How Did Pelham Get Its Name?

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

The precise origins of the name of The Town of Pelham in lower Westchester County, New York, are shrouded in the mists of time. Yet, after years of work by local historians and Pell family genealogists, the origins of the name may be a little clearer. 

The first written use of the term “Pelham” to describe the lands that Thomas Pell purchased from local Wiechquaeskeck Native Americans on June 27, 1654 (old style Julian calendar) appears in the October 20, 1687 patent issued to Thomas Pell’s sole legatee, his nephew John Pell. The patent, signed by New York Governor Thomas Dongan, confirmed John Pell as owner of the lands inherited from his uncle. Those lands included today’s Pelham. The 1687 patent refers to the lands as “the lordship and manner [manor] of Pelham.” 

The lands were known as the “Manor of Pelham” for more than a century until the division of Westchester County into towns on March 7, 1788. As of that date, much of the land that formed the Manor of Pelham became, officially, the “Town of Pelham.” 

For many years, local historians who considered the matter concluded that the name “Pelham” derived from an early English phrase meaning “home of the Pells.” Lockwood Barr, who published a history of Pelham in 1946, wrote that “The word ham was early English for home – so Pelham came to mean the home of the Pells.” 

Barr apparently based his conclusions on the work of earlier historians, including the work of Robert Bolton, Jr. who first published a two-volume history of Westchester County in 1848. That work included a chapter on the Town of Pelham. Bolton wrote in 1848 that “The name itself is of Saxon origin, and compounded of the two words Pel (remote) and Ham (mansion.) The former, being the ancient surname of the manorial proprietors, affords us a very good reason for its adoption in connection with the last.” 

Monumental work by Pell family genealogists in the last sixty years, however, has cast substantial doubt on Bolton’s theory. Although the matter is not free from doubt, the explanation may be simpler than Bolton supposed. 

Thomas Pell, born in 1612, and his brother, John, never knew their parents well. The boys lost their mother and, a little later, their father by the time young Thomas was about four years old. A stepmother and two of their parents’ “Trustees” reportedly raised the boys. One of the “Trustees,” also the “Overseer” of John Pell’s will, was a man named Pelham Burton. Many now believe that Thomas Pell named the area “Pelham” in honor of his father figure, Pelham Burton. 

Who was Pelham Burton? Some have described him as Thomas Pell’s “tutor.” Pelham Burton, however, was far more than a tutor. He was Thomas Pell’s family friend, benefactor, legal guardian, and surrogate father. 

Pelham Burton seems to have been the single most important figure in the life of young Thomas. Thomas Pell’s mother, Mary, died in February, 1614/15. His father remarried to Joanne Gravette, but died a short time later on April 14, 1616/17. According to PELLIANA, a genealogical publication about the Pell family: 

“The boys were orphaned when Mary, first, and then John, their father, died and were raised and educated by their stepmother Joanne Gravett Pell and John’s ‘Trustees’ or Executors, Pelham Burton and the Reverend Richard Vernon, Rector of Eastbourne.” 

Just as Pelham Burton cannot be described merely as Thomas Pell’s tutor, he likewise cannot be described as a mere “Executor” of the will of Thomas Pell’s father. Rather, Pelham Burton became, in effect, a surrogate father to Thomas. 

As the “Overseer” of John Pell’s will, Pelham Burton served as legal guardian of Thomas and his brother. According to PELLIANA, Burton “took in the boys and their widowed stepmother, made them a home at Compton Place and directed their education”. He sent them to the local “Free School” where the boys received a classic Latin education designed to prepare them to “read” for matriculation into Oxford or Cambridge. 

Pelham Burton was a member of the local gentry and an honorable and respected member of the Southwyck community. According to genealogical research by the Pell family, Pelham Burton “took a prominent part” in the affairs of the Sussex area in England in the early 17th century. In addition, he built Compton Place, the estate where he brought the boys and their stepmother upon the death of the boys’ father. That magnificent estate later became one of the residences of the Duke of Devonshire. 

There is no known documentary evidence that would prove that Pelham derives its name from Thomas Pell’s legal guardian and surrogate father, Pelham Burton. But, documentary evidence strongly suggests that Pelham Burton was an extraordinarily strong and positive influence on young Thomas Pell. This seems to provide overwhelming support for the theory that later in his adult life, Thomas paid homage to the only “father” he had ever known – Pelham Burton – and named the lands he purchased from local Wiechquaeskeck Native Americans 365 years ago “Pelham.”

Though There is No Known Image of Pelham Founder Thomas Pell,

This Drawing by Thom Lafferty, Based on an Original by an Unknown

Artist, Depicts Pell as the Artist Imagined Him.  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Three Days of Westchester County Sessions Court Run by John Pell of Pelham Manor in June of 1687

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

John Pell of the Manor of Pelham served as the presiding Justice of a regular session in the North Riding of the Court of Sessions of the County of Westchester from June 7 until June 9, 1687.  John Pell, so-called "Second Lord" of the Manor of Pelham, was the nephew and principal legatee of Thomas Pell who founded the Manor of Pelham.  John Pell inherited the Manor of Pelham after Thomas Pell's death in late September, 1669 and arrived in New England to accept his inheritance in the fall of 1670.

Portrait of John Pell, So-Called "Second Lord"

of the Manor of Pelham Who Was a Nephew

and the Principal Legatee of Thomas Pell, the

Founder of the Manor of Pelham.  NOTE:  Click

on Image to Enlarge.

Soon after his arrival in New England, John Pell was accepted as a member of the landed gentry of the southern parts of the Province of New York and soon became a Justice of the Court of Sessions of Westchester County.  The county's court of session was divided into three "Ridings" with Justices "riding" about the area to hold court in various places within each "Riding."  The three Ridings at the time were the North, East, and West Ridings.  John Pell was a Justice in the North Riding.

The court of sessions was held by all the justices of the peace within their respective riding three times a year, June, December and March in the earlier years.  (In later years some were held in November rather than December.)  During a court session, in the absence of a member of the Provincial Council, the oldest justice presided.  The jury was composed of overseers elected from the various towns within the Riding.  The court of sessions possessed both civil and criminal jurisdiction.  It had cognizanze of all actions of debt, account, slander, trespass and actions on the case, where the sum involved was more than five pounds and not over twenty pounds.  Court days likely were lively affairs that attracted visitors from throughout the Riding to participate in markets and for the "entertainment" offered by lively court sessions.

The Court of Sessions of the County of Westchester was somewhat different than what we may think of a court in our separate judicial branch of government today.  Some of its pronouncements seem nearly legislative today.  Indeed, an analysis of the court session held from June 7 through June 9, 1687 sheds interesting light on the nature of the court, the types of matters it addressed, and the nature of the responsibilities that John Pell of the Manor of Pelham had as a Justice who heard matters on behalf of the court.  

The three-day court session in June, 1687 was held in the village of Westchester (once located near today's Westchester Square in the Bronx, not far from where Pell lived near today's Bartow-Pell Mansion Museum).  The minutes reflecting the Court session were recorded by the Clerk of the Court, Joseph Lee.  It appears from the records that John Pell served as the presiding Justice on a four-judge panel consisting of him, Justice John Palmer, Justice Joseph Theale, and Justice Joseph Horton.  There was empaneled a thirteen-member Grand Jury (associated with criminal matters) as well as a twelve-member Petit Jury (to serve as fact finders in jury trials).  Judicial dockets in those days were somewhat less crowded.  The minutes suggest that the court heard and decided sixteen matters over three days.  Those matters and their dispositions are summarized below, followed by research and transcriptions related to the summaries.

First Matter

The first case was an unspecified matter between Gabrell Legatt and Samuell Palmer.  The matter was not heard apparently due to a petition for habeas corpus.  

Second Matter

The second matter involved two related petitions, one filed on behalf of a minor nammed Daniel Turner and another filed by Martha Hobard (likely Hubbard).  The stated facts are scant, but it appears that Daniel Turner recently had lost his father and had inherited some form of interest in the land on which he and his mother were living.  It appears that the husband of Martha Hobard claimed an interest in the same land through her and had seized some property located on the land.  Martha Hobard's petition sought clarification of the title to the land.  The court ruled that certain "cloth stock" and corn seized from the land belonged to Daniel Turner.  Regarding title to the land, however, it held that the issue should be decided by a higher court, the Court of Oyer & Terminer, and that Daniel Turner and his mother could remain on the land but would have to pay back rent if it ultimately were determined that the land belonged to Hobard.

Third Matter

The third case involved a dispute over the credentials of a man nammed John Thomas to serve as Constable in Mamaroneck.  After hearing the matter, the Court concluded that there had been a failure to present adequate credentials and that an election should be held by the citizens of Mamaroneck to elect a Constable by majority vote and thereafter present the Constable to be sworn into office by a Justice of the Peace of the County.  

Fourth Matter

The fourth matter involved a complaint by the High Sheriff of Westchester County who claimed the roadways in the County of Westchester were in such bad condition that the Justices needed to implement a solution.  The Court ordered every municipality in the County to appoint at least one surveyor of roads to review road conditions and further ordered every resident of every such municipality to two work at least two days each year to oversee workers in the repair of the roads between mid-August and mid-September.  Those with "teams" (presumably of horses or oxen) were to work with their teams while those without teams were to appear simply to work.  The court further ordered that in the event anyone failed to work as required, the road surveyors were authorized to hire workers in their place, pay those workers double wages, and then present the Court of Sessions with a petition to fine those who failed to work.    

Fifth Matter

The fifth case was a suit brought by John Gee alleging a claim of trespass against Thomas Masters.  The court dismissed the lawsuit based on a technicality noting that although the complaint specified an action of trespass, the declaration submitted in support of the action was for an action seeking repayment of a debt -- not a claim of trespass.

Sixth Matter

The sixth case involved the confirmation of an indenture of a minor named John Turner whose father had abandoned his family to permit young John Turner to serve as an apprentice in an unspecified profession to a man named James Miller.

Seventh Matter

The seventh case involved a proceeding by the Westchester County tax collector sought an excise tax payment of seven pounds, ten shillings from the "Estate of John Turner" of the settlement of Westchester that once stood near today's Westchester Square in the Bronx.  It may have been a probate matter.  The excise tax apparently was tied John Turner's rental of farmlands and was due for the year 1686.  The Court ordered that the money be taken from monies due to John Turner from a man named Nathan Bayly.  The order further specified that Justice Palmer and Justice Richardson should inventory the debts of and credits due to the Estate of John Turner and specified a series of known debts that were to be paid from the estate.  

Eighth Matter

The next matter involved the High Sheriff of Westchester County presenting an order from the higher Court of Oyer & Terminer directing the Court of Sessions to pay certain funds owed by the Court either to the High Sheriff of Westchester County or to Westchester County itself.  The Court of Sessions directed that the amounts due to the High Sheriff should be paid from the next set of Westchester County tax receipts and further directed that Justice Pell and Justice Horton oversee an audit to settle all accounts between the High Sheriff of Westchester County and the Clerk of Court of the Westchester County Court of Sessions.  

Ninth Matter

The next matter was more in the nature of an administrative court matter or the enactment of a court rule.  It involved entry of an order that no dispute would be permitted to proceed to trial until the plaintiff in the matter posted a bond to secure payment of the Court's fees and fees owed to jurors.  

Tenth Matter

The tenth matter seems to have been somewhat unusual.  The Court announced that it was taking steps to improve the tax assessment process of the County on its own initiative after noticing it "to be irregular."  Thus, it ordered that every tax assessor in the county undertake an annual written assessment of all real and personal property owned by every resident of the county each August and to present the results of the resultant county taxes to be paid on "every mans perticular account of his estate" to the county court of sessions during its November Riding each year.  

Eleventh Matter

The Court ordered execution of a previous judgment entered by the court in a June, 1686 session of the Court against the Estate of Morganie Jones.

Twelfth Matter

The court refused in the twelfth matter to grant the requested court costs of a previous litigant named "Thomas Mollenax" because, during the pertinent court session held in Eastchester during June, 1686, the court did not tax a bill of costs in favor of Mollenax.  

Thirteenth Matter

The clerk's minutes of the next matter are so brief and summary that it is difficult to determine the nature of the dispute and its resolution.  Plaintiff Humphrey Underhill sued Richard Headley for trespass, seeking damages of 10£  It appears that after the jury returned a verdict the defendant prevailed.  The Clerk's minutes say "The returne he keeps his house and will not be taken".  

Fourteenth Matter

In the court's fourteenth matter, a man named Matthew "Tylor" (Tyler) sued Captain Ponton seeking an attachment -- a request that specific property owned by a debtor be transferred to the creditor (or be sold for the benefit of the creditor).  The Court seems to have determined that because an important witness, Mr. Tuder, did not appear in person or through the filing of a declaration, it would not entertain the request for an attachment.  

Fifteenth Matter

The town council and constable of the settlement of Westchester complained to the Court of Sessions that several residents of the settlement had failed to pay required taxes to support the poor of the settlement not only for the previous year (1686), but also for 1687.  The Court ordered the required payment of the taxes.  

Sixteenth Matter

In what appears to be the last matter before Justice John Pell of the Manor of Pelham and the Court of Sessions over which he presided during the three-day session of June 7-9, 1687, the High Sheriff of Westchester County returned to complain about the Court's failure to remit funds and delivered another order from the Court of Oyer and Terminer that "Recommended it to the Justices of the said County to take care that the same be paid by the County."  The Westchester County Court of Sessions ordered that Justices Pell, Richardson, and Horton determine the status of the account between the High Sheriff and the Westchester County Court of Sessions by the end of the following August and pay any required debts from the next set of tax receipts received by the County of Westchester.  

*          *          *

Background Research Regarding the Nature of the County Court of Sessions

During the period from 1657 until 1696, the Court of Sessions of Westchester County followed English traditions and was administered by English personnel despite the face for many of the early years of that period the Dutch continued to claim dominion over the area.  During this period, of course, the area we know today as Westchester County was in its infancy.  By the end of the 1600s, some say, the population of the entire county number "less than two thousand."  Fox, Dixon Ryan, ed., The Minutes of the Court of Sessions (1657-1696) Westchester County New York, Source Series Vol. I,  p. xiii (White Plains, NY:  Published for Westchester County by the Westchester County Historical Society, 1924) (Note:  paid subscription required to access via this link).

The following description describes the Court of Sessions of the County of Westchester prior to an overhaul of the judicial system in the Province of New York in 1683:  

"In Westchester, the court of sessions, as it was called, followed the terminology and general legal conceptions of the English common law courts, and not those of the Roman-Dutch system of jurisprudence.  Certain Dutch practices, however, did find their into the law as administered during the time of these records from 1657 till 1664, notably the disposition to arbitrate a dispute instead of litigating it; the raising of money for public purposes by an excise tax; and the levying of special assessments for local improvements.

When, after the surrender of New Netherland in 1664, the government of the Duke of York was established under Col. Nicolls, the proceedings of the Westchester court of sessions appear to have gone on almost as if there had been no change at all.  The same legal terminology and practice is used under the system established by the Duke's Laws as under the government of Peter Stuyvesant.  Damages were given in terms of shillings and pence precisely as before, and also the fines, which had been levied in accordance with the Dutch system of guilders and stivers, were now levied after the English system of money units.

The judicial organization established by the code of laws known as the Duke's Laws ws somewhat elaborate.  1  [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "1  Colonial Laws of New York, vol. i, ,p. 6."] similar to those exercised by the English quarter-sessions.  1  [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "Documents Relating to Colonial History of New York, ed. E. B. O'Callaghan, vol. iii, p. 389 (Dongan's Report)."]  A local court was established for actions of debt or trespass under five pounds.  It was held every two, three, or four weeks, as was found most convenient, by the constable and overseers, who were elected yearly by the freeholders.  Six freeholders with the constable constituted a quorum.  Decisions were determined by a majority vote; in the case of  tie, the constable had the deciding ballot.  In all cases, an appeal lay to the court of sessions.

The Province, or more properly speaking, that part immediately brought under the English law, Long Island, Westchester and Staten Island, was divided into three 'ridings' -- the east, the north, and the west.  The court of session was held by all the justices of the peace within the riding three times a year, June, December and March.  In the absence of a member of the Council, the oldest justice presided.  The jury was composed of overseers elected from the various towns within the riding.  The court possessed both civil and criminal jurisdiction.  It had cognizanze of all actions of debt, account, slander, trespass and actions on the case, where the sum involved was more than five pounds and not over twenty pounds.  There was no appeal except in case the sum was over twenty pounds.  If any persons claimed greater debts or damages than were actually due him, he paid treble damages by way of punishment.  If any action were settled out of court, the clerk of the court was required to enter the agreement reached upon the records."

Source:  Fox, Dixon Ryan, ed., The Minutes of the Court of Sessions (1657-1696) Westchester County New York, Source Series Vol. I, pp. xxiii-xxiv (White Plains, NY: Published for Westchester County by the Westchester County Historical Society, 1924) (Note: paid subscription required to access via this link).

In 1683, the assembly of the province of New York overhauled the entire judicial system of the Province.  According to scholars, the reorganized system may be described as follows:

"At the top of the system was the Court of Chancery, consisting of the governor and council, which was the supreme court of the province, and to which appeals could be brought from any other court.  Secondly, there was the court of Oyer and Terminer, held once a year within each county, to determine all cases, capital, civil or criminal, having general appellate review of any action or suit in which the damages were five pounds or over.  Thirdly, there was the court of sessions held twice a year in each county by three justices of the peace, as in England.  Finally, there was a town court held once a month to hear small causes of debt or trespass, not relating to land, slander or matters in which the crown was concerned, composed of three commissioners appointed by the governor.  In addition to these courts, the governor, in 1685, established a court of exchequer, to try suits arising between the king and his subjects relating to the lands, rents, rights, profits and revenues.  1 [Footnote 1 reads:  "Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New York, vol. iii, p. 389."]  

The details of this organization were changed from time to time, either by act of assembly, or by ordinance of the royal governor. . . ."

Source: Fox, Dixon Ryan, ed., The Minutes of the Court of Sessions (1657-1696) Westchester County New York, Source Series Vol. I, pp. xxv-xxvi (White Plains, NY: Published for Westchester County by the Westchester County Historical Society, 1924) (Note: paid subscription required to access via this link). 

Transcription of Minutes of June 7-9, 1687 Session of County Court of Sessions

"[PAGE I OF MINUTES IN POSSESSION OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY.]

[TORN] held at Westchester for the County of Westchester by his Maties Authority the seventh eighth and ninth dayes of June in the third year of the Reigne of King James the second, Annoqu Dom'i 1687

Present
John Pell Esqr Justice }
& quorum
John Palmer esqr
Joseph Theale }
Joseph Horton }
Esq
Justices

Grand Jury
Mr. Thomas Hunt   Sen   1
Capt Richard Ponton      2
Mr Edward Waters           3
Mr. Nicholas Bayly          4
Mr Wm Barnes                  5
Mr Thomas Baxter           6
Mr Moses Hoyt                 7
Mr Nathaniell White        8
Mr Thomas Warrenton   9
Mr Thomas C Kirke Senjor 10
Mr Humphrey Underhill  11
Mr Joseph Hunt               12
Mr Josiah Hunt                13

Petty Jury.
1  Jonathan Hartt
2  Timothy Knapp
3  George Knifton
4  Thomas Merritt
5  Ackelrah Browne
6  Caleb Hoyt
7  Joseph [?] Purdey
    James Mott           8
    Henry Fowler       9
    Frances Purdey 10
    Job Nelson         11
    John Tomkins     12

[Page 2] 

Gabrell Legatt     )
          ad                }   Dammage 30d
Samuell Palmer )

Removed by habias corpus

Martha Hobards petition
Daniel Turners petition

The Petitions of Martha Hubbard & Daniell Turner being red with all the writeings Relating to the same with the writt & Inventory what was seazed  Itt is the Opinion of the Court that the Cloth stock & corn mentioned in the Inventory is the orphans Daniell Turner  The title of the land being Dubias as it is pretended to by Edward Hubbard by the Right of his wife, and by Daniell Turner as the Orphant of Laurence Turner Deceassed is sumewhat difecult to decide.  This Court Recomends the Tryall of the Title to the next Court of Oyer & Terminer and that in the meane time Daniell Turner remaine in possession of the house orchyard & lands with his Mother untill the Title be decided by the next Court of Oyer & Terminer.  And if that the title of the lands appears to be Edward Hobards and not the Orphans, that then the Orphant shall pay a valuable consideration for the use of the house and lands abovesaid.

[Page 3]  

Mr James [Mott] [pres]ent Constable of Mamorronock makes returne of John Thomas as chosen Constable by Mrs. Richbill, noe authoritie appeareing to justifie Mrs Richbill's Choyce nor anything under her hand to aver the same, the Court Judgeing the Returne to be made Insufficiant as Concerning the Constable for the yeare following doe hereby order that according to law a Constable be chosen for the yeare ensueing for Momorronock by the major vote of the Inhabitants of said place and that the person soe chosen be forthwith after such choyce is made presented to a Justice of the Peace of this Country to be Sworne to the performance of the ofice of a Constable according to the laws of this governmt for the yeare ensueing or till another shall be sworne in his place.  

Upon Complaint of the badness of the highwayes in this County by the Highsherrife The Court Orders that Every Towne precinct and Pattent shall make choice of one or more Surveyours of the Highwayes for mending of the Highwayes and bridges of Every Towne precinct & pattent aforesaid shall worke two dayes Every yeare And be Called out by the Surveyors soe chosen to see the same performed at the time appoynted by the Court for doeing the same every yeare which shall be betweene the midle of Augut to the midle of Septembe  And that one day shall be appoynted and attended for Cutting of Brush in Every Towne & place within the County the towne Comitioners to appoynt the place where the brush shall be cutt and alsoe appoynte the day when it shall be done he that has a Teame to attend with his Teame and a labourer that has noe Teame to attend with his owne person for the mending of the high wayes and bridges aforesaid.  they that refuseth to be obedient [to] the Surveyors or Towne Cometiones when they shall be called to worke the Surveyors or Towne Cometiones shall hire men [in t]here place and give them dowble wages and present themm to the next Court of Sessions where they shall be lyable to a fine according to the discretion of the Court.

[Page 4]

The present Surveyors to be [chosen from Inhabitants] & freeholders of every place within ten dayes after the Receipt of this Order and forthwith to be sworne by the next Justice of the Peace for their true performance of the trust aforesaid.  The persons soe refuseing to performe their duty aforesaid the surveyors or Cometioners have hereby authority to goe to a Justice of the Peace for a warrant to disstraine for the pay & charges for the labour done by those that are Imployed in the Roome of the neglector.

John Gee        )
         ad            }
Tho. Masters  )

The writt being an Action of Trespass and the Declaration for an Action of Debt the Sherrife in the behalfe of the defendant Craves a nonsuit and the Court gives their Judgmt accordingly.

The business concerning John Turner the sonn of John Turner of Westchester who has absented himselfe from his family the Court Orders that Justice Pell and Justice Horton have full power from this Court to confirme the said younge John Turner in his apprenticeship with James Miller & draw a paire of Indentures betweene them & signe and seal them according to law.

Applycation being made by the subcollector of the Exize for the County of Westchester to this Court that he may have an order for seven pounds tenn shillings in monney upon the Estate of John Turner of the County towne of Westchester Due upon bill.

[Page 5]

To his present Majesty for the said Exize let to farme.

The said John Turner of Westchester for ye yeare 1686.  

The Court Orders that the said subcollector shall be payd the above said seven pounds tenn shillings out of the Estate of the said Turner for Sattisfaction of his Majesties Dutyes of Exize to the subcollect aforesaid:  tis ordered by the Court that the Ressidue of the bond of twenty five pounds being the sume of thirteen pounds.  Due from Nathan Bayly to John Turner shall be putt into the subcollectors hands to Receive the sume of seven pounds tenn shillings Due to him upon acctt of his Majties Exize for the Towne of Westchester and the said Collector to take bill of the said Bayly for the Ressedue in behalfe of the Court and deliver the same to the clark of the sessions to be ordered by the next Court of sessions as they shall see cause.

The Court Orders that Mr. Justice Palmer and Mr. Justice Richardson shall take an estemate of Debt & Creditt of the Estate of John Turner and sattisfie the Debts of th[is] order written the first:  & the rest of the Debt soe far as the Estate shall beare in such order as they shell see meete

The Justices fees and the Clarke.
The midwife to be payd--
For her keeping till the Court & for makeing her close.
For keepeing the catle till the vendue
The charges of ye Court of sessions to be paid
[Next paragraph is crossed out but is legible and therefore is inserted]

Whereas the Sherrife brings before this Court an order from the last Court of Oyer & Terminer held at Westchester sixth day of December 1686 concerning the charges of the first Court of Sessions held within this County the Court of Oyer and Terminer Recomend to the Justices of the Said County to 

[Page 6] 

to take care that the same be paid *   *   * and that Mr. Justice Pell, Mr. Justice Richardson & Mr. Justice Horton doe state the accompt aforesaid with the High Sherrife, and furthermore they find Due for charges of said Court to be paid out of the next Publick Rates of this County betweene this and the last of August next the Acctts are to be stated by the said Justices.

The Court Orders that Mr. Justice Pell and r. Justice Hortoni doe audict the accompts of Court charges by the 15th of July next and that the Clarke attend with the accompts.  That is to say to cleare the accompts betweene the Sherrife and Clarke -- &c

The Cour[t] Orders that noe cause or cases shall proceed to tryall till the plaintive give in suffitiant surety for the paymt of the Court & Juries fees and that the Clarke give notice of the same by setting this order up in his office.

Concerning the County Rates

The Court takeing into their Consideration of the Assessors of the County to be Irregular doe order that the Assessors of every Towne precinct & pattent doe make an Estimation of all Reall & personall Estates of the Inhabitants and freeholders of every place within ye county being or reputed to be the Estates of all and all & every person ratable within the month of August, and to be brought in faire writeing with the accompts of every mans perticular account of his Estate to November sessions for defraying of the publick and necessary charges of the county

[Page 7] 

And for every towne, precinct and Pattent Annually do make choyce of assessors according to Law to performe the same, and that the mannor or forme of the Estemations shall be according to former Regulation.  The aforesaid Order to be sent to Every Constable, and he to Comunecate the same to the Inhabitants thereof soe soone as this Order Comes to their hands.

The Court Orders that Joseph Lee shall have Execution against the Estate of Morganie Jones wheresoever it shall be found within the County for a Judgmet of a Court of Sessions the said lot obtained pay & ye sd Jones at June Sessions 1686 & Costs About the bill of Thomas Mollenax The Court takes noe notice of it because they did not tax their bill of Cost at that Court of Sessions held at Eastchester.

The Court orders that Execution be endorsed on the backside of the poores Rate for the payment of the Arreare.

Humphrey Underhill      )
       ad[versus]              }  Trespass Damage 10£  The returne he keeps his house
Richard Headley           )           and will not be taken

Mathew Tylor                )
          ad                        }  Attatchm't  Mr Tuder not appearing neither by declaration
Capt Ponton                  )           nor in person the Court takes no notice of the attachmt

[Page 8]  

The Constable and Town Commissioners of Westchester commplaines of severall the Inhabitants of the Town and precincts for their neglect of paying the poors Rate  Both the last yeare & this yeare, therefore desires the Court to take it into their Consideration and that their Worshipps will make an Order that the negleigte may pay the same  Upon which the Court Orders that Execution shall be Indossd on the Backside of the poores Rate for the paymt of the Arreares.

Whereas the Sheriffe brings before this Court an Order from the last Court of Oyer & Terminer held at Westchester for the County of Westchester concerning the charges of the first Court of Sessions held within this County the said Court of Oyer and Terminer Recommended it to the Justices of the said County to take care that the same be paid by the County.  And the Court Orders that Mr Justice Pell, Mr Justice Richardson and Mr Justice Horton doe state the Accompt aforesaid with the High Sherrife between this and the last of August next.  And for what they find due for charges cf said Court to be paid out of the next Publick Rates of the County.

Joseph Lee       C of Sessions
Comit[tus] Westchester."

Fox, Dixon Ryan, ed., The Minutes of the Court of Sessions (1657-1696) Westchester County New York, Source Series Vol. I, pp. 39-46 (White Plains, NY: Published for Westchester County by the Westchester County Historical Society, 1924) (Note: paid subscription required to access via this link).  

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Pelham: Once Oyster Capital of the World

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

It seems fanciful and hard to believe today.  Pelham once was oyster capital of the world and supplied New York City with much of its massive daily oyster fare at a time when oysters were sold on nearly every street corner.  In those days, City Island was part of the Town of Pelham before its annexation by New York City.  City Island Oystermen were world famous for their harvests off the shores of the island and for their scientific approach to the renewal of the resource on which they relied.  It was a serious business.  Pitched battles were fought in Long Island Sound among oystermen, including City Island oystermen, protecting their right to harvest the tasty marine morsels.  

I have written extensively on numerous occasions about Pelham's rich oystering history.  At the end of this posting, I have included links to eighteen previous stories about Pelham and the City Island oystering industry.  

The 19th century oystermen of City Island in the Town of Pelham long have been credited with inventing the process used to create and cultivate artificial oyster beds.  Today's Historic Pelham blog posting transcribes an account published in 1884 alleging that City Island oystermen pioneered the process.  It is followed by the transcription of an article about legislation proposed during the 19th century that upset the City Island oystermen because it proposed to allow the government to charge oystermen for the right to harvest oysters off City Island and elsewhere.

"OYSTER FARMING IN AMERICA.

The American system of oyster farming, which presents some features of resemblance to the French system, and also many differences, has grown up as the result of private enterprise, without any help or any direct encouragement from government.

The French people are generally held to be the originators of modern oyster farming, but, as an American, I take pleasure in pointing out that our own industry, which is now so extensively developed in Connecticut, has not been borrowed from France, but has grown up independently.  

Several years before Coste and De Bon commenced their experiments, the oystermen of East River, having observed that young oysters fastened in great numbers upon shells, which were placed upon the beds at the spawning season, started the practice of shelling the beds, in order to increase the supply, and in 1855, or three years before Coste represented to the French Emperor the importance of similar experiments, the State of New York enacted a law to secure to private farmers the fruits of their labor, and a number of persons engaged in the new industry on an extensive scale.  Among those pioneers in this field were Mr. Fordham, Capt. Henry Bell, Mr. Oliver Cook, Mr. Weed, Mr. Hawley and others.

The industry has grown steadily from that time, and East River is now said by Ingersoll to be the scene of the most painstaking and scientific oyster culture in the United states, and the interest and importance of the subject is so great that I quote the whole of Ingersoll's account of its origin, development and present methods:

'I have no doubt that, whatever was the date of its origin, the credit of first truly propagating oysters from seed caught upon artificial beds or prepared receptacles belongs to the men of City Island.  It has been a matter of common observation that any object tossed into the water in summer became covered at once with infant oysters.  The sedges along the edge of the marshes, and the buoys, stakes and wharf-piles, were similarly clothed  If the circumstances were favorable this deposit survived the winter, and the next spring the youngsters were large enough to be taken and transplanted.  It was only a short step in logic, therefore, to conclude that if objects were thrown thickly into the water on purpose to catch the floating spawn, a large quantity of young oysters would be secured, and could be saved for transplanting at very slight expense.  The next question was -- What would best serve the purpose?  Evidently, nothing could be better than the shells which, year by year, accumulated on the shore from the season's opening trade.  They were the customary resting-places of the spawn, and at the same time were cheapest.  The City Island oysterman, therefore, began to save his shells from the lime-kiln and the road- [page 100 / page 101] master, and to spread them on the bottom of the bay, hoping to save some of the oyster-spawn with which his imagination densely crowded the sea-water.  This happened, I am told, more than fifty years ago, and the first man to put the theory into practice, it is remembered, was the father of the Fordham Brothers, who still pursue the business at City Island.  In 1855 Captain Henry Bell, of Bell's Island, planted shells among the islands off the mouth of Norwalk River, and a short time after, under the protection of the new law of 1855, recognizing the private property in such beds, Mr. Oliver Cook of Five Mile River, Mr. Wood of South Norwalk, Mr. Hawley, of Bridgeport, and others, went into it on an extensive scale.  Some of these gentlemen appear never to have heard of any previous operations of the sort.  Discovering it for themselves, as it was easy and natural to do, they supposed they were the origination; but if any such credit attaches anywhere, I believe it belongs to the City Island men.  It was soon discovered that uniform success was not to be hoped for, and the steady, magnificent crops reaped by the earliest planters were rarely emulated.  Many planters, therefore, distrusted the whole scheme, and returned to their simple transplanting of natural-bed seed; but others, with more consistency, set at work to improve their chances by making more and more favorable the opportunities for an oyster's egg successfully to attach itself, during the brief natatory life, to the stool prepared for it, and afterward to live to an age when it was strong enough to hold its own against the weather  This involved a closer study of the general natural history of the oyster.'"  

Source:  Brooks, William Keith, et al., Report of the Oyster Commission of the State of Maryland January 1884, pp. 100-01 (Annapolis, MD:  James Young, State Printer, 1884).  

Additionally, immediately below is a transcription of an article published in the Mount Vernon Chronicle in 1887 detailing the reaction of City Island oystermen to proposed legislation that would raise their cost of doing business.

"PELHAM AND CITY ISLAND.

*     *     *

The oystermen of City Island are very indignant at the proposed bill of Mr. Eugene Blackford, the United States Fish Commissioner, who has again brought this obnoxious question into the state assembly.  The purpose and substance of said bill seems to be that all of the natural beds or ground on which the natural growing oyster now exist in this state shall be sold out or commissioned to the ownership of capitalists, who shall have the exclusive right to grow oysters thereon, and utterly disfranchise the thousands of poor industrious fishermen, who are entirely dependent on this branch of industry for the maintenance and support of themselves and their families.  It has been heretofore an established matter of fact that custom makes law, and it seems that no precedent is on record where an established and legitimate business recognized as the privelege [sic] granted to them by the Creator of all things, for the purpose of feeding the inhabitants who live in the vicinity, and who have without any interruption or pretended claim from this state, been allowed to pursue the dredging and raking such shell fish from the bottom of the bay as may naturally grow there, for a period of at least fifty years past, and consequently those engaged in this business have managed to have built boats and small vessels suitable for the trade at considerable expense; in fact, they have invested every dollar they could possibly spare from their immediate wants, in purchasing improved tools and implements needed to work with, with no expectation or fear that any person or firm would ever be heartless enough to originate such a heartless scheme to steal from them the only means at present known to them of earning their daily bread and sacrifice all of their investments, that it has required years by hard struggling to accumulate, and consequently leave them helpless and penniless.  And this only done to suit the grasping disposition of some who would sink so many of their fellow beings into obscurity and beggary if they could only accomplish such a design by foul legislation.  Such does not seem likely to the masses in this neighborhood; but in order to evade such a serious conspiracy against the rights of such a serious conspiracy against the rights of such of our worthy citizens as are engaged in this legitimate business, it becomes necessary to Chronicle the facts of the case in order to arrest such a calamity.  Believing that our present assembly, if they knew all of the facts in relation to this scheme, would not tolerate it for a moment, I sincerely hope they will give it their earnest attention and defeat such schemes as this that can have no other effect than destroy all confidence in our legislators, if passed, and would send thousands of its victims headlong into poverty from which they can never extricate themselves.  A large assemblage of the City Island oystermen was held in the court house, one evening recently.  John M. Bell, Esq., was chosen chairman.  Supervisor Sherman T. Pell and others addressed the meeting, dwelling particularly on the proper course to pursue to thwart such damaging attempts to rob our citizens of their privileges to make a living."

Source:  Pelham and City Island, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Vol. XVIII, No. 956, Feb. 4, 1887, p. 2, col. 4.

Oystermen Dredging in Long Island Sound in 1883.

Source:  Harpers Weekly, Aug. 18, 1883. 

Below are links to more stories about Pelham's rich oystering traditions.    

Thu., Mar. 25, 2010:  Discovery of "The Great Oyster Bed" in Long Island Sound in 1859.

Wed., Mar. 24, 2010:  The Oyster War of 1884 Between Glen Cove and City Island Intensifies.

Tue., Mar. 23, 2010:  Yet Another "Oyster War" in 1884; Glen Cove Officials Feud with City Island and Connecticut Oystermen.

Mon., Mar. 22, 2010:  77-Year Old City Island Oysterman Joshua Leviness Reminisces in Testimony Provided in 1884.

Fri., Mar. 19, 2010:  The New York Legislature Stepped Into the Oyster War on Long Island Sound in 1895.

Thu., Mar. 18, 2010:  1859 Town of Huntington Record Reflecting Dispute with City Island Oystermen.

Wed., Mar. 17, 2010:  Report of September 13, 1884 Tour of Oyster Beds by Captain Joshua Leviness of City Island.

Tue., March 16, 2010:  More on 19th Century Oystering in Pelham - Descriptions of Oyster Beds Off Hart Island, City Island and in Pelham Bay Published in 1887.

Mon., Mar. 15, 2010:  More on 19th Century City Island Oyster Industry - City Island Oystermen Complaint of Pollution.

Fri., Mar. 12, 2010:  Early History of Oystering in the Waters Off City Island in the Town of Pelham.

Thu., Mar. 11, 2010:  The "Great Oyster War" Between City Island and Tarrytown in 1877 and 1878.

Thu., Dec. 3, 2009:  Pelham News on May 30, 1884 Including Allegations of Oyster Larceny and Meeting of the Pelhamville Improvement Association.

Mon., July 30, 2007: 1885 Report Notes Decline of Oyster Industry Near City Island in the Town of Pelham.

Fri., Jul. 27, 2007:  Possible Origins of the Oyster Feud Between City Islanders and Huntington, Long Island.

Thu., Jul. 26, 2007:  Pelham's City Island Oystermen Feud with Long Islanders in 1869.

Fri., Apr. 13, 2007:  Oystermen of City Island (When It Was Part of the Town of Pelham) Pioneered Oyster Cultivation.

Fri., Jan. 26, 2007:  A History of the Early Years of City Island When it Was Part of the Town of Pelham, Published in 1927.

Mon., Sep. 18, 2006:  A Brief Description of Oystering in Eastchester Bay and at Pelham Published in 1881.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Text of the 1687 Grant That Formed the Lordship and Manor of Pelham

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Below is the text of the 1687 grant by the Governor of the Province of New York, Thomas Dongan, to John Pell by which Pell's land holdings were elevated to the status of a "Manor" to be known as the "Manor of Pelham".
"MANOR GRANT OF PELHAM.

THOMAS DONGAN, Captain General and Governor-in-chief in and over the province of New Yorke, and the territories depending thereon in America, under his most sacred Majesty, James the Second, by the grace of God Kinge of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, defender of the faith, &c., -- to all to whom these presents shall come, sendeth greeting : Whereas, Richard Nicolls, Esq., late governor of this province, by his certaine deed in writing, under his hand and seale, bearing date the sixth day of October, in the eighteenth year of the reigne of our late sovereigne lord, Charles the Second, by the grace of God, of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Kinge, defender of the faith, &c., and in the year of our Lord God one thousand six hundred sixty and six -- did give, grant, confirme and rattefye, by virtue of the commission and authoritye unto him given by his (then) royal highness, James, Duke of Yorke, &c., (his now Majesty,) upon whome, by lawful grant and pattent from his (then) Majesty, the propriety and government of that part of the maine land, as well of Long Island and all the islands adjacent. Amongst other things was settled unto Thomas Pell, of Onkway, alias Fairfield, in his Majesty's colony of Connecticut -- gentleman -- all that certaine tract of land upon the maine lying and being to the eastward of Westchester bounds, bounded to the Westward with a river called by the Indians Aquaconounck, commonly known to the English by the name of Hutchinson's River, which runneth into the bay lyeing betweene Throgmorton's Neck and Anne Hooke's Neck, commonly caled Hutchinson's Bay, bounded on the east by a brooke called Cedar Tree Brooke, or Gravelly Brooke; on the south by the Sound, which lyeth betweene Longe Island and the maine land, with all the islands in the Sound not before that time granted or disspossed of, lyeing before that tract of land so bounded as is before expresst; and northward to runne into the woods about eight English miles, the breadth to be the same as it is along by the Sound, together with all the lands, islands, soyles, woods, meadows, pastures, marshes, lakes, waters, creeks, fishing, hawking, hunting and fowling, and all other proffitts, commodityes and heridetaments to the said tract of land and islands belonging, with their and every of their appurtenances, and every part and parcel thereof; and that the said tract of land and premises should be forever thereafter held, deemed, reputed, taken and be an intire infranchised towneshipp, manner and place of itself, and should always, from time to time, and at all times thereafter, have, hold and enjoy like and equall priviledges and immunities with any towne infranchised, place or manner within this government, &c., shall in no manner of way be subordinate or belonging unto, have any dependance upon or in any wise, bounds or the rules under the direction of any riding, or towne or towneshipps, place or jurisdiction either upon the maine or upon Longe Island -- but should in all cases, things and matters be deemed, reputed, taken and held as an absolute, intire, infranchised towneshipp, manner and place of itselfe in this government, and should be ruled, ordered and directed in all matters as to government, accordingly, by the governour and Councell, and that General Court of Assizes -- only provided, always, that the inhabbitants in the said tract of land granted as aforesaid, should be oblidged to send fforwards to the next townes all publick pachquetts and letters, or hew and cryes coming to New Yorke or goeing from thence to any other of his Majestie's colonys; to have and to hold the said tract of land and islands, with all and singular the appurtenances and premises, togaither with the privilidges, imuneties, franchises, and advantages therein given and granted unto the said Thomas Pell, to the proper use and behoofe of the said Thomas Pell, his heirs and assigns for ever, ffully, ffreely and clearely, in as large and ample manner and forme, and with such full and absolute imunityes and priveledges as bfore is expresst, as if he had held the same immediately from his Majesty the Kinge of England, &c., and his suckcessors, as of the manner of East Greenwich, in the county of Kent, in free and common sockage and by fealtey, only yealdeing, rendering and payeing yearely and every yeare unto his then royall highness, the Duke of Yorke and his heires, or to such governour or governours as from time to time should be him be constituted and appoynted as an acknowledgement, one lambe on the [Page 156 / Page 157] first day of May, if the same shall be demanded as by the said deede in writeing, and the entrey thereof in the bookes of records in the secretarie's office for the province aforesaid, may more fully and at large appeare. And whereas, John Pell, gentleman, nephew of the said Thomas Pell, to whom the lands, islands and premises, with appurtenances, now by the last will and testament of him, the said Thomas Pell, given and bequeathed, now is in the actual, peaceable and quiett seazeing and possession of all and singular the premises, and hath made his humble request to mee, the said Thomas Dongan, that I would, in the behalf of his sacred Majesty, his heirs and suckcessors, given and grant unto him, the said John Pell, a more full and firme grant and confirmation of the above lands and premises, with the appurtenances, under the seale of this his Majestie's province: Now Know Ye, that I, the said Thomas Dongan, by virtue of the commission and authority unto me given by his said Majesty and power in me being and residing, in consideration of the quitt rent hereinafter reserved, and for divers other good and lawfull considerations me thereunto mouving, I have given, rattefied and confirme and by these presents do hereby grant, rattefie and confirme unto the said John Pell, his heirs and assigns for ever, all the before mentioned and rented lands, islands and premises, with the heridatements and appurtenances, priveledges, imuneties, ffranchises and advantages to the same belonging and appertaining, or in the said before mentioned deede in writing expresst, implyed or intended to be given and granted, and every part and parcell thereof, together with all that singular messuages, tenements, barnes, stables, orchards, gardens, lands, islands, meadows, inclosures, arable lands, pastures, feedeings, commons, woods, underwoods, soyles, quarreys, mines, minnerally, (royall mines only excepted,) waters, rivers, ponds, lakes, hunteing, haucking, ffishing, ffowleing, as alsoe all rents, services, wasts, strayes, royaltyes, liberties, priviledges, jurisdictions, rights, members and appurtenances, and all other imunityes, royaltyes, power of franchises, profitts, commodeties and heredatements whatsoever to the premises, or any part or parcell thereof belonging or appertaining: and further, by vertue of the power and authority in mee being and residing, I doe hereby grant, rattefie and confirme, and the tract of land, island and premises aforesaid are, by these presents, erected and constituted to be one lordship and manner -- and the same shall henceforth be called the lordshipp and manner of Pelham; and I doe hereby give and grant unto the said John Pell, his heirs and assigns ffull power and authority at all times hereafter, in the said lordshipp and manner of Pelham aforesaid, one court leete and one court barron, to hold and keepe at such time so often yearly as he and they shall see meete, and all sines, issues and amerciaments at the said court leete and court barron, to be holden and kept in the manner and lordship aforesaid, that are payable from time to time, shall happen to be due and payable by and from any the inhabitants of or within the said lordshipp and manner of Pelham abovesaid; and also all and every the powers and authorities herein before mentioned, for the holding and keepeing of the said court leete and court barron, ffrom time to time, and to award and issue forth the costomary writts to be issued out in the name of the said John Pell, his heirs and assignes, and the same court leete and court barron to be kept by the said John Pell, his heirs and assignes, or his or their steward, deputed or appoynted; and I doe further hereby give and grant unto the said John Pel, his heirs and assignes, full power to distraine for all rents and other sums of money payable by reason of the premises, and all other lawful remedys and meanes for the haveing, receiving, levying and enjoying the said premises and every part thereof, and all waifts, strayes, wrecks of the sease, deodands and goods of ffellons, happening and being within the said manner of Pelham, with the advowson and right of patronage of all and every of the church and churches in the said manner, erected and to be erected -- to have and to hold all and singular the said tract of land, islands and manner of Pelham, and all and singular the above granted or mentioned to be granted premises, with their rights, members, jurisdictions, privileidges, heredaments and appurtenances, to the said John Pell, his heirs and assignes, to the only proper use, benefitt and behoofe of the said John Pell, his heirs and assignes forever; to be holden of his most sacred Majestye, his heirs and successors, in free and common soccage, according to the tenure of East Greenwich, in the county of Kent, in his Majestye's kingdom of England, yielding, rendering and praying therefore yearly and every year forever, unto his said Majestye, his heirs and successors, or to such officer or officers as shall from time to time be appointed to receive the same -- twenty shillings, good and lawful money of this province at the citty of New Yorke, on the five and twentyth day of the month of March, in lieu and stead of all rents, services and demands whatsoever.

In testimony whereof, I have signed these presents with my handwriting, caused the seale of the province to be thereunto affixed, and have ordained that the same be entered upon record in the Secretary's office, the five and twentyeth day of October, in the third yeare of the King Majestye's reigne, and in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty and seven.

THOMAS DONGAN."

Source: De Lancey, Edward Floyd, Origin and History of Manors in the Province of New York and in the County of Westchester, pp. 156-57 (NY, NY: Privately Printed, 1886).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."