which had arrayed in bitter feeling one section of the county of Chester against the other, and | culminated in the erection of the eastern townships into the new county of Delaware, naturally drew forth many sarcastic articles on both sides of the contro- versy. The press of that day, however, did not fur- nish the same facilities for epistolary discussion as the present, hence the following address to the Legis- lature written by David Bevan,? an acrimonious anti- removalist, for the first time is given to the public: “To the Honor Representatives of the freemen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania : “Through the chanell of the press I make free to address your honor body, not choosing to petition in the usual mode, as I am too well ac- quainted with the manner pursued by some parts of Chester county, mustering scribes and getting poor-rate duplicates, and inserting names without asking consent. You, gentlemen, will no doubt receive a num- ber of petitions from those who have already got every request they wanted from the Legislature, the removal of the seat of Justice or Court of Jurisprudence from the ancient borough of Chester to that elegant and notorious place called the Turk’s Head (by some called West Ches- ter), a place as unfit for the general convenience, and much more go, that any one spot that might be pointed out within ten miles square of the above-described place, except towards New Castle line. ““We have no doubt of petitions fabricated for this purpose, that Mr. T——, the greatest advocate for this spot of any member of Chester county, might vociferate, as he often does, in the house, more for the display of his Talents than any universal good. Let us, therefore, beg, if we have sent one noisey member, that he may be heard, and, altho”he does stammer sometimes, perhaps, with the assistance of a few pebble- stones, he may become a prodigee of the age, and (may he) exceed De- mothenes to convince you of his superior abilities, I havea petition of his fabricating for the purpose of the Township of Edgmont, which shall be handed to the publick for their perusal as a pattern that any body politic corporate, &c., may have a form to fabricate petitions for such purposes, if ever any such may be needed.” On the other side the removalists were not deficient in scribes who presented the ludicrous aspect of the contest in rude derisive jests wherein their adversa- ries were burlesqued in sarcastic jingling verses, many of which in lapse of years have been entirely forgot- ten. One, however, has been preserved by Dr. Wil- liam Darlington, in a sketch of West Chester prepared by him for the Directory of that borough, published in 1857. The author of the “ Pasquinade” was Joseph Hickman, and, as we are told by Dr. Darlington, an old English wool-comber, Marmaduke Wyvil, about the beginning of this century “used to ramble about the country like an ancient Troubadour,” and a glass of cider or whiskey “would at any time procure its recital with emphatic intonation and peculiar unc- tion.” The ditty was known as “ Chester’s Mother,” and designed to give expression to the woe of the promi- nent anti-removalists, who were dependent on the public for a livelihood at the county-seat, and their 2In the receipt-book of David Bevan, in the Delaware County Insti- tute of Science at Media, will be found the draft of the above address. If it ever, as a whole, was published before its insertion in this work, I fail to find it in the files of the newspapers of that period. 80 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. lamentation consequent on the prospective loss of “a nursing mother.” ; “LAMENT OVER CHESTER'S MOTHER. “ Poor Chester's Mother’s very sick ; Her breath is almost gone; Her children throng around her thick, And bitterly do moan. “ Cries little ’Lisha! the first born— ‘What will become of I, A little orphan, held in scorn, If Mama she should die? “Not only I will be opprest ;— I younger brothers have Who cannot do without the breast When Mama’s in her grave.’ *« And then poor helpless Billy? cries— ‘Ob! how shall I be fed? What shall I do, if Mama dies? I cannot work for bread. “These little hands have never wrought Oh! how I am opprest! For I bave never yet done aught But hang on Mama's breast.’ “Little Davis 3 he comes next A puling, silly boy; His countenance appeared perplex’d And destitute of joy. “How is our dear Mama?’ he cried : ‘Think you we can her save? How is the wound that’s in her side Which cursed Hannum? gave?’ 1 Elisha Price, a nephew of Elisha Gatchell, who became so noted in the controversy between Penn and Lord Baltimore, was a lawyer of prominence in the last century, having been a student in the office of Joseph Parker. He frequently represented Chester County in the Colo- nial Legislature, and in the troublous times preceding the active out- break of hostilities in the war of Independence, he was an unflinching Whig, When the merchants of Philadelphia and New York adopted their noted non-importation agreement and asked the support therein of the people in the outlying districts, he was one of three to whom was addressed the circular sent to Chester County, and was one of the com- mittee selected by the Convention, July 15, 1774, held in this borough to consider the matter. The following day he, with his associates, met similar committees from tbe other counties in Philadelphia. In 1775 he was appointed one of the committeemen of correspondence from Chester County. After the erection of Delaware County he was ap- pointed an associate judge. He was an earnest Episcopalian, and from 1767 to 1798 his name appears among the vestrymen aud wardens of St. Paul’s Church. His wife was descended from James Barton, a minister of Friends, and “an early settler,” says Deborah Logan, “a gentleman and a person of excellent character.” Elisha Price died in 1798, a victim of the yellow fever. His two sons who survived him both lost their lives in the service of the government, Maj. Price being one of the American invaders of Canada, during the war of 1812, and died there. 2 William Kerlin, then owner and landlord of the Washington House, Chester, a strong anti-removalist. 3 Davis Bevan, captain of the schooner “ Polly,” captured by the “ Roe- buck” man-of-war ; appointed mustering-master of Chester County, was captain of marines on privateer “ Holker,” and afterwards a retail mer- chant in Chester. He, of course, was a strong anti-removalist. 4Col. John Hanuum, a militia officer of the Revolution. He was a native of Concord township, but purchasing a large farm in East Brad- ford, he became an earnest removalist. During the Revolutionary war he was one of the Committee of Seventy, appointed at the county meet- ing held at Chester Dec. 20, 1774. Col. Hannum was present with Wayne during the latter part of the day of Brandywine battle, and during the winter of 1777 was captured one night asleep in his bed by some British light-horse, who were conducted to his house by a loyal- ist neighbor. He was taken to Philadelphia, where he was retained as a prisoner of war until the following spring, when he made his escape. In 1778 he was appointed one of the five commissioners of Chester “ Says little Ned,5—' Upon my word, Poor Mama will be slain ;— Though cursed Hannum lost his sword ® He’s got it back again. “¢What shall I do, if Mama dies? What will become of Ned?’ The tears came trickling from his eyes And straight he took his bed. “Then Caley,7 he came next in view,— His mouth was all awry; Says he—‘Oh! what will Caley do, If dear Mama should die? “*She might have liv’d for many a year, And all her children fed, If Hannum hadn't poisoned her— Curse on his frizzled head!’ “Cries little John,’ the youngest son, Who just began to crawl— ‘If Mama lives, I soon shall run; If not, I soon shall fall. “Oh! may Jack Hannum quickly die— And die in grievous pain ;— Be sent into eternity That Mama may remain. “¢May all his projects fail, likewise— That we may live again!’ Then, every one roll’d up his eyes And cried aloud, ‘ Amen !’” The ancient borough of Chester had been shorn of its chief glory; the little hamlet of sixty houses® was County under the act of attainder. He was one of the justices of the peace, but resigned that office as well as commissioner of forfeited es- tates when, in 1781, he was elected to the General Assembly. He was a member of that body until and including 1785, during which time he steadily fought the battle of removal to a successful conclusion. He was very active in bringing about the repeal of the test law, and after the erection of the county of Delaware he filled many important offices in the county of Chester. Col. Hannum died Feb. 7, 1799. 5 This reference, the late Dr. Darlington, of West Chester, stated, is either to Edward Vernon or to Edward Richards, but which is now un- certain, 6 This allusion is to the capture of Col. Hannum, as heretofore men- tioned. 7 Caleb Davis, who was prothonotary from 1777 to 1789, when Dela- ware County was erected, and was a strong opponent of removal, 8 Mayor John Harper was a stanch Whig and a brave soldier. On Feb. 9, 1776, he was appointed quartermaster of the Fourth Pennsylva- nia Battalion, commanded by Col. Anthony Wayne; on Oct. 12, 1776, he was commissioned ensign in Capt. Taylor’s company of the same battalion; Jan. 1, 1777, he was appointed first lieutenant of the Fifth Pennsylvania Line, and was brigade major of Second Brigade at battle of Brandywine. A few days subsequent to that engagement Maj. Har- per, in company with Lieut.-Col. Persifor Frazer, was on a reconnois- sance, when the whole party was captured by some of Gen. Grant’s com- mand, and taken to Philadelphia. Col. Frazer succeeded in making bis escape, but Harper, after the evacuation of the former city, was sent to the prison hulk at New York, where he was detained as a prisoner for over three years, He was exchanged Nov. 4, 1780. Towards the end or after the Revolution Maj. Harper took the tavern now known as the City Hotel, and became mine host of the inn. Of course he was opposed to removal. On March 6, 1785, Harper, who was then coroner of the county, purchased the tavern property, donbtless well knowing that the Suspension Act of March 30, 1785, would be passed. His action when the forces of old Chester moved against those at West Chester has been narrated in the text. After the county-seat was removed to the latter place, Maj. Harper, believing that the sun of Chester's prosperity had set never to rise again, emigrated to the new local capital, and became the landlord of the Turk’s Head Inn there. He died at Dilworthtown shortly after the beginning of this century, and was buried at the grave- yard at Cheyney Shops, Thornbury. ® Article “Chester, borough of,” in Joseph Scott’s “ United States Gaz- etteer,” firat gazetteer published in the United States (Philadelphia) 1795. THE ERECTION OF DELAWARE COUNTY. no longer the place where the weary suitor waited on the law’s delays, or the culprit cringed in the dock; no longer did the court-house ring to the eloquent sentences of Wilson, Bradford, Chew, Levy, Sergeant, Reed, Rush, Laurence, and a score or more of noted lawyers, who, in that early day, rode circuit with the Supreme Justices, nor yet of Elisha Price and Henry Hale Graham, who made the old town their place of residence. The staffs of office had fallen from the tip- staves’ clutch, the crier’s often repeated admonition of “ Silence in the court-room !” had become a verity ; the jangling bell ceased to announce that the justices had taken their places on the bench, and the innkeepers would no longer mark with anxious longings the time for holding the quarterly courts, when their hos- pitalities should be taxed to the utmost, and money flow to their coffers. Now the vacant jail stared at the occasional passer-by with its barred windows, and the empty building returned a hollow echo to the blow of the reckless urchin who could summon courage to rap on its iron-bossed door. The very town seemed to stagnate, and the twinkle of triumph in the eyes of the Goshen and Western township peo- ple when in the spring of the year they journeyed hither to buy fish, was aggravating to the people of Chester beyond endurance. It was too much for the residents of the eclipsed county-seat to bear, hence they earnestly bestirred themselves in manufacturing public opinion looking to the erection of a new county, and so earnestly did they labor to that end that on Sept. 26, 1789, the following act was approved, au- thorizing a division of the county of Chester and the erection of a part thereof into a new county: “Wuereas, The inhabitants of the borough of Chester, and the south- eastern part of the county of Chester, having by their petitions set forth to the General Assembly of the State, that they labor under many and great inconveniences from the seat of justice being removed to a great distance from them, and have prayed that they may be relieved from the said inconveniences by erecting the said borough and southeastern parts of the said county into a separate county ; and as it appears but just and reasonable that they should be relieved in the premises, “2. Be it enacted, etc., That all that part of Chester County lying within the bounds and limits hereinafter described shall be, and the same is hereby erected into a separate county, that is to say, Beginning in the middle of Brandywine River, where the same crosses the circular line of New Castle County ; thence up the middle of the said river to the line dividing the lands of Elizabeth Chads and Caleb Brioton, at or near the ford commonly known or called by the name of Chads’ Ford; and from thence on a line, us nearly straight as may be, so as not to split or divide plantations, to the great road leading from Goshen to Chester, where the Westown line intersects or crosses the said road; and from thence along the line of Edgmont, Newtown, and Radnor, so as to in- clude these townships, to the line of Montgomery County, and along the same to Philadelphia County line, and along the same to the river Dela- ware, and down the same to the circular line aforesaid, and along the same to the place of beginning, to be henceforth known and called by the name of ‘ Delaware County.’ “3. All that part of the township of Birmingham, which, by the line of division aforesaid, shall fall within the county of Chester, shall be one township, and retain the name of Birmingham; and all that part of the said township, which, by the division-line aforesaid, shall fall Israel Acrelius, however, in his “ History uf New Sweden,” published in 1758, tells us that “ Chester, the County-town on the Delaware, is sixteen miles below Philadelphia and has one hundréd and twenty houses.” Reynolds’ Translation, p. 143. 6 81 within the county of Delaware, shall be one township, and shall retain the name of Birmingham; and all such part of the township of Thorn- bury, which, by the division-line aforesaid, shall fall within the county of Chester, shall be one township, and shall retain the name of Thorn- bury, until the same shall be altered by the Courts of General Quarter Sessions of the said counties respectively. “4, The inhabitants of the said county of Delaware shall, at al} times hereafter, enjoy all and singular the jurisdictions, powers, rights, liber- ties, and privileges, whatsoever, which the inhabitants of any other county of this State do, may, or ought to enjoy by the constitution and laws of this State. “5, The elections for the said county of Delaware shall be held at the old court-house, in the borough of Chester, where the Freemen of the said county shall elect, at the times and under the regulations directed by the constitution and laws of this State, a councillor, representatives to serve them in General Assembly, censors, sheriffs, coroners, and com- missioners, which said officers, when duly elected and qualified, shall have and enjoy, all and singular, such powers, authorities, and privileges, with respect to their county, as such officers elected in and for any other county may, can, or ought to have, and the said elections shall be con- ducted in the same manner and form, aud agreeably to the same rules and regulations as now are or hereafter may be in force in the other counties of this State. “The justices of the Courts of Quarter Sessions and Common Pleas, now commissioned within the limits of the county of Delaware, and those that may hereafter be commissioned, or any three of them, shall and may hold Courts of General Quarter Sessions of the Peace and Gaol Delivery, and County Courts of Common Pleas, for the said county of Delaware, and shall have all and singular such powers, rights, jurisdic- tions, and authorities, to all intents and purposes, as other justices of the Courts of General Quarter Sessions and justices of the County Court of Common Pleas, in the other counties of this State, may, can, or ought to have in their respective counties. “The sheriffs, coroners, treasurers, and collectors of excise hereafter to be appointed or elected in the said county of Delaware, before they, or any of them, shall enter upon the execution of their respective offices, shall give security for the faithful execution of their respective offices.’ ’ By the provisions of the act, John Sellers, Thomas Tucker, and Charles Dilworth were appointed com- missioners ‘‘to run and mark the line dividing the counties of Chester and Delaware,” and they scrupu- lously performed their duty. The act, probably hastily drawn, provided that the western boundary of Delaware County should begin in the middle of Brandywine River, where it crosses the circular line of New Castle County. Strictly following this direc- tion, the result was a severing of a fraction of territory from the rest of the county of Chester. An exami- nation of the map’ shows that a short distance above Smith’s bridge the circular line separating Pennsyl- vania from Delaware is crossed by the Brandywine, and that stream then makes a bend northward, and returning touches the circular line about half a mile northwest of the point where the river first enters the State. Delaware being erected out of Chester County, only that territory expressly coming within the designated lines of the new county could be in- cluded within it, hence this small tract of land lying between the circular line and the bend of the river remained a part of Chester County. The commis- sioners were directed to run the “line as nearly straight as may be, so as not to split or divide planta- tions,” and while they fully carried out the latter 1Dr. Joshua W. Ash’s map of Delaware County, published in 1848, shows plainly this little part of Chester County which wedges itself into Birmingham, Delaware Co., and yet owes allegiance to and pays taxes in another jurisdiction. 82 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. instruction, the former seems to have been entirely overlooked, for a more crooked boundary-line could not have been surveyed had that been the intention of the persons making the division. Certain it is more obliging commissioners would have been diffi- cult of selection, if tradition be accepted, for the latter states that the owners of farms in the townships of Birmingham and Thornbury were permitted to choose in which of the two counties their plantations should be placed. From a draft in the possession of Dr. Smith, which was probably prepared from the surveys made by the commissioners, that author was enabled to glean the following interesting particulars of the manner in which the line was finally adjusted, as well as some of the representations made to the Legislature when the act was pending before that body: “A straight line was run from the starting-point ou the Brandywine to the intersection of the Goshen road by the western line, which is six miles three- quarters and fifty-four perches in length, whereas the crooked line between the same points, passing along the boundaries of the farm, cut by the straight line, and now forming the division-line between the two counties, has a length of eleven miles one quarter and nineteen perches. On a line perpendicular to the above-mentioned straight line, the court-house at ‘West Chester is only three miles three-quarters and fifty-eight perches distant. The bearing of this per- pendicular line is N. 46° W. It is charged in a note on the draft, that a member of the Legislature, while the act for a division of the county was under consid- eration, asserted that no part of the straight line run by the commissioners would come nearer West Ches- ter than six miles. The court-house at West Chester lies nearly due north from the commencement of the division-line on the Brandywine, and is a little over five miles distant from that point, whereas it was alleged at the session of Legislature at which the act was passed that the distance was nine miles. From the intersection of the Goshen road and the county line to West Chester the distance in a direct line is four miles three-quarters and sixty perches, nearly, and the course N. 85° W. The shortest distance from the Street road to West Chester is nine hundred and thirty-five perches. It also appears from the draft that another division-line had been proposed. This commenced at the mouth of Davis’ or Harvey’s Run, on the Brandywine, and ran so as to include the whole of Thornbury township, in Chester County.’’! That the people of the original township of Thorn- bury, who, by the division-line, were included within the limits of Delaware County, were dissatisfied there- with, we learn from the proceeding of the Legislature, for, on Nov. 80, 1789, a petition was presented to that body from “the inhabitants and freeholders of the township of Thornbury, Delaware County, remon- 1 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 345. strating against the act for erecting the said county, and praying they may be re-annexed to the county of Chester.” The Legislature, it seems, had at last be- come weary of the constant wrangling growing out of the efforts for the removal to or retention of the seat of justice at designated localities in Chester County, which had extended over twenty years, and had now culminated in a division of the territory ; they refused to further hearken to complaints, and the petition was therefore ordered to lie on the table. After the passage of the act of Sept. 26, 1789, cre- ating the county of Delaware, Kerlin sold the old court and jail building Nov. 3, 1789, to the county for £698 88. 8d. The first election in the new county took place in October, 1789, all voters coming to Chester, where the poll for the entire territory was held. On the 12th of October, President Mifflin and the Supreme Execu- tive Council appointed John Pearson, Thomas Levis, Richard Hill Morris, and George Pearce to be jus- tices of the peace, and on November 7th Henry Hale Graham was commissioned president judge of the courts of Delaware County. Almost immediately thereafter it was discovered that this appointment was irregular, Graham at the time not having been com- missioned as a justice of the peace, which was requisite to make him legally eligible to the position. There- upon President Mifflin desired Graham to return his commission, which he did, and on the 9th day of the same month he was appointed a justice of the peace, and the following day, president judge in and for the county of Delaware. The first constitution of Pennsylvania, framed by the convention which met early in July, 1776, aroused considerable opposition even at the time of its adop- tion, but when its crude and cumbersome provis- ions, after nearly fifteen years’ trial, were found to bear unequally on the people, and legislative and ex- ecutive authority was discovered to be sadly jumbled, the opinions became prevalent that the fraudulent law of the State required general revision. When, on March 20, 1789, Representative Wynkoop offered a resolution in the General Assembly, providing for the calling of a Constitutional Convention, there was some opposition manifested, but the measure was finally adopted March 24, 1789, the six representa- tives from Chester County voting in the affirmative. On September 15th the Assembly ordered the conven- tion to assemble at Philadelphia on the fourth Tuesday of November following, and likewise directed at the next election that the several counties should select delegates thereto. Two days subsequent to the adop- tion of these resolutions the county of Delaware was erected; hence, at the election in October, the people of the county selected John Sellers and Henry Hale Graham to represent them in the convention. While attending the sessions of that body in Philadelphia, on Saturday, Jan. 23, 1790, Henry Hale Graham died, and on Monday following the convention appointed FROM THE ERECTION OF THE COUNTY TO THE WAR OF 1812. Messrs. Roberts, Gray, Gibbons, Thomas Ross, and Sellers a committee to attend the funeral of Judge Graham the next morning, January 26th, at eleven o’clock. On Wednesday, Mr. Roberts reported “they had performed that service,” and the same day the county of Delaware was directed to hold a special election on Wednesday, 3d of February, to fill the vacancy occasioned by Graham’s death. On Friday, Feb. 5, 1790, the return of the special election was presented to the convention, and Nathaniel Newlin, who had been chosen a member of that body, was duly qualified and took his place therein. The last member of the Supreme Executive Council from Chester County was Col. Richard Willing, of Haverford township. When Delaware was erected Chester County discovered that the division had left the old territory without a member in Council, hence at the election in October, 1789, Dr. Thomas Ruston was chosen to represent that county. Dr. Ruston, on October 26th, addressed a petition to President Mifflin, claiming a seat in Council, be- cause, as he argued, every county by law was entitled to one representative, and no councillor could repre- sent more than one county; that by the erection of Delaware Col. Willing virtually became its repre- sentative, for in that county his property and resi- dence was located, and that Chester, believing a vacancy existed in Council, had, in accordance with law, filled the vacancies at the ensuing election. The Supreme Executive Council, however, was unmoved by his reasoning, for on Oct. 29, 1789, it was unani- mously “ Resolved, That Dr. Thomas Ruston cannot be admitted to take his seat as councillor for the county of Chester, that county being represented in Council by Col. Richard Willing, who was elected on the fifteenth day of October, 1788.” With the adoption of the Constitution of 1790 the Supreme Executive Council ceased to be, and the last cause of contention between the two counties was laid at rest by the new and better order of things which was ushered into being when the republic of Penn- sylvania gave place to the great commonwealth of the like name. CHAPTER XI. FROM THE ERECTION OF THE COUNTY OF DELA- WARE TO THE SECOND WAR WITH GREAT BRITAIN. THE sparsely-peopled territory, which in the anger of defeat at the removal of the court-house from “Old Chester”—for so the ancient borough now began to be termed, to distinguish it from the newly-born West Chester—had formed a separate county govern- ment, now began bravely to organize its local admin- istration, select its officers, and prepared to meet the obligations it had assumed. So bitter had been the quarrel respecting the removal of the seat of justice 83 in the old county of Chester, that in those townships which had been erected into Delaware County, regret for the step taken seldom found utterance, notwith- standing the cost of separate government soon began to be oppressive to the taxpayers. The people un- willingly paid their taxes, scolded the rulers for want of economy in county matters, but rarely re- flected that the additional cost had been the direct outcoming of their own action. The burden of main- taining public highways and county bridges particu- larly bore heavily on the people. The Queen’s High- way from Darby to Chester, and the King’s Highway from Chester to the State of Delaware, formed the direct line of communication to the Southern States, and travel was exceedingly heavy on these roads. The county was unable to keep those thorough fares in good repair; their condition in winter time was so wretched that the press of that day, as well as trav- elers’ letters, constantly referred to them in the most uncomplimentary terms. The State, at length, in order that the county of Delaware might be relieved in a measure of the oppressive cost for the mainte- nance of these roads, which, in the major part, was incurred for the benefit of persons residing without her borders, authorized the county commissioners, by act of Assembly, April 11,/1799, to place toll-gates on the post-road for the term of five years, when the law expired by limitation, and to collect tolls from persons using that highway. The county commission- ers, in compliance with the law, placed a toll-gate at the bridge over Ridley Creek, and the following schedule of tolls was observed : Coach, light wagon, or other pleasurable CBEIaBe; with four wheels and four horses... Coach, light wagon, or other. ‘pleasurable carriage, ‘with ‘two wheels and two horses Chairs, sulkey, etc., with one horse.. Sleigh, with two horses. Man and horse......... Wagon, with four ho Wagon, with two horses. Cart and horse... eee Every additional horse to carriages of pleasure.. Every additional horse to carriages of burden 25 cents. In 1798 the yellow fever raged as a dire pestilence in Philadelphia. It is related that a party of boys in that year, at Chester, went in a boat to a vessel lying in the stream on which were several persons ill with the disease, and in that way it was communicated to some of the residents of the town and neighborhood, but it did not spread, nor was it as fatal as the same malady proved to be five years thereafter. Ninety- four years before the period of which I am now writing, in 1699, when for the first time we have undoubted record of the yellow fever visiting the shores of the Delaware, Chester and the adjacent settlements suf- fered severely, but beyond that fact very meagre par- ticulars respecting it have been preserved. In 1793, however, the scourge in Philadelphia was so malig- nant that the city was almost depopulated; those of its inhabitants, as a rule, who had the means, fled for safety to the surrounding country districts. The record of the noble deeds of a few men who remained 84 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. in Philadelphia in that appalling time to minister to the sick and dying, as well as to give assistance and succor to the poor and needy, in true heroism far ex- ceeds the achievements of the ordinary class of sol- diers with whom history deals, who amid the din and smoke of battle sought the bubble reputation at the cannon’s mouth, and for their courage have received the unstinted praises of poets and historians alike. Nor is the cool, calm bravery of the men alluded to the only matter disclosed by the minutes of citizens which is worthy of commendation: in other respects these records present a grand testimonial to the higher and better nature of mankind. I have just narrated the difficulties encountered by the inhabitants of this section in meeting the’ ex- penses of the county; but when the cry of distress went up from Philadelphia it awakened a responsive sympathy throughout our territory, and from people in all condition of circumstances contributions freely came. It is an interesting fact that the first donation from Delaware County, which was received Oct. 4, 1798, was from ‘“ Widow Grubb, of Chester,’ who presented “ eighteen bundles of shirts and shifts for the use of the orphans under the care of the commit- tee.” On the 12th of the same month, John Pearson, of Darby, informed that body that a sum of money had been collected for the use of the orphans, and the same day Benjamin Brannan, of Upper Darby, gave notice that the people of Delaware County were raising money for the relief of the sick in the hospital and for persons in distress. On the 15th the com- mittee was notified that £161 6s. 6d. had been col- lected in Delaware County; that Nathaniel Newlin, of Darby, was ready to pay that sum to any person authorized to receive it. The letter also stated that further contributions might be looked for. Henry De Forest was instructed to go to Newlin’s house, near Darby, and receive the money, which he did. October 16th Mathew Carey and Caleb Lownes met Tsaac Lloyd at Weed’s Ferry, on the Schuylkill, from whom they received $1448.21, being part of the sub- scription made by citizens of Philadelphia residing in the neighborhood of Darby, to be applied to the use of the sick and poor of that city. Two days there- after, the 28th, Mathew Carey and Caleb Lownes by appointment visited Nathaniel Newlin’s house, and received $641.91, a further donation from Delaware County, while the same day Thomas Levis, of Spring- field, sent $13 for the like purpose. On December Ist, John Pearson, of Darby, paid £12 10s., an additional sum raised by our people, and on Jan. 18, 1794, the committee acknowledge $34.69 from citizens of Phila- delphia residing in and near Darby. The contribution from Delaware County amounted in all to $1291.57, a record of which this locality may justly be proud, when it is remembered that at that time the popula- tion was less than ten thousand persons all told. The sum just stated was exclusive of the donations “from citizens of Philadelphia residing in and near Darby,” which fund was contributed, among others, by Col. Thomas Leiper, of Ridley; John Wall, a large real-estate owner in our county; Edward Tilgh- man, that distinguished lawyer, who refused the chief-justiceship of Pennsylvania, that it might be bestowed on his kinsman, William Tilghman, and whose country-seat was in Nether Providence, where Samuel C. Lewis now resides; Raper Hoskins, who then owned the estate, and spent his summers at Green- bank, more recently the Porter House, at Chester, and others deserving prominent places in the history of Delaware County, as well as in that of the city of Philadelphia. In 1798 the yellow fever visited Philadelphia again, and once more the people fled, many carrying with them the seeds of the disease in their systems, to spread it at the places of refuge they sought. Mrs, Deborah Logan records that a woman from Philadel- phia, dying of the fever in Chester, “exacted a promise from some of her friends that her body should be brought back to the city and buried in consecrated ground, and that in consequence of this bad vow the infection was first caught in the borough (Chester), where it spread with frightful rapidity, and depopulated whole families and streets.”? On Edgmont Avenue, from Fourth Street to the river, there were then only seventeen houses within the space mentioned; more than thirty persons died, while in one of those dwellings’ all the family ex- cepting a boy of five years fell a victim to the plague. Indeed, it is stated that almost one-fifth of the popu- lation of Chester was swept away before the fever had subsided. At Chester Mills, now Upland, it was very virulent. Richard Flower, the owner of the mills, was so severely attacked that he was believed to be dead; but when the burial party was about to place him in the coffin he spoke, and subsequently recovered, to live nearly half a century thereafter. The cooper-shop at that place was made a hospital, and it is traditionally asserted that three dead bodies at one time were then awaiting interment. Only thirty persons constituted the entire population. In other localities near by the disease was equally fatal. The power of the Federal government to impose taxes, or in any wise to act within the limits of the several States, was during Washington’s administra- tion very imperfectly understood, and from that igno- rance the difficulties in Western Pennsylvania, known in history as the Whiskey Insurrection, had their origin. The settlers of that part of our common- wealth were largely Scotch-Irish, and naturally in traditions descended from fathers to sons recitals of the oppressive acts of the excisemen in the mother- country in discharging their official duties, which nar- 1 Mrs. Deborah Logan’s manuscript ‘ Reminiscences of Chester,” con- tributed as notes to John F. Watson's “‘ Visit to Chester in 1827,” in collection of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 2The house adjoining on the north, the present residence of Jona- than Pennell. FROM THE ERECTION OF THE COUNTY TO THE WAR OF 1812. 85 rations had so moulded the opinions of their descend- ants that, throughout all our colonial and early State history, any excise tax was regarded with open disap- proval by a large class of citizens. During the Revo- lutionary war the whole people submitted to the levying of duties on distilled liquors, yet at the con- clusion of that contest those who were opposed to the measure combined and secured the repeal of the act of 1772 providing for the tax. Hence when Congress, on March 8, 1791, at the suggestion of Secretary Ham- ilton, imposed a duty of four pence per gallon on dis- tilled liquors, the law was openly defied in Fayette, Alleghany, Westmoreland, and Washington Counties of this State. President Washington, on Sept. 15, 1792, issued a proclamation requiring all persons to cease their resistance and submit to the law, which failed to have the desired effect. On June 5, 1794, Congress amended the law, which action on its part, instead of satisfying those hostile to the tax, merely resulted in making them more clamorous for its abso- lute repeal. Deputy marshals and collectors, who had theretofore only been tarred and feathered, were now fired upon by large bodies of armed men and com- pelled to promise they would not attempt to exercise their authority. The Federal government, however, determined to enforce the law, and instructions were issued to indict those distillers who refused to pay the duties. These instructions on the part of the admin- istration were productive of widespread disorder and organized open defiance. President Washington, on Aug. 9, 1794, published another proclamation, re- quiring all associations whose object was resistance to the excise law to disperse on or before the 1st of September following, at the same time directing a force of nearly thirteen thousand men to be imme- diately raised in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia to suppress the insurrectionary move- ment, which body of soldiers was required ‘‘to be held in readiness to march at a moment’s warning.” On the same day Governor Mifflin called for the quota assigned to Pennsylvania, five thousand two hun- dred men, directing them to be armed and equipped as quickly as possible. The number of troops required from Delaware County was twenty cavalrymen and sixteen artillerymen, which force was to compose part of the Second Brigade of the Third Division, under command of Brig.-Gen. Thomas Proctor.!. The call, however, was not responded to with alacrity, for Sec- 1In William Whitehead’s “ Historical Sketch of the Borough of Chester” (Directory of Chester, 1859-60) it is stated, “Chester sent a company of infantry to the scene of disturbance, under the command of Capt. Wil- liam Graham.” Dr. Smith merely says that Delaware County furnished a company under Capt. Graham, and refers to the Directory of Chester as authority for the statement. An article written in 1854 by William H. Dillingham, and published in the West Chester Republican (quoted at large in Martin’s “ History of Chester,” pp. 169-170), entitled “‘ Remin- iscences of William Graham, Esq.,” says, “He commanded a troop of cavalry in the western expedition.” Benjamin M. Nead, Esq., of Har- risburg, in a sketch of the life of Brig.-Gen. Thomas Proctor (Penna. Mag. of History, vol. iv. p. 466), states that “on August 7, 1794, Gen. Proctor was placed in command of the First Brigade, which marched retary Dallas, in his report to the Senate of Pennsyl- vania, says, ‘ Returns from the County of Delaware, dated the 6th of September, 1794, stating a variety of difficulties that leave little hope of procuring by reg- ular drafts the quota of this county,” and he reiterated that assertion in his “report relative to the want of promptness of the militia,’? dated Jan. 16, 1795. Indeed, from a letter written by Attorney-General Ingerso}l to Governor Mifflin, May 25, 1795, it appears that in order to raise the quota in both Chester and Delaware Counties three thousand three hundred and ninety-six dollars had to be paid in bounties, Sec- retary Dallas pledging his personal credit to procure the amount expended.*? Why the quota of Delaware County was placed at only thirty-six men is difficult to understand, when we remember that in May of the same year, under the call of the President for ten thousand seven hundred and sixty-four militia in Pennsylvania to be held in readiness during the threatening difficulties on the frontier, our county was required to furnish two hundred and sixty-two men. And it is equally incomprehensible why any difficulty was had in raising thirty-six men in the Whiskey Insurrection, when it is considered that in May, 1794, Governor Mifflin had ordered Adjt..Gen. Harmer to immediatély organize and equip the militia of Phila- delphia and‘the county of Delaware to be in readiness, if needed, to prevent any breaches of the neutrality laws by the cruisers of England or France within this State, or the equipment of any privateer at Philadel- phia by either of the belligerent powers. However, Capt. William Graham, a lawyer, of Chester, raised a company of cavalry, the greater part of the organization being recruited or drafted from the neighborhood of Chester, and the quota of Delaware County was filled. When the troop was ready to march the ladies of Ridley township presented it with a white silk flag, trimmed with fringe of like material. On it was painted a figure of Washington in full mili- tary costume, to whom an American eagle was de- scending bearing in its claws a sprig of laurel, while from its mouth was a ribbon with the motto, ‘“ Liberty or Death.” The allegorical picture was surrounded by flags, drums, cannons, and other military emblems.* with 1849 men, 96 of which were from Delaware county.” The fore- going statement is the only one wherein the gross number of men is given, other than that which is presented in the text. The latter I derived from various papers (in the fourth volume, second series, Penn- sylvania Archives) relating to the Whiskey Insurrection. Yet Mr. Nead may be correct in the number mentioned, for he is a gentleman whose assertion on an historical point is always worthy of respect and consideration. Unfortunately, I cannot find on record, at Media, the election returns for the year 1794, The troops called into service voted in the fields, and the duplicates for that year, if they could be found in the prothonotary’s office, would give the names of every man from this county, and, of course, to obtain the number would be a simple matter of addition. 2 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. iv. p. 306. 3 Ib., p. 532. 4 In 1840 this flag was in the possession of Dr. Joseph Wilson. It was carried in the great Whig procession, at Chester, on July 23d of that year by the delegation from Springfield. 86 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Governor Henry Lee, of Virginia, as chief com- mander of the army, took up the line of march for the scene of tumult, and an imposing body it was | when we recall that Governor Thomas Mifflin led the Pennsylvania troops, Governor Richard Howell, of New Jersey, those from his State, Governor Thomas S. Lee those from Maryland, and Gen. Daniel Mor- gan those from Virginia. President Washington, ac- companied by Gen. Knox, Secretary of War, Alexan- der Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, and Judge Richard Peters, followed the army. In the mean time the more conservative part of the inhabitants of the offending counties, when they learned that the overwhelming force was coming against them, dis- patched a committee to visit the President. An inter- view was had, and the campaign finally ended without further bloodshed. A few of the leaders in the insur- rectionary outbreak were subsequently tried, and con- victed of treason. They were, however, pardoned by Washington, and the rebellion, which at one time promised to be difficult of suppression, melted away be- fore the determined action of the Federal government. The general history of Delaware County, until the declaration of war between Great Britain and the United States, is very meagre of stirring incidents, and little took place excepting those matters which belong to the story of the several townships, or judi- cial narrative, which will be related under these head- ings, so that it is unnecessary to refer to those events in this summary of the county’s annals. Dr. Smith has so admirably portrayed this placid period in our his- tory that a reproduction of his statement will suffi- ciently represent the quiet but certain progress of that day. “Owing to the European war that raged during this period,” he says, “the commerce of our country was benefited, and there was an increased de- mand for its agricultural products. Our county fully shared these advantages, and the result was an effort on the part of our farmers to improve their lands, and thereby to increase their products. ‘These lands in many places had become exhausted by a system of bad farming that is generally adopted in new coun- tries, and it was not then uncommon to see large tracts abandoned for agricultural purposes and left uninclosed. These exhausted tracts generally re- ceived the appellation of ‘old fields.’ The use of gypsum and lime as manures now began to be intro- duced; the former at first worked almost miracles by the increased productiveness it imparted to the soil. It was soon discovered, however, that its effects were greatly diminished by repeated application, and, as a consequence, it became less used; while lime, though slow in developing its benefits, soon became the gen- eral favorite with our farmers, and deservedly so, for it cannot be denied that it was owing to its extensive and continued application, combined with a better system of farming, that much of this county has been brought from an exhausted condition to its present state of fertility and productiveness.”’ CHAPTER XII. THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND. In a work such as this it is not to be expected that space can be given to a discussion of the causes which led the Congress of the United States, on June 18, 1812, to a declaration of war against Great Britain, but it is sufficient to say that the act was looked upon as largely a political measure,—the Democratic party, which was then in power, declaring for a vigorous prosecution of the war, while the Federalists opposed the contest as unnecessary, injudicious, and destructive of our commercial prosperity. In the city of Balti- more to such an extent was party spirit aroused that serious breaches of the peace and riotous attacks were manifested between the opposing political factions. In the county of Delaware, as elsewhere, there was a division of sentiment, but the preponderance of opinion was adverse to the war, and was outspoken in its disapproval. On Aug. 5, 1812, in the Chester and Delaware Federalist (now Village Record),’ appeared the following advertisement : “COUNTY MEETING. THE FEDERAL REPUBLICANS and all others friendly to Prace and Commerce in Delaware county are re- quested to meet at the house of Isaac Cochran, in the township of Upper Providence, on Saturday, the 8th of August, at 2 o’clock P.M., on busi- ness preparatory to the ensuing ELECTION in October and November next.” The county meeting thus called was largely at- tended. Thomas Smith was appointed chairman, and Maskell Ewing secretary, and the following preamble and resolution were unanimously adopted : “The Congress of the United States having on the 18th of June last passed an act declaring war against Great Britain and her dependencies, which has thrown this heretofore happy and prosperous country into a hostile attitude, at a time, too, when we are unprepared by land or sea, our territory and citizens exposed to invasion and plunder, our com- merce unprotected, a prey to an enemy whose ships have power to con- trol the ocean,— “ Resolved, That we view the proceedings as hostile to the happiness and intorest of this country, and consider the men who sanctioned it by their votes as unworthy of our confidence, that we will exercise every constitutional right to displace them and put those at the head of our affairs whom we deem capable of honestly representing us.” The resolution met with such general approval that a meeting of the young men of the county was called in the court-house at Chester, and on Aug. 22, 1812, the building was crowded, many persons who attended being unable to enter the doors. Samuel Edwards, Esq., then a rising young lawyer who had been ad- mitted a few years previous, was called to preside, and Zedekiah W. Flower was appointed secretary. A lengthy address, evidently carefully prepared, was read, in which it was argued that no good reason, ex- cepting the impressing of American seamen by Eng- lish vessels, had been advanced by the advocates of the war, and even that cause should and could be re- moved by negotiation between the two nations. The following resolutions were adopted : 1 No newspaper was then published in Delaware County. THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND. 87 “ Resolved, That we are determined to employ all our exertions to pro- duce a speedy and honorable peace, and that we will obey all constitu- tional acts of our government. “ Resolved, That, feeling confident that nothing but a change of men and measures will produce the blessings of peace and National prosper- ity, we consider it a solemn duty imposed on every citizen by true and genuine patriotism to use all honorable means in the exercise of the right of suffrage to procure an immediate change in the administration of the National Government, und thereby save us from the dreadful consequences of # protracted war. * Resolved, That at a time like the present, when one of our most flour- ishing and commercial cities has been subjected by an infuriated mob,! we consider it the duty of every citizen to aid and assist in suppressing all riots, tumults, and mobs, believing that they are tending to over- throw the only Republican government on earth. “ Resolved, That although we do not apprehend any disturbance of the kind in this quarter, yet should any outrages be attempted we pledge ourselves to each other and to society to use our utmost exertions to support the laws and defend the lives and property of our fellow-citizens against such proceedings.” Little of interest can be gleaned, at this late day, from our annals respecting the progress of the war. That there were a number of soldiers enlisted from our county is fully ascertained, but the names of such persons have been forgotten in the lapse of time, and because they were recruited into organizations not strictly local. We know that the two sons of Elisha Price, of Chester, both died in the service, one from diseases contracted, and the other killed in action on the Canadian frontier. An interesting scrap of local history is furnished in the following extract from the Freeman’s Journal, pub- lished in Philadelphia, March 12, 1813, for it not only shows the means used to convey intelligence of im- portant events in those days, but it indicates that the ancient borough of Chester was proud to have an op- portunity to send forth to the public the news of the great victory achieved by the gallant captain who made that town his home: “Postscript. Another Naval Victory.—The following important note was endorsed on the way-bill from Chester, Penna., received at the Post- office last night: ‘“‘ Essex” frigate captured the British frigate ‘ Castor,” and killed one hundred and fifty of her men.’ The report adds that the ‘ Essex,’ Capt. Porter, had arrived in the Delaware, March 10, 1813.” The safe arrival of the “ Essex,” thus reported, was only six days previous to the active blockade of the Delaware River and Bay by the British vessels of war “ Poictiers,” ‘“ Belvidere,” and several smaller crafts under the command of Commodore Beresford. On March 16th, when the former vessel lay off the village of Lewes, near Cape Henlopen, and threat- ened to open fire on the hamlet unless twenty-five bullocks and a proportionate quantity of vegetables should be contributed to the support of the English fleet, the news of the outrage was carried by couriers to arouse the people to resistance, and Delaware County promptly responded. That organization was effected within our county previous to Admiral Cock- burn’s attack on and spoliation of Havre de Grace, and even before the Jatter’s forces applied the torch to the village of Fredericktown, on May 6th, is evident from the official correspondence. Under date of April 1 Riots had occurred in Baltimore. 7, 1818, James Trimble, deputy secretary of the com- monwealth, wrote to William Brooke, brigadier-gen- eral of the Third Division of militia, stating that on the application of Samuel Edwards and Thomas D. Anderson, of Chester, Governor Snyder had consented to furnish sixty muskets with bayonets, and, if possi- ble, as many cartridge-boxes, for the purpose of arm- ing the Chester Company of Infantry, on condition that Messrs. Edwards and Anderson, with two other gentlemen to be approved by Gen. Brooke, should enter bonds to return the arms and accoutrements in good order in six months after they received them. On May 12, 1818, Secretary of State Boileau wrote to Thomas S. Anderson that Governor Snyder was pre- pared to forward as early as practicable five or six hun- dred stands of arms and cartridge-boxes, and orders had been forwarded to Deputy Quartermaster-Gen- eral Foering to furnish whatever ammunition might be required, but that there were no tents or other camp equipments belonging to the State, fit for use, that could be had. He suggested that in the then season of the year, and in a country so thickly settled, the men in service might find shelter from any inclement weather in houses, barns, or temporary huts. He fur- ther stated that in 1793 Governor Mifflin had loaned one hundred and sixty tents to the Board of Health in Philadelphia, and Gen. Foering would be instructed to ascertain their condition, and, if found fit for use, they would be delivered to Gen. Brooke, the brigade inspector for the district including Delaware County. Under date of May 15, 1818, Secretary Boileau wrote to Joseph Engle that three hundred and fifty stands of arms, with other articles, had that day been for- warded to Chester, and as Gen. Brooke lived some distance from the latter place, the arms had been sent in Mr. Engle’s care, and he should receipt to the wagoner for them. In a postscript he adds that after the muskets were loaded in the wagon it was found it would not carry more than three hundred boxes, and as it was thought the other articles were not as neces- sary as the guns, they had not been forwarded. The muskets mentioned in the letter to Anderson of May 12th, and those that were forwarded to Engle on May 15th, were doubtless intended to arm the emergency men, when the intelligence of the de- struction of Fredericktown was received, together with the report that a large force of English troops, accompanied by Indians, who spared neither women nor children, had landed there, doubtless intending serious mischief. The latter part of this rumor was without foundation. Nothing of interest appertaining to the war oc- curred in Delaware County for fifteen months, al- though the militia must have been held in readiness to move at short notice. In the early part of March, 1814, Secretary Boileau wrote to Gen. Brooke that a thousand muskets had been sent by the United States to the State arsenal in Philadelphia to arm the mili- tia, and the quota of Delaware County would be de- 88 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. livered when it became necessary. The cartridge- boxes which had been sent to Chester must have been sadly out of order, for in the same letter the Secretary says in respect to them, “Although not of the best quality, (they) will at least serve for a short campaign. Any man who receives a box can easily put a few more tacks to secure the belts.” On the same day Secretary Boileau wrote to Deputy Quarter- master-General Foering, “That in case of a threat- ened invasion of the shores of the Delaware, and you should be called upon by Brig.-Gen. Brooke, of the Third Division, or Maj.-Gen. Steele, of the said di- vision, for arms, equipments, and ammunition, that you furnish them with what may be deemed neces- sary.” 7 The idea of gathering the militia into camps of in- struction seems to have been the suggestion of Presi- dent Monroe, for April 6, 1814, he wrote to Gen. Joseph Bloomfield, stating that the military organiza- tions "ought to be assembled and a camp formed,” suggesting that such cantonment should be on “some commanding, healthy ground between the Schuylkill and the heights of the Brandywine.” The President urged the gathering of this force at once, as “we must keep together a nucleus at least of an army, with every necessary equipment, sufficiently strong to oppose the enemy on his landing until you can get the whole together to overwhelm him.’’? In the early summer of 1814 the inhabitants of the Middle and Southern seaboard States were fully aware that England, now that peace in Europe had appar- ently released a large force of veteran soldiers from service there, and that they were under orders to America, meditated a decisive movement against the United States, and, being uncertain where the blow would be struck, made every effort to place all ex- posed situations on our coast in a position of defense. Hence when the city of Washington fell before the British army under Ross, on the 18th of August, when the incendiary Cockburn had applied the torch to the unfinished capitol, the library of Congress, the President’s house, and other public buildings, and | Baltimore was menaced, Governor Snyder promptly, on Aug. 27, 1814, issued a general order, setting forth that ‘‘the recent destruction of the capital of the United States, the threatened and probable conflagra- tion of the metropolis of a sister State, and the gen- eral threatening aspect of affairs, warranted the opin- ion that an attack is meditated by the enemy on the shores of the Delaware.” To repel the foe and to guard against surprise, he deemed it necessary to have a sufficient force “of freemen’ ready for every emergency, and therefore required that the militia generally of the counties of Philadelphia, Bucks, Montgomery, Delaware, Chester, Lancaster, Dauphin, Lebanon, Berks, Schuylkill, Lehigh, Northampton, and Pike, in addition to those drafted for the service “ 1 Penna. Archives, 2d series, vol. vii. p. 735. of the United States, under orders of July 22d, who were already subject to the orders of Gen. Bloom- field, “be held in readiness to march at a moment's warning.” The militia of Pennsylvania having been ordered to ; assemble at the town of York to the number of five thousand, on Sept. 8, 1814, Governor Snyder wrote to Gen. Bloomfield that he proposed asking the Secretary of War to transfer the troops to the shores of the Del- aware for the defense of the city of Philadelphia and the country along the river. In his letter to President Monroe dated September 9th, the Governor advocated this movement, adding that the authorities ‘“ must at present rely upon the patriotic feeling which per- vades Pennsylvania, rather than on coercing obedi- ence to our militia laws, and before that feeling can have an effect, the enemy, by rapid movements, may have effected his depredatory incursions.” He sug- gested a locality for the camp should be selected so that the troops would be marched in a few days either to the Delaware River or Chesapeake Bay. On the 10th, Governor Snyder wrote to the President that about six thousand volunteers had arrived in Phila- delphia, and many others were on the march to that city ; that Gen. Bloomfield thought a camp should be formed at Marcus Hook, where the volunteers should be organized under United States regulations, and Gen. Bloomfield would himself take command of the forces. The Governor was of the opinion that inas- much as the militia had selected their own company officers, they would be unwilling to be consolidated into other bodies and have strange commanders placed over them. He, therefore, suggested that they should be organized in accordance with the laws of the State, in battalions and regiments, under which they would willingly serve the term of three months for which they had enlisted. Immediately below Marcus Hook, to command the river, extensive earthworks were hastily constructed and mounted with cannon, while between Ridley and Crum Creeks earthworks were erected to control the Queen’s Highway to Philadelphia. So intense was the alarm in the borough of Chester and county of Delaware that the records were packed ready to be transported, if necessary, at a moment’s notice to the interior of the State. On Sept. 18, 1814, Secretary Boileau wrote to Gen. Brooke that, during the alarm at Elkton the preceding summer, three hundred stands of arms had been sent to Chester for the use of the militia. These muskets Gen. Brooke was ordered to have delivered to him, and if any repairs to them were needed, to have them mended in the neighborhood, if possible, but if that could not be done, to send them to the State arsenal at Philadelphia for that purpose. He also required Gen. Brooke to inquire for and take into his posses- sion the cartridge-boxes which had been forwarded to Chester at the same time the muskets were sent. We learn, from a letter written by Secretary Boileau, THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND. 89 Sept. 28, 1814, that the drafted men at that date, who were stationed at Marcus Hook, were destitute of tents and other camp equipments, while the volunteers had good quarters and were well supplied with all neces- sary camp furniture. The cantonment was located just back of Marcus Hook cross-roads, was called Camp Gaines (subsequently Fort Snyder), and was under the command of Maj.-Gen. Worrall. Col. William Duane, Adjt.-Gen. and Maj. Hunter, both | of the United States army, had the care of the camp | and superintended its discipline. Dr. Smith states, respecting the drafted troops from Delaware County, that “the first company was con- vened at the ‘Three Tuns,’ now the Lamb Tavern, in Springfield, on the 14th of October, and marched to Chester that day. Its officers were Capt. William Morgan, 1st Lieut. Aaron Johnson, 2d Lieut. Charles Carr, and Ensign Samuel Hayes. This company re- mained at Chester two weeks waiting for camp equip- age, before repairing to the encampment at Marcus Hook. During this time the men occupied meeting- houses and other public buildings.” From the manuscript Orderly Book of the Mifflin Guards of Delaware County, commanded by Capt. Samuel Anderson, we Jearn that on Sept. 15, 1814, that body of volunteer infantry was at Camp Bloom- field, Kennett Square, Chester Co. That on the 17th of the same month they broke camp, and the troops marched to Gregg’s Tavern, three and a half miles from Wilmington, while the following day they were in cantonment at Camp Brandywine, and on the 29th they were at Camp Dupont. This cantonment was located in the neighborhood of Wilmington, Del., and was under the command of Brig.-Gen. Thomas Cad- walader. Governor Snyder, on October 5th, visited the camp and was received with a Federal salute, fired under direction of Maj. Provost, as soon as the head of the escort entered the main grounds, the troops presenting arms and “the drums giving the ruffles.” Gen. Bloomfield was superseded in control of the Fourth Military District, Oct. 7, 1814, on which date Maj.-Gen. Gaines assumed the command and re- viewed the troops at Marcus Hook on the 12th of the same month. The discipline of the troops of course was very lax, and the desertions from camp numerous; therefore, October 19th, Gen. Gaines issued a general order, in which he stated that he had received the finding of a court-martial, to which he had refused his approval, because the sentence imposed on certain soldiers found guilty of desertion, in his opinion, “ has no ade- quate proportion to the offence committed by them. Slight punishments for high military offences are worse than useless. The infamous crime of desertion particularly calls aloud for the highest punishment. Deserters must be shot.” 1 History of Delaware County, p. 31. There is a slight error in the dates given by Dr. Smith, since the official records at Harrisburg show that the company was in camp at Marcus Hook on Oct. 10, 1814. A general order was issued on Oct. 14, 1814, dated at Marcus Hook, commanding that the Pennsylvania volunteers called into service under the order of Governor Snyder, Aug. 27, 1814, should be imme- diately organized under the act of Assembly of March 28, 1814. On Oct. 29, 1814, the Delaware County Fencibles, Capt. Serrill, was attached to the First Brigade Pennsylvania Volunteers till further orders. On Nov. 15, 1814, Lieut.-Col. Raquet was ordered to march the next day with Capt. Leonard’s company of artillery, and Capts. Mifflin’s, Swift’s, Brown’s, Ser- rill’s, and Murray’s companies of infantry, and take a position to cover New Castle. The artillery was to consist of two six-pounders and two howitzers. On the same day, Gen. Gaines issued an order approving the finding of the court-martial which sat at Fort Clem- son, November Ist, for the trial of David Jefferies, a private in Capt. Patterson’s company, Thirty-second Regiment, United States Infantry, charged with deser- tion, who was found guilty, sentenced to be shot to death, and the execution ordered to take place the next day, November 16th, between twelve and four o’clock, at such place as Col. Irwin, or the officer in command at Camp Clemson, near New Castle, should : appoint. The dread of an immediate invasion or attack on the Middle Atlantic States having subsided, on Nov. 28, 1814, the artillery companies commanded by Capts. Rodney and Reed, of Delaware Volunteers, were ordered to take post at New Castle for the de- fense of that town, and Gen. Cadwalader was in- structed to put the whole of the Advance Light Brigade in march for the city of Philadelphia, there to await further orders. That this was done appears from an affidavit of Abel Green, of Edgmont, on file in the prothonotary’s office, Media, who, under date of April 7, 1855, states that he was a private in the company of Capt. Benja- min Weatherby, which was drafted for the term of three months, and “was honorably discharged at Philadelphia on the 2d day of December, 1814.” That the Mifflin Guards were ordered to Chester we know beyond dispute, because at the latter place, under date of Dec. 10, 1814, Capt. Samuel Anderson issued the following order: “The company will assemble for drill in Chester on every Wednesday and Saturday at ten o’clock until further orders. The orderly or a ser- geant acting as orderly will attend at my headquarters every morning at nine o’clock to receive and execute such orders as may be given. All knapsacks, haversacks, and canteens in possession of the members will be delivered at my quarters on the next company day. It is expected that the members will pay the same attention to the cleanliness of their arms as they did while in camp. As a reward for industry, the four per- sons having the cleanest muskets on each day of parade will be excused from duty for one week. The company will bear in remembrance that they are still in the service of the government, consequently that they are subjected to the penalties and punishments prescribed by the arti- cles of war for the neglect of duty, disobedience of orders, or any other violation of the rules and regulations laid down for the government of the armies of the United States. It is therefore expected that all orders from your commander will be respected and punctually obeyed. De- faulters must and will be punished. 90 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. “Those persons who formerly considered themselves as members of this conipany, but had not patriotism and fortitude sufficient to encoun- ter the difficulties and endure the hardships and privations of the cam- paign, are ordered to deliver up their arms and accoutrements, being no longer considered members of the company.” On Dec, 21, 1814, Capt. Anderson issued this order : “Company drills are dispensed with until further orders. For the conveniences of members the company will be divided into three classes. The first class will include all the members residing in Chester and its vicinity, to be under the immediate command of the captain. The second class will include those who reside in the neighborhood of Marcus Hook, and all others who may find it most convenient to meet at that place, to be commanded by Lieutenant Marshall. The third class will be under the command of Lieutenant Evans, to include all those who may find it most convenient to meet at the Black Horse Tavern in Middletown. The members of each class, respectively, will assemble at the quarters of the officer commanding on every Wednesday at 11 o’clock, a.m., with arme, except in wet weather. The officers commanding the second and third class will report to the Captain on every Thursday. The names of absentees to be inserted in their reports, also the names of those who neglect to keep their muskets in order. All such as neglect to comply with this order will be considered deserters and reported as anch to the commanding General. Those who obtained leave of absence before the troops left camp, on account of sickness, and have not since reported themselves, will report forthwith, otherwise they will be reported as unfit for the service of the U. S. and discharged accordingly. The Quarter-Master will report to Philad. in order to procure the rations due to the company.” I have not learned when the volunteers were mus- tered out of the service of the United States. Martin says it was Dec. 6, 1814. The foregoing orders show that that date is inaccurate. In 1868, when the bill was before Congress uaa ing for pensions to the soldiers of the war of 1812, a meeting of the survivors of that struggle in Delaware County was called at the Columbia House, in Ches- ter, on December 6th, and organized by the appoint- ment of Hon. George G. Leiper chairman, and Capt. John Martin secretary. The object of the meeting being stated, it was “ Resolved, That we approve of the convention of soldiers of the war of 1812, which is to assemble at Philadelphia, on the Ninth of January next, and that the following persons are hereby appointed delegates to said convention from this county, viz.: James Serrill, George G. Leiper, Levi Reynolds, Henry Myers, David Hayes, George Litzenberg, and Aaron Johnson. “ Resolved, That the soldiers of the war of 1812, poorly clad, poorly fed, subjected to great exposure in defending the Coasts and a long line of Northern frontier, after a tardy delay, should not be stinted in the be- stowment of Government bounty, aud that any discrimination against the soldiers of 1812 is manifestly unjust. “ Resolved, That the above proceedings be published in the papers of this county, and that the Secretary be requested to forward a copy of them to Dr. J. B. Sutherland, of Philadelphia. “Georce G. LeirPer, Chairman. “Joun Martin, Secretary.” The following is the roll of the soldiers of the vol- unteer and drafted companies from Delaware County: ROLL OF MIFFLIN GUARDS, FIRST REGIMENT, PENNSYL- VANIA VOLUNTEERS. Commanded by Col. Clement C. Biddle. Samuel Anderson, captain; Frederick Shull, first lieutenant; David A. Marshall, second lieutenant; William Biggart, ensign. (Atan elec- tion held at Camp Dupont Oct. 2, 1814, John Caldwell was elected first lieutenant.) Sergeants—John Caldwell, Benjamin Haskins, William Evans, Henry Horne. Corporals—John Thomson, George Hawkins, John Marshall, Joseph Derrick, Juhn Rowan, Privates. —Samuel Edwards, Edward Minshall, Thomas Kille, John Gar- rett, John Lambert, John Lloyd, Joseph Hall, David Fisher, Joseph Martin, Jr., John Hawkins, Levi B. Martin, Thomas Parsons, Laza- rus Martin, Daniel Broomall, Robert Beatty, Thomas Pedrick, James Burns, Jeremiah Brown, Samuel Palmer, Evan Bonsall, Thomag Merion, John Lutkin, Joseph Hooper, Jacob Duey, Robert Clark, Jonathan §. Bonsall, William Kinsey, William Helms, John Mc- Lain, Thomas Ash, Peter Long, Cornelius Macky, David Smart, Na- than Hayes, David Bonsall, Isaac Brooks, Daniel McGineley, John McGilton, Samuel Bunting, Philip Painter, George Myers, Davis Smith, Thomas P. Ash, Jonathan Quicksall, Thomas Fleming, Thomas Painter, William Beatty, James Evans, Thomas P. Smith, Charles Lear, John Stevenson, John Pyewell, William Geary, Wil- liam H. Marshall, James Lock, Daniel Mitchell, John McKee, John Martin (Hook), Joseph Wilkinson, Leonard Cole, William Cummins, Thomas D. Barnard, Thomas Bowers, John Statton, John Hahn, George Ross, Thomas Williams, Moses Wells, Jr., Thomas McCul- lough, William Smith, Andrew Rively, John McCleaster, William Glover, Joshua Bonsall, Samuel Bonsall, Jr., Thomas Bonsall, Clement Smith, William Cox, John Shaw, George W. Johnson, William Jones, William Humphreys, John Frazier, Jobn Meyers, John Wetherill. ROLL OF DELAWARE COUNTY FENCIBLES, TWENTY-SECOND PENNSYLVANIA MILITIA. Entered service Sept. 21,1814. October 14th encamped at Marcus Hook. James Serrill, captain; George G. Leiper, first lieutenant ; James Ser- rill, Jr., second lientenant; George Serrill, ensign ; Moses Adams, sergeant-major. Sergeants,—John B. Pearson, Richard R. Jones, David Rose; Jr., Joseph Oakford. Corporals—Henry Wood, Joseph Shallcross, Andrew Urian, John C, Farrell. Musicians.—James Warner, Robert Holmes. Privates.—John Stroop, Enoch Bonsall, Thomas J. Martin, Ellwood Ormsby, Mathew McNulty. Casper Trites, Jesse Z. Paschall, Jobn Rively, Daniel Smith, John Dobbins, George Williamson, William Fines, Reuben Bonsall, Charles Justis, James Cleary, John Dunant, Richard G. Martin, Charles G. Snowden, Joseph Pyle, William Lind- say, George Caldwell, David Cummins, James Brattin, Aaron Mar- tin, Joseph Hibbert, Lewis B. Stannard, Clement Hanse, Charles Bonsall, Charles Gibson, Charles Attmore, Miles McSweeny, Aaron Helms, Cadwalader M. Helms, Andrew Noblit, Andrew Enberg, Marshall Siddons, Thomas Bonsall, William McCormick, Samuel Bonsall, John Brown, John Hansell, Joseph T. Jones, William Tor- rance, John Dermont, William Grubb, John Bradford, John Martin (Chester), Townsend T. Johns, William Torrence, John McDermott. BOLL OF CAPT. WILLIAM MORGAN’S COMPANY, FIRST COM- PANY OF FIRST BRIGADE, THIRD DIVISION OF PENN- SYLVANIA MILITIA. Encamped at Marcus Hook Oct. 10, 1814. Sergeants.—James Morgan, Caleb Smith, John Mather, Lewis Brook, Charles Crozer. Corporals.—David Trainer, William Urain, George Davis, Isaac Smith. Quartermaster-Sergeant.—Isaac Atmore. Privates—George Delainey, James Lee, William Gill, Samuel Brown, Vernon Lewis, Jeremiah Maul], William McClelin, Aaron Hibberd, Henry Handly, Adam Litzenburg, John Schringer, Benjamin AT ment, William Fraim, Hezekiah Kamp, Isaac Jones, James Wright, Israel Jones, Philip Trites, William Wright, John Forsyth, Isaac Cox, William Armstrong, John Stewart, George Yoecome, Alexan- der Garey, Jacob Byers, William Stewart, John Tree, John Heppel- finger, John O’Harrah, Joseph Davis, Robert Low, John Smitb, Isaac Burns, Jonathan Davis, William Mace, Robert Valentine, Jones Jone, William Eppright, Joseph Rhudolph (2), James Lindsay, Jr., John Latch, Enoch Ramsey, Evan Pennell, John Hoven, Jobn Kerns, John Gare, Jr., Samuel Humphrey, William Orr, James Price, Hugh McDade, John Little, George Wells, John Hoff, Elias Worrell, Jonathan Vernon, Joshua Hardey, Joseph Green, Robert Litbgaw, James McDougal, Enoch Dickason, William Palmer, Thomas Taylor, Jonathan Morgan, George Dunn, Davis Smith, Jo- seph Rhudolph, John Gore, Samuel Wright, Thomas Rhbudolph, Jacob Grim, David Smith, James Fraim, John Fraim, Samuel Lind- sey, Lewis Williamson, John Crozer, William Trites, John Ewing, Michael Flahady, John Morton, John McDonnal, James Holdt, George Ely, John Cozens, Edward Waters, Septamus Flounders, John Green, Isaac Sharpless, John H. Worrell. FROM THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND TO 1850. 91 ROLL OF FIRST COMPANY, SIXTY-FIFTH REGIMENT PENN- SYLVANIA MILITIA. Commanded by Lieut.-Col. John L, Pierson, of Ridley. Captain, John Hall; First Lieutenant, Matthew Dunbar; Second Lieu- tenant, William Scofield ; Third Lieutenant, Thomas Olly ; Ensign, Robert Munn. Sergeants —Jacob Wise, Johu Bowers, Jr., Joseph Dunwoody, Jabez Lewis. Privates—Joseph Bittle, Isaac Davis, Robert Corker, Moses Newlin, Joseph Fulton, Bennett Lewis, Thomas J. Miles, Isaac Richards, John Daver, John Reyner, Joshua Lainhoff, Samuel Taylor, John Ormsby, Benjamin Serril, John Mann, John Engle, John McGahey, John Cray, Peter King, Joseph Evens, Samuel Lynch, Abraham Miller, Philip Rap, Thomas Car, Armet Rossiter, William Phillips, Jacob Kulp, Ezekiel Shur, Jesse Shauer or Shawer, Jacob Root, Daniel Root, John Job, Frederick Hough, Isaac Zebar, John Mc- Kealher, George Hough, Daniel Rice, Thomas Scot, Jabez Nice, Samuel Lindsey, William Rudabaugh, Samuel Rudolph, James Blundat, William Field, Peter Burns, William Evens, Lewis Pennell, Joho Alexander, Edward McLary, Thomas C. Pearce, Eli Roberts, Samuel Lindsey, John Standley, John Humphreys, Jacob Wiley, John Fergurson, John Hoofstickler, Benjamin Worrell, Thomas E. Downs, James Everheart, Samuel Miller, St, Samuel Miller, W>t, John Shaffener, John White, David Royer, Adam Poley, Jacob Donabower, Samuel Walker, Peter Defrain, Conrad Baker, Jesse Boyer, David Shuteman, John Rap, Nathan Brook, Mittle Hause, Andrew Laird, Jacob Haven, Martain Sheater, John Walker, Alex- ander Clemans, Malen Rossiter, Miles Beaty, Francis Enos, William Fox, James McFagen, William McNeal, Marcus Boon, Charles Bugle, Mifflin Lewis, John Hoops, Jacob Jones, Able Lodge, Daniel Davis, Samuel Jenet, Philip Litzenburg, Benjamin Urian, John Hoiser, Denis Sheridan, George Brannan, James Hughs, Isaac Gar- rison, Mordecai Thomas, Philip Miller, Jacob Stoneback, Henry Longacker, Abiza Rossiter, Able Williams, Jacob Smith, John Shinkle, Jacob King, Michael King, George Geger, Jacob Defrain, James Lundy, Jacob Longaker, James Adrikens, Henry Stophel- bine, William Danafelser, Isaac Jones, Henry Sheet, Jolin Possey, Daniel Young, George Litzenburg, John Saylor, Amos Griffith, Andrew Rively. ROLL OF FIFTH COMPANY, SIXTY-FIFTH REGIMENT PENN- SYLVANIA MILITIA, CAPT. JAMES LACKEY COMMAND- ING. : Privates—Reuben Taylor, George Roberts, Jacob Goodwin, James De- graut, Kenith McKinzy, John Smith, George Hersh, Hezekiah Jackson, Lawrence Wilson, Edward Salyards, Henry Garman, Jacob Forwood, William Hoskins, Joseph Conway, Thompson Hunter, Samuel Sinquet, Jacob Howell, John McDonald, Levi Waldravin, Davis Morgan, David Rider, David Egee, William Town, John Frame, Joseph Rogers, John Cross, John Archer, Benjamin Torton, Samuel Eppright, William Thompson, William Sill, Matthew Scott, Thomas McKeown, Charles Rowland, Jon King, James Day, Wil- liam White, William Bowers, Joseph H. Lawrence, George Wells, Powell Clayton, Charles Griffith, John Burk, Benjamin Clare, Evan Griffith, John Walker, Richard Ford, William Bucknell, Hugh Love, David Williamson, Thomas Trimble, James Cummings, Johu Far- row, Samuel Griffith, John Gallino, Francis Himes, John Funter- wise, Thomas Hutcheson, Henry Pearson, Peter Pearsou, Thomas Llewellyn, George L. Davis, Joseph Farrow, Thomas Everson, Jona- than Crozier, James Brothers, Isaac White, John Kitts, William Martin, Jacob Essex, George Hannum, Benjamin Work, Edward May, Edward W. Robeson, William Dempsey, Samuel Pennell, John Petterson, Timothy Pierce, William Hodge, Benjamin Thomp- son, William McCray, Abram Peck, John Gilmore, Thomas Kelly, Martin Bryan, Thomas Chaffin, John Nickles, William Sharp, Peter Young, Aaron Carter, Jeremiah Murry, Jesse Sharpless, Oswald Sill, John Bane, Isaac Eaches, Joho Heck, Bartholomew Shimer, Samuel Sullivan, John Haycock, Jacob Stanley, Thomas Cochran, Henry Carr, Atlee Porter, Samuel Cozens, Emmor Davis, Charles Rowland, George Farrow, John Wizer, Lazarus Weidner. ROLL OF SIXTH COMPANY, SIXTY-FIFTH REGIMENT PENN- SYLVANIA MILITIA, CAPT. BENJAMIN WETHERBY. Entered United States service Sept. 20, 1814; encamped at Camp Snyder, Marcus Hook, Oct. 17, 1814. Sergeants, James McGuigan, John Taylor, George Peters, Thomas Ash, Patrick McGuigan. Corporals.—Samuel Roberts, Barney McGuigan, Benjamin Yarnall. Privates.—Samuel Bittle, Eli Ratteu, James Mitchel, William Davis, James Huff, Jehu Griffith, John Henthorn, John Gorby, Aaron Beale, Giliad Burns, William McLaughlin, Sr., Jacob Stewart, John Varly, Thomas Marshall, Aaron Smith, John Davis, William Turner, John Kelly, Samuel Burnet, Jesse Green, James McCoy, Joseph Griffith, Henry Bean, Jesse McKinstry, Woodward Hampton, Nich- olas Marrow, Daniel Likens, George McBride, Frederick Stimel, Alexander Torbert, Peter Harper, Richard Baker, Abel Green, Fran- cis Harbinson, William Rauzel (or Raugel), David Cornog, Robert Valentine, William Graff, George Russell, Frederick Close, Curtis Barlow, Cornelius Wright, William Odenheimer, William Weare, John R. Price, Archibald Dougherty, William Smith, Jacob Rizer, William Mace, Levan Bernard, Andrew Black, James Weare, Sam- uel Russell, Charles Smith, Thomas Mercer, Benjamin Allison, Isaac Tompkins, Richard Clayton, Aaron Lawrence, Jeremiah Dut- ton, John Smith, William McLaughlin, David Torton, John H. Craig, John Barlow, Vincent Jester, Charles McGarraty, John Alcot, John S. Hannum, Robert Steel, Thomas Brown, James Hodge, George Hine, Peter Smith, Johu Burnet, Joseph Murphy, Jacob Young, Valentine Dick, David Jay, Abel Smedley, John S. Travis, Richard Warnick, John Wheeling, James Taylor, John Hoops, Felix Fields, Henry Collins, Joseph Edworthy, Matthew Hopkins, James Weare, Jr., Alexander Parks, Baldwin Weaver, Thomas Jones, An- thony N. Still, Andrew Hunter, Reuben Miles, John Hook, Jona- than Gibson, John King, Joel Scott, Nehemiah Baker, David Broom- ell, John Pyle. CHAPTER XIII. FROM THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND TO 1850. THE second war with England had almost wholly severed communication with the Old World, particu- larly with Great Britain, and the immediate result was an effort on the part of the people to meet the public demand for those commodities which previous to the beginning of hostilities were obtained entirely from Europe. The numberless cruisers of England had swept the merchant marine of the Republic al- most from the seas, until the only vessels bearing the American flag were men-of-war or letters-of-marque ; hence the great demand from this cause stimulated the establishment of manufacturing enterprises, largely throughout the Eastern and in a measure in the Middle States. It should be remembered that during all our colo- nial history—not only our State but all the colonies —England had persistently, as in Ireland, forbidden the people to engage in manufacturing any articles which might come in competition with the industries of the home country. Although writers during the middle of the last century in Great Britain argued that the American colonies would not for hundreds of years engage in manufacturing, basing their conclu- sion on the then known history of the world, that it was only “ after there was such an overplus of inhab- itants, beyond what is necessary for cultivating the soil, as is sufficient for forming large towns, where trade and manufacturing can be carried on to advan- tage;” still there were others who rightly judged the geographical position of the American colonies might make them an exception to the rule as taught in the 92 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. annals of the Old World. The English Parliament early became alarmed at the development of the iron industry in the colonies, particularly in Pennsylva- nia, and the establishment of furnaces and rolling- mills, so that in 1749 an act was passed “to encour- age the importation of pig- and bar-iron from His Majesty’s colonies in America, and to prevent the erection of any mill or other engine for slitting or rolling of iron, or any plating Forge to work with a tilt-hammer or any furnace for making steel in any of | the said colonies.” At that time one forge we know was in operation in Thornbury township, at the pres- ent Glen Miils, and some years before that date was another on Crum Creek,—Peter Dick’s Iron Works. The numerous trades, such as carpenters and brick- makers, and the like, were early known on the Dela- ware; hence, from the references found in the Dutch records a quarter of a century before Penn came, I am confident that no bricks in any dwelling standing in Pennsylvania to-day were made in Europe and brought here. Indeed, the bricks which we know came from Governor Printz’s mansion-house, at Tin- icum, present every appearance of having been hard- ened merely by the heat of the sun; and besides, the peculiar yellow clay of which they were made is still found on Tinicum Island. Previous to 1698, we learn from Gabriel Thomas, who came to the colony before Penn, that ‘“ brickmakers have twenty shillings per thousand for their bricks at the kiln.” Wool-comb- ers, we are also told, “ have for combing twelve pence per pound.” It would seem from Thomas’ account that even in that early day the people of the colony had turned their attention to producing articles of daily use, for he informs us that all sorts of very good paper was made at Germantown, and a fine German linen, “such as no person of quality need be ashamed to wear, and in several places they make very good Druggets, crapes, camblets, and serges, besides other woolen clothes, the manufacture of all which daily improves.” One of the first notices we have of the doings of the European settlers in Pennsylvania was that Governor Printz had built a yacht at Tinicum ; and previous to 1758 we learn from Acrelius that Marcus Hook was noticeable for the building of ships, and in 1727 the first paper-mill in the old county of Chester was erected at the present Ivy Mills, in Concord. In 1715, John Camm, a stocking- weaver, was located in Upper Providence, and in 1728 he warned the public against one Mathew Burne, who had been in his employ two years, part of the time at stocking-weaving, and that Burne was no longer connected with him, but “goes about selling stockings in John Camm’s name” when the articles were not made by him. Strange as it may seem, until William T. Seal’ had shown the contrary, this Mathew Burne was credited with having made the first stocking as a regular manufacturer in the United States. But of more particular interest to our present purpose is Gabriel Thomas’ reference to ‘“‘ the famous Darby river which comes down from Cumbry by Darby town, whereon are several mills, viz., fulling- mills, corn-mill, &c.” Of course, these fulling-mills did not manufacture, but simply scoured the cloth made by the busy housewives of that day. The wives and daughters of the early English settlers, as the Swedes who had preceded them, employed “them- selves in spinning wool and flax, and many of them in weaving.”’? During all the period before the Revolutionary war, the greater number of farmers in the colonies had looms for weaving in their dwellings, on which the women wove flax and tow-linen, cloth, and _linsey- woolsey of coarse texture but strong and substantial. Indeed, when power other than manual labor was first applied to any part of the process of preparing the raw material to manufacture linen, cotton, or woolen cloths, the mills were very smalt, containing only a few hundred spindles, where yarn simply was pro--- duced, which was afterwards woven by hand in the farm-houses. From that fact the coarse fabrics of that day, in contra-distinction of the imported goods, were known as “ domestic,” a term which has been contin- ued as the name of shirtings and sheetings even to this day, although the reason for the name had ceased a half-century ago. So general was this individual manufacturing carried on in the colonies to the north of Maryland that David Dulany, the great lawyer of that colony, in 1765, wrote that “the poorest. sort of people to the Northward make all their clothes.” * The unprecedented growth of the United States after the Revolution early directed the attention of thoughtful men to the subject of American manufac- tures, and foremost in advocacy of the establishment of such industries was Tench Coxe, of Philadelphia, ——a member of our bar, and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Hamilton. It is now generally conceded that the first manufactory of textile fabrics in the Union was established by Samuel Wetherell, in Philadelphia, previous to 1782, at which date he was making “‘ Jeans, Fustins, Everlastings, Coatings, &c.,” suitable for every season of the year, as he in- formed the public by his advertisement in the Penn- sylvania Gazette in April, 1782. Near the close of the year 1791, William Pollard, of Philadelphia, obtained a patent for cotton-spinning which was, we are told by Samuel Weller,‘ the first water-frame put in motion in Pennsylvania, but the enterprise failing, its want of success retarded the progress of cotton-spinning in that vicinity. The time, however, was fast approach- ing when the spirit of enterprise, born of necessity, would stimulate the development of the manufacture of textile goods to an abnormal extent. 1“ History of Hosiery Industry in Philadelphia.”—Teztile Journal, March, 1883. 2 Campanius, p. 90. 8 Peuna, Mag. of History, vol. iii. p. 148. 4Manuel of Power, pp. 22-28, FROM THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND TO 1850. 93 In the new era of industrial progress which was coming, the county of Delaware occupied no second- ary position in the story of that time, but it marched abreast of the commonwealth in the movement which has resulted in placing Pennsylvania in the fore-front of manufacturing States. As early as 1810, we are told by Dr. Smith,’ an English family named Bot- tomly erected an addition to an old saw-mill on a small stream in Concord, and converted it into a woolen factory, to the great astonishment of the people in that neighborhood. Dennis Kelley, the same au- thor informs us, with the assistance of a Mr. Wiest, about the beginning of the war, erected a small stone factory on Cobb’s Creek, in Haverford, which enter- prises, owing to the embargo and the demand for goods by the national government created by the war and the want of the people generally, the factory was compelled to run night and day up to its full ca- pacity. The statement of Dr. Smith, however, does not give our county its due credit in early manufac- turing, for in Upper Darby, in 1798, Nathan and Da- vid Sellers had a cotton-mill, and, in Darby, Isaac Oakford had a fulling-mill and stamping-works. At that date John Orna was employed there as a calico- stamper and Samuel Wetherington as a calico-printer. Previous to May, 1812, Benjamin Smith and William Stedham had begun spinning and carding at William Siter’s clover-mill, near the Spread Eagle Tavern, in Radnor, and advertised that they had placed a spin- ning-machine in their building “ which will work for customers,” and also setting forth the prices de- manded by them for their labor. These factories were small, but the almost total prohibition of European goods had advanced the prices of American fabrics to such extravagant rates, and the profits realized to the manufacturers were so large, that it naturally stimulated men of means, de- sirous of rapidly making large fortunes, to embark in the business. The result was that cotton- and woolen- mills sprang up in all parts of New England, and quite a number were located in the Middle States. In the latter the majority were woolen-factories. The war, as usually is the case, had inflated every article in prices,—flour had advanced to ten and fifteen dol- lars a barrel, a statement also true as respected other commodities, while real estate, during the time the nation was practically shut out from the world, had doubled and in many instances quadrupled in its supposed valuation. No sooner was peace declared than the storehouses of the Old World opened, and the superior articles of European manufacture were thrown into the American market, and being offered at less prices than the actual cost of the coarsest do- mestic goods, found ready sale. The English mill- owners, pressed to meet their obligations at home, realized, even at a loss on their stock, in the vain hope of being able to withstand the pressure of a 1History of Delaware County, p. 353. falling market, and succeeded in merely prolonging the period of their financial ruin. But it finally came to them as it did to their American rivals. The public mind in this country, notwithstanding the present losses, had been aroused to the possibili- ties of manufacturing on a large scale, and the inter- vention of Congress was had in the tariff act of 1816, which imposed a duty of twenty-five per cent. ad val- orem on all cotton cloths for three years, the minimum valuation at the port of exportation being fixed at twenty-five cents per square yard, which was a spe- cifie duty of six and a quarter cents on every yard. The tariff bill, however, was a sliding one, providing for a reduction of twenty per cent. ad valorem at the end of three years, and the same rate was applicable to cotton twist, yarn, or thread, unbleached costing less than sixty cents per pound, and bleached or colored less than seventy-five cents per pound. Delaware County had, as before stated, become largely inter- ested in manufacturing, and then, as now, the people, irrespective of party, were ardent advocates of pro- tection. Public meetings were then held to give ex- pression to this opinion. The first gathering of citi- zens in this county friendly to “ Domestic Industry,” which I have met with, was held at the Rose Tree Tavern, then kept by Isaac Cochran, on July 3, 1819, of which meeting Maj. William Anderson acted as president, and John Wilson secretary. It was there “ Resolved, That George G. Leiper, William Anderson, Benjamin Pear- son, John Mattson, aud John Willcox be a committee to draft articles for the formation of a society in Delaware County, and an address to the citizens to promote the important national object of fostering national industry.” The officers of the meeting were also instructed to publish the proceedings in the Village Record, Down- ingtown Republican, and Philadelphia papers, after which it adjourned to August 14th. If there was any subsequent meeting at the time designated, I have failed to find reference to it in the newspapers of that day. In Delaware County the majority of cotton- and woolen-factories after the war, most of them hastily built or changed from ancient grist-mills and filled with crude machinery, were compelled to close, while the larger number were sold by the sheriff to meet the outstanding obligations of their owners. Indeed, we are told by John P. Crozer that about 1821 only one cotton-factory in Delaware County was in suc- cessful operation,—that of Wagstaff & Englehorn, and that that firm could continue was mainly due to the fact that the senior member of the firm was a prac- tical cotton-spinner from England? In considering that period of our history it should not be overlooked that all Europe as well as the 2 Life of John P. Crozer, page 51. It is to be regretted that neither Mr. Crozer nor Dennis Kelly, both actively engaged in manufacturing in Delaware County, and both familiar with the story of its early strug- gles, have left no extended historical account of that industry, present- ing its birth, growth, and ultimate establishment as the leading indus- try in Delaware County. 94 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. United States had just emerged from war, the long Napoleonic contest which had drained the resources of the Old World’s governments to maintain armies in the field and navies on the sea. There, as here, on the cessation of hostilities business enterprises crum- bled under the sudden withdrawal of the governments from the markets as purchasers, and failure followed failure asarule. But in England, as on the Conti- nent and in the United States, an impetus had been imparted to manufacturing industries which could merely be impeded, not arrested, and in the end its importance to mankind far outweighed the defeat of the great captain at Waterloo. In the general depression of that period all suf- fered, and no class more severely than owners of real estate. In cases where farms and town-lots were encumbered, in the event of the foreclosure of the mortgages it rarely happened that properties when forced to sale brought more than the charge against them, and, although in Delaware County such sales were not so numerous as in other counties in this State, the rule stated maintained in almost every case. In manufacturing, the protection offered by the tariff law aided largely in the ultimate success of these enterprises; but of greater importance was the introduction of power-looms, and to that fact more than the tariff should be ascribed the permanent establishment of cotton manufactories as a national industry. In 1826 we find that in Delaware County there were then fourteen woolen-mills, employing 228 hands; twelve cotton factories, employing 415 hands; and one power-loom mill, with 200 looms, employing 120 hands. Six years afterwards, in 1832, there were eleven cotton-mills, employing 600 hands, and using a total of 19,500 spindles; three cotton-weaving mills, em- ploying 480 hands and 400 power-looms; two cotton- spinning mills, employing 120 hands; and eight woolen-mills, with 350 hands; the entire yearly pro- duction being a total of $950,000. In the documents transmitted to Congress from Pennsylvania in that year, John P. Crozer stated that he had established his mill in 1825, that it was run by water-power, and that the capital invested was fifteen thousand dollars. From the year 1829 to 1830 the business had yielded him no profit, but since that time until he made the report it had been paying an average profit of eight per cent. on the capital invested, and that he annu- ally expended two-fifths of that income in improve- ments. Woolen-mills, he stated, were doing better than that. At his mills the consumption of cotton was three hundred and eighty-three bales a year, and in the article he made there was no competition by foreign goods. At that time his mill gave emplay- ment to fifteen men, sixteen women, and twenty chil- dren, who worked twelve hours daily all the year round. The production of the mill was sold in Phila- delphia to owners of looms on a credit of four months. If the tariff of twelve and a half cents, as provided in the bill pending before Congress at that time, should become a law, he stated he would be compelled to abandon the business; for although at the time no duties were necessary to protect him against foreign competition, yet the then tariff was not sufficient to absolutely protect him from European sacrifices, Finally, as a general conclusion, he declared that cotton-spinning was a “‘ very uninviting” occupation. It is unnecessary to continue the narrative of man- ufacturing in this county, as a whole, further at this time. The story of the rise, progress, success, and decay of the various industrial establishments will be given in the histories of the several townships and boroughs wherein such works have been or are located. Free Public Education.—At the session of the Legislature in 1830-31, the first steps were taken to- wards a general free education of the children of the commonwealth by providing for the levying of a tax to create a school fund. At that time John Lindsay was the representative from Delaware County in the House, and John Kerlin in the Senate. It will be required here to retrace our steps. That Penn’s in- tention before coming to his province was to provide for public instruction is evident from the twelfth arti- cle of his frame of government, which declared “ that the Governor and Provincial Council shall erect and order all public schools,” which ‘declaration is twice repeated by the General Assembly, the last time in 1696. At the second General Assembly, held at Phil- adelphia March 10, 1683, when Penn personally pre- sided, the general laws, chapter cxii., provided,— “And to the End that Poor as well as Rich may be instructed in good and Commendable learning, Which is to be preferred before Wealth, Be it, &., That all persons in this Province and Territories thereof, having Children, and all the Guardians or Trustees of Orphans, shall cause such to be instructed in Reading and writing; so that they may be able to read the Scriptures, and to write by that time they attain to twelve years of age. And that then they be taught some useful trade or skill, that the poor may work to live, and the rich, if they become poor, may not want. Of which every county court shall take care; And in case such parents, guardians, or overseers, shall be found deficient in this respect, every such parent, guardian, or overseer, shall pay for every such Child, five pounds, Except there should appear an incapacity in body or understanding to hinder it.” This law was abrogated by William and Mary in 1698, but in the laws “made and past” in the same year when Benjamin Fletcher as captain-general of Pennsylvania had superseded Penn’s authority the law numbered twenty-five was enacted, entitled “The law about education of youth.” It presents the fore- going provisions in the same language, except where it applies to guardians and trustees of orphan chil- dren, and in these cases those having the care of such minors were required to have them taught to read and write, provided the wards had “sufficient estate and ability so to do.”1 It nowhere appears in our colo- nial history, so far as I have learned, that public funds 1 Duke of York’s Laws, p. 238, FROM THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND TO 1850. 95 were set apart to pay the costs of educating the youth even in the slight acquirements then deemed essen- tials, but where such information was imparted, the costs of tuition must be discharged by the parent or guardian of the children so taught. By the middle of the last century it had become a practice generally in townships throughout the present county of Dela- ware, to provide schools for the instruction of youths to which the several residents of the neighborhood made voluntary contribution, but the sum so contrib- uted was a contract that could be enforced by process of law. The idea, however, of free public instruction for the children of persons in indifferent circumstances is presented throughout all our State history. The section of the Constitution of 1776 which provided that ‘a school or schools shall be established in each county by the Legislature for the convenient instruc- tion of youth, with such salaries to the teachers paid by the public as may enable them to instruct youth at low prices,” did not bring into existence the free- school system of which we are now so proud, nor did the seventh article of the Constitution of 1790, which directed that ‘‘ the Legislature shall, assoon as conve- niently may be, provide by law for the establishment of schools throughout the State, in such manner that the poor may be taught gratis.” As far back in our county annals as 1794 we find Dr. William Martin, of the borough of Chester, in a lengthy article in the Aurora (a Philadelphia paper) for December 31st, urging the establishment of pub- lic seminaries of learning; but his views were far in advance of the times. On April 4, 1809, the Legis- lature enacted a law—the pauper law, as Thaddeus Stevens termed it—that the children of parents too poor to provide for the education of their offspring out of their own means, could have proper instruc- tion given them at the public cost, and directing how the expenses thereby incurred should be defrayed. The act of April 3, 1831, provided that all money due the State by holders of patented lands, and all fees received by the land-office, should be invested until the interest annually would amount to one hundred thousand dollars, after which time the interest was to be applied to the support of common schools through- out the commonwealth. At the time of the passage of the act of April 1, 1834, about half a million dol- lars had been received from the sources named, and the opponents of the school Jaw of 1834—for they were many and included a large number of the ablest and best men of the State—were clamorous in their denun- ciation of the Legislature for having, as they alleged, violated their plighted faith in providing for the sup- port of the schools by direct taxation instead of wait- ing until the fund set apart in 1831 had accumulated to two millions of dollars, when the interest alone should be applied to the maintenance of the schools. The act of April 1, 1834, however, was submitted to the various townships in Delaware County, when the result showed that fourteen townships were favorable to the adoption of the law and seven against it. Dr. George Smith at that time was the senator from this district, and Samuel Anderson, representative, both of whom were warm friends of the measure, Dr. Smith being particularly active in advocacy of the bill. The opponents of the law in this county assem- bled Oct. 30, 1834, at the public-house of Isaac Hall, in Nether Providence, and the list of the committee then appointed indicates how strong and influential that opposition was. The meeting was presided over by Benjamin Pearson, and Jonas P. Yarnall was sec- retary. The following resolution was unanimously adopted : “ Resolved, That we disapprove of the law passed at the last session of the Legislature as a system of general education, believing that it is unjust and impolitic. That it was never intended by our Constitution that the education of those children whose parents are able to educate them should be educated at the public expense.” Dr. Joseph Wilson, Joseph Gibson, James S. Peters, George Lewis, and Benjamin Pearson were appointed a committee to draft a memorial to the General As- sembly, which contained a statement that while not disapproving of the clause of the Constitution pro- viding for the education of the poor gratis, yet the law of 1834 was oppressive inasmuch as it “ imposed a disproportionate and unreasonable burden on the middle class of the community, who can partake but little of its benefits ;” that the authority of the school directors under its provisions was unlimited, having power to tax the citizens to any extent, and being “responsible to nobody ;” that the assessments for State and county purposes were sufficiently oppressive ‘without any addition to carry into operation an ex- periment of doubtful efficacy,” and for these reasons they petitioned for the repeal of the law. Capt. James Serrill and Joseph Bunting were appointed a com- mittee to have the memorial printed, and a committee of sixty-four persons was appointed to circulate printed copies for signatures, which papers were to be returned to the chairman by the first Monday of November following. In the mean time the friends of the law were not less active, for on Nov. 4, 1834, the school delegates in the various townships, excepting those of Aston and Concord, together with the county commis- sioners, met in the court-house at Chester in ac- cordance with the provisions of the act. George G. Leiper was chairman, and Homer Eachus secretary. The proceedings were not harmonious, but a reso- lution was adopted by a vote of thirteen to nine, providing that two thousand two hundred dollars should be appropriated for school purposes, and a meeting of the citizens at the usual places of election in each township was called to be held in the after- noon of November 20th to ratify or reject the action of the deputies. Those citizens who favored the act also assembled in convention at Hall's Tavern, in Nether Providence, on Noy. 18, 1834, when William Martin acted as president; J. Walker, Jr., and I. E. 96 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Bonsall, vice-presidents; and J. S. White and A. D. Williamson as secretaries. That meeting adopted the following resolution : “ Resolved, That the tax levied by the Commissioners and Delegates ought to be extended to bonds, mortgages, stocks, etc., in the same pro- portion as on real estate, and that in order to raise an additional tax for the support of common schools, that the directors in the several districts shall meet as directed in the Seventh Section, and determine whether there shall be an additional tax, and if they decide in the affirmative, then the Clerk of the Board shall notify the directors, who shall deter- mine the amount and be authorized to levy and collect such tax on bonds, mortages and profitable occupations, as well as real estate, and the proper officers of the townships constitute a Court of Appeal in case any person may think himself aggrieved in the amount of tax so levied by said Directors.” The second resolution indorsed the course of Gov- ' ernor Wolf in the matter of popular education, as,also that of the members of the General Assembly who had voted for the measure, and the third resolution appointed William Amies, Dr. Jesse Young, Spencer Mcllvain, Samuel T. Walker, and William Martin to prepare a memorial to be presented to the Legisla- ture. This memorial stated that the signers were “deeply impressed with the importance of a proper system of education by common schools throughout the State. They have examined the last act passed at the last session of the Legislature for that purpose, and are of opinion that the objects contemplated by. the law would be greatly promoted by an alteration in the mode for raising the fund necessary to support public schools. So far as the law bears equally on all, they cheerfully acquiesce in it, but some of its provi- sions they deem burdensome and unequal in their operations on a portion of their fellow-citizens. The landed interest, as the Jaw now exists, pays nearly the whole expense of the system, while many that are proper objects of taxation contribute but a very small proportion.” The memorial therefore suggested that bonds, mort- gages, money at interest, and occupations should be taxed, as well as a fixed proportion to be paid by real estate; that such sums as may be necessary, beyond the State appropriation, should be levied by the school directors as a township tax, while the township offi- cers should act as a Board of Redress. The memorial concluded : “Your memorialists remonstrate against a repeal of the law, and are only desirous that the matter may have your deliberate consideration ; sensible that such amendments will be adopted as you may deem most beneficial and just, tending to equalize the operations of the law, the effects of which will strengthen the system, disseminate knowledge among the people, the only sure means of perpetuating the principles of national Liberty.” Those opposed to the law presented thirty-three petitions to the Legislature, containing one thou- sand and twenty-four names, while those remon- strating against its repeal presented thirteen peti- tions, bearing eight hundred and seventy-three names. It is creditable to Delaware County that the remon- strants against the repeal of the school law exceeded in numbers almost threefold that from any other county in the State. James W. Baker, superintendent of the public schools of Delaware County, in his report for the year 1877, presented an interesting and valuable his- tory of education in this county, in which he says, “On the 4th of November, 1834, of the twenty-one districts of the county, eleven accepted the law, viz,, Birmingham, Chester, Haverford, Lower Chichester, Marple, Nether Providence, Radnor, Ridley, Upper Darby, and Upper Chichester. In consequence of the obscurity of the law, and the difficulty of putting it in operation, only six accepted it the following year; but in 1886 all the districts but one accepted the new law enacted that year. The last one joined the others in 1838.”! On the other hand, in the report of James Findlay, secretary of the commonwealth, on the sub- ject of common schools, submitted to the Legislature and dated March 2, 1835, it is stated that in Delaware County all the school districts had accepted the law, that the State appropriation was one thousand seventy dollars and ninety-three cents, and that two thousand two hundred dollars had been voted to be raised in that county by tax.’ The narrative of the rise and progress of the benefi- cent public school system is from this time part of the story of the several townships, and will be therein related under the proper heading. On July 4, 1834, the equipped militia of Delaware County, as was usual with those organizations at that time, celebrated Independence Day with a parade, followed by a banquet. On that occasion Gen. Root presided, and at his right hand was a militia colonel, who was called on for a toast. The latter, not having prepared himself, trusted to his genius and the oc- casion to creditably propose a sentiment when the time came, sat a moment in thought, and finally concluded his toast ought to be something of a mili- tary nature. The guests called again upon the colonel before he had fully determined what he would say. In response, he arose and announced in a loud voice, “The military of our country—may they never want——” Here he hesitated,—‘‘may they never want!” He came to a full stop, and looking im- ploringly at Gen. Root, he whispered, ‘“ What the devil shall I say next?” “And never be wanted,” whispered back the general. ‘‘ And never be wanted,” roared the colonel. The joke was too good to prevent it being related, and at length it found its way into the newspapers of the day, and now it is so popularly known in the country that long since its birthplace was generally forgotten. The military history of the county, other than that occurring in times of actual war, is brief and of a spasmodic character, usually the ground-swell after 1 Report of Superintendent of Public Instruction for 1877, p. 239. 2 Hazard's Register of Pennsylvania, vol. xv. p. 194. FROM THE SECOND WAR WITH ENGLAND TO 1850. 97 the storm of battle had subsided. In our early an- nals, the Swedish settlers and the Dutch were more or less under military organization, as were the English previous to the coming of Penn. In the Duke of York’s book of laws considerable space is devoted to ordinances relating to military service, and providing for the maintenance of bodies of soldiers. As early as 1673 the Council at New York directed the enlist- ment of ten or twelve men from settlers on the Dela- ware, and ordered that every sixth man of the inhabi- tants should be summoned to build a fort for the defense of the river. Previous to that date the pre- sumption is that the troops were recruited abroad, and were brought hither in the character of soldiers. James Sandelands, we are told-by Dr. Smith, came to the Delaware River settlement as a private under Capt. Carr’s command, and was discharged in 1669. In May, 1675, there was a company enlisted, for at a court held at Peter Rambo’s in that month, James Sandelands, as a punishment for a “scandalous busi- ness” (he had thrown a drunken Indian out of his tavern at Upland, and injured him so that he died from the effect of his fall), was sentenced to pay a certain sum towards building a new church at ‘ Weck- ahoe,” alike sum to the sheriff, and was ‘‘ put off from being Captain.” Hans Junian, who had been lieu- tenant, was made captain, John Prince lieutenant, and Jonas Keen ensign. The new captain and ensign were residents of the present Delaware County. On Sept. 23, 1675, Capt. John Collyer was by Gov- ernor Andross appointed commander of Delaware River, and he was particularly required to take care that the militia in the several places should be well armed, duly exercised, and kept in order. We know that previous to that date, towards the end of the year 1671, it was ordered, “ That every person that can bear arms, from 16 to 60 years of age, be always provided with a convenient proportion of powder and bullets, fit for service and their mutual defense, upon a pen- alty for their neglect herein to be imposed by the commission-officers in command, according to law. That the quantity or proportion of powder and shot to be adjudged competent for each person to be at least one pound of powder and two of bullet.” All that I have learned respecting military organi- zations in the county previous to the Revolution has already been related, which is equally true of the war of Independence. After peace was assured the militia of the State was regulated by law. The Pennsylvania Packet states that at a meeting of the Chester County militia, commanded by Edward Ver- non, on Oct. 25, 1789, Rev. James Conarroe, of Marcus Hook, was appointed chaplain. This notice was after the county of Delaware had been erected, but Edward Vernon and Mr. Conarroe were residents of the new county, and in all probability the entire organization they represented was from the southeasterly part of the old county of Chester (the present Delaware County). The act of 1792, organizing the militia of | ( the State, continued in operation for forty years with- out any definite action being taken by the people to correct its provisions. Under the law of April 9, 1799, the militia of the commonwealth was arranged into regiments. From it we learn that “in the county of Delaware the regiments commanded by Lieut.- Colonel Levis shall be No. 65, and by Lieut.-Colonel Wilcocks, No.110.” Five years previous to the latter act, Jonah Lamplugh was convicted at the January session, 1794, of refusing to discharge the duties of the office of collector of militia fines, to which he had been appointed. It is unnecessary to recall the incidents of the whis- key insurrection and the war of 1812, related else- where. During the latter struggle, the Delaware County Troop was organized, with Dr. Joseph Wil- son as captain, and it was commanded by Capt. Pear- son Smith when it took part in the ceremonies at the dedication of the Paoli Monument, Sept. 20, 1817. The next year Dr. Wilson again became its captain, and its lieutenants Baker and Cornog, and George Kirk quartermaster. In 1820, the Troop was reorganized, with John Hinkson, captain ; Samuel M. Leiper, first lieutenant ; John Wells, second lieutenant; Evans Way, first ser- geant; and George Kirk, color sergeant. For some years it was part of the first squadron of Mont- gomery, Chester, and Delaware County cavalry. In time interest in the organization began to flag, and it was believed that it might be revived in 1830, when an election was held, which resulted in the selection of Samuel M. Leiper as captain, Edward H. Engle as first lieutenant, John Wells as second lieutenant, Evans Way as first sergeant, and George Kirk as color sergeant. The interest had gone, however, and after dragging along for six years the organization, in 1836, finally disbanded. The Delaware County Blues was also an outgrowth of the war of 1812, and was commanded at first by Capt. George Hawkins, and subsequently by Capt. George Litzenberg. It pre- served its organization until 1836, when it also dis- banded. In 1817 the Delaware County Fencibles was commanded by Capt. George G. Leiper, and as such took part in the ceremonies at Paoli. Judge Leiper was subsequently lieutenant-colonel of the Delaware County Battalion, and on Sept. 4, 1828, announced his appointment of George Litzenberg as adjutant, Charles Bonsall quartermaster, and Dr. Morris C. Shallcross as surgeon. Dr. Wilson was major of the battalion ; Capt. George Hawkins had command of the Delaware County Blues, Capt. Myers of the Delaware County Volunteers, and Capt. Weaver of the Pennsylvania Artillerists. The latter company was organized about 1819, with John J. Richards as captain, and at his death, in 1822, Joseph Weaver, Jr., succeeded to the command, to give place in 1828 to Capt. William Martin, and he subsequently to Samuel A. Price. The latter officer, in 1832, was colonel of the First Brigade, Third Division, and with Lieut. John K. Zeilin and J. 98 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. M. G. Lescure, represented the county of Delaware at the military convention of the State, which assembled at Harrisburg January 2d of that year. Col. Price was one of the four vice-presidents of that convention. He was succeeded in command of the Pennsylvania Artillerists by Capt. John K. Zeilin. In 1817the Union Troop, of Chester and Delaware Counties, was a mili- tary organization existing in the two counties, and at Paoli in 1817 had the right of the line under the com- mand of Capt. Harris. This organization continued until 1888, when it was commanded by Capt. William Haines, and John Lindsay was its first lieutenant. In 1824 the Forty-ninth Regiment of militia of the county of Delaware was commanded by Col. John Smith, Lieut.-Col. Benjamin F. Johnson, and Maj. Abner Barrett; while the Thirty-eighth Regiment, of the same county, was commanded by Col. Benjamin Wetherby, Lieut.-Col. Benjamin Smith, and Maj. Jonathan David. In 1857, the Delaware County Volunteers, organ- ized about 1822, was disbanded, and from its fragments a new company—the Harmony Rangers—was formed, Capt. Jesse L. Green commanding, who was succeeded by Capt. Simon Leany. It was disbanded in 1842. In 1834, Lieut.-Col. Henry Myers was in command of the Delaware County Volunteer Battalion, succeeding Col. George G. Leiper in that office. Besides the foregoing military organizations, in 1824 there was a company of militia known as the Washington Artillerists, in 1833 the Union Guards, Capt. George Kirk, and Jesse Sharpless orderly ser- geant, and in 1840 the Delaware County Rangers, Capt. Samuel Hall. On Friday, Oct. 11, 1838, the City Troop of Phila- delphia, commanded by Capt. Hart, was met at Darby by the Delaware County Troop and escorted to Chester, where they remained until the Monday following, when they returned to Philadelphia, stopping to dine on that day at the tavern kept by J. R. Lamplugh, in Darby. During the riots of 1844 in Philadelphia, a meeting was held at the court-house in Chester, on July 15th, at which resolutions were adopted calling for the im- mediate organization of a corps of volunteers, “‘ citi- zen soldiers,” which body was directed to be equipped and armed, so that, if necessary, the authorities could call on it to preserve public order. The next day, July 16, 1844, the Union Troop of Delaware and Chester Counties marched to Philadelphia, reaching that city in the evening, when they immediately re- lieved the Philadelphia Cavalry, which had been in service for some days, and were then worn out from loss of sleep. In August, 1844, the Delaware County Grays were organized by the election of John K. Zeilin, captain, Charles W. Raborg, first lieutenant, and Joseph Tay- lor second lieutenant. The following year the Forty- ninth Regiment of militia, in this county, was com- manded by Col. John K. Zeilin, and C. W. Raborg was adjutant, while the companies composing the organization were commanded by Capts. Walter, Johnson, Crosby, Eyre, Ulrich, and Irwin. The pub- lic feeling was then strongly adverse to military ser- vice. On May 18, 1845, Maj. Charles Peck, brigade inspector, visited Chester, reaching that place an hour before noon, when some of the older citizens waited on him, and apprised him that the boys in the town were armed with eggs, which they proposed to present to him in no quiet manner, and he hurried away with- out inspecting the undisciplined militia, which had assembled for that purpose, according to his published orders. On Saturday, June 13, 1846, the Delaware County Grays were inspected by Maj. Peck, Capt. Zeilin having, through Governor Shunk, offered the services of the company to President Polk for the Mexican war. The quota of Pennsylvania being filled, however, the offer was not accepted. The next year Maj. Peck again visited Chester, when he was made the victim of a practical joke, which, as tradition ascribed, was suggested by John M. Broomall. Several of the practical jokers who then infested Chester induced the major to visit the prison, on the pretext that within its ancient precincts were several relics of the long ago worthy of the no- tice of a stranger. The plan worked to a charm. After the party had gained admission to the jail, the door was locked behind them, the keys were con- cealed, and all that day until evening the military gentleman and two of the roysters of Chester stood looking through a grated window in the second story, calling to the people below in the street to procure their release. The keys could not be found until night had nearly come, but several times during the day the imprisoned men lowered strings to the crowd below and drew them up with provisions and other refreshments attached thereto. After his release Maj Peck had several other jokes played upon him before he shook the dust of Chester from his feet, never to return to it again. Not only was the brigade inspector personally trifled with, but the commissioners of Delaware County failed to enforce the collection of the militia tax; hence Maj. Peck instructed his counsel to bring suit against the county commissioners for their neglect in not issuing duplicates to the collectors for collection of the military fines. The suit, however, never was pressed, the act being repealed by the Legislature in 1849. The following is the list of persons holding the office of brigade inspector for Delaware County, so far as I have been able to obtain their names: William Brooke, lieutenant of the county of Delaware....Aug. 21, 1791 William Brooke, brigade inspector. April 11, 1793 John Crosby, brigade inspector... John Crozer, brigade inspector... William Brooke, brigade inspector.. Casper Snyder, brigade inspector..... -April, 1813 Col. James Peck, brigade inspector... -April, 1815 Nathaniel Brooke, brigade inspecto April, 1824 Thomas James, brigade inspector... pril, 1838 Maj. Charles Peck, brigade inspecto pril, 1842 Walter J. Arnold, brigade inspector... il; 1861 STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. 99 Maj. Arnold was appointed in 1859, but did not take out his commission until the attack on Sumter made it necessary to have such an officer to aid in forwarding troops in the early days of the civil war. CHAPTER NIV. STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. WE have little save tradition respecting storms, freshets, and earthquakes in the olden times. Ié is only within the last half-century that any circum- stantial records have been kept of such incidents in our annals, On March 22, 1662,! William Beckman, in a letter, mentions the day before the tide in the Delaware was so high that a “galiot” was driven out of the Kil, but was recovered by the sailors of the ship “ Di Purmerlander Kerck.” The same night she was driven to the other (New Jersey) side of the river, and again the sailors rescued her from destruc- tion. In 1683 we know that Chester mill and dam, which was located at the present site of Upland, “ were soon carried away by the flood,” and subsequent thereto a new dam, saw- and grist-mill was erected at that point, but the second dam, we are told in 1705, was ‘carried away by the flood.”* In 1740, tradition states, an extraordinary and destructive freshet oc- curred in all the creeks in the county, but beyond that fact no particulars have been handed down to the present generation. In the winter of 1795 a heavy, warm rain occasioned the melting of the snow on the hills and the ice in the runs and creeks of Delaware County, but as the streams were not, as in more recent years, blocked with dams, which backed up the water until the weight broke away the ob- struction, the damage then sustained, although at the time it occurred regarded as great, was trifling when compared with that of 1843. In 1822 a notice- able freshet occurred in Delaware County consequent “on the rapid melting of the deep snow. The mill- ponds were covered with a thick ice, which was broken up, and occasioned considerable damage in addition to that caused by the weight of the water in the creeks.” ? And again, in November, 1830, when the river rose so high that the piers at Chester were submerged and the embankments on the river were overflowed. On Friday night, Jan. 24, 1839, rain began to fall, and continued without intermission until Saturday afternoon, when it ceased; the snow and ice, melt- ing under the warm rains, filling the streams until 1N. Y. Historical Record, vol. xii. p. 365. 2 Deed for Samuel Carpenter to Caleb Pussey, Dec. 19, 1705. 3 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 355. they became more swollen than had happened for forty years before, and the ice, broken into masses and cakes, crashed and ground against each other as the rising water swept them outward to the river. In many places the ice gorged the streams, damming the waters up until the pressure became so great that the temporary obstacle was torn away, and the arrested torrent burst in one great wave onward in its course, sweeping away mill-dams, bridges, and doing other damages as it sped seaward. The Westtown stage, as it crossed the hollow on the Providence side, near the bridge on Crum Creek, on the road from Springfield meeting-house to Rose Tree Tavern, was carried away by the irresistible velocity of the current, which rushed round the wing walls of the bridge at a dis- tance of about eighty yards from that structure. When the stage was borne away by the water it fortunately contained but two passengers, Joseph Waterman and a colored woman. They, as well as the driver, succeeded in getting free from the vehicle, and, catching some bushes as they swept along, man- aged to support themselves until assistance came. The driver finally swam to shore after being in the water three-quarters of an hour, while the passengers were extricated from their unhappy plight by means of ropes lowered to them by the residents in the neighborhood, who gathered to their assistance, but not until they had been in the icy water nearly three hours and were almost frozen. One of the horses was drowned, and the other was not taken out until four hours had elapsed.*’ On Saturday afternoon two sons of George Serrill, of Darby, made an attempt to save two horses on the marsh, a few miles below that vil- lage, but it was impossible to get to the animals, and turning to retrace their way the water had risen so much that the horses they rode became fractious, and plunged down a bank into the main creek. The riders swam ashore, abandoning the animals, but the latter also landed safely. The two horses on the meadow remained there until the Tuesday following before they could be reached and some hay taken to them. They were found in almost three feet of water, and so completely surrounded by ice that it was impossi- ble to extract them. On Saturday evening a widow woman and her six children, living on Tinicum meadow, had to be taken off in a boat, the water at the time surrounding the house to the depth of seven 4 John C. Beatty states that George Dunn, seeing the woman in the water, ran half a mile and got a rope from the Rock House, and making it fast he sprang into the stream, swam to the woman, and by means of the rope she was drawn ashore. When the news was brought to the axe-factory six or eight men ran to the place and found Waterman standing on a post in a fence below the bridge. It was learned he could not swim, and just after this fact was made known a cake of ice struck the post, throwing him into the current. For twenty minutes he was not seen, and then he was discovered standing on another post, his face just out of the water. A tree was felled so that it reached towards him, and George Dunn walked along it and cast a rope to Waterman, who caught it, and he was drawn ashore. Next spring, after the ice had all washed away, Mr. Beatty found the canvas mail-bag, but its contents were entirely ruined. 100 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. feet. The inmates had sought safety in the second story, and were taken out through the window fam- ishing and almost frozen. Severe as was the con- dition of that family, the situation of a man, his wife, and four children, residing on the bank of the Dela- ware, who had remained without food or fire for three days until relief came, was more distressing. One of the children was so benumbed with the cold that it was totally blind for nearly a day, while the other little ones were all more or less frost-bitten. The party who went to their assistance bore the children in their arms along the bank, between three and four miles, to a place of safety. A family residing on the meadow, between Darby Creek and the Schuylkill (not in Delaware County), seemed absolutely beyond relief, for around the dwelling for miles the ice and water had accumulated. But on Saturday afternoon a large boat was manned and pushed out across the meadow in the direction of the dwelling. The water froze on the oars, and the drifting ice-cakes seemed as if they would crush the boat, so heavily did they strike against its sides, but the crew held firmly to their purpose, and succeeded in rescuing the family, —a man, wife, and two children,—who without fire, food, and but scantily clothed, were in a perishing condition when help came to them. They were landed at William Davis’ house on Darby Creek, who sheltered them. The woman was so completely exhausted that no sooner had she been received into Mr. Davis’ dwelling than she fainted, and was with difficulty revived. Many bridges were swept away and dam-breasts broken by the pressure of the flood; that at Penn’s Grove and Rockdale was completely demolished. On Chester Creek, at Knowlton, John P. Crozer sustained damages amounting to five thousand dollars; William G. Flower, from Chester Mills, had fifty thousand feet of lumber floated away; William Eyre, Jr., of Chester, lost fifteen hundred feet of lumber; J. P. & William Eyre had fifty tons of coal swept off the wharf at the same place, and Samuel Bancroft had a boat loaded with coal to sink at the dock; Jabez Bunting, of Darby, lost three horses by the flood, and a break was made in the bank of Darby Creek, which caused the overflow of the Philadelphia, Wilming- ton and Baltimore Railroad, and interrupted travel for several days. In four years after this freshet Delaware County was visited by a cloud-burst, which wrought wide- spread destruction along all the streams within its | boundary that were of sufficient size to be termed water-powers. The circumstances connected with the noted “‘ Lammas Flood” are briefly these: On Saturday morning, Aug. 5, 1843, at daybreak, | the sky indicated rain, and about seven o’clock a moderate fall setin, which, while it slackened, never entirely ceased until between the hours of two and six o’clock that afternoon, when the extraordinary opening of “the windows of heaven” took place | which made such extended ruin and misery in a brief period of time. The rain, when falling most abundantly, came down in such showers that the fields in that part of the county removed several miles back from the river are said to have been flooded with water almost immediately, and where the road was lower than the surface of the ground on either side, the water poured into the highway ina constant stream of miniature cascades. The light- ning played incessantly through the falling torrents, reflected from all sides in the watery mirrors in the fields producing a weird and spectral appearance, such that those who witnessed it could evermore recall, A peculiar feature of the storm was that Cobb’s Creek, on the extreme eastern, and the Brandy- wine, on the western boundary of the county, were not swollen to any remarkable degree, clearly show- ing that the territory where the violence of the cloud- burst occurred was noticeably restricted to the feeders and bodies of Chester, Ridley, Crum, and Darby Creeks. Dr. Smith states that “as a general rule, the heavy rain occurred later as we proceed from the source of the stream towards their mouths. The quantity of rain which fell decreases as we proceed in the same direction, particularly from the middle parts of the county downwards. In those sections of the county where its greatest violence was expended, the char- acter of the stream more nearly accorded with that of a tropical hurricane than with anything which apper- tained to this region of country. The clouds wore an unusually dark and lowering appearance, of which the whole atmosphere seemed in some degree to par- take, and this circumstance, no doubt, gave that peculiarly vivid appearance to the incessant flashes of lightning which was observed by every one. The peals of thunder were loud and almost continuous. The clouds appeared to approach from different direc- tions, and to concentrate at a point not very distant from the zenith of the beholder. In many places there was but very little wind, the rain falling in nearly perpendicular streams; at other places it blew a stiff breeze, first from the east or northeast and sud- denly shifting to the southwest, while at a few points it blew in sudden gusts with great violence, accom- panied with whirlwinds, which twisted off and pros- trated large trees, and swept everything before it.” The hurricane which occurred in Bethel township during the storm is thus described : “The wind blew from different points at different places in the same neighborhood, as is manifested from the position of uprooted trees, etc. A peach- orchard belonging to Mr. Clayton was blown down, the trees lying toward the northeast. An apple- orchard not very distant, lays prostrated towards the southeast. At John Larkins’, two miles north of Clayton’s, the gale appears to have been most violent. 1 Dr. Smith’s '‘ History of Delaware County,” p. 360. STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. 101 The wind came from the southeast, and tore up a large quantity of heavy timber (said to be about two hun- dred cords) all in a narrow strip, not more than two hundred yards in width. A valley of woodland, bounded by pretty high hills, had nearly all of its timber blown down, and, what is very remarkable, the trees are not generally laid lengthwise of the valley but across it, with their tops towards the northeast, while on the adjacent hills but few trees were up- rooted; one very large white-oak, however, which was deply and strongly rooted in a clay soil, was blown down.”? The almost instantaneous rise of the water in the creeks throughout the county is hardly paralleled in any flood on record, and the manner in which the current is related to have moved down the various streams to the Delaware would be incredible if it were not that the destruction it produced fully sustains the statements. In Cobb’s Creek, as before mentioned, the water did not rise to a height beyond that usual in times of freshets, while Darby Creek, separated from Cobb’s, in Upper Darby, by less than a mile of inter- vening land, was a wild, struggling torrent, swollen seventeen feet beyond its usual level, crushing even solid masonry before it as it rushed outward towards the river. Ithan Creek, a branch of Darby Creek, in Radnor, rose to such an unprecedented height that the arched stone bridge which spanned the stream on the old Lancaster road, near Radnor Friends’ meet- ing-house, unable to vent the water, was undermined and fell, allowing the torrent to escape through its broken archway. On the west branch of Darby Creek, before that feeder enters Delaware County, consider- able damage was done in broken dams, which, freeing the water therein restrained, resulted in augmenting largely the force of the freshet, which rushed in irre- sistible force to Hood’s bridge, where the Goshen road crosses the creek, and the double arched stone struc- ture there yielded before the mass of water that was hurled against it, attaining at that point a height of seven feet beyond the highest point ever before reached so far as records extend. In its mad career the torrent injured the mill-dam of Clarence and William P. Lawrence’s grist-mill, and more than a hundred feet of the western wing wall of the stone bridge that spanned the creek on the West Chester road was swept away, the water reaching a point thir- teen feet beyond its usual level. The stone bridge near where the Marple and Springfield line meets on Darby Creek had a large part of the guard-wall de- molished. At Heysville the lower story of the woolen- factory then occupied by Moses Hey was flooded and the machinery much injured, while the dam there was entirely swept away. Farther down the stream the paper-mill of Palmer & Masker was badly damaged, thirty feet of the build- 1 Report on the Great Storm and Flood, made to Delaware County In- stitute, Jan. 4, 1844, p. 11. ing was undermined and fell, a paper-machine ruined, while the race and dam were broken. Just below stood the paper-mill of Obern Levis, and there the water leveled the drying-house to its foundations, and, burst- ing through the doors and windows of the basement of the mill itself on one side, swept out at the other, doing great damage to the machinery and stock. A small cotton-factory at or near the site of the present Union Mills, above the Delaware County turnpike in Upper Darby, then occupied by John and Thomas Kent, was carried away by the flood, together with the machinery and stock, and an unoccupied dwelling was absolutely obliterated, nothing after the passage of the water remaining to mark the place whereon it stood. Three stone dwellings were partly carried away, and several private bridges were borne off by the current. At Kellyville the stone picker-house was washed away, together with the contents, and the basement story of the mill flooded. The next mill below, then owned by Asher Lobb’s estate, on the Delaware County turnpike, and occupied by D. and C. Kelly, was flooded and the dam broken. It was here that a frame dwelling, near the bridge, occupied by Michael Nolan, his wife, five children, and a young woman, Susan Dowlan, was washed away. As the water swelled Nolan and his eldest son left the house to make arrangements to remove the family to a place of less danger, and not five minutes thereafter the wing wall of the bridge gave way, the loosened flood poured onward surrounding the house, and in half an hour bore the building from its foundations. The wife and four children were drowned. Susan Dowlan, when cast into the water, clutched as she was swept onward a branch of a tree, and thereby obtained a foothold on a knot which projected from its trunk in such a way that the trunk was interposed between her and the direction in which the floor was moving. Thus for nearly four hours she remained immersed to her waist in the water. When the freshet had subsided in a measure, Charles McClure, John Cun- ningham, and John Heller made an effort to rescue her. At great personal danger they ventured into the flood and obtained a position where the water was shoaling, but an angry torrent still rushed between them and the tree to which the woman clung. Mc- Clure, taking the end of a rope, swam to her, and fastening it around her she was drawn to a place of safety. When rescued she was so exhausted that she could not have held her footing much longer. The bodies of Mrs. Nolan and her four children were re- covered the following day. The dam at Matthews’ paper-mill, below Lobb’s Run, was washed away to its foundation, and the water rushed violently through the floor of the mill, while farther on, at Bonsall’s grist-mill, the dam and race were injured. The dam at Thomas Steel’s mill, the last one on the creek at that time, was torn away completely, his cotton-house and stable removed by the flood, while the water, rising seventeen and a half feet at that point, inun- 102 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. dated the lower floor of his factory. When the large three-arched stone bridge at Darby, which had cost the county eleven thousand dollars, gave way and fell piece by piece until nothing but the abutments were left, Russell K. Flounders and Josiah Bunting, Jr., the former twenty-one and the latter nineteen years of age, were standing on the bridge watching the angry waters, and were precipitated into the flood and per- ished. The body of Flounders was found four days afterwards on the meadows two miles below, while Bunting’s was not recovered for two weeks, when it was discovered wedged in among the broken arches of the bridge. In Crum Creek, immediately below the Chester County line, at Jonathan W. Hatches’ factory, a vacant dwelling-house was floated off, and the arch, one of the abutments, and part of each end of the wing walls of the stone bridge that spanned the creek on the West Chester road were washed away, while the stone arched bridge, known as Howard’s bridge, on the road that intersected with the Newtown and Marple Line road, was almost destroyed. Below this point and above Hunter’s Run a sleeper bridge was bodily carried off its abutment. At T. Chalkley Palmer’s flour-mills the torrent tore away a wide and strong embankment; swept into a ruin a stone wagon-house fifty feet in length, and caused other damages in the vicinity. Trout Run, which empties into Crum Creek some distance below Palmer’s mill, was so swollen that the dam at Willet Paxson’s mill was broken down, and at the bridge that crosses the run on the road from Springfield meeting-house to the Rose Tree, the water forced a deep channel through the western abutment. At Beatty’s Hollow, where were located the edge-tool works, flour-, saw-, and plaster- mills owned by John C. Beatty, the dam was broken. All the buildings, except the flour-mill, together with the county bridge, which crosses the creek immedi- ately below the works, were swept away. Mr. Beatty | stated that in ten minutes the water rose seven or eight feet; that the bridge fell over as if there was no strength in it, the head-gates burst, and ‘“‘the edge- tool factory went with a tremendous crash, and in an instant there was nothing to be seen but water in the place where it stood.” The day of the flood Mr. Beatty was putting in two | new wheels and building a block for the head-block to reston. A neighbor seeing the work, said, ‘“ Mr. Beatty, you are building a monument which will stand when you and your grandchildren are six feet under ground. It can’t get away.” Yet at five o’clock that afternoon there was not a stone to be found in place. Perciphor Baker, John Baker, and Mr. Beatty went to the mill when they found the water rising, and at that time no water was within twenty-five feet of the door, yet five minutes afterwards Mr. Beatty, chancing to look back, saw the water pouring in at the door they had just entered. The three men got out of the window and ran across the race bridge not a moment too soon, for hardly had they reached a place of safety when the works and bridge were swept away before the wave of water, at least ten feet in height, which moved down the creek. At the paper-mill of John Lewis, now J. Howard Lewis, part of the draw was swept away and the lower part of the mill flooded. The wooden bridge which spanned the creek at the Philadelphia, New London and Baltimore turnpike road was carried off by the current, while the dam of George Lewis’ cotton-mills —now Wallingford—was destroyed, as also a stone dye-house, and the lower story inundated, the water rising twenty feet above its usual level. The dams at Strathaven and Avondale, the first located where Dick’s Run enters the stream and the latter near where the Springfield roads cross Crum Creek (the factories at both places were then owned by William J. Leiper and occupied by James Riddle), were par- tially swept away. All the houses of the operatives at Avondale were submerged to the second stories; the county bridge had its guard wall destroyed, and a team of five horses was drowned, the water rising so rapidly that the animals could not be gotten out of the stable. Farther down the creek George G. Leip- er’s mill-dam was damaged and his canal broken, while a large tree coming down the stream root first was forced through one of the windows of the mill and got fastened in the machinery. Thestone bridge that crossed the Queen’s Highway at Leiperville hada small portion of the western wing walls carried away, and thirty-six head of cattle belonging to John Hol- land, which had been borne down the stream, passed beneath the arch and succeeded in reaching the meadow below it uninjured. On Ridley Creek some slight damage occurred in Willistown, Chester Co., and the dam at the grist- mill of James Yarnall, near the county line, in Edg- mont, on a stream that empties into Ridley Creek, sustained injury, while the county bridge that crosses | the creek on the highway from Providence road to , the school-house near Howellville, known as Russell's | bridge, was injured to some extent. At Amor Bish- | op’s mill the dam was destroyed and the buildings | considerably damaged. Two houses, together with the | furniture, were swept away. Strangely, the bridge at this point remained intact, although the greater part of the abutments on the western side was overthrown by the water. Edward Lewis’ paper-mill below the Delaware County turnpike was demolished, as was also his saw-mill, and his flour-mill was nearly destroyed. The county bridge above him was hurled from its place and went down with the flood. Edward Lewis and his son, Edward, were in the third story of the grist-mill, when that structure began to yield and part of the walls fell, leaving them exposed in that perilous position. They subsequently reached a place of safety by use of a rope. The woolen-mill of Edward Taylor, then owned by Charles Sherman, was greatly injured, as well as the machinery and goods therein; the dam STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. 103 was destroyed and three houses carried away by the freshet. A double frame house, occupied by William Tombs and James Rigley and their families, floated down the stream, lodging against the factory, opposite a window in the picker-room. From the upper win- dow of his house Rigley succeeded in passing his wife and child into the mill, and then rescued Tombs (who was ill at the time), his wife and two children from the garret of the house, to do which he was com- pelled to break a hole in the roof. How quickly he acted may be gathered from the fact that in six min- utes from the time this house rested against the mill it was again whirling down the stream. Below the woolen-factory of Samuel Bancroft the water reached twenty feet above the usual level. A portion of the factory, fifty by thirty-six feet, was absolutely de- stroyed, a quantity of wool was washed away and lost, and four dwellings wrecked. The latter was a long stone building which had been altered into four houses. In one of the centre dwellings resided George Hargraves, his wife, five children, and his brother, William Hargraves, and in the adjoining one lived Thomas W. Brown, his wife and child. When the flood came they endeavored to secure the household goods in the basement ; the water rose so rapidly that their escape was cut off, and they retreated to the second story. William Hargraves, finding the walls of the building yielding to the force of the flood, plunged into the water and was carried down the stream for more than half a mile until, catching in a standing tree, he succeeded in holding on until the flood sub- sided and he was saved. While there, his brother George and his four eldest children on a bed borne by the current, passed by, and a moment after William saw them hurled into the water and drowned. The bodies were found about nine miles farther down the stream, that of the youngest child firmly grasped in its father’s arms. Jane Hargrave, the wife of George, when the water broke through the house, with her baby in her arms, was standing in a corner of the room, and strangely that part of the floor, only a few feet square, remained, and there the woman stood for | five long hours until rescued by Thomas Holt. In the adjoining dwelling Thomas W. Brown, his wife, | and child stood on a corresponding part of the floor where Mrs. Hargrave stood, only it was not more than half as large as that she occupied. All else of the two middle houses was carried away save that part of the wall which held up these broken pieces of the second-story flooring-boards. On Vernon’s Run, which empties into Ridley Creek, the dam of the flour-mill of Thomas Hutton was swept away. At Park Shee’s paper-mill the breast of the dam and the buildings were much injured, and two small houses destroyed. Here the water rose to twenty feet. At Edward Taylor’s lower factory,—now Ban- croft’s,—then owned by Charles Shermans, the dam was carried away, and the building used as a machine- machinery therein. The basement story of the mill itself was submerged. The wooden county bridge on the road from Hinkson’s to Sneath’s Corner was swept away, and the abutments injured. Some damage was done to the rolling-mill of J. Gifford Johnson, while at the woolen- and flour-mills of Enos Sharpless, at Waterville, the water rose eighteen feet, flooding the basement story, doing considerable damage, and a counting-house, a bath-house, and a temporary bark- house floated off. The bridge was carried away, but lodged less than a mile down the creek, and was sub- sequently recovered. Three-fourths of the dam was destroyed. John M. Sharpless, at the same place, lost a cooper-shop and its contents, while at the stone bridge which spanned the creek on the Providence road the arches were swept away, and one of the abutments was almost entirely destroyed. At Pierce Crosby’s mill—now Irving’s—the water rose twenty-one feet above the usual level, the dam was carried away, one dwelling floated off, and the flour- and saw-mill much injured. The county bridge at Crosbyville was swept off its abutments and broken. Farther down the creek, at the Queen’s Highway, the eastern abutment was washed out and the bridge whirled down the current, while the railroad bridge at the present Eddystone Station was greatly damaged and the tressel-work on the eastern side swept away. On the east branch of Chester Creek the dam at the rolling and nail factory belonging to the estate of John Edwards, in Thornbury, was broken, and a like damage was done at the paper- and flour-mill of James M. Wilcox, where a protection wall at the end of his mill was torn away. The tilt-mill of Thomas Thatcher was absolutely destroyed, nothing remaining after the waters subsided but the tilt-hammer and grindstone. Grubb’s bridge, on the State road, although not carried away, was badly injured. At Lenni the dam was de- stroyed and the county bridge rendered almost worth- less, while about half a mile farther down the stream —at a large cotton factory belonging to the estate of Peter Hill, now Parkmount Mills, then unoccupied— the dam was broken and the mill injured. It is necessary now to retrace our course up the east branch of Martin’s or Rocky Run to David Green’s cotton factory, located about half a mile south of Howellville. The dam here was washed away and the mill—the first story stone and the remainder frame—yielded to the torrents, and a large part of the stone work was removed, but sufficient remained to support the frame superstructure. The dam at the flour-mill of Humphrey Yearsley, in Middletown, about three-quarters of a mile south of the Edgmont line, gave way, as did also that at the saw-mill of Jo- seph Pennell, on Rocky Run, about three-quarters of a mile before the latter stream entered into the eastern branch of Chester Creek. Ascending the west branch of the same stream, the first dam on Chester Creek was at Caleb Brinton’s shop and picker-house destroyed, together with the ’ grist-, saw-, and clover-mill, in Thornbury, just above 104 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the Concord line, and here the dam gave way, as did also that of the flour-mill of Matthew Ash, in Concord, above Deborah’s Run. The dam at the flour- and saw- mill of Casper W. Sharpless, about three-quarters of a mile lower down the stream, was broken, the water rising ten feet beyond its usual level. At the cotton- factory of Joseph M. Trimble, below the State road, the dam gave way, as did also that at the paper-mill of James M. Wilcox, at Ivy Mills. At this point the flood moved a store-house several feet, without de- stroying it. In Green Creek the water rose to an ex- traordinary height. At Samuel F. Peter’s saw- and grist-mill, in Aston, just east of the Concord line and near the mouth of Green Creek, the dam was swept away and the saw-mill submerged to the roof. The freshet poured along the west branch and carried off the bridge where the Logtown road crosses that stream. At this place James Shelly Tyson’s grist- mill was located, and here, as before, the dam broke and a dwelling-house was floated off. One mile be- low this point was the West Branch Mills of John P. Crozer, and less than a half-mile beyond, at Crozer- ville, was another cotton-factory belonging to the same gentleman. When the streams began to swell rapidly Mr. Crozer dispatched his son, Samuel A. Crozer, to the West Branch Mills, where he found the hands, asa precautionary measure, already engaged in removing goods from the lower to the upper story of the ware- house. Shortly after five o’clock the dam gave way, and soon after the warehouse, stone by stone, yielded to the flood, and fell with a crash, while at the same time the water-wheel, mill-gearing, dye-house and size-house floated away. Soon after, the northern wing of the three-story mill, forty-eight by thirty feet, began to give way, and, falling, carried with it eighty power-looms, much machinery, and goods. One of the corners of the centre building was also carried away, and the whole structure was momentarily ex- pected to fall. But the flood had spent its fury, and the work of destruction ceased at this point. The lower story of the mill at Crozerville was flooded, and the cotton-house, containing a number of bales, was swept away, as was also the county bridge at this place, while the abutments were leveled to the foun- dation. The two branches of Chester Creek meeting at Cro- zerville, the united flood ran madly down the stream, which was swollen nearly twenty-four feet above its ordinary level. A story and a half building, formerly used as a machine-shop by John Garsed, who had just taken the tools out, was washed entirely away, and the machinery in Riddle’s mills was much damaged. One of the two stone houses owned by George Peter- son .was washed away, and the other excessively dam- aged. The larger part of the furniture was floated out and borne off by the current. Near by John Rhoads, an aged man, owned four small houses, one of which was occupied by himself and family, and the others by tenants. The flood swept the buildings ab- solutely away, leaving no trace, when the waters sub- sided, that they had ever stood there. At the time the torrent poured down upon them, John Rhoads, his daughters, Hannah and Jane, and his granddaughter, Mary Ann Collingsworth, were in the dwelling, and with it they wereswept away. Allof them were drowned. In one of the houses, Mary Jane McGuigan and her infant child was washed away and perished. Her body was found early in April, 1844,a short distance from where the house which she occu- pied at the time of the freshet stood. The body of John Rhoads was found two and a half miles down the creek, one of his daughters at Baldwin’s Run, nearly five miles away, while the body of the other daughter was borne into the Delaware, and was found near Naaman’s Creek, about six miles below the mouth of Chester Creek. The corpse of the grandchild was not found until nearly six months afterwards, when a heavy rain on Jan. 17, 1844, washed away some earth near where Rhoads’ house had stood, and exposed the remains to view. Thesuperstructure of the county bridge at Pennsgrove was carried away, and imme- diately below, at Rockdale, the two dams of Richard S. Smith’s factories were destroyed, as well as a block of four stone houses, fortunately at the time unoccu- pied. At Knowlton the water rose thirty-three feet above the ordinary level of the creek, but this was partly due to the fact that driftwood gathered against the bridge, choking up the archways and, acting as a dam, turned the body of the flood against the factories at that point. Mr. Crozer’s ‘‘ Knowlton Mill,” a three- storied stone building, thirty-six by seventy-six feet, recently fitted with new machinery, was razed to its foundation, the roof floating off as a whole, and the bell in the cupola tolling as the mass undulated on the struggling torrent. It was well that the disaster occurred when it did, for the hands, over fifty persons, had all retired to their homes, hence not a life was there lost. At the same place a frame mill owned by Mr. Crozer, and occupied by James Dixon, was swept away. Every dollar’s worth of property the latter had in the world was lost, besides he was left in debt nearly a thousand dollars; but Mr. Crozer, his cred- itor, although he had sustained a loss of over seventy- five thousand dollars, immediately released Dixon from the obligation. The resistless water, as it sped onward to the Delaware, carried away J. & L. P. Dutton’s flour-mills, which had stood nearly a cen- tury, as well as the saw-mill, barn, and wagon-house at that point.’ Even the mansion-house was invaded by the flood, and two rooms were stripped of their furniture. Jona- than Dutton barely escaped with his life. He was carrying some articles from the lower to an upper story of the mill, when the great mass of water came rushing down upon the building. He fled to the upper story, and, feeling that the structure was yield- ing to the torrents, he sprang out of a window, and STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. fortunately succeeded in reaching a place of safety. The county bridge was here destroyed. In the meadow just above Upland, Mary Jackson, a colored woman, was with her husband gathering drift-wood when the flood rushed down upon her, and hesitating for a moment in which direction to flee, he was overwhelmed by the water and drowned. The Chester Flour- and Saw-Mills, then owned by Richard Flower, were much injured, and the bridge at that place was swept away and the abutment greatly damaged. William G. Flower, who was at the time lessee of his father’s mill, was in the meadow when the waters rushed down upon him, and he was whirled along until he succeeded in catching a vine which was entwined around a large tree on the race bank, and by means of which he mounted into the branches, but the tree was torn up by the roots, and among drift-wood, timber, and trees he was carried down by the flood until he was lodged in a standing tree, to which he clung, although much exhausted, until the flood had in a measure abated, when Abner Wood bravely swam to him, carrying a rope, by means of which Mr. Flower was safely brought to shore. At Chester the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad bridge was swept away, together with part of the western abutment; and the county bridge, at the present Third Street, was thrown from its place, but, as the superstructure was held by the chains on the eastern side, it did not prove a total loss. The pattern-house, with its contents, at Jacob G. Kitts’ foundry, was floated away, as was the stone kitchen from William Kerlin’s house, still standing on Third Street, near Penn, and the dwelling itself was much damaged, while a frame house and other outbuildings belonging to Mr. Kerlin were destroyed. The dwelling-house was occupied by William Benton, and all his household goods, his cart, dearborn, and other personal property were swept away. A bureau, containing his and his children’s clothing, his watch, and all the money he had, was found floating at Pennsgrove, N. J., and was returned to Mr. Benton by the finder. It is reported that the water rose at Chester one foot a minute until it reached a point twenty-three feet higher than the ordinary high- water mark. As stated before, the volume of water on the Bran- dywine was not greatly increased, although some damage was done on that stream. The branches of Beaver Creek, a feeder of the Brandywine, in Dela- ware County, being within the territory where the cloud-burst occurred, rose sufficiently to break the dam at the saw-mill of Reese Perkins, just above where the Delaware line, at the extreme southwestern line of Birmingham, joins Concord township. The loss, however, was not great. Harvey’s Run, which emp- ties into the Brandywine a short distance below Chad’s Ford, rose sufficient to break the dam of Thomas Brinton’s grist-mill and that of Joseph P. 105 Harvey’s saw-mill, but, so far as I have learned, very little damage other than that stated was sus- tained on that tributary. Thirty-two county bridges were destroyed or seri- ously injured by the flood, while the individual losses on Darby Creek and its tributaries amounted to twenty thousand dollars; on Crum Creek, twenty- four thousand dollars; on Ridley, thirty-nine thou- sand dollars; and Chester Creek, one hundred and five thousand dollars. On Saturday, July 8, 1853, a destructive hail-storm passed over the townships of Thornbury, Upper and Nether Providence, Springfield, Upper Darby, and Darby, leveling the crops to the earth, and producing other damage. At Media over a hundred lights were broken in the court-house windows, a large number of those at the Charter House and in private houses, while at Crook’s (Bancroft’s) upper factory nearly every pane of glass on the west side of the building was broken. Thursday, Aug. 11, 1870, the most violent storm and freshet to that time since the notable one of August, 1843, occurred, and the destruction it occa- sioned in Delaware County reached a quarter of a million dollars. On Rocky Run, twenty-five feet of the breast of Humphrey Yearsley’s flour-mill, in Middletown, was swept away, as was also that at James Pennell’s mill, farther down the stream. The flood, swollen by the contributions from these dams, rushed down upon the West Chester and Philadelphia Railroad bridge which spans the run above Wawa, and near Pennelton Station. The five o’clock train from West Chester reached the bridge just when the water was the most turbulent, and the structure gave way beneath the weight of the train, together with the pressure of the flood. The engine, baggage-car, and a passenger-car were thrown into the stream. Fortunately, George W. Evans, the engineer, notic- ing that the bridge seemed wavering, whistled ‘down brake,” the headway of the train was in a measure arrested, and it so happened that the first passenger- car, which contained about thirty persons, lingered for a few moments on the edge of the stream, just sufficient to permit the escape of the passengers, and then it plunged into the water. The fireman, who sprang from the engine when the whistle sounded, escaped without injury, but the engineer, brakeman, and baggage-master were much hurt. At Lenni the dam at the factory of Robert L. Martin was broken, not less than a hundred feet of the dam-breast being torn away, and the loosened waters deluged the first story of the mill, damaging machinery, ruining goods, and making great havoc as it rushed by. At Parkmount, near Lenni, a por- tion of the dam-breast at George Glodhill’s mill also gave way. Chester Creek was filled with floating rubbish; lumber, logs, pig-styes,—the squeaking ani- mals still in the pens,—buckets, tables, stools, and hundreds of other articles were borne off by the 106 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. rushing torrent. At Samuel Bancroft’s upper bank, on, Ridley Creek, the water rose rapidly, flooding the lower floor of the mill, damaging machinery, and injuring goods. The bridge over the race at this point was washed away. At John Fox’s Hillboro’ Mills the dam was injured, the house over the water- wheel of the mill, and part of the dye-house, with articles of personal property, were carried off, causing a loss of ten thousand dollars. The Rose Valley Mill of Antrim Osborn & Son’ was much injured, the dam-breast broken, and the wool-sheds and other property were floated off, causing a damage of nearly six thousand dollars. Two sloops belonging to Spen- cer McIlvain & Son were lifted over the bank at Ridley Creek and stranded thirty yards from that water-course, while the bridge over the Queen’s Highway, although it was lifted a foot from its foun- dation, fortunately was not carried off .its abutments. At the paper-mill of J. Howard Lewis, on Crum Creek, the damages sustained amounted to nearly five thou- sand dollars, and at the axe-works of John C. Beatty the loss of property was greater than at Lewis’ mill. On Tuesday evening, July 11, 1871, violent rain fell in torrents for half an hour, accompanied by vivid lightning and heavy thunder. The storm, which moved from the direction of New Castle and ex- tended to Philadelphia, included only the river town- ships in its passage through this county. In South Chester, the walls of several houses in course of erec- tion were blown down and much other damage sus- tained. In Chester part of the walls of the house of Humphrey Fairlamb, in North Ward, was destroyed, the roof of National Hall much injured, and in South Ward a frame building was bodily moved from its foundation. In Ridley lightning struck a tree at J. Morgan Baker’s brick-yard, near Leiperville, shatter- ing it to pieces, and Mrs. John Dunilevy, while stand- ing near the door of her house at Leiper’s Landing, on Crum Creek, was struck by lightning. When car- ried into the dwelling she showed no visible signs of life, and although respiration was resumed in a short time, she remained in a comatose state until noon of the next day. At the dwelling of George Caldwell, on the Edgmont road, in Chester township, a large sycamore-tree was struck. The lightning, it is said, like a great white ball, descended from the tree to the well-curb, where it exploded with a deafening noise. Fences and trees were prostrated and uprooted, while the air was filled with broken branches during the violence of the storm. A furious gale, extending from Washington to the New England States, occurred on Wednesday, Feb. 2, 1876. At Morton Station, in Springfield, an unfin- ished house was blown down, and at Aston a new barn being erected on the farm of George Drayton was also demolished. The tin-roofing of Patterson’s mill, at Chester, was partly torn away, as was also that on the residence of Rev. Henry Brown. A portion of the roof of the Sunnyside Mill was blown off, as was also part of that of the barn at the Pennsylvania Military Academy. In Chester township a house on the farm of Abram C. Lukins was overturned, the roof of the picker-room of No. 3 mill, at Upland, was carried bodily into the creek, and two brick houses near Kirk- man’s mill, in South Chester, had the roofs taken off by the gale. The velocity of the wind is said to have exceeded forty miles an hour in this vicinity, On Sept. 15, 1876, occurred a storm exceeding in violence any which had preceded it in thirty years, Throughout the county the corn was blown flat to the earth and the blades stripped from the stalks by the wind, pears and apples shaken from the limbs and fences laid prostrate, while houses and outbuildings were unroofed and otherwise injured. Tinicum Island and Morris’ Ferry to the Lazaretto was almost entirely submerged. Jacob Alburger’s meadow of one hundred acres was overflowed, his corn crop almost destroyed, and many tons of hay floated off. His loss was computed at several thousand dollars. The banks of Darby Creek were breached in many places, and the damage sustained was great. In Chester, all the cellars in the Middle Ward, near Chester Dock, were filled with water, and in some instances the dwellers in the houses in that locality were removed in boats to places of safety. The floor of the chemical works, at the foot of Market Street, was covered with water to the depth of two feet, and salt cake, valued at five hundred dollars, and other articles, were destroyed. The tin roof of Irving & Leiper’s mill was blown off, carrying with it many of the rafters, and a large quan- tity of coal was swept from the mill-wharf into the river, involving a loss of nearly seven hundred dol- lars. The lower floor of Patterson’s mill, near Chester Creek, was covered with water, causing much damage to the machinery, and the greater part of the coal for the mill was forced into the creek. Mort6n, Black & Bro., at their lumber-yard, near the mouth of Ridley Creek, lost nearly five thousand dollars by the storm. Along the line of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad telegraph-poles were blown over the track, and in many cases the wires prevented the passage of the cars until removed. The aggregate loss throughout the county was many thousands of dollars. Sunday, July 28, 1877, a rain storm of much vio- lence visited our county, particularly the townships of Nether Providence, Middletown, Newtown, Edg- mont, Marple, and Springfield. The streams were gorged with the torrents of rain which had fallen; but noticeable was this the case with Crum Creek, which, about midnight, carried away the bridge at Paxon’s Hollow, and another on the same road. The culvert which crosses the road at George Allen’s, unable to vent the water, blocked it there until it in- undated the road for several hundred yards, making it impassable. The highways through Upper Provi- dence, Darby, Springfield, and other townships were much injured. At Beatty’s axe-factory the water rose STORMS, FRESHETS, AND EARTHQUAKES. ten feet, carried away the bridge at Holt’s mill, and | rushed forward towards the dam at Strathaven. J. Howard Lewis, hearing the noise of rushing waters, and fearing that a freshet might follow the rain, went to his paper-mill at midnight, and not long afterwards the waters of Crum Creek covered the lower floor of the building to the depth of three feet, but subsided without doing any serious injury save floating away several ricks of straw. The dam at Strathaven banked the torrent for a time, but it only augmented the power of the flood, for when the obstruction finally gave way a roaring mass of water came with a rush down towards Avondale. Neill Melloy, one of the operatives in John Greer & Co.’s mill at the latter place, had risen to smoke, and as the stars were shin- ing brightly had walked to the hillside spring for a drink, when chancing to look up the creek he saw the flood approaching. Without a moment’s delay he ran from house to house waking the slumbering inmates. Not a moment too soon, for the rushing water forced the foot-bridge away, uprooted trees, swept away the wool-house, poured into the mill and into the houses, from which the dwellers fled in their night clothing. In several cases women sleeping in the upper stories were lifted through the windows by Neill Melloy (who preserved his presence of mind), and passed to parties without, who bore them to places of safety. Over a dozen houses were flooded and greatly injured. Daybreak disclosed the fearful damage that had been wrought, and everywhere were strewn broken articles of household furniture, while clearly defined in places along the banks and on the houses were marks show- ing that the water had risen to the height of fifteen feet. On the 9th of October following, the most violent rain-storm since 1843 swept over our county. Early in the evening of that day the wind blew heavily, in- creasing to such an extent that the Philadelphia, Wil- mington and Baltimore Railroad dispatched no trains from Philadelphia southward after nine o’clock, al- | though the storm ceased an hour before midnight. Chester Creek was swollen to arushing torrent. From ashort distance above Rockdale down to its mouth great damage was done. The dam at West Branch and Crozerville Mills broke, as did that at Glen Rid- dle, and much damage was done at J. B. Rhoads & Brother’s mill at Llewellyn. The hurrying water forced its way into the lower floors and engine-rooms of Crozer’s mills at Upland, and a carpenter-shop at No. 1 mill floated down the stream, accompanied with numerous articles-of personal property which had been caught by the flood in its course. At Chester | boats and shallops torn from their moorings were car- ried out into the river, and the yacht “ White Wing” drifted down the Delaware. Along the line of the Chester Creek and Baltimore Central Railroad the damage was so great that for two days no trains passed over the road because of washouts and uprooted trees which lay upon the track. At Bridgewater an engine | 107 and tender was thrown from the road by a break in the track there, and between Chad’s Ford and Brandywine Summit the road had so sunk that it was dangerous, A culvert east of the latter place was washed out, at Chad’s Ford the railroad bridge was swept away, and a short distance below Concord Station a small bridge was carried off, while another near by had so sunk that it could not be crossed until repaired. The lumber in the yard of Alexander Scott & Son at that place was strewn in every direction, while fences and trees were leveled to the earth. Three acres of corn belonging to George 8. Cheyney was absolutely annihilated. At Darby, Griswold’s mill was partially inundated, which, with the coal that was washed from the wharf, occasioned a loss of over ten thousand dollars. A stable at the same place belonging to William D. R. Serrill was inundated, and two horses drowned. Some damage was sustained by J. Howard Lewis, at his paper-mill on Crum Creek, while at Morton a large unfinished stable belonging to Judge Morton was partly blown down, and much injury sustained at his brick-kilns, near by that station. A terrible tornado swept over this county on Wed- nesday morning, Oct. 23, 1878, causing great destruc- tion of property. At Media trees, fences, and barns were leveled with the earth, and a dwelling-house on State Street, near Jackson, being erected by Ralph Buckley, was blown down, and Mr. Buckley, who was in the building at the time, was buried in the ruins and seriously injured. The sheds of the Methodist Church in Middletown were torn away, and the lumber so broken that it was useful only as kindling, while in all parts of the county great damages marked the tracks of the storm. At Glen Riddle the wagon of James Howarth, the mail carrier, was thrown against a telegraph-pole just as he was entering the bridge over the West Chester Railroad, which prevented Howarth from being precipitated over an embank- ment nearly forty feet in height. The wagon was | demolished. In Chester the frame stable of the Hanley Hose Company was destroyed ; so was also the drill-hall of the Pennsylvania Military Academy, and a row of eight unfinished houses on Second and Norris Streets were thrown down in a mass of ruins, as were some houses on Penn Street, above Sixth, then building. The roofs of St. Paul’s, First and Second Presbyterian, Madison Street, awd the Immaculate Heart of Mary Churches were injured, as were Patterson’s, Ledward’s, Gartside’s, Barton’s, and Irving & Leiper’s mills; Sanville’s spar-shed, Cox’s sash-factory, the sugar- refinery, and the engine-house and mould-lofts at Roach’s ship-yard were blown entirely or partially off. In South Chester the front wall of a row of brick houses belonging to Mr. Kirkman was forced in, and the Democratic wigwam at that borough torn to pieces. Over fifty houses in Chester, North and South Chester, and Upland were unroofed. The tide rose 108 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. far above its usual height, so that the water covered the wharves, submerged the Front Street Railroad, flooded Roach’s ship-yard, Lewis’ Chester Dock Mills, and inundated the lower floor of the Steamboat Ho- tel. Morton, Black & Brother’s planing-mill and lumber-yard suffered damage amounting to three thousand dollars, while at Mendenhall & Johnson’s, Dutton & Anderson’s, and J. & C. D. Pennell’s lum- ber-yards the loss was large. Three canal-boats sunk at Weidner’s wharf. As a storm simply it was the most furious one ever recorded as happening in this county. Earthquakes.—The first earthquake which is re- corded as having occurred in this vicinity was in October, 1727, and was so violent that in Philadelphia, New York, and Boston it “set the clocks to running down, and shook off china from the shelves,”* and in 1732 slight shocks were noticed in this part of the country. On Dec. 7, 1738, a severe shock was felt at night, ‘accompanied by a remarkable rumbling noise; people waked in their beds, the doors flew open, bricks fell from the chimneys, the consternation was serious, but, happily, no great damage ensued.” ? On Nov. 18, 1755, a severe shock was felt for eight hundred miles on the Atlantic coast, including this locality. On the night of March 22, 1763, a smart shock was felt, and on Sunday, Oct. 18, 1763, an earth- quake, accompanied by a loud roaring noise, alarmed the good people of Philadelphia and surrounding country, and the congregations in churches and meeting-houses, fearing that the buildings would fall upon them, dismissed themselves without tarrying for the benediction. In an old volume on which is in- dorsed “ Peter Mendenhall, his almanac for the year 1772,” still in the ownership of his descendants in Chester County, under date of April 25, 1772, he re- cords this interesting item: ‘‘ At or near eight o’clock in the morning the roaring of an earthquake was heard, succeeded by a shake which made the house to tremble. A second ensued soon after the first had ceased, which was more violent.” Peter Mendenhall then resided on a farm in Delaware County. On Jan. 8, 1817, an earthquake occurred which tossed vessels about the river and raised the water one foot. On Sunday evening, June 17, 1871, about ten o’clock, the shock of an earthquake was distinctly felt in Delaware County, and on Monday morning, October 9th of the same year, at 8.40 o’clock, a severe shock was felt from Perryville, Md.,'to Philadelphia. «The dwellings in the southern part of the county shook and trembled to their foundations, causing the inmates to run in alarm out of their houses, A rumbling sound as of the reverberation after the discharge of a cannon occurred during the shock. The quivering of the earth was more noticeable in the western part of this 1 Watson's Annals, vol. ii. p. 413; Smith’s “ History of New Jersey,” p. 427. 2 Smith’s “ History of New Jersey.” 3 Martin’s “ History of Chester,” p. 163. county and in Chester County. Bayard Taylor, who was at Cedarcroft, his residence, at Kennett Square, in a letter to the New York Tribune thus describes the shock in that locality : “The first symptoms were a low, rumbling sound, which rapidly in- creased to a loud, jarring noise, as if a dozeu iron safes were rolling over the floors. The house shook from top to bottom, and at the end of ten or fifteen seconds both the noise and vibration were so violent as to alarm all the inmates. I had frequently experienced heavy earthquake shocks in other countries, but in no instances were they accompanied with such a loud and long-continued reverberation. For about fifteen seconds longer the shock gradually diminished, but the jarring noise was heard, seemingly in the distance, after the vibration ceased to be felt. The men at work in the field stated that the sound was first heard to the northward, that it apparently passed under their feet at the mo- ment of greatest vibration, and then moved off southward. The birds all flew from their perches iu the trees and hedges, and darted back and forth in evident terror. The morving had been very sultry and over- cast, but the sky cleared and a fresh wind arose immediately after- wards. The wooden dwellings in the village were so shaken that the people all rushed into the streets. Some crockery was broken, I be- lieve, but no damage was done to walls or chimneys. There was a light shock about midnight the following night. The first seemed to me to be nearly as violent as those succeeding the great earthquake which destroyed Corinth in 1858. It is thirty or forty years since any shock has been felt in this neighborhood.” On June 6, 1869, during a rainfall at Chester, oc- curred a shower of shells. Specimens of the shells were collected, and became the subject of consider- ation by the members of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia.* The shells proved to bea new species of Astarte, a genus that is essentially marine and found in every sea. The delicate char- acter of the specimens indicate a Southern habitat,— most probably the coast of Florida,—and as the storm came in that direction it is believed that they came from there, and possibly were lifted into the clouds by a water-spout. The specimens which were gath- ered by the late Hon. Y. 8. Walter, and presented to Mr. John Ford, a member of the Academy of Natural Sciences, in remembrance of the peculiar circum- stances in which they were discovered to the scien- tific world received the name Astarte Nubigena, or the cloud-born Astarte. CHAPTER XV. THE TEN-HOUR MOVEMENT. OnE of the most important movements, and, in the results which have flowed from it, of great moment to the people of Delaware County, the State of Penn- sylvania, and, more or less, to the country at large, was first put into practical effect in the eastern por- tion of this State, and mainly through the efforts of a comparatively few individuals in the county of Dela- ware, Much has been said and much controversy elicited + American Journal of Conchology (new series), vol. y. p. 118. 5 Contributed by James Webb. THE TEN-HOUR MOVEMENT. 109 as to the policy of attempting to regulate merely social or business questions by the aid or power of law. A great deal may be said on both sides, much of it probably to little or no good purpose. But the regulation of the time during which labor may be carried on in large manufacturing establishments has worked so well, and been productive of so vast an amount of unmixed good to at this time a full gener- ation of factory operatives; the benefits and blessings derived from it by old and young, by both employer and employé during more than a third of a century, establish the beneficial effects of the policy beyond doubt or cavil. For many years in England after the introduction of labor-saving machinery and the con- sequent aggregation of large numbers of persons of all ages and of both sexes in manufacturing establish- ments, it became necessary for the successful prose- cution of the business that some certain regulations be adopted to that end. Much of the machinery and many of the processes are of that character that can be operated with much greater success and far more advantageously by children and young persons than by adults. Indeed, if children were entirely banished from such establishments, it is a question whether many articles now made both for use and ornament would not have to be abandoned altogether, to the manifest disadvantage of the whole community. As time went on, and as manufacturing by machinery instead of mere manual labor became a success, it was altogether in human nature to endeavor to make as much out of it during a given time as possible; and as farming the soil and what is generally known as the mechanical trades were the chief employments of the people, and as each individual was his own “boss,” it necessarily followed that every one was free to work as his necessities or his inclinations impelled him, or to lay off and rest when physical or other causes induced him to do so. Not so in the new system of combined labor in factories. The single individual must give way to the aggregate. Rules had to bemade. The machinery must be started at a certain agreed-upon time, and must all stop to- gether. There had to be order and uniformity, or the thing would not work. In this, the new system, precedent was followed. The old custom on the farm and in the shop was adhered to, to begin as soon in the morning and work as late at night as they could see. Of course, in the beginning, when the insti- tutions were small and not yet fully organized or developed, there would be breaks from one cause or another, and the ill effects of the system would not be felt. It was only as it progressed, and the num- bers engaged therein increased, and the necessity of all being employed at one time for the general good, that it became monotonous. Then was felt the depressing influence on the human mind and body of this then recognized custom. It has been described as worse than the British treadmill discipline, established for the punishment of crime, or the system of slavery as then existing in our own Southern States, the only difference being that the one was free to leave it and learn something new to enable him to live,—better if he could, or worse if he had to; the other had not that option. In England, where the system was first established, it made much slower progress than in the United States at a later period. But it was there that the depressing influence of the daily routine on the minds and bodies of those subject to it began to make itself heard in complaints both loud and deep. Unfortunately, at that time the masses of the people in England were without political power or influence. But a few humane and intelligent gentlemen of educa- tion, outside of their ranks, took up their cause, purely from motives of humanity. Notably among these was the late Richard Oastler, Esq., afterwards known among his humble adherents, from his zeal in their cause, as ‘the Old King.” Some time after this their complaints reached the Houses of Parliament, when the late Lord Ashley took up the matter, and pressed it with such vigor and earnestness that it resulted in the passage of a law making eleven hours a day’s work in all factories, and establishing Good Friday an additional legal holiday. A few years after this was followed by an amended law, reducing the time to be worked to ten hours a day, which remained in successful operation from that time to this. About the years 1846-47 the subject began to be earnestly discussed ' in Pennsylvania. Philadelphia and Man- ayunk moved in the matter, and correspondence was had with Delaware County for organization there to obtain, if possible, the passage of a law establish- ing ten hours as a legal day’s work in this State. The first general meeting of operatives appertaining to that end was held at the Seven Stars Hotel, now Village Green, in a hall generously loaned for that purpose by the late John Garrett. At this meeting an organization was effected, and a committee of two from each mill in the county ap- pointed as a central body. The committee met at the house of Mark Clegg, on the road leading from the Red Bridge to the Union Methodist Episcopal Church, opposite Crook’s (now Bancroft’s) lower mill, in Ne- ther Providence, where they continued to meet weekly until the completion of their labors, which resulted in the passage of a law by the Legislature making ten hours a legal day’s labor in all cotton, woolen, flax, paper, and glass manufactories in this commonwealth. Such isa brief epitome of this im- portant work ; its influence for good is, and has been, felt, not only in our own State, but measurably in every State where manufacturing exists, or is likely to 1 Ten years before the date mentioned in the text, ou Feb. 20, 1836, a meeting of operatives employed in cotton-mills on Chester Creek was held at the Seven Stars Tavern, of which meeting Lewis Cornog was president and John Haynes secretary. The object of the meeting was to oppose “the long-hour system enforced by employers on hands in cotton-mills against their will.” In May, 1836, all the operatives on Chester Creek struck, demanding higher wages or less hours of labor. 110 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. exist, throughout our broad domain. But while this is a general history of this excellent and most highly important law, there are many incidents connected therewith, and the chief actors engaged in the work of bringing it about, that should not, in the interest of the present generation as well as those which shall succeed it, be lost entirely in oblivion. It is not to be expected that a measure, even of much less im- portance than this, entirely in the interests of labor, but at that time supposed to be in antagonism to capital, should be brought to completion in so short a time without opposition. The antagonism to it was persistent and strong. We impugn no man’s motives, It was undertaken in the interests of humanity, and the result has proved the justice of the cause. At the above meeting, in addition to the appoint- ment of the committee alluded to and other routine business, a most inspiriting address, written by the late John Wilde, was adopted, and ordered to be printed. It was also inserted in the Upland Union and the Delaware County Republican, and signed by Thomas Ashworth as president, and Joseph Holt as secretary. The address was extensively circulated, and followed by a series of meetings at different points contiguous to the various mills and factories in the county. At these meetings speeches were made and other legitimate means used to concentrate pub- lic opinion to the importance of endeavoring to ob- tain a law to restrict this then great and growing evil. In the Delaware County Republican of Nov. 19, 1847, appears the following editorial: ‘The press is taking hold of the ten-hour system now about being peti- tioned for by the factory operatives in good earnest. . . . Let those who oppose it just dgop into a factory and work among the dirt and grease for fourteen hours each day for a twelvemonth, and tell us at the expira- tion of that time their opinion of the matter.” The next general public meeting of the operatives was at the old Providence Inn on Saturday evening, Nov. 20, 1847, when the following resolutions were unanimously adopted : “ Resolved, That the persons composing this meeting have been long and practically convinced of the injurious effect of the great number of hours now constituting a day’s work in factories, upon the mental and physical powers of those subjected to such long-continued toil and confinement. “ Resolved, That this meeting hails with a lively satisfaction the in- creasing interest manifested by all the producing classes, and more par- ticularly the expressed sympathy and support of the public press in aid of the present movement to ameliorate the condition of the factory operatives. “ Resolved, That we will continue our united exertions to procure by constitutional and legal means the passage of a law reducing the time of labor in factories to ten hours a day, or fifty-eight hours per week.” These resolutions were urged in stirring addresses by Messrs. Webb, Cotton, Ashworth, Walker, and Fawley. A meeting of operatives and workingmen generally was held at Sneath’s Corner on Saturday evening, Dec. 4, 1847. Dr. Jesse Young having suggested some doubts about the constitutionality of a law reg- ulating the hours of labor for adults, a spirited debate arose between him and Messrs. Ashworth, Fawley, and Walker, which continued for more than an hour, Hon. Joseph Engle (one of the associate judges for Delaware County) being present was solicited for his opinion, and stated that he believed the Legislature had. power to pass laws to promote the moral and physical well-being of the citizens of the State, and as the present object of the operatives appeared to him to be expressly designed for that highly com- mendable purpose, he had no doubt of either the right or justice of such legislation. The following Saturday evening, Dec. 10, 1847, 4 meeting was held in the school-house at Hinkson’s Corner, which was addressed by Messrs. Ashworth, Holt, F. Pearson, and Greenwood. The following resolutions were adopted : “ Resolved, That in the opinion of this meeting: the present system is more particularly injurious to children employed in factories, depriving them in a majority of cases from ever acquiring the rudiments of a common education, so essentially necessary to enable them to perform the duties devolving on them as citizens of this Republic. “ Resolved, That we believe that the confinement of female operatives for twelve or fourteen hours in a day is highly injurious, depriving them of the opportunity of acquiring the necessary knowledge of domestic duties to enable them to fill their stations in well-regulated households, and deprives them of the means of acquiring a practical and useful edn- cation.” Similar meetings continued to be held, and peti- tions forwarded to the Legislature, and all other le- gitimate means used to obtain the passage of the much-desired law. On the 25th of March, 1847, the Senate passed the bill making ten hours a legal day’s work in all factories in this State. It afterwards passed the House and became a law, to take effect on and after the 4th day of July, 1848. As showing how the law was received at the time, we copy the two following editorials from newspapers contemporary with its passage : “Tre Ten Hours' System.—The proprietors of Fairhill Factory, in Philadelphia, have already extended the benefits of the ten-hour law to the operatives in their employ, and we understand that most, if not all, of the manufacturers of the city and county will comply with the requisitions of the law immediately after the fourth day of next month,” 2 Again,— “We understand that a portion, if not all, of the manufacturers of cotton goods in this county (Delaware) have determined to close their factories for several weeks after the 4th of July next. It is said that most of them have a large stock of goods on hand, and failing to effect sales, they have concluded to await until the market becomes better.” Such were the differences of opinion among those who were supposed to be more pecuniarily interested in the future effects of the law. The actual effects of it I now proceed to show. The late John P. Crozer, who at that time was generally supposed to be the leading spirit in opposition to the new system, aftera few years’ trial when established, generously admitted the errors under which he had labored, and after- wards became one of its most friendly advocates. 1 July, 1848. THE TEN-HOUR MOVEMENT. Such was the state of feeling among the community at the time of which I write, 1848. Immediately an- terior to the passage of the act many good men were divided in their opinions as to the policy of such a law. A number contended that no power existed in a free government to determine how long a man should or should not work. There was some plausi- bility in the point, for it had not then been ascer- tained that the government possessed a police power in just such cases. But by public meetings, by pri- vate discussion, and particularly by the aid of the press, the popular mind was enlightened, and the pro- posed law began to be favorably looked on by the people. While it had its persistent enemies, it had the most generous and warm friends. Among the operatives themselves many opposed it. The writer was present at a shop-meeting at one of our large es- tablishments as a spectator merely, when one of the proprietors remarked that he did not think that a ma- jority of their hands wanted shorter time. Some of the operatives ventured to differ with him. “ Well, now,” he says, ‘‘suppose we try?” Weldon. Sam! Minshall. Thos Vernon. Joseph Askew. Nicbolas Newlin. Jeremiah Collett. Henry Reynolds. John Sharpless, William Eyre. William Huston. Samuel Hewes. William Linsey, John Brown. Edward Inskep. Tho* Maris. Sam! Kain. Jno. Marshall, Zach. Pedrick. Daniel Sharpless. Jno. Riley. Tsaac Weaver. Richard Clark. Thomas Swayne. Tho? Phillips. Daniel Brown, Moses Moore. Jacob Deriger. David Jackson. George White. “The freeholders of Nether Providence In Concurrence with the above Petitioners have subscribed their names. “Wm Lindsay. James Sharpless, “ Allowed.” John McMubill. Joseph Vernon. The following is the list of the justices of the peace for Upper Chichester : Samuel Price... . 30, 1791. Johu Edwards. 24, 1797. Joseph Marshal 20, 1800. Matthias Kerlin.. 4, 1808, Thomas Pierce. 5, 1814, James Bratton. 3, 1820. Joseph Fox... 4, 1823. Jobo Mattson.. 13, 1823. Joseph Bowen. 10, 1824. Joseph Trimble 21, 1827. Robert Frame.. 15, 1829, Robert Hall..... 8, 1831. William Mendinhall.. 6, 1836. James Huston.. 14, 1840. 15, 1845. 15, 1851. Chichester Friends’ Meeting.—The present Friends’ meeting-house is the second building erected by that society on the lot of two acres lying east of Chichester Creek, in the sharp angle of the road leading from Chichester Cross-roads to the highway from Aston to Marcus Hook. Chichester Meeting, for record and business, was held for the first time on the 17th of First month, 1684, although religious services had been had in that section of the couaty as early as 1682. The meeting originally comprised Aston, Bethel, Birmingham, Concord, Thornbury, and Westtown, and beyond the limits of these town- ships, west and north, indefinitely. At this time the religious meetings were held at private houses; and after the organization of Monthly Meetings, Friends would assemble at designated dwellings. In the record of Chichester Meeting we find that 4 UPPER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 451 subscription was taken among Friends at the Quar- terly Meeting held in Fourth month, 1687, to “en- able a poor man to build a house.” This practical charity was so noticeably the rule in the society that William Moraley, in 1752, records: “The Quakers have a Custom of raising Money at their several Meet- ings, as I observ’d before, with which they do many Charitable Offices to the Poor and Indigent. I have myself experienced the Effects of their Benevolence. If any Person, though a Stranger continues to do well, by preserving a good Character, and they have a good Opinion of them, they will enquire into his Circumstances, and if it appears he is Distressed in his Business for Want of Stock, or necessary Implements to carry on his Trade, they will set him up out of this Money, without demanding any Security either by Bond or Promissory Note; and if he repays them, will relieve other Persons in the like Circumstances. If he never repays them, they will never give him any Trouble.” * The want of a proper meeting-house for the society soon made itself felt, and hence we learn that an effort was being made to erect a building for that pur- pose. The minutes state: “Ata monthly meeting held at Chichester the 11th of Eleventh month, 1688, it was proposed and agreed to build a meeting-house upon a parcel of land granted by James Brown, as by deed may further appear, and some time afterward it was agreed by Friends to fence in a burial-ground upon the said land joining to the meeting-house. The subscriptions thereunto are as follows, viz. : @ AROANWRAROKHRON MOH APOONMNOBDBHAODWIDN # “James Brown... Jobn Kingsman John Harding... Thomas Wither: Edward Bezer... Joseph Bushell. Jacob Chandler. Philip Roman... Francis Harriso: William Hughe: Susanna Beezer Nathaniel Lamplugh... William Brown.... John Ayres...... Francis Chadsey.. Robert Pyle...... William Clayto John Beales..... William Clowd, Sr... Elizabeth Lockley. Edward Carter..... ra Bee row oe ~ ecsvoseoscoooooo oo acooooanocse = SSCHCSCSDSCOHOMONHOCONNHH END HNOWNW th oo oS - 2 The deed from John Brown, dated fourth day of Tenth month, 1688, in consideration of one shilling and sixpence, conveyed the two acres heretofore men- tioned to William Clayton, Sr., Philip Roman, Robert Pyle, Jacob Chandler, Joseph Bushell, and John Kingsman, in behalf of and for “ the only use of the people of God called Quakers. . . . Provided always and at all times, that if any one or more of the above said purchasers, or any one or more than shall be law- fully chosen to succeed hereafter, shall fall from the belief of the Truth as held forth by the people of God called Quakers, as aforesaid, either in a profane and scandalous life, or in doctrines, and continue therein, it shall and may be lawful in such case, for the afore- said people of the town and county aforesaid, by their order and consent in their monthly meeting, always and at all times to remove and put out any such one or more of the said purchasers, or any other that shall succeed. And always and at all times hereafter to nominate and chose and put in one or more in his or their room, as they shall see fit.” It is presumed that the meeting-house was erected shortly after these proceedings were had, but the exact date is not recorded. In the ground surrounding the building many generations of Friends belonging to Chichester Meeting have been buried, but the testi- mony of the society in early times being opposed to the erection of tombstones, the resting-place of many of the first settlers in that quiet graveyard cannot now be designated with any degree of certainty. On Dec. 4, 1768, the old meeting-house was totally destroyed by an accidental fire. The following year the present meeting-house was erected, and tradition records that the greater part of the fund raised for that purpose was contributed by Richard Dutton, and Friends, in recognition of his generous aid, caused a stone bear- ing, in rude figures, the date “1769” and the initials “R. D.,” the latter divided by a small star, to be built into the gable of the house. While Cornwallis’ command lay at Aston, from the 18th to the night of the 15th of September, 1777, British foraging-parties went out from Village Green in all directions, and one of these marauding expedi- tions halted at the meeting-house, and in mere wan- tonness shot repeatedly at the closed doors, the marks of the bullet-holes being readily seen in the front door to this day. Nehemiah Broomall, for many years sex- ton of the meeting-house, used to relate how the Brit- ish army, on its way from the Brandywine to Philadel- phia, encamped near the old meeting-house, and on that occasion the soldiers were permitted to discharge their muskets at the doors as a pastime. The British army never moved in that direction; the closest the division under Cornwallis approached Chichester meeting-house was about two and a half miles away, as that commander marched down the Concord road towards Chester. In the last half-century the attend- ance on religious worship in the venerable meeting- house has been growing less and less; still, it is said Jonathan Larkin often would be the only person who would attend regularly Fifth-day meeting, and the hour allotted to worship would be passed by the one person present in silent communion with his God. Upper Chichester Meeting.—In the fall of 1829, after the division in the society, those Friends be- longing to Chichester Meeting who adhered to the teachings of Elias Hicks retained ownership of the old meeting-house, while those known as Orthodox, in connection with Friends of Concord, determined to erect a new place of worship in Upper Chichester, near the residence of Salkeld Larkin. A lot was do- nated for that purpose on the Marcus Hook and Con- cord road, and Joseph Talbot, Thomas Griffith, Isaac Morgan, George Martin, Nathan Larkin, Salkeld 452 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANTA. Larkin, Joseph Pennell, Isaac Hughes, and Hester Hughes were organized in accordance with the rules of the society to act as a preparative meeting. On the lot given for the purpose a stone meeting-house, thirty- two by forty feet, was erected in 1831. In the same year a school was organized, and for two years John Reeves taught the pupils in the meeting-house. In 1834 a stone school-house twenty-five by thirty feet was built, and was under charge of the Monthly Meet- ing. Joseph Bennett and his daughter, Louisa Ben- nett, were teachers, as were also John Cardwell and Thomas Speakman. After the public-school law was adopted, and until the directors erected a school- house, the building just mentioned was rented and used for school purposes. During the lifetime of Salkeld Larkin he was the head of the meeting, and at his death, April, 1870, aged ninety years, Nathan Pennell succeeded, to be followed in turn by Caleb Eyre. In 1888, Upper Chichester Meeting was “laid down,” and Friends in that section united with Con- cord Meeting. Schools—In 1798 the society of Friends estab- lished a school in Upper Chichester, which was main- tained and continued under the auspices of that re- ligious organization until the public-school system was accepted and introduced in the township, when its further continuance was unnecessary. Besides the school under the supervision of Friends, previous to 1825, was a subscription school kept in a brick house erected for that purpose on the site of the present No. 1 public-school building, a short distance north of Chichester Cross-road, McCaysville, and Chiches- ter, for the cluster of buildings—wheelwright- and blacksmith-shops, and a few dwelling-houses—at the intersection of the Chichester and Concord road have been known by all three of these names. On Dec. 31, 1819, a meeting of the citizens of Delaware County was held in this school-house to form a society for the suppression of vice and immorality. Thomas Ryer- son was appointed chairman, and John Kerlin secre- tary. George Martin, Jr., Dr. R. M. Huston, Thomas Ryerson, Joseph Walker, Jr., Thomas Dutton, and James Brattock were appointed to draft a constitution and by-laws, which they were instructed to report at a meeting to be called at a future time to be deter- mined. As they seem never to have reported, and as the names are all those of Upper and Lower Chiches- ter residents, the other sections of Delaware County appear to have taken no interest in the movement. Hence the projectors of the society failed to effect an organization. After the adoption of the school law of 1836 the building was placed in charge of the school directors, and was continued to be used until 1867, when the old structure was taken down, and the present two-story brick building erected. The lower story was built by the school directors, at a cost of two thousand five hundred dollars, and the second story was erected and completed at a like cost by the voluntary contributions of the citizens of the town- ship, who were desirous of providing a room for Sun- day-schools, and where public meetings could be held. After the question of continuing the public schools in the township had been decided in the affirmative by a popular vote, in 1837, on January 4th of the follow- ing year John Talbot was appointed teacher at the brick school-house, near Chichester Cross-roads, but he seemed totally unable to control the pupils, and on February 15th the school was discontinued until the directors could obtain the services of a more effi- cient teacher. After a few weeks Joseph Henderson was employed for the remainder of the term, and the school was opened. The children attended, but no complaint appears of record of the new pedagogue’s inability to command obedience from the scholars, ¢ The Dutton school-house, at the intersection of the Upper Chichester road with the highway leading from Aston to Marcus Hook, was built many years before the free public-school system was established in the commonwealth, and because of the material employed in the construction of its walls and the abundant use of lime, was also known as the stone or white school- house. The lot and house being located on lands formerly of Richard Dutton, it is very probable that this was the site of the early Friends’ school, and that Dutton, who did not die until 1795, had, two or three years before that date, given the lot and contributed to the erection of the building for educational pur- poses. Let that be as it may, after public schools were established in Upper Chichester the Dutton building passed into the control of the directors, and continued to be used for such purposes, an addition, in 1838, having been made to the house. On May 22, 1887, Elizabeth Harvey began teaching at this school, but on December 18th of the same year John Lloyd was the master there. In 1870 the directors purchased additional land adjoining the school lot from William H. Dutton, the ancient stone house was removed, and the present school-building erected, ata cost of nineteen hundred dollars, the contractors being Mifflin Wright and Benjamin F. Green. The two schools mentioned had become so crowded that on Dec. 9, 1842, an additional school was opened in a house of Salkeld Larkin, on the Chichester and Concord road, of which Larkin Pennell was the first teacher. This was known as No. 8 school, and eon- tinued to be kept in Larkin’s house until 1859. On the 26th of May of that year an acre of land was purchased from Enos Thatcher, near Salkeld Larkin’s, and a stone house, twenty-four and a half by twenty- nine feet, was erected. This was known as Larkin’s school-house. In 1874 the directors discontinued in- struction in this building. The following year school was resumed there, to be discontinued in June, 1876, since which time it has not been used for educational purposes. After the passage of the act of 1834, under its pro- visions the court appointed Joseph Henderson and William Booth inspectors of the public schools for UPPER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 453 Upper Chichester. The township, however, did not adopt the law, but under that of 1836 organized public schools. The following is a list of those persons who have discharged the duties of school directors therein: 1837, George Martin, Salkeld Larkin, Abraham Johnson, Jeremiah C. Brown, John B. McCay, William H. Grubb ; 1838, George Martin, William Smith, Jonathan Dutton; 1839, William Booth, Robert R. Dutton, Andrew Hance, Robert B. Craig ; 1840, Joseph Henderson, Joseph Pennell; 1842, Jonathan Dutton, Andrew Home; 1843, John Stevenson, George Harvey; 1844, John M. Broomall, Jonathan C. Larkin ; 1845, Jonathan Dutton, George Broomall ; 1846, Harry B. Grubb, Stephen Madgin; 1847, John B. McCay, Jonathan C. Larkin ; 1848, George Broomall, William Grubb; 1849, Robert McClintock, Joseph Casey; 1850, Andrew Hance, Jonathan C, Larkin; 1851, Robert M. Brown, Larkin R. Broomall ; 1852, Samuel Wells, Wil- liam H. Grubb; 1853, William Cloud, William H. Grubb; 1854, Wil- liam H. Grubb, Larkin R. Broomall; 1855, Caleb E. Thomas, David Boyd; 1856, Harry B. Grubb, Jeremiah C. Brown ; 1857, William H. Grubb, David Boyd; 1858, John E. Warne, Thomas Roberts; 1859, George Broomall, Jeremiah C. Brown ; 1860, George Broomall, David Boyd; 1861, James Larkin, David N. Larkin; 1862, Abram Ward, Robert M. Brown ; 1863, Clark W. Hance, James Craig ; 1864, James Larkin, Thomas B. Jones; 1865, Davis O. Barlow, Joseph R. Jvhnson ; 1866, Clark H. Hance, Lloyd Norris; 1867, James Lar- kin, Nathan Pennell; 1868, David H. Dalton, Andrew Osborne; 1869, Melchior Ebright, John Todd; 1870, Nathan Pennell, Alvanza W. Jester; 1871, Thomas Harvey, C. W. Hance; 1872, Thomas Harvey, William McCay; 1873, Joseph Newlin, John B. McCay; 1874, Samuel Vernon, Mrs. D. H. Dutton ; 1875, Clark W. Hance, Pennell Eyre; 1876, James McClintock, Joseph Newlin; 1877, Charles W. Todd, William G. McCafferty ; 1878, David Dutton, John B, McCay; 1879, Joseph Newlin, E. B. Jester; 1880, Andrew Os- borne, William G. McCafferty; 1881, David H. Duttun, John B. Mc- Cay ; 1882, E. B. Jester, Lewis Fraim; 1883, Lewis Fraim, Andrew Osborne ; 1884, John B. McCay, Sr., William O'Donnell. James Annesley, Earl of Anglesey —Of all notable cases which have been presented to judicial tribunals for adjudication it is doubtful whether any can be found in the records of civilized nations which presents more romantic incidents than those set forth in the trial of fact between James Annesley vs. the Earl of Anglesey, in the Irish Exchequer Court, in 1748. The circumstances of this cause have not been overlooked by the novelist, and on them Smollett founded “Roderick Random,” Sir Walter Scott “Guy Mannering,” and, in more recent times, Charles Reade “The Wandering Heir.” The case is reported in Howell’s “State Trials,” Burk’s “Celebrated Trials connected with the Aristocracy,” and in other authoritative works. It has been alleged that the incidents in the case, so far as this territory is concerned, are disproved, because the records of Chester County are silent as to James Annesley’s im- prisonment in the jail at Chester or the trial of the fugitives with whom he was captured. ‘lhe objection, however, is untenable. The crime was one punish- able with death, and the county courts were prohib- ited from trying such issues, hence no mention of the case would appear on the records of our county, such entry being made only on the docket of the Supreme Provincial Court, and the minutes of that tribunal have not been preserved (so far as known), excepting in a book, covering about ten years prior to 1728, of trials held in Chester County by the supreme judges. The volume is in the office of the prothonotary of Delaware County, at Media. Annesley, for a period of his term of service as a redemptioner, was a resi- dent. of Chichester, hence we present a brief account of his extraordinary adventures as found in a recent. publication :? “ Arthur Annesley, Viscount Valencia, who founded the families both of Anglesea and Altham, was one of the stanchest adherents of Charles IL., and had a considerable hand in bringing about his restoration to the throne. Immediately after that event his efforts were rewarded by an English peerage, his title being Baron Annesley, of Newport-Pagnel, in the County of Buckingham, and Earl of Anglesea. Besides this honour he obtained the more substantial gift of large tracts of Jand in Ireland. The first peer had five sons. James Annesley, the eldest son, having married the daughter of the Earl of Rutland, and having Leen consti- tuted heir of all his father’s English real property and a great part of his Irish estates, the old earl became desirous of establishing a second noble family in the sister kingdom, and succeeded in procuring the ele- vation of his second son, Altham, to the Irish peerage as Baron Altham of Altham, with remainder, on failure of male issue, to Richard, his third son. “ Altham, Lord Altham, died without issue, and the title and estates accordingly devolved upon Richard, who, dying in 1701, left two sons, named respectively Arthur and Richard. The new peer, in 1706, espoused “lary Sheffield, a natural daughter of the Duke of Bucking- ham, against the wishes of his relatives. Helived with his wife in Eng- land for two or three years, but was at last obliged to flee to Ireland from his creditors, leaving Lady Altham behind him in the care of his mother and sisters, These ladies, who evidently hated her, set about ruining her reputation, and soon induced her weuk and dissipated hus- band to sue for a divorce, but, as proof was not forthcoming, the case was dismissed. Thereupon his lordship showed a disposition to become reconciled to his wife, and she accordingly went over to Dublin in Octo- ber, 1713, and through the good offices of a friend a recouciliation was effected, and the reunited couple, after a temporary residence in Dublin, went to live at Lord Altham’s country-seat of Dunmain, in the County of Wexford. Here, in April or May, 1715, Lady Altham bore a son, which was given to a peasant woman, named Joan Landy, to nurse. At first the young heir was suckled by this woman at the mansion, and afterwards at the cabin of her father, less than a mile from Dunmain. In order to make this residence a little more suitable for the child it was considerably improved externally and internally, and a coach-road was constructed between it and Dunmain House, su that Lady Altham might be able frequently to visit her son. “Soon after the birth of the child Lord Altham’s dissipation and his debts increased, and he proposed to the Duke of Buckingham that he should settle a jointure on Lady Altham, and for this purpose the pair visited Dublin. The effort was unsuccessful, as the estate was found to be covered by prior securities; aud Lord Altham, in a fury, ordered his wife back to Dunmain, while he remained behind in the Irish capital. On his return his spite against her seemed to have revived, and not only did he insult her in his drunken del auches, but contrived an abominable plot to damage her reputation. Some time in February, 1717, a loutish fellow named Palliser, who was intimate at the house, was called up to Lady Altham’s apartment, on the pretence that she wished to speak with him. Lord Altham and his servants immediately followed; my lord stormed and swore, and dragged the supposed seducer into the dining-room, when he cut off part of one of his ears, and immediately afterwards kicked him out of the house. A separation ensued, and on the same day Lady Altham went to live at New Ross. “Before leaving her own home she had begged hard to be allowed to take her child with her, but was sternly refused, and at the same time the servants were instructed not to carry himnear her. The boy there- fore remained at Dunmain under the care of a dry-nurse, but, notwith- standing his father’s injunctions, was frequently taken to his mother by some of the domestics, who pitied his forlorn condition, When he came to an age to go to school, he was sent to several well-known seminaries, and was attended by a servant both on his way to them and from them; ‘ was clothed in scarlet, with a laced hat and feather,’ and was universally recognized as the legitimate son and heir of Lord Altham. “Towards the end of 1722, Lord Altham—who had by this time picked up a mistress named Miss Gregory—removed to Dublin, and sent for 1 Celebrated Claimants. London, 1873. 454 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. his son to join him. He seemed very fond of the boy, and the woman Gregory for a time pretended to share in this affection, until she con- ceived the idea of supplanting him. She easily persuaded her weak- minded lover to go through the form of marriage with her, under the pretence that his wife was dead, took the title of Lady Altham, and fancied that some of her own possible brood might succeed to the title, for the estates were by this time wellnigh gone. With this purpose in her mind she used her influence against the boy, and at last got him turned out of the house and sent to a poor school; but it is, at least, so far creditable to his father to say, that he did not quite forget him, that he gave instructions that be should be well treated, and that he some- times went to see him. “Lord Altham’s creditors, as has been stated, were very clamorous, and his brother Richard was practically a beggar: they were both sadly in want of money, and only one way remained to procure it. If the boy were out of the way considerable sums might be raised by his lordship by the sale of reversions, in conjunction with the remainder-man in tail, who would in that case have been Lord Altham's needy brother Richard. Consequently the real heir was removed to the house of one Kavanagh, where he was kept for several months closely confined, and in the mean time it was industriously given out that he wasdead. The boy, however, found means to escape from his confinement, and, prowl- ing up and down the streets, made the acquaintance of the idle boys of Dublin. Any odd work which came in this way he readily performed, and although he was a butt for the gamins and an object of pity to the townspeople, few thought of denying his identity or disputing Ris legiti- macy. Far from being unknown, he became a conspicuous character in Dublin; and although from his roaming proclivities it was impossi- ble to do much to help him, the citizens in the neighborhood of the col- lege were kindly disposed towards him, supplied him with food and a little money, and vented their abuse in unmeasured terms against his father. “Yn 1727, Lord Altham died in such poverty that it is recorded that he was buried at the public expense. After his death his brother Richard seized all his papers,and usurped the title. The real heir then seems to have been stirred out of his slavish life, and declaimed loudly against this usurpation of his rights, but his complaints were unavail- ing, and, although they provoked a certain clamor, did little to restore him to his honors. However, they reached his uncle, who resolved to put him out of the way. The first attempt to seize him proved a failure, although personally superintended by the uncle himself; but young Annesley was so frightened by it that he concealed himself from public observation, and thus gave grounds for a rumor, which was industriously circulated, that he was dead. Notwithstanding his caution, however, he was seized in March,1727, and conveyed on board a ship bound for New- castle, in America, and on his arrival there was sold as a slave to a planter named Drummond. “The story of his American adventures was originally published in the Gentleman's Magazine, and has since been rehearsed by modern writers. It seems that Drummond, who was a tyrannical fellow, set his new slave to fell timber, and, finding his strength unequal to the work, punished him severely. The unaccustomed toil and the brutality of his master told upon his health, and he began to sink under his misfortunes, when he found a comforter in an old female slave, who had herself been kidnapped, and who, being a person of some education, not only endeav- ored to console him, but also to instruct him. She sometimes wrote short pieces of instructive history on bits of paper, and these she left with him in the field. In order to read them he often neglected his work, and, as a consequence, incurred Drummond's increased displeas- ure and aggravated his own position. His old friend died after four years, and after her death le resolved to runaway. He was then sev- enteen years of age and strong and nimble, and, having armed himself with a hedging-bill, he set out. For three days he wandered in the woods until he came toa river, aud espied a town on its banks. Al- though faint from want of food, he was afraid to venture into it until nightfall, and lay down under a tree to await the course of events. At dusk he perceived two horsemen approaching, the one having a woman behind him on a pillion, while the other bore a well-filled portmanteau. Just as they reached his hiding-place, the former, who was evidently the second man’s master, said to the lady that the place where they were was an excellent one for taking some refreshment; and bread and meat and wine having been produced from the saddle-bags, the three sat down on the ground to enjoy their repast. Annesley, who was famished, ap- proached closer and closer, until he was discovered by the servant, who, exclaiming to his master that they were betrayed, rushed at the new- comer with his drawn sword. Annesley, however, succeeded in con- vincing them of his innocence, and they not only supplied him with food, but told him that they were going to Apoquenimink to embark for Holland, and that, out of pity for his misfortunes, they would pro- cure him a passage in the same vessel. His hopes were destined to be very short-lived. The trio remounted,and Annesley had followed them for a short distance painfully on foot, when suddenly horsemen appeared behind them in chase. There was no time for deliberation. The lady jumped off and hid herself among the trees. The gentleman and his servant drew their swords, and Annesley ranged himself beside them, armed with his hedge-bill, determined to help those who had generously assisted him. The contest was unequal, the fugitives were soon sur- rounded, and, with the lady, were bound and carried to Chester gaol. “It appeared that the young lady was the daughter of a rich mer- chant, and had been compelled to marry aman who was disagreeable to her; and that, after robbing her husband, she had eloped with a previous lover who held a social position inferior toherown. All the vindictive- ness of the husband had been aroused; and when the trial took place, the lady, her lover, and the servant were condemned to death for the robbery. James Annesley contrived to prove that he was not connected with the party, and escaped their fate; but he was remanded to prison, with orders that he should be exposed to public view every day in the market-place; and that if it could be proved by any of the frequenters that he had ever been seen in Chester before, he should be deemed ac- cessory to the robbery and should suffer death. “He remained in suspense for five weeks, until Drummond chanced to come to Chester on business, and recognizing the runaway, claimed him as his property. The consequence was that the two years which remained of lis period of servitude were doubled; and when he arrived at New Castle, Drummond’s severity and violence greatly increased. A complaint of his master’s ill-usage was made to the justice, and that worthy was at last obliged to sell him to another; but Annesley gained little by the change. For three years he continued with his new owner in quiet toleration of his lot; but having fallen into conversation with some sailors bound for Europe, the old desire to see Ireland once more came upon him, and he ventured a second escape. He was recaptured before he gained the ship, and under the order of the court, the solitary year of his bondage which remained was increased into five. Under this new blow he sank into a settled state of melancholy, and seemed so likely to die that his new master had pity upon his condition, began to treat him with less austerity, and recommended him to the care of his wife, who often took him into the house and recommended her daugh- ter, Maria, to use him with all kindness. The damsel exceeded her mother’s instructions, aud straightway fell in love with the good-look- ing young slave, often showing her affection in a manner which could not be mistaken. Nor was she the only one on whom his appearance made an impression. A young Iroquois Indian girl, who shared his servitude, made no secret vf her attachment to bim, exhibiting her love by assisting him in his work, while she assured him that if he would marry her when his time of bondage was past she would work so hard ag to save him the expense of two slaves. In vain Annesley rejected her advances and tried to explain to her the hopelessness of her desires. She persistently dogged his fuotsteps, and was never happy but in his sight, Her rival, Maria, no less eager to secure his affections, used to stray to the remote fields in which she knew ‘he worked, and on one occasion encountered the Indian girl, who was also bent upon visiting him. The hot-blooded Indian then lost ber self-control, and having violently assaulted her young mistress, sprang into the river close by and thus ended her love and life together. “ Maria, who had been seriously abused, was carried home and put to bed, and her father naturally demanded some explanation of the ex- traordinary quarrel which had cost him a slave and very nearly 4 daughter. The other slaves bad no hesitation in recounting what they had seen, or of saying what they thought, and the truth came out. An- nesley’s master was, however, resolved to be certain, and sent him into her room, while he and his wife listened to what passed at the inter- Their stratagem had the desired success. They heard their daughter express the most violent passion, which was in no way returned by their slave. As they could not but acknowledge his honorable feel- ing and action, they resolved to take no notice of what passed, but for their daughter's sake to give him his liberty. Next day his muster ac- companied him to Dover, but instead of releasing him, as he had prom- ised his wife, sold him to a planter near Chichester for the remainder of bis term. “ After various ups and downs, he was transferred to a planter in New- castle County, whose house was almost within sight of Drummond's plantation, While in this employ he discovered that he was tracked by the brothers of the Indian girl, who had sworn to avenge her untimely fate, and nearly fell a victim to their rage, having been wounded Ly one view, LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 455 of them who lay in wait for him. By dnother accident while he was resting under a hedge which divided his master’s ground from a neigh- bouring plantation he fell asleep, and did not awake until it was perfectly dark. He was aroused by the sound of voices, and, on listening, found that his mistress and Stephano, a slave on another farm, were plotting to rob his master and to flee to Europe. Repressing his desire to reveal the whole scheme to his master, he took the first opportunity of inform- ing his mistress that her infamy was discovered, and that if she perse- vered in her design he would be compelled to reveal all that he had over- heard. The woman at first pretended the utmost repentance, and not only earnestly promised that she would never repeat her conduct, but by many excessive acts of kindness led him to believe that her unlawful passion had changed its object. Finding, however, that she could not prevail upon him either to wink at her misdeeds nor gratify her de- sires, she endeavored to get rid of him by poison; and an attempt having been made upon his life, Annesley resolved once more to risk an escape, although the time of his servitude had almost expired. ‘¢On this occasion he was successful ; and having made his way in a trading ship to Jamaica, got on board the ‘Falmouth,’ one of his majesty’s ships, and declared himself an Irish nobleman. His arrival, of course, created a great stir in the fleet, and the affair came to the ears of Admiral Vernon, who, having satisfied himself that his preten- sions were at least reasonable, ordered him to be well treated, wrote to the Duke of Newcastle about him, and sent him home to England. He arrived in October, 1741. His uncle Richard had in the mean time suc- ceeded, through default of isgue, to the honors of Anglesea, as well as those of Altham, and became seriously alarmed at the presence of this pretender on English soil. At first he asserted that the claimant, although undoubtedly the son of his deceased brother, was the bastard child of a kitchen wench. He next tried to effect a compromise with him, and subsequently endeavored to procure his conviction on a charge of murder. It is also said that assassins were hired to kill him. But it is certainly true that Annesley having accidentally shot a man near Staines, the Ear] of Anglesea spared neither pains nor money to have him convicted. He was tried at the Old Bailey, and being ac- quitted by the jury, proceeded to Ireland to prosecute his claim to the Altham estates. On his arrival at Dunmain and New Ross, he was very warmly received by many of the peasantry. His first attempt to secure redress was by au action at law. An action for ejectment was brought in the Court of Exchequer in Ireland for a small estate in the county of Meath, and a bill was at the same time filed in the Court of Chancery of Great Britain for the recovery of the English estates. “In Trinity term, 1743, when everything was ready for a trial at the next ensuing assizes, a trial at bar was appointed on the application of the agents of the Earl of Anglesea. The case began on the 11th of November, 1743, at the bar of the Court of Exchequer in Dublin, being, as is noted in Howell's ‘ State Trials,’ tle longest trial ever known, lasting fifteen days, and the jury (most of them) gentlemen of the greatest property in Ireland, and almost all members of parliament. A verdict was furind for the claimant, with 6d. damages and 6d. costs, A writ of error was at once lodged on the other side, but on appeal the judgment of the Court below was affirmed. Immediately after the trial and ver- dict, the claimant petitioned his Majesty for his seat in the Houses of Peers of both Kingdoms; but delay after delay took place, and he finally became so impoverished that he could no longer prosecute his claims. “James Annesley was twice married; but although he had a son by each marriage, neither of them grew to manhood. He died on the 5th of January, 1760.” The Talbot Mill._—In 1767, John Talbot built a stone grist-mill on the east branch of Naaman’s Creek, which for many years was noted in that sec- tion of the county commanding a large and remuner- ative trade. The mill, shortly after 1820, passed into possession of Nathan Pennell. In 1826 it was owned by his heirs and rented to Mordecai Larkin, and sub- sequently to others. It was finally purchased by Wil- liam McCay, and subsequently became the property of his son, John B. McCay. In 1884 tHe ancient mill was entirely consumed by fire. Dutton’s Saw-Mill—On a branch of Green Creek, and on the tract of land surveyed to John Kingsman in 1682, a saw-mill was built shortly after the middle of the last century by Kingsman Dutton, the grand- son of the settler, Kingsman’s daughter Elizabeth having married John Dutton. The date stone on the east gable of the two-story brick house standing near the east branch of Aston township, erected by Kings- man Dutton, bears that date, and it is supposed that he built the saw-mill about that time. He died leaving his estate much involved, and the premises were sold by the sheriff in 1768. Joseph Talbot be- came the owner of the mill and plantation, and the estate descended to his grandson, Benjamin Elliott, who removed the old saw-mill building in 1860; it having been long discarded, became dilapidated and an unsightly ruin. Evening Star Lodge.—The only secret society in Upper Chichester, Evening Star Lodge, No. 18, of the Daughters and Sons of St. Luke, was chartered in June, 1879. The members of this lodge, an organiza- tion of colored men and women, reside mostly in Lower Chichester, although the meetings are held at Upper Chichester Cross-roads. The society was in- stituted with thirty charter members, but the number has largely increased since that time. The quiet stillness which pervades the township of Upper Chichester, wherein license to keep public- house has not been granted for almost a century, was rudely shaken on Wednesday, Jan. 20, 1869, when the body of a female was found in the middle branch of Naaman’s Creek, on the farm of George Broomall, which is located in the ’southwestern end of the town- ship on the circular line. The utmost excitement prevailed. The dead girl was a stranger, and al- though the circumstances strongly suggested that she had committed suicide, inasmuch as her hat and veil were found on the bank near by, and her under-skirt had been removed and wrapped around her head ina way that indicated that she had placed it in that posi- tion, yet there was much anxiety to learn the cause prompting the act. It was subsequently ascertained that the deceased was Ellen Haggerty, and that her mind had become diseased, the result of religious ex- citement. The body had lain in the water four days before it was discovered. CHAPTER XXXVIII. LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. A rew years before the Dutch wrested the authority from the Swedes on the Delaware, Queen Christiana, of Sweden, was graciously pleased to grant a large tract of land in the colony to Capt. John Ammund- son Besk, his wife, and heirs, in consideration of ser- vices he had rendered the State and was expected to render to the government in the affairs of New 456 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Sweden. The following translation of this royal gift is reputed to be the most accurate extant :' “ We Christiana, by the Grace of God, Queen of Sweden, Gothen and Wenden, Grand Princess of Finland, Duchess of Eastland, &c.: “Be it known that of our favor, and because of the true and trusty service which is done unto us and the Crown, by our true and trusty servant, Captain Hans Ammundson Besk, for which service he hath done, and further is obliged to do so long as he yet shall live; so have we granted and given unto him freely as the virtue of this open letter is and doth show and specify, that is, we have given and freely granted to him, his wife and heirs, that is heirs after heirs, One Certain piece and tract of land, being and lying in New Sweden, Marcus Hook by name, which does reach up to and Upwards of Upland Creek, and that with all the privileges, appurtenances and conveniences thereunto be- longing, both wet and dry, whatsoever name or names excepted of them, that is which belonged to this aforesaid tract of land, of age, and also by law and judgment may be claimed unto it and he and bis heirs to have and to hold it unmolested forever for their lawful possession and inheritance. So that all which will unlawfully lay claim thereunto, they may regulate themselves hereafter. Now for the true confirma- tion hereof have we this with our own hand underwritten, and also manifested with our seal, in Stockholm, the 20th of August, in the year of our Lord, 1653. ‘“NEILS TUNGELL, Secretary. “ CurisTiana [L. §.].” Only that portion of Lower Chichester lying east of Marcus Hook Creek was included in this patent, as has been very conclusively shown by the late Edward Armstrong, and it is unnecessary for me to further allude to his argument.? The land west of that creek, comprising all the remaining territory now known as Lower Chichester, was patented by Gover- nor Andros, March 28, 1679,? to Charles Jansen, Olle Rawson, Olle Nielson, Hans Hopman, John Hen- drickson, and Hans Olleson, containing one thousand acres. Dr. Smith says, in the survey, it is mentioned that this land “‘was formerly granted unto the said persons in the time of the Dutch Government.” * The quit-rent reserved in the patent by the Duke of York was ten bushels of winter wheat. At Upland Court, March 18, 1678/9, Rodger Pedrick appeared and ac- knowledged that he had sold to William Hughes, in fee, half of his land at Marcus Hook, which land he, Pedrick, had purchased of John Hendrickson; and at the same court, Hans Ollsen (Olleson) acknowl- edged a deed to William Clayton for all his land, “right & interest of & to his houses and appurtances Lying and being att Marretties hooke.”® The ancient name of Marcus Hook was sought to be changed by the residents of that locality early under Penn’s administration, for at the court at Upland, June 13, 1682, the old records show that “‘the grant formerly made from Governor Markham to the in- 1 Martin’s “ History of Chester,” p. 7. 2 Record of Upland Court, p. 135. See note 2. 3 Benjamin OH. Smith’s historical introduction to atlas of early grants and patents of Delaware County, page xii. “This tract was called ‘common,’ and comprised all the land between Naaman’s Creek and Chichester Creek, extending from the river to the present line dividing Upper and Lower Chichester. There appears to have been a partition of the tract among the owners, but owing to the vagueness of the descrip- tions as recorded, it is now a matter of great difficulty to locate the orig- inal property. Many deeds from the patentees remain on record.” 4 History of Delaware County, p. 521. 5 Record of Upland Court, p. 135. habitants of Marcus Hook, at their request for the the calling of said Chichester, which said Grant bears date the Twentieth day of April, Anno 1682, and was read and published in the Court held at Upland June the Sixteenth, Anno 1682, according to order as a record thereof.” Although in legal documents for many years there- after the settlement at Chichester is thus designated, the popular name was so fixed in the public mind that it would not accept the more modern title, and to this day, despite legislation and executive power, the village still retains its time-honored nomencla- ture. In September, 1682, as before mentioned, Marcus Hook was visited by Lord Baltimore when the latter was on his way to New Castle, after his unsatisfactory interview with Markham at Upland, and by his asser- tion of title to that place and all the territory north of the degree of forty, occasioned the utmost conster- nation among the settlers there. The first appearance in our records of Chichester township was at the court held 27th of Fourth month (June), 1683, when Willard Hughes was appointed constable for “ Chi- chester liberty.” What territory was included in that term liberty is now purely conjectural, but Dr. Smith is doubtless correct in declaring that it was probably the township of Chichester, as it had been laid out by Charles Ashcome. That there was some dispute re- specting the bounds of that municipal district is evi- dent from the decree of court made the 6th day of Eighth month, 1685, whereby it was ‘‘Ordered that the township of Chichester extends its bounds as formerly laid out by Charles Ashcome until further ordered.” After the coming of Penn, in 1682, Marcus Hook grew apace, and for a time it was a formidable rival to Chester. In 1708 the two places were of almost equal size, for a writer at that time, describing them, states that both of these settlements “ consist of almost 100 houses.” ® In the early judicial records of Chester County, Chichester, being an important locality, furnished perhaps more than its due proportion of business for the courts of those days, which, no doubt, was largely owing to the fact that during the Swedish administra- tion the Fins, who were mostly of the convict class of the mother-country, had collected to the east of that hamlet. The cases were generally of that char- acter of misdemeanors prevalent among the lower order of society,—particularly where ignorance is the rule. I do not propose to draw largely from the records or to present extended extracts from the pro- ceedings in those cases, but I cannot refrain from call- ing attention to two trials, the particulars of which, even in the lapse of two centuries, will be of interest to the modern reader. The first case was tried at 6“ Pennsylvania in 1708,” by J. Oldmixon; Hazard’s Register, vol. vy. p. 180. LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 457 Chester on the 7th day of Second month, 1685, and at that time aroused intense public feeling, due, largely, to the prominent social position of the parties litigant, as also the serious matter involved. As the case terminated, it would have been better for the plaintiff if he had never instituted the action. Henry Renolds, of Marcus Hook, who became a resident there early in 1680, was a publican, keeping a tavern in the village (at which he sold liquor with license when he could get the court’s approval, but whether he obtained that permission or not he persisted in vending ardent spirits), seems to have been a man of quick temper, which would often cause him to do that which was of the utmost disadvantage to him. At the court held at the date stated, Renolds sued Justa Anderson for scandalous and defamatory words, in that he had reported that Renolds had beaten his servant-girl and the next day she died. The plaintiff showed by James Sandelands, James Brown, William Hawkes that Justa Anderson had asserted that he saw Henry Renolds “beat and kicke his maide and that he saw her alive no more.” The defendant was able to show by Thomas Pearson that when he was at Renolds’ house he saw the latter lift “up the tongs” and threaten to strike his maid-servant ‘for not eat- ing such things as was provided for her,” while Wooly Rosen, who lived just below Naaman’s Creek, in New Castle County, testified that while he was at Renold’s the girl asked him for some milk, which angered her master,—she was an indentured servant, —and he struck her “ one Blow with a broome Staffe, asking her whether there was not vituals enough in the house?”’ William Cornell declared that he saw Renolds “ Beate his maide with a Broome staffe and afterwards kicked her as she was by ye fire.” While Robert Moulder related a marvelous story that the night the girl died “he see the maide sleeping by ye fireside, and sometimes afterward shee went to bed, after which a ‘revelation’ came to him that the maide would dye that night.” Prudence Clayton, Renolds’ mother-in-law, who, after the girl died, had been sent for “to lay her out, did not remember that shee did see any manner of hurt about her.” The jury found, however, for the defendant, and the case had aroused such public attention that James Ken- neily, the first coroner of whom we have record in Chester County, intervened in the matter. This we learn from the order of the court, held 1st 3d day of Seventh month, 1685, that “Execution be granted against Henry Renolds for ye Crowner’s fees, charges of Inquest & taking up ye said Renolds’ maide, with all other charges whatsoever thereunto belonging.” The sheriff in this execution levied on an ox, and Renolds at the next court had to pay £4 10s., when “the court ordered him his Oxe againe.” The other case was heard at a court held at Chester on the 1st day of 8d week, Fourth month, 1690, when John Martin, a weaver, was tried for having stolen from the heuse of Thomas Brown fourteen dressed deer-skins, of the value of thirty shillings. Thomas Brown, the plaintiff, testified that the accused had acknowledged the theft, but the interesting feature of the case was presented in the manner in which the crime was traced to the prisoner. It appeared from the evidence of Francis Chads, who, before his re- moval to Birmingham, was a shoemaker in Chichester, that he had mended the shoes worn by Martin, and that he had done so “ with 2 nails & 2 plates towards ye towes of his shoes.” William Clayton stated that he and Thomas Brown, Jr., while the prisoner and Thomas Brown, Sr., were talking, had gone to the house of Thomas Brown, Sr., where Martin lived, “and there we saw the print of a shoe, and we fol- lowed it, and we perceived it to be print with nails & a pleat with nails, & we followed it to the swamp & there in a hollow tree we found the skins, and after- wards we took the measure & went to James Brownes & compared the measure with the prisoners. It seemed to be the very same.” George Foreman, a justice, testified that on the morning of the theft Brown told him of his loss, that his house had been broken open, and asked for a search-warrant, which he issued. He also states, after the search had been made, that he told Brown to ‘go to his house & see if there were no tracks of anybody. He went & re- turned shortly after, saying there was a print of a foot. Then I went to his house myself & saw the window open, & upon the ground the print of a shoe with nails & clamps of iron. We followed the tracts down to the side of the fence, & then along the swamp until we came upon Wm. Clayton’s new cleared field, and there in a swamp, in a hollow tree, we found fourteen drest skins. Then we went to James Brown’s house & took along with us the measure of the print of the shoe & measured John Martin’s, and it seemed to us to be the very same. Martin seemed to be startled at my taking his shoes off.’ The jury con- victed the prisoner, and he was sentenced to be sold for eight years to another province, to make good all damages to the party aggrieved, and his master’s charges,—he was an indentured servant,—amounting in all to £17 7s. 9}d., and to “receive 89 lashes well Laid on his Bare Back at ye Cart’s Tay].” If tradition be accepted as authority, at the conclu- sion of the seventeenth and the first and second de- cades of the eighteenth century the pirates which then infested the Atlantic coast from New England to Georgia would frequently stop at Marcus Hook, where they would revel, and when deep in their cups would indulge in noisy disputation and broils, until one of the streets in that ancient borough from that fact was known as Discord Lane, which name the same thoroughfare has retained for nearly two cen- turies. Blackbeard, who for many years kept the coast in alarm, with his crew it is said often visited Marcus Hook, where at the house of a Swedish woman there, to whom he gave the title of Marcus, although her name was really Margaret, he was ac- 458 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. customed to indulge in the wildest disorder and drunken debauches.* At the meeting of the Provincial Council in Phila- delphia, Aug. 11, 1716, Governor William Keith called the attention of Council to “the great losses which this colony has already sustained beyond any of its neighbors by our Trade’s being blocked up and infested with pirates at the Capes of this river and bay,” and further informed them “that one Trench, a noted pirate, who has done the greatest mischief of any to this place has been lurking for some days in and about this town.”? We know that on Friday, Sept. 1, 1698, a pirate ship and tender landed fifty armed men and plundered Lewistown. In May, 1701, a French pirate appeared above Bombay Hook,‘ and for many years thereafter the colonial records show the constant alarms the province was subjected to by fears of piratical demonstration on the settle- ments on the river. 1 Trench, or Druinmond, let his family name be what it may, was as grotesquely conspicuous a villain as can be found in the annals of crime. Blackbeard, for that was his piratical name, in person tall, of swarthy complexion, and with an exuberant black beard of extraordi- nary length covering his whole face, from which his sobriquet was de- rived, and which he used to twist into numberless small tails, the ends tied with bows of brightly-colored ribbons, was a picture sufficiently repulsive, one would think, without calling in, as additional decoration when in battle, three braces of huge pistols dangling across his shoul- ders, and lighted matches protruding from beneath his hat to illuminate his dusky face and savage eyes with a supernatural glare. His was, in- deed, when prepared for action, a figure to be gazed upon with fear and apprehension. Socially he was a sensual polygamist, whose harem of fourteen wives was the scene of brutulities such as even his harcened crew could not witness unmoved with pity, aud yet which no one dared to reprove, To render his power over his lawless men absolute, he an- nounced that he had entered into a compact with hell, and once, when at sea, a mysterious personage appeared on the ship, sometimes aloft, sometimes on deck, sometimes below, who spoke to no one but Black- beard, and who disappeared as secretly as he had come among them. The crew firmly believed that this was the veritable devil himself, aud that this was but one of many dark communications their chieftain held with the powers of evil. At another time when afloat, it is re- corded he said, maddened with drink, “ Come, let us make a hell of our own, and try how long we can bear it.” Going below with some of his crew, he caused the hatches to be closed, and had several large tubs filled with sulphur and other combustible articles, to which he set fire; then while the thick choking vapors rolled in dense columns through- out the ship, he danced and filled the sickening air with his profanity, until those above released the half-suffocated and fainting men from their perilous situation, which, apparently, gave the piiatica] chieftain no respiratory uneasiness. His convivial pleasantries were also of a similar hideous character; for once when drunk, seated at the head of his cabin table, he blew out the candles, cocked his pistols, and crossing his hands fired on each side at his associates, one of whom was wounded so desperately that he never recovered. This incident Blackbeard often himself related in gleeful moments, stating in conclusion, “If I did not now and then kill one of my men, they would forget who I am.” In the fall of the year 1718 the Governor of Virginia sent Lieut. May- nard with two vessels to cruise for Trench, and on the 21st of November he encountered the pirate, who, fortunately, then had but a small crew on board his ship. A bloody fight resulted,—Maynard and Blackbeard contested hand to hand,—and it is related that the corsair received over twenty wounds with swords, and almost as many bullets struck him, before be was slain. Maynard cut off the dreaded pirate’s head and af- fixed it to the bowsprit of his vessel, and thus he entered Hampton Roads with the ghastly, grinning token of his success exposed to public view. 2 Colonial Records, vol. iii. p. 54. 4Ib,, vol. ii. p, 21. 3 Ib,, vol. i, p. 539. In 1698, when Gabriel Thomas wrote his quaint “History of Pennsylvania,” he specified, among the four great market towns, Chester as enjoying that priv- ilege, and “likewise all those towns have fairs kept in them,”’ It seems that Marcus Hook, shortly after this statement was made, desired to invest itself with the dignity of a market and fair, for at the Council at Philadelphia, May 16, 1699, at which Governor Markham presided, the minutes show :° “Upon reading the petition of some of the Inhab- itants of Chichester, in the Countie of Chester, Re- questing a weeklie markett & two fairs in the year; After a full debate yrupon, the Leivt Gov & Council granted ym a weeklie market on friday’s to be keept in broad street as is desired.” On Feb. 14, 1700, Penn having returned, and per- sonally presiding over the deliberations of Council, on the minutes of that body under the date given is the further reference to Marcus Hook as a market town: °® “The petition of the ffreeholders in and about the Town of Chichester was read, setting forth that Lieut. Gov. Markham & Council, had granted to the said Town of Chichester, the Privilege of a fair and Market, and therefore humbly requests that what was then imperfectly done, the Gov. would be pleased fully to Compleat and perfect.” “ Resolved, That they shall have a Charter fora ffair & Market, with this proviso: That because some Complaints have been made agat fairs in General, their fairs should, notwithstanding anything Contain’d in the said Charter, be put down whenever it should be thought fitt that the other fairs of tha Government should be also suppressed.” It was not, however, until seven months after Penn had consented to grant a charter to Marcus Hook that he actually gave the ambitious borough the charter, with all the rights and privileges, defined in an official document. The following is a copy of that charter, and it is very interesting, inasmuch as it locates the habitations of the prominent men of that day residents there, and presents other historical data: “William Penn, True & Abzolute Propt & Governor in Chiefe of the Province of Pensilvania & Terri’es thereunto belonging: “To all to whom these p’sents shall come SENDETH GREETING: “Whereas, the ffreeholders & Inhabitants of the lower parts of the County of Chester, on the river Delaware in the s4 Province, through a laudable desire & inclination of improving the s¢ parts, by setling more close together, & enlarging of commerce, have humbly besought mee that I would erect into a market town a certain comodious place, well situated for that purpose, aforetime commonly called Marcus Hook, with the privilidges of a Fain & WEEKLY MARKET to be held therein. “Know YE, THEREFORE, That I, favoring the just & reasonable re- quest of the sé fireeholders & Inhabitants, by virtue of the powers by the King’s Letters Patent to me & my heirs given & granted, have erected, & do, for me, my heirs & successors, by the tenour of these p’sents, erect into a Market Town the s4 place, aforetimes called MaRcus Hook, or such part thereof as is hereinbefore described, under the bounds & limits hereinafter mention’d. That is to say, all that tract or space of ground lying & being situate on the river Delaware: Br GINNING at the upper point of the land of Jonas Sandilands upon the river & extending along the s@ river to the lower point of the land of Nathaniel Lamplugh, about two hundred & fifty perches, be it more or less; and from the river Dellaware extending backwards about one thousand feet, by lines at right angles with the river, from the s! two points tu the sixty foot road leading to Chester; which town, as above bounded, I will shall be called CurcHEsTER, as of late it has usually been called, and I doe hereby grant unto the inhabitants of the 34 town free ingress and egress, by land & water, to & from the s4 town, through 5 Ib., vol. i. p. 558. 6 Ib., vol. ii. p. 12. LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 459 all parts of this Province & Terr'ies: As also to lay out all such streets, highways, lanes, alleys & passages in the s¢ tuwn, as to them shall seem meet & convenient to lay out for the accomodation thereof; & more especially, that there shall be one street called ffront street, leading from the upper to the lower part of the s? town: The whole Jength of the st town; bounded to the north north-west, with a line paralell to the river, at the distance therefrom that W™ Clayton’s dwelling house now stands, and in breadth fifty foot: Also, one other street called Broad street beginning at the s¢ ffront street, on the east north-east of the s4 House of W™ Clayton, running in a direct line north north-west, one thousand ffeet or thereabouts, to the ed sixty foot road leading to Ches- ter, & in breadth the same distance that now is between the st W™ Clay- ton’s House & the house now of Roger Jackson, for the length of two hundred and fourteen feet; & at the extent of the st two hundred and fourteen feet there shall be a Publick Market Place, in breadth one hundred and forty feet, & in length along the Broad street two hundred and thirty feet; & from the s4 market place to the sixty foot road afores4, the s¢ Broad Street shall be in breadth one hundred feet: Also, one other street called New street, in breadth twenty five foot, begin- ning at the s4 ffront street at the distance of ffour hundred & twenty foot to the east north-east of Broad Street & running in a direct line north north-west, to the s4 sixty foot road: Also one lane, called Market Lane, in breadth thirty foot, beginning at the s¢ New street ffour hun- dred & fourteen feet from the ffront street & running parralel!] to the s¢ ffront street, three hundred eighty-three feet into the Market Place: Also, one other lane called Discord Laue, in breadth thirty foot, begin- ning at the south corner of the Market Place & running west south- west, paralell to the s4 Front Street, to the outhermost bounds of the town; which s¢ street, Market Place, & Lanes, I do hereby grant & con- firm for the s¢ publick uses forever, together with all other such streets, squares, alleys or passages as now are or hereafter shall be laid out as afores(, reserving always to all persons whatsoever all the rights & in- heritances which they now have or hereafter may have or lawfully claim in or to any lands or lotts within the bounds or limits afures4, the publick streets, ways, lanes, alleys & Market Place only excepted. And I doe further, for me, my heirs & successors, grant to the s4 inhabitants and ffreeholders, to have, hold & keep a free market in the st Market Place, on the sixth day of every week, forever, with ffree leave and liberty, to & for the s4 inhabitants & all others who shall resort thither to buy & sell on the s4 sixth day of every week at the said place, all manner of provisions & other necessaries for life, with the right, privi- lidges & immunities whatsoever that to a free market, according to the comon customs & vsages of England do belong: For the hetter regula- tion of which Market, I do hereby constitute & appoint Walter Marten clark thereof, to be succeeded, in case of death, removal from the s? place or other incapacity by such person & persons in the s4 office for- ever, as two justices of the Peace for the Cuunty of Chester, dwelling in or nearest to the 84 town, together with six of the chiefe inhabitauts thereof, to be chosen in the Market Place by the ffreeholders of the town & township of Chichester, shall appoint, with full power to the st Walter Marten & his success", to be appointed as afures‘, to discharge all the parts & duties of the s4 office of Clark of the market as ffully & amply, to all intents & purposes, as any other Clark of the Market within this Government may or can: And, for the greater incouragement of trade to the 1 town, by the resort of persons from remoter parts, I doe further grant tu the s4 inhabitants, ffreeholders & others, ffull power & liberty to Have, Hotp & Keep a Pusiick Farr, to be held on the nine & twen- tieth day of September, & on ye two days ffollowing, in every year, for all lawful wares & merchandizes in the 54 Market Place, and for horses & cattle in the upper part of Broad street, adjuyning the s! Market Place: ProvipepD, That there shall be no unlawful sports, plays, gaming, revelling, drunkenness, or debanchery, nor any other disorder, nor loose & idle practises, tolerated in the a4 ffair, in avy part or place thereof, or in the s town, by reason of the s4 fair, at any time whatsoever ; nor any ale, wine, rume or other strong liquors, sold in the 84 fair, but in the usuall dwelling houses of the s4 town: And for the better regu- lation of the 84 fairs and preservation of good order therein, I doe hereby constitute & appoint Walter Marten & Philip Roman, Wardens of the 84 ffair, to be, in case of death, removall from the s¢ place, or other in- capacity, succeeded by such two persons in the 8 office, forever, as two Justices of the Peace of the county of Chester, dwelling in or nearest to the si town, with twelve of the chiefe frecholders of the town & township of Chichester, (to be chosen as afores?) shall think fitt to ap- point, and upon the decease, removall or other incapacity of any of the 84 Wardens to act any further in the 84 office, no fair shall Le held in the s4 town till a successor or success’ to the st Warden or Wardens be duly chosen, according to the tenor of these p’sents, anything herein contain’d to the contrary notwithstanding; And I doe hereby grant to the st Wardens & to their successors to be elected us afores’ full power forever to exercise within the s4 fairs every year, during the time they shall be kept, all necessary jurisdiction & authority for suppressing of vice, maintaining good order, & regulating all other things whatsoever within the s4 town, to the s4 fairs immediately relating: “In Witness Wuereor, I have caused these, my Letters to be made Patent; Witness myself, at Philadelphia, the twelfth day of September, in the thirteenth year of the reign of William the Third, over England, Scotland, Ffrance, and Ireland, King, &c.; & the one & twentieth of my Govermt over this Province of Pennsilvyania, Annogq. d’m. 1701. “Wm Penn, “Recorded ye 17th, Tbr, 1701 “By comand of the Propry & Govern “James Loan, Secry.” On one occasion, at least, the good people of Mar- cus Hook attempted to give vitality to this charter ; hence sixty years after it was granted a meeting of the residents was held April 29, 1760, whereat John Wall and John Crawford were chosen successors of Walter Martin and Philip Roman and John Flower, clerks of the market, after which date the old charter has lain accumulating the dust ofea century undis- turbed. The powers of the people in their collective characters in those days certainly was much over- estimated, for in Lower Chichester, “At a town meeting held this 17th March, 1770, it is unanimously agreed by us present that every freeholder not attending at the two an- nual elections & not showing a sufficient reason shall be subject to pay into the Overseers of the Poor the sum of one shilling to be applyed as will be thought most proper & any of the officers not attending shall be subject to the payment of two shillings to be employed as aforesaid And farther itis agreed that the publick expennses at Town Meeting shall le regulated & fixed for the whole year to any sum not exceeding Ten Shillings in Regard to the Poor by the Overseers by them to be allowed in their accounts. “ Present—Jacob Worril, Ricbard Riley, Samuel Lamplugh, John Crawford, Wm. Dockerty, Arch’d Dick, Adam C., Clayton, Isaac Law- rence, Jno. Flower, Joseph Marshall, Rich'd Clayton, Benj. Miller, Jo- sepli Clayton, Samuel Armor.” In the last century Marcus Hook was noted for the number of vessels built there. Acrelius, in 1755, made particular mention of this industry, while in 1748, Peter Kalm, the Swedish naturalist, who re- mained for a brief season at Chichester, records that ‘they build here every year a number of small ships for sale, and from an iron work which lies higher up in the country they carry iron bars to this place and ship them.” The furnace mentioned was the famed Sarum Forge, on Chester Creek, near the present Glenn Mill. In 1758, William Howell, of Marcus Hook, was a leading shipwright at that place, and in that year sold a lot of ground to Charles Norris, on the southeast side of Discord Lane, extending to high- water mark on the Delaware.’ In 1800, Samuel Trim- ble was also a ship-builder there. The ancient town continued to remain prominent as a ship-building locality until the tonnage of ves- sels in recent years had increased so greatly that its lack of large yards, capital, and other facilities re- stricted the industry to small coasting crafts. As late 1 Deed of partition of estate of Charles Norris, May 24, 1788, Deed- Book D, No. 2,, p. 303, etc. Recorder's office, Philadelphia. 460 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. as the middle of this century Samuel T. Walker car- ried on quite an extensive trade in the building of schooners and sloops, the work being done by Wood- ward & Farray, who seem to have been sub-contract- ors under him, In May, 1849, Jacob Sinex, who had been for several years engaged in ship-building at Marcus Hook, removed to Chester, where he carried on the same business. At the present time Samuel J. Burton has a ship-yard at the Hook, and in March, 1884, a large-sized schooner was launched from his yard. William Cranston, who died in 1811, aged seventy- seven, in Delaware, was a native of Marcus Hook, and in early life was a noted ship-builder in that bor- ough (was assessed as such in 1800), as was Simon Sherlock, with whom Cranston had served his appren- ticeship. Simon Cranston, born at Marcus Hook in 1768, and died near Stanton, Del., in 1856, aged eighty-eight years, was named by his father in honor of his old master. He frequently related that he could remember? as a lad of eight years, when the British fleet coming up the river opened fire on the town. His recital of that incident is as follows: “The fleet lay opposite the town, and the Conti- neutal Light-Horse were stationed back of the village. My parents’ dwelling lay between the two forces. The fleet fired on the troops, and the British sent a buat ashore, and an officer told my mother to take her children into the cellar; in her fright she took them outside of the house and down into the cellar, in that way exposed to the flying balls.”! In the fall of the year 1784, we learn from a letter written by Judge Francis Hopkinson, that a vessel had been built at Marcus Hook; was attached by a tradesman, on a claim for work and materials furnished in construction of the craft. When she was launched the attachment was laid, but the owners forcibly ejected the officers and moved the vessel to Wilming- ton. The judge was anxious that the State govern- ment should take “the most speedy measures for bringing the offender to answer for the Indignity they have thrown on a Court of Justice of this Common- wealth.” ? Peter Kalm, to whom reference has just been made, in the fall of the year 1748 tarried a brief season in Marcus Hook, and spoke of it by its legal name, Chichester, as “‘a borough on the Delaware, where travelers pass the river in a ferry.” How long this regular mode of conveyance to New Jersey was main- tained does not appear. But about the beginning of this century an attempt was made to sustain such a means of communication with the eastern shore of the river, but after a brief trial it was abandoned for want of patronage. Kalm made particular reference to the fact that in the town and neighborhood were “many gardens, which are full of apple-trees sinking 1 Martin's “ History of Chester,” page 109. 2 Penna. Archives, Ist Series, vol. x. page 355. under the weight of innumerable apples.” In 1828 the newspapers of that day called attention to a re- markable cabbage-tree, then growing in the garden of John 8S. Van Neman, at Marcus Hook, which was five feet high, eleven and a half feet in circumference, and had twenty limbs, on which were more than fifty small heads of cabbages. At the beginning of this century Marcus Hook was the residence of one of the early noted painters of the United States. I copy the account of him given by Thompson Westcott :? “ Adolph Ulrick Westmuller, a native of Sweden, after having painted in Europe, came to America, at the age of forty-four years, in 1794, and settled at Philadelphia. He brought with him some of his paintings, which were greatly admired. President Washington sat to him. He recopied, it is said, for James Hamilton, the portraits of the Hamilton fam- ily, and then Hamilton destroyed the originals. Westmuller went back to Europe in 1796, where he lost money by the failure of a great house in Stock- holm. He came back to Philadelphia in 1800, and brought with him his celebrated picture of Dana, which, heing a nude figure, was exhibited only to such as might apply to view it; and from the exhibitions Westmuller received a handsome income. He re- mained in Philadelphia some years, married a lady of Swedish descent, and finally removed to Marcus Hook, Delaware Co., where he lived until his death, in 1812. His pictures were sold at auction shortly after his death, and brought good prices. For a copy of his Dane five hundred dollars were paid.” St. Martin’s Episcopal Church.—Walter Martin, of Upper Chichester, a Quaker, tradition relates, who being “ dealt with” by that society, became embittered against Friends, on Dec. 18, 1699, “for divers good causes and considerations him thereunto moving,” conveyed to the town and inhabitants of Chichester— Marcus Hook—an acre and one perch of ground for a church and free burial-place for the inhabitants, “Quakers and reputed Quakers only excepted.” This ancient deed is explicit as to the doctrine to be taught by the persons who should avail themselves of the donor’s bounty to erect a church or meeting-house there. ‘“ The inhabitants of said town and township, which are to have free liberty to build a church, chapel, or meeting-house, are intended to be such as own the two ordinances of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper of bread and wine; and such as own the resurrection of the bodies of the dead, and own the ordinance of singing of psalms in the praise of God in the congregation, or in their families, and such as own the taking of an oath on the Bible, ac- cording to the laws of England, if lawfully called thereto for the confirmation of the truth ; and it is to be a free burying-place to such as will bear part of the cost of keeping up the fences, or concern them- 8 History of Philadelphia, chap. cxvi., Sunday Dispatch of Philadelphia. LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. selves with building a church, chapel, or meeting- house thereon.” This lot, the donor strictly declared, was to be kept for the purposes expressed in the deed, “and for no other, whatever,” and explained his exception against Friends, “ because the Quakers have a meeting house of their own in the said township.” William Thomas, the quaint document provided, should be the “ first sexton or grave digger for the town of Chichester, during his life, or so long as he is able to perform duties appertaining to the office of sexton or grave digger,’ with power to those “ concerned” in keeping the burying-place to name a successor when Thomas should cease to act in that capacity. The adherents of the Church of England in that neighborhood availed themselves of Walter Martin’s gift, “feeling little or no satisfaction in their own minds, without having a sacred place set apart for holding public worship according to the ritual of that church,” but “ being few in number and of less ability to build a place of worship,” in the year 1702 they purchased from John and Tobias Hendrickson a rude frame building, which had been used as a blacksmith- shop, for which they paid about five pounds, and all the male residents aided in moving the structure to its new location, where it was subjected to a buuntiful coat of whitewash within and without, rude benches constructed, and the nameless church, other than that which it derived from its location, was established. In connection with St. Paul’s, at Chester, and the church at Concord, it became a missionary station, under the protection and support of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Rev. Evan Evans, in a letter written in 1707, states that in 1700 he was sent over as missionary to Philadelphia, but the churches of that denomination increased so rap- idly that he was frequently compelled to make long and weary journeys to preach to the scattered congre- gations, “ for this reason,” he states, “I went frequently to Chichester,”! until, in 1704, Rev. Henry Nichols was placed in charge of St. Paul’s parish, then in- cluding the churches at Chester, Marcus Hook, and Concord. Walter Martin died in 1719, and was buried in a lot in the churchyard which he had reserved as a place of interment for himself and friends. The place where his remains lie is marked with a head- and foot-stone, which, a half-century ago, by order of the wardens and vestry, was redressed and the letters re- cut. The ancient monument presents, near the top, the carved representation of an hour-glass and cross- bones, and bears the following inscription : “In the memory of Walter Martin, buried June 26, 1719, aged 68 years. “The just man lives in good men’s love, And when he dies, he’s bless’d above.” In 1714, Rev. John Humphreys was in charge of the parish, and continued as the rector until 1725, when 1Hazard’s Register of Pennsylvania, vol. iii. p. 338; Dr. Perry's “Papers Relating to the Churches in Pennsylvania,” p. 33. 461 he went to Baltimore (?}, and refused to return unless the churches at Marcus Hook and Chester would raise his salary to forty pounds perannum, This the parish appears not to have done, for from a paper dated April 5, 1727, signed by Ralph Pile, of Birmingham, Philip Ottey, and others, it is stated that, in 1726, ‘‘a great mortality reigned amongst us; we were obliged to de- sire the Rev. Mr. Hesselius, the Swedish minister at Christiana, who, out of his pious and Christian dispo- sition, came to bury our dead, and seeing the discon- solate condition of our churches, offered to assist us once a month at our churches, which he still continues todo.”? In the summer of 1728, Rev. Richard Back- house was appointed missionary to St. Paul’s parish by the society. The letter apprising Governor Gor- don of the appointment of Mr. Backhouse is dated at London, August 3d of that year.’ Rev. Israel Acrelius, who came from Sweden in 1749, arriving at Christiana on July 20th of that year, states that so constant were the demands made upon him to hold divine services in the Episcopal Churches at Concord and Marcus Hook, besides his direct charge at Christiana, and as each church desired him to preach there on Sundays, it became impossible to satisfy the congregations, for “there were not as many Sundays in the months as there were congregations to serve. . . . The good old Swedes now began to murmur, partly at the minister, that they never got to hear him on Sunday in their own church, and partly at the English, who wished to have him with them, and never once paid his expenses of travel.”* The parish of St. Paul’s was then with- out a rector, Rey. Richard Backhouse having died at his home in Chester, Noy. 19, 1749. He had been succeeded by Rev. Thomas Thompson, who aban- doned his charge, apparently, shortly after he as- sumed the responsibilities of the position. In the will of Jeremy Collett, in 1725, a legacy of fifty pounds was bequeathed for the “ better support of the Episcopal minister officiating in the chapel” at Marcus Hook, doubtless a welcomed addition to the slender means of that congregation. Twenty years after that date, in 1745, the old frame structure be- coming insufficient to meet the need of the neighbor- hood, an effort was successfully made to provide a better house of worship. A fund was raised sufficient to erect asmall brick church, about twelve by sixteen feet, which was surmounted by a belfry and an iron yane, in which the figures 1745 were cut. Three years subsequent to the erection of this new edifice, the old frame structure being still standing was used from time to time as a school-house, under the auspices of 2The above statement appears in a note to Martin’s “ History of Ches- ter,” p.97. The statement is slightly erroneous. The town of Baltimore was not laid ont until 1730. The sesqui-centennial of that city was held in the fall of 1880. Mr. Humphreys could hardly havé gone there in 1725. He doubtless went to Whetstone Point, now within the city limits, for, as we know, Whetstone Point was incorporated as early as 1706. 3 Penna, Archives, 1st Series, vol. i. p. 226. 4 Acrelius, p. 305. 462 HiSTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the church organization. A new difficulty arose, for in a letter written by Mr. Backhouse, June 26, 1748, a year before his death, he says, ‘‘ The Moravians have hired a house to keep their meetings in twice a month at Marcus Hook, to which place my congregation re- sort, but I hope (and believe) more through curiosity than anything else, because they show me the same respect they ever did, and carefully attend the church as formerly, when it is my turn to be there.”’} In 1759, Rev. George Craig become the rector, having been sent from London asa missionary by the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and continued in charge of the church during almost the entire war of the Revolution, unti] 17838. He died a few years subsequent to this date, and his re- mains were deposited in the aisle of the church. It was during his rectorship, in 1760, that the nameless sanctuary received the title it now bears, St. Martin’s, and it was accepted by the vestry at the suggestion of Emanuel Grubb, as commemorative of Walter Martin, its founder. The annalist Watson states that Emanuel Grubb was the first child of English parents born after the grant to Penn of the province, 1681, and that his birth occurred in a cave in the bank of the river, near Chester. The statement, however, as re- gards the date of birth is contradicted by the tomb- stone in St. Martin’s churchyard, the inscription being,— “Vmanuel Grubb, Died August 9, 1757, Aged 85 years and 10 days.” which makes the date of his birth to have been July 30, 1682. In 1765 the Episcopal Churches at Chichester and Concord were going to decay, and to raise money to repair these buildings and to aid other churches in other localities, in January of that year the Assem- bly passed an act authorizing a lottery to secure the sum of £3003 15s., and although the Governor re- turned the bill for some amendments,’ we know that such an act was finally approved, for in 1769 the provincial treasurer paid to St. Martin’s Church £66 18s. 4d., the share it was entitled to as the proceeds of that lottery. In 1845 the old church, built one hundred years before, became so dilapidated, and besides was in- sufficient to meet the requirements of the congrega- tion, that it was determined to build a new edifice, which was promptly done, and the present building, the third, was erected. In 1822 St. Martin’s Church, which, previous to that date, had been a part of the parish of St. Paul’s, of Chester, became a separate organization, and from that time has been in charge of the following rectors: Rev. Benjamin S. Hunting- ton, 1852-53; Rev. John Baker Clemson, 1858-58; Rey. Henry Hall Hickman,’ April 8, 1860; Rev. Jo- 1 Perry’s ‘‘ Papers Relating to the Churches in Pennsylvania,” p. 251. 2 Colonial Records, vol. ix. p. 243. 3On Wednesday evening, May 2, 1860, Mr. Hickman was walking from the cross-roads to Marcus Hook, when he fell dead. seph A. Stone, 1860-68 ; Rev. J. Sturgis Pearce, 1863- 71; Rev. Gustavus Cleggett Bird, 1871. In 1860 the old brick school-house, which had been built in the hitching-yard belonging to the church in 1801, was taken down by William Trainer, who gave one hundred dollars for the material, and with the bricks obtained from the old building Mr. Trainer erected the wall on the north side of the hitching- yard. The sheds belonging to the church cover the site of the old school-house, and on Sunday, Oct. 15, 1870, a pair of horses belonging to Thomas W. Wook- ward, of Linwood, being back from the shed, broke through and fell into the well which was formerly used, but having been covered with a few boards and some earth, in time was forgotten, until the incident narrated brought its existencetomemory. Oneof the horses broke its neck in the fall, and the other was found severely injured when extricated. In 1871 the congregation erected a parsonage adjoining the Odd- Fellows’ Hall, the church in all its preceding history never before having a residence for its rector. The land was donated for that purpose, and the cost of the building subscribed by several of the wealthier mem- bers of the congregation. In 1879, John Larkin, Jr., presented a tract of ground comprising about two acres adjoining the churchyard to St. Martin’s Church, thus adding space to the burial-lot, which in almost two centuries had grown crowded with the dead of many generations, St. George’s Methodist Church.—The Methodists had no church organization in Lower Chichester until 1835. In that year Rev. Brooke Eyre visited Marcus Hook, where at that time only three persons resided who were members of that denomination. Mr. Eyre was invited to preach in a shoemaker’s shop; and so earnestly and effectively did he address his audience that an interest was immediately aroused. While the excitement was at its height one of the three Methodists in the town chanced to enter the store of William Trainer, and in conversation said if they, the Methodists, had a church in Marcus Hook it would be of great benefit to the village and neighborhood. “Build one,” said Mr. Trainer; and, taking down a pass-book, he wrote the formula of a subscription, and headed the list with a promise to pay twenty dollars towards building a Methodist Church. With that beginning the paper was circulated, John Lar- kin, Jr., contributing the like sum. That afternoon between two and three hundred dollars was pledged to the object, and in less than three weeks a sufficient amount was obtained to justify the erection of a plain wooden structure on Discord Lane, where the Meth- odist burying-ground is now located, the land for that purpose being sold by William McLaughlin at a trivial price. The building was supplied with rude uncushioned benches, and a raised platform at one end, where an unornamented board desk served as 4 pulpit. The congregation was poor, and hence it had to rely on the circuit preachers to conduct its regular LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 463 services, but the body increased steadily in member- ship. On Feb. 20, 1839, Lewis Massey and wife made a deed of trust of a house and a lot of land in Marcus Hook as a parsonage for the minister of the Chester Circuit, which lot of ground was located on Broad Street, where the present church edifice now stands, and it continued to be held by the Wilming- ton Conference until St. George’s Church became a station, in 1870. At that date the board of trustees decided to petition the Court of Common Pleas to be empowered to convey to the trustees of Marcus Hook Methodist Church one hundred feet on Broad Street, and extending in depth the whole length of the lot, to be used for the erection of a church thereon, and to sell the remaining part of the lot to John A. Ste- venson for two thousand five hundred dollars, which sum was proposed to be used in the purchase of an- other parsonage, the house in Marcus Hook, then dilapidated, being six miles distant from the place where the clergyman of Chester Circuit was appointed to preach. The court authorized the trustees, in No- vember, 1878, to make the deed to Stevenson in fee- simple, free, and discharged from all the trusts men- tioned in the deed of trust. The old frame church, in the thirty-five years of constant use, had grown too small for the congrega- tion, and besides was fast falling to decay; hence it was resolved to build a new sanctuary. The corner- stone was laid on Saturday, July 8,1871. Edward 8. Farsons, although not a member of the church, took warm interest in the building, and it was through his influence in a large degree that the present ornate church edifice was erected, which is one of the most imposing structures in the ancient borough. Previous to 1868 the Methodist Episcopal Church of Marcus Hook was one of the five appointments which constituted the Chester Circuit. In 1868 the territory embraced in the Philadelphia Annual Con- ference was divided into two Annual Conferences. The part lying between the Susquehanna and the Delaware Rivers, and north of the Delaware State line, was made the Philadelphia, while the State of Delaware and the Eastern Shore of Maryland consti- tuted the Wilmington Conference. After this division Marcus Hook was the only appointment of the old Chester Circuit which remained in the Philadelphia Conference, the other appointments becoming part of the Wilmington Conference. The following year (1869) the Marcus Hook Church was made a sta- tion, and Rey. E. H. Hoffman was appointed pastor. On Nov. 22, 1869, a charter was secured, in which the church was named Cokesbury, in honor of the first bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, and that still re- mains as the charter-name of the church, although at the present it is popularly known as St. George’s Church. At the close of the year 1869 the church had seventy-nine members in good standing, and the property belonging to the station was valued at four hundred dollars. In March, 1870, Rev. J. H. Wood was appointed pastor, and was succeeded the follow- ing year by Rev. George A. Wolfe, who continued there for two years. It was during his pastorate the present church edifice was built, at a cost of nine thousand dollars; and when the building was dedi- cated there was an incumbrance of three thousand dollars upon it. The following is a list of the pastors of St. George’s Church from that time: 1878-74, Rev. William M. Gilbert; 1875, Rev. T. W. Maclary; 1876, Rev. M. Lorin ; 1877-78, Rev. A. M. Wiggins; 1879-81, Rev. R. Smith; 1882-84, Rev. William K. Macneal. The debt which remained on the church at the time of its dedication was discharged in full during the pastorates of Rev. T. W. Maclary and Rev. R. Smith. At the present time there are one hundred and fifty-one members of the church in good stand- ing, and the property is valued at nine thousand dol- lars, and is free of debt. Baptist Church.—The Baptist Church of Marcus Hook was organized May 3, 1789, the members form- ing the association being Rev. Eliphaz Dazey, who died about 1796, Judge Richard Riley, Richard Moore, Thomas Perkins, George Price, John Walker, who subsequently became a Baptist clergyman, George White, William Perkins, Mary Riley, the judge’s wife, Jemima Dazey, who after her husband’s death kept a store in Chester, on Market Street, in the second house from the southeast corner of Fourth Street, Sarah Cannell, Christiana Dick, Hannah Moore, Elizabeth Parsons, Mary Perkins, Elizabeth Walker, and Sarah Price. The later was the wife of Samuel Price, who owned a large part of the real estate where the villages of Linwood and Trainer’s are now located. The church was built by subscription, and erected in 1789,! the cost of the structure being £164 16s, 64d. It was built of bricks, which were made from clay dug near by, and burned in a clamp-kiln. The dimen- sions were twenty-two by twenty-five feet, one story in height. The gallery was located at the south end of the auditorium, and the congregation sat on plain benches having backs to them. At the north end was a raised platform set off from the remainder of the apartments by a baluster and a seat for the minister. The wood-work was in its natural state, excepting the windows and doors, which were painted white. In 1814 the congregation had increased so much in number that an addition of fifteen feet was made to the length of the church, and pews with doors took the place of the old benches. The church as an organization was ad- mitted into the Philadelphia Baptist Association Oct. 6, 1789. For many years Bristow was the sexton of the church, and it is related that on the evening of May 17, 1853, while the old man was driving his cow homeward, he fell to the earth dead. The corner-stone of the present handsome church 1 Smith’s “ History of Delaware County,” p. 362, 464 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. edifice was laid Sept. 10, 1853, and the same night the box deposited in the stone was robbed of its contents. The church was completed the following year, and on Oct. 21, 1854, the first services were held therein. In March, 1862, Mary Moulder, the daughter of Joseph and Margaret (Flower) Moulder, died at Marcus Hook, aged one hundred and five years, and was buried in the Baptist burial-ground at that place. She had been an earnest member of the church nearly three- quarters of a century. The list of pastors of Marcus Hook Baptist Church is as follows: Rev. Elephaz Dazey, May 3, 1789, to April 2,1796; Rev. John Walker, Sept. 5, 1818, to March 10, 1821; Rev. Joseph Walker, Aug. 7, 1824, to —— 1842; Rev. D. L. McGear, Aug. 9, 1845, to June 18, 1846; Rev. Theophilus Jones, May 20, 1848, to Feb. 7, 1849; Rev. Isaac Gray, May 1, 1853, to Jan. 4, 1855; Rev. Miller Jones, 1858 to 1861; Rev. E. W. Dickinson, D.D., August, 1862, to Dec. 8, 1875; Rey. H. B. Harper, May 6, 1876, to April 17, 1878; Rev. C. C. W. Bishop, Sept. 28, 1879. Hebron African Methodist Church.—This re- ligious society was organized about 1837. The first meetings were held in a log house which stood on the road from Dutton’s Cross-roads to Upper Chichester Cross-roads. In 1844 a lot was purchased from John Mustin, and the present frame church erected during the pastorate of Rev. Abraham C. Crippin. The pas- tors from the organization of the church have been as follows: Rev. Israel Geott, Rev. Jeremiah Downer, Rev. John Cornish, Rev. Henry J. Young, Rev. Abra- hem C. Crippin, Rev. Isaac B. Parker, Rev. John L. Armstrong, Rev. Adam Drener, Rev. Jeremiah Buley, Rev. William W. Schureman, Rev. Sheppherd Hol- comb, Rev. Jeremiah Young, Rev. Peter Gardiner, Rev. Caleb Woodward, Rev. Jacob Watson, Rev. George W. Johnson, Rev. William H. Davis, Rev. Henderson Davis, Rey. John W. Davis, Rev. John W. Norris, and Rev. Thomas H. Moore, the present pastor. The church has a membership of thirty, and the trustees are Samuel Anderson, William D. Laws, and Peter Lunn. The Schools.—The first school of which we have any information in Chichester was conducted under the auspices of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and was held in the old frame house of worship on St. Martin’s lot, after the first brick sanctuary was erected, in 1745, and con- tinued for nearly sixty years. In 1801 a new brick school-house was erected on the church lot, the fund for that purpose being raised by contributions among the members of the parish. Here, too, all the public meetings of the township appear to have been held, certainly after 1805. The old school-house was torn down iu 1860 by William Trainer, as mentioned in the account of St. Martin’s Church. About 1854 the school-house known as Cedar Grove was erected near the Baptist graveyard, and the building on the St. Martin’s lot ceased to be used for school purposes. After the passage of the school act of 1884, the di- rectors of Lower Chichester were active in the ad- vocacy of the system, and the following year erected a school-house near the present Linwood Station, on lands given by John D., White, one of the directors, for that purpose. The building was defectively con- structed, the walls cracked, and being pronounced un- safe, it was pulled down, and another house built in 1844 at Rocky Hill. The old site being near the rail- road, was believed to be dangerous to the children. On Dec. 7, 1876, the court, on the petition of Samuel Hickman, ordered his farm on the east and west branches of Naaman’s Creek to be attached to Upper Chichester school district. In 1880 an ornate school- house was built on the great Southern Post road, near Trainer’s Station. In 1860, and for some time thereafter, the Misses Emanuel kept the Linwood Seminary in Lower Chi- chester. The full list of school directors of Lower Chichester township is as follows: 1834, Joseph Walker, Jr., John D, White; 1840, Samuel F. Walker, Joseph Marshall; 1842, David Trainer, William Eyre; 1843, Peter N. Gamble, Charles P. Bunting ; 1844, William McGlaugh- lin, William Trainer; 1845, Joseph P. Pyle; 1846, William Eyre, William B. Roberts; 1847, John Stewart, Johu F. Broom- all; 1848, John Larkin, David Trainer; 1849, no report; 1850, Benjamin F. Johnson, John Stewart; 1851, David Trainer, James Price; 1852, Charles P. Bunting, William H. Rigby, John Ste- venson; 1853, Edward McDade, Towusend Rowand, John F, Broomall; 1854, John R. Casey, John Stevenson; 1855, Peter N, Gamble, Charles F. Wishman; 1856, Manuel Emanuel, Peter N. Gamble, George C. Healy; 1857, Thomas Taylor, Alfred Bunting; 1858, Isaac Eyre, Jacob English; 1859, Manuel Emanuel, Isaac Hendrickson ; 1860, Alfred Bunting, Daniel C. Green; 1861, Samuel Spansey, Jacob English ; 1862, Isaac Hendrickson, William Trainer; 1863, J. R. Casey, Benjamin Johnson; 1864, Daniel C. Green, Wil- liam Appleby; 1865, Samuel Spansey, Benjamin D. Johnson; 1866, William H. Rigby, Isaac Heacock; 1867, Frank Gray, George Barton; 1868, William Barto, Dr. Manley Emanuel; 1869, Nathan Pennell, Alfred Bunting; 1870, Frank Gray, Charles Weston ; 1871, William L. Derrickson, Tracy E. Walker; 1872, Isaac Eyre, John Roberts ; 1873, Stephen Hall, E. W. Casey; 1874, Frank Gray, Ed- win Lisler; 1875, J. Eyre, John Lamplough; 1876, J. E. Green, Clifford Loughead, William M. Black ; 1877, no report; 1878, John D. Goff, Clifford Loughead; 1879, Clarence Larkin, John Lamp- lough ; 1880, J. E. Green, S. J. Burton; 1881, B. D. Johnson, A, D. Hastings; 1882, John Roberts, Clarence Lurkin ; 1883, James Philips, Henry Heacock; 1884, John D. Goff, William Trainer. Licensed Houses, Lower Chichester.—One of the first cases which occurs in our county annals wherein license is alluded to was heard ‘“‘ November 30, 1661, before William Markham, Esq., and Justices,” the defendant being a resident of Lower Chichester. The case, as it appears of record, is set forth in the quaint phraseology of that period: “Henry Reynold having appeared at this court to answer for his selling strong liquor by small measure in his house contrary to the Governors and Council’s order, upon his submission to the court, was dis- charged.” Six years subsequently to this proceeding, at De- cember court, 1687, another of the early settlers at Marcus Hook figured in connection with a violation of the license law, as follows: LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 465 “Robert Moulder being yt last Court Indichted for suffering Thomas Clifton and Samuel Baker to be Drunk att his house was upon ye same called to ye Barr Butt nothing being Proved ordered to keep an ordinary provided he keep Horse meat & man’s meate.”” Moulder must have been indicted under that clause in the “ Duke’s Booke of Law” which, promulgated Sept. 22, 1676, enacted that ‘‘no Licenced Person shall suffer any to Drink excessively or at unseason- able hours after nine of the Clock in or about any of their houses upon penalty of two shillings, six pence for every Offence if Complaint and proof be made thereof.” Hence it would seem that the defendant was at the time keeping a licensed house of enter- tainment, for Law 10, enacted by the first General Assembly in December, 1682, at Chester, ‘‘ against such as Suffer Drunkenness in their houses, and about Ordinances,” clearly could have been intended to punish those only who, having special privileges con- fided to them, exercised the same to the injury and disadvantage of the public. The penalty prescribed for this offense was that they “ who suffer such excess of Drinking in their house, shall be lyable to the punishment with the Drunkard,” which was, for the first offense a fine of five shillings or five days’ deten- tion at hard labor in the House of Correction, and to be “fed only with bread and water,” while for the second and all subsequent convictions, “ten shillings or ten days’ labor, as aforesaid.” The case of Peter Stewart, who was tried in Octo- ber, 1688, for feloniously breaking open the chest of John Wickham, who was then stopping at the house of William Clayton, seems to indicate, from the sen- tence, that at that date Clayton was keeping a public- house at Marcus Hook. The record shows that he was not licensed in 1704, for at the conclusion of that year he was presented “for keeping an Ordinary without license,’ but petitioning the court for such license it was granted to him. The first instance I have found of license being granted in Lower Chichester, other than to Clayton and Moulder, occurs under date of May 25, 1714, when Richard Edwards presented his petition to keep 4 public-house at Chichester, which was allowed. In 1720, Edward Smout had license granted him for a house of entertainment, with leave “to sell all sorts of liquor,” at Chichester, and continued there until Feb. 26, 1724, when his petition states that he “had obtained license for a publick house at Chichester, but now removed to Chester and desires license there,” which was approved by the court. Feb. 23, 1725, An- drew Rawson informed the justices that he had taken the house late of Edward Smout, in Chichester, which house he asked might be continued asa license house, which was granted. Elizabeth Clayton, wife of William Clayton, Jr., Sixth month 28, 1717, petitioned for a renewal of license in Chichester, possibly at the house kept by 30 her father-in-law, William Clayton, Sr., in 1688, as mentioned above. On Ninth month 23, 1719, Wil- liam Clayton asked to be permitted “to keep a com- mon ale house in the house where he dwells.” On Aug. 20, 1720, he was given full license for a public inn, and Aug. 25, 1724, he petitioned for renewal of this privilege. The following year Elizabeth Clayton states that, ‘‘ having for several years past obtained ye Honours Recomendacon,” ask that it be continued, which was approved for that as well as the following year, as also in 1727. In 1728, Thomas Clayton obtained the grace of the courts, which was extended to him during the year following. In 1730 the license was granted to Wil- liam Weldon, who had rented the premises. Aug. 27, 1734, Thomas Clayton again presented his peti- tion to the court, in which he says, that “ having some years ago leased the house where he formerly Dwell at Chichester & kept a house of entertaint there to one William Weldon, who ever since kept a pub- lick house and the terms of the said leace being near expired, your petitioner Inclined to return their again,” but the justices were not so inclined at that session, yet, on Nov. 26, 1734, when Clayton again petitioned for the license, setting forth that “ your Petitioner's father having kept a house of entertain- ment for several years in Chichester until his Decease and your Petitioner some time after his said ffather’s Decease, until his affairs Called him abroad,” etc., had followed the same occupation, the court yielded to his importunity, and annually thereafter his name appears on the list of approved licenses, until 1756, ’ when Hannah, his widow, kept the house, and re- mained there until 1770. In that year John Flower purchased the property and continued the business until 1787, when license was granted to him for the last time at ‘‘The Ship.” Caleb Pierce followed the next year, when Sarah Flower, a maiden daughter of John Flower, took charge of the house in 1789. In 1808 she received license from the court of Delaware County, after which I fail to trace the license until 1808, when John Marshall had the house, and re- mained there until 1809, when Jonas Fairlamb fol- lowed him. Benjamin Collam kept the Ship in 1810, and in 1811, Mary Goodwin was granted license there. In 1818, Thomas Noblet petitioned leave to keep a house of entertainment at the “noted old stand formerly kept by Mr. and Miss Flower, and lately by John Marshall, who has removed to another place in Mar- cus Hook,” which was accorded him. The next year the house ceased to be an inn, and being then much dilapidated, it was taken by Rev. John Walker, who taught school therein for several years with success. The ancient hostelry subsequently was used as a store, and was such on the evening of May 16, 1872, when it was totally destroyed by fire. At the date mentioned Charles P. Bunting occupied it, and the accidental overturning of a vessel containing an inflammable 466 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. liquid, which took fire from a lamp in Mr. Bunting’s hands, resulted in a few moments in enveloping the building in flames. Even the records of the school board, in Mr. Bunting’s custody, were destroyed, and he narrowly escaped being burned to death. The loss was over twelve thousand dollars. The broken walls of the ancient structure as the fire left them are still to be seen at the southwest corner of Front and Broad Street, Marcus Hook. On Front Street, “‘ facing the lower pier,” in the early part of this century, David Marshall, who had been a lieutenant in Wayne’s regiment, kept the tavern known as the ‘‘sign of George Washington.” In his petition for the year 1799, he states the place “has been a noted stand for the space of forty years. A great number of shipping lying for the space of three months and upwards opposite your petitioner’s tavern, and his house is constantly crowded with per- sons from vessels.” Over half a century before he filed this petition, John Kerlin, in 1748, had license for many years at this place, and after being kept as an inn by several parties, William Pierce seems to have become the landlord, until it was taken by Mar: shall, who continued to receive the court’s approval until 1824, when it in turn ceased to be a public- house. In 1771, Reece Peters obtained license for a house on Front Street, and in his petition states that it was the house formerly occupied by William Hughes. In 1787, John Taylor was granted license there, after which it ceased to be an inn until 1804, when Joseph Merrihew, in his petition for the old house of Reece Peters, urged the court as an inducement for their bounty that “if granted license, intends to keep ferry boats in order to transport horses, cattle, and heavy articles to New Jersey, as for want of such convey- ance the public very frequently suffer great inconvey- ance; there being no ferry on either side of the Dela- ware from New Castle to Gloucester Point.” The court granted his application, but as he did not peti- tion at the next court, he doubtless found that the business was not remunerative. In 1814, Isaac Dut- ton, who had been refused license at the old Blue Ball, obtained the court’s favor for this stand, which he dubbed the Fountain Inn, and under that title William Warden kept it in 1816, but the following year changed the name to the Eagle, and John Perrine, who succeeded him in 1818, added to the sign the word “Golden” Eagle. In 1821, Richard Barry followed as the landlord, but the next year he was denied license. In 1828, Margaret Marshall kept the house, and in 1830, James Marshall followed her, and continued as landlord of the Farmers and Me- chanics’ Inn until 1841, when John Larkin, Jr., kept it for three years, after which time it disappeared finally from the list of public-houses in Lower Chi- chester. At the cross-road, below where the Union Hotel stands, in former years was a tavern, the record of which J cannot trace farther back than 1812, when it was kept by Thomas Noblet, who took with him the name he had formerly used at the Union Hotel, “the United States Arms,” and gave it to this house. It subsequently was kept by Fanny Irving, and she was followed by Susan Dutton. Objection being made to the continuance of the license, she removed to Wil- mington, and the house ceased to be a public inn. The Old Blue Ball Tavern.—Nathaniel Lampleu (Lamplugh), Oct. 10, 1727, stated to the court that he “had been at considerable charge in building a house for public house on King’s Road to Newcastle” and asked license for the same, which was allowed, and annually continued to him until Aug. 31, 1731, when Samuel Gray presented his petition to court, alleging that he had “taken to farm ye House with the appur- tenances Commonly called & known by ye name of the Blew Ball Tavern, where a house of Entertain- ment hath been for some considerable time & now is kept.” Gray remained at the noted inn, which was about a half-mile above the Delaware State line, until 1736, for on August 31st of that year Thomas Howell states that ‘having taken the house when Samuel Gray lately Dwell on the Great Road from Chester to New Castle, in the township of Chichester,” he de- sired license, and it was granted to him annually thereafter until 1753, when he having died, the tavern was kept by his son until 1765, when Jonathan Pugh was the landlord. He was succeeded in 1765 by Wil- liam McCoy, who seems to have died, for the next year Rachel McCoy had licensed, and in 1767, who gave place to John McCoy, and the latter in 1770 to Archibald Dick, who in his petition states that he suc- ceeds McCoy in business, and that the building and farm are his property. Here Archibald Dick continued yearly to receive license until and including 1776, when, so far as the records show, his last application was in 1776, which was approved. Dick is said by Martin to have lived like a nabob at the Blue Ball, or rather as that author erroneously, I think, located his dwelling as being the large frame house standing at the southwest corner of the Chichester (Hook) Cross- roads, which at that period was an imposing struc- ture. He says that when Dick visited Philadelphia, he drove thither “in a barouch with four splendid horses, with his negro driver and servant,” and that he was the owner of fine stock.! May 4,1772, Mr. Dick announced in the Pennsyl- vania Packet that he has purchased the “ noted horse Dove, imported from England by Dr. Hamilton,” and in the same paper, May 17, 1773, he advertises that he has “at Marcus Hook the horse Pennsylvania Farmer, without exception the greatest beauty in Ame- rica, under care of David Miller.” During the Revo- lutionary war he was active in behalf of the colonies, and held in 1779 the office of assistant quartermaster- general, and in 1780 was assistant forage-master for 1 History of Chester, p. 395, LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 467 Chester County. He must have resided in Chester in 1779, for in the Pennsylvania Packet of J uly 1st of that year is published a letter from Archibald Dick, dated ‘‘ Liberty Hall, Chester, June 28, 1779.” He died March 9, 1782. His distinguished son, Dr. Elisha Cullen Dick, who was born near Marcus Hook, March 15, 1762, was one of the consulting physicians called in by Dr. Craik, the family physician, to visit Gen. Washington in his last illness. ‘‘ When all hope of recovery from less extreme remedies had been abandoned, Dr. Dick proposed an operation which he ever afterwards thought might have proved effectual in saving the general’s life, but it did not meet the approval of the family physician.” 1 Archi- bald Dick was succeeded in business as host of the Blue Ball by Zebidee Hollingsworth, who remained there until 1783, in which year Dr. Dick sold his un- divided half-interest in his father’s real estate, April 29, 1783, to Isaac Dutton, for nine hundred and eighty-five pounds. Thomas B. Dick made partition of the estate, and the Blue Ball was taken by Isaac Dutton, who continued there until his death in 1798, and from 1794 to 1808 the inn was kept by Elizabeth Dutton, his widow. In 1809, Benjamin Collum had the tavern, and also in 1810. The following year, and that of 1812, the court refused to license the Blue Ball. In 1814, Cornelius Pratt stated in his petition that he had purchased the property with the express view of occupying it as a tavern; that the house and stables were the most commodious for an inn “of any on the road between Chester and the State line,” having been constructed and prepared long since for such use; that since the unfortunate obstruc- tion to the navigation of the Delaware and Chesa- peake, the road aforesaid has been so much used by travelers and wagoners as to have made it difficult sometimes to find convenient and uncrowded accom- modation, “your petitioner, suffering under an op- pressive restraint by the want of a license, and loosing that just and reasonable advantage of applying his property to end most profitable and beneficial to his family.’ He seems, however, to have purchased it subject to the condition of obtaining the license. In 1817, William Worden petitioned, but the court re- jected the application, as also in the year 1818, when Susanna Dutton petitioned “to keep a public house at the old Blue Ball Tavern, about five miles below Chester,” but was refused. The continued denial of license at last compelled a sale of the property, and John M. Smith, having purchased it in 1821, after considerable pressure being brought to influence the court, succeeded in obtaining the approval of the judges. In 1822, Ashbill Taylor became landlord, and continued there until 1828, when John Bowlen, Jy., succeeded him. In 1830 and 1831 James Mar- shall; 1882, John Bowlen, Jr.; in 1832, William Holston until 1834, when the Blue Ball was a tem- 1 Thomas Maxwell Pott’s “ History of Carter Family,” p. 79. perance house. In 1835, Priscilla Thompson was the landlady ; in 1837, James Plunket was mine host, and in 1838 he was succeeded by Sarah Bullock. From that date the old Blue Ball inn disappeared from the list of public-houses, even the ancient build- ing itself being demolished. In 1848, John Larkin, Jr., builtin close proximity to the site of the noted tavern the large square house which he sold to John Cochran in 1850. The site of the old Blue Ball subsequently became the property of Thomas W. Woodward, an extensive wholesale tobacco merchant of Philadelphia. On Feb. 19, 1878, while Mr. Woodward was conversing with his family, he suddenly expired, dying in the chair in which he was then seated. The Union Hotel.--John Flower, who had kept tavern at another location in Lower Chichester from 1729 to 1784, and perhaps before the first date, in 1736, presented his petition, setting forth that “having lived long in this county, and now unable to labour for maintenance of wife and family, hath taken an House lately erected on the main Road from Chichester into the back parts of Chester county, where the same Crosses the Road leading from Phila- delphia to New Castle,” and desired to keep a public- house thereat, but the court refused to grant him the license, although in the following year they gave him the privilege. He died in 1738, and that year his widow, Mary, was granted the right to continue the business, and that the court extended its indulgence to her the following year we learn from the remon- strance of residents of Lower Chichester, dated Aug. 29, 1739, against the petition of Elizabeth Bond for hotel license. The latter, on Aug. 30, 1738, the year previous, had presented « petition, in which she in- formed the court that she “is Left a widdo with a Considerable Charge of small Children, and having no way to maintain them but by my hard Labour,” asks that she be permitted “to sell Beer and sider.” Her application being indorsed by a number of the most substantial citizens, the justices acted favorably on her request. The following year, however, when she presented herself, with the statement that “having three small children to maintain, wishes to sell rum and other liquors, by small measure,” a remonstrance was filed by the inhabitants of Lower Chichester, representing that “there are already four public- houses—Thomas Clayton, Mary Flower, William Weldon, and Thomas Howell—in the township,” and that no necessity exists for another, whereupon her application was rejected. ; In 1741, Humphrey Scarlet, who had married the widow Flower, was licensed at the cross-roads until 1746, when he dying also, the widow again succeeded to the business in 1747, and in 1749, she having mar- ried her third husband, John Rain, became the land- lord. Rain was no exception to the rule, and he dying in 1756, Mary again became the landlady. In 1759, Richard Flower, her son by her first husband, 468 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. had license for the inn. He died in 1763, and his widow, Hannah, continued the business until 1768, when she married John Wall, who seems to have had license for a public-house in the township from 1759 to 1764. The following year, 1769, Wall was suc- ceeded by Joseph Gribble, and the latter, in 1773, gave place to John Dunlap, who, in his petition, stated that the inn was then known as the ‘‘Ship Princess Amelia.” In 1774, David Ford followed Dunlap, and in 1776 John Taylor became the land- lord, the title of the tavern having been changed to the King of Prussia. In 1778, Jacob Cobourn fol- lowed as mine host of the inn, after which date I lose record of it until 1791, when Henry Odenheimer had license for the tavern, including 1793. In 1795- 96, John Walker was Be host, while in 1798-99, Henry C. Barker was the landlord. He was suc- ceeded, in 1800, by John Selah, at which time the inn was known as “the Sign of the Leopard.” In 1808, Charles Afflick became mine host of the Leopard, and was followed by Henry C. Barker, in 1804. For six years Jacob D. Barker was the landlord, to be succeeded, in 1810, by Edward Sal- liard, and he in turn, in 1811, by Thomas Noblett, who called the house “the United States Coat of Arms,” and, in 1813, Jacob D. Barker again returned to the cross-road inn. The petition of Barker, in 1820, states the house is known as “The Union Inn.” In 1824, George Hoskins followed Barker, and continued there until 1839, when Jolin Harper, Jr., had the license. In 1841, William Appleby be- came the landlord, and remained there as such until 1850, when he having died, the license was continued to his widow, and she in turn was followed by her son, William Appleby, in 1861. The latter remained as landlord of the ancient hostelry until 1866, when Wil- liam Wilson had license until 1873,—the year of local option. In 1876 the house was again licensed to his widow, Hannah H. Wilson, and she continued an- nually to receive the court’s approval until 1884, when the license was withheld from all houses in Lower Chichester. At this road-side inn the great men of the last gener- ation have stopped, that their horses might be watered and themselves refreshed. William Trainer informs me that he can distinctly remember seeing John Quincy Adams riding along the road to and from Washington, with four horses to his coach, and with out-riders. The sturdy farmers of that day gazed with a kind of awe as “‘ the leaders of the political parties” passed by with their followers without deigning, in many cases, to return the profound bows of the rustic freemen. The Spread Eagle—In 1782, William Burns ob- tained license for the tavern facing the upper pier, the name of the house being set forth as the “Tun and Punch Bowl,’ but in 1791 the name was changed to the Spread Eagle, which title it retains to this day. In 1815, Burns having died, the tavern was kept by his widow, Hannah, but the following year Henry Houghton was the landlord, who was succeeded, in 1817, by John Marshall, and in 1819, Benjamin Fit- man succeeded the former. Ann Lane kept the tavern in 1820, and John Barton in 1821, who gave place to John Manderson in 1823. Margaret Marshall fol- lowed the former in 1827, and the next year William McLaughlin, who had purchased the property, kept the tavern there. In 1842, Charles P. Morris was the landlord, and the next year Jesse M. Justice, who was followed by Lydia A. Justice. George C. Healey had the house in 1850, and in 1853, Charles P. Swing. Edward Chandler had license in 1855, and Humphrey P. Gibson in 1856. In 1850, Mary A. Gibson was the landlady of the Spread Eagle, and two years there- after William Wilson became the landlord. In 1864, Lewis Wolcott had license granted him, but the same year he transferred it to Robert K. Jacquett, and in 1868, John J. Thurlow secured the court’s favor, but he soon afterwards transferred it to Henry Wilkins. After the local option law was repealed William H. Gibson had the hotel until 1878, when John H. Kerlin became the landlord, to give place, in 1880, to Caleb C. Perkins, who is the present host of the ancient public-house, to which license was refused by the court in 1884. The population of Lower Chichester was small in 1715, if we form our opinion from the following names returned by the assessors as the male taxables of that township: Philip Roman, Jonah Roman, Robert Roman, John Rawson, Richard Bezer, Philip Pedrick, Anthony Baldwin, William Flowers, Mordecai How- ell, John Royley, Richard Edwards, William Clayton, William Hewes, William Hewes, Jr., John Hopton, Richard Crosby, John Ross; Freemen, John Flower, Thomas Clayton, and Thomas Howell. That the above list is far from complete is evident. The name of Lamplugh does not appear, and yet we know from the county records, other than the assessors’ returns, that the family did reside then in that locality. In- deed, the records of the old borough and township, as with Chester, are sadly deficient, while the traditions are very inaccurate. In 1799 the following names appear on the assess- ment-roll for the year: Samuel Amor, Charles Affleck, William Burns, Sr. (inukeeper), Wil- liam Burns, Jr. (waterman), John Burns (cordwainer), Jacob Burns, Henry C. Baker (innkeeper), Nathaniel Brown, Curtis Clayton, Joseph Clayton (pumpmaker), Richard Cockshott (carpenter), William Connell (shop-keeper), William Cranson (shipwright), Benjamin Cloud, Thomas Connarroe, Elizabeth Dutton (innkeeper), Zachariah Derrick (wheel- wright), William Fordson, John Harding (tanner), William Howell (cordwainer), David Johnson, Benjamin Johnson, Melchior Looen (shop- keeper), David Marshall (shop-keeper and tavern-keeper), Joseph Mar- shall (shop-keeper), John Marshall (innkeeper), Hester Mitchell, Joseph Merribew, Hannah Moore, George Martin ( tailor), Nicholas Newlin (physician), Samuel Rice (justice of the peace), John Prince, Sarah Per- kins, Richard Riley (judge), Joel Scott (pilot), Caleb Sayers (physician), | Samuel Trimble (shipwright), Joseph Walker, Thomas Wallace (tailor), Thomas Wilson, Thomas Biggert (weaver), Nehemiah Broomall, Joseph Cobourn, Jr. (cordwainer), George Derrick (wheelwright), John Ellis, Thomas Eanix (carpenter), John Goodwin (wheelwright), W illiam Max- "vd “©O AUVMVIZAG ay "fe JO AONACIS NIVUL “N ‘uz VN Wi a Mn Mk mye il] LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 469 well (weaver), James Marshall (weaver), Joho Richards (millwright), Heber Thomas (joiner), James Thomas, James Burns (carpenter), Benjamin Talley (cordwainer), Ellis Wright (carpenter), Thomas York (merchant). It will be noticed that the above list of taxables presents almost without exception the names of Eng- lish settlers, so rapidly did the latter race supplant their Swedish predecessors, The time when the old market-house, removed in 1870, which stood in Broad Street, was erected in Marcus Hook I have been unable to ascertain, but as it was a counterpart of the similar building which stood in Market Square, Chester, I do not believe it antedates the middle of the last century, that in Ches- ter having been erected subsequent to 1744. I learn that about 1838 a town hall, or large room, was built on the top of the market-house, running the entire length of the building, and here public meetings, singing-schools, and the like were held. Nothing seems now to be known regarding the mill which stood on Front Street, almost at the extreme south- westerly limit of the borough, as shown in a plan of the town of Chichester, said to have been made by Isaac Taylor, the surveyor of Chester County, about 1701, which date I much question, since the plan shows a road in early times, called the road to Chester, ex- tending from New Street, obliquely, to the King’s Highway, a short distance west of the bridge over Chichester Creek, and we know that short road was not laid out until 1704. King’s Highway and Chichester Creek Bridge. —The present Southern post-road was not laid out until June, 1704, as appears from the following report: “By virtue of a law made at New Castle the 27th day of the 9th mo., 1700, Confirmed at Philadelphia the 5t day of the"10 mo., 1701, ordering and appointing the Justices of the County Court for this county to lay out a road from the King’s Road that leads to New Castle and Maryland near as may be to Ralph Fishborn the intended place for a bridge over Chester Creek. We the present Justices did accordingly this day view and lay out the said road but in regard some of the inhabitants of the township of Chichester did declare that they would never cut nor clear the same. We order and appoint the inhabitants of the township of Chester with such others as are willing to assist them at their own proper charge for the more effectual answering the said law and speedy accommodation of all travellers to cut and clear the road as we have now laid it out & make return to us of their so doing the next Court of Quarter Sessions to be held at Chester, aforesaid. Given under our hands the 10t day of June in the year 1704. “CaLeB Pusey, “JonATHAN Hayes, “Joun Guest, “JasPER YEATES, “ Justices, “We the inhabitants of the Township of Chester in pursuance to the within order of Court Do certify to the Court that according as the Jus- tices was pleased to make the within mentioned road we have at our own charge cut and cleared the same requesting it may be recorded and confirmed according to law. Witness our hands. : “Edward Danger. James Townes. Robert Barber. Charles Whitaker. Paul Sanders. John Wade. Samuel Tomlinson. William Pickles. “ Allowed in open court the 29 day of August, 1704, and ordered to be Entered on Record.” George Simson. Joseph Edge. James Sandiland. John Hoskins. A bridge over Chichester Creek on this road was erected prior to 1708, for on Nov. 24, 1708, the jus- tices, commissioners, and assessors of Chester County, in open court, entered into an agreement for building or repairing the bridge at Chester Creek, and the record states,— “Tt is further agreed that the said James Hendrickson shall build a bridge over Marcus Hook Creek in the Queen’s Road, where the old bridge now is, and erect it ten feet broad and so long as is sufficient and necessary for the same to extend, and to build it all of white oak tim- ber completely finished with and the said bridge to be finished at or before the Ist day of April next, in consideration the said James shall be paid £14. “Further ordered that the causeway at the end of the bridge shall be repaired and made a sufficient road and it is also ordered that Philip Roman shall be Supervisor of the same to agree with workman and see it completely finished.” The Linwood Mills, at Trainer’s Station, on Chi- chester Creek, occupy the site of a grist-mill erected on that stream, about the middle of the last century, by John Price, the then owner of the land. In 1790, Samuel Price, his son, owned the mil], which was operated by George Pearson. In 1806, Samuel Price having died previous to 1802, David Trainer, the father of the present owner, purchased the grist-mill, and in 1811 a John R. Pine built a saw-mill near by on his late father’s estate; but subsequent to 1813, David Trainer, Sr., in connection with Gideon Jacques, purchased the saw-mill and carried on the grist- and saw-mill at that place. The former was driven by an overshot wheel, while the saw-mill was fed by a separate race, the waters being discharged into that which turned the grist-mill. In the fall of the year 1814, when the militia of Pennsylvania sum- moned to the field by the President of the United States to repel the threatened invasion by the British army were assembled in encampment near Marcus Hook, the troops, numbering over five thousand men, were located on this and adjoining estates, and close by, at Widow Price’s, Maj.-Gen. Gaines, of the regu- lar army, in command of the department, had his headquarters, and in the neighborhood of the mills reviewed the entire force on Oct. 12, 1814.’ The logs used at the saw-mill were generally floated by water to a point very near the building, and it was neces- sary that the water-way should be preserved; hence to that end the General Assembly, on March 24, 1817, declared Lower Chichester Creek, ‘from the mouth thereof up the same to the mill of David Trainer and Gideon Jacques, be and the same is de- clared a public highway for the passage of rafts, boats, and other vessels, and it shall be lawful for the inhabitants and others desirous of using the naviga- tion of said creek to remove all natural and artificial obstructions which may be within the same.”*? The 1] have seen it stated that Gen. Anthony Wayne was the command- ing officer who reviewed the troops on that occasion. Of course that is amistake. ‘“ Mad Anthony” died at the present site of Erie, Dec. 15, 1796, and had been dead almost eighteen years when the review took place. 2 Bliss’ “ Digest of Delaware County,” p. 19. 470 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. act itself declared that under no construction were its provisions to be held as authorizing the removal, injuring, or impairing of the bridge spanning the great post road. In 1887 the old grist-mill was changed into a cot- ton-factory, and an addition, eighty by forty feet, two stories in height, erected, which was operated by David Trainer, Jr., and John Hastings, Jr., until 1842, when, the firm having lost heavily in that year through the failure of the commission house with whom they dealt, the partnership was dissolved, and under discouraging prospects David Trainer contin- ued the business there. At the National Fair, at Washington, D. C., in May, 1846, the goods made at Trainer’s mill received special notice. Success at- tended his efforts, and he had already accumulated considerable means, when at his father’s death, in 1849, the estate became his by inheritance. Two years thereafter Mr. Trainer met with a serious loss in the destruction of his. mill by fire. On Monday morning, Oct. 13, 1851, between one and two o’clock, as the night-train from Baltimore came in sight, the conductor and engineer noticed a bright flickering light in the mill, and as no one in the neighborhood seemed to be stirring, the train was stopped and the alarm given. The fire was sup- posed to be the work of an incendiary, as the flames had broken out in a cotton-shed where fire was never used. The loss amounted to fifty thousand dollars, of which only eighteen thousand dollars was covered by insurance. While the walls of the burned factory were being demolished a tremendous mass fell, burying a mason named Armstrong to his waist in the rubbish, and to the surprise of all who saw the accident, when extracted he was found to have sustained no serious in- juries. The work of rebuilding was pushed rapidly, and on Aug. 1, 1852, the old structure having been replaced by a new mill three and a half stories high, one hun- dred and ten by fifty feet, fully stocked with new ma- chinery, operations were resumed. In 1865 an addi- tion of ninety feet was added to the mill, thus making the main building two hundred by fifty feet, to which were attached spacious buildings used as cloth- and picker-rooms, a dye- and finishing-house and an engine- room. In1865 the firm became David Trainer &Son, J. Newlin Trainer having been taken into partner- ship, and again, in 1868, it became D. Trainer & Sons, William E. and Edward Trainer having been admitted into the firm. In 1869 mill No. 2 was erected. It is a two-story building, sixty by five hundred and two feet, with the necessary outbuildings for boilers, en- gines, etc., and in the spring of the following year, having been fitted with the best and improved ma- chinery, the firm began manufacturing in this mill. In the fall of that year the neat iron bridge spanning Hook Creek, near the mill, which had been made at the Chester Bridge- Works, was put into its place. An industry such as this, giving employment to a large number of persons, necessarily resulted in building up in its immediate vicinity a village of dwellings for the operatives. In 1873 the Chester Improvement Company erected a large factory in South Chester, which was purchased by D. Trainer & Sons, and is now known as Mill No. 8. A brief account of this mill will be found in the historical account of South Chester borough. In 1878, at the Paris Exposition, David Trainer & Sons were awarded a bronze medal for superior tickings manufactured at their mills. David Trainer was born in Delaware County, Pa., on the 9th of July, 1814, and reared on the farm where his birth occurred, and where he still resides. Here he enjoyed such advantages as the subscription schools of the period afforded. His father, David Trainer, had purchased, in 1806, the property, consisting of a farm and flouring-mill erected before 1753 by John Price, and the lad was employed on the farm and about the saw-mill, which had been erected by his father in 1812. In 1887 an addition was made to the old flouring-mill, and the whole having been fitted with machinery, was put in operation for the manu- facture of cotton goods by the son and John Hastings, Jr. The firm become deeply involved by the failure of their commission merchant in 1842, and having dissolved the partnership, David Trainer resolved to retrieve his fortunes single-handed. Upon the death of his father, March 1, 1849, he fell heir to the estate, consisting of the mills and some fifty acres of land. A disastrous fire destroyed the old mill Oct. 8, 1851, but nothing daunted he took immediate steps for rebuilding, and by Aug. 1, 1852, the oid flouring-mill had been replaced by a new structure and equipped with new and improved machinery. In 1865 he en- larged this mill, and in 1869 erected Mill No. 2, which was followed in 18738 by the erection of Mill No. 3. These structures are models of comfort and con- venience. In addition he has erected three mansion- houses and eighty-five dwellings for the accommoda- tion of his operatives, in whose welfare he manifests a deep interest. Having thoroughly educated his sons, and acquainted them with the practical details of cotton manufacture, he gave to each an interest as he attained his majority, the firm now being D. Trainer & Sons. Mr. Trainer became connected with the Bank of Delaware County in 1833, and upon its reorganization as the Delaware County National Bank he was chosen a director, and in 1878 elected its presi- dent, serving a term of two years, when he was re- elected, but declined the honor. He is in politics a stanch Republican, having formerly voted the Whig ticket. He is in his religious associations an Episco- palian and member of St. Martin’s Church, of Marcus Hook, of which he is senior warden. Mr. Trainer is public-spirited and enterprising, courteous to all, and a vigorous supporter of every public improvement. Diamond Mills.—On the east branch of Naaman’s Creek, near the northwest boundary of the township, is the saw- and grist-mill of Samuel Hockman, which is one of the old mill-seats and landmarks of the (Aber ECELIPCED LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 471 county. Towards the end of the last century it was the property of Nathan Pennell, but he having died about 1800, it was leased to Andrew Steel, and in 1802, Nehemiah Broomall became its owner. In 1826 the mill is recorded as grinding between three and five thousand bushels of grain per annum, while the saw- mill was run only occasionally, and was not rated as a first-class mill. On Oct.19, 1829, Nehemiah Broom- all sold the property to Benjamin Hickman for three thousand dollars. A strange incident connected with the mill occurred on Saturday night, Aug. 23, 1849. man that night was aroused shortly before midnight by the barking of his dog, and going out to the mill saw no one. Before he entered the house the dog barked furiously, and then Hickman noticed a light in the woodshed. He called several times to know who was there, but receiving no answer he discharged his gun, and the report was followed by an exclama- tion, “ You have shot me!’ Hickman went to the place, and found a haggard, withered old woman lying on the ground, the shot having taken effect in different parts of her body. She had collected a large amount of combustible materials in a mass, apparently with the intention of setting fire to them. A physician was sent for, and the next day the woman, who would not tell her name, was lodged in jail. She was sub- sequently sent to the county house. After Benjamin Hickman’s death the widow, Ann, conducted the business. The mill is now owned by Samuel Hick- man, who has erected a new merchants’ mill on the old site, and at this time the brand of “ Diamond Mills” is accepted by the trade as the equal of any flour in the market. In 1870, John H. Barton and Jarius Baker erected a sugar-refinery on a tract of land to the east of the upper pier at Marcus Hook. It was a large brick building, forty-five by fifty-six feet, and towering up- wards to the height of sixty feet. A new wharf was built adjoining the upper pier, and a canal or way was dug to enable vessels of large size to come close to the building to receive or discharge cargoes. In April, 1871, sugar was first made in the refinery. Early on Sunday morning, Feb. 25, 1872, fire was discovered in the char-room, and in two hours thereafter nothing remained of the building but the fire-marked walls. The loss was one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, which was not entirely covered by insurance. Subsequently, James Baker, using the standing wall, erected a large flour-mill on the site of the refinery, but four years after the first fire the new structure was in its turn totally consumed, the fire being, it is sup- posed, an incendiary one. In 1878, John Larkin, Jr., purchased the site of the burned flour-mill, and using part of the walls, rected a machine-shop and foundry, which was occupied by Keesey & Hubbell for a few months, when they aban- doned the enterprise. In 1880 the Pioneer Iron- Works, a limited company, became the lessees of the Benjamin Hick-- establishment, but after building seven iron vessels it failed, and the premises. were rented by Charles C. Glover,who manufactured steam-fittings therein, which business also proved to be unsuccessful. The build- ing is now leased to Joseph Kidd, who is engaged in manufacturing iron conductors for the Union Line cable-roads in Philadelphia, and has at the present time an iron vessel on the stocks, building for parties in New York. In 1871, Mr. Larkin erected a large brick building, three stories in height, intended for a shoe-factory. It was occupied by Morton Bowker for a few months, but was subsequently changed into the Riverside Hosiery-Mill, and on Sept. 1, 1877, Clarence Larkin and John G. Campbell began manufacturing hosiery therein. In October of the same year Mr. Campbell withdrew, and the business has been conducted by Clarence Larkin from that date. About 1875, John Larkin, Jr., built a machine-shop and foundry on Market Street. It was occupied by William Pearson for some time in building hosiery machinery, but more recently it was rented by the Titanic Steel-Casting Company. It isnow unoccupied. Within the last few years Mr. Larkin has built sixty houses in Marcus Hook. In all the history of the town for a century and a half preceding Mr. Larkin’s improvement, the number of houses erected in that period did not equal those built by Mr. Larkin in the time men- tioned. Kaolin has been found in Upper Chichester, for in 1839, when William Trainer was digging in the side of a hill near his dwelling, a body of clay was ex- posed, which was submitted to Professor Hare, Wil- liam J.S. Warner, and Professor Rogers, the State geologist, for examination, and the last-named per- son pronounced it the purest porcelain clay he had ever seen. No effort seems to have been made to put this article in the market. Although kaolin has been found in several townships in Delaware County, only in Birmingham has the industry ever been established or maintained. During all its history Marcus Hook was prominent as a fishing station. In a description of the village in 1802, published inthe ‘“Traveller’s Directory” for the year, it is mentioned as ‘a place engaged in shad and herring fisheries.” Inhabitants of the deep other than the fishes mentioned have occasionally been captured off Marcus Hook. In July, 1869, William Blizzard caught off that place a shovel-nosed shark, which measured over five feet in length and weighed a trifle over two hundred pounds. On May 16, 1879, a sea- lion was taken in a seine near Marcus Hook. Its captors being under the impression that it would in- jure their net, killed it. It was thought it had escaped from the Zoological Garden in Fairmount Park sev- eral weeks previous to the time it was caught. On Saturday evening, Jan. 26, 1879, a remarkable accident occurred near Linwood as the southward- bound express-train was approaching that station. 472 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. The wind was blowing furiously, when two students of Princeton College, named Vaughan and Larkin, at- tempted to pass from one car to another. Vaughan was swept from the platform by the strength of the gale, and his skull fractured by the fall. Larkin’s life was saved simply by his coat catching on the knob of the car-door, which held him on the platform until the conductor and brakesman came to his assistance. Societies.—In 1845 a band was located at Linwood, which furnished the music on several occasions for public meetings and military displays. I have no further information of the organization than is here given. On June 14, 1869, the Linwood Building As- sociation was organized, with George Broomall, presi- dent ; William H. Dickinson, secretary and solicitor; and David Trainer, treasurer. The association has settled its business and disbanded. Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Lodge, No. 185, I. 0. of 0. F., was instituted July 11, 1846, with the fol- lowing charter members: Richard Leach, Robert Black, James Stott, William Appleby, Sr., James Phillips, Stewart Smith, John Stevenson, Sr., George Williams, Townsend Rowand, and Edward Waggoner. On the night of institution nine candidates were in- itiated, making a total membership of nineteen. Dur- ing the year twenty-five persons were initiated, making a membership of thirty-five at the beginning of the year 1847. Since that time the lodge has been in active operation, never suspending benefits, paying promptly all lawful claims on the treasury. On July 4, 1849, the corner-stone of the present Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Odd-Fellows’ Hall was laid, C. C. Burr, of Philadelphia, delivering the address on that occa- sion. John Larkin, Jr., was largely instrumental in suggesting and carrying forward the building to com- pletion. The total number of members of Lodge No. 185 since its institution is two hundred and thirty- four, of which number thirty-two have been buried. At present the membership is seventy-two. The lodge since it was instituted has paid over ten thousand dollars in benefits, mostly distributed in Upper and Lower Chichester, and, besides, has about four thou- sand dollars safely invested. Four of the charter members still survive. Wawasett Tribe, No. 172, I. 0. of R. M.—This tribe was instituted eighth sun, flower moon, G. Y. D. 881 (8th day of May, 1872), with twenty-one charter members. The tribe now numbers eighty-one mem- bers. The appointed chiefs are: 1st 8., R. H. Dutton; 2d 8., L. K. Bane; G. of F., Wilmer Heacock; G. of W., Frank H. Wooley; 1st W., George B. Rowand ; 2d W., Amos Pennell; 3d W., James P. Yeager; 4th W., Levin C. Barton; Ist B., Ellis Maxwell; 2d B., Isaac McKinley; 3d B., Daniel Congleton; 4th B., George W. Vernon, Jr. The elective officers are: 8., Andrew Mahla; 8S. §., Charles Green; J. S., -George W. Morton; P., Samuel Congleton; C. of R., -F.S, Vernon; K. of W., I. F. Hendrickson. Golden Star Council, No. 319, 0. U. A. Mi— This council was chartered July 9, 1873, with twenty- two members, and Isaac J. Brown, Councilor. The first meeting was held in the second story of the ma- chine-shop on the southwest corner of Fourth and Market Streets, Marcus Hook. After that council met until November of the same year at the Spread Eagle Hotel. At that date the society rented the hall at- tached to the hosiery-mills, and used it as a council- chamber until the room was required for mill pur- poses. By dispensation from the State Council granted Dec. 1, 1880, council was authorized to re- move to Linwood Station, where they leased Odd- Fellows’ Hall one night in a week. The present Councilor is Edward Truitt, and the number of mem- bers is fifty-three. Linwood Lodge, No. 499, K. of P.—This lodge was instituted May 12, 1884, by District Deputy Dan- iel W. Flenner, of Chester. Meetings are held in the Odd-Fellows’ Hall. John D. Goff is OC. C. The present number of members is fifty-six. Old Residents and their Homes.—Dr. Caleb Smith Sayers settled at Marcus Hook, where he practiced his profession until his death, in 1799, at the early age of thirty-two years. He was a victim of yellow fever, with which he was attacked after visiting a man ona vessel who was lying ill, the captain being ignorant of the serious nature of the disease. The house where the doctor lived, almost as it was in his day, facing the river, still stands. At the time of his death he owned sixty-three acres of land in Upper Chichester, and a brick house and lot and half an acre of ground in Marcus Hook. His son, Hon. Edward 8. Sayers, who was consul for Brazil and vice-consul for Portugal, at Philadelphia, died March 29, 1877, was born at Marcus Hook shortly after his father’s death. Sub- sequently thereto the family removed to Philadelphia, where Edward §. Sayers became a prominent mer- chant. When the Emperor Dom Pedro visited the Centennial Exposition, he was always attended by Mr. Sayers, the latter in early life having personally become acquainted with the royal family in Brazil. In early times Marcus Hook appears to have been a favorite locality for physicians, and success seems to have attended their efforts there. In 1799, Dr. Nich- olas Newlin not only had his own residence and one hundred and ninety-eight acres of land, but he owned several houses which he rented to families,—a very unusual thing at that period. During the second war with England, Marcus Hook in the fall of the year (1814) was the designated en- campment of Pennsylvania militia called to the field, as well as a few regiments from Delaware, and the United States regular army, the force gathered there amounting to eight or ten thousand men. During the time of the threatened attack on the city of Phil- adelphia by Admira] Cockburn, the armed gunboats patroled the river to a point near New Castle, and it was no unusual thing for the residents of Marcus Hook to see three or four of these gunboats sailing LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSGITP. 473 by the town in a day. They were flat sloop-rigged crafts, of forty or fifty tons, carrying one large gun, and commanded by an officer and ten or twelve men, the latter armed with muskets, cutlasses, and pikes. The old houses standing east of the creek, Morton, Johnson, Pennell, and several others, were all erected before or about the middle of the last century, the clay being dug and the bricks made and burned near where the houses were built. On those farms to this day the excavations made in digging the clay can be pointed out. The Pennell house was built in two parts, the kitchen in 1744, by William Hendrickson, who then owned the property. The figures given have been pressed in the bricks in several places. He sold the estate to John Smith, who built the main part of the present house. Smith was an Irish Quaker, who settled near Kingsessing, and married a Bunting, of Darby. It is stated by tradition that, when looking for a farm, he was told that this was one of the best in the county, and purchased it. He subsequently acquired much real estate in the neigh- borhood. The Trainer family, in the maternal line, are descended from John Smith. Elizabeth Smith, the centenarian, who died in 1802, aged one hundred and three years, and is buried in St. Martin’s grave- yard, is said to have been a sister of John Smith, but was always a stanch member of the Church of Eng- land, and a liberal contributor to the struggling parish of St. Paul. The inscription on the gravestone in St. Martin’s Church-yard where she lies is simply— “Elizabeth Smith. Born August, 1699. Died Oc- tober, 1802,”—thus proving that she had lived in three centuries. The Johnson house, on the west side of the great post-road, near Stony Run, was built about the same period mentioned as the date of the Pennell building, and with the exception of about twenty years, as long as our records run, the estate has been in the ‘ownership of the family. Benjamin F. Johnson, the old squire, as he was termed, then an octogenarian, on Nov. 9, 1871, died suddenly while seated at his supper-table. A man of studious habits for years, he had maintained the reputation of being one of the best-informed men in the county, and in his lengthened lifetime had been county treasurer, a justice of the peace for nearly half a century, and for sixty successive years a vestryman of St. Martin’s Church,—the longest period of continuous service, in any capacity, so far as I have knowledge, ever per- formed by a resident of this county. The Eyre mansion, just west of the line of the borough of South Chester, is of more recent date, having been built by William Eyre about the begin- ning of this century. Forty years ago, Jan. 2, 1845, Martin Sullivan, a lad on this farm, fell through the funnel in the barn on that estate and was instantly killed. The village of Linwood is a direct outgrowth of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Rail- road, and its history does not extend backward in our » annals a half-century. The incidents connected with the story of Lower Chichester I have already given, so far as I have information. In 1878, John Lenkins, a printer, began the publi- cation of a newspaper in Lower Chichester, called The Linwood Times. After one issue the paper was suspended. The following is a list of justices of the peace: Names. Date of Commission. Samuel Price..... Aug. 30, 1791. Joseph Marshall ay 20, 1800. James Withey... uly 4, 1806. Jacob Edwards... Jan. 1, 1807. John Caldwell... 16, 1814. Joseph Walker... Samuel Smith.... David Marshall. George W. Bartram.. Benjamin F. Johnson Abraham Kerlin... Samuel T. Walke John Afflick.. Samuel Shaw.. William Martin. William Eyre.... George W. Bartram... Jordan D. Bitting (vor Benjamin F. Johnsou William Eyre. WA John Larkin, Jr. (borough of Marcus Hook). aol Benjamin F, WOMEON. sy se sivecssisnwrevuansecles April 15, 1845. William Eyre... «April 15, 1845, Edward Waggoner. “(Worough Of “Marcus Hook) -April 14, 1846- Benjamin F. Joh -April 9, 1850. William Byre........ «+. April 9, 1850, » Samuel T. Walker ( 8 Hook)April 11, 1854. Benjamin F. Johnson Oct. 23, 1855. William Eyre........... Oct. 23, 1855. Benjamin F. Johnson.....seeseeseeee seeceesreeees April 10, 1860. Alfred Bunting (borough of Marcus Hook)..April 10, 1860. Manley Emanuel -April 15, 1861. Benjamin F. Johnson -April 28, 1865. Robert A. Loughead z 16, 1867. Samuel T. Walker. -April 14, 1867. 1. Henry Walker (b ook).April 13, 1869. Robert A. Loughead.. «April 19, 1872. Henry Larkin....... April 15, 1873. Daniel Fergerson...... -March 25, 1876. Robert A. Loughead. July — 2, 1877. “March 25, 1878. -April 10, 1882. - April 6, 1883. Joho A. Green....... Robert A. Loughe John A. Green..... The Marcus Hook Piers.—The wooden piers at Marcus Hook were erected by the State of Pennsyl- vania subsequent to the Revolutionary war. Previous to that date there were wharves at that place,—one in front of lands belonging to William Burns and the other that of Robert Moulder (the latter generally known as Moulder’s wharf). They, of course, were indifferent structures, mere landing-places, affording no protection to vessels during the heavy spring freshets and ice-drifts. In January, 1785, it appears a committee of merchants in Philadelphia memorial- ized the State government,' setting forth the necessity for the construction of new piers along the Delaware River at designated localities, and the advantage to be gained by such an outlay in maintaining the com- mercial supremacy of the city by affording protection to vessels in the winter season and during the ice-runs in the spring, for at that period it was no rare inci- dent for crafts at anchor to be cut through by the heavy ice and sunk. The ship “John” was lost in that way, and the shoal still known by the name of that vessel was formed by the deposits settling around 1 Penna. Archives, 1st series, vol. x. p. 406, 474 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the sunken hulk. The State government regarded the project with approval and submitted the memo- rial to the port wardens, and on May 18th the latter body made a favorable report, on which the Supreme Executive Council ordered the wardens to enter into contracts with the owners of lands at Marcus Hook, abutting on the river, so that any “ improper. extension” of wharves into the Delaware at that place would be prevented thereafter.1 Drawings of the proposed improvements had also been prepared, for on May 19th Council delivered the plans for the piers at Marcus Hook to the port wardens, with the understanding that they were to be returned “when called for.”? Previous to that date (on May 7, 1785) Thomas Davis submitted a bid for the con- struction of the piers, four in number, in which, for the sum of four thousand one hundred pounds in specie, he agreed to have the piers “so far carried on & made this spring as to be sufficient for receiving & protecting the shipping next winter and the whole work to be completed on or before the first Day of September, 1786.” ° Thomas Davis, however, appears not to have re- ceived the contract, but on the Ist of June, 1785, the owners of Jand on the river at Marcus Hook exe- cuted the following contract, which, as it is an important document, the full text is given :* “ Articles of agreement, made the first day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-five between the Supreme Executive Council of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in behalf of the said Commonwealth, of the one part and sundry persons whose names are hereunto subscribed and seals affixed of the other part: “Wuerezas, The said Supreme Executive Council have contracted and agreed with a certain for sinking and building of sundry piers at Marcus Hook, in the county of Chester, in the State of Pennsylvania, for the accommodation of vessels entering into and going out of the Port of Philadelphia. And “WuEREAS, The said said several persons whose names are hereunto subscribed and seals affixed, are seized of sundry lots or pieces of ground situate on the river Delaware, at Marcus Hook aforesaid, and lying near or between the piers so intended to be sunk as aforesaid: Now, it is hereby agreed by the said Supreme Executive Council in behalf of the said Commonwealth, with the said several persons whose names are here- unto subscribed and seals affixed, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, that they, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, may have and enjoy the liberty and privilege of sinking, building and carrying out from the ends of their respective lots, any piers, wharves or other erections whatever, provided the same be not carried out further than the extent of the wharf or pier now called Moulder’s Pier, lying to the southward of the said lots of ground and of the wharf or pier in- tended to be sunk by William Burns, opposite the wharf or pier called Bunn's Pier, lying to the northward of the said lots of ground. And the said several persons whose names are hereunto subscribed and seals affixed, do hereby, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, several covenant promise, and grant, and agree to and with the said Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, not to build, sink, or carry out any piers, wharfs or other erections whatsoever, from the ends of their respective lots, further than the extent aforesaid, and permit or suffer all persons whatsoever to pass and repass across and along their respective wharves, and to permit and suffer all vessels lying at the pub- lic piers to load and discharge their cargoes without any let, hindrance or molestation by or from them, or any or either of them, or their, or any of or either of their heirs, executors, administrators or assigns. “In witness whereof, the President of the said Supreme Executive 1 Colonial Records, vol. xiv. p. 460. 2 Ib., p. 464. 3 Penna. Archives, 1st Series, vol. x. p. 713. 4 Colonial Records, vol. xiv. p. 474, Council hath set his hand hereunto, and caused the seal of thesaid Com- monwealth to be hereunto affixed, and the said several persons have hereunto subscribed their names and affixed their seals, the day and year first above written. “JosEerH Few. ([L. 8.] “Joun Crawrorp. [L.8.] “Rrcu’p Riney. [1.8.] “Ropr. Movtper. [L. 8.] Joun Dickryson. [1. 8.] Joun Frower. (1. s.] Witt1am Burns. [z.8.J Joun Price. [. 8.] Tuomas Moorz. [t. 8] “Sealed and delivered by John Crawford, Richard Riley, Robert Moulder, John Flower, William Burns, John Price, and Thomas Moore, in presence of ‘“Natn’L Falconer, * Jos. BULLOCK. “Sealed and delivered by Joseph Few, in presence of us. “Gxorce Orb, “Joun HazeLwoop.” On Wednesday, June 8th, two of the port wardens appeared at the session of the Supreme Council, and delivered the foregoing agreement, and submitted several proposals made by Joshua Humphreys and Thomas Conarroe for building the piers at Marcus Hook. On the 15th the contract was awarded to Thomas Conarroe, of the Northern Liberties of Phil- adelphia, wharf-builder, and Council ordered that the wardens of the port should be furnished with a copy of the agreement “ for the building and sinking four piers, etc., etc., at Marcus Hook, on the river Delaware,” with authority to the wardens to make payments as they severally became due.® The man- ner of the work or the price agreed upon, so far as Conarroe was concerned, does not appear, but we learn something from the proposals presented by Joshua Humphreys. The four piers were not four separate and distinct piers, each leading directly to the land, but an inner and an outer pier, forming one landing-place, the sluice-way between Moulder’s wharf and the first pier being forty feet, while be- tween the inner and the outer pier there was a sluice- way of thirty feet, both of these sluices being spanned by heavy sleepers and floored with two-and-a-half- inch oak planks, the pier over all two hundred feet, the outer pier thirty feet wide. The other pier at William Bunn’s wharf was to be in all respects simi- lar to the lower pier (Moulder’s) already described.° Conarroe seems to have prolonged the work at the piers, if the bid of Thomas Davis, already mentioned, is any indication of the time deemed necessary by other contractors for building them. The piers were in an unfinished condition in De cember, 1786, for on the 15th of that month Thomas Moore, of Marcus Hook, wrote to the port wardens that the Spanish frigate ‘ Loretto” was then lying about ten or fifteen feet without the pier, and “her mooring made fast to the Ties of the same (still in an unfinished state),” and, as the ice on the river was unusually heavy, and “forcing itself against the stern of the frigate,” the contractor Conarroe and residents of the place were apprehensive that great injury might be done to the pier.’ The same day the war- 5 Ib, 6 Penna. Archives, 1st Series, vol. x. p. 471. 7Tb.,, vol. xi. p. 99. LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 475 dens called the immediate attention of the Supreme Council to the danger, and the following day John Hazelwood and Nathaniel Falconer, members of the Board of Port Wardens, were dispatched to Marcus Hook, bearing a letter from President Benjamin Franklin to Capt. De Ugarte y Lianes, of the “ Lo- retto.” The gentlemen were instructed by Franklin in writing as to their course of action, which was to deliver the letter, view the situation of the ship and pier. This being done they were directed to offer the Spanish officer their opinion as to the best means to secure her from damage by driving ice, which advice was to be putin writing. If the commander refused to follow their advice, and they deemed his action would be injurious to the pier, that they should apprise him that the matter would be made the subject of ademand on his government for all damages sustained. They were also especially instructed to inquire into the rumors “ of Injuries done by his People to the Inhab- itants,” and if it appeared that the reports were well founded, to request the captain to prevent such in- juries for the future. On Dec. 17, 1786, Hazelwood and Falconer were at Marcus Hook, and by letter in- formed the commander that they had come there to aid and assist him in placing the vessel in a place of safety, ‘as the Winter setting in sooner than com- mon, with a very severe Frost, which filled the Rivers suddenly with Ice, and fearing, as you are Strangers, & unacquainted with the dangerous situation that ships are thrown into by the violence of the Ice in this River, therefore it is our Opinion & Necessary there should be an Anchor & Cable got out from the Bows of the Ship to the Shore, in Order to Support the Post & Fasts that are now out to keep the Ship from going off the Bank, and that we also recom- mend that some of the Guns may be run over, in Order to list the Ship in towards the wharf, and that there be some Spars got ready pointed & drove down, on the Starboard Quarter, Then, we are of Opinion the ship will remain perfectly safe.” That this advice was followed we learn from the Spanish commander’s letter of thanks to President Franklin, which he dates from the “ Frigate N.S. De Loretto, at Anchor in the Delaware, now secured in one of the Moles at Marcus Hook.”} The ship wintered at that place. Two large cannons, said to have been put ashore from this Span- ish vessel of war, remained on the pier at Marcus Hook for at least a third of a century. Conarroe seems to have lost money on the contract, and he petitioned Council to make him whole. On June 21, 1787, the port wardens attended the session of Council, and were instructed to inquire into the loss, if any, sustained by the contractor, growing out of “ difficulties he has met with in the said business,” to report to Council, together with their opinion.? On the 26th the port wardens reported, stating that 1 Penna, Archives, 1st Series, vol. xi. pp. 100-102. 2 Colonial Records, vol, xv. p. 228, two hundred and fifty pounds would be ‘“ but a very moderate compensation for the services rendered by him in erecting and completing the piers at Marcus Hook,” on which report Council ordered the treasurer of the commonwealth to pay Thomas Conarroe that sum.$ In the description of Marcus Hook which appears in an exceedingly rare book, the “ Travellers’ Direc- tory,” published in Philadelphia, 1802, it is stated that the creek of that name is eighteen miles and three-quarters from Philadelphia by the post road, and adds, “at the confluence of this creek with the Delaware is a small town called Marcus Hook, where vessels are defended from the ice in winter by long wharves or piers made for that purpose.” Marcus Hook has ever been a dangerous place for unprotected shipping. As late as Dec. 24, 1842, the brig “ Henrietta,’ owned by John De Costa, of Phila- delphia, was caught in a severe storm and blown ashore a short distance below Marcus Hook. The drifting ice was so heavy that the ship was cut through and sunk in nine feet of water. The wreck was afterwards moved to Naaman’s Creek, but proved a total loss. On Feb. 4, 1871, the ship ‘‘ Research,” bound for Antwerp, with the largest cargo of coal oil ever to that time shipped from Philadelphia, struck on the Hook rocks, a short distance above Marcus Hook, where she sank in twelve feet of water. The cargo was lightered and the vessel raised. The Hunter-Miller Duel.—On Sunday, March 21, 1830, William Miller, Jr., of Philadelphia, a young lawyer of much prominence, was killed in a duel with Midshipman Charles G. Hunter, of the United States navy. The meeting took place a short distance be- low the Delaware State line, near Claymont, and cre- ated much excitement in Delaware County, where for many years afterwards it was a favorite theme for nar- ration in stores and public places where people as- sembled in the evening. Strange as it may seem, the two men who stood facing each other on that Sabbath morning, at the inception of the misunderstanding were not parties to the quarrel which resulted so tragically, but were drawn into it in the endeavor to bring about a settlement of the difficulty. The cir- cumstances connected with the fatal encounter are briefly.these: In Philadelphia, on Friday afternoon, Feb. 17, 1830, Henry Wharton Griffith meeting R. Dillon Drake at the house of a friend, accompanied by several gentle- men, the parties being well acquainted went to a bil- liard-room at Third and Chestnut Streets, where Grif- fith, while playing, was asked by Drake whether he would try a game with him. Griffith was a noted billiard-player, and, as he stated, knowing his superi- ority to Drake in that respect, he merely smiled and made no reply. The latter, apparently enraged at this trifling circumstance, struck Griffith in the face, 8 Ib., p. 283. 476 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. following the assault with several other blows. That evening Griffith sent a message to New York to Mid- shipman Charles H. Duryee, of the United States navy, requesting him to come to Philadelphia, and at the same time addressed a note to Drake apprising him that a friend would wait on him to demand satis- faction for the insult. This letter Drake returned by the bearer. On Tuesday night, the 21st, Midshipman Duryee reached Philadelphia, and the next morning waited on Drake as the friend of Griffith. Drake re- fused to entertain any message, alleging that Griflith’s reputation was not above reproach, and for that rea- son he could not accord to him the satisfaction of a gentleman. Capt. Vorhees, of the navy, when the re- sult of the interview was repeated, wrote a certificate stating that under similar circumstances in his own case, he would not hesitate to meet Griffith. Armed with this certificate Duryee returned to Drake, when the latter referred him to William H. Carmac. Then it was asserted that Griffith in having addressed a letter to a lady to whom Dr. Drake, a brother of R. Dillon Drake, was to be married on the very day the assault took place,—which letter was derogatory of Dr. Drake,—had by that act put himself beyond gen- tlemanly recognition. At the meeting William Mil- ler was introduced by Drake to Duryee. Pending these proceedings eight days had elapsed. On February 26th, Duryee, who declared that he would post Drake as a coward, was challenged by the latter, William Miller being the bearer of this note. The next day Lieut. Hampton Westcott, United States navy, on behalf of Duryee, replied that the latter could not accept the challenge until Drake had given Griffith satisfaction. To this Drake stated that he must decline “the degradation of placing him- self on a level with that degraded individual.” The matter did not rest here, for on March 7th several gentlemen of New Brunswick, N. J., friends of Duryee, whom it appears in now accepting the chal- lenge was placed in questionable position among his brother-officers, wrote to William Miller, asking that the whole matter be referred to a committee appointed by both sides; to which proposition Mil- ler (on the 9th) replied that both Drake and he looked upon the difficulty as finally and satisfactorily settled. 7 On March 10th, Midshipman Charles G. Hunter, then barely twenty-one years of age, came to Phila- delphia as Duryee’s friend, and wrote to Miller de- manding the immediate delivery of the letter written from New Brunswick, giving the latter one hour to reply. The result was an interview between Hunter and Miller, at which Hunter stated Miller had de- stroyed a letter which, he said, was the one in con- troversy. A few days after this interview the New Brunswick letter was printed. Hunter thereupon announced that Miller’s base and ungentlemanly conduct in suffering a letter to be published after he declared it had been destroyed was such that he demanded immediate satisfaction, and on March 17th dispatched Lieut. Westcott with a cartel to Miller. The latterin writing denied being in any wise connected with the publication, and being entirely ignorant of it, declined to receive the chal- lenge from Hunter. During the interview, R. Dillon Drake entered the office and handed to Miller a man- uscript copy of the New Brunswick letter, stating that it had been in the possession of his brother, Dr. Drake. Miller, turning to Westcott, said, “ You see, sir, that I fulfill my promise to Mr. Hunter, and will destroy the copy in your presence.” “Ido not care about seeing it destroyed,” replied Westcott, ‘as there are printed copies of it in circulation.” On Saturday, March 20, Hunter posted Miller, and concluding the document by stating that he held Miller in the utmost contempt as a coward, and knew him to be guilty of base falsehood, “ yet I am, and always will be, ready to meet him whenever he may think proper to accept.” Previous to this pub- lication, on March 17th, Midshipman Duryee sent Hunter to Drake, accepting his challenge of February 26th, but Drake declined the meeting at that late day. After Hunter’s statement was posted, Lieut. Edward Byrne, as the friend of Miller, waited on Hunter with a written acceptance of his challenge, and was re- ferred to Westcott, who would arrange with him for the meeting. It was agreed that the duel should take place the next morning at the nearest boundary of the State of Delaware, and that besides the seconds on both sides one gentleman should be present. For some reason it was not until noon of the next day— Sunday—that the combatants left Philadelphia in separate carriages for Chester. One party, consist- ing of Miller, Byrne, Craig, and a surgeon, left the dwelling on Chestnut Street which formerly occupied the site of the present German Democrat building, while the other, consisting of Hunter, Westcott, Dur- yee, and another gentleman, left the United States Hotel, which stood on the north side of Chestnut Street, opposite the custom-house. At Chester the suspicions of the residents of that quiet village were aroused, for it was rightly conjectured that a duel was the object of this Sabbath journey, and the people in the ancient borough were greatly excited over the mysterious silence preserved by the party as to their destination. When Naaman’s Creek was crossed arrangements were immediately made for the inter- change of shots. It was subsequently alleged by Hunter’s friends that, after the first fire, if Miller should act as a brave man, Hunter had determined to withdraw the charge of cowardice, and upon Mr. Miller’s friend declaring on his honor that he be- lieved Miller innocent of the publication of the letter, the parties should be reconciled. The paces being measured off, and each end of that distance marked with a stone, the preliminaries were gone through with and the men stationed. Nota word passed on LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. ATT the grounds between the principals in the duel, and so far as remembered all that either said was the as- senting answer to the question, “‘ Gentlemen, are you ready?’ At the word both fired in accordance with the agreement, so nearly together that the separate reports of the pistols could hardly be distinguished. Instantly Miller wheeled, and, uttering an exclama- tion, fell to the earth. Hunter, advancing towards the fallen man, said in a loud voice, ‘“ Gentlemen, I assure you that I had no enmity against that man; his blood must rest upon the heads of others who have dragged him into their quarrels.” Miller died almost immediately, the bullet having perforated his lungs. As soon as the fatal result of the encounter was ascertained, the gentlemen who had accompanied the dead man to the field urged Hunter, Westcott, and Duryee to leave the State before the determina- tion of the duel could be known, and acting on that advice they hired conveyances, were driven to New Castle, where they boarded an out-bound vessel and finally reached New York. The dead man was placed in a sitting posture on the back seat of one of the carriages, a cap, fashion- able at that time, drawn down over his forehead so as to shade his eyes to prevent them being seen by any one glancing into the vehicle. To hold the body up- right one of the men sat by its side and two on the front seat, and they managed to preserve the semblance of life (in what was really a corpse) to a casual ob- server passing by. This carriage started on the jour- ney to Philadelphia, the second being occupied by the surgeon and the gentleman who accompanied Hunter, and had not: fled to New Castle. In the mean while several young men of the neighborhood of Chester who had been riding in the vicinity of Clay- mont learned that a duel had taken place, and as they preceded the carriages, the fact became known abroad, and it was determined, if possible, to arrest the principals at the bridge over Chester Creek. A number of the citizens of Chester assembled there for that purpose. By this time night’s shadows had set- tled down, and as the first carriage came in sight of the bridge, the driver, noticing that a body of men seemed gathering there, and knowing his coach bore an unusual passenger, whipped his horses almost to a run, crossed the bridge in a gallop, and passed on un- molested. The second carriage, however, came along at an easy trot, and was without difficulty brought to a full stop, when it was found that only the surgeon and a looker-on had been detained. Shortly after they were permitted to resume their journey to Phila- delphia. The first carriage, after it had dashed through the village, continued on the way to its destination, and it was about nine o’clock that night when it halted with its ghastly passenger at the house on Chestnut Street from which that noonday it had taken away the dead—then aliving man. Rumor relates how all that night the men kept the corpse in a room, while those present drank deeply, due largely to the extreme excitement under which they labored. The next day the father of the dead man was informed of his son’s fate, and shortly after six o’clock the following morn- ing the remains were interred without waiting for the form of a coroner’s inquest. The duel caused the utmost excitement throughout the country, and on Saturday following, March 27th, Mr. Moore, of Beaver County, in the House of Repre- sentatives, at Harrisburg, offered a resolution that the President of the United States be respectfully re- quested to strike the said Lieut. Charles G. Hunter from the roll of the navy, and also requesting the Governor of Pennsylvania to forward a copy of the resolution to the President. On Monday, the 29th, the resolution was adopted and forwarded immedi- ately. On the following day the Secretary of the Navy wrote to the President: “Navy DEPARTMENT, “ March 30, 1830, “Sir: It has been proved to my satisfaction that Lieuts. Edward Byrne and Hampton Westcott, Passed Midshipman Charles H. Duryee, and Midshipman Charles G. Hunter, of the navy of the United States, were recently concerned in a duel which took place between the last- named officer and William Miller, Jr., of Philadelphia, which resulted fatally to the latter. I respectfully recommend to you that the names of the said officers, Kdward Byrne, Hampton Westcott, Charles H. Duryee, and Charles G. Hunter, be erased from the list of officers of the navy of the United States. “T am very respectfully, “Joun Brancn.” On the back of the letter the Executive indorsed : “ Let the above-named officers of the navy be stricken from the roll. “ANDREW JACKSON. “31st March, 1830.” Shortly after this was done a number of influential persons declared that the proceeding was arbitrary, that the men had been dismissed without a hearing, and petitions were circulated for signatures, asking that they might be reinstated and an inquiry could be had as to the circumstances attending the duel. William Miller, Sr., the father of the slain man, per- sonally petitioned the President that Hunter might be reinstated; that he did not regard him as guilty of his son’s death, but that his life had been sacrificed to the absurd code of honor which then maintained in the naval service of the government. Hunter was re- instated, and during the Mexican war was court-mar- tialed and dismissed from the squadron because he had captured the town of Alvarado and the Mexican forts in that vicinity without having been ordered by the commodore to do so. Ever after he was known as Alvarado Hunter. The writer can recall Hunter just previous to his death in St. Joseph’s Hospital, New York, when poor, dissipated, and broken in health, it was a gleam of sunlight on his darkened life journey when those who knew him in better times nodded their recognitions or shook his trembling band. His life had been em- 478 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. bittered and full of troubles, all dating from that quiet Sunday, near the Delaware, when a man he had never met but twice in his life lay dead before the unerring aim of the best pistol-shot in the American navy. James Gordon Bennett, Sr., at his own cost, placed a tombstone over the grave of an accomplished, brave gentleman, who had dare to capture an enemy’s town and fortress without orders, and was suspended be- cause he was victorious. The Webb and Marshall Duel.—Forty years ago Thomas F. Marshall was one of the most conspicuous men in public life. As an orator he was the foremost Kentuckian of any period, and ranked superior to Clay, Crittenden, Barry, Pope, Rowan, Bledsve, Mene- fee, the Breckinridges, and the galaxy of brilliant men who carried the name of their State to the front in the spoken literature of the nation. So potential was his eloquence that in 1841, when he offered him- self a candidate for Congress from the Ashland dis- trict, no antagonist could be found to contest with him on the hustings the issues of the hour, and with- out opposition he was elected a member of the Twenty-seventh Congress. On the floor of the House he was an earnest advocate of the repeal of the bank- ruptcy bill of 1841, while Col. James Watson Webb, editor of the Courier and Enquirer, a daily paper of large influence, published in New York City, was as earnestly enlisted on the other side, and took occasion in his editorials to criticise severely those opposed to his views. Marshall’s prominence in advocacy of the measure made him a distinguished figure, and the shafts of Col. Webb’s sarcasm and vituperation were frequently directed at the tall Kentuckian, so espe- cially that their purpose was not to be misunderstood. Early in 1842, Col. Monroe Edwards had been ar- rested in Philadelphia, charged with forging drafts amounting to sixty thousand dollars on Brown Brothers, the bankers, and other well-known business men of New York. He was taken into custody on a requisition from the Governor of New York. The trial ranks as one of the American causes célebres. The colonel had played no trivial part in the pomp and fashion of the day; he was a man of conspicuous presence, of fine address, and a cultivated conversa- tionalist, who had mingled familiarly, abroad and in the United States, in the best society. The case at- tracted additional attention because of the magnifi- cent array of counsel employed. The defense was represented by Hon. John J. Crittenden, of Ken- tucky; Hon. Thomas F. Marshall, of the same State; Messrs. William M. Evarts, J. Prescott Hall, and Robert Emmett, of New York. The commonwealth was represented by Hon. James R. Whiting, district | attorney (familiarly known as “ Little Bitters,” be- cause of his sarcasm), assisted by Hon. Ogden Hoff- man, United States district attorney for the Eastern District of New York, then the most brilliant forensic orator of the United States, whose address in behalf of Richard P. Robinson, when tried for the murder of Helen Jewett, has ever been regarded as a masterpiece of legal advocacy. The trial began on the 7th of June, 1842, before Judge William Kent, and the Courier and Enquirer of that date published editorially the following para- graph: “We learn from the Tribune that the Hon. T. F. Marshall, after wan- dering about the country for some thirty days lecturing on temperance and giving his experience as a devotee of the bottle, has returned to this city to defend the notorious Monroe Edwards. When he gets back to Washington he will have been absent about forty days, for which he will doubtless draw from the treasury, with the sanction of his brother members, three hundred and twenty dollars! Now, while the editor of the Tribune was advocating the reduction of the army and navy, why did he not gently hint to Congress the necessity of reducing their own pay, and of not paying themselves anything from the public purse while making mountebanks of themselves or devoting their time to advo- cating the cause of notorious swindlers.” Mr. Marshall, when he came to make his address to the jury at the close of the evidence, alluded to this attack on him, and said,— “ Now, I would venture to assert that under all the circumstances of the case, so far as the public are acquainted with them, that the parallel of that paragraph cannot be found in the whole history of the press of this country. .. . But to the attack itself, gentlemen, let me explain the nature and cause of it. It is, let me tell you, a mere personal mat- ter. It is intended for me alone, and for the sole gratification of wreak- ing private revenge in certainly the most dignified manner and under the most humanecircumstances. In sbort,I did not believe that hnman revenge on one individual could be conceived in so lofty, so exalted a manner; but I do believe that I was alone the motive, the sole victim sought. But so elevated were the feelings of this writer, so iutent was he of gratifying his revenge on me, that he entirely forgot the cruel and unmanly manner in which he was wreaking it upon the unfortu- nate prisoner, who had never done him the slightest injury or ill-will, I regret exceedingly that this thing is so, and I regret that it occurred, and that this explanation is necessary. I feel the awkwardness of it, and I am aware if the counsel on the opposite side choose to make an un- generous use of it, it may be made a subject of attack on me. But I felt compelled to make this statement, and it has happened to be my misfortune, my most unpleasant situation, to have had to notice this same disreputable source of attack twice recently, and both times in discharge of my public duties, and I will explain to you the circum- stances that drew forth this noble mode of revenge, the precious morsel against myself. Last winter this same writer made a charge against Congress—I state the substance of the charge—that a quantity of British coin had been brought to this country for the purpuse of bribing the members of Congress, of which I was one, and that they had been bought to the tune of one hundred thousand dollars apiece! I, in my place in Congress, instantly repelled the charge, and in very niild language for so gross an attack. This brought » letter from the writer of the article asking me to retract what I said. Well,I reviewed the ground, and I didn’t retract it, and haven’t retracted it, and I never would retract it on the face of the earth till I die! This brought a second letter, but no retraction followed, and there stuck the correspondence and here is the revenge. Well, I don’t know that I am exactly the thing represented in this corrupt paper, but I believe that I can lay some claim to the character of a gentleman, that Iam a tulerably good judge of what pertains to the character of a gen- tleman,—at least as well as the man who wrote that article, and who pretends to bea gentleman. But I will simply remark that in Congress, at the bar, before the people, in all these various characters,—all of which I consider are merged in the character of a gentleman,—that I stand ready at any time and at all times for whatever I am responsible, and for anything that may have occurred in this so perfectly filthy 4 quarrel, Under any circumstances, I pledge my honor that I shall plead no privilege that pertains to my position as a member of Congress, and I do hope that such gentlemen as have any personal revenge to gratify against me will seek some other mode and place, if they can, and not by means of the public prints gratify their malice against me by attacking my client,—such time and place as gentlemen can seek, and they will always find me ready to meet them.” LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 479 Although Marshall had thus publicly intimated that he not only expected, but would accept, a chal- lenge from Col. Webb, no such message came. The conviction of Monroe Edwards, and the remarks the prisoner made to the court, complaining that he had been hounded by the press, doubtless deepened the impression on the mind of Marshall that he had been most grossly insulted and ill-used. He, therefore, at the termination of the trial, addressed a note to Col. Webb, demanding satisfaction, and gave it to Lieut. Duke to present to the colonel. When the epistle was delivered to the latter, he, through Mr. Charles Livingstone, informed Lieut. Duke that in the city of New York Col. Webb could not receive such a mes- sage, but that he would be in Wilmington, Del., with his friend, Maj. Morell, on Friday, the 24th day of June, at two o’clock in the afternoon, and he would then receive any communication Mr. Marshall might desire to send him. At the time designated the parties met at Wilming- ton, I believe at the Indian Queen Hotel, on Market Street. In this, however, I may be in error. Here the challenge was again proffered by Marshall, and was accepted by Webb, who, it was understood, went there to be challenged. Marshall was accompanied by Dr. Carr, of Baltimore, in the capacity of second, and Dr. Gibson, of the same city, a son of Professor Gibson, of Philadelphia, as surgeon, Mr. Hunt, of Kentucky, and his (Marshall’s) brother being present as friends. Col. Webb was attended by Maj. Morell, proprietor of the New York Courier, as second, Dr. Tucker, formerly of Virginia, then of Philadelphia, as surgeon. Josiah Randall, Esq., father of ex-Speaker Samuel J. Randall, of Philadelphia, and George Bryer, Esq., were present as his friends. After the prelim- inaries were arranged, and articles written providing for the manner in which the duel was to be con- ducted, both the principals, accompanied by their friends, left Wilmington, intending that the encounter should take place the same evening. The presence of Marshall and Webb in that city quickly became known, and as the intelligence of the bitter blood be- tween the gentlemen had preceded them, the purpose of their visit was surmised, and the authorities were immediately on the alert. The duelists drove in their carriages to Marcus Hook, or rather the present Linwood, but as a number of persons, said to have been nearly one hundred, were following them, they stopped at the Union Hotel, at Hook Cross-roads, then kept by William Appleby. Here Col. Webb (for the purpose of quieting the suspicions of the authorities of Delaware County, for he learned that Hon. John Larkin, Jr., then sheriff, was in the neighborhood, and would use every means at his disposal to prevent the proposed breach of the public peace) left his carriage, went to Marcus Hook, embarked in a boat, and was rowed across the river to the Jersey shore. The impression then became general that Marshall would shortly follow Webb, and that the duel would be fought in New Jersey during the following day. The crowd that had gathered stood on the pier watching the movements of the boat, which was rowed slowly along the opposite shore, without indi- cating any disposition on the part of the inmates to disembark on that side of the river. Several persons followed the course of the boat by the use of tele- scopes, until evening coming on, darkness screened the movements of the little craft from further obser- vation. Then the assembled crowd reluctantly dis- persed. Col. Webb, taking advantage of the darkness, lingered on the river in the boat until late at night, when he returned quietly to Appleby’s, about eleven o’clock, and passed the remainder of the night in his carriage. Marshall and his friends were comfortably housed in the Union Hotel. An hour before day- break all the parties interested in the due] assembled, and a few minutes before four o’clock the carriages, closely following each other, left the hotel and started for the place designated for the encounter to take place,—an open field on Samuel T. Walker’s farm, a few yards to the south of the King’s Highway, and just within the Delaware State line. Two gentlemen from Philadelphia, who had not been invited, were present, as well as between thirty and forty persons who resided in the neighborhood. When the seconds had measured the ground—ten paces—they marked the extremities of the line with stones, one at each end, where the principals were to be stationed. By this time it was daybreak. Maj. Morell tossed a coin to determine the choice of posi- tions, and the silver fell in the grass, a fact which gave.rise to some controversy between Dr. Carr and Maj. Morell, the seconds, as to which of the parties had won, both gentlemen resolutely declining to yield. Marshall hearing the dispute, cried in an impatient tone of voice to Dr. Carr,— “Give it to them, doctor, give it to them. I came here to have a shot at him, and I do not mean to be baffled by trifles.” “We ask you to give nothing,” proudly and angrily replied Maj. Morell. “We ask but what is our right.” Marshall’s second, however, having yielded the point as instructed by his principal, he, Dr. Carr, tossed a coin to determine whose second should give the word. In this fortune again favored Col. Webb. The principals took their places when told to do so with alacrity, and with the utmost coolness. Neither had attired himself in apparel best calculated to fight a duel in with the Jeast danger to the wearer. Marshall’s tall form, six feet two inches in height, erect, symmetrical, and lithe, was clad in a blue cloak, dark coat and pantaloons, and a light vest. Col. Webb, above the average height in stature, was dressed in a dark coat, vest, and light-brown pair of pantaloons. Each of these two men, as they stood at 480 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. the places assigned them, placed his left foot against the stone, before mentioned, so as to stand firmly, the right leg advanced slightly towards his antagonist, the weight of the body being supported mainly by the left leg. The pistols—ordinary dueling-pistols— having been loaded, Dr. Carr, Marshall’s second, then desired that the articles of agreement which were to govern the encounter should be read by Maj. Morell. One of the clauses stipulated that the friends of the duelists on the ground should be searched. Col. Webb’s second and friends insisted that under the terms of the agreement Marshall should himself be searched. Thereupon Dr. Carr walked over to where Col. Webb stood, and received from him his watch, which was worn on the left side of his vest, in a fob- pocket, with a slight gold chain extending across the right breast. Col. Webb, as he took these trinkets from his person, did not move from the position in which he had been placed by his friends. Maj. Morell remained standing at the place when he had read the agreement, and Marshall, noticing this, approached him, and requested the major to search him. This the latter persistingly declined to do, whereupon Marshall produced a small pocket-comb and several other trifling articles, stating that they were all he had in his pockets. He then returned to his place. Maj. Morell, in a clear, distinct voice, inquired, “Gentlemen, are you ready ?” ““T am,” responded Col. Webb. “No, Iam not,” replied Mr. Marshall. And for a moment he paused, while every person gazed earnestly and wonderingly at him. He looked fixedly and searchingly at Col. Webb for a minute or two, then unfastening his cloak, and slowly lifting his hat from his head, he tossed both articles of apparel from him without having apparently altered his position in the least. “Now, sir,” he said, “I am ready.” During this peculiar proceeding on the part of his antagonist Col. Webb preserved the utmost coolness and self-possession. Maj. Morell glanced hastily at the combatants, and then in full, audible tones exclaimed, ‘ Fire! One— two—three !”” Just before the word “one” the pistols were dis- charged, and so simultaneous were the reports that for a moment it was believed that Col. Webb had not fired his weapon at all. The ball from his pistol, however, had fallen in a direct line, and entered the ground almost at the feet of Marshall, while the lat- ter’s ball struck the earth ten feet in front, and about three feet to the right of where Col. Webb stood. Marshall then raising his pistol in the air above his head, cried, ‘‘ Another shot.” A parley was thereupon had between the seconds, who consulted with their principals, and it was deter- mined that another fire should be exchanged. The pistols were accordingly loaded once more and placed in the hands of the two men who stood facing each other, without having changed position from that in which the first fire had been had. Again the word was given, and again the pistols were discharged. At the word “Fire!” both men brought their weapons to a level, and before the word “two” was spoken, as at the first discharge, the reports mingled together. The ball from Col. Webb’s pistol passed in close proximity to the person of Marshall, but he escaped without a scratch. Col. Webb for a moment after the firing kept his position, apparently unhurt, then he faltered.on the left foot. Maj. Morell, his second, believing that his principal was unharmed, was looking in the direction of Marshall, when Dr. Carr suddenly exclaimed,— “Sir, your friend is falling. Why don’t you catch him?” Dr. Carr, as soon as he noticed that Col. Webb was staggering, had called thus to Maj. Morell, but with- out waiting for a response he sprang towards and caught Col. Webb in his arms and gently laid him on the grass, supporting his shoulders. Dr. Tucker, the wounded man’s surgeon, came forward and examined the injury. The ball had entered the left leg just below the knee, on the back part of the inside, and had passed out on the outside of the leg. After the wound had been examined Dr. Carr returned to Marshall, when the latter inquired where Col. Webb had been hit. The doctor stated that he was wounded below the knee. “What!” exclaimed Marshall, “hit in the knee! It is the damnedest lowest act of my life! We must exchange another shot. That man has injured me more than any other being on earth. If he cah stand I expect and demand that we shall exchange another fire.” Dr. Carr immediately walked over to Maj. Morell and told him that Marshall desired a third shot. The major quickly responded that it would depend upon Col. Webb’s condition, and Dr. Tucker would decide as to that. The wound by this time was bleeding profusely. Maj. Morell, addressing himself to Dr. Tucker, said,— “Dr. Carr informs me that Mr. Marshall insists on a third shot if Col. Webb can possibly stand. The demand strikes me as unwarrantable, as Col. Webb’s wound, it seems to me, will put him at most serious disadvantage; but I desire that you, doctor, shall decide this matter.” Quite a number of the bystanders by this time had gathered around the seconds, and listened anxiously to the conversation. “Col. Webb’s wound might, of course, have been more dangerous,” replied Dr. Tucker. ‘As it is, it may be serious, for my examination has not yet been sufficiently thorough to determine whether any of the nerves or muscles have been permanently injured. It fortunately now appears to be only a flesh wound. Under any circumstances, however, it is impossible LOWER CHICHESTER TOWNSHIP. 481 for Col. Webb to continue the matter at present. I will not listen to it, sir.”’ Marshall’s brother, who had withdrawn some dis- tance from the ground where the duelists stood dur- ing the firing, now joined the group, and said, with much warmth of manner,— “It is absurd to talk about another shot. This matter has already gone far enough. Tom has no right to ask it of Col. Webb, but he should rather thank God that things are not more serious than they are.” The bystanders now joined in and declared that they would not permit the duel to be continued ; that both the gentlemen ought to be satisfied, at least for the time being. Col. Webb, who was lying on the ground, supported in the arms of Maj. Morell (who, after he had told Dr. Tucker the import of Marshall’s demand, had returned to the side of his principal), inquired what was the subject-matter of discussion. Maj. Morell stated that Marshall was not satisfied, and had demanded another exchange of shots. “T have entertained no unkind feelings towards Mr. Marshall at any time,” replied Webb; ‘nor do I now feel unkindly towards him. I do not know why he should bear such uncompromising malice against me.” When it was announced to Marshall that the second and surgeon of Col. Webb, and even the bystanders, would not consent to the continuation of the duel at the present time, he shrugged his shoulders, remark- Ing,— “We've no further business here; we may as well return to the hotel.” And almost immediately Mar- shall and his friends left the grounds, both parties ap- parently entertaining the same hated feeling towards each other as when they met. In a few moments after Marshall left, Col. Webb was assisted to his feet by his friends, and partly lifted over the fence and placed in his carriage, which drove off to Appleby’s. Marshall and his party went to Marcus Hook, in- tending to get aboard the steamboat, but finding that they could not do so, they returned to the Union Hotel for breakfast. Marshall meeting Mr. Randall on the porch, inquired how Webb was, trusted that his wound would not be a serious one, and expressed re- grets that he had insisted upon the third shot. His excitement and anger, seemingly, had entirely abated. Marshall and his party, later in the day, went directly to Baltimore and Washington. At the Union Hotel, Col. Webb had his wound dressed anew, and while the surgeon was probing he is said to have watched the movements of the doctor with interest, but without exhibiting the least fear or indicating in anywise that he was suffering pain. At an early hour Col. Webb’s party drove to Philadel- phia, reaching that city at half-past nine o’clock in the forenoon, and stopped at the United States Hotel, where the wound was again examined, and some ap- prehension expressed that it might be necessary to 31 amputate the leg. This anticipation was not realized. Col. Webb in a few days became much better, and his flow of spirits never deserted him. On one occasion when a friend asked him if he was not tired of being confined to his bed, he, with a good-natured Jaugh. replied, ‘I can’t help it; I am under Marshall law.” On the return of Col. Webb and Maj. Morell to New York, they were arrested for violating the statutes of that commonwealth, which made it penal to leave the State to accept, fight, or be anywise con- nected with a duel. The grand jury found a true bill against Webb; he was tried, and the jury rendered a verdict of guilty. The case excited general public attention, and Webb was for a season one of the noted sensations. His friends brought enormous pressure on Hon. Silas Wright, then Governor, who made him the object of executive clemency. On June 9, 1845, Washington Keith and Morris Meredith, both of Philadelphia, fought a duel on the old field,—where, it was said, the stones marking the spaces where Hunter and Miller stood remained un- disturbed, and every spring were whitewashed to make them conspicuous. By a stupid blunder of the seconds, at the word only one of the principals (Keith) fired, his ball lodging in Meredith’s thigh. The wounded man, too badly injured to return the fire of the man who had shot without being shot at, was brought to Chester, where Dr. McClellan, who had attended as one of the surgeons, extracted the ball, and after many weeks the wound healed kindly. There was, however, no further effort made to give Meredith a chance to rectify the error. He had es- caped with his life, and honor’s demands had been fully met. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. WILLIAM TRAINER. David Trainer, the grandfather of William, emi- grated from Ireland when nine years of age, and entering the service of George Hinkson, of Nether Providence, Delaware Co., remained until he attained his majority. He married Martha, daughter of Bethel Robert Booth, to whom were born children,— Jane, Lydia, Mary, Martha, Margaret, Prudence, and David. He married, a second time, Margaret Morton, whose children were Daniel, Edith, George, and James. Mr. Trainer for a while cultivated a farm, after which he engaged extensively in the quarrying of stone, in Ridley township, in connection with his former occupation. His son, David, was born Feb. 19, 1777, in Darby township, and during his active life was both a farmer and a miller. He was an in- fluential citizen, public-spirited and progressive, in politics a pronounced Federalist, and for one or more terms commissioner of the county. He married Mrs. Sarah Newlan, of Lower Chichester township, whose 482 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. birth occurred March 27,1771. Their children were Sarah (Mrs. James H. Walker), William, Josiah, Mary (wife of Capt. Frank Smith), and David. Mr. Trainer died Feb. 29, 1846, in his seventieth year, and his wife, July 29, 1849, in her seventy-ninth year. Their son, William, the subject of this sketch, was born Dec. 10, 1806, in Lower Chichester township, where his life has been spent. After such advantages of education as were obtainable in the neighborhood were enjoyed, he became for six months a pupil of Benjamin Tucker, a celebrated Quaker instructor resident in Philadelphia. Returning to his home, the labor of the farm engaged his attention until twenty-one years of age, after which a year was spent in travel in the West. Another year was employed as superintendent of the work connected with the Delaware breakwater, after which he embarked in the business of store-keeping at Marcus Hook, and in 1838 resumed the labors of a farmer. He was married, in 1832, to Miss Mary P., daughter of Israel Heacock, of Darby township, whose children are Emma (wife of Joseph McElrey), Henry Clay, David E., and William,—all] married and residing in Phila- delphia. The death of Mrs. Trainer occurred, after a most useful and exemplary life, on the 12th of Sep- tember, 1883. Mr. Trainer, after his marriage, in- herited the farm which is his present home, and con- tinued its cultivation until 1883, when he abandoned active labor. In politics he was early a Federalist, after which be became an earnest supporter of the Whig principles of which Henry Clay was the able exponent, and now votes the Republican ticket. He was formerly active in local politics, and for many years director of the poor of the county. Under his super- vision the old almshouse property at Media was sold, and land purchased at advantageous figures in Mid-. dletown township, on which the present spacious buildings are located. Mr. Trainer was educated in the Quaker faith, but, with his wife, in 1837 became a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Mar- cus Hook, though at present one of the congregation of the Methodist Episcopal Church of that place. CHAPTER XXXIX. CONCORD TOWNSHIP. ConcorD TownsHIP, the largest municipal division in the county of Delaware, is first mentioned at the | court “held at Chester, for the County of Chester, on the 27th of the 4th month, called june, 1683,” at which session John Mendenhall was appointed con- stable for ‘‘ Concord liberty.” The name it bears is believed to have been bestowed because of the harmo- nious feelings which in early times prevailed among the settlers there. The township was laid out origi- nally in a rectangular form, and a road exactly in the centre (called Concord Street) ran from Bethel, on the south, to Thornbury, on the north, dividing it in halves. This street, laid out in 1682, appears never to have been opened to public travel. The south- western end of Concord, which intrudes into Birming- ham, rendering the boundary-lines of that township the most irregular in the county, resulted from the fact that the lines of the manor of Rockland, in New Castle County, ran along the western boundary of Concord, and, after the division of Pennsylvania and Delaware, the Rockland manor lands were patented to settlers who, doubtless, selected and were annexed to the township in which they wished their lands located. This idea is inferentially established by the fact that no land, either in Concord or Birmingham townships, within the manor was patented previous to 1701, in which year Penn authorized the division be- tween Pennsylvania and the three lower counties— the present State of Delaware—to be made. That part of the Rockland manor which is now in Concord was patented by four persons. George Lee, Dec. 28, 1701, had surveyed to him two hundred acres border- ing on Bethel to the Concord line. Nathaniel Newlin received two patents, June 2, 1702, for six hundred acres,—one of two hundred and the other of four hundred acres,—beginning at the eastern boundary of the original township and extending to the present western line of Concord. His patents were located on the n6rth of Lee’s tract, and included almost all the lands between parallel lines, except one hundred and thirty and a half acres, which were surveyed to Francis Chads, April 9, 1702. This tract began a short distance west of Elam, and ran eastward to the original township-line. The irregular piece of land, which juts to a point almost northwest into Birming- ham, was patented to John Chevers, as two hundred acres, Oct. 28, 1708. Early in the history of the township the savages, whose custom was to roam undisturbed wheresoever they pleased, hunting for game and killing the swine, became an annoyance to the settlers in the “ back woods” of Concord. This disposition on the part of the red men created much trouble, and soon became so detrimental to the residents that on Nov. 16, 1685, they presented a petition to the Provincial Council respecting it, which is of record as follows: “The Complaint of ye friends, Inhabitants of Concord and Hertford” (Haverford),—widely separated townships“ against the Indians, for y¢ Rapine and Destructions of their hoggs, was Read. “Ordered that ye Respective Indian Kings be sent for to y¢ Council with all speed, to Answer their Complaint. “The Inhabitants of the Welsh Tract Complains of the same, by an Endorsement on y* aforementioned Complaint.’"1 What ultimately resulted from this action of the Concord settlers does not appear of record, nor has tradition preserved anything respecting it. At the southwestern end of the original township of Concord was a tract of three hundred acres, which 1 Colonial Records, vol. i. p. 162. Zu SNA 22 3 20 ‘MILLA "hH WRYYA "1CO Hh a MUNA WOMGCD y, VN i Hil NH JOUPO,) JO UoTe & *panoiSo010j OU} UL TOL ‘Oo i NU HA CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 483 was surveyed to William Beazer March 29, 1688, and which shortly afterwards passed into the ownership of William Cloud, who, although an aged man, accom- panied by his family, came to the colony among the earliest settlers and moved “into the woods” at Con- cord. He was a native of Calne, county of Wilt- shire, and from him the Cloud family of Delaware County claim descent. Just above his tract John Beal, who had married Mary Cloud, took up two hundred acres on rent in 1683, but he subsequently removed. Nearly midway of the township, extend- ing from the western limits of Concord as originally surveyed to Concord Street, which ran north and south, dividing the district into halves, was a tract of five hundred acres, which was surveyed Oct. 12, 1683, to John Haselgrove. This estate, after passing through several owners, none of whom were residents, in 1710 was acquired by Henry Peirce, who settled on this land and was taxed therefor in 1715. Above Con- cordville, John Lee, on Dec. 3, 1701, received a patent for one hundred and fifty-two acres. He was a wool- comber by trade, and came from Wiltshire, England, in 1700, and settled in Concord. He lived until 1726, and was a noted public Friend in the early days of the province. Above Lee’s tract John Mendenhall pur- chased three hundred acres of land, which was pat- ented to him June 27, 1684, On this property Con- cord Friends’ meeting-house was located, the land being given by Mendenhall for that purpose. He is believed to have come from Mildenhall, county of Sussex, England, and was one of the original pro- jectors and owners of the Concord Mills. Above the Mendenhall tract William Byers had two hundred acres surveyed to him Jan. 17, 1683/4, which, in 1698, passed into the ownership of Nicholas Pyle. He settled in Concord, in 1686, at which time he may have already occupied the estate. In the company’s mills he took an active part as one of the owners. He was a member of Assembly, serving as such for six years, and was an active, enterprising man, whose energy did much to tame and subdue the wilderness. In 1701 he purchased the western half of the five hundred acres taken up by William Hitchcock, which extended from the east to the west boundary across the township, for on that part of the estate bought by him the Society Mills were located. The tract of two hundred and fifty acres lying above Pyle’s land was surveyed to Philip Roman, February, 1682/3, but it is not probable that he ever resided thereon. On the eastern side of Concord Street, extending from that road to the eastern line of the township, and immediately south of Thornbury, John Harding, at the same date as Roman, acquired title to two hundred and fifty-five acres of land, but he, as with Roman, never resided on the property. Just south of this tract was the William Hitchcock land, already men- tioned, which was subsequently purchased by Benja- min Mendenhall, who resided thereon in 1715, and probably followed his occupation of wheelwright. In 1714 he was a member of the Assembly, and, retain- ing the good opinion of the public, he lived to an ad- vanced age, dying in 1740. Below this tract Nicholas Newlin, on Sept. 24, 1683, received five hundred acres. He was reputed as very wealthy, a nobleman by de- scent, being one of the De Newlandes, who had come over with the Conqueror. Although of English fam- ily, he emigrated, with his wife and children, from County Tyrone, Ireland. He was appointed a mem- ber of the Provincial Council and a justice of the courts. His son, Nicholas, was about twenty-four years old when he accompanied his father to Pennsylvania, a man of education and means. In 1698 he was a member of Assembly, and served as such at several different periods. He was also appointed one of the proprietaries’ commissioners of property, and a justice of the courts. In 1722 he was one of the trustees of the loan-office, a position he continued to fill until his death. On the Newlin lands, Codnor farm, owned by Col. Frank M. Etting, the author, is located. Below the present Markham Station, on the Balti- more Central Railroad, was a tract of two hundred acres, patented to Thomas King, July 22, 1684, and thereon he resided until his death, in 1706. On the south of King’s land was one hundred acres surveyed to Thomas Moore in 1684, while immediately below him were two hundred acres, patented July 15, 1684, to Nathaniel Park. Jeremiah Collett on March 1, 1682/3, took up two hundred acres on tract immedi- ately south of Park’s plantation. On March 1, 1686, this property passed to John Hannum, who gave the ground at the northwest corner of the tract on which St. John’s Church was built. He was the grandfather of Col. John Hannum, of the Revolution, who was the controlling mind which caused the removal of the county-seat to West Chester, an act which eventually resulted in the erection of Delaware County. Col. Hannum, it is said, was born on this plantation. South of the Hannum property were three hundred acres, Which on July 12, 13, 1682, were surveyed to George Strode, of Southampton County, England, a grocer by trade, but beyond that fact very little is now known respecting him. Directly south of Strode’s tract were one hundred acres entered on rent Sept. 24, 1688, by William Hawkes, which on March 26, 1688, were patented to John Palmer. The latter, tra- dition says, was enticed away from his widowed mother’s home, in England, and came as a redemp- tioner to the colony. He married Mary Suddery, a woman of great courage, for it is related that on one occasion she drove a bear away from a chestnut-tree on this plantation with a fire-poker, or poking-stick. Two hundred acres south of the Palmer tract was sur- veyed to William Oborne July 3, 1688, and a similar tract to the south of Oborne’s land was patented to John Beazer, Aug. 4, 1684, but he did not reside on the estate. Dennis Rochford, Feb. 10,1682, had surveyed to him five hundred acres, to the south of the Bezer land. Rochford was an Irishman, from Emstorfey, 484 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. County of Wexford, and accompanied William Penn in the “Welcome.” His wife, Mary, died on the pas- sage in that plague-smitten vessel, as did also two of his daughters. He settled on the estate in Concord, and in 1683 was a representative from Chester County in the Assembly. On Oct. 6, 1691, Thomas Green pur- chased four hundred acres of the Rochford lands. He, with his wife, Margaret, and two sons, Thomas and John, settled in Concord in 1686, possibly on the tract he subsequently bought. From him the Green family of Delaware County trace descent. The re- maining one hundred acres bordering on the Bethel line was sold to William Clayton, Jr., Feb. 14, 1684/5, but he never resided on the land in Concord. Concord Friends’ Meeting-House.—The land for a Friends’ meeting and graveyard at Concord, the sixth in the county, was conveyed or rather leased to trustees, by John Mendenhall, in 1697, they pay- ing ‘‘ one peppercorn yearly forever.’’ In that year a sum was obtained by subscription for fencing in a burial-ground at Concord, and at a monthly meeting held at the house of George Pearce, on the 10th day of Fourth month, 1697, the following paper was read: ‘© WHEREAS, the has been some differences by some that have sepa- rated from Friends in their subscriptions towards their building of meeting-houses, &c., for the service of Truth, We, whose names are hereunder subscribed, do promise and oblige ourselves hereby, that if we, or any one or more of us, should separate ourselves from the Society and Communion of these Friends of Concord, Birmingbam, and Thorn- bury, that now we walk in fellowship with, either in doctrine, life or conversation, we will make uo trouble amongst these people by reason of any right we, or any one of us think we have because of this, or any other subscription that was, or may be, towards building a meeting- house or making a burial-place for the youse of the said people of God called Quakers. And we further promise to relinquish and lay aside all pretence of right or claim whereby any disquiet may arise among the aforesaid people of God called Quakers, of Concord, Birmingham, and Thornbury. According to the purport, true meaning and intent of the written as above said, we subscribe as follows: £38 d. £8 d. “Nath’l Newlin... 710 0 | Peter Dix........ - 515 0 Benj. Mendenhall. - 510 0 | George Pearce. - 5 6 0 Elizabeth Hickman...... 1 5 O | Isaac Taylor.... » 280 Thomas Ring..... - 3 5 0 | Wm. Brinton, Sr. . 310 0 Nicholas Pyle. . 3 6 0 | Wm. Brinton, Jr. - 216 0 William Cloud... . 8 6 O | John Mendenhall - 216 0 William Collett. 2 0 0 ! Benj. Woorlward.. 118 0 116 0 | John Bennett.. 450 615 O | John Hertchim 126 Robert Way... 1 6 0 | Joseph Edward 015 0 Edward Bennett. + 1 6 O | Joseph Gilpin.. . 010 0 Thomas Radley..... » 1 0 O | Samuel Scott.... . 010 0 Richard Thatcher. - 115 0O | John Sanger... . 060 Francis Chadsey.. + 1 6 O | Goodwin Walter.. .~ 050 Jonathan Thatcher........ 110 0 | Daniel Davis.......00....... 05 0 John Newlin... . 510 0 | = Henry Osborn .. = 2-5 0 56 0 3” Although this sum was subscribed for the building of a meeting-house in Concord, it seems not to have been completely ready for use until 1710, and was then a frame or log structure, which, in 1728, gave place to a brick edifice. In the early times the meet- ing-houses had no stoves in them, but were partially warmed by charcoal fires, which were built on large stones in the centre of the building, which were allowed to die out before the hour set for meeting, or were warmed by open wood-fires in wide chimney- places. Concord meeting-house was warmed by these latter means, large wood-fires being built in the attic at each end of the building, to which members would resort previous to assembling in the apartment below. Concord meeting-house having become too limited in its dimensions to meet the wants of Friends of that neighborhood, a movement was made looking to its enlargement or the building of an entirely new edifice. In the winter of 1788, while Friends had assembled to consider that question, the house caught fire from the soot in one of the chimneys, and despite the efforts of those present was burned, leaving only the brick walls. Immediate steps were taken to re- build the house, the expense being borne jointly by Concord Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, the for- mer agreeing to pay six hundred pounds, one-third of the estimated costs, and the six Monthly Meetings in Chester County obligating themselves to discharge the remaining two-thirds. The present Concord meeting-house was built under these circumstances, the old walls being used, an addition being made thereto. The cost of the structure exceeded largely the estimate, and a call was made for three hundred and seventy-five pounds additional to complete the meeting-house. In this old building for seventy years the question of human slavery was discussed, and by degrees the feeling grew that it was unjust, until on 20th day Second month, 1800, at Concord Quarterly Meeting for the first time appeared on its record this announcement: ‘Clear of importing, dis- posing of, or holding mankind as slaves.” At two o’clock on Friday, Sept. 12, 1777, Maj.-Gen. Grant, with the First and Second Brigades of the British army, marched from Chad’s Ford to Concord, and some of his men were quartered in the old meeting- house, while foraging parties scoured the “ country and woods” near by, picking “up Waggons, Horses, Am- munition, Provision and cattle, and several Rebels that had secreted themselves.”’? Tradition records that the meeting-house was made a hospital by the English for their wounded, but the inference is more probable that disabled American soldiers, in striving to escape, were found in the woods by the English scouting parties, were brought there, and on Sunday following, when Dr. Rush with three surgeons came to “attend the wounded Rebels left scattered in the Houses about the field of Battle, unattended by their Surgeons till now,” he visited that building on his errand of mercy. Gen. Grant, tradition also asserts, occupied as his headquarters, while he tarried at Con- cord, a house built in 1755, near St. John’s Church, which in recent years has been removed to make room for needed improvements. The English officer, when he advanced to unite with Lord Cornwallis at Village Green, left a guard at the meeting-house for the short time intervening before the whole British army marched away from that neighborhood never to return. The venerable Friends’ meeting-house had 1 Journal of Capt. John Montressor, Penna, Mag. of Hist. vol. vii. p. 34, iia CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 485 been the scene of many incidents connected with the family history of the old families of Concord and surrounding townships which will ever render it a place of interest and considerate care. St. John’s Episcopal Church.—The first mention of an Episcopalian Church at Concord occurs in the letter of Rev. Evan Evans, dated London, Sept. 18, 1707, on “the state of the church in Pennsylvania, most humbly offered to the venerable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel ineForeign Parts.” Rey. Mr. Evans, in 1700, was sent to Philadelphia by Bishop Compton, the then Bishop of London, to aid by his ministry and teachings the infant Christ Church, the congregation of which, in 1696, had erected a place of worship in the “ Great town” in the colony. This missionary gave glowing accounts of the growth of the doctrines of the Church of Eng- land among the people of the province, and in order to show how deeply the seed he had sown had taken root, records, ‘“‘ And the true religion (by the frequent resort of persons from remote parts to Philadelphia) did so spread, and the number of converts did so in- crease that I was obliged to divide myself among them as often and as equally as I could, till they were formed into proper districts, and had ministers sent over to them by the venerable society. For this rea- son I went frequently to Chichester, which is twenty- five miles; Chester or Upland, twenty ; Maidenhead, forty (where I baptized 19 children at one time) ; Concord, twenty; Evesham, in West Jersey, fifteen ; Montgomery, twenty; and Radnor, fifteen miles dis- tant from Philadelphia. All which, though equally fatiguing and expensive, I frequently went to and preached, being by all means determined to lose none of those I have gained, but rather add to them till the society otherwise provided for them.” In the same letter Mr. Evans states, “Our winters, being severe in these parts, detain many from church whose plantations lie at a distance, and for that rea- son Mr. Nicholas preached sometimes at Concord in the week-days.’’! The first St. Paul’s Church at Chester was built in 1702, and on Sunday, Jan. 24, 1708 (new style), it was opened for public worship. In 1704, Rev. Henry Nichols was assigned by the Society for the Propaga- tion of the Gospel in Foreign Parts as missionary in charge of St. Paul’s parish, then including Marcus Hook and Concord; hence the week-day services mentioned by Mr. Evans must have been held in that year, certainly prior to 1707. On March 17, 1682/3, Jeremiah (or, as he is usually termed in the early records, ‘‘ Jeremy’’) Collet, an earnest Episcopalian, entered on rent two hundred acres of land in Concord, and on March 1, 1686, conveyed the property to John Hannum (who settled in Concord about that time, certainly within two years thereafter), an ardent 1“ Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania,” Hazard’s Register, vol. iii. pp. 338, 339. churchman, who is alluded to by Rev. Mr. Ross in his report to the society, June 25, 1714, in which he furnished “an account of the Building of St. Paul’s at Chester,” as among the “ Parishers who were chief helpers to carry on the work.” In 1702, John Han- num gave a lot of ground at the northwest corner of his tract on which to erect a church, and doubtless a log building was located thereon about that year. A tradition prevails that long previous to this date the Swedes were accustomed to hold divine service in Concord. A similar tradition maintained until within recent years that the early Swedish settlers had a church at Chester on the site of the old St. Paul’s; but careful investigation has so fully demonstrated the error of this statement that it is no longer an open question. Indeed, previous to Penn coming it is ex- tremely doubtful whether a Swedish person ever saw the territory now Concord township. The tradition originated in the fact that often for months together no clergyman of the Church of England could be procured to preach in these remote settlements. And as late as 1751, Rev. Israel Acrelius records that the Swedish pastor in charge of the Lutheran Church at Christina was frequently requested to preach in the Episcopal Churches, ‘‘as otherwise their (the parish- ioners’) children would become unchristened heath- ens or Quakers, their churches would be changed into stables alongside of Quaker meeting-houses: They praised Mr. Tranberg as a warm-hearted man, who had always assisted them. The Provost, therefore, took some time to see whether it was possible to please everybody. He preached once a month in all these places. He was at Christina every Sunday, but on week-days and saints’ days in the others. That became the rule, and at first was all right, but after- wards each congregation wanted preaching on a Sun- day. So there were also added the churches at Con- cord and Marcus Hook, which presented the same request; and then there were not as many Sundays in the month as there were congregations to serve, and so Christina would always have been vacant. The good old Swedes now began to murmur, partly at the minister, and partly at the English, who wished to have him with them and never once paid his expenses of travel.”* Hence, while the names of several Swedish ministers appear among the list of pastors of St. Paul’s, St. Martin’s, and St. John’s Churches, they were there merely to fill a vacancy, and were never regularly ordained rectors of St. Paul’s parish, which included until 1835 St. John’s Church in Concord. Ralph Pyle, of Concord, who was a liberal contrib- utor to the first church of St. Paul’s, at Chester, in his will, dated Jan. 1, 1739, and proved Sept. 1, 1741, provided : “ Ttem. I give twenty pounds, that is to say, the Interest of the said money, for the use of a minister of the Church of England, to preach three Sermons yearly in the Township of Concord, that is to say, the 2 Acrelius’ “ History of New Sweden,” p. 305. 486 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Sunday before Christmas Day, the Sunday before Easter, and the Sun- day before Whitsunday, that is the lawful interest of the said twenty pounds shall be carefully paid unto such minister yearly who shall Preach the sermons at the times as above mentioned, whilst there is a Church remain in Concord aforesaid.” Although this bequest was not made a specific charge on the real estate of Ralph Pyle, yet William Pyle, his son, by will Jan. 8, 1745/6, proved four days there- after, devised to his son, John Pyle, a plantation of two hundred and fifty-six acres in Birmingham, sub- ject to the annual payment of this and other “ de- mands which his grandfather, Ralph Pyle, ordered to be paid by his last will and testament.’ The peculiar feature of this devise was that the land on which the grandfather’s bounty was made a charge by William Pyle in his devise to his son, was conveyed to him by his father, Ralph, twenty years before the latter made his will, in which the above bequest was made. Six years prior to the death of John Hannum—he died in 1730—Isaac Taylor, the noted surveyor of Chester County, on Sept. 25, 1724, surveyed the plot of ground given to the church twenty-two years prior to that date. The log church erected in 1702 was located on the present cemetery, just below the Foucitt lot, and the old church records “the graves of Rev. Richard and Mary Saunderlands were at the church- door.” I have been unable to designate who Rev. Richard Saunderlands was. His name does not ap- pear in Professor Keen’s carefully-prepared and ex- ‘ haustive history of the descendants of James Sande- lands, of Chester. The first books of the church have been lost, and no record remains prior to 1727. That the congregation of St. John’s Church was organized and recognized many years previous to that date is accepted as historically established the refer- ence made to it by Rev. Mr. Evans, heretofore men- tioned, can leave no doubts existing, and the fact that Queen Anne presented, in 1707/8, a silver com- munion set to St. John’s Church, at Concord, is con- firmatory of this statement. The frame structure was the only house of worship for the Episcopalians of Concord for many years. In February, 1765, the Provincial Assembly passed an act authorizing the raising of £3003 15s. by a lottery, the proceeds to be divided among the congregations of St. Peter’s Church, in Philadelphia, St. Paul’s, in Chester and in Carlisle, to be used in furnishing those churches, to build a church at Reading, to repair the church at Molltown, in Berks County, and Huntingdon town- ship, York County, “and for repairing the Episcopal churches in Chichester and Concord, and purchasing a glebe for the church at Chester, in the county of Chester.” In 1769 the treasurer of the Province paid to the congregation at Concord its proportion of the funds netted by this lottery. With this sum in 1773 a western end, laid with brick, was added to the frame church, and in 1790 an eastern end, laid with stone, took the place of the early rude structure in which the congregation for nearly a century had worshiped. The new building, however, did not cover the site of the first church. In 1887 another addition was made, but as the edifice had been erected at various dates, and was insufficient to meet the requirements of the congregation, it was determined to build a new church. On June 15, 1844, the corner-stone of the present building was laid, and the work was so hastened to completion that on Oct. 27, 1844, the new church was consecrated by Bishop Lee, “acting with the permis- sion and at the request of Bishop Henry W. Onder- donk, Bishop of PennsyJvania.” With the exception of such repairs as from time to time became necessary, the present building is the one erected in 1844, A large chancel window was placed in the church as a memorial of the late Bishop Onderdonk, and several other smaller memorial windows have also been erected. New furniture since the building was com- pleted has taken the place of that of ancient days, St. John’s Church has an endowment of one thousand dollars, a bequest of the late Mrs. Elizabeth Sharp- less. During the years 1883-84 a new church was erected in the parish,—St. Luke’s, at Chad’s Ford,— which is in charge of Rev. J. J. Sleeper, rector of St. John’s. The pastors of St. John’s parish have been as follows: Revs. Evan Evans, Henry Nichols, George Ross, John Humphreys, John Backhouse, Thomas Thompson, George Craig, John Wade, James Connor, James Turner, Levi Heath, Joshua Reece, M. Chander, William Pryce, Jacob M. Douglass, Samuel C. Briockle, Jacob Douglass, George Kirke, John Baker Clemson, M. D. Hirst, E. Wilson Wiltbank, Alfred Lee, Samuel C. Stratton, Benjamin S. Huntington, R. B. Claxton, W. H. Trapnell, Charles Buck, John R. Murphy, Richardson Graham, John B. Clemsen, M. Christian, J. J. Craigh, Joshua Coupland, H. Baldwin Dean, Joseph J. Sleeper, the present rector. It is unnecessary to refer to the Roman Catholic Church establishment in Concord, that being presented in the account of Ivy Mills and the Willcox family. The Taxables in 1715 and 1799.—The following taxables appear on the assessment-list for 1715, of taxables in Concord: Nath. Newlin, Jut, Nicholas Pyle fur ye mill, James Clamston, Nath. Newlin, Sen", Joseph Cloud, Henry Oburn, John Palmer, John Palmer, Jur, Godwin Walter, George Robinson, Jacob Pyle, Ralph Pyle, Henry Peirce, Matthias Carle, Ralph Evenson, James Heavrd, William Ammet, Thomas Smith, John Lee, Robert Chamberlin, Robert Chamberlin, Jun’, Thomas West, William Hill, Morgan Jones, Thomas Durnall, George Lee, Daniel Evans, Joseph Nicklin, John Hannum, Benj= Mendenhall, John Mendenhall, John Newlin, Joseph Edwards, Thomas Broom, Wil- liam fforde, ffrancis Pulin, John Peuneck, James Chiffers, John Hackney, Christopher Penock. ffreemen, Caleb Pearkins, Richard ffar, Peter Poulston, John Pennock, John Engram, Henry Jones, Thomas Falthan. In the assessment for the year 1799, the following persons appear as taxables in the township: William Alleson, taylor; Moses Bullock, mason; John Bail, weaver; Joseph Cloud, carpenter; Joseph Hutton, mill-house, currying-shop, and tan-yard, tanner; James Jefferies, tavern-keeper and store-keeper ; Thomas Marshall, one stone mill and currying-shop, tanner; Thomas Newlin, Esq., justice of peace; Nathaniel Newlin, saw-mill; Thomas Newlin, blacksmith; John Newlin, atone grist-mill, miller; Moses Palmer, assemblyman and hatter; John Palmer, saddler; John Perkins, shoemaker; Micajah Speakman, blacksmith; Thomas Speakman, joiner; Jacob Thomas, store-keeper; William Trimble, one saw-mill, one large paper-mill; Ann Vernon, tavern-keeper; William Vernon, ‘qucSNnoo J4©@ JONaGISaY co WUV4I GNVILOSS ,, “© BUVMVTAG YUAaNW KAW “va ‘LLOOS 97098 "a “£ “19% “ON AaqsiSey prez ‘peg svoupuy 3g ] ith CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 487 saw-mill; William Willis, taylor; William Walter, miller, one stone grist-mill; William Howard, millwright. Inmates.—Abeshai Mellon, weaver; Wheleback Paulin, tanner; Robert Selah, paper-maker; William Clughson, paper-maker ; George Moore, paper-maker; William HulJ, mason; Thomas Willcox, paper- maker ; Jesse Plankinghorn, wheelwright ; Thomas Melleon, weaver; Thomas Hance, weaver; Joseph Finch, miller; James Cloud, mill- wright; Thomas Cheney, hatter; Jolin Masson, shoemaker; Daniel Doaks, wheelwright; James Hall, mason; Pridey Kimber, carpenter ; John Hatton, carpenter; James Mendenhall, wheelwright; Moses Perkins, shoemaker; John Selah, paper-maker. LIST OF THE JUSTICES FOR CONCORD TOWNSHIP. Date of Commission. Aug. 19, 1791. Feb. 5, 1814. July 4, 1808. Feb, 3, 1820. Dec. 4, 1823. Dec, 13, 1823. Nov. 10, 1824. April 21, 1827. . Jan. 15, 1829. Names. Thomas Newlin. Thomas Pierce... Matthias Kerlin James Bratton Joseph Fox... Joseph Trimble. Robert Frame.. Robert Hall..... . Feb. 8, 1831. William Mendenhall.. Dec. 6, 1836, April 14, 1840. Casper W. Sharpless, April 15, 1845, April 9, 1850, April 28, 1857, April 24, 1862. Edward J. Willcox hasansaastasannacsia diencaeeseoares April 11, 1867. Darwin Painter, April 11, 1867, April 15, 1872, March 23, 1877, April 10, 1882. Roads.—On Oct. 25, 1687, the grand jury, or those members of that body who attached their names, laid out a thirty-feet wide road from Dilworthtown, fol- lowing the course of the present road to a point a short distance south of the present Concord Station, and above St. John’s Church, on Concord road, at which point the road widened to forty feet, as will be noticed by following the description in the report sub- mitted to court : “Laid out a High way from Burmingham to Concord, being a thirty- foote way, by vertue of an order of Court bearing date ye 4th of October, 1687, laid out by us, Walter Marten, John Mendenhall, John Kingsman, William Cloud, Rich. Thatcher, being one-third part of ye present grand Jury of ye county of Chester, as followes, viz. : “Beginning att a white oake standing on aSmall Branch att William Branton’s, marked with five knotches; thence along a lyne of marked trees between Alice Brunson and land lat Edward Turner to Concord corner tree; thence doune Concord lyne Between y¢ said Alice Brunson and Philip Roman to a white Oake marked with five knotches; then crosse y° Corner of said Philip Roman’s land; then crosse William Hitchcock’s land; thence crosse land that was William Biases ; thence crosse John Mendenhall’s land; thence crosse land that was Peter Lounders’; thence crosse part of John Symcock’s land to ye foote- Bridge of Thomas Moore; then crosse part of ye said Thomas Moore’s land to a White Oake marked with five knotches. “Laid out by vertue of ye aforesaid Order, a fourty-foote Road from Concord to ye King’s Highway in Chester, as followeth, by us, whose hands are under written, ye 25th of October, 1687. “Beginning at a white oake with five knotches, standing att y¢ corner of Nathaniell Park’s land, next Thomas Moore’s land; thence through y¢ land of ye said Nathaniell ; thence cross John Hannum’s land; thence crosse George Stroud’s land; thence crosse John Palmer’s land ; thence crosse land late William Oburne’s; thence crosse land late John Bea- sar’s; thence crosse Dennis Rochford’s Land; thence crosse William Clayton, Junt’s land to ye Hamlett of Bethell. “Thence crosse Edward Beason’s land; thence cross ffrancis Smith’s fand; thence crosse Robert Eyre’s land to Chichester; thence crosse Walter Martin’s land; thence crosse land late John Beasars’; thence crosse John Kingsman’s land; thence crosse Henry Hastings’ and Rich- ard Buffington’s land; thence cross James Brown’s land; thence Thomas Wither's land to Chester. “Thence crosse part of Robert Wall’s Jand to a small blacke vake marked with 5 knotches, standing att the King’s Highway. “WaLteR MaRTen, Joun KiNGSMAN, “Joun MENDENHALL, Wiutiam CLoup” “RicHARD THATOHER, At the court held on “8rd day, 2d week, 7th month, 1688, George Strode, Nathaniel Parker, John Palmer, John Hannum, Thomas Moore, John Sanger, Robert Pyle, Petitioned against y® Road lately laid out through the town of Concord. Ordered that y® Grand Inquest doe Inspect y* Road, and make report to y° next Court under y® hands of noe less than twelve.” All these petitioners owned land on the present Concord road, south of the present Concord Station, on the Baltimore Central road. The jury, however, confirmed that highway, but the road leading from Concord to Birmingham at Dilworthtown appears not to have been immediately opened, but remained until May 21, 1707, when, after twenty years, the route as laid out by the jury in 1687 was finally ac- cepted. The losses sustained by the residents of Concord, occasioned by the pillaging of the British army in 1777, was severe, and the extent of the damages in- flicted in that township will never be ascertained. The greater part of the inhabitants were Friends, whose religious principles precluded them from de- manding pay for articles destroyed in war. Under the act providing for a registration of claims for damages on account of the British spoliations, the following demands were filed: From Alexander Vincent, Sept. 13. William Hannum.. “James Hatton.. “Amos Mendevhall.. “Alexander Lockhart. “ Thomas McCall..... “Samuel Mendenhall.. “Same person, Concord.. “James Taylor (by Knyphausen’s party) “William Pierce, September. “William McCoy, Sept. 13. “Patrick Gamble, “ 15... » ° @locoococeccoooca R Isaac Arment, who died in Concord, Nov. 28, 1848, aged ninety years, could recall the fact that he was living at Chad’s Ford on the day the battle of Brandy- wine was fought, and from the heights on the east side of the creek, which afforded a commanding view of the scene, he witnessed the engagement, of which, as years rolled by, he delighted to relate to those who would listen to his recollection of those stirring days. Schools.—The first reference in any wise in Concord township to the subject of education occurs in the will of Ralph Pyle, dated Jan. 1, 1739. The clause is as follows: “ Ttem, I give twenty pounds the Interest thereof to the use hereafter mentioned viz: to support the Schooling of a poor mans child who shall then reside either in Concord or in the Township of Birmingham in the County of Chester, So if the Parents of the said child shall be Estab- lished Church of England, to be paid by my Heir and him and his Heirs successively and shall have the liberty to put such child out to school and shall change the child once in three years, if any arrears by book for the children.” This bequest was subsequently made a charge on land in Birmingham by William Pyle, of that town- | ship, the son of Ralph, who in his devise of a plan- i tation to his son, John, charged the estate with the 488 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. payment of bequests contained in Ralph Pyle’s will. Nothing has come to our knowledge respecting this schooling of a poor man’s child other than stated. The first schools known to have been established in the township were conducted under the charge of the society of Friends. One such school is believed to have been located in Friends’ meeting-house about 1779, and in 1793 a dwelling was built close by for the accommodation of the teacher. In 1827 a school- house had been erected, a two-storied building, and, it is alleged by County Superintendent Baker, in his report for 1877, was partially graded. In the follow- ing year the division in the society of Friends oc- curred, and from that date the Orthodox and Hicksite branches educated their children in separate schools. Under the act of 1804 school directors in Delaware County had been elected prior to the law of 1834. On March 18, 1825, Concord elected trustees of schools for three years. Ralph C. Marsh, William Menden- hall, and James M. Willcox were returned to court as elected. At that time school was held at Mattson’s, and preparations were made to accept other houses in the township. In 1834, when the school law was passed, the court appointed James M. Willcox and W. H. Palmer to act as inspectors of schools until di- rectors had been elected. On Nov. 4, 1834, a county convention was held at the court-house at Chester, to which delegates, chosen by the several townships, were requested to be present. Concord neglected or refused to elect delegates, and the township was not represented at the meeting. The opposition there was so general that it was not until the act of 1836 was passed that Concord accepted the provisions of the law.. That is the received opinion, and yet, in 1835, $165.90 was received by the township as county and State appropriations. The first board of directors elected under the act of 1836 consisted of William Mendenhall, James M. Willcox, Joseph Cloud, Joseph Palmer, Robert N. Palmer, and Reece Pyle, and on August 27th of that year the first meeting was held at the public-house of James Hannum. It was resolved that Neal Duffee should be employed as teacher for Lower School, No. 2 (Mattson’s); Jesse Green, for Union School, No. 8 (near Elam); and Alexander McKeever, for the Up- per School (Concord Hill), at twenty-five dollars per month of twenty-four days. The following notice was soon after posted in the township : “Norice.—At a meeting Concord, Sept. 2, 1836. To all concerned. The Directors of the district of Concord have resolved to open three schools in said District, viz.: At Millers or Lower School and Union School, near Newlins store and Upper School, Concord Hill, on second day the 12th inst. for the reception of all children over four years old for tuition and instruction. “ By order of the Board, “REECE PYLE, Secretary.” On the 8th of October, 1836, Alexander McKeever was notified by the board that his pay would cease at \ May, 1837, he was again chosen with Neal Duffee and Jesse Green to teach the schools. June 7, 1888, the directors employed Moses M. Lincoln teacher for school No. 1, Amos H. Wickersham No. 2, Jesse Green No. 3. Wickersham resigned January 14th, and Feb. 11, 1839, James G. Hannum was appointed in his place. The question of continuing the public schools in Concord seems to have been undecided as late as 1840 when in May of that year an election was held, and it was voted to continue them. In the year 1853 the school-houses in the township were known as follows: No.1, Hatton’s; No. 2, Mattson’s; No. 8, Gamble’s; and No. 4, Sharpless’. The first school-house erected in the township, ex- cept that of the Friends at Concord Hill, was upon a lot of land which by deed dated Dec. 10, 1796, Levi Mattson gave in trust for that purpose. The people of that section, to the number of eighteen, appointed Moses Palmer, Stephen Hall, William Hannum, Na- thaniel Walter, and Thomas Hatton, trustees to ac- cept the real estate. It consisted of half an acre of land situated on the north side of the great road from Concord to Chester. A one-story stone school-house was erected by contribution from the neighbors upon this lot and used for school purposes. The building was under direction of trustees until the school law was accepted. The old contribution school passed to the control of the directors, and in the notice of Sept. 2, 1836, it is mentioned as Miller’s or Lower school. Jobn Larkin, Jr., of Chester, and Mrs. George Sharp- less, of Springfield, were pupils here from 1812 to 1815; John McClugen was a teacher at that time. His Saturday night libations at the Cross-Keys Tavern often incapacitated him from appearing Monday morn- ing in proper condition to teach. William Neal, Nich- olas Newlin, and Thomas Haines were also teachers. In 1859, when the directors were about erecting a new house on this lot, the deed from Mattson could not be found, and much doubt was expressed as to the title, but subsequently the deed was procured and recorded. The title being perfected, the directors contracted with Robert Barleu to erect a stone school-house at a cost of nine hundred and forty-four dollars, which was completed Sept. 15, 1859. It has been used for school purposes. On the 13th December, 1826, Robert N. Gamble sold to Joseph Larkin, William McCall, and Samuel Hance (who were trustees of schools of the township in that year) a half-acre of land on the road leading from Naaman’s Creek road to Concord road, in consideration of having a school-house erected thereon. A school-house was built and used under the charge of trustees until 1836, at which time it was placed in care of the directors of the public schools, when it was known as School No. 3. It was maintained by them until 1856, when a new house was erected at Johnson’s Corners which is still in use. The Gamble lot was sold to William H. Slawter, and the sale confirmed by the court Feb. 27, 1860. The the expiration of two months, but on the 18th of | land is now owned by Mrs. Mary Collins, who resides CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 489 there. The lot at Johnson’s Corners was purchased by the directors from Thomas Harlan, July 28, 1856, for one hundred and ninety-eight dollars and twenty- five cents, and Emmor Taylor contracted for the erec- tion of a frame school-house at a cost of nine hundred and sixty-three dollars, to be completed Nov. 15, 1856, when it took the place of Union School, No. 3, men- tioned above. On April 15, 1837, the directors appointed a com- mittee to ascertain whether a suitable lot could be ob- tained for the erection of a public school-house. This action was rendered necessary by the refusal of Friends to allow the school-house at their meeting-house to be longer under the charge of the directors. No mention is made of a report of this committee, and on the 14th of May, 1838, the board of directors resolved to rent a house in the vicinity of Concord meetigg-house for the purpose of a free school. James 8. Peters and Samuel Trimble were appointed to rent and furnish a room. On May 24th, they reported that they had rented a house of Matthew Ash, in which school was opened and kept for along time. The first agitation to build a school-house in Concordville was made in 1860, and April 26th, in that year, a meeting was called to consult on the subject. Nothing, however, was accomplished until 1873-74, when the present commodious two-story brick house was built, at a cost of four thousand dollars. It is located on the State road at the western end of the village. On the 15th of June, 1847, the school directors pur- chased ninety-six square perches of land of Casper Sharpless. A stone school-house was erected, and school opened May 15, 1848, with Sarah C. Walton as the first teacher. This house was used till 1870, when the lot was exchanged with Fairman Rogers, and the present brick house, forty by forty feet, was erected. It is located in close proximity to Markham Station. On May 8, 1851, the board of directors resolved to build a school-house to supply the place of No. 1, and on the 9th of September, 1852, purchased ninety-six perches of land of Hannah Hatton and Deborah Peters. A contract was made with Robert Barlow to erect the building for five hundred and fifteen dollars. This house was built, and was known as the Spring Valley House. It was used until 1874, when it was abandoned, and the district was absorbed in the present No. 1 District, at Concordville, and McCart- ney District, No. 5. The McCartney school-house lot was purchased of Samuel Myers about 1878, and the present house erected. This is known as No. 5, and is situated in the south part of the township below Smith’s Cross- road. The following is a list of the school directors since 1840, as obtained from the election records of Media: 1840, Joseph Hannum, Robert Mendenhall; 1841, —; 1842, John H. Marsh, Peter W. Mattson; 1843, Marshall Cloud, Moses D. Palmer; 1844, Samuel Hanes, William W. Palmer; 1845, John H. Marsh, Evan P. Hannum; 1846, Robert Gamble, Thomas Marshall ; 1847, Samuel Hance, William W. Palmer; 1848, Thomas Marshall, Peter W. Mattsdn; 1849, Edward Green, Matthew Wood; 1850, Joel Swayne, Thomas P. Powell; 1851, Joseph Walter, Isaac Tussey ; 1852, Nathaniel Pratt, Andrew Hudson ; 1853, Davis Richard, Sam- uel Myers; 1854, Robert H. Palmer, John Sharpless ; 1855, Andrew Pratt, David L. Manley ; 1856, John Miller, Thomas Hinkson ; 1857, Davis Richards, John Hill; 1858, William Gamble, R. H. Hannum, Joseph Johnston; 1859, David 8. Manley, Job Hoopes; 1860, John Shaw, George Rush; 18641, George Drayton, Henry L. Paschall; 1862, John H. Newlin, Robert H. Hannum; 1863, Emmor 8. Lee- dom, Thomas W. Johnson ; 1864, Henry L. Paschal], Penrose Miller; 1865, R. H. Hannum, John H. Newlin; 1866, Samuel Bennington, T. W. Johnson ; 1867, UH. L. Paschall, Penrose Miller; 1868, R. H. Hannum, T. I. Peirce; 1869, Samuel Bennington, T. W. Johnson; 1870, Lewis Palmer, Peter Ingram; 1871, R. H. Hannum, Milon 8. Heyburn; 1872, no report; 1873, Lewis Palmer, D. Darlington ; 1874, Henry Bishop, George Rush; 1875, Samuel Bennington, Thomas W. Johnson; 1876, R. H. Hannum, William Gamble; 1877, Ralph M. Harvey, Harry Bishop; 1878, Thomas W. Johnson, Sain- uel Bennington; 1879, William Gamble, R. H. Hannum; 1880, Henry C. Bishop, Samuel N. Hill; 1881, Thomas W. Johnson, W. G. Powell; 1882, Isaiah H. Miller, R. Henry Hannum; 1883, John L. Tucker, Joseph Trimble ; 1884, Elwood Hannum, Daniel Fields. Maplewood Institute—A large tract of land, near Friends’ meeting-house, at Concordville, was purchased by Professor Joseph Shortledge, who erected thereon a building fifty by eighty feet, three stories in height, especially designed for a seminary of learning. In the fall of 1862 he established a school, which was conducted successfully, both sexes being admitted as pupils. The academy was well patronized, and soon won its way in public favor. On April 6, 1870, it was chartered by an Act of As- sembly, as the ‘“‘ Maplewood Institute,” with collegi- ate privileges. Shortly after this date the building was enlarged by the addition of a wing to the rear, forty by eighty feet, affording facilities which were much needed. The institute at the present time has accommodations for eighty pupils, a well-selected library, and is also well supplied with chemical and philosophical apparatus. Ward Academy.—In 1882, Benjamin F. Leggett erected on the road from Concord Station to Concord- ville a commodious building for educational pur- poses, and therein established the Ward Academy. Although an institution of recent date, it has been well attended, and gives promise of extended useful- ness. It has grown rapidly in public approval, and is firmly established. Leedom’s Mills.—At the court held Oct. 2, 1695, occurs the first mention of Concord Mills, now Lee- dom’s. The grand jury, following the recommenda- ‘tion of a previous grand inquest “to lay an assess- ment” to pay the judges’ fees, to meet the county expenses, and provide funds for the erection of the prison then building, assessed Concord Mills at ten pounds. According to Smith’s map of early grants and patents, accepting the above date as the year of the erection of Concord Mills, in 1695, the company’s enterprise was located on the west branch of Chester Creek, and on the tract of five hundred acres which / was entered by William Hitchcock, Sept. 8, 9, 1681, 490 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. secured to him Feb. 18,1682, and a patent was issued | therefor June 27, 1684. This tract was a long and narrow strip, extending the entire width of the town- ship, near its northern boundary. On Feb. 7, 1701, Hitchcock sold two hundred and fifty acres of this land on the west of Concord Street road, laid out in 1682,—the road has ceased to be, excepting the upper part known as Thornbury Street,—to Nicholas Pyle, and the same day the remaining two hundred acres east of the road was conveyed to Benjamin Mendenhall. Concord Mills is on the extreme east- ern and lower end of the Pyle tract, the race be- ginning a long distance above the mill, on the west branch of the creek. The mill was built by a com- pany of which William Brinton, the younger, of Birm- ingham, was one of the owners and the chief pro- jector of the enterprise. In those days the mill was of great importance to the neighborhood, for prior to its erection there was none within several miles, and hauling was difficult excepting in the winter, when sleds moved easily over the frozen snow. The assess- ment in 1695, which gave the appraised value of this mill as ten pounds, clearly indicates that it was a frame structure, which subsequently, at a date not as- certained, gave place to a stone building. In 1715, Nicholas Pyle had charge of the mill, for he appears on the assessment-roll for that year “for ye mill.” When Concord meeting-house was burned, in 1788, the mill was used as a temporary place for Friends to gather until the present meeting-house was rebuilt. At that time it was owned by Thomas Newlin, who had acquired title to the mill prior to1780. From 1790 to 1810, John Newlin rented and operated it, and in 1817 he became the owner. A short distance below this mill, in 1696, Nicholas Newlin built a saw-mill, which in 1790 was owned by Nathaniel Newlin, in 1802 by Thomas Newlin, and in 1817 by Benjamin Newlin. The grist-mill, from 1810 to 1820, was rented and operated by Mendenhall and Pennell, and after the latter date by John Newlin. He con- tinued there many years. The grist- and saw-mill sub- sequently became the property of Casper W. Sharp- less, and finally was owned by George Drayton. The latter, in 1859, sold thirty-eight acres and the upper mill to Samuel Leedom, by whose son, Emmor S. Leedom, both the saw- and grist-mill are now held as trust estate. Hill’s Mill.—On Sept. 24, 1688, five hundred acres of land was surveyed to Nicholas Newlin, which, lying to the south of the Hitchcock tract, extended from the eastern township line westward to Concord Street road, which ran north and south, dividing the township in the centre. Within this estate, which was patented to Newlin May 1, 1685, a part of the head- waters of the west branch of Chester Creek were em- braced, and through the lower part of Newlin’s land, running east and west, Providence and Concord road was laid out Aug. 15, 1715. Twenty-two years prior to this highway being approved, Aug. 21, 1698, a road still in use, beginning east of the present school-house on that road, and running thence northward to the Thornbury line, was laid out by the grand jury. On April 2, 1708, the tract was resurveyed to Nathaniel Newlin, the son of Nicholas, and was found to con- tain five hundred and fifty-two acres of land. The following year (1704) Nathaniel Newlin built a stone grist-mill on the west branch of Chester Creek, now owned by Samuel Hill. In the walls of this old mill is a date-stone marked “ Nathan and Ann Newlin, 1704.” This mill passed from Nathaniel or Nathan Newlin to his son Thomas, and in 1817 was sold to William Trimble as twenty-seven acres, and the “Lower Mill’ Thomas Newlin having for many years previous to that date been the owner of the “Upper Mill,” or Society Mill, as it was known in early days, and now as Leedom’s. The terms Upper and Lower Mills being used to designate the one from the other, after they had both become the property of Newlin. The Lower Mill later came into possession of Abraham Sharpless, who operated it several years, and after his death it was sold by Casper W. Sharp- less, executor of his father, Abraham Sharpless, in April, 1861, to John Hill & Son. The junior mem- ber of the firm, Samuel, operated it until the death of his father, John Hill, when the latter’s interest was acquired by his son, Samuel Hill, who is the present owner of the mill. Trimble, or Felton Mills—In 1734, William Trimble appeared at Friends’ Meeting at Concord with Aun Palmers, and there they declared their in- tention of marriage. Soon after their marriage, Wil- liam Trimble bought one hundred acres of land, the half of the two hundred acres: patented to Thomas King, July 22, 1684. The part purchased adjoined the Nicholas Newlin Mill land, tu the south of the latter. In 1742, William and Ann Trimble built a stone house, which is still standing, and now owned by Dr. Joseph Trimble, William Trimble, the younger, had on this estate a saw-mil] in 1782, and prior to 1799 had erected a paper-mill, which was operated as such by him until 1813, when it was changed to a cotton-factory at the instance of John D. Carter, an Englishman, who had just previous to that time immi- grated to Pennsylvania. This factory was four stories in height, sixty by thirty-four feet, and was conducted by Carter until 1826, when he purchased the Knowlton Mills and removed there. The Trimble cotton-factory at that time contained four carding-engines, ten hun- dred and sixty-eight spindles, and spun seven hun- dred and fifty pounds of cotton yarn weekly. The mills, after Carter’s removal, were leased by Jacob Taylor, and later by Joseph Trimble, Charles Cheel- ham, Callaghan Brothers, and others. In March, 1873, the mills were destroyed by fire, and the prop- erty was sold to Gen. Robert Patterson. The execu- tors of the Patterson estate, on July 1, 1884, sold the site of these mills to George Rush, Jr., who is rebuild- ing the burned mills, wherein he proposes to manu- CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 491 facture the Rush roller skates, of which article he is the patentee. Early in this century, Samuel Trimble conducted the saw-mill in the immediate neighbor- hood of the Trimble paper-mill, and continued there many years. Marshall’s Tannery,—In the year 1785, Thomas Marshall had a tannery and stone bark-mill on the west bank of Chester Creek, below the present Mar- shall Mill. It was still owned and operated by him in 1826, and later fell into disuse. The property is now owned by Ellis P. Marshall. In 1770, Robert Mendenhall was operating a saw- mill on the Mendenhall tract, which he conducted till 1788, when it was in charge of Stephen Mendenhall, and later went out of use. In 1788, Thomas Hatton owned and operated a saw-mill until1799, when John Hatton succeeded him in the business, and also con- ducted a currying-shop and tan-yard. In 1802, Joseph Hatton appears to have control of the business, and he conducted it subsequent to 1880. In 1770, John Newlin was operating a grist-mill, and in 1774, Cyrus Newlin and Daniel Trimble were also engaged in that occupation. In 1782, Abraham Sharpless and Hugh Judge were each running a grist-mill. About 1800, William Walter built a grist-mill, which was oper- ated by him many years. A grist- and saw-mill is now on the site of the mill, which is owned by his descendants. In 1788, William Hannum was oper- ating a saw-mill on Green Creek, where in 1811 the business was conducted by William Hannum, Jr., who in the same year had a tan-yard connected with the mill. In 1818, Aaron Hannum built a grist-mill, which, prior to 1826, had been changed by John Han- num to a fulling-mill and woolen-factory, which was operated by John Jones. At that date the machinery consisted of two carding-engines, one belly of thirty- six spindles, one jenny of fifty spindles. Subsequent to 1848 the business was abandoned and the building no longer used as a factory. In 1811, Matthias Corliss had a carding- and spin- ning-machine in Concord, which he operated for a short time. In 1779, Henry Myers owned a saw-mill on Concord Creek, which, in 1811, was owned and operated by John Myers, and in 1848 by Jesse Myers. It is not in use at the present time. Prior to the last century William Vernon had a saw-mill on Green Creek, near the Bethel line, which was discontinued many years ago. Johnson’s Corners.—The locality known by the above name was the site of the old Three Tun Tavern, established by Nathaniel Newlin in 1748, which was kept as a public-house until 1814. The property in 1848 was owned by John H. Newlin and William Johnson. A school-house was erected there in 1856, which is still used. A store was at the Corners in 1875, but is discontinued. The land on the west side of the road is now owned by Thomas Johnson. The grounds of the Brandywine Summit Camp-Meeting Association are located on the farm of Thomas Johnson. Camp-meetings have been held at the place for twelve or fifteen years, but without organi- zation. In the summer of 1884 an association was formed, and a charter was granted by the court of Delaware County. The association obtained a lease of twenty acres of land, and meetings are held there in the month of July or August. The Brandywine Summit Camp-Meeting is under the charge of the Wilmington Conference. Elam,—The tract of land on which the hamlet is situated was first granted to Francis Chads, and con- tained one hundred and thirty and a half acres of land. It was resurveyed April 9, 1702, and April 19, 1708, it was sold to John Willis. The road that runs northerly through it was laid out in February, 1705. At the place now called Elam, formerly known as Pleasant Hill, James Smith lived, and in 1819 he petitioned court for a license, which was not granted him till 1823. A full account of his troubles will be found in the account of the licensed houses. Sub- sequent to 1832, the property was sold as the estate of James Smith to Edward Hoskins. It passed from Hoskins to Joseph Cheyney, and later to William May, whose heirs are now in possession of the land. In 1848 there was at the place a store, post-office, and tavern. The store was built by Marshall P. Wilkin- son, and later was sold to Miller & Yarnall. Mrs. Mary A. Yarnall now conducts the store and post- office, having been postmistress since 1865. The Elam Methodist Episcopal Church, situated a short distance from Elam, was established as a branch of the Siloam Methodist Episcopal Church, of Bethel, in 1882. A lot was purchased of Daniel Husband and Jehu Tolley, and a neat stone chapel, thirty by forty-five feet, was erected. The pastors of Siloam Church, Bethel, have this in charge. Concordville.—Except the few dwellings clustered about the Friends’ meeting-house at this point there was no conspicuous settlement until 1831, when John Way was licensed to keep a public-house there, and in the next year a mail station was established, and known as the Concordville Post-office. Aline of stages from this time ran through the village on the New London, Philadelphia and Brandywine Turn- pike. John Way acted as postmaster until 1844, when he was succeeded by George Rush, who in June, 1869, was followed by Mrs. Sheoff. The latter held the office for only a short time, and was suc- ceeded by George Rush, the present incumbent, who established a store at Concordville in 1844. Ivy Mills and the Willcox Family.—For many reasons a historical sketch of the Willcox family is interesting, identified as it has been with Delaware County since an early period. Their business, estab- lished in this county as far back as 1729, has continued in the family for more than a hundred and fifty years, descending from father to son through five successive generations. This is the oldest business house now standing in the United States. It has had intimate 492 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. relations not only with Franklin, Carey, and all the principal printing-houses of the last century, but also with the authorities of all of the old Colonies that issued paper money in the colonial days for forty years preceding the Revolution; with the Continental authorities of the Revolutionary period, and with the United States authorities ever since that period ; all in the line of its regular business as manufacturers of printing, currency, and security papers. On three different occasions, far apart, the services it was able to render the government, in times of war and dis- credit, were so important that it may be said they were services of necessity. After more than a century and a half of continuous business the principal place of manufacturing is still within two miles of the orig- inal location, and the mercantile house still remains in Minor Street, Philadelphia, where it has always been. The Willcox family in Pennsylvania dates back to 1718, in which year Thomas Willcox and his wife Elizabeth (née Cole), settled in Delaware County, selecting their future home on the west branch of Chester Creek, in Concord township. Their property has passed by inheritance four times from father to son, and is now owned by their direct descendant of the fifth generation of the same name as the founder, Thomas Willcox. The name Willcox (Wild Chough) is undoubtedly of Saxon times and origin, as the family crest (a Cor- nish chough upon a pile of rocks) indicates. The chough is a red-legged raven of the southwest of Eng- land, and the first Willcox was so called, doubtlessly, because he bore a wild chough (pronounced gutturally) upon a shield or pole in the many battles fought in those rude days. Thomas Willcox, originally from Devonshire, Eng- land, came over young, as he and his wife lived together in Concord from 1718 until his death, in 1779, his wife dying in the following year. They were of the Roman Catholic faith, as are all their descendants of the name in Pennsylvania to-day, and the family is believed to be the oldest Catholic family in the State. At their house was established one of the ear- liest missions in Pennsylvania, but at what precise date cannot now be determined, as the early records of some of the Jesuit missions (of which this was one) were destroyed by a fire at St. Thomas, Md., where they were kept; but it is supposed to be about 1732. A room devoted to chapel purposes has always been reserved in the mansion-house of all the successive proprietors up to this time, and the Catholics of the neighborhood have ever been invited and accus- tomed to attend the religious services conducted there. Many articles of the old chapel furniture, such as chalice, missal, vestments, etc., that have been in use there from the beginning, are still preserved and prized by the family. In 1852, chiefly at the cost of James M. Willcox, the then proprietor of Ivy Mills, the church of St. Thomas was built near Ivy Mills, since which time the private chapel has been maintained for occasional services and private devotion. Thomas and Elizabeth Willcox had nine children, —John, Anne, James, Elizabeth, Mary, Deborah, Thomas, Mark, and Margaret. The eldest son, John, and Mary (married to John Montgomery) removed to North Carolina in early life, settling near Fayetteville, and their descendants of several generations are nu- merously scattered throughout the Southern States. The counties of Willcox in Georgia and Alabama, respectively, have taken name from some of these, and the old family Christian names of Thomas and Mark are carefully handed down among the Southern branches of the family. The eldest daughter, Anne, married James White, and a distinguished Governor of Louisiana of that name was her grandson. Her grave and tombstone are in old St. Mary’s church- yard on Fourth Street, in Philadelphia, the lettering nearly obliterated by time. John’s and Mary’s de- scendants embrace many of the best-known names in nearly all the cotton States, and are particularly nu- merous along the Ocmulgee River in Georgia, and in the Carolinas. The original home in Concord, including the large farm and Ivy Mill, descended to the youngest son, Mark, born in Concord in 1748. Mark Willcox, better known in the community as Judge Willcox for the last thirty years of his life, after an early study of law entered into business with his father for a time, and then removed to Philadelphia, where he became a prominent merchant of that city. The firm (Flahavan & Willcox) consisted of his brother-in-law Thomas Flahavan and himself; and their books, some of which are still preserved, show that they owned several vessels, and traded principally with Wilmington and Newberne, N. C., and with London, Dublin, Rotterdam, and Amsterdam. Some of the letters of their letter-book, covering the period of 17883 to 1787, are interesting, and contain valuable materials connected with the history of the time, re- garding not only Philadelphia and vicinity but a number of other places. In one, for instance, of date Philadelphia, March 20, 1786 (per ship “ Adolph,” Capt. Clarkson, via Amsterdam), they write to their correspondents Messrs. Roquett F. A. Elsires and Brothers Roquett, of Rotterdam, requesting the latter to sell in Europe all or part of six thousand acres of land belonging to the firm, lying above Mount Vernon on the Potomac; and, subsequently, in letter of date April 21, 1786, they thus enter into a fuller expla- nation of the location and value of the lands: “Should you not be able to sell, you'll keep the Papers in your hands belonging to us until you hear from us. We have the pleasing news from a Gentleman who has Lands in the same Neighborhoud, & has moved lately 28 Families on them, that the County is settling faster than any other in the States, & he says he makes little doubt of those Lands being soon settled as thick as within 20 Miles of Philadelphia. There is another advantage which they have, that we neglected to men- tion to you in our former Letters, that is, that General Washington's Lands are in the vicinity of our’s, that Virginia has undertaken to clear the Potowmack River, and, that the General has the Direction of it, & uo doubt as well for his Country’s Interest as his own, will forward the SUVMYVTAG “"@OD “wd ‘STTIM WAdVd ScKOOTTIM “9EST peq9aI0 ,, BIW UTD JeddA » “ZL p9}00L0 , “BIT AAT 5 “SPST poqoede ,,‘8([IT WO] IOMOT ,, CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 493 work as fast as possible. Also that a Town is to be built within 6 Miles of the Lands by Order and Permission of Government. You may therefore Insure them as prime Lands and of the First Quality. There is very little doubt but in a little time this will be the first Country in the World. There may be some Objections Respecting the Savages, but this you may clear up by informing to a Certainty that there are no Savages within a hundred Miles of them, &c., &. “With great esteem, “Fianavan & WILLcOXx.” The future “town to be built by order of Govern- ment” is the present city of Washington, rapidly be- coming one of the most beautiful capitals of the world. The ‘‘savages” are now far enough away. They were very extensive owners of land, as will appear from the following extract of a letter to the same correspondents, in Rotterdam, dated June 4, 1787 : “Since then we have Accts. from France to Gentle- men here, who had letters from their Correspondents in Europe, of their contracting with the Farmer Gen- eral for 200,000 acres in the neighbourhood of our Lands, for 200,000 French Crowns, & that the Govern- ment was sending out Settlers. Ifso no doubt it will add to the value of our Lands. Ifyou could uot sell . on advantageous terms you had better find out the Gentleman that sold those Lands and send him the papers. Perhaps he may have it in his power to sell ours along with his Own. Or, if you could sell a larger tract, say twenty thousand acres more, that is, if Speculators in Land would rather have a larger Tract, we would have you engage 20 or 30 Thousand Acres more, and shall send you out all the papers, or deliver them to your Order. We have also Accts. from England of Mr. Vancouver’s selling 100 Thou- sand Acres to English settlers who are coming out next Spring, so that that Place will be as thick as any Place in the States. If these Schemes should fail send back the papers as Quick as Possible. You will soon hear if this news of sale to Farmer General is true and you will be able to judge whether a tryal in France will answer.” It is also well known that Mark Willcox, following the example of many promi- nent men of means in Philadelphia at that time and long after, committed the mistake of investing in lands in many of the interior counties of Pennsyl- vania, instead of at their very doors. The rapid growth of the city was not foreseen, nor the overleaping by emigration of the mountainous districts of Pennsyl- vania, where they purchased, for the rich and vast valley of the Ohio and Mississippi. The whole tenor of this venerable letter-book shows plainly the great and lasting depression in all business that followed the Revolution. Its foreign correspondence contains many references to public matters transpiring at the time, one of which to the great Convention of ’87 shows the feeling of the intelligent portion of the community in regard to it. This letter is of date July 18, 1787: “‘ We have nothing new to Relate you except that Our Grand Convention, being deputed from the different States, is now sitting here. They have sett for upwards of six Weeks, and are as Respectable a Body as one ever had to meet on Public Business, as well for their Understanding & Fortunes as for the unbounded Confidence being placed in them by their Constituents. The purport of this Meeting is to see into the Situation of the Foederal Union, mend De- fects, and Strengthen it upon such solid Basis as will give power to Congress as well as many Resources, so that they’ll be reputable abroad as well as at Home. In the mean time to guard against the Infringing upon the Liberty of the Subject. This, no doubt, they will be able to Accomplish, as the People are Tired of the Loose Manner in which they have been Governed for Some time.” The last reference to the convention appears in a letter dated Sept. 25, 1787, as follows: “The Conven- tion has broken up, & has recommended us a Code of laws which, if adopted, will make us Happy at Home and Respected abroad, and we have little doubt of their being adopted, as the People are Generally for it. Nor is there any doubt of General Washington being Universally appointed President General, &c.”’ There are many precious bits of history and histor- ical reference in this old book which should not be lost, and which will become more valuable as time passes and the still fresh tints of recent history fade away. Mark Willcox’s first wife was his partner’s sister, Ellen Flahavan; another sister became the wife of Mathew Carey and the mother of the late Henry C. Carey, of Philadelphia, whose writings on social sci- ence and political economy have given him a world- wide reputation. Among the brothers-in-law an inti- mate friendship always existed, ending only at the death of Mark Willcox, in 1827. The only child of this first marriage, Ellen Willcox, was educated at the only boarding-school in Pennsylvania at that time, the Moravian School at Bethlehem. She married William Jenkins, of Baltimore, Md., and their de- scendants, quite numerous, are among the best-known and most-esteemed citizens of that city. His second wife was Mary Kauffman, daughter of Dr. Theoph- ilus Kauffman, of Strasburg, Germany, who came to Philadelphia long before the Revolution, and who died some years afterwards in Montgomery County, whither he removed away from the “rebels,” who had captured the city, and with whose Revolutionary ideas he had no sympathy. When his father died, in 1779, Mark Willcox con- tinued to live in Philadelphia, and carried on the manufacturing of paper at the Ivy Mill. At what date he removed from the city is not precisely known, but one of the letters in the letter-book spoken of mentions the fact of his living in the country in 1789, The old Ivy Mill had then been running sixty years, and was the second paper-mill built on the American continent, the Rittenhouse mill, on the Wissahickon, being the only one before it. Following its lead, a number of paper-mills were built in Delaware County, 494 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. commencing on Chester Creek ; and as late as the be- ginning of the nineteenth century more paper was made in Delaware County, Pa. (then shorn to its pres- ent dimensions), than in all the rest of the whole United States. This was the pioneer county in that particular industry, and long it held its pre-eminence. The old Ivy Mill, after standing over a hundred years, was torn down fifty-four years ago, or rather the greater part of it, and rebuilt by James M. Willcox. Two men of two generations, father and son, had conducted it ninety-eight years. The ponderous ma- chinery, however, of modern mills silenced it long ago, but it still stands, a silent relic of its early time. Its wheel has long since decayed; its stone gable is thickly covered with the venerable ivy-vine whose root came over the ocean (in 1718) from near the old Ivy Bridge, in Devonshire; and the day is drawing near when it will begin its last change into a picturesque ruin as ancient as we have them in this New World. The old mill has a history deeply interesting from its connection with the printing-presses of historic men, and perhaps more so from its relations to the old col- onial governments that preceded the formation of the United States, and the general government subse- quently. The Colonies were wont to issue each its own particular currency, and up to the time of the Revo- lution the paper for all the money of all the Colonies, from Massachusetts to the Carolinas, was manufac- tured by Thomas Willcox at his Ivy Mill; after which followed, out of the same mill, the paper for the Continental currency, and after that the paper for the government issues made necessary by the war of 1812. After Mark Willcox removed to the country (about 1789) he never afterwards returned to the city to live. He was a man of erudition, and a genial but dignified gentleman, and up to the time of his death (in 1827) it was his habit and pleasure to receive frequent visits from his many friends in town, who would drive their twenty miles to pass some days, in the old-fashioned way, at his pleasant country home. Many years before his death Judge Willcox had associated his sons, John and Joseph, in business with him, but retired early, as the books show that in 1811 the firm consisted of John and Joseph Willcox. Joseph died young and unmarried, and John again united with his father, the product of the mill being always principally bank-note, bond, and similar papers. John died in 1826, leaving two daughters, and his widow married, some years afterwards, Lieut. John Marston, Jr., U.S.N., who has survived her. He now (1884), as Rear-Admiral Marston, resides in Phila- delphia, enjoying good health at eighty-nine years of age. On the death of John Willcox his youngest brother, James M., assumed charge of the hereditary mill, and threw more vigor and activity into the business than it had ever known. His father dying the fol- lowing year, James became the sole proprietor. Three years afterwards he tore down the mill that had run for a century, and built upon the site a new one of double capacity, with improved machinery, Bank-note paper still continued to be the specialty. For a long period not only were the banks of the United States supplied with their paper from the Ivy Mill, but its lofts were at times piled with peculiar- looking papers of various tints, bearing the ingrained water-marks of most of the governments and banks of South America. Nearly the whole Western Continent drew its supplies from there, such was the reputation of the establishment; and Eastward its paper went as far as Italy and Greece. But an end had to come to this. The sagacity of James M. Willcox foresaw the impending changes that were to revolutionize the paper manufacture, and he began early to prepare for them; at first by improving and enlarging facilities, and then by adopting at once the revolutionary pro- cesses according to their best features, for which he had not long to wait. He was very early to appre- ciate the full merits of the Fourdrinier machine, and one of the first enterprising enough to adopt it. In 1835 he purchased from the heirs of Abraham Sharples the elder, on the main branch of Chesters Creek, and about two anda half miles from Ivy Mills, an extensive water-power, and the property on which the Sharples iron-works, consisting of rolling- and slitting-mills, had been situated. Here he built the first of the mills known as the Glen Mills, in which was placed one of the new Fourdrinier paper-machines of the largest class then known. He took his sons, Mark and William, into partnership, and for many years conducted a large and successful business, di- viding his attention among his various interests,—his farm, the Ivy Mill, the Glen Mill, and his mercantile house in the city. In 1846 he built the second of the Glen Mills. Soon after his health became precarious, and, although he suffered much, he remained actively engaged in the details of all his many engagements as long as he lived. On March 8, 1852, he completed his long-contemplated arrangements and retired from business, leaving it to his three sons, Mark, James, and Joseph, and died unexpectedly before the follow- ing morning. He was a man of unusual intelligence, strength and earnestness of character, and fervent religious convictions that governed all his intercourse with other men. No man was better known or more respected in the entire community. His charities ac- corded with his means. His influence was great, and always for good; and his death was a public loss. Born in 1791, and dying in 1852, he was not sixty-two years of age. His remains repose in the old family burying-ground upon the Ivy Mills property, where those of his father and grandfather were laid before him; and in the same ground lie the remains of many colored people, formerly slaves of his ancestors when slavery existed in Pennsylvania, and a number of their descendants for several generations. Without change of title, Mark, James M., and CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 495 Joseph, the three oldest sons of James M. Willcox, succeeded to the Ivy Mills and Glen Mills business in 1852. In 1866, Joseph retired from business, after disposing of his interests to his elder brothers, since when he has devoted his time to scientific pursuits, chiefly in the departments of geology and mineralogy. In the mean time the civil war had broken out, and the government was again forced to the issue of paper money, this time on a scale unprecedented in the his- tory of the world. For the third time, under the pressing necessities of war and broken credit, it had recourse to the Willcox House to supply its needs. Fortunately this had kept in advance of the times, and the brothers had, but a few years before, suc- ceeded in changing the manufacture of bank-note paper by bringing it also upon the Fourdrinier ma- - chine, thus enabling themselves to produce more in a day than the old practice, by hand process, could producein amonth. When, therefore, the emergency came they were able to meet it, first with one large mill, and soon after with a second. The supply was maintained, and always up to the requirements of the government. All the bank-note paper-mills of Europe, save one, are still hand-mills, and it is not too much to say that, at that time, all of them united could not have supplied the paper needed for our government’s issues of paper money. In 1864 the United States Treasury Department, prompted by the desire to prevent the counterfeiting of its issues, undertook the task of manufacturing a currency paper for its own use, and imparting to it some peculiarity of character by which counterfeiting could be detected. A costly mill with Fourdrinier machine was built on the lower floor of the Depart- ment building, and experiments at great cost were conducted there for four years. There was no out- come of any value; the attempts were all failures, and the Treasury mill ended where it had begun, with an inferior quality of simple white paper. It was then torn out, and the Willcox Brothers were invited to undertake a task that the Department, with all the scientific aid it could command, had failed in, and that had never yet been successfully performed any- where, This they were prepared to do by means of a peculiar paper invented by them, and patented three years before. The “localized-fibre”’ paper, manufac- tured for many years after this at the Glen Mills for the notes and bonds of the government, attained not merely a national, but a world-wide, reputation, for it accomplished the object desired. So jealously was it guarded by the government that for ten years the mills and premises were occupied by a government officer with a numerous police and detective force, and some forty employés of the Treasury Department, to insure that no sheet or bit of paper should be ab- stracted for unlawful purpose, and that every sheet should be counted and registered as made, and tracked through the various stages towards completion, until it should be delivered over to the express company to be taken away for use. During that period not a sheet, out of hundreds of millions made, was lost or missed, not a counterfeit seen on any treasury note or bond of the issue or series that began with that paper; and at the end, when Secretary John Sherman, in 1878, removed the manufacture of government paper from Pennsylvania, the paper account at Glen Mills balanced, a clear quittance was given, and the Treas- ury issue of paper money with which he began his administration was free from counterfeits. In 1880, Mark Willcox purchased his brother James’ interest in the Glen Mills property, the Philadelphia business, and the Sarum farm adjoining Glen Mills, of which they had been joint owners. Some years before he had purchased from his younger brothers, Edward and Henry, the old Ivy Mills estate, so that at his death, in April, 1883, he had acquired posses- sion of nearly all the properties of the family in Del- aware County that had historical interest. His two sons, James Mark and William, the present owners of the Glen Mills property, have recently enlarged the principal mill and are actively engaged in the old business, the mercantile department of which is still conducted by them at No. 509 Minor Street, Phila- delphia. These two young men constitute the oldest business house of any description in the United States; one that has continued from father to son, in one lo- cality, a hundred and fifty-five years. The Ivy Mills property, the original home, now belongs to the youngest brother, Thomas, of the same name as the founder of the family in America. James M. Willcox the younger, whose portrait is herein presented, was born at Ivy Mills, in the same house in which his father and grandfather were born, Nov. 20, 1824. He is the fourth son of James M. Willcox, and the second son of a second marriage contracted in 1819. His mother was Mary eldest daughter of Capt. James Brackett, of Quincy, Mass., in which State the Bracketts have resided for ten gen- erations. The first of them, also Capt. James Brack- ett, was born in Scotland, in 1611, and came over with the early Puritans. This ancestor figures in Haw- thorne’s “Scarlet Letter,” as captain of the soldiery and custodian of the jail in which Hester Prynne was confined. Her mother, Elizabeth Odiorne, descended from the ancestor of that name who came over with the Church of England colony that founded Ports- mouth, N. H. The old Odiorne mansion is still stand- ing, and is one of the most interesting antiquities of that place. James M. Willcox’s early school years were passed at Anthony Bolmar’s boarding-school, at West Chester, Pa., and thence he passed to George- town College, D. C., whose reputation for superior classical and literary training has always been recog- nized. After leaving college he commenced the study of medicine, but before completing the course changed his intentions and went to Italy, where he spent three years, mostly in Rome and its vicinity, in the study of ancient and modern languages, the higher mathe- 496 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. matics, and philosophy. There existed nowhere bet- ter or higher schools of languages and philosophy than the Roman Propaganda and Sapienza. In them the Latin, instead of being an object of study, was the text of the class-books, the medium of communica- tion, the spoken and written language of the schools. In it Greek, Hebrew, the sciences, and philosophy were learned and expounded by the professors. The rare advantages within his grasp the young Ameri- can student employed to the best advantage, and brought home a full share of the honors competed for, becoming an accomplished linguist, speaking several languages, and attaining in the end to the Doc- torship in Philosophy. This degree is lightly given in the United States, frequently without any course of philosophy at all, but in the universities of Conti- nental Europe it is conferred on but few, on account of the very severe course and examination required in logic, metaphysics, and ethics, as well as in physics and mathematics. At this time Mr. Willcox enjoyed the privilege of the acquaintance and conversation of men whose names are now historical in the literary world, the recollection of which he now cherishes as among the most pleasant of his life. Not the least among these friends was the greatest of all linguists, ancient or modern, Cardinal Mezzofanti, who was master of forty languages, and with whom he made a study of ancient Anglo-Saxon. In 1847 he received from Pope Pius IX. his degree in philosophy, the di- ploma issuing, not from the faculty, but, as a special favor, directly from the Pontiff, as thus set forth in its text: “Pius Papa Nonus, volens eum speciali gratia cumulare, eum Doctorem in Philosophia creavit, cum omnibus honoribus et oneribus que Phi- losophiz Doctoribus propria sunt.” This diploma, it is unnecessary to say, is much valued and preserved with great care. After spending some months in visiting many parts of Europe Mr. Willcox returned home in the fall of 1847, with health somewhat im- paired, and some years afterwards entered into busi- ness with his father and brother at Glen Mills. Trans- ferring the same industry and ambition into practical business that he had carried into his scholastic career, he gradually introduced features into it so radical as to entirely change its character. The advantages of superior education are not lost in any career in life, for the discipline and enlarge- ment of the mind attained can be advantageously applied almost anywhere. One of Mr. Willcox’s first aims was to raise the paper manufacture to a higher level, out of the routine into which it seemed to have settled; and to this end he conducted a series of ex- perimental researches, producing, in the course of a few years, as he relates, a greater variety of papers than had ever before been made by any one person. Taking as his department of the business the prac- tical manufacture, he turned special attention towards the plan of making bank-note paper by machinery, and with complete success. Then, impressed with the importance of checking, and perhaps preventing, the counterfeiting of money, so commonly and easily done at that time, he conceived the task of aecom- plishing with paper what the bank-note companies, with their arts of fine and geometrical engraving, could not accomplish ; the result being the invention of the “localized-fibre” paper, so long and so effi- ciently used by the United States government for its notes and bonds. For many years, as was said before, this distinctive paper was manufactured at Glen Mills, under the government’s supervision and pro- tection. Its success at home brought it to the favor- able consideration of the governments of Europe, and in 1878, under agreement with the Imperial Gov- ernment of Germany, Mr. Willcox sent out an agent to Berlin, near which city was put in successful oper- ation a bank-note paper-mill with the special ma- chinery required, as at Glen Mills, for the manufac- ture of the German currency paper. So pleased were the authorities with the product of the new mill that he received from them a testimonial stating that the contract had been more than carried out, to their great satisfaction; and the localized-fibre paper be- came the currency paper of the Empire. An exhibit of this protective paper was subsequently made at the great Paris Exhibition, and there received the highest possible award of “ Dipléme d’Honneur.” The chemical paper long used by the United States Treasury Department for the stamps and checks of the department, and called “‘Chameleon” paper on account of its sensitive changes when tampered with, was also Mr. Willcox’s invention, and put an end to the counterfeiting and re-using of Internal Revenue stamps, by which the government had long been ex- tensively robbed of its revenue. Thus in many parts of his business he found fields for the employment of knowledge acquired outside of its ordinary sphere, and so succeeded in vastly enlarging its proportions and lifting it to the highest plane of usefulness. During this long period of active life and heavy cares his earlier tastes for literature were not neglected, and the hours unoccupied by business were generally de- yoted to scientific study. He has been an occasional contributor to The American Catholic Quarterly Review, always upon subjects of metaphysical philosophy ; and a few years ago he published the conclusions from a long course of abstract reading and reflection in an octavo volume of! logico-metaphysics, taking strong ground throughout, from the stand-point of rational analysis, against the growing materialistic atheism of the times, impelled thereto, as set forth in the dedi- cation, by the desire to contribute his part in a good work. He has in progress, he states, two other works of somewhat kindred character, upon which he labors alternately, which will require several years to com- plete. 1 Elementary Philosophy, Parts I. and Il. By James M. Willcox, Ph.D. Porter & Coates, No. 822 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia. CONCORD TOWNSHIP. When the scheme for a Centennial Exhibition was | projected Mr. Willcox was among the first to earnestly advocate that it should be international, and to do all in his power to advance it. He was appointed a mem- ber of the first Board of Finance created by act of Congress, and at a later day was requested by the Centennial Commission to act as one of the Judges of the Exhibition, of whom there were one hundred American and one hundred foreign selected. At the first meeting of the committees he was chosen Presi- dent of Group XIII., and after six months’ active duty in that capacity he wrote, by request, a critical compendium of the entire work of his committee for publication. His services were recognized in a letter of thanks, with a special medal, by the Commission. In 1852 he married Mary Keating, of Philadelphia, daughter of Jerome Keating, who, in partnership with John J. Borie, was one of the early manu- facturers of Manayunk; and granddaughter of John Keating, a distinguished officer of the French army in the last century, who, for having captured the island of St. Eustache from the British, was decorated by Louis XVI., and made Chevalier of the Order of Saint Louis. Of this marriage there are five children living, of whom two are married, one residing at Col- orado Springs and the other in Philadelphia. His present wife is Katharine, daughter of the late Abra- ham W. Sharples, of Thornbury township, and grand- daughter, on her mother’s side, of Right Rev. Henry U. Onderdonk, formerly the Episcopalian Bishop of Philadelphia. Of this marriage there are two children, both living. The family have lived in Spruce Street, Philadelphia, for many years, but still retain posses- sion of a farm in Thornbury, near Cheyney’s Station. Since his retirement from regular business in 1880, Mr. Willcox has been in the habit of spending the winter months in Florida. He early foresaw the phe- nomena! development of South Florida, little known six years ago, but now rapidly distancing the northern part; and made extensive purchases of property in Orange County and on Indian River that are now very valuable. With the care of these and his ma- terial interests at home, the responsibilities of direc- torship in some large corporations, the continued pursuit of scientific study, and the labor upon his works in hand, he indulges in little leisure; and, to judge from the past and present, is not likely to find the pleasures of idleness as long as he lives. Licensed Houses.—The first record that appears of license being granted in Concord is at the August: court, 1722, when the petition of Mathias Karle (Kerlin) was presented, asking that he be permitted to keep a public-house in that township, and to sell rum and other liquors therein, which application was approved by the justices. At the same court John Hannum desired the privilege of keeping a house of entertainment to sell “Beer and Sider,” which was also granted. Kerlin’s name annually thereafter, to and including the year 1726, appears of record, after 82 497 which it is omitted from the clerk’s list, as is also that of Hannum from the list of 1731. Hannum’s house, I learn from the application of his son, John Hannum, in 1747, was on the road from Chester to Nottingham,—the Concord road,—and the latter’s name appears annually thereafter up to 1760. In 1761, Robert Hall succeeded Hannum, and in 1771, John Palmer followed Hall in business, and continued there until 1776. In 1782, Frederick Steen seems to have kept this house, then called the “ Buck,” and the following year John Gest succeeded him. Robert Burnett obtained license for 1784, and William Han- num from 1785 to 1787, when William Lockart took his place until 1788, at which date the inn disappears as a public-house. To return to Kerlin’s inn, On Nov. 24, 1730, Mat- thias Kerlin presented his petition, in which he states that he “had license for several years and no com- plaint made, but on account of other affairs had de- clined making application for a considerable time, now wishes to renew,” which application was granted. Michael Atkinson, Aug. 31, 1731, presented his pe- tition, wherein he sets forth that for some time past “he had a recommendation to keep a public-house in West Town, and being desirous to remove into Con- cord, found a suitable place, but hearing that Matthias Kyrlin had an inclination to get into that business, he went to him and received a denial of the report.” Atkinson then agreed with the landlord for a term of years at eight pounds per annum, and obtained li- cense to remove into Concord. ‘‘ The license now being expired,” he wished it renewed. It appears that, notwithstanding Kerlin’s declaration that he did not propose to apply for license, he did present his application to the court, which was supplemented by the following petition emanating from the ‘ Inhabi- tants of Concord,” bearing date Aug. 31, 1781, “ That whereas our Township have been through some mis- fortune in some measure oppressed by so many pub- lick houses allowed in our town, & by some this last year without our knowledge or good liking. Let us have but one of that Calling, and if you think fit to grant recommendation to Mathias Kyrlen we shall, &c.,” be pleased if the court act on these suggestions. The remonstrance was signed by Benjamin Menden- hall, Thomas Downing, and nine others. The foregoing remonstrance is indorsed “ Allowed,” while the petition of Atkinson is marked “ Not Al- lowed.” Kerlin’s name appears regularly on the clerk’s list from that date to 1738, when I lose sight of him until 1745, when he regularly is allowed to entertain the public until Feb. 26, 1750, when his pe- tition states that he has kept tavern twenty-eight years; that his family is small, as his children are provided for, but he is unable to work at his trade of shoemaking. As an additional reason why he should be allowed license, he urges that he and his wife are descendants of the ‘‘ first adventurers who came into this province when money would not purchase 498 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. Bread.” The court, however, declined to grant him the privilege desired. In 1785, William Underwood was licensed to keep public-house in Concord. In 1786, Samuel Johnson, Alexander Lockart, and Caleb Taylor received the court’s approval. The latter, in 1788, had the privi- lege continued to him. In 1748, Nathaniel Newlin was granted license for his house “ near several great roads,” and it was con- tinued to him until 1776, excepting during the years 1757-59, when William Smith seems to have been the landlord, and in 1760 no names appear of record. License may have been, but probably was not, denied to Newlin during that period. This house was on the Wilmington and Great Valley road, near where the Naaman’s Creek road crosses the former highway, now Johnson’s Corners. From 1776 to 1782 there is no record respecting license in Concord ; in fact, the tracing of successive landlords for public-houses in that township is more difficult than in any other in our county, Ridley and Lower Chichester not ex- cepted. In 1782, Amos Mendenhall had license; in 1774, John Burnett; and from 1758 to 1788, Thomas Maddock, when I lose trace of this house. In 1791, however, John Fred appears to have been landlord of Newlin’s Tavern, and in 1800, James Jeffries kept the house, to yield it, in 1806, to John Hickman. In 1810, Charles Hughes had license for The Three Tuns (a favorite name for inns at that day), and Nathaniel Newlin superseded Hughes in 1814, and continued as ‘mine host” there only one year, when, in 1814, Thomas Smith took his place for a season as the land- lord of the old house. After that year the owner declined to have it longer licensed as a tavern. Moses Bullock, Jr., in his application for the year 1815, says that the noted tavern, The Three Tuns, the property of Nathaniel Newlin, is about -“‘to Drop, and your petitioner has lately erected a convenient House for Business on the same road leading from the Borough of Wilmington to Great Valley, about half a mile from the former stand, and a tavern will be badly wanted in said neighborhood.” Bullock’s Tavern,—for his application was allowed,— we learn from the remonstrance against James Smith, was located on the Wilmington road, about a quarter of a mile above Elam. It was known as the Buck, and he was licensed annually thereafter until 1832, when as a public inn it disappears from the records. In 1783, Joshua Vernon had leave to keep a tavern known as The Blue Ball, at which house he was superseded, in 1787, by James Oliver, who had license only for that year, while Joshua Vernon re- ceived the privilege to keep an inn at a house located on the Concord road a short distance beyond Chelsea. The ancient hostelry, well known as the Cross-Keys, no longer as a public-house, is now owned by Michael McGinnis. In 1789, the last year the justices of Ches- ter County granted license for the territory now com- prising Delaware County, Joshua Vernon was the only person in Concord to whom the judges show partiality. Under the new order of things, at the first court held at Chester, after the division, he re- ceived license, and was continued yearly to be favored until 1796, when James Jeffries succeeded him at the Cross-Keys. The latter was the landlord until 1799, when Ann Vernon had the license, and in 1800, George Mattson followed her. Thomas Ring had the house in 1802; Samuel Chapman was there in 1805, and the next year he gave place to Jonathan Paul, Jr., who, in 1807, was succeeded by Amos Wad- dell. In 1809, Curtis Jeffries was “mine host,” but he surrendered the honors to Amos Waddell the next year, and the latter, in 1811, to Peter Harper. In 1812, James Marshall took the responsibility of the Cross-Keys on himself, and sustained them during the second disagreement with England, and for three years after the cruel war was over, when, in 1818, David Howes succeeded him, to be superseded the next year by William Baldwin. The latter remained there for eight years, until 1828, when Reece Pyle had license for the inn, and in 1888, Nathaniel Stevens became the last landlord of the Cross-Keys of Con- cord, for after 1836 it disappears from the list. In 1817, Joseph Hannum petitioned court for license to keep a public house of entertainment on the West Chester and Concord road, although it would have been more accurate had he said on Concord road, for the White Horse Inn was located on the latter highway, a short mile above Chelsea. The old build- ing, partly of logs and partly of stone, recently the property of Robert M. Smith and now owned by J. & J. Darlington, still stands. He was successful in his application, and he received the court’s favor annually thereafter until 1837, when it ceased to be a tavern. During all the time it was a licensed house, the elec- tors of Concord, Birmingham, Bethel, and that part of Thornbury lying west of a public road, from Street road by the shops and continuing by the house of Jacob Parks, to the road dividing the townships of Concord and Thornbury (in 1823), all voted at this inn, while in 1830 the second election district of Delaware County, comprising Concord, Birmingham, Bethel, and Thornbury, had their polling-place at the White Horse, and continued annually to be held there until and including 1837, when a tavern at that place was discontinued. On Jan. 15, 1819, James Smith, the owner and oc- cupier of the premises at the intersection of the roads leading from Wilmington to West Chester, and from Brandywine to New London Turnpike road, states in his petition that he is desirous of keeping a public- house at that location, and to that end has improved his property and provided himself with buildings and other things necessary and convenient for that busi- ness. On Jan. 18, 1819, a remonstrance from the in- habitants of Concord and Birmingham sets forth that the signers “have heard with much consurn that James Smith has petitioned your honours to grant him CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 499 a Licence to keep a house of public entertainment on the Wilmington road, in the neighborhood of the public houses on the same road, one of them but one-quarter of a mile above and the other one mile and a half be- low, which is sufficient to accommodate the public. Besides it is feared that if the number of public houses should be encreased that some of them will have to re- sort to neighboring custom for support.” The court re- jected the petition, as also asimilar one dated October 18th of the same year, which was indorsed by seventy- nine signatures. The remonstrance filed against the latter application states that the petitioner wanted “to locate a tavern at the intersection of the road from Chandlers bridge to the Philadelphia and New London Turnpike road with the road from West Chester to Wilmington, which we consider wholly useless and apprehensive, and would be injurious for many reasons. On the West Chester and Wilmington road there is a tavern, about one-quarter of a mile above the afore- mentioned intersection, and below it there is one in New Castle County, a small distance more than a mile, so that travelers from West Chester to Wilming- ton can need no opportunity for refreshments more than is already afforded. The other road from Chan- dler’s bridge is but lately laid out and your remon- strants confidently state that few (if any) loaded travelling waggons have been seen on that road, be- sides the said road crosses the Concord road not more than a quarter of a mile from Hannum’s Tavern, so that those who have really occasion to pass along the said cross road can have no difficulty in obtaining re- freshments in passing at either of the intersections.” The remonstrants continue, ‘‘ Although they acknowl- edge the names of many inhabitants of Delaware County very respectable, are signed to the petition of James Smith, yet it is a matter of certainty that a large proportion of the signers are inhabitants of the State of Delaware, inhabitants of Chester County, and other places distant from James Smith’s, who prob- ably can have no opportunity of knowing the facts set forth in his petition nor any occasion of passing by the said cross road.” The remonstrance had sixty names attached thereto. Jan. 27, 1820, James Smith again petitioned fora license for the house, his application being signed by one hundred and twenty-four persons. He also filed an additional paper with seventy-six names. attached, in which the signers state “that, learning that a large number of respectable citizens stating” (to the peti- tion already filed) “ their belief that a Tavern is much wanted at the stand where the said James Smith lives and that he is a suitable character to keep such house of entertainment. We under the influence of a simi- lar opinion and from a conviction that the public con- venience would be promoted by such an establish- ment, which is needed both for the accommodation of travellers and drovers using the road with cattle, unite in requesting that license be granted to Smith.” The court, however, shook their judicial heads, and again the petitioner was turned unsatisfied away. The next year he remained dormant, but March 22, 1822, he ap- pears again. The judges held his petition under ad- visement and finally refused it, but at the April court, 1823, James Smith came off with flying colors, and after four and a quarter years of bitter struggles the Drove Tavern, at present in Elam, was established. In 1826, James Smith changed the name of the house to the Drovers’ and Travelers’ Inn, and it was so kept by William Smith in 1827. In 1831 the tavern was licensed to Jane Smith; in 1835, to James; and in 1837 to William Smith, who remained there until 1844. In the latter year Milton Stamp became the landlord of the old hostelry, changing its name again to the Drove, and the following year he gave it a new title, that of Pleasant Hill. In 1849, Isaac B. Gilpin succeeded to the business, to be followed in 1854 by Edward B. Hoskin, and in 1856 Joseph Cheyney became the ‘‘mine host” of the inn. John Reven had license the following year, and in 1858 Charles Cheyney received the court’s favor. In 1859, William 8. Cheyney was the landlord, and continued as such until 1860, when Joseph Cheyney had license granted him, but he died before taking it out, and the privilege was extended to his widow, Mary Cheyney. In 1864, William E. May became the proprietor of The Farmers’ and Drovers’ Inn, to be succeeded, in 1868, by Richard T. Plummer, who restored the more modern title, Pleasant Hill, to the tavern. In 1869, Joseph Chandler was the landlord, to be followed, in 1870, by Plummer, who owned the property. The house was not licensed from 1871 to 1875, when Za- dock T. Speakman had license granted him, to be suc- ceeded, in 1878, by Benjamin French. In 1879, Wil- liam F. May was landlord, and, in 1881, was followed by Jackson McFarlan. In 1888, when the general remonstrance against granting any license in Concord was presented, the court denied to McFarlan the privilege for the sale of liquor at Elam, exactly sixty years after James Smith was first granted the right to keep a public-house there, The Concordville Inn was established as a public- house in 1830, in which year John Way was granted license there, and being centrally located in the town- ship, after Joseph Hannum retired from tavern-keep- ing, the election polls were ordered to be held at that point. In 1858, John Way declined to apply, and the privilege for that year was granted to David M. Hannum, but he failing to take out the license, George W. Taylor was permitted to enjoy it in his stead. The latter continued annually to petition suc- cessfully until 1861, when he was followed by Zadock T. Speakman, who, in 1869, gave place to James Cloud. The latter called the house the Concord- ville Hotel, and in 1871 he was the only person in the township who received the approval of the court. In 1872, Frank H. Cloud had the license, after which time it does not appear to have had the indorsement of the Quarter Sessions until 1876, when the present 500 HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. owner and landlord, James Neeld, secured that favor. Annually thereafter he was among the licensed houses until April, 1883, when two lengthy petitions, one signed by one hundred and twenty-eight men, and the other by one hundred and fifty women, were pre- sented to court protesting “against granting of any hotel license in the said township, and especially against granting license for the sale of intoxicating liquors to James Neeld, of Concordville, or Jackson McFarlan, of Elam, . . . believing that such license and sale is fraught with results disastrous to the com- fort, prosperity, and morality of a portion of our peo- ple and the disturbance of our peace, that their peti- tions are very generally signed by those who bear but a small share of taxation, and who are intoxicated to their own injury. We are fully persuaded that such licenses are not necessary for the accommodation of the public, and that our neighborhood will be better withoutthem.” After a lengthy hearing, Judge Clay- ton refused to grant the license. At the January court, 1884, the license was restored to the Concord- ville Hotel. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES, CIIARLES W. MATHUES. The Mathues family are of Irish lineage, Andrew, the grandfather of Charles W., having emigrated after the war of the Revolution, and settled in Balti- more County, Md. He was united in marriage to a Mrs. Smith, widow, and had a son, William, born Dec. 16, 1796, in the above county, where his early life was spent. When about twenty-one years of age he came to Chester County, Pa., and followed the trade of a paper-maker. He married Susan Mc- Henry, whose children were Andrew W., John Mc- Henry, William F., Moses R., Charles W., David S., Alexander C., and Susan E. (Mrs. Daniel Hart). Charles W. was born March 15, 1830, in Chester County, and when thirteen years of age became a resident of Delaware County, at which early period of his life he began a self-supporting career by enter- ing the cotton-mill of John P. Crozer. After two years spent at that point he became an employé of other mills in the vicinity, and at the age of twenty entered the professional field as a student of dentistry. Concluding, however, not to practice, he became a clerk for N. L. Yarnall, at Lenni, and subsequently purchased and ran a stage line for a period of two years. He, in 1851, married Amanda, daughter of Milcah Richardson, and has children,—Andrew W., William M., Mary E., Susan M., Charles G., Samuel W., Amanda E., and Ida May. Having determined to become a farmer, Mr. Mathues, in 1857, rented land in Aston township, and subsequently in other localities, finally purchasing a farm in the above township, which his son now cultivates. In 1879 he located in Concord, and has since that time filled a position of prominence as an agriculturist in that township. He is in politics a pronounced Repub- lican, and as a representative of that party was elected in 1875 sheriff of Delaware County, which office he held for the term of three years, as also various town- ship offices. He has since that time been devoted to the cultivation of his farm. Mr. Mathues is a mem- ber of the Independent Order of Odd-Fellows, as also of the Improved Order of Red Men, the Knights of Pythias, and the American Protestant Association, He is active as a leader in the temperance cause, and has carefully shunned the use of strong drink and to- bacco during his lifetime. .These correct principles, together with habits of industry and self-reliance, have rendered him independent. In religion he worships with the Methodist Episcopal Church. THOMAS P. POWEL. Davis Powel, the father of the subject of this bio- graphical sketch, was born in Chester County, and married Miss Catharine, daughter of Thomas Pen- nell. Their children were Thomas P., Charles Rogers, Davis, Benjamin Rush, Hannah A. (Mrs. William Baldwin, of Harford County, Md.), and G. Washington. Mr. Powel eventually removed to Mary- land, where he purchased an extensive landed prop- erty, and remained until his death. His son, Thomas P., was born on the 7th of April, 1811, in Philadel- phia, and in early life repaired with his father to Maryland, where he enjoyed superior advantages of education. Circumstances influenced his removal in youth to Concord township, Delaware Co., where he engaged in the cultivation of the estate of his maternal relatives. In 1861, having inherited the farm, he made it his residence, and during the remainder of his life followed the business of a farmer. He married, on the 3d of February, 1852, Miss Lydia, daughter of William Garrigues, of Philadelphia, and grand- daughter of Samuel Garrigues, of Haverford town- ship. Their only son, William G., now occupies the Pennell homestead, which, in the direct line of de- scent, is the property of Mrs. Powel and her son. The latter is actively identified with the public meas- ures of the county, was for years secretary and treas- urer of the Republican Executive Committee of the county, as also its chairman in 1880, and in 1882 was elected to the State Legislature. Thomas P. Powel made his influence felt in the social and political life of the county. He was in politics a Democrat of the Jeffersonian school, and an ardent supporter of the principles of his party. During the sessions of 1857- 58 he was its representative in the State Legislature, and served on the Committees on Agriculture, Rail- Toads, ete. He also filled various less important offices in connection with the township. Though 4 Friend by virtue of his antecedents, he worshiped with the congregation of St. John’s Protestant Epis- My if SE —AA Nh y if A jj ip . — K ZA ty by ij We Pi yy, vi | i n\ SS : | CONCORD TOWNSHIP. 501 copal Church of Concord, and was a member of the vestry of that church. Mr. Powel was frequently called upon to act as trustee of estates and guardian, while his unbiased judgment made his services es- pecially valuable in cases requiring arbitration. In public life he was a man of sterling integrity, the strictest justice, and great decision of character. In his social relations he was distinguished by an emi- nently sympathetic, kind, and benevolent nature. His death occurred Jan. 7, 1872, in his sixty-first year. CHARLES PALMER. John Palmer, the progenitor of the family in Dela- ware County, in 1688 purchased one hundred acres of land in Concord township, the greater part of which has remained in the possession of his descendants to the present time. He married Mary Southery, and had among his children a son, John, who married Martha Yearsley, whose son, Moses, inherited two- thirds of the homestead. He married Abigail New- lin, whose only son, John, born in 1745, married Han- nah, daughter of Abram Martin, of Aston, and had children, ten in number, of whom John, born in 1788, in conjunction with the occupation of a farmer, learned the trade of a saddler. He married Beulah, daughter of William Walter, of Centreville, Del., and had children,—Lewis, William W., John, Rachel, Charles, Hannah, Lydia, and Beulah. By a second marriage to Elizabeth Hall were born no children. Charles Palmer, whose birth occurred Sept. 16, 1811, in Concord township, spent his youth at the home of his parents. At the age of sixteen he removed to Wilmington, Del., and served as a merchant’s clerk. He later repaired to Chester, Pa., and acted in the same capacity for J. P. & William Eyre, remaining with them until his marriage, in 1838, to Deborah, daughter of Benjamin and Mary Pitman, of Mon- mouth County, N. J. Their children are Mary F. (Mrs. Edward Darlington), Lewis, James (deceased), Edwin H. (deceased, who served in the late war), and Hannah Ann (deceased). Mrs. Palmer died Nov. 1, 1870. She was a woman of marked character, and much respected in her neighborhood for works of charity and love. He was again married in 1874 to Joanna Stoll, of Concord, who survives. After his marriage Mr. Palmer engaged in mercantile pursuits at Beaver Valley, Del.; but finding that no trade could there be successfully conducted without the sale of liquor, he abandoned mercantile ventures and became a farmer. In 1842 he was appointed steward of the County House, and filled the office with entire satisfaction for a period of twelve years. On the ex- piration of this term he purchased the Hall home- stead, in Concord township, and during the remainder of his life engaged in the cultivation of its broad acres. He was, as an early Whig and later as a Republican, actively interested in public men and measures, As supervisor for a term of years he did much to improve the roads of his township. He held the offices of director of the First National Bank of Media for several years, and of the Delaware County Mutual Insurance Company from its organization. He was in religion a member of the society ot Friends, and attended the Concordville Friends’ Meeting. His death occurred April 12, 1876, in his sixty-fourth year. The following resolution of the Delaware County Mutual Insurance Company on the occasion of his decease bears witness to his character: “ Resolved, That in the death of Charles Palmer the company has lost one of its most faithful and efficient officers and society a useful member. Active and evergetic in the discharge of his duties, moderate aud con- scientious in his counsels, prompt and constant iu his attendance at our meetings, and pleasaut in his intercourse with his fellow-members, his absence will be noted and his loss felt. His helping hand was ever ready for those who were needy, and his death will be mourned by many to whom his unostentatious kindness has been extended when strug- gling in the toils of adversity.” The First National Bank of Media, also, in a sim- ilar series of resolutions, expressed the fact “That in his death the board and society have lost one of their most useful members, one who by his attention and integrity contributed in a considerable degree to the success of the institution. Pleasant and considerate to all with whom he had intercourse, his loss will be greatly deplored.” LEWIS PALMER. Lewis Palmer, the son of Charles and Deborah Pit- man Palmer, was born Oct. 2, 1837, in Concord town- ship, and in early youth removed to the present site of the borough of Media, where he remained until sixteen years of age. His education was principally received at the school of S. M. Janney, of Loudoun County, Va., and in Chester County, Pa. On completing his studies he returned to the farm and cultivated the land on shares for his father. He was married in 1862 to Hannah H., daughter of Joseph and Susan Pancoast, of Salem County, N. J., and has children ,—Charles, Joseph P., Mary D., Anna T. (deceased), Edwin L., and Samuel C. Charles, of this number, graduated with honor at Swarthmore College, and is now en- gaged in teaching. Mr. Palmer, on the death of his father, inherited the paternal estate upon which he now resides. He devotes his attention principally to the manufacture of butter for the Chester market. He has also given some thought to genealogical re- search, and prepared with much labor and care a record of the various branches of the Palmer and Trimble families. He is in politics a Republican ; has served for six years as school director, and been a leading spirit in the erection of commodious school buildings in Concord township. He has also been one of the most earnest advocates of the temperance cause in the township. Mr. Palmer is a member of the Delaware County Institute of Science, and corre sponding member of the Historical Society of the State of Delaware. He is also president and director of the Farmers’ Market of Chester. In religion he is a Friend, and an acknowledged minister of the Concord meeting. His views on religious subjects are, however, of a liberal character. HISTORY OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 502 OTB BOT, diqs ur “eq ‘10% “S249 9¥ poaLuy ‘nana tos dunok qa ‘9g9T “aq ‘IT sung ‘etdnoa smypy, ‘eS9L "Pp ‘99 -BODL'P {PO9L “"g99T “ul “JuES ‘qy1OMspuLyL "2691 "Pp ‘NOL ae = "AUVAL —— ‘Sq9L ‘a 8 -Gc9L sce ais aie one ‘TA jo “ig ‘aasNadg WVITIAA JO Jezysnep ‘ABV jo ajoq pus aos ‘usvay ee ‘tl “YIOMSpusA qv spuvy jo pezjos polp + 6F9T “9091 “0991 "P ‘L291 ‘uoq1ousduly "9990 «'q) “ANYE SPOLMIB MA 78 poling fpoom “PO9T “GZoT ‘ATT “9191 ‘AUT ‘op ‘Aopnys -odoy 38 pelt ‘sung 'q ‘VHLUVAL ‘NOLONIUUG ‘qu0dHs ¥ jo Lunog toot “avr 43g _— "89-2991 ‘0091 KUay ‘Ur sSvVHOUL NHOG jo *duq ‘auvHOIy jo mee ee “OZ9L “4 ates “OTOL ‘A saat ts . *P fOT9L 4 SNVITTIAA ‘A ‘A on ? i ie Higa ve 11 ‘ VIUVA 1eysnep ‘Nvo¢ — sey puvuos a "A | ‘ “ELST “6291 “PO WALL “PLSL paaoad [pL f yqaom 2 "GOL ‘qQ710M" ‘on AUW “apvg Lond Jo qoom -spuvyy JO NHoe "96-G69L ‘F "dog “Wi S HOTMAB AA ‘p ‘qqtomspuvy jo “spuvyy 48 ‘D SLLgT . “TIVNG AINUVHLVO jo uos 4sodunoé ‘op ‘aeeig uospukm JO aTHOOGGIG NHOf jo Jioy puv pering ae ee eee jo Jo}ySnep ‘vaHLouog ——— ‘isay 410 ‘assy a es uudo0op yADOY Jo 190}YyYsnep ‘HLAaVZITI uos ‘aLsay on "AI “68gr “ydog 410% ‘WoMoseTeTT ‘AIBIGT OTPVNTeA 48 poling ‘juezxo MoU St poop YO ‘Moy HSOf oUO 0} ‘NVIT SIq peyyvonbog oy [BIpeqyeQ YOM Jo 10jdevyO puv uveg oy} 04 ‘TeMor puwy TLALM sdoysig zeeu ‘wrpoyywg Arnqsipeg ul paring LL-OLGL 'P SILT ‘Aangsityg Jo rouowpy doysig {09-6¢¢T ‘13} -soqooy Jo doysig {6gg1 ‘ArnqieyuRQ Jo ucoBepyoIy { gocT ‘Wore pL SLE ‘OJSUTUTISAA, IB WRT JUVISE}01g OY} PUOJop 0} payutoddy -TIAA Pres OF} JO ATV] UeSeAde.1 [BUOS.IOd sv ‘powmvU-1oqye eoISIpod SI} UL ‘ESVay) SVIOHOIN Aq poudisse 10M ‘OOLT “uRr WOE perep poop Aq ‘ort ‘ative QOOT 10f ‘10}80044 “OE ‘UeA\OSe, BAT UT “UOSIt -I¥y) ol} puv esavINQ fo[MOQ poURIs ‘ycq] ‘euNnr 4G poy¥p peop Se-Lecl ‘edpriqurep ‘eZop[op a,suryy Jo MolIOT “ELaT ‘q ‘SIsad9) aNAWa a9} Aq “sibsy ‘AaN0, 0TH PUe LNAOTE SVWONY, WoyM 01 ‘WVITTIA, ‘ “qyeOH “HIST) SVHOBI, ssa: MOY JO TLSAH AONAUAVT *purlsag ‘Mey SUlUIIIg WOT YI10U JO 4SAM 01991] B SoU Moy B SUA THOMSPUBA, OUR OU, —'970Ar “ITA A100 Ze pur TE ‘pazjos porp Ayyereaos Loy YOIYA Jo pus ‘eoqasos ,s]QSIUy Aq ploy AUNAFT pue SVWOHY, pres OY} Ory ‘ory spuvl, puv oFunssam v pou “TTA LIUOF YY ‘OMSpULET JO TouR_ oY} 10J pjey JANOH V 4¥ ‘puvqsny sy ‘AIsTH NHOL ples ey} WOYA Jo WSU ‘ITA Aue ZI ‘o.10 4} spuey ONd Ul ‘YSIeg UopOUSTUTY ur “WaT MOY 01 eso[o “Og 10}s0010A\ ‘opomdoyy Jo par ‘eSunssour ‘pfoy{doo jo yuWBU9} poz}twWpe SAYAV] AUNAR Jo JopYSneppuwis-jvois puv svwOu, Jo doy pu 1oyyInep ‘Gauvorvyy “—""N._{ ploy ‘WJAOMspuLy Jo ‘usgHy 10 ‘ALsay) NHOL *T rr “LOST “p ‘pavyory Jo TTY pus os ‘YIIOMSpULT] JO TLSI) NHOC “IIT | —= “LoL ‘p ‘aisay NHor Jo 110 pus uos ‘yoMspuey] JO FTisay GUVHOTY ‘] ‘puysuq ‘su1y JO eBeT[0N Ur ‘PEgT ‘ot1YsI9}se0I0 44 JO UOIVE}ISIA— “AQ ‘S19 IVEY YOTIYSO Z ueomjoq ‘1edoid ‘pasvie pray siojoaoys W—7s049 ‘radoid ‘pasvia spveq S19[9AOYS E MOVAJoq ‘IQ WOIAOYO v oINZyY—'swtpy ‘powaup yntoar fo saInigy pau ay) puv puvpbug yjog wr sarrtoyinp say20 puv Bpaaqy api Wow sunybuiuug eaniopr ag fo asoy Burpnjow ‘saysiung sayio pun ‘ayojsnyg ‘aanjd yoy fo ssarsibay suajenapy ayn ‘yrwomepungy fo spjoy aunog ay7 woif paonpagy “(LS3ND S3aIyNLNAQ OML 1SV71 NI AISNOSNOHHA ing N3130) ATINWA LSVa9 ‘LSaHD ‘“ALSAD ‘LSAD AHL AO FAaANVIIGAd 2. \\ S ) \ \\ \\ \\ GEST. JOSEPH ST. = Y IBEKAT G > v J 503 CONCORD TOWNSHIP. *80]V1G POU ON) UT AjIAOSUOT ys9}Ba1F ‘paure9u0d st ATIUIBJ STY) Sv IB} OS YSvaT 4B ‘ayBOIPUL puv ‘Ysva Vy} 0} OUT} Jo polted FZurpuodserto9 19A09 oNUeIyY Ey} JO SOM SUOIIDUDT ssay OM} 'SP.10M 19Y}JO UT “UOIBIOUET UROLOUTY YUAAV]A ‘Z9ST “q “LSA AUNT, HaaTsor YI spuodsa.t.10o Ajiweu ‘uoyRiaues Ysi[saq yUeEZIIG} ‘ZLST “q ‘ATVaDAG CUOALVULY SIONVUA WVITIM— ALON “gay TUVyY ‘IG ‘ISdy HVESaaY ‘YIP ‘ISaH FUOOWW NOAAY ‘pe “ISA “Y AUOAAITO ‘PZ ‘Isa AUNT WaAasor 48ST "TX ISIH STAUNG NVITITA ‘GIF ‘ISH TIVHSUVY NO ‘pg “LISTH) VIGAATT ‘ps ‘LSA ‘qd UONVXATY 4ST “TX Baral] [18 “GeIp[yo eq, = “erqdyep “¢ a & “OL8T “LST "90 [of pZZ ‘q ‘auoalvaig NVAIGAdUy, uvoag 10% °Q ‘GUOTLVULG SIONVUG™ NVITIIA “IITX , 81 “oad WIFT “ur “GO M Seg ‘nvar -dAUUL GUVMaG sat “UVHY ATG oraz ySuep ysadunod ‘SaONVE goITy "S281 ACE WIL “dF 9L8T Wey ysiy ‘Mey 4e loys eg “IVAN WHT pur de yoraav Ay “OILY SHOLM ‘guo0js1oqyy Iwau ‘|TV oval — wag 00 ‘IV e[vaseyy Jo ava “sory “DAG GUOTLVALG NVITIIAA TIX :— -d eyed syseg—onolg “19 pesiopua saul pus poly ‘agus Vo 18940 , LBST‘L ‘nb yuedurei uly [ev Wore “WE NVNLYOg “ILST “3dog WICT TaA0 “ZY pure “Sav 19} ENNOOSTA JO1OjSIs puL “P SOO8T “Tady 4ST “4 {Lb-ZEST jo Airuq “S1y ‘pe pus ‘Jes10q ‘euojsuvdsige jo Sbsy ‘NvWLUOg AIIMNA GUY Ay Jo Joyqsuvp ‘vig LaMUv~A, pZ 1 NBajz103 B 1ayABUd 381 94} ul—unb oul, -om sso1s “Sy ‘QP pur ys] ‘K[1oyuNH—'su py ‘ATIYSYOUMIBAL YON JOY “g ‘N‘T'a pue ae ‘(vos