The New York Genealogical and Biographial Record Benjamin Rand, "Memorial of New York Loyalists," Volume 21 (1890): pp. 180-185.

MEMORIAL OF NEW YORK LOYALISTS.

Comments

Thank you all for the overwhelming response to the loyalist article. As I stated before, we just happened across the article while doing an index search of the NYGBS magazine THE RECORD for the name ROOKE. We did not see the actual document. This was a gentleman, Benjamin Rand, that reprinted the document for the magazine just as we did for the mail lists. We don not know the where these people were from or with what Loyalists regiments they were associated. If anyone can pinpoint where these people were from it would be great. A couple of the query answers below do some of that. Do you all think that all these people were in New York (a British protected area) after losing all their land elsewhere? Is that the reason they could get so many signatures? I just find this all so fascinating and all you list participators so knowledgable. Thank you again for all your time, effort and considerations.

Jana Rooke

San Jose, CA

http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/r/o/o/Mark--Jana--Rooke/index.html

I am going to post some of the responses we received since I posted the document on several mail lists.

*****From [email protected]

Thomas Carleton, Sir Guy Carleton's brother, was made Govenor of the new province of New Brunswick so these may be some of the people who landed on the north side of the Bay of Fundy.

This counterpetition is mentioned in Ann Gorman Condon's book "The Loyalist Dream" "...The most notorious example of the jealousy that existed within the refugee ranks was the storm of protest that arose over the Petition of 55.....this petition was drawn up by several well known Loyalist merchants, clergymen,and lawyers in the city, and requested that in recognition of their dignity and sacrifices, they should be granted the same allowance as field officers in Nova Scotia-namely 5000 acres. This petition lit a fuse which continued to fire refugee resentment until long after they were settled in their new homes. The initial reaction to it was a counterpetition signed by 600 refugees who noted that they also had 'been deprived of very valuable landed estates and considerable personal Propertys' as a result of the war."

The Petition of 55 was titled "Petition of Sundry residents of New York City,22 July 1783" and was signed by prominent and well educated people while Ms Condon notes that one tenth of the signers of the counterpetition used an X to mark their names.

Nancy

***********

I see my gr.gr.gr.gr.grandfather listed on page 185. You have hin listed as Will Plant. He left New York in 1783 for England only to return to America, landing in Louisbourg, Cape Breton. He later settled in Sydney, Cape Breton. Are you able to get a copy of this document ? If so. what would be the cost ?

Carol MacLean in Vancouver, BC., Canada

**********

Do you have any idea where these LOYALISTS received their land? Some of the names are familiar -- but I do not believe they came to Port Roseway. During the last few years I have become more acquianted withthis part of my heritage. I will check tomorrow and locate the regimental name and number, if any.

Muriel M. Davidson

**********

I will take a stabe at the date as being 1782. William Plant on the list went from NY to England before coming to NS J. Pell arrived in NS in 1783 as part of the Port Roseway Loyalist group.

It seems that this might be a document stating these people were remaining Loyal to the British Crown and had been promised land in NS.

Lark

********

THANK YOU a million times! I've found what are most likely at least 3 of my ancestors on the document you re-typed. Now to track them further with a renewed interest.

Jeanne

*********

****From [email protected]

Thanks for posting the list of petitioners who oppposed the "55". That elite group had held positions of power in the pre-revolutionary days and felt the Briish Government would look favorably upon their request to divide Sunbury County of Nova Scotia into feudal estates similar to those in England. Because the majority of people who came here in 1783 were average people, mostly farmers and tradesmen, they wanted no part of slaving for an absentee landlord. In fact, one of the 55 had already laid out a tract of land in the parish of Dumfries that he called the Barony It still goes by that name today. Fortunately, the petitioners named in the document were successful and all land grants were held to around 200 acres rather than thousands in the hands of a few. Nonetheless, the 55 obtained positions of power in the newly formed province of NB and left their mark through the government. Not much has changed in 200+ years.

Bill Boone (Ship Union, April, 1783--or at least my ancestor)

***********

In a nutshell, it's quite simple. Those Loyalists were complaining to the Crown that although they had lost every bit as much as anyone else back in the rebelling American Colonies, they felt that some landgrabbers and speculators had got to Nova Scotia before they did and had been favored with disproportionately huge land grants. That was at least partially true, but most of those large early land grants were eventually escheated (reverted to the Crown), broken up, and were regranted to other refugees in smaller parcels.

C B Knox

***********

**** From [email protected] The gist appears to be these petitioners are afraid that new assignments of land in Nova Scotia may pre-empt their own claims. Personally speaking, the Jas. Ketcham listed is one member of a Connecticut branch of Ketchams who removed to the safety of British held New York. As the war closed, they were part of the great exodus to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Apart from the Ketcham listed, most of this clan chose to settle in New Brunswick.

regards,

Greg Ketcham

webmaster,

"Drums Along The Mohawk: the American Revolution on the New York Frontier"

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/4171

*********

Thank you for putting the Loyalist document out for all to see. I recognize some names: Flewelling & Fowler are connected to my wife's lines as well as Harding. I did not see some on my line which would include, McCowen (McKown) and Parlee. I believe that this is a land grant request or redress. Do you have any other records such as these?

Thanks,

Sincerely, Stephen G. Schweyen

*********

I recognize some of the names as of folks from Sussex/present-dayWarren Counties, NJ whose lands were confiscated in 1778 by reason of having defected to Tory side. At least one of these settled in New Brunswick. I *speculate* that the land intended to be granted to such folks as DeLancey's Rangers may have included land already settled, and that this was the reason for the petition.

Judy

*****From PA-ROOTERS

Ok, I'll take a stab at it. Don't know how good it'll be. Someone else will correct it, I'm sure. I'm going to number the paragraphs and take them one at a time:

Paragraph 1: We were loyal to the British in the American Revolution, and seeing we had no chance to go back to our land in the states, we had decided to move to Nova Scotia, and take advantage of the King's offer for all Loyalists thrown out of the U.S.

2: We've heard that 55 people have jumped the gun, and asked the King for 275,000 acres of land, and not only that, they have already sent a forward party to survey the land.

3: Even though we are really ticked at the way things seem to have worked out in the States, and even though we can't have our old land back, we were sure we would find protection under the Crown, little knowing these sneaky people would try to take more than their share of Nova Scotia.

4: We understand the Sneaky People lied to get the favors they got, and kept it a secret, and now that it's too late to do anything, they are boasting to the rest of us about what they've done. Not only that, but we''ve noticed that these people, some of whom aren't even staying here, but returning to Britain, are the rich guys, and have been more distinguished by their favors from the government that from the fact that the suffered in the war, or served in any important capacity.

5: We can't help but notice that if these grants go through, the rest of us (not the Sneaky People) will have to either settle on land where we can't grow anything, or are 100 miles from anywhere, or we must be tenants and rent land from these guys who are not better than us, just quicker and sneakier.

6: (p. 181) We request from the King that some equity prevail here, and that all of us be recompensed according to our losses and service in the War, and if that is not done, and after an investigation, you determine that the Sneaky People got the land fair and square (which we doubt!), please delay their occupying the land until we have a chance to carve out some small piece on which to raise our families. I don't mean to be flippant about this, but I didn't know any other way to keep the people straight in my own mind.

Linda in Utah

***********

****From PHILLY-ROOTS This is a protest by American loyalists (Tories) in Canada against other loyalists attempting to gain title to the best land allocated to the loyalists by devious means. They are demanding equal treatment for all loyalists. There were Stackhouse loyalists but it seems that they weren't on this petition.

Eugene Stackhouse

********

telephone XXX [an error occurred while processing this directive]