Notes |
- *Robert Everitt (From notes of Harry Tanto) Notes See 00.18.5 for some information which needs support. There is considerable uncertainty about Robert Everitt. Some think that he was born in America, and there were families with that name in New England to support that deduction. The best evidence to indicate his birth in England, is an entry whic h seems to have come from a Bible which reads: 'Robert Everitt, born Oct. 15,1715, at Yarley, County of Suffolk, England. married Esther Butterfield, born Sept. 17, 1719. Died Feb. 2, 1805. The widow of John E.' (John E. Butterfield) There are a couple of things to be questioned in this entry. There can be found no place named 'Yarley' in England, but there is a 'Yaxley' and the writer may have misread or mistaken the letter; and was Esther really a widow of some man when sh e married Robert? Perhaps this means her former husband was John Everitt and Robert took some kinfolk's former wife. Then we have the problem of whether Esther's maiden name was Butterfied, or was her deceased husband John Butterfield? These Butte rfields, no doubt, are descended from the immigrant, Benjamin Butterfield and his wife Ann Jundon from England in 1635, who settled for several generations at Chelmsford, Massachusetts. A history offamilies of Ulster County, New York, states that the Everitts: 'left their home in England and established the family in the New World, locating first in New England, with the course of migration westward, finally locating in Ulster co unty, where ... Robert Everitt was born. He became a farmer and a wealthy man, and owned a number of slaves. He reared a large family, all daughters except Daniel, and John Everitt, who, incurring his father's dislike, was disinherited by him.' Al though there are questions, this account will proceed on the bases of a number of assumptions. Robert Everitt may have came to America at age seventeen (about 1732. This would give Robert Everitt the distinction of being the most recently arrived ancestor of ours to North America). He became a farmer in the township of Blooming Grove, Orang e County, New York. Being raised in England, could have made him a staunch Tory when Americans were becoming disillusioned with British rule. On the other hand, the history of Ulster is probably correct, and Robert is part of that well establishe d family of America, who had done well under British rule, and had no desire to leave it. Robert,s daughter, Anne 'Nancy', was age fourteen when Barnabus Many had a strong interest in this girl, and Robert did not welcome this revolutionary suitor into his home at Hamtonburg. When Nancy and Barnabas eloped and married, Robert was said to have whipped his daughter, whereupon Barnabas sued his father-in-law and collected the equivalant of $1 00 in damages. But this is only part of family folklore. It does reflect a character of a father who disowne d a son. John. Nancy was only one of at least eight children of Robert and Esther, and probably the eldest. If animosity existed at the time of marriage of Nancy and Barnabas, it was forgiven by the time of the Revolution. One of Roberts bequests in his will is ' one note of hand of 100 pounds from Barnabas Maney dated Dec. 17th, 1776'. He would not have loaned Barnabas that much ifbad feelings were present. In addition Daniel was ordered to 'teach my grandson. John Manna, (who died the same year as Robe rt) the trade of shoemaking or weaving, and ifhe remain with him till of age, 30 pounds, two suits of good clothes and a horse.' . Robert Everitt purchased land in the Dusenberry Tract about 1750. He settled in what was then Marlborough township by 1773, for at a town meeting that year he was chosen as 'pounder' at Valley (now Plattekill) which was the keeper of the pound fo r animals found at large. He must have left his sons, Daniel and John, in charge of his more developed lands at Blooming Grove, for in the Assessment Rolls of Orange County for 1775, the sons are assessed by John Stewart in District No.7, each 52 5 pounds, 12 shillings and 5 pense. This is the highest assessment of any individuals in the district. Robert's will is dated September 28, 1781 and proved June 28, 1785, so he must have died before the latter date. In . the will he names his wife Esther, two sons, Daniel and John; and six daughters, Nancy, Frances, Patty, Esther, Jane and Sarah . He states: 'Seriously considering the uncertainty of human life in the best and more particularly of my own declining state of health, '. He left his wife one good bedstead, two good cows and six sheep, to be kept by my son Daniel for her use, ' along with 'flax, ground which said son is to sow and dress for her, not exceeding one bushel of seed to be sown yearly, full privilege of my house to live in with my son Daniel, six apple trees, and a decent maintenance out of my estate.' Sh e also received his negro woman, Bell. Daniel was left the faffi1, two yoke of good working oxen, notes of 100 and 20 pounds, Robert's silver watch and his gun. His moveable estate was to be equally divided among his daughters, with three exceptions: Sarah was to get only 5 pounds; Fra nces was to get 5 pounds over her share 'in consideration of her being an infirm and weakly woman'; and Jane was to receive 50 pounds and a cow, above her share because 'of having lived with me and served me longer than any of my daughters.' As the historian mentioned, Robert's son John was basically disinherited. The will left him two pounds 'if peradventure it should so happen that he live in this place again'. The story is that John had been sent to a private school in Millbrook, where he forged checks. Also to gain his father's disfavour, he took a commission as an officer in the British service, received a grant of land in Canada and settled there after the war. Although Robert harboured Tory sentime nts he did not condone a course of armed resistance against the will of the American colonists.
|