Friday, June 27, 2008

The Wright Family of Oyster Bay L.I. by John J. Latting

Lydia Wright, her father Peter Wright and wife Alice, are our ancestors through the Hollingshead line as follows:
Inez Elizabeth Hollingshead, the daughter of Hanna Burdette Rollins and
Abraham Hollingshead; the son of Elizabeth Evans and
Nelson Stoyell Hollingshead; the son of Aurelia Matthews and
Thomas Hollingshead who was the son of Anne Hill and
William Hollingshead; the son of Anthony Hollingshead and
Elizabeth Conrow; the daughter of Darling Conrow and
Deliverance Stokes; daughter of Thomas L Stokes and
Deliverance Horner, daughter of Isaac Horner and
Lydia Wright, daughter of
Peter Wright and his wife Alice; Emigrants of 1636-7 from England by way of Mass.

The following history is taken from the New York Biographical and Genealogical Record of January 1872


Read before the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, at their meet­ing on Saturday evening, Oct. 14, 1871.

The brothers PETER, ANTHONY and NICHOLAS WRIGHT emigrated from England to Massachusetts as early as 1636–7. It is believed, although not positively proved, that they were of the very ancient, fam­ily of Wright in Norfolk, seated in that county from time immemo­rial, of which family was Thomas Wright, living in the reign of Henry VIII, father of John Wright, who died, seized of the manors of Tin­dallg and Rowses, in East Laxham, Norfolk, in the 32d year of the reign of Henry VIII. He had two sons, EDMUND, his heir, and NICHOLAS. They married sisters, daughters and co-heirs of Edmund Beaupre, of Beaupre Hall in Norfolk. From Edmund, by a second marriage with Jane, daughter and co-heir of Thomas Russell, brother of John, Earl of Bedford, descended the family of Wrights, now, or lately represented by John Wright, Esq., of Kilverstone Hall, near Thetford, in Norfolk.
Nicholas, by his wife, Anne Beaupre, was father of five children, from one of whom, there is reason to believe, came the immigrant brothers above named.
They are found first residing at Lynn, then called Saugus, in Massachusetts, but shortly afterwards removed to Sandwich, Cape Cod, in the settlement of which place they all became active leaders, Aquiring lands and holding offices there of military as well as of civic trust. Here several of the children of Peter and Nicholas were born. In 1653 they joined the company led by the Rev. William Leverich, and came to Long Island, and united in the first purchase from the Indians of the territory, including the site of the present village of Oys­ter Bay. They all became large landed proprietors at that place, and were men of prominence and influence in the town. Anthony appears to have lived and died a bachelor, but both Peter and Nicholas left large families.
They were all, at an early period, active and zealous members of the Society of Friends. Anthony's house in the village of Oyster Bay was for many years the place of their meetings, both for worship and business, and he subsequently conveyed to them portions of his homestead for a burial–place and the erection of a meeting–house. The record of this deed, though in a mutilated and imperfect state, is still preserved in the ancient book of minutes of the Society, and is as fol­lows:
Knowe ... Greeting ... Anthone Wright .. Longe Island .. and bequeath six poles ... part of my my now dwelling house in Oyster baye ... for and to the use and behoofe of my well ... Ales Crabbe, Hannah Wrighte, Samuel [Andrews, Mary Andrews, and the rest of the people in this place called Quakers, for a Bur ... as alsoe fortie footes square of the south ... corner of my whome lot, next and adjacent to the highwaye, for to builde upon itt a meeting­ house for them, and alsoe, such other hear ... them in the same faith and profession ... of Christ Jesus, to have, hould possess ... perpetuallie, as their own proper endes, use and uses as aforesaid, without ... hindrance, molestation, or disturbance by ... through me or by my meanes at any time ... whatsoever; and this is my will and pleasure. Witnesse my, hand and seale this fifteenth ... the eighte moanth, Anno one thousand six hundred seaventie-two.
Acknowledged, subscribed,and sealed in the presence of us,

A meeting-house was erected on this land in the following year, under a contract made between the Society and two of their members, Samuel Andrews and John Feakes. This contract follows the deed in the record above referred to, and is of interest as prescribing the size and form of the building, and the number and particular location of the windows and doors. The whole work vas to cost 20 Pounds, equal to $100 present currency, and the builders were to be paid in wheat, “ pease, Indian-corn and porke.” Of course, no vestige of this ancient struc­ture now exists, it having been, at a later date, succeeded by a much larger and ampler house.
Anthony Wright died in Oyster Bay, on the 8th of September, 1580. Having always led an unblemished life, he was beloved and respected by all his townsmen, and his memory was long cherished among them, and sought to be perpetuated in the bestowal of his name to the brook which flowed through the village, near his house for many years called Anthony's Brook, the bridge over it being also known as Anthony's Bridge; but the name has long ago ceased to be applied to these localities, although the brook still flows where it did its cool and limpid waters gliding, gently and peacefully along its pebbly bed and under the ancient bridge, forever murmuring a not unfitting requiem to the soul of its venerated namesake
Anthony's last will and testament affords a curious exposition of his remembrance of, as well as his desire to be remernbered by, his numer­ous relatives. It does not inform us of the exact relationship of all his beneficiaries. The bequests may seem trivial to us, but it should be remembered that 2s. 6d. in that day had a much greater value than at this.
“I, Anthony Wright, of Oysterbape, in the North Rydeing upon Long Island, In Yorkshire, being in perfect memory, as my last Will and Testament, Doe here-by make my loving sister, Ales Crabbe, of the same towne as above said, my full and sole Executor, Giving and bequeathing unto her all my whole Estate both of Houseing, Lands, Goods, Cattles, and Chatteles, all of which I shall be deceased of for her the said Ales, to have, hold, Possess, and Enjoy the same as her owne, proper or otherwise, to lett, sell, or Dispose thereof, or of any part or Parcel thereof, as she shall seeme meate and convenient, without any molestation of any Person or Persons, or by any act or acts hereafter by me to be made, only excepting out of the said Estate such. Legacyes as hereafter followeth. The which I likewise give, that is to say, unto my brother, Nicholas Wright, five shillings; and unto his wife, Ann Wright, I give five shillings; and unto his son, Caleb Wright, I give two shillings, six pence; and to John Wright, two shillings, six pence; and to Edward Wright, two shillings, six pence. To Rebecca ffrost, two shillings, six pence; to Sarah Lattin, two shillings, six pence; and to Mary Cole, two shillings, six pence; and to Deborah Wright, two shillings, six pence; and to Gideon Wright, two shillings, six pence; to Elizabeth Wright, his wife, five shillings; to Adam Wright, two shillings, six pence; and to his wife, Mary Wright, five shillings. To Job Wright, two shillings, six pence. Unto Mary Andrews, two shillings, six pence; to Hannah Wright, two shillings, six pence; to James Townsend, five shillings; to his wife, Elizabeth Townsend, two shillings six pence; unto Lydia Wright, two shillings, six pence; and unto Richard Crab, five shillings. Alsoe, I give unto Isaack Dotye one cow. And this is my Will and Pleasure so to doe, and in confirmation hereof I have hereunto set my hand and seale this 20th day of the third month, Anno 1673.
Acknowledged signed and sealed and delivered in presence of us,
Was endorsed on the backside as followeth Oysterbay, September 4th, 1680. Then was the within mentioned will shown to us, undr subscribed by Anthony Wright, and by him acknowledged to be his Will and Testament, and avoyd scruple that play arise from any that may pretend to be concerned, he did declare to us the day above meneoned, that the words under the tenth line in the will on the other side (" person or persons,") and the words " to bee," and the word ‘estate,’ being interlined under ye eleventh line, were soe done before signeing " and sealing of this my last will aforesaid.
The will was proved at a court of sessions at Jamaica, Dec. 8, 1680. (N. Y., Surrogate's office, Lib. II. of Wills, p. 202).

Peter's wife was Alice; she was an active, energetic and prominent member of the little community. She survived her husband, and sub­sequently married Richard Crab, one of the early Stamford settlers, who came to Oyster Bay in 1660. Peter's children were Peter, born at Sandwich, Cape Cod, February 28th, 1651; Gideon, Job, Adam, Lydia, Mary, Hannah and Sarah.
The three daughters—Lydia, Mary and Hannah—inherited largely the self-reliant characteristics of their mother. They were noted for their religious zeal and for their endurance under persecution at the hands of the intolerant governor and magistrates of Massachusetts, who so cruelly executed their disgraceful laws against the Quakers; so much the more disgraceful and inexcusable, by reason, that the very men who fled from persecution in their native land, that they might find a place wherein to worship God according to their conscience, ,were the foremost to persecute and oppress those who happened to differ with them in religious faith. Thus it has been truly and tersely said, “ Laud was justified by the men whom he had wronged."
It may be difficult for us in this later and more enlightened age to comprehend or account for this inconsistency, but let it be some pal­liation for the reproach to remember, that while our ancestors fled from the fatherland in search of religious liberty, it was for “religious liberty in a peculiar sense that they contended, and they were severely faithful to the cause as they understood it. The true principles of religious liberty, in its wide and full comprehension, had never dawned upon their minds, and were never maintained by them." [Upham's Hist. of Sir Henry vane.]
Their persistent barbarity in putting Mary Dyer to death excited the indignation of all converts to the Quaker faith, and impelled many to flock to Boston under the firm persuasion that they were called of God to utter their exhortations and warnings in the very ears of their persecutors. Among those who appeared there shortly after Mary Dyer's execution (A. D. 1660) were the sisters Mary and Hanna Wright. They were particularly " bold in speech," publicly denounc­ing the magistrates for their part in that affair. They were imme­diately seized and lodged in Boston jail. Here were lying at this time twenty-five others, some under sentence of death, some to be whipped, others to be banished. Among them was Wenlock Christis­son (or Christopherson), a fearless and outspoken champion of the inter­dicted religion, who, having been before banished from Massachusetts, had recently returned and been summarily condemned to death for daring to confront the magistrates in open court and denounce them for their cruel proceedings agaipst William Leddra.
Alluding to the events of this period, Bishop, in his New England Judged, says: “Several of Salem friends ye committed, and have con­tinued them long prisoners at Boston, as M. Trask, John Smith, Margaret Smith, Edward Wharton, and others; Robert Harper, also, of Sandwitch, and Deborah ye committed likewise; and these were in your prison the 30th of the l0th Month, 1660. Several ye banished upon pain of death, as winlock Christison, and Will. King of Salem, and Martha Standly, a maid, belonging to England, and Mary Write of Oyster Bay in Long Island, who gave her testimony against you for your cruelty in putting Mary Dyer to death, whose blood ye also thirsted after, because of it."
Fortunately for the imprisoned ones, intelligence of these persecutions having reached England, and manifestations of disapprobation being made by the Home Government, the Court hastened to enact what they termed a New Law, which commences with the following merciful (!) preamble: “This Court, being desirous to try all means with as much lenity as may consist with our safety, to prevent the intrusions of the Quakers, who, besides their absurd and blasphemous doctrines, do, like rogues and vagabonds, come in upon us, and have not been restrained by the laws already provided, have ordered," &c. ; and then proceeds to declare that every person convicted by a magistrate of being a Quaker shall be " stripped naked from the middle upwards, and tyed to a cart's–­tail, and whipped through the town, and from thence immediately con­veyed to the constable of the next town towards the border of our jurisdiction, as the warrant shall direct, and so from constable to con­stable, till they be conveyed through any the outwardest towns of our jurisdiction.
On the 22d of May, 1661, the Court made the following order respecting the prisoners then lying in the jail: " It is ordered that all the Quakers now in prison be acquainted with the New Law made against them, and forthwith released from prison, and sent from con­stable to constable, out of this jurisdiction; and if they, or any of them, be found after twelve hours within the same, he or they shall be proceeded with according to the law made this present Court, Peter Person and Judah Brown excepted, Persons condemned to be whip'd in the prison only with twenty stripes apiece."
The circumstances attending the release of the prisoners are quaintly told by Chroniclers, and as the two sisters Wright were of the party, we think the recital deserves repetition at our hands. Says Besse, in his History of the Sufferings of the Quakers (vol. ii. p. 224) : "When one of the marshals and a constable came to the prison, and told them they were ordered by the Court to make them acquainted with their New Law, Wenlock Christison said, ‘What means this? Have ye a new law?’ They answered, ‘Yes.’ Then, said Wenlock, ‘You have deceived most people.’ ‘ Why ?’ said they. ‘Because,’ said Wenlock, ‘they did think the gallows had been your last weapon. Have you got more yet ?’ ‘ Yes,’ said they. ‘Read it,’ says Wenlock; which they did. Then Wenlock said, ‘Your magistrates said that your law was a good and wholesome law, made for your peace and the safeguard of your country. What! are your hands now become weak? The power of God is over you all.’ Then the prison doors were set open, and Wenlock, with twenty-seven others turned forth, of whom Peter Pearson and Judith Brown were whipt with twenty cruel stripes, through the town of Boston, on their naked backs. Many of their mouths were opened, and they published the truth among the people. A guard armed with swords were appointed by the Court to drive them all out of that jurisdiction, into the wilderness country, which they performed accordingly.”
Whether either of the sisters were of those “who opened their mouths and published the truth” on this occasion is not told, nor are the sufferings of the party while wandering in the then wilderness country about Boston related to us. But in the following year, 1662, Hannah, the younger sister, then only fourteen years of age, “was stirred with such zeal, that, coming again from Long Island, some hun­dreds of miles from Boston into that bloody town, she appeared in the court there, and warned the magistrates ‘to spill no more innocent blood.’' This saying so struck them at first, that they all sat silent, till Rawson, the secretary, said “What! shall we be baffled by such an one as this! Come! let us drink a dram!” [Sewall’s History of the Quakers, p. 389.]
It is probable her youth saved her from the wrath of the astonished Court, or, possibly, they drank so deeply as to be mollified into forget­fulness of the bold culprit. She grew up an active member of the Society. She never married, and continued to reside with her mother and stepfather in Oyster Bay. Her name and the names of her sis­ters appear frequently after this period, in the minutes of their meet­ings at Oyster Bay, Matinecock and Flushing, until the record of her sudden death in Maryland, in 1675, communicated by Matthew Prior in the following “Testimony.’ Unfortunately, the entry is so muti­lated and indistinct, that the whole of it cannot be deciphered. What can be read is as follows
... riland ye 4th of ye first month 1675 ... testimony concerning our dear friend Hannah Wright ... ye body in Maryland, she being there in ye service of ... everlasting truth, upon ye fourth day of ye month, being ye fifth day of ye week being [aboard] we past away intending to ye western shore, but being prevented by ye determinate hand of ye just and all seeing God, wee being upon ye watter, about ye 10th hoar in ye night, ye boat overset & wee were seaven persons in ye boat, three was taken away in ye Judgment but I believe in mercy to their ow souls, and ye rest had their lives just given them for ... which I hope will never be forgotten by them, but I hope will dwell upon their soules for ever. And after our deep exersise, when I began to consider ye loss of our deare friend, ye loss of her was to me a double loss (which made me cry as David did for his son). She was wholly given up for the servis of truth, and was faithful in her measure, which her heavenly father had committed unto her, for she was a good seavour unto all people wherever she came. She was made willing to pass through all trialls & hardeships wtever for ye spreading of God's blessed truth, and for ye honour of his holy name, & hath finished her testimony & hath laid down her head in her heavenly father's bosom in peace & is crowned, I believe, with life and Immortalite forever. Matthew Prior.
Lydia, the other sister, was also a conspicuous member of the Soci­ety, and underwent sundry trials and sufferings at the hands of our Boston " friends." The persecutions of former years had failed to diminish the number of adherents to the " benevolent faith " whom the laws stigmatized as heretics. Thus the lawmakers and the magistrate continued in their blind bigotry, forgetful or regardless that the "blood of the Martyrs is the seed of the Church;" and so it proved. These persecutions only served to strengthen rather than to weaken the cause against which they were aimed.
In the summer of 1677 there came to Boston one Margaret Brewster of Barbadoes, a distinguished Quakeress, the wife of Thomas Brew­ster. There had lately been promulgated at Boston the law requiring all persons coming into the country to take an oath of fidelity to the Government, making no exception as to the Quakers who professed conscientious scruples against taking any oath, because of the Scripture direction, “swear not at all”. She sent the governor a protest and warning against enforcing the law as to the Quakers. She also went , about, uttering her warnings in public. On Sunday, the 8th of July, of that year, she marched into the South Church, at Boston, during service, with " her hair about her shoulders, ashes upon her head, her face colored black, and sackcloth upon her upper garments." Fol­lowing her came Lydia Wright, with Sarah Miles and Elizabeth Bowers, jun., and John Easton, jun., who took her riding-clothes and shoes when she went into the house.
They were all immediately seized by a constable and carried to prison, and there kept upon the follow­ing warrant, issued early the next morning
To the Keeper of the Prison at Boston:
Whereas, there was one man and four women, Quakers, committed to prison yesterday, being the Lord's-day, for making an horrible disturbance and affright­ing the people in the South Church in Boston, in the time of the publick dispens­ing of the Word, whereby several women, as I am informed, are in great danger of miscarrying. These are, therefore, in his Majesty's name, to will and require you to keep the said Quakers carefully till they be thence discharged by order of law. And for the other Quakers taken at that meeting, and committed to prison by the constable, the law of the 3rd of Nov., 1675, directs you what to do: which you are to observe at your peril.
Dated the 9th of July, 1677. (Signed) SIMON BROADSTREET.
On the 4th of August following; they were brought into court, at Boston, before the governor [John Leverett] and magistrates and tried. The examinations of the parties accused are given by the faithful historian in true dramatic style. They are too long for insertion here. What relate to Lydia Wright is detailed as follows
Governor.—Call Lydia Wright.
Clerk. —Lydia Wright, of Long Island.
L. Wright. —Here.
Governor. —Are you one of the women that came in with this woman into Mr. Thatcher's meeting-house to disturb him at his worship?
L. Wright. —I was, but I disturbed none; for I came in peaceably, and I spake not a word to man, woman, or child.
Governor. —What came you for then?
L. Wright. —Have you not made a law that we should come to your meeting? For we were peaceably met together at our own meeting-house, and some of your constables came in, and haled some of our friends out and said, “This is not a place for you to worship God in.” Then we asked him, “Where we should worship God?” Then they said, “We must come to your public worship.” And upon the first day following, I had something upon my heart to come to your pub­lic worship, when we came in peaceably, and spake not a word; yet we were haled to prison, and there have been kept near a month.
S. Broadstreet. —Did you come there to hear the Word?
L. Wright. —If the word of God was there, I was ready to hear it.
Governor. —Did your parents give consent you should come thither?
L. Wright. —Yes! my mother did.
Governor. —Shew it. .
L. Wright. —If you will stay till I can send home, I will engage to get from un­der my mother's hand that she gave her consent.
Juggins, a magistrate, said: —You are led, by the spirit of the devil, to ramble up and down the country, like whores and rogues a-cater-wawling.
L. Wright. —Such words do not become those who call themselves Christians; for they that sit to judge for God in matters of conscience ought to be sober and serious; for sobriety becomes the people of God; for these are a weighty and pon­derous people.
Governor. —Did you own this woman?
L. Wright. —I own her, and have unity with her, and I do believe so have all the faithful servants of the Lord, for I know the power and presence of the Lord was with us.
Juggins. —You are mistaken. You do not know the power of God. You are led by the spirit and light within you, which is of the devil: there is but one God, and you do not worship that God which we worship.
L. Wright. —I believe thou speakest truth; for if you worshipped that God which we worship, you would not persecute his people; for we worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the same God that Daniel worshipped.
So they cried, “Take her away.”
Then followed the examinations of the other two girls; and they were all car­ried back to prison, and about an hour afterward brought again into the court, when, the governor being present, the clerk read their sentence as follows
“ Margaret Brewster, you are to have your clothes stript off to the middle, and to be tied to a cart's-tail at the South meeting-house, and to be drawn through the town, and to receive twenty stripes upon your naked body.”
“Lydia Wright and Mary Miles, you are to be tied to the cart's-tail also. Bar­bara Bowers you are to be tied also.”
“So they were carried to prison again, this being the 7th day of the week, and on the 5th day following the sentence was executed.” The historian adds, “During the examination of these women they appeared altogether unconcerned as to themselves, being fully resigned to what­soever sufferings might be their portion; steadfastly maintaining their full assurance of a divine call to the service they went upon, and a per­fect peace and serenity of mind in yielding obedience thereunto. In all which they seem to have really exercised the faith and patience of the saints and people of God.”
Immediately after this disgraceful scene, the two martyr-friends, Margaret and Lydia, shook the dust of Boston streets from their feet, and traveled back to Sandwich. They went thence to Rhode Island, that little State in the “corner” of New-England, where the Quaker was looked upon with more toleration, where there was no persecu­tion for conscience sake, and where Religious Freedom found a safe retreat.
Here lived at this time William Coddington. In former years he had been a magistrate in Boston, and was Treasurer of the Colony. He was subsequently, for several successive years, Governor of Rhode Island. He was now an old man, seventy-five years of age. In a letter written by him at this time, to his friend Judge Fretwell, in Barbados, he briefly relates the particulars of the arrest and trial of these parties, and of the execution of the sentence against them; uttering his denunciations of these persecutions, declaring in his homely but forcible phrase, that the magistrates of Boston “stink of the Blood of the Innocent !”

It may not be thought out of place to cite here his enlightened opinion of these horrid practices of his Massachusetts neighbors, con­tained in a letter written by him two years before, while he was Governor of Rhode Island, to John Leverett, then Governor of Massa­chusetts. “It is the shame” (writes he) “and reproach of New Eng­land, that those that were persecuted in England, and bore their testimony there against bishops and ceremonies, should in New Eng­land put to death four of the servants of the ever-living God, [a William Robinson, Marmaduke Stevenson, Mary Dyer, and William Leddra] banish upon pain of death, cut off ears, fine, whip, and imprison for keeping their conscience pure to God.”
The Governor of Massachusetts had charged him with having
“declined from his former profession and practices,” but the good old Governor sets himself right by declaring: “Our profession in Eng­land which thou mentionest, about fifty years ago, was far before yours in the Massachusetts. We persecuted not, but stood, together for the public good. I was one of those many Lincolnshire gentle­men, so called, that denied the Royal Loan and suffered for it in King Charles the 1st 's days, and bishops and ceremonies were denied by us, and all evils . . . Assure thyself I am supported by that Power, that I shall never dishonor my grey head to come to you, for I am the servant of the Lord, that worship him in spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in your fleshly worship . . . I am old, in the 72d year, and thou not young, I suppose, near 60. I have known thee from thy childhood, and thou me, many years. I do de­sire that thou and all that ever knew me, were as I am. Thou might­est lose by it in some respects, but thy gain in the enjoyment of the power and presence of the Lord would be one hundred fold in this life, and in the world to come, eternal glory.”
Such was the liberal and large-hearted spirit of the brave old Gov­ernor, who, in these perilous times, dared to offer shelter to our suffer­ing friends.
Lydia Wright soon returned to her island home, and continued a faithful preacher and teacher among the people; but her heart seems to have yearned after her friends in Barbados, who were there still suffering from the intolerance of their English rulers. From the follow­ing certificate, given her by the Quarterly Meeting held at Flushing, in November, 1682, it is inferred she passed the winter of that year in the west Indies.
... Friends at Barbadoes, Antigoe, Nevis, Jamaica ... where this may come greeting, whereas, the bearer hereof, our deare friend, Lydia Wright, hath ... time had drawings and rnoveings on her heart, and minde in ye love of God to visit the seed of God in those parts, and now finding freedom in his love, hath signified ye same unto consideration of this our men and women's Quarterly meeting, we, after a weighty consideration and examination of matters, in God's feare, for ye preservation and exalta­tion of God's truth, both in particular and in generall, we, with unanimous consent, did and doe aquiess with ye motion of her going to visit friends in your parts, as having good unity therein and therewith; moreover, yt she is one yt hath walked as becometh truth ever since her convincement, according to our knowledge ---- have not heard to ye
contrary but has lived in unity with us, and we with her in ye truth. In which truth, that never changeth, we recommend this our deare friend and sister unto you, hoping and desiring your godly care over her, who are your brethren and sisters in ye same truth.
At our Quarterly men and women's meeting at Flushing, on Lo. Island, this 30th of ye 10th mo., 1682. [Signed by the following;]

If she made this intended visit, she must have returned early in the following spring, for, on the 17th day of the 1st month (March), 1683-4, she Lydia Wright was married in the meeting-house at Oyster Bay to Isaac Horner, whose name, it will be seen, heads the list of signers of the above certificate. Her sister Mary was already married to Samuel Andrews, one of the architects of the meeting-house.
On the 26th of March, 1685 there was born to Lydia and her hus­band, at Oyster Bay, a daughter, whom they named “Deliverance,” and in the month of October following, the two sisters and their hus­bands sold out their possessions in Oyster Bay and migrated to New Jersey.
Of Nicholas, the other brother, the town records contain abundant
entries, showing him to have been a man of large estate, for those days, and occupying sundry public offices at various dates. He died in Oyster Bay, in the year 1682, and left the following WILL:
Oysterbay, the 10th of April, 1674.
I, Nicholas Wright, aged sixty-five years or thereabouts, Being sick and weake, yett in perfect memory, Doe bequeave my Soule to the Almighty God that gave it me, and my Body to the Yearth from whome it came.
Imprimis, I make my Loving wife, Ann Wright, sole Executor of my movables, both within my house and without, both of kine, horse-flesh, and swine, together with my house and Lands which I now Possess, During her life, and to have the full Disposing of any Part or Parcell of it as she shall see cause for her use and re­liefe whilst she doth live, only a Parte of my house Lott, from the North side of my Orchard to the highway next to my Sister Crab's, I have given to my sonne Caleb for his present use, it being the same Breadth to the reere of my lott; and after my decease and my wife's Decease, all the home Lott and orchard is to be my son Caleb's, with a right of Commons to itt; and my lands upon hog-Island to be equally divided between my three sonns, Caleb, John, and Edmund, and alsoe, my right of meadow at the south is to be equally divided between my before-men­tioned sonns ; and alsoe, my meadows lying on the East side the Beaver-swamp Creek, with my share of meadow in the home meadow, is to be equally divided between my sons Caleb and Edmund, and the share of meadow on the west side of the Beaver-swamp River I give son John, and further, that lott lying by Joseph Weeke's home Lott is to be Equally divided between my sonns John and Edmund.
And further, my lands by the way that Goes to Robt Williams' plantation, with common Privileges, is to be equally Divided amongst my three sonns before named; and the peece of Land Lyeing before my home Lott that was given to my sonne John by the towne, is to be my sonne Edmund's; in Lieu of this peece of Land I give my sonne John that peece of Land whereon he now lives, and my peece of swamp in the-mill-River Swamp is to be equally Divided Between Caleb and Ed­mund. All these Lands and meadows here mentioned, Excepting that parte to Caleb that is given to him, present, as to be all att my wife's Disposing During her Life, and this is my Last Will Testamt. Itt is to be understood, that peece of Land which is mengoned on the other side, that I give to my sonne John in lieu of that peece I had of him, Before my home Lott, that was given him by the towne; he is to have all that Lott whereon he now lives to him & his heirs for Ever, provided he pays five pounds att slatter-time [slaughter-time] next ensuing, in Peese or Pork, att merchants' Price, and to this I subscribe my hand.
Proved at a court of sessions held at Jamaica for the north riding of Yorke­shire, on Long Island. the 13th, 14th, & 15th days of December, 1682.
Letters granted to Ann Wright, the widow, Jany. 15, 1682. [Lib. 2 of Wills (N. Y.), pp. 133, 134, 135.]

The children of Nicholas were:
Caleb, some of whose descendants still own and occupy his old home~stead in Oyster Bay;
John, who married Mary Townsend, daughter of the 1st Henry Townsend; Sarah, who mar­ried Josias Latting;
Edmund who married his own cousin Sarah Wright, the daughter of Peter; Martha, who married Nathaniel Colds;
Mercy, who married Robert Coles; and
Rebecca, who married Eleazer Lev­erich, son of the Rev. William Leverich, from whom, however, the Court of Assize, in 1670, granted a divorce on account of his alleged impotency, after they had been married seven and a half years. This, it is believed, was the first case of divorce by this court. The proceedings are set forth at length in the court records, the last order being made on the 24th February, 1670, when the Court deczeed that “Eleazer Leverich do pay, or cause to be paid unto Rebecca Wright, from whom he is divorced, the sum of 25 pounds, in living cattle, to be apprized by indifferent men, or in corne, beef, or pork, at price cur­rent, in lieu of what she brought to him at their marriage.”
This ends the article about the Wright Family, found in The New Youk Biographical and Genealogical and Record. We next present a short Genealogy of the Wright family as contained in the book LONG ISLAND GENEAlOGIES Compiled by MARY POWELL BUNKER. This has been augmented somewhat by adding addidtional families, names, dates etc. especially on Peter Wright’s line

OF BETHPAGE, L. I., 1688.
Albany, N.Y.
Joe Munsells’s Sons, Publishers; 1895
Three brothers came from England to Massachusetts in 1636-37.
Nicholas1 Wright b. 1609, wife Ann, he d. 1682.
Peter Wright 1 and wife Alice, she m. 2d Richard Crabb, she d. 1685.
Anthony 1 Wright “dyed ye 8th of 7th mo, 1680, gave property to sister-in-law, Alice Crabb, and his brothers' children

The Peter Wright Family
Peter1 Wright and Alice had 9 children.
1. Hannah 2 , b. 1651, The Devotee, died the 4th day of the 1st month 1675. She was one of three persons who drowned when a boat containing seven person overturned as they were crossing a body of water to the western shore in Maryland.
2. Peter2 , b. February 28,1651, at Sandwich, Cape Cod.
3. Gideon2 , married Elisabeth Townsend.
Gideon 3
4. Job2 , married Rachel Townsend.; Children
Keziah 3 Wright, married 29th day of the 3rd month 1712, John
Burr of Northhampton, Burlington Co. N. J., son of Henry Burr, yeoman, and Elizabeth Burr his wife.. The entry noted that Job 2 Wright was recently deceased.
Reachel 3 Wright, married the 1st day of ye 7th month 1715, at Westbury, Thomas Stokes of Waterford in Glouster County in West New Jersey, yeoman
5. Adam2 , married Mary Dennis. They had:
Dennis3, married Susanna
Joseph3, married Temperance Seaman, widow of Arthur Kirk.
Ch: Adam 4, John 4, Mary 4, Joseph 4, Charles 4, Job 4.
Peter3, b. 1698
6. Sarah2 , married her cousin Edmond Wright, son of Nicholis. Ch:
Nicholas 3;
Caleb 3;
Daniel 3;
Jacob 3;
Eliphal 3 Wright;
Edmond 3, married Sara Townsend daughter of Mill John
7. Elisabeth 2 , married 1693, James Townsend, son of John
8. Mary 2 , married, at Oyster Bay, 30th of ye 8th mo 1693, Samuel Andrews. They moved to New Jersey in 1683.
Morkecai 3 Andrews, “borne ye 11th day of ye 6th month 1664, m. 1691 a French woman
Peter 3, borne ye 12th of 11th month 1668
Peter 3 , born ye 28th of 3d month, 1671;
Hester 3, born ye 12 th of ye 10th month 1673;
Hannah 3 born ye 23rd of ye 2d month 1675; d. 1686;
Edward 3, born ye 16th of ye 1st month, 1678, m. 1694,
SarahOng, dau of Jacob and Sarah.
Jacob 3, born ye 12 of ye 7th month, 1680, d. 1686;
Mary 3, born ye 29th of ye 5th month, 1683

+ 9. Lydia 2 , married at Oyster Bay 17th of ye 1st month 1683/4, Isaac Horner. Two children:
Isaac 3 Horner, of Mansfield in ye Countey of Bourlingtown and
province of West New Jersey married 9th day of 8th month 1718, Eleanor Bowne, Daughter of Samuel Bowne of flushing [L.I.]
Deliverance 3 Horner , b. 1685, married 1704,Thomas Stokes of New Jersey. Children:
Hannah 4 Stokes, born July, 1705, died in childhood.
Joseph 4 Stokes, July 12, 1706.
Benjamin 4 Stokes, January 27, 1708, who went to North
Carolina, and has sometimes been con­fused with his father.
Lydia 4 Stokes, July 13, 1710, married (first) 1734, Samuel Haines, and (second) Jacob Lamb.
Thomas 4 Stokes, Novem­ber 5, 1711, married, 1741, Abigail,
daughter of John, son of William Matlack, the emi­grant, by his second wife Mary Lee.
6-6. De­liverance 4 Stokes, September 18, 1713, married
Darling Conrow, son of Isaac Conrow and Sarah Darling.
Deliverance 3 Horner died between 1713 and 1715, because on
the 1st day of the 5th month, 1715. Thomas Stokes married Rachel Wright daughter of Job Wright and cousin of Deliverance Horner.

NICHOLAS 1 WRIGHT and wife Ann had:
1. Caleb 2 Wright; b. 1645, m. Elisabeth. Children:
William 3 b.1680, m. Elisabeth Rhodes, he d.1759.
Elisabeth 3 m. Joseph Cole.
Penelope 3 m. David Reynolds, of Conn
2. John 2 Wright; m. Mary Townsend, dau. of Henry. Children:
Rose[3] m. 1691, 1st Nathaniel Coles, jr., he d 1701; 2d m. John
Townsend, he d. 1709; m 3d Samuel Birdsall.
Eliphal 3 , m. 1st Henry Townsend, he d.. 1709, m 2d Daniel
Mary 3 m. 1st Jacob Underhill, 2d Richard Latting.
3. Sarah 2 Wright, m. Josias Latting.
4. Edmond 2 Wright; m. Sarah Wright, dau. of Peter Wright and
Children: Nicholas 3; Caleb 3; Daniel 3; Jacob 3; Eliphal 3 Wright;
Edmond 3, married Sara Townsend daughter of Mill John
5. Mercy 2 Wright; m. Robert Coles.
6. Rebecca 2 Wright, m. 1st Eleazer Leverich, divorced, she m. 2d 1672, William Frost.
7. Deborah 2 Wright, m. Nathaniel Coles.

No comments: