{"id":2581,"date":"2012-03-31T07:12:40","date_gmt":"2012-03-31T11:12:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/?p=2581"},"modified":"2024-11-19T13:07:43","modified_gmt":"2024-11-19T18:07:43","slug":"anderson-bray-farm-and-the-pyatt-family-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/anderson-bray-farm-and-the-pyatt-family-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Anderson Bray Farm and The Pyatt Family"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mr. Bush Traces Ownership of Place Long Owned<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>by Bray Descendants<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>The Bray Family Portraits<\/strong><\/p>\n

by Egbert T. Bush, Stockton, N.J.<\/em>
\n published by the Hunterdon Co. Democrat, April 19, 1934<\/em><\/p>\n

The following article was written by Mr. Bush about a farm many people think of as\u00a0the Chet Huntley farm or the Douglas Knight farm.\u00a0I have added footnotes to flesh out the story.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
The Andrew Bray House<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

This old farm and vicinity have been for several years a matter of much interest to me. The farm was known to have been in the Bray family for a long time, but whom or by whom it had been conveyed to them was not known. Careful search, supplemented by no little inquiry, has thrown much light upon the subject. It is found that by deed dated Sept. 1, 1821, Elisha Rittenhouse and Isabella his wife, in consideration of $3,100, conveyed to Andrew Bray, a son of General Daniel Bray, \u201cAll that tract or parcel of land formerly the property of Thomas Opdycke, deceased, and by him conveyed to the said Elisha Rittenhouse . . . October 20, 1801.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cBeginning at a rock where formerly a sweet maple stood, corner to John Smith\u2019s land and also corner to what was formerly called Montgomerie\u2019s tract; thence along said Smith\u2019s line South 86(?) degrees West, 60 chains to a stone in said line; thence North 4 degrees West, 10.65 chains to a hickory saplin for a corner, also corner to lands formerly Daniel Howell\u2019s; thence North 21 degrees West, 18 chains to a stone corner;\u00a0 thence North 4 degrees West, 83 (?) chains to a corner of other lands of said Rittenhouse (formerly Bellises), on the North side of the run; thence North 67 degrees East, 6.80 chains; thence down said run, North 2 degrees East, 6.40 chains, thence North 50 degrees East, 10.50 chains to a hickory for a corner in the road; thence South 70 degrees East 2.40 chains (?);\u00a0 thence South 4 degrees East 20 chains to a stone;\u00a0 thence North 86 degrees East, 33.50 chains to the middle of the Witchecheoak Creek;\u00a0 thence down the same, South 35 degrees East 10 chains to the old line;\u00a0 thence along the same South 4 degrees East 26.90 chains to the place of Beginning, containing 248 acres, be the same, more or less.1<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This long description, tho abbreviated by us of figures and partly clarified by a little punctuation\u2014yet a trifle obscure in spite of all\u2014has been found advisable for checking the work.<\/p>\n

Recital From Deeds<\/h3>\n

The deed by Thomas Opdyke, Oct. 20, 1801, says:<\/p>\n

\u201cWhereas Jacob Rouser stood lawfully seized in fee of a certain Tract of Land or plantation, situate in the Township of Amwell, aforesaid, containing by estimation 288 acres, being so seized thereof, the said Jacob Rouser died intestate on or about the 17th day of April, 1789; and Whereas administration of the goods of the said Jacob Rouser was, on the sixth day of May 1789, granted unto Mary Rouser and Jonathan Woolverton; and Whereas Peter Fox did afterwards become joint Administrator with said Mary Rouser and Jonathan Woolverton by his marriage with the said Mary Rouser; and Whereas the said Administrators obtained of the Judges of the Orphans Court, May 2, 1792 . . . by virtue whereof . . . Thomas Opdycke became the highest bidder for said plantation, whereupon the said plantation was cryed off and sold to the said Thomas Opdycke; Now therefore this Indenture Witnesseth that the said Administrators, in consideration of 1,333 Federal Dollars and 33 cents, did convey the said plantation to the said Thomas Opdycke, the 21st day of May, 1793\u201d.2<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A deed by Elisha Rittenhouse and Mabel, his wife, and Sarah Rittenhouse (widow of Peter Rittenhouse) to Thomas Opdycke, has this preamble:<\/p>\n

\u201cWhereas William Rittenhouse the elder had surveyed and located 240 acres of Land lying in the Township of Amwell on the Wickechaoak Creek (recorded in the Surveyor General\u2019s office in Burlington, in Book A page 293). The said William Rittenhouse being so seized thereof, did, by deed dated August 3, 1760, convey 100 acres of the above tract to his son Peter Rittenhouse and Whereas the said William Rittenhouse by his last will and testament did devise the residue of said Tract of 240 acres to his aforesaid son Peter Rittenhouse and the said Peter Rittenhouse, by his last will and testament, bearing date of the 22nd day of August, 1791, did devise the above mentioned tract of Land to his son Elisha Rittenhouse, party of the first part to these presents;<\/p>\n

\u201cNow This Indenture Witnesseth that the said . . ., in consideration of the exchange of Lands to the full value of the Lands hereby intended to be conveyed, by Deed bearing even date with this Deed, by which said Thomas Opdycke conveyed a farm or plantation in full compensation for the Lands hereby intended to be conveyed.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This may appear hardly necessary to our purpose; yet it clearly shows to whom these lands belonged in the early days.3<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

The Rittenhouse Will<\/h3>\n

The will of Elisha Rittenhouse dated April 29, 1839, and probated Dec. 28, 1846, has the following: \u201cI give to my wife Isabella Rittenhouse the use of the homestead farm containing about 100 acres, during her natural life, Excepting the mills thereon erected and also as much of the land of said tract as will secure to the purchaser of the Mills the water power required for their use and benefit.\u201d Evidently the Holcombe Mills of later date.\u00a0\u201cTo my daughter Sarah, wife of Andrew Bray, to them I conveyed land several years ago, making as I conceive ample provision for them.4<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0I shall therefore add nothing to their legacy except six shares of my Centre Bridge stock, and this I give exclusively to my daughter Sarah, notwithstanding her marriage.\u201d By this he evidently meant nothing against her husband, but wanted this stock to furnish Sarah with \u201cpin money,\u201d or money over which no one else should have any control.5<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

This will also says: \u201cMy son Allison Rittenhouse departed this life leaving six children, three of each sex. To them I hereby give and bequeath the farm or tract of land whereon they now live, situate in the township of Delaware,6<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0and also twelve shares of my stock in the Centre Bridge crossing the Delaware River. To my daughter Keturah, wife of John Risler, I give the farm whereon they now live, containing about 100 acres, to the said Keturah and John Risler and to their heirs forever\u201d.7<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

This John Risler (generally written John T. Risler) was made executor of the will. He was the father of the late Cyrus Risler and of the John Risler who owned the farm adjoining that of Cyrus Risler, until he sold it to John Jungbludt, July 5, 1921: \u201cBeing the same which Keturah Risler conveyed to the said John Risler, April 5, 1870.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ancient Trees Felled<\/h3>\n

We find that by deed dated March 31, 1866, Anderson Bray and Sarah Bray conveyed 66 \u00bd acres of land to William L. Hoppock, Samuel C. Hoppock and John Finney, for the snug sum of $6,000. Also that the same tract was by the same parties conveyed to Anderson Bray April 22, 1867, in consideration of $1,000. This looks like a great and sudden depreciation in value. And such was the case. Any old citizen knowing the activities of the first purchasers\u2014especially of John Finney\u2014may readily recall or imagine the different aspect presented by that tract of land when it came into their possession, from that which it presented when they sold it back. The fine old oaks and graceful hickories all gone. Not one majestic beech or towering poplar remaining. Nothing but sickly saplings, perhaps broken and disfigured, struggling for life among stumps and briers and piles of blackening brush\u2014the ghastly remains of last year\u2019s grandeur and glory.8<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

Neither of these deeds has any recital. Whether it all came from the original tract or not is hard to tell without careful drafting. Another noticeable thing about them is that Sarah Bray is not designated as \u201cwidow.\u201d And what is still more puzzling is that she is not mentioned in the later deed.9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

By deed dated Jan. 24, 1857, Elisha R. Bray, in consideration of $5,000, released to Anderson Bray and Sarah Bray, \u201cAll his rights and share in the property of Andrew Bray, deceased, in all lands and personal {property} of all kinds, held and enjoyed by the said Sarah Bray, Elisha Bray and Anderson Bray as joint proprietors.\u201d The deed speaks of the real estate as about 300 acres, with another lot adjoining. Elisha R. was a bachelor living with his mother and his brother Anderson.<\/p>\n

The will of Sarah (Rittenhouse) Bray, probated Feb. 17, 1882, has this provision: \u201cTo my son Anderson Bray I give the use of the balance of my estate as long as he lives, and if he leaves legal issue to the time of his decease, it shall belong to them at the age of 21 years, both principal and interest remaining\u201d.10<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

Anderson Bray Marries<\/h3>\n

Up to that time, Anderson Bray had been a bachelor, living with his mother and brother. Subsequently he married Amy, daughter of Britton Snyder (always known as \u201cBrit Snyder\u201d). They had but one child, a daughter Sarah R., who under the provision of her grandmother\u2019s will, came into possession of the property at the age of twenty-one.11<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0She married Clarence A. Pyatt, a great grandson of that well-remembered Dr. James Pyatt, who came from the vicinity of Piscataway in 1805, and began to practice medicine at Croton. In 1808 he married Sarah, daughter of Jeremiah and Sarah (Rittenhouse) King, on her 20th birthday. In 1758 \u00a0[Jeremiah] King had bought a tract of land near Quakertown, a part of the original 500-acre tract owned by John Stevenson. In 1776 he sold this and soon after bought the large tract of land above Croton, where they lived at the time of their daughter\u2019s marriage to Dr. Pyatt. In 1778 King\u2019s first wife died. In 1779 he married Sarah, daughter of Moses and Mary Rittenhouse.<\/p>\n

The Pyatt Family<\/h3>\n

Dr. Pyatt\u2019s activities, professional and otherwise, covered a period of about 60 years. Clarence Pyatt is a son of Albert and grandson of King Pyatt, who was burned to death in 1895, when the attractive old house known as the \u201cUpper Boarshead Tavern\u201d was destroyed by fire. A grewsome sight, indeed, was the search for the few remaining pieces of charred bone representing all that remained of the good old man.12<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

Clarence A. and Sarah (Bray) Pyatt have five children; namely, Albert S., Dorothy E., Robert, Ruth and Evelyn. While yet in high school, from which she graduated at the age of 15, Dorothy wrote for the D.A.R. a very creditable article on the Life and Services of Gen. Daniel Bray. The organization thought so well of the effort that both it and its author received appropriate recognition.<\/p>\n

In these five youngsters is mingled the blood of at least four well-known families that mingled long ago: the Brays and the Rittenhouses on one side, and the Kings and the Pyatts on the other. In fact, we find the widely-distributed Rittenhouse family coming in on both sides.<\/p>\n

The Bray Portraits<\/h3>\n

Unfortunately, there are no photographs of the elder Brays. A fine oil painting of Andrew Bray and one of his wife Sarah adorn one hall in the homestead dwelling. These were painted by William Bonnell and by him signed and dated, April 20, 1825. Who that old-time artist was is not known, but his works live after him.13<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

This Pyatt family, however, hold two photographs that were submitted to me some months ago for identification. They are fine pictures of Dr. James Pyatt and his wife Sarah. They are highly prized, and would doubtless be of interest to many people who have knowledge of this old couple, once so prominent in the affairs of their community.14<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Dr. James Pyatt 1784-1864<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Sarah King Pyatt, 1788-1874<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

[Note: The faces of Dr. and Mrs. Pyatt speak volumes about the challenges of their lives, but also reflect the state of photographic technology of the time. They had to hold still for many minutes while the exposure was being taken. Try staring into a camera, keeping perfectly still, for five minutes. You’d look somber too.]<\/em><\/p>\n

Letters of administration of the estate of Dr. Pyatt were granted to his son King, Nov. 24, 1864. Sarah King Pyatt died in Flemington, April 9, 1874.\u00a0The well-kept Bray records show:<\/p>\n

Andrew Bray, born Dec. 12, 1789, married Sarah Rittenhouse Jan. 15, 1815, died March 27, 1849;
\nSarah Rittenhouse Bray, born May 14, 1796, died Feb. 3, 1882; and that their children were:
\nSylvanus Jackson Bray, born Oct. 27, 1815, died Feb. 16, 1827;
\nDaniel Bray, born Sept. 5, 1818, died March 10, 1842;
\nElisha Bray, born Sept. 5, 1818, died Oct. …, 1891;
\nAnderson Bray, born Dec. 5, 1826, died June 6, 1913.15<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

\u00a0The nucleus of Andrew Bray\u2019s extensive holdings, long known as the Anderson Bray Farm, has been at various times expanded or contracted. The latest change was made by Sarah R. and Clarence A. Pyatt and Amy Bray, Oct. 1, 1932, when they conveyed 75 acres from the western part thereof, to Henry E. Pardoc and Tiza Pardoc, his wife, leaving the present area at about 100 acres.<\/p>\n

Buildings Very Old<\/h3>\n

Unfortunately, there are no dates or records to show when the older buildings were erected. In 1852 a new barn was built, as a stone in the foundation shows. The timbers from the old barn were used in another new structure, now serving as a cow barn; they remain hard, sound and massive as ever. The house is certainly old, but it has no distinctive features by which to fix even the approximate time of its erection.16<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

On these historic places the sturdy old farmers worked and prospered, tho the soil would never justify what was laconically said of rich Western land: \u201cTickle it with a hoe, and it laughs with a harvest.\u201d But hard work and good management forced this soil at least to smile pleasantly, in spite of sternness. Here as elsewhere, what the soil did for the farmer depended very much upon what the farmer did for the soil. And it may be that this old law of compensation has never been repealed, however much some of us may have disregarded it. Be that as it may, this old Bray farm is still the home of thrifty people, fighting their way thru discouraging conditions, much as their ancestors were doing long ago.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mr. Bush Traces Ownership of Place Long Owned by Bray Descendants The Bray Family Portraits by Egbert T. Bush, Stockton, N.J. published by the Hunterdon Co. Democrat, April 19, 1934 The following article was written by Mr. Bush about a farm many people think of as\u00a0the Chet Huntley farm or the Douglas Knight farm.\u00a0I have […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[233,243,226,241,6,4,258],"tags":[68,16,166,82],"class_list":["post-2581","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-amwell-township","category-bray-families","category-e-t-bush-historians-revisisted","category-families","category-historians-revisisted","category-hunterdon-county","category-rittenhouse-families","tag-farming","tag-land-titles","tag-portraits","tag-taverns","has-post-title","has-post-date","has-post-category","has-post-tag","has-post-comment","has-post-author",""],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2581","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2581"}],"version-history":[{"count":101,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2581\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20477,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2581\/revisions\/20477"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2581"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2581"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2581"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}