Hudson Tercentenary: An historical retrospect regarding the object and quest of an all-water route from Europe to India; the obstacles in the way; and also Hudson's voyage to America in 1609 and some of its resultsChamberlain, Frank
History
Hudson Tercentenary: An historical retrospect regarding the object and quest of an all-water route from Europe to India; the obstacles in the way; and also Hudson's voyage to America in 1609 and some of its results
Chamberlain, Frank
Hudson River (N.Y. and N.J.) -- History; Hudson, Henry, -1611
the manor house in Watervliet, such as a specified number of bushels of
good clean wheat, four fat fowls, one day’s service with carriages and
horses, and finally the one-quarter part of the purchase price on every
sale of land. The aim and intent was to perpetuate, if possible, and as
far as possible, the interest of the Van Rensselaers in the estate. The
estate remaining was divided by the two eldest sons, Stephen 4th getting
that on the west side and William Patterson Van Rensselaer that on the
east side of the Hudson river, and each all the reservations of rents in
their respective territories. “In 1839, when the said Stephen and
William Patterson began to push their claim against the landholders and
demand immediate payment of back rents, etc., the landholders, called
‘anti-renters,’ held a convention and appointed a committee to wait on
Stephen Van Rensselaer and ascertain if an amicable settlement of the
manor claims for rents in arrears could not be made and to learn on what
terms a clear and absolute title to the land could be had. The
committee, men of character, went to the manor office in 1839 to see and
converse with Mr. Van Rensselaer, but the latter refused to recognize or
even see the committee. He did, some time subsequently, send a letter to
the chairman of that committee declining to sell on any terms. Great
excitement was created in Albany county. The rent collectors were
roughly treated and they were told that no rents would be paid. Sheriffs
were called upon to discharge their duties and they were resisted and
driven back by men masked and dressed in Indian costumes. The sheriff
called to aid him the ‘posse comitatus,’ or power of the county, and
marched 600 strong into the anti-rent district, where they were turned
back by 1,500 anti-renters. The sheriff reported the state of affairs to
Governor William H. Seward, who immediately ordered out eight companies
of militia under the command of Major Bloodgood. They met no resistance.
“The Patroon interest hoped the military ordered out by the Governor of
the State would bring the anti-renters to their senses and induce them
to pay up. The landholders or anti-renters hoped that their display of
strength and resistance would induce the Van Rensselaers to offer terms
of compromise which they could accept. Neither hope was realized. Then
some lawyer who had dug into old English law books said the Patroon
patent was invalid and the matter must go to the court for settlement.
It became a political question at once. The anti-renters elected
representatives in the Legislature from eleven counties and the new
Governor favored them. The decisions of the courts seemed to alternate
in favor of the Van Rensselaers and then in favor of the anti-renters.
In 1852 the counsel of the Van Rensselaers advised them to sell their
claims, for they believed they could not be sustained and that advice
was accepted. Some of the landholders or anti-renters accepted the terms
offered.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account