More on John Ffinch, A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's June 27, 1654 "Indian Deed"

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."

On June 27, 1654, Thomas Pell signed a so-called "Indian Deed" with local Native Americans acquiring the lands that became Pelham and surrounding areas. A copy of that deed, said to be in Thomas Pell's handwriting, exists. It is among the Pell family papers maintained by the Fort Ticonderoga Museum. That document offers some of the best evidence we have of those who knew Thomas Pell. 

I long have been researching the lives of those Englishmen who signed the Pell deed and agreement on June 27, 1654 as witnesses. An image of that agreement and a transcription of its text is available on the archive of the Historic Pelham Web site by clicking here. 

Among those whose signatures or marks appear on the document as witnesses are "Richard Crabb", "Henry Accorly", "John Ffinch", "William Newman" and others. Inquiry into the backgrounds of these men has shed additional light on Thomas Pell and his purchase. 

Periodically I have published on the Historic Pelham Blog a little of the massive amount of information I have assembled about these various Englishmen of the 17th century. For examples, see, e.g.:

Thu., Aug. 09, 2007:  Information About John Ffinch: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654.

Friday, November 03, 2006: More About Richard Crabb, the "Magistrate" Who Witnessed the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Friday, September 22, 2006: Henry Accorly: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Friday, September 15, 2006: William Newman: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Thursday, May 18, 2006: Richard Crabb, the "Magistrate" Who Witnessed the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

In 2009, I also published an article in The Bronx Historical Society Journal about the Englishmen who signed Pell's so-called "Indian Deed."  See Bell, Blake A., The New Englanders Who Signed Thomas Pell's 1654 Agreement Acquiring Much of Today's Bronx and Lower Westchester Counties From Native Americans, The Bronx County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XLVI, Nos. 1 & 2, pp. 25-49 (Spring / Fall, 2009).

Image of the Handwritten Copy of Pell's So-Called "Indian Deed"

Signed on June 27, 1654.  This Deed is the Original Deed in the

Chain of Title for Every Home in Today's Town of Pelham. For a

Transcription of the Text Prepared by This Author, click here

and Scroll Down.  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Today's Historic Pelham Blog article adds to this research by providing a previously unnoticed reference to John Ffinch (i.e., Finch), one of the men who signed the Pell deed.

John Finch was among the seven hundred or so English Puritans led by John Winthrop who migrated from England to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the eleven ships that formed the “Winthrop Fleet of 1630”. 

During the 1630s and early 1640s, Finch could be found in the Boston, Cambridge and nearby Watertown areas of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay.  In the early 1640s he moved to Stamford. He seems to have followed Daniel Finch, who may have been his brother.  In any event, John was in Stamford by October, 1642 when he received a land grant.

In Stamford, Finch met three of the four men with whom he eventually signed Thomas Pell’s deed: Henry Ackerly (referenced on Pell’s deed as “Henry Accorly”), Richard Crabb, and William Newman.  In those years, New Haven’s rule over settlements including Stamford and Greenwich was a constant source of irritation for local settlers. In 1644, a considerable part of the group that had relocated from Wethersfield to Stamford fled to Long Island preferring to live under the Dutch than to “remain under the oppressive jurisdiction with which they had now become thoroughly acquainted, and as thoroughly dissatisfied.” John Finch, Richard Crabb, Henry Ackerly and William Newman were among those who remained. 

Things did not improve for those who remained, however. Finally, in 1653, Stamford residents delivered a formal complaint to New Haven authorities regarding taxes, voting rights and “various other obnoxious measures”.  New Haven authorities attended a town meeting and found Stamford residents “full of discontent with the present government they are under”.  

New Haven authorities concluded that at least one of the Finch men – perhaps John Finch – had whipped up ill sentiment in Stamford toward the Colony of New Haven.  At about this time, John Finch sold his house and lot in Stamford, although he seems to have remained in the area for a time. 

Interestingly, another of those who later signed Pell’s deed as a witness – William Newman – was also accused at this time by the New Haven authorities of being “one of the disturbers of ye peace of Stamford, in pleading for such libertie in votes as would overthrow the foundations of goverment [sic] here laid”.  

Finch may have had a strong motive to assist Pell in Pell's purchase of lands from Native Americans.  Finch may have sought to arrange a settlement for his son, also named John, on a portion of those lands. 

Within months of his acquisition, Pell made some land available to English settlers who planted a settlement far west of the boundary established by the 1650 Treaty of Hartford. They settled at the mouth of today’s Westchester Creek in the Bronx. The Dutch called the settlement “Oostdorp”. The English initially called the settlement “Westchester.”  

The enormity of Pell’s move was not lost on the Dutch. They soon invaded the settlement and removed some settlers to a prison ship. They released the settlers shortly, but forced them to pledge allegiance to the Dutch to remain in the settlement. 

During some of these events, a “John Finch” was an inhabitant of “Oostdorp”. For example, an “Oath Written and Signed by the Inhabitants of Oostdorp” on January 1, 1657 affirming the settlers’ allegiance to the Dutch after the Dutch invaded the settlement is signed by, among others, “John Finch”. Admittedly, the records do not explicitly indicate whether this was “John Finch” senior or junior. Yet, careful consideration suggests that it was the son who settled in Oostdorp.  The father seems to have remained in the Stamford area. 

According to some authorities, John Finch, Sr. died in Stamford on September 5, 1657.  The inventory of his estate was recorded in Book 1, page 66 of the Stamford records bearing the date of 9th of 12th mo., 1658 so he certainly died before that date.

Recent research has revealed an additional 17th century document referencing what appears to be John Ffinch, Jr. (the son of the John Finch who signed the Pell deed) living in the tiny settlement of Oostdorp, so renamed by the Dutch after they invaded the settlement previously known as Westchester.

The two-page document is a petition copied into Dutch Council Minutes reflecting that the original was signed by seven residents of the settlement of Westchester and submitted to Dutch authorities on March 13, 1656.  The transcription of the document by Dr. Charles T. Gehring shows that one of the petitioners was "John Finth," almost certainly John Finch, Jr. who lived in the settlement at the time.  The document is a petition presenting the names of six of the settlement's earliest and most important settlers from which the Dutch were to select those whom they would allow to serve as local government officials.  An image of the petition copied into the Dutch Council minutes appears immediately below, followed by Dr. Gehring's transcription of the same.

March 13, 1656 "Letter from Robert Bassitt and others to director

and council", Page 01 of 02.  Source:  "Letter from Robert Bassitt

and others to director and council", New York State Archives, (visited

Apr. 22, 2018).  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.  Transcription

Appears Below.

March 13, 1656 "Letter from Robert Bassitt and others to director

and council", Page 01 of 02.  Source:  "Letter from Robert Bassitt

and others to director and council", New York State Archives, (visited

Apr. 22, 2018).  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.  Transcription

Appears Below.

"[6:341b] 

[NOMINATION OF OFFICIALS AT WESTCHESTER] 

Westchester, March 13th, 1656 

Honoured Sir 

The inhabitans of Westchester haveing taken into consideration the nesessite of haveing offisors established amonghst our selves in this Towne for the executing of such Lords in the Towne may conduce to the good of our towne shippe therefore this may signifie to your honour that the Towne have presented unto your honour these sixe, Leftenant Thomas Wheeler: Thomas Neuman: John Lord: Josiah Gilbert: William Ward: Nicklis Bay ley: that soe you may be pleased to confirme and establish offisires amonghst us for this yeare next insending the date hereof further the towne have chosen and deputed as debutyes in theyre Behalfe the afore said full confirmation from your honnour how fare our bounds shall extend and Reach. 

The underwritten in the behalfe of our selves and the rest of the town 

Robert Bassit 
Robert Rosse 
John Fenner 
William Bensill 
John Finth 
Joseph Lanckton 
John Richardsone"

Source:  Gehring, Charles T., Trans. & Ed., Council Minutes 1655-1656, p. 281 (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1995).

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."

Dutch Authorities Remove the Settlers At West Chester in March, 1656

Please Visit the Historic Pelham Web Site
Located at http://www.historicpelham.com/.
Please Click Here for Index to All Blog Postings.

Not long after Thomas Pell planted a tiny settlement of Englishmen at the head of Westchester Creek in late 1654, the Dutch in New Amsterdam decided to remove the settlers by force.  Early Dutch records reflect efforts to remove the English settlers.  One such account appears below, followed by a citation to its source.

"Book V. ~ 1656. . . .

Feb. 2. . . .

The Directors having received, by this time, information of the encroachments of the English at Oyster bay and Westchester, sent out orders to erect a fort at the former place, and to repel, even by force, all attempts to settle on the Company's lands in voilation of the treaty of 1650,

Feb. 22.

which the States General formally approved this spring. 2  [Footnote 2 reads:  "Hol. Doc. viii., 122, 134; Alb. Rec. iv., 207; De Witt, iii., 192; Thurloe, iv., 526; Hazard's State Papers, ii 549."]  Pursuant to these instructions the Director-general took the necessary steps to vindicate the Company's rights to Vreedlant.  The English of that settlement ('which they called Westchester,') were not only in the habit of entertaining fugitives from justice, but had kept up, during the recent Indian excesses, a constant correspondence with the savages.  To put an end to these irregularities, Captains

Mar. 6.

De Koninck, Newton, and the Attorney-general were sent secretly to that quarter with a suitable force to arrest the leaders and destroy all the buildings, except three or four, permitting the other settlers to remove their furniture within three days.  Those of the expedition who should be guilty of plunder were to be most vigorously punished.  this party set out immediately, and on reaching the place, were met by Lieut. Wheeler and other settlers, prepared for resistance, 'as the land was their own.'  They were forthwith disarmed, and removed, twenty-three in number, to the Manhattans, where they were placed on board the Ballance.  Those among them who were runaways were

Mar. 14.

Chap. VL ~ 1656.

afterwards sent to prison.  The others, who had been inno- [Page 312 / Page 313] cently lured to settle on the Company's lands, were placed under civil arrest and lodged in the City Hall.  'On the remonstrance of their wives,' and in consideration of the inclement season of the year, the Director and Council ordered that they should be set at liberty, on promising,

Mar. 15.

under oath, to depart with their goods and chattels within six weeks from the district, not to return again without permission.  On the followind day the arrested parties

Mar. 16.

addressed a petition to the Director-general and Council expressing their willingness to submit to their government 'so long as we continue within your jurisdiction,' provided they should be allowed the liberty of choosing their officers for the administration of such laws as may be enacted for the good of the township, and have their arms restored.  They likewise asked the privilege to make laws for the regulation of their town affairs not repugnant to the general laws of the province; and to divide the lands among the townsmen, none being admitted except according to the agreement which had been made among themselves, on commencing the settlement. 1 [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "Signed, Thomas Newman, Thomas Wheeler, Robert Bassett, Isaiah Gilbert, John Rose, Robert Rose, Therwod Caniff, [in another entry, Davis,] Uncles Bill, William Benfall, John Jenner, Robert Meaker, [Bartholomew Meares,] Obadiah Gilbert, Roderick Osbert, John Broundith, [Landish,] Edward Waters, Samuel Morris, Samuel Hart, William Ward.]  They were told, in reply, that they should be allowed the same privileges 'as the freemen of the villages of Middleborough, Breukelen, Midwout, and Amersfoort were enjoying.'  They should be permitted to nominate a double number of persons to fill the offices of magistrates, from which the Executive would make a proper selection.  Capt. Raith. Paxton, William Elliott, Black Marchand, John Gray, Roger Wheeler, 'all Englishmen,' who had taken up arms against the authorities, were discharged and ordered to quit the province,

Mar. 25.

unless some of the other towns were willing to receive them and remain security for their good behavior.  Westchester sent in its first nomination of magistrates shortly

Mar. 28.

after the date of the above agreement. 2 [Footnote 2 reads as follows:  "These persons were Lieut. Thomas Wheeler, Thomas Newman, John Lord, Josiah Gilbert, William Ward, and Nicholas Bayley.  The application [Page 313 / Page 314] was signed Richard Bassett, Robert Rose, John Jenner, William Benfall, John Smith, Joseph Laugton, and John Richardson."]  The settlers

Book V. ~ 1656

petitioned at the same time that no farms nor villages should be granted or established within two Dutch miles of the centre of their settlement; that such as had land granted them may select it where they considered most convenient; that they may have power to admit or reject new settlers for just cause; that such lands as were not entered on within six months should be forfeit; that actual settlers be obliged to contribute to the common expenses in proportion to the extent of their farms; that they be permitted to choose, within themselves, officers to execute justice according to law, and to maintain peace and manage town affairs; also officers to discipline the settlers 'in a military way.'  They requested a copy of the laws of the country 'drawn out in English,' that they may know how to conduct themselves, when they transgress the same, and how to punish evil-doers, with power to make orders for town matters 'not repugnant to the fundamentals of your laws.'  They finally craved arms and ammunition for self-defence, on paying therefor, and that whatever wriings may pass between themselves and the government be in English, so that they 'may fully and perfectly understand them.'  Thomas Wheeler, Thomas Newman, and John Lord were

Mar. 28.

selected as magistrates, but the conclusions on the other demands were postponed until the Director and Council should have an opportunity to consult the petitioners.  Thus happily terminated a misunderstanding which threatened, at first, a different issue.  This settlement was henceforth called 'Oostdorp' by the Dutch, and East-town by the English. 1  [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "Alb. Rec. iv., 187; x., 38, 39, 250, 315, 316, 321, 322, 328-331, 335-337, 340, 343-346; xi., 283-285, 291, 300-303, 308-313, 318-321; xvi., 303.  When the English appeared before New Amsterdam, (August, 1664,) the inhabitants of Westchester addressed a petition 'to his Majesty's Commissioners for the affairs of New England,' in which, after setting forth the purchase of this tract by Pell, they refer to the arrest of the twenty-three settlers by Capt. De Koninck, who they say 'were committed prisoners to the hould of a vessel, where they continued in restraint from all friends, for the space of thirteen days, fed with rotten provision, creeping with worms, whereby some of them remained diseased to this day, after which they were carried away in chaines and laid in their dungeon at Manhatoes; that they had perished with famine in the said impris- [Page 314 / Page 315] onment but for the relief obtained at other hands,' and 'that when the said pretended powers had freed the said prisoners and introduced their own government over the said plantation, they drove away such as would not submit to their pretended authority, to their great endamagement, and the enslaving of such as remained.'  Book of General Entries, i., II.  This statement has been copied by some English writers, without, however, any reference to the real statement of the facts.  By comparison with the text, it will now be seen how blinded these men have been by their own passions.  Capt. De Koninck set out from New Amsterdam on the 7th, and returned about the 10th or 11th of March.  The prisoners were landed on the 14th, and conveyed, those who had been fugitives from justice, to prison; the others to the City Hall.  They were, therefore, only about three or four (instead of thirteen) days aboard the Ballance.  The story of 'the rotten provision,' &c., is, it is to be presumed, of the same character as this representation.  On the 15th, the day after they landed, all were liberated except five, who, having taken up arms against the authorities, were allowed to settle in the other towns of the province, on giving security for keeping the peace.  The privileges granted to the town, show that the settlers were placed on a par with the other settlements in New Netherland, and do not in any way substantiate the representations made to his Majesty's commissioners."] 

[Page 314 / Page 315]

Chap. VI. ~ 1656

At the close of the year, another nomination, in conformity to their patent, was sent in, and Messrs. Newman, Lord, and John Smith were appointed magistrates.  Capt. Brian Newton, Secretary Van Ruyven, and Commissary Van Brugge, were sent thither to administer the oath of office to these men, and that of allegiance to the other inhabitants.  The latter, however, objected to taking the oath in the absolute sense in which it was drawn, and would promise obedience only to the law provided it was conformable to that of God; their allegiance was to continue only 'so long as they remained in the province.'

1657.  Jan. 1.

This form having been agreed to, was signed by fifteen of the settlers.  The whole population at this time amounted to twenty-five men, and ten to twelve women.  Six of the former were absent when the commissioners visited the place, and Anthony Gill refused to sign the declaration. 1  [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "This first day of January, Anno 1657:  In East towne in the New Netherlands:  Wee hose hands are onder writen do promise to owne the Gouernor of the Manatas as our Gouernor and obey all his magistrates and lawes that are made accordin to God so long as we liue in his jurisdiction.  (Signed) Robbert Bassett, George x Reith, John Finch, John Wilson, Richard x Horton, Thomas x Taylor, Hendrick x Cornelysen, Thomas x Marsin, Nick Loobey, John Quimbee, Josiah Cibber, Obadiah Cibbord, Jonathan Llockwood, Robert x Meacker, Jeffery x Fferris.  The meeting to sign the above paper was called by beat of drum.  The commissioners were desirous, for dispatch sake, to have the people assembled on Sunday, but they would not consent:  'It was their [Page 315 / Page 316] Sabbath.'  Of their mode of worship the commissioners give in the journal of their expeditioin the following account:  '31 Dec.  After dinner Cornelis van Ruyven went to the house where they held their Sunday meeting, to see their mode of worship, as they had, as yet, no preacher.  There I gound a gathering of about fifteen men, and ten or twelve women.  Mr. Baly said the prayer, after which one Robbert Bassett read from a printed book a sermon, composed by an English clergyman in England.  After the reading, Mr. Baly gave out another prayer and sung a psalm, and they all separated.']

[Page 315 / Page 316] 
Book V. ~ 1657.

The people complained seriously of annoyance they experienced from the Indians, who, having guarantied the quiet possession of the land to Mr. Pell, were now displeased that the settlers had submitted to the Dutch, especially as Mr. Pell insisted on having either his money returned, or the conditions of the sale honestly fulfilled.  On this account they insisted on the restoration of their arms, which, they said, were not all returned according to promise.  In their present condition they were exposed to great danger, should the Indians attack them, and therefore they demanded means to protect themselves. 1  [Footnote 1 reads as follows:  "'Honored Sir, wee humbly desire and requestthat you would be pleased to send us a count book and those twelve muskets which you spak of, with the rest of the ammunition for the use and safeguard of our plantations with the orders and lawes which we are to walk by that wee may know how to act.   From Este towne the 1st of January, 1657, Thomas Newman.'"]

Source:  O'Callaghan, E.B., History of New Netherland; or, New York Under the Dutch, Vol. II, pp. 312-16 (NY, NY:  Bartlett and Welford, 7 Astor House, D. Appleton and Company, No. 200 Broadway 1848).

Please Visit the Historic Pelham Web Site
Located at http://www.historicpelham.com/.
Please Click Here for Index to All Blog Postings.

Information About John Ffinch, One of the Englishmen Who Signed Thomas Pell's Treaty on June 27, 1654

Please Visit the Historic Pelham Web Site
Located at http://www.historicpelham.com/.
Please Click Here for Index to All Blog Postings.

This is the third in a series of four postings regarding four of the Englishmen who witnessed the signing of Thomas Pell's treaty on June 27, 1654. For yesterday's posting, see Wednesday, October 31, 2007: Information About Richard Crabb, One of the Englishmen Who Signed Thomas Pell's Treaty on June 27, 1654. For the first posting in this series, which includes links to earlier postings dealing with the same topic, see Tuesday, October 30, 2007: Information About Henry Accorly, One of the Englishmen Who Signed Thomas Pell's Treaty on June 27, 1654.

"FINCH, JOHN, is assigned by the town [of Stamford] in October 1642, six acres, with marsh and upland as the other men. He died here in 1657. He sold his house and homelot in 1653 to Richard Ambler. The inventory of his estate, Book 1, page 66, bears date 9th of 12th mo., 1658."

Source: Huntington, E. B., History of Stamford, Connecticut, From its Settlement in 1641 to the Present Time Including Darien, Which Was One of its Parishes Until 1820, p. 32 (Stamford, CT: Published by the Author, 1868).

Please Visit the Historic Pelham Web Site
Located at http://www.historicpelham.com/.
Please Click Here for Index to All Blog Postings.

Information About John Ffinch: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

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."

On June 27, 1654, Thomas Pell signed a so-called "Indian Deed" with local Native Americans acquiring the lands that became Pelham and surrounding areas. A copy of that deed, said to be in Thomas Pell's handwriting, exists. It is among the Pell family papers maintained by the Fort Ticonderoga Museum. That document offers some of the best evidence we have of those who knew Thomas Pell.

For about a year I have been researching the lives of those Englishmen who witnessed the agreement on June 27, 1654. An image of that agreement and a transcription of its text is available on the archive of the Historic Pelham Web site by clicking here. Among those whose signatures or marks appear on the document as witnesses are "Richard Crabb", "Henry Accorly", "John Ffinch", "William Newman" and others. Inquiry into the backgrounds of these men, hopefully, may shed additional light on Thomas Pell and his purchase.

Periodically I have published on the Historic Pelham Blog a little of the massive amount of information I have assembled about these various Englishmen of the 17th century. For example, see:

Friday, November 03, 2006: More About Richard Crabb, the "Magistrate" Who Witnessed the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Friday, September 22, 2006: Henry Accorly: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Friday, September 15, 2006: William Newman: A Witness to the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

Thursday, May 18, 2006: Richard Crabb, the "Magistrate" Who Witnessed the Signing of Thomas Pell's "Indian Deed" with Local Native Americans on June 27, 1654

[Subsequent editor's note / addendum posted after this article was written and posted:  For an article published in 1909 collecting addressing the Englishmen who signed Pell's Indian Deed, see Bell, Blake A., The New Englanders Who Signed Thomas Pell's 1654 Agreement Acquiring Much of Today's Bronx and Lower Westchester Counties From Native Americans, The Bronx County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XLVI, Nos. 1 & 2, pp. 25-49 (Spring / Fall, 2009).]

Today's Historic Pelham Blog posting collects references to "John Ffinch" that appear in The Minutes of the Court of Sessions of Westchester County (1657-1696). The minutes were published by the Westchester County Historical Society in 1924 and were taken from minutes preserved in the "Leggett Papers" maintained by the New York Historical Society. Each reference below is followed by a citation to its source.

It should be noted at the outset that references to "Easttowne" are references to the settlement once known as "Oost-dorp" and known by the English at the time (and subsequently) as Westchester, now part of the Bronx in the area of Westchester Square. The references below tell an intriguing story. It appears that "John Ffinch" (Finch) ran up crushing debts and owed large sums to several citizens of the plantation of Easttowne. As the court repeatedly entered judgments requiring Finch to repay his debts, it appears that he conspired with an acquaintance named Edward Waters in which Waters filed a "false" lawsuit in which he fraudulently alleged that Finch owed him the large sum of twenty four gilders. Once he recovered the sum he surreptitiously returned the sum to Finch. When the court discovered the fraud, it fined Edward Waters twelve guilders.

"Eastowne april ye 5 1657.
The estate of John ffinch Sold at a out crey by vartu of a court Acte at a towns meting at a out crey according to Law [Page 1 / Page 2] to paye a debt dew upon bill to mary Cuggsshall of fluching [Flushing] to the value of twelf poun"

Source: Fox, Dixon Ryan, ed., The Minutes of the Court of Sessions (1657-1696) Westchester County New York, pp. 1-2 (White Plains, NY: Westchester County Historical Society 1924) (Publications of the Westchester County Historical Society Vol. II, Source Series, Vol. I).

"John finch in [torn] march ye I st 57".

Source: Id., p. 2.

"aprill the 5th: 1657
The sentans of the court is that John finch shall pay to mr John fleekes ye debt and damages and coast of couret twelf pounds and his * * * to be prised according to * * * of the bill ten days after the sentancs"

Source: Id., p. 3.

"Eastowne may ye 16: 1657
The estate of John Finch sold at a outcrey at atownes meeting his house and Lot and acomudations Sold for nine pounds (a leven shilings ten cowes at five pounds apeise and a cow sold at five pounds five shilings to pay a true [?] debte to mr ffeekes of flushing"

Source: Id., p. 3.

"September ye I : 1657
Edmund waters plantive against John finch in a aktion of debt to the valu of three pounds ten shilings

it being proved in couert that John finch is in deted to Edward Waters three pounds ten shilings therfor wee order that John finch shall pay to Edward waters three pounds ten shilings and cust of couert which amounts to twelf shilings -- to be performed in ten days
September
ye I : 1657 [Page 5 / Page 6]

A prizal off the goods of John ffinch sold at an out crey [auction] at a townes meting by vartu of a cuart acte to pay a dete dew to Edward waters

november the 24: 1657

to Robert baset £ sh
one Stockcloth [£] 00 [sh] 04 [pence] 02
2 botol rings [£] 00 [sh] 03 [pence] 06

to Richard ponton
one axe [£] 00 [sh] 05 [pence] 03
one iron pot [£] 00 [sh] 5 [pence] 03

To Edmand waters
one pare off tongs [£] 00 [sh] 08 [pence] 00"

Source: Id., pp. 5-6.

June ye 6 : 1658

it is by varto of A coarte acte heare Recorded that Edward waters having planted a sute in coarte in the yeare fifty seven against John ffintch and by ffals hood and defraud hath recuvered twenty foure gilders of John ffintches estate and hath in privut retourned the mony to John fintch againe by asinement of bill there fore wee soe caus and have ffined Edward waters twelfe gilders and to stand heare Recorded for a fals case"

Source: Id., p. 9.
"The 24th of march 1659 John Richesons bill of sale was recorded bearing date the 27th January 1658
know All men whom it may consern that I richard Ponton now inhabitant of West Chester or East Towne now within the jurisdict[ion] of the new netherlands have set over & sould [Page 9 / Page 10] unto John Richeson his heirs Executors Administrators or Asignes the home lot which was laid out to Samuel Westket & After sould to hendrick Cornelius & Roger wiles with All the Acomadations there unto belonging [words crossed out here] or which shall hereafter fall by lot with all Buildings & fencings thereunto belonging I say I the said Richard have sould unto the aforesaid John or his heirs Executors Administratrs or Asignes to have & injoy for ever the Aforesaid Acomadations & As witnes hereof I have set to my hand
Witness
Robert Basset
John ffinsh
Richard Ponton his mark [a cross within a rectangle standing on end]"
Id., p. 10.

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."