Title: Notes
Text:
Descendants of Capt. John Underhill
FIRST GENERATION
1 JOHN UNDERHILL, son of John and Honor (Leonora) (Pawley)
Underhill, was
born in England, traditionally in 1597, and married in The Hague, Holland, Dec.
12, 1628, He˜lken (Helena), daughter of William (son of John) and Govertge
(Emonts) de Hooch of Gorinchem, Holland. He arrived in Boston, Mass., after
Feb. 26, 1630, and died in Killingworth, Oyster Bay, Long Island, N. Y., 21, 7,
1672, as per the Flushing records of the Friends. His wife Helena is first
mentioned Dec. 15, 1633, in New England, when she joined the First Church in
Boston. She died in Southold, L. I., before Aug. 19, 1658. Shortly after her death,
he married Elizabeth, born in 1633, probably in Watertown, Mass., daughter of
Lieut. Robert and Elizabeth (Fownes-Winthrop) Feake. She died in Killingworth,
L. I., before Nov. 4, 1675.
For fully one hundred years the first wife of Capt. John
Underhill was supposed to
have been Helena Kruger, but no documentary proof or suggestive evidence has
been found to sustain it. Tradition connected her with Leiden, Holland, and at
various times correspondence was conducted by members of the family with
certain individuals of that city, with no definite results, until the search was
undertaken in a systematic manner by Dr. Morton of Philadelphia, who in trying to
establish the marriage in that city, received the following reply to his query, from
Ch. M. Dozy, City Archivist, dated May 26, 1900: "The undersigned certifies that,
according to the alphabetical indices, no entry is made in the old marriage
records of the city of Leiden, of a marriage between John Underhill and Helena
Kruger."
It is not definitely known when John Underhill arrived
in New England, but he was
in Holland Feb. 26, 1630, when his wife received her share of her father's estate
and is first mentioned in New England on Sept. 7, 1630, when the Court of
Assistants met at Charlestown and ordered that Mr. Patrick and Mr. Underhill be
allowed one-half year's provision, two hogsheads of meal, four bushels of malt
and about ten pounds in money for other provisions. "The public to stand the
charge and the year to commence from the time they begin to keep house."
(Records of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. 1, p. 75.) On Sept. 28, 1630,
the Court ordered that Mr. Patrick and Mr. Underhill should have a certain
allowance in money, to purchase household stuff and for help to wash, brew and
bake. (Ibid., p. 76.) At this same meeting it was decided that there "shall be levied
and collected out of the several plantations, the sum of fifty pounds for the
maintenance of Mr. Patrick and Mr. Underhill." (Ibid., p. 77.)
John Underhill and Daniel Patrick were in the Guard of
the Prince of Orange in
Holland and were brought to New England by John Winthrop, where they became
the first paid military officers to direct the colonists. On May 18, 1631, they were
made freemen (New England Register, vol. 3, p. 90) and before that time the title
of Captain had been conferred upon them. The fact that they were accepted as
freemen indicates that they had joined the church and taken the oath of
allegiance and Savage states that the name of John Underhill was No. 57 in the
list of members of the First Church in Boston. On July 26, 1631, the court ordered
a general training of Capt. Underhill's Company, on every first Thursday in every
month in Boston and Roxbury.
In May, 1634, John Underhill was elected Deputy to the
General Court and on 7
mo., 1 day, 1634, is listed as one of the Selectmen, which record is the earliest
existing of the town of Boston. (New England Register, Vol. 4, p. 124.)
At a court held at New Town, Sept. 3, 1634, he served
on a committee with
others to locate convenient places for forts on Castle Island and in Charlestown
and Dorchester. (Records of Colony of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. 1, p. 125.) On
Nov. 6, 1634, he was about to sail for England and carried with him a letter to
Winthrop's son and was given permission to visit his friends in Holland, although
there is no evidence to show that he did so. When he returned is not known, but
before September, 1635.
The Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, Vol. 1, p. 191,
state that on 1 mo., 9
day, 1636/7, John Underhill was chosen Captain for Boston and for the "country's
service" doubtless preparatory to participation in the Pequot War, through which
he so ably served that John Fiske in writing of his valor there as well as of that of
Capt. John Mason, considered their "overthrow of the Pequots a cardinal event in
the planting of New England and removed the chief obstacle in colonizing the
Connecticut coast." In August 1637, the court consented to allow Capt. Underhill
continued maintenance for three months at Saybrook. (Ibid, vol. 1, p. 200).
No one escaped the religious controversies of the day
and Capt. John Underhill
with his liberal views was no exception. He had fallen under the influence of the
teachings of Ann Hutchinson and her husband's brother-in-law, Rev. John
Wheelwright, who was tried for a sermon he preached in the Boston church on
fast-day 1637 and declared guilty of sedition and contempt and sentenced to be
banished and disfranchised. Capt. John Underhill with his love of justice signed a
petition in his behalf and in consequence he was discharged from further service
(and was to have a quarter's pay for a gratuity), by the court held 2 of 9 mo. 1637,
but for putting his hand to a seditious writing was ordered disfranchised, put from
the Captain's place and disarmed (Mass. Bay Colony Records, Vol. 1, pp. 208,
211). It is of interest to note in the list of Boston men who signed the petition for
Rev. Wheelwright, that twenty of them already were, or shortly became members
of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of that place.
Late in 1637, Capt. John left for England, where the
Calendar of State Papers,
Colonial Series, London, 1574-1660, page 267, have the following notice of him:
"Brooke House, March 24, 1638. Minutes of a Committee for Providence Island.
Capt. Underhill was this day entertained on these conditions: To go by next ship
to Providence; to have his own and one servant's transportation, borne by the
company; to have one hundred pounds sterling for one year, whereof seventy
pounds in hand, the rest to his assigns, immediately on the first notice that the
year is expended, the said year to commence from May 12 next; to have meat
and drink found him and his servant, in the Island." (Colonial Entry Book, Vol. 3,
pp. 228-9.) He evidently never went there, and under date of April 26, 1638, in
the ancient register of Stationers Hall in London, is: "Entered for his copy, under
the hands of Mr. Clay and Mr. Apsley, warden, a book called 'Newes from
America,' by Capt. John Underhill."
The book contains forty-four pages and gives a dramatic
account of his activities
in the Pequot War and an enlightening opinion of a woman, as follows: "My selfe
received an arrow through my coate sleeve, a second against my Helmet on the
forehead, so as if God in his providence had not moved the heart of my wife to
persuade mee to carrie it along with me which I was unwilling to doe, I had been
slaine. Give me leave to observe two things from hence first when the houre of
Death is not yet come, you see God useth weake means to keepe his purpose
unviolated. Secondly, let no man despise advise and Counsell of his wife though
shee be a woman; it were strange to nature to thinke a man should be bound to
fulfill the humour of a woman, what armes hee should carry, but you see God will
have it so, that a woman should overcome a man; what with Daliahs flattery and
with her mournful teares must and will have their desire, when the hand of God
goes along in the matter," etc.
That he was in Boston again by Aug. 1, 1638, is evidenced
by the fact that on
that day he sold to Thomas Makepeace of Dorchester, his house in Boston with
100 acres of upland at Muddy River (now Brookline), etc., and "his share of
woodlands in the Islands with a garden at the house and another behind Parker's
house to the quantity of one-half acre and somewhat more and also near half an
acre upon the Fort Hill, for one hundred pounds."
Because he still believed he was right in his religious
convictions and would not
retract what he had proclaimed in signing the petition previously mentioned, he
was on 6 of 7 mo., 1638 (p. 237, Massachusetts Bay Colonial Records),
sentenced to be banished, as Mr. John Underhill; to leave within fourteen days
and not to return except to take passage for England in the ship Salem. He
followed Wheelwright, leaving Boston late in September, 1638, for the
neighborhood of Exeter, now in New Hampshire, and became Governor of Dover
and Exeter, serving about a year. That he was early considering changing his
residence is evidenced by the fact that on Sept. 8, 1639, the Dutch records of
New Amsterdam have the following minute: "Whereas Governor John Underhill
residing towards the North requests permission to dwell with some families here
under our protection. On condition of enjoying such Freedom as the other
inhabitants residing here, said Underhill's request is granted, provided that he and
the people accompanying him shall take the oath of allegiance to their High
Mightinesses the States General and His Highness the Prince of Orange."
That he thought of New Amsterdam for a new home was but
natural, for there is
every evidence that his sister and his mother were residing there at the very
period of his request.
Why John Underhill did not take advantage of the permission
to reside in New
Amsterdam at this time cannot now be determined. The General Court at Boston,
on 13, 1 mo., 1638/9, had granted him safe conduct to come and answer certain
charges against him and gave him until the 22nd of the 3 mo., to comply. (Col. of
Massachusetts Bay, Vol. 1, p. 251.) On the 29 of 11 mo., 1639, the request was
renewed at his solicitation and he was assured by the authorities that he could
come and return in safety, provided the time he was to be in Boston, would be the
first week of the first month next, or the second week of the third month and not
stay more than ten days, after receiving notice to depart. (New England Register,
Vol. 16, p. 158.) The Court held at Boston, 7 of 8 mo., 1640, shows that he
delayed accepting the privilege accorded him, but that he was there at that time
and openly and humbly acknowledged his sins and errors and was again received
into the church, but his banishment was to continue until the end of the next Court
of Elections, when it was to be further considered. (Col. of Massachusetts Bay,
Vol. 1, p. 301.) And at the meeting of the General Court held in Boston, 14, 4,
1641, the order of his banishment was repealed. (Ibid., p. 329.)
On his return to Dover in 1640, he found Thomas Roberts
had been elected in his
place.
The records of the First Church of Boston, under date
of Aug. 22, 1641, state:
"Our brother Capt. John Underhill and our sister Helena, his wife, were this day
granted letters of recommendation to the church at Exeter." This gives us the
knowledge that he was still lingering in New England, but the West India
Company's records state that they received a letter from him dated New
Amsterdam, Jan. 6, 1642, and the Dutch records of that place give evidence
again of his intention of residing under its jurisdiction, for on Jan. 16, 1642, he
leased from Andries Hudde, the latter's house and plantation in Flatlands, for two
years from May, 1642, the yearly rental being two hundred pounds of tobacco,
well cured. He may have occupied this plantation during that summer, but it
appears doubtful.
The records of the First Church of Boston, page 76, show
that it was his desire
"to go to the Dutch," but the church wished him to locate with the English at
Stamford, Conn., near the Dutch. "He had been restored into favor with the
church sufficient to induce them to fit him out with a pinnace to take him and his
family to some place where he could find better employment," and at a Town
Meeting held in Stamford, in October, 1642, he was given eight acres of land and
on 5 of 2 mo., 1643, he was elected Deputy from that place to the General Court
of New Haven (New Haven Colony Records, 1639-1649, p. 85), proving
conclusively that he had decided to establish his residence there.
During 1643, the fear of an Indian uprising was felt
among the Dutch and English
Colonists and on Oct. 27, 1643, as per the General Court of the Jurisdiction of
New Haven, Conn., a proposition and request were made "by Capt. Underhill and
Mr. Allerton, by instruction from the Dutch Governor and some freemen of that
jurisdiction, for the raising of one hundred soldiers out of the plantation of the
English and armed and victualled, to be led by Capt. Underhill against the
Indians, now in hostility against the Dutch, to be paid by bills of exchange into
Holland." (New Haven Colony Records, 1639-1649, page 116.)
As the Court did not deem it advisable to send Capt.
Underhill and the
Englishmen who would have to serve under him, against the Indians, without the
consent of the other members of their Confederacy (Massachusetts, Plymouth
and Connecticut), Underhill requested a loan of twenty pounds, to be repaid by
the town of Stamford out of the salary they allowed him yearly. This was duly
considered and the loan made, provided Stamford would agree to its payment
and "to prevent the snares of larger offers for his remove." (Ibid., 117.) It is not
known that he finally accepted this loan, but it certainly seems apparent that he
gathered a body of men to train, preparatory to an Indian attack.
Capt. Patrick of Greenwich, had sworn allegiance to the
Dutch, and as an
inhabitant of that place had been killed by the Indians, a force was sent from New
Amsterdam in search of the slayers. They were unsuccessful and marched to the
home of Capt. Underhill in Stamford, where one of them after an argument with
Capt. Patrick drew a pistol and shot him. Shortly after, a conspiracy among the
Indians to slaughter both Dutch and English became known and the rumor not
losing ground as time went on, the combined forces under Underhill marched on
Hempstead, where a division was made, he having fourteen men to attack one
Indian village. Each division returned successful, killing over one hundred
Indians. On his return to Stamford, he was informed of a large Indian
encampment near Greenwich, and journeying to New Amsterdam, advised an
immediate attack.
However, in February, 1644, they left New Amsterdam and
attacked the Indians
in their encampment near Greenwich, killing fully five hundred of them and
destroying their homes by fire, taking very few prisoners, and numbering only
fifteen wounded among their own men. As the result of this engagement John
Fiske states that "it would not be extravagant to call John Underhill the savior of
New Netherland."
After a short period of rest at Stamford, they returned
to New Amsterdam, where
upon their arrival "a Thanksgiving was proclaimed," ...
It is probably about this time also that Director Kieft
presented Underhill with the
land on Manhattan Island, the ground-brief of which has not been found. He
never returned to Stamford, Conn., to reside, but must have permanently left
shortly after April 16, 1644, when he met many Indian chiefs in conference there
(Dutch Manuscripts, p. 88), who solicited him to sue for peace in their names, to
which he agreed on condition "that they in future keep quiet." At a court
proceeding in New Amsterdam on May 25, 1644, his absence is noted but the
court "expects his return." The Dutch Manuscripts also state that on June 6,
1644, he was a referee in New Amsterdam in a case of Henry Sately against
Adam Mot for debt; that on Nov. 26, 1644, he was a referee with Isaac Allerton in
a difference "between Moor and Wedderly respecting a bark" and that on March
21, 1645, another court case was referred to him.
The Register of New Netherland, 1626-1674, by O'Callaghan,
page 15, states
that on May 24, 1645, John Underhill was elected a member of the Council of
New Amsterdam. This Council body acted in a twofold capacity: as an Executive
Council and as a Court of Justice. The members could not be sued before, and
were not amendable to, a Court of inferior jurisdiction. (Ibid., p. 11.)
In 1653 John Underhill was arrested by the Dutch at his
home in Flushing and
imprisoned in Fort Amsterdam, for hoisting the Parliament Colors and addressing
a so-called seditious paper to the people of Long Island, after hearing of
contemplated war between the Dutch and the English. He wrote among other
grievances that, "this great autocracy and tyranny is too grevious for any good
Englishman or brave Christian to bear." The charges against him were dismissed
and shortly after he left for Newport, R. I., where, in a letter to the Commissioners
of the United Colonies, he had offered his services in the "common cause of
England against the Dutch." On the very day his offer was received, May 19,
1653, it was agreed by the General Assembly of Rhode Island that it was
necessary to defend themselves and they gave Capt. John Underhill and Capt.
William Dyre full power and authority to take all Dutch ships and vessels that
should come into their territory and the Assembly further resolved that Capt.
Underhill be constituted Commander-in-Chief on land and Capt. William Dyre
Commander at sea.
Support from all the Colonies was not forthcoming and
Newport could provide but
little, but Underhill thought of the isolated Dutch post between Saybrook and
Hartford, known in 1653 as The House of Hope, which had been fortified by
Director Kieft in 1641. It being owned by the Dutch, hampered the development of
Hartford and on June 27, 1653, Capt. Underhill seized it for the English, with
permission from the General Court of Hartford. This fort he finally sold, excepting
"the State's part" and this sale annoyed him in many ways for practically the
remainder of his life.
Peace with the Dutch was declared in July, 1654, and
probabilities are that when
he left Flushing he established his home in Southold, L. I., for on June 10, 1653,
he and Capt. John Young, a Southold man, sailed for Boston, although he made
deposition in Easthampton, L. I., Oct. 18, 1653, he certainly was residing in
Southold in March, 1654, when he sought advise from the New Haven Colony,
under whose jurisdiction Southold then was; also at a testimony, given in
Huntington, L. I., in 1665, when he styled himself High Constable of Oyster Bay,
he stated he was living in Southold in 1654.
On April 12, 1656, he wrote John Winthrop from Southold,
asking him to
prescribe for his wife, as Winthrop at times administered to the sick. He said,
"she daily continues in great pain, receiving last year a pain in her back with lifting
a heavy stone and daily increases her pain and descends into her left leg so that
she cannot turn in bed, nor go upright by day."
After the death of his wife Helena, in Southold, between
Jan. 1 and Aug. 19,
1658, he sold his property there (which he had registered Jan. 12, 1658) to
Thomas Moore, on April 1, 1659. The deed of the sale is evidently not recorded
but when Moore made it over to his son Thomas Moore he states: "Thomas
More, mariner of Southold, purchased of Capt. John Underhill, some tyme an
Inhabitant in Southold, for the consideration of Twenty and nine pounds to him
payed: All that his dwelling house scituate in Southold, together with the Barne,
orchard, Garden, home lott and fence thereof and all other outland meadows,
marshes, woodlands, commons and common pasture, etc. . . . belonging to said
John Underhill . . . as per by his deed under his hand and seal bearing date the
first day of Aprill in the yeare, One thousand, six hundred fiftye and nine." The
deed describing the above is dated Feb. 16, 1662, and was recorded in Southold,
March 19, 1679/80. (Printed Town Records of Southold, Vol. 1, pp. 182-184.)
Before January, 1659, he had married the second time
and as per a petition
presented to the General Court in Connecticut by the inhabitants of the plantation
at Cromwell's Bay, as follows, he considered that place his home, prior to its date.
Just when Capt. John Underhill located in Oyster Bay
is not definitely known, but
it is claimed by some that he was there as early as 1661. Unfortunately the first
land record there mentioning him is undated. He was to have ten acres between
Nicholas Wright's land by the way to Hempstead and the Highway. It was to be
80 poles long and 20 broad. (Oyster Bay Town Records, Vol. 1, p. 7.)
The following year he was appointed by "His Highness,
the Duke of York," High
Constable and Under Sheriff of the North Riding of Yorkshire on Long Island, with
full power and authority to execute all laws made for good government in the
Duke's territory. All other persons within the said Riding charged and required to
take notice thereof. He was also to take the oaths of the Constables and
Overseers of the town of Oyster Bay. (Dept. of State, Albany, Deeds, 2, page
16.)
The Indians must have been completely satisfied for the
work he did for them as
their attorney, for on Feb. 20, 1667, the Matinecock tribe conveyed to John
Underhill 150 acres of land, as per the following deed, the original of which is
preserved in the summer home of Myron C. Taylor (a descendant), located on
part of the same property. It is recorded in Oyster Bay Town Records, Vol. 1,
page 681.
The second paragraph of the letter below indicates that
Capt. John was seeking
the opportunity of naming the locality in which he lived and Killingworth as a
territorial designation first appears on the Town Records in the form of
Kelenworth, at the heading of each of the "Seven Purchase Deeds," on June 22,
1667, and not only applied to Underhill's own possessions but included that of the
other seven purchasers as is amply shown in sundry places on the public
records.
There can be no doubt today that Capt. John Underhill
gave that name to the
territory in which he last lived, in remembrance of the home of his ancestors in
Kenilworth, Warwickshire, England.
Capt. John Underhill made his will in Killingworth, L.
I., "ye 7th munth called, ye
12th day," 1671, and after quite a lengthy religious preamble, expresses his
wishes as follows: "Shall Decently be Entered. I bequeath my whole Estate In
possession of my wife Elizabeth Underhill During ye Time of her widowhood ....
Capt. John Underhill was buried in what is now known
as The Underhill Burying
Ground, in Locust Valley, L. I., said ground being a part of the 150 acres
conveyed to him in 1667 by the Matinecock Indians. He was probably the first to
be buried in it
JOHN UNDERHILL
By JOHN G. WHITTIER
A score of years had come and gone
Since the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth stone,
When Captain Underhill, bearings scars
From Indian ambush and Flemish wars,
Left three-hilled Boston and wandered down,
East by north, to Cocheco town.
With Vane the younger, in counsel sweet
He had sat at Anna Hutchinson's feet,
And, when the bolt of banishment fell
On the head of his saintly oracle,
He had shared her ill as her good report,
And braved the wrath of the General Court.
He shook from his feet as he rode away
The dust of the Massachusetts Bay.
The world might bless and the world might ban,
What did it matter the perfect man,
To whom the freedom of earth was given,
Proof against sin, and sure of heaven?
He cheered his heart as he rode along
With screed of Scripture and holy song,
Or thought how he rode with his lances free
By the Lower Rhine and the Zuyder-Zee,
Till his wood-path grew to a trodden road,
And Hilton Point in the distance showed.
He saw the church with the block-house nigh,
The two fair rivers, the flakes thereby,
And, tacking to windward, low and crank,
The little shallop from Strawberry Bank;
And he rose in his stirrups and looked abroad
Over land and water, and praised the Lord.
Goodly and stately and grave to see,
Into the clearing's space rode he,
With the sun on the hilt of his sword in sheath,
And his silver buckles and spurs beneath,
And the settlers welcomed him, one and all,
From swift Quampeagan to Gonic Fall.
And he said to the elders: "Lo, I come
As the way seemed open to seek a home.
Somewhat the Lord hath wrought by my hands
In the Narragansett and Netherlands,
And if here ye have work for a Christian man,
I will tarry, and serve ye as best I can.
"I boast not of gifts, but fain would own
The wonderful favor God hath shown,
The special mercy vouchsafed one day
On the shore of Narragansett Bay,
As I sat, with my pipe, from the camp aside,
And mused like Isaac at eventide.
"A sudden sweetness of peace I found,
A garment of gladness wrapped me round;
I felt from the law of works released,
The strife of the flesh and spirit ceased,
My faith to a full assurance grew,
And all I had hoped for myself I knew.
"Now, as God appointeth, I keep my way,
I shall not stumble, I shall not stray;
He hath taken away my fig-leaf dress,
I wear the robe of His righteousness;
And the shafts of Satan no more avail
Than Pequot arrows on Christian mail."
"Tarry with us," the settlers cried,
"Thou man of God, as our ruler and guide."
And Captain Underhill bowed his head.
"The will of the Lord be done!" he said.
And the morrow beheld him sitting down
In the ruler's seat in Cocheco town.
And he judged therein as a just man should;
His words were wise and his rule was good;
He coveted not his neighbor's land,
From the holding of bribes he shook his hand;
And through the camps of the heathen ran
A wholesome fear of the valiant man.
But the heart is deceitful, the good Book saith,
And life hath ever a savor of death.
Through hymns of triumph the tempter calls,
And whoso thinketh he standeth falls.
Alas! ere their round the seasons ran,
There was grief in the soul of the saintly man.
The tempter's arrows that rarely fail
Had found the joints of his spiritual mail;
And men took note of his gloomy air,
The shame in his eye, the halt in his prayer,
The signs of a battle lost within,
The pain of a soul in the coils of sin.
Then a whisper of scandal linked his name
With broken vows and a life of blame;
And the people looked askance on him
As he walked among them sullen and grim,
Ill at ease, and bitter of word,
And prompt of quarrel with hand or sword.
None knew how, with prayer and fasting still,
He strove in the bonds of his evil will;
But he shook himself like Samson at length,
And girded anew his loins of strength,
And bade the crier go up and down
And call together the wondering town.
Jeer and murmur and shaking of head
Ceased as he rose in his place and said:
"Men, brethren, and fathers, well ye know
How I came among you a year ago,
Strong in the faith that my soul was freed
From sin of feeling, or thought, or deed.
"I have sinned, I own it with grief and shame,
But not with a lie on my lips I came.
In my blindness I verily thought my heart
Swept and garnished in every part.
He chargeth His angels with folly; He sees
The heavens unclean. Was I more than these?
"I urge no plea. At your feet I lay
The trust you gave me, and go my way.
Hate me or pity me, as you will,
The Lord will have mercy on sinners still;
And I, who am chiefest, say to all,
Watch and pray, lest ye also fall."
No voice made answer: a sob so low
That only his quickened ear could know
Smote his heart with a bitter pain,
As into the forest he rode again,
And the veil of its oaken leaves shut down
On his latest glimpse of Cocheco town.
Crystal-clear on the man of sin
The streams flashed up, and the sky shone in;
On his cheek of fever the cool wind blew,
The leaves dropped on him their tears of dew,
And angels of God, in the pure, sweet guise
Of flowers, looked on him with sad surprise.
Was his car at fault that brook and breeze
Sang in their saddest of minor keys?
What was it the mournful wood-thrust said?
What whispered the pine-trees overhead?
Did he hear the Voice on his lonely way
That Adam heard in the cool of day?
Into the desert alone rode he,
Alone with the Infinite Purity;
And, bowing his soul to its tender rebuke,
As Peter did to the Master's look,
He measured his path with prayers of pain
For peace with God and nature again.
And in after years to Cocheco came
The bruit of a once familiar name;
How among the Dutch of New Netherlands,
From wild Danskamer to Haarlem sands,
A penitent soldier preached the Word,
And smote the heathen with Gideon's sword!
And the heart of Boston was glad to hear
How he harried the foe on the long frontier,
And heaped on the land against him barred
The coals of his generous watch and ward.
Frailest and bravest! the Bay State still
Counts with her worthies John Underhill.
+++++++++++++++
Capt. John Underhill came to Matinecock as Deputy Sheriff
and Surveyor of the
Customs in an endeavor to break up the smuggling then rife in the harbors on the
north side of Long Island especially at Oyster Bay and Musketa Cove.
Accompanying him came his young brother-in-law, John
Feke, the son of Lieut.
Robert Feake and Bess Fones, the widow of Henry Winthrop, and it appears that
he gave to young Feke the southeast part of the tract received from the Indians,
on which Feke built and reared a family of considerable note......
Killingworth, the naming of which has been heretofore
attributed by sundry so-
called historians to Capt. John Underhill as given in honorable remembrance of
his English home at Kenilworth; but I am unable to get any proof that the family
were seated at or near Kenilworth, but, to the contrary, Capt. John's father and
mother were of Wolverhampton. It seems to me more probable that, as there was
a Killingworth in Connecticut from whence some members of the Frost family
migrated to Matinecock, there might be more reason to believe that the name
came from such source than otherwise.
+++++++++++++
In 1678 John Underhill [son of Capt. John and 1st wife]
purchased from his
father-in-law, Matthew Priar, sixteen acres in Killingworth, bounded "with ye Corn
Crik on ye south, on ye west with Nathan Burcham's lot (now, 1901, Francis Y.
Underhill's), on ye north with James Coke's lot (now, 1901, in possession of
eighth generation of the name), and on ye east by part of Matthew Priar's own
land"; together with certain land adjoining. On this land it is believed John, Jr.,
built the house, in part at least, of the one standing there today (1901). The step-
mother of John, Jr., having died intestate without any disposition of the personal
estate left her by Capt. John, John, Jr., was appointed administrator. On May 31,
1685, his brother, Nathaniel, having attained his majority, made a sale to Henry
Franklin of Flushing of "All my rights in my lands in Matinecock, bounded north by
John Underhill's land, west with Nathan Burcham's land, south with a highway to
Oyster Bay and east with a creek and David Underhill's land and meadow, except
always and reserved unto him, the said Nathaniel or his assignes the Burying
Place that now is, containing Six Rod Square, and a highway to it containing one
Rod wide, etc."
This deed was made void and on March 22, 1686-8, the
same property, without
the reservation of the Burying Place, was sold by Nathaniel to his brother John,
described as follows: "All my housing and land, both upland and meadow lying
and being at Matinecock, which is the land my father John Underhill, Sr., lived
upon."
NATHANIEL UNDERHILL, son of (1) John and Elizabeth (Feake)
Underhill, was
born 22, 12, 1663, and married, 10, 10, 1685 (?), Mary, daughter of John and
Mary (Jackson) Ferris. He died in Westchester, N. Y., Nov. 10, 1710. The date of
her death has not been found, but as she is not mentioned in the will of her
father, dated May 9, 1715, it is fair to assume she pre-deceased its making.
A copy of Friends' Records, furnished the editor by John
Cox, Jr., contains the
following: "Nathaniel Underhill and Mary Ferris, 2nd intention at Jericho, 27.12
(Feb.) 1685/6. Marriage certificate not recorded," which casts some doubt on the
date given above, and shows they were probably married in 1686.
John Underhill and Matthew Prior were appointed by the
Friends to enquire as to
the clearness from other engagements of Nathaniel Underhill, when he and Mary
Ferris announced their intentions of marriage, 10th mo., 1685. Mary "was to
procure a certificate from her parents of their consent against ye next monthly
meeting."
12th mo., 1685, they signified their intentions of marriage
a second time, and the
Meeting, "finding all things clear on their part together having consent of parents
and relatives do not see cause to object to their proceeding but leave them to
take a suitable time for consummating their marriage."
On Jan. 8, 1685, Nathaniel Underhill, late of Oyster
Bay, purchased of John
Turner and his wife Sarah, of Westchester, N. Y., land near the bridge of
Westchester upon "ffrog's Neck." This was acknowledged Feb. 4, 1686.
On March 22, 1686-'87, Nathaniel Underhill and his wife,
Mary, of the Town and
County of Westchester, N. Y., conveyed for the sum of eighty pounds, to John
Underhill of Matinecock in Oyster Bay "All my Housing and Land both Upland &
Meadow lying and being at Metenicok in the Limitt and bounds of Oyster baye
aforesaid which is the Land that my father John Underhill Sen. lived upon with
forty Acors of Land lying in the Woods which I bought of the Indians Being butted
& bounded on the West by James Cock's land and on the East by Nathan
Burcham's land and on the South with Musketo Cove path, etc." (Oyster Bay
published Town Records, Vol. 1, p. 688.)
Page 197 shows that Nathaniel received the above mentioned
forty acres from
the Indians March 1, 1682, for favors they had received from his father, Capt.
John.
The Land Records at White Plains show that on Jan. 23,
1709/10, Nathaniel
Underhill, Sr., of Westchester, carpenter, conveyed to his son Nathaniel, Jr., all
interests in the Town of Westchester, reserving interest, however, in the sheep
pasture. (Liber D, Second Part, p. 50.)
Liber F, p. 196, states that Nathaniel Underhill recorded
a mark for his son John
Underhill's creatures, April 10, 1728, but it is possible this may refer to John, son
of Nathaniel, Jr., but if so, said John was only ten years of age.
The property Nathaniel Underhill purchased of John Turner
in 1685 was situated
in what is now known as Williamsbridge, being in 1902 in the upper part of New
York City. This property passed to his grandson, Israel Underhill, who, with his
wife Abigail and several members of the family were buried in the graveyard on
the farm. The old home burned, leaving nothing but the foundation to show its
location. In 1847, William A. Spencer occupied the residence built on the original
farm.
WILLIAM UNDERHILL, son of (6) Nathaniel and Mary (Ferris)
Underhill, was
born, April 7, 1707, in Westchester, N. Y., and married, in 1729, Mary Bayley,
who died in Dorset, Vt., May 1, 1791. He died there Nov. 26, 1777, and they were
buried in Maple Hill Cemetery, and their gravestones are still standing.
A letter from one of his descendants states that sometime
between 1730 and
1747 he settled in South East, N. Y. (then Dutchess County); that in 1769 three of
his oldest sons with their families located in Dorset, Vt., and were three of the first
six families to settle there; that in 1771, William and his wife Mary with William,
Jr., and his family followed, and they became the head of what has since been
known as the Vermont branch of the Underhill family. Certain family papers state
that Wm., No. 28, was "Wm. Bartow Underhill," but no evidence has been found
to sustain it, even his gravestone stating plain "William."
Issue:
+120 Abraham, born Feb. 19, 1730.
+121 Freelove, born 1733.
+122 Augustine, born March 24, 1736.
123 John Calvin, born 1738, died unmarried, 1808. He
was a lawyer and a
prominent member of the Society of Friends.
+124 William, born July 24, 1741.
The New York State Calendar of Land Papers gives the
following concerning land
in Vermont, and it is possible that the John Underhill referred to is John the son of
William, No. 28. If so, he could not have been a Friend and a Corporal, too.
Page 374. July 25, 1765. Return of survey for John Dawson,
John Coulter,
Thomas West, Thomas Goldsmith and John Underhill, late corporals in the 80th
Regiment. 1,000 acres on east side of Lake Champlain in Albany County (now
Shelburne, Vt.).
Page 406. July 15, 1766. Petition of David Mathews, James
Sackett and
Associates, praying for a grant of a tract of land, 23,040 acres, called Underhill,
east of Westford, and same to be erected into a township.
Page 629. Nov. 13, 1775. Petition of Frederick Rhinelander
in behalf of himself
and associates for a confirmatory grant of township of Underhill to the east of
Lake Champlain on River Le Moil.
Page 599. April 6, 1774. Petition of John Brandon for
the letters patent for 800
acres in Ulster County, to be granted in names of Joseph Saxon (Sackett ?),
Samuel Stevenson and Caspar (Jasper ?) Underhill.
+++++++++++++
Underhill Genealogy Vol 5
On Bolton's chart #123 was shown as John C., ob.s. (d
single). The Underhill
Mss. elaborated on this, calling him John Calvin b 1738 d unmarried 1808, a
lawyer and Quaker. This was the account used in Vol. II, but like so many
accounts in the early generations of the manuscript, it cannot be documented and
now appears to be largely without basis in fact.
For example, no reference can be found in original sources
to a John C. or John
Calvin Underhill in this period. If #123 did have a middle name, he would have
been the only Underhill of his generation to bear one. As for the claims that he
was a lawyer and a Quaker, neither can be proven, and may well be misplaced
references to his nephew John (#425), who was indeed a Quaker and held
judicial offices in Dorset, VT.
Despite doubts thus raised, it still appears likely that
there was a son John in
(#28) William's family. Whoever told Bolton the names of William's children
probably was a descendant of one of the other sons, and was quoting family
tradition if not records. That William would name a son John, after his deceased
eldest brother or his illustrious grandfather, is certainly likely.
The strongest argument for the existence of #123 is the
appearance in Ulster
Co., NY of an otherwise unplaced John Underhill, whose estimated dates
coincide with those attributed to William's son. This John of Ulster married and
had issue, which contradicts all descriptions of #123, starting with Bolton. The
latter was mistaken in stating that at least two other Underhills had no issue (#9
David and #91 Benjamin), so an error in the case of John is equally possible. It
would appear that when Bolton or his informants knew of no issue for a particular
individual, they assumed that he had none. No primary source can be found
which states that #123 John was either unmarried or had no offspring.
Bolton did, however, show the descendants of #123's brothers
in some detail,
and correctly, so if #123 also had issue there must be a reason why Bolton's
informants could not describe that line as well. It has been proven that, aside
from John, all of William's family removed to Dorset, VT prior to the Revolution. If
John went instead to Ulster Co., it follows that his family could have lost contact
with their relatives in Dorset. It was a similar migration to Ulster Co. that
contributed to #91 Benjamin being deprived of his rightful issue on Bolton's chart.
John Underhill of Ulster Co. and his descendants were
omitted from all previous
Underhill genealogies, except for scattered unidentified references in Vols. II-IV.
Besides these items there are other references to this family in many original
sources. In 1977 the present Editor brought
together all this material and was able to reconstruct
the line back to John. At that
time it was determined that he must have been born no later than 1740, had
children 1762-ca 1783, and died between 1805 and 1810.
He was the earliest Underhill in Ulster Co., but where
he had previously lived
remained unclear. Assuming that he was descended from Capt. John (like the
other 62 Underhill households in NY 1790), the Editor analyzed the first four
generations as set forth in Vol. II. The only likely place for John seemed to be as
#110, born in 1719 with no family indicated, and John and his descendants were
written into the draft of the present volume on that line. But further analysis (see
#91) disclosed that #110 never existed, thus casting out what had seemed to be
the sole solution to the problem.
Almost simultaneously, however, the present solution
materialized, for the restudy
of the early generations had shown that numerous statements made about them
were undocumentable and, in many cases, false. Thus the claim that #123 John
had never married could no longer be accepted as fact, opening the possibility
that he was John of Ulster Co. This identification was encouraged by #123's
dates, 1738-1808, as they fit exactly into the parameters set for John of Ulster.
The source of these dates remains unknown, and as they are both given as years
only, they could be as imaginary as many similar dates from the Underhill Mss.;
but if #28 William did have a son John, he was most likely born in the 1730's.
Any evidence connecting John of Ulster to #28 William's
family is circumstantial,
and is unlikely that direct proof of relationship can ever be found. As a young
man, William's son #123 John would have lived in South East, NY, a town then in
Dutchess and now in Putnam Co. That people migrated from that area across the
Hudson to Ulster Co. is a known fact. It would seem likely that John made this
move before 1769-71, when the rest of the family left South East (and vicinity) for
Vermont. There is no proof that John ever lived in Vermont.
It is also interesting to note the names used in this
family. John of Ulster had
three sons, John Jr., William and Robert. Obviously, William could have been
named for his grandfather, #28. He in turn named a son Daniel Bloomer, and this
may reflect his mother's origin. She called her third son Robert, a name
characteristic of the Bloomers but not of the Underhills in this period. Another son
of #28 William, Augustine, married Jerusha Bloomer, so we could have a case of
brothers marrying sisters. Unfortunately, the incomplete Bloomer genealogy
(NYG&B Record, Vols. 69 and 71) mentions neither Jerusha nor Mary. (It is
possible that the Bloomer connection is through William's wife Martha rather than
his mother.)
This completes the case at hand, but mention must also
be made here of a
Corporal John Underhill, who may well be identical with John of Ulster Co. There
are documented references to Corpl. John in Vol. II (p. 91) and IV (p. 191). Mrs.
Frost suspected that he was #123, but noted that this conflicted with the claim
that he was a Quaker; there is no evidence that John of Ulster Co. was of that
faith, and indeed most of #28 William's family appears to have gone over to other
denominations.
Corpl. John Underhill served in His Majesty's 80th Regiment
in the French and
Indian War, sometime prior to Dec. 1764, making him eligible to receive grants of
land on the frontier. On Dec. 12, 1764 he gave a power-of-attorney to his "friend"
William Provoost, merchant of NYC, to receive from Lt. Gov. Colden a grant of
200 acres and then assign the same to William Wilson, another NYC merchant.
On Oct. 7, 1765 the same Corpl. Underhill received a patent for 1,000 acres, on
the east side of Lake Champlain, said to have been at Shelburne, VT. No
Underhill is known to have lived in that area before the Revolution, and like most
of the grantees Underhill was probably just interested in the land for speculation.
Another reference cited in Vol. II (p. 91, from NYS Calendar
of Land Papers, p.
599) is dated Apr. 6, 1774, a petition by John Brandon for letters patent on 800
acres in Ulster Co., to be issued in the names of Joseph Saxon, Samuel
Stevenson and Caspar Underhill. There is no other reference to any Caspar; Mrs.
Frost suggested the name might be Jasper, but the earliest Underhill of that
name was but a child in 1774 (#105-H). Any connection between Caspar and
John of Ulster is unknown.
1-6-28-123 JOHN UNDERHILL, b 1738 d 1808 m Mary (Bloomer?).
His dates are
not proven. The account given here represents a major revision of that in Vol. II,
p. 91; see below for a detailed discussion.
This John Underhill settled in Ulster Co., probably before
the Revolution and
certainly by 1781, when his daughter Eleanor was married there. At the 1790
census he was of the Town of Woodstock, with two males 16 and over, two
males under 16, and two females. He subsequently moved to Saugerties, then in
the Town of Kingston, where the 1800 census lists him with a male and female
over 45 and two males 16-26, son John Jr. being recorded separately in the same
town.
On Feb. 21, 1805 John Underhill Jr. of Kingston promised
the Trustees of that
town that he would "keep said Kingston harmless against the support of John
Underhill and his wife Mary, father and mother of said John Jr." (Ulster Co.
Mortgages 10:266, quoted Vol. II, p. 403). This would seem to indicate that John
and Mary were suffering from age or illness, and as there is no trace of either in
the 1810 census, they had probably both died by that date.
1-6-28-123-C WILLIAM UNDERHILL, b Jan. 20, 1773 m Feb.
15, 1801 Martha
(???) b Jan. 9, 1783 d May 5, 1822. At 1810 and 1820 census res Hunter,
Greene Co., NY which is adjacent to Saugerties where he previously lived. See
Vol. IV, pp. 182-3.
Issue:
A JOANNA, b Aug. 15, 1802 d May 2, 1884 m George Kerr
or Carr and res
Tannersville, Greene Co., NY.
B MARY, b Jan. 30, 1804 d Feb. 14, 1841 m an Abbott.
C ELEANOR, b Jan. 10, 1806; either she or Esther m Michael
Dunigan of Hunter,
NY.
+D DANIEL BLOOMER, b 1807 d 1861 m 1st Harriet Olds m
2nd Sophia Hazard.
+E CHARLES H., b 1810 d 1856 m 1836 Caroline Wager.
F ESTHER, b Aug. 1, 1816.
G GEORGE, b July 9, 1819 d Sep. 11, 1828.
Title: Matthews' American Armoury and Blue Book
Text:
Underhill Captain John Underhill
, 1597-1672 , of Boston , 1630 , Governor of Piscataqua Plantation. He had
previously served in the British Army in the Netherlands , in Ireland , and at
Cadiz .
Arms - Argent, on a chevron sable, between three trefoils slipped vert, as many
bezants.
Crest - On a mound vert a hind lodged or.
Title: A Man Hated and Hailed
Text:
By Steve Wick | Staff Writer
For a few months after the Dutch summoned Indian leaders from Long Island to
their fort at New Amsterdam, there was peace across the region. But by the fall
of 1643, the killing had begun anew. As panicky settlers across western Long
Island fled to the fort at New Amsterdam, Gov. Willem Kieft and his advisers
reached out for help from the English community in Connecticut. While offering
no troops, the English allowed for the raising of a small army of English
mercenaries.
Enter John Underhill, a man with a reputation.
In Long Island history, there is no one like Underhill. He sailed from England to
the Plymouth Colony in Massachussets in the early 1630s. By written accounts,
he was no Puritan. He did not like being told how to live his life by church
leaders.
But he was useful when it came to fighting. When the English made war against
the Pequots in Connecticut in 1637, Underhill helped lead the murderous assault
against the Indians' log fort near present-day Mystic. By his own account, he and
his men killed more than 1,000 Pequots - men, women and children - and put the
torch to their fort and wigwams. As a people, the Pequots all but disappeared
from the landscape after Underhill was through with them.
As the Dutch huddled behind pallisaded walls on Manhattan Island through the
winter of 1643-44, Indian attacks along the fringes of their settlement picked up.
In response, Dutch troops attacked Indian villages on Staten Island and in
Westchester County.
Soon, Underhill, leading the army of mercenaries, arrived at New Amsterdam.
Long Island historians of the 19th Century often wrote flattering lines about him,
calling him a heroic Indian fighter who ``saved'' Europeans from extinction. But
there is a markedly different view supported by the evidence.
``Underhill changed the history of Long Island, and southern New England,'' said
John Strong, a professor at the Southampton Campus of Long Island University.
``Before Underhill, the Indians on Long Island could think they could share the
land with Europeans. After the Pequot War, and after other slaughters he
participated in, that changed.''
Underhill's claim to a bloody piece of Long Island history began in April, 1644.
Dutch records of the day say that ``seven savages'' were arrested at Hempstead,
an English village within the Dutch sphere of influence, on charges of killing pigs
``though it was afterwards discovered that some Englishmen had done it
themselves.''
Hearing of the arrests, the Dutch governor in New Amsterdam, Kieft, sent
Underhill and 15 or 16 soldiers, who promptly killed three of the seven Indians.
``They then took the other four with them in the sailing boat, two of whom were
towed along by a string around their necks till they were drowned, while the two
unfortunate survivors were detained as prisoners at fort Amsterdam,'' according
to a Dutch account written at the time. The report went on:
When they had kept them a long time ... the director (Kieft) became tired of
giving them food any longer and they were delivered to the soldiers to do as they
pleased with.
The prisoners were immediately dragged out of the guard house and soon
dispatched with knives of from 18 to 20 inches, which director Kieft had made for
his soldiers for such purposes ... that these knives were much handier for
bowelling them. The first of these savages having received a frightful wound ...
dropped down dead. The soldiers then cut strips from the other's body ... Kieft ...
stood laughing heartily at the fun.
The bloodbath on Long Island escalated when Underhill and his troops attacked
a peaceful community of Indians, apparently at a site in modern-day
Massapequa. When the shooting stopped, Underhill's troops had killed 120
Indians - the first and last Indian ``battle'' on Long Island.
Although this incident is well-documented in colonial records, the exact location
of the massacre has been debated among historians for years. Some said the
massacre occurred in present-day Queens; Strong and others, including famed
archeologist Ralph Solecki, say the evidence strongly suggests it occurred at a
site in Massapequa called Fort Neck. Confirmation would appear to have come
in 1935, Strong has written, when the bones of 24 people were dug up during an
excavation at the site.
In the late 19th Century, an Oyster Bay historian named Samuel Jones wrote this
account:
After the battle of Ft. Neck, the weather being very cold and the wind northwest,
Capt. Underhill and his men collected the bodies of the Indians and threw them
in a heap on the brow of the hill, and then sat down on the leeward side of the
heap to eat their breakfast. When this part of the county came to be settled, the
highway across the neck passed directly over the spot where, it was said, the
heap of Indians lay, and the earth in that spot was remarkably different from the
ground about it, being strongly tinged with a reddish cast, which the old people
said was occasioned by the blood of the Indians.
A historical marker noting the site of the slaughter stood on the corner of Merrick
Road and Cedar Shore Road. It was evidently stolen in the early 1990s and
never replaced.
Next, Underhill turned his attention to an Indian village in Westchester County.
There, as he had in Mystic, he attacked Indians assembled in a fort, shot them
and torched their wigwams. More than 180 Indians were killed.
Later, Underhill bought an estate in Oyster Bay called Killingworth, where he died
in 1672. A marker on Factory Pond Road and Locust Valley-Bayville Road, in
Lattingtown, notes the location of Killingworth. The marker describes Underhill as
a ``distinquished military officer, statesman and pioneer.''
A huge obelisk to Underhill's memory was erected in 1907 by the Underhill
Society of America, a genealogical group, on Factory Pond Road, in Mill Neck. It
features four plaques on its base showing Underhill reading to a group of Indians
who are kneeling worshipfully at his feet. On the cover of the book are the words,
``Love One Another.''
http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-
hs306a,0,6174655.story
Title: Underhill Genealogy
Text:
http://www.longislandgenealogy.com/johnunderhill.html
Life and Activities of Capt. John Underhill
Edited from "Underhill Genealogy," by Jossephine C. Frost (Mrs. Samuel Knapp
Frost) Brooklyn, NY Vol. 1
Published Privately by Myron C. Taylor in the interests of The Underhill Society
of America, 1932
The English Ancestry of Capt. John Underhill has been established back to
and including Hugh Underhill, keeper of the wardrobe to Queen Elizabeth in
Greenwich Palace, examined, and passed, by the College of Arms in London
and traced to armigerous Underhills of Ettington in Warkickshire and their
predecessors of the thirteenth century. As to the year of his birth, legend varies
between 1597 and 1600; as to place, tradition locates it at Baginton, near
Kenilworth (Killingworth) in Warwickshire.
The mother of Capt. John Underhill was a widow living in Holland in 1618,
and it should be conceded that he was residing there with her at that time, but no
authentic evidence is found concerning him until Nov.28, 1628, on which date
the Betrothal Records of Gorinchem and the Hague testify to his betrothal to
Heylken, daughter of Willem de Hooch of the former place and in each entry he
is described as a Cadet in the Guard of the Prince of Orange. As a sequel to
those entries, the marriage of the couple on December 12, 1628, is recorded in
the records of the Kloosterkerk at The Hague. He makes one other appearance
in the Dutch records there on Feb.26, 1630, when he signs a document stating
his acceptance of the division of his wife's father's estate.
|
