Pennsylvania Lands: A guest post by project intern Dean Williams

Likely obvious to anyone who has read previous entries to this blog, the Chew Family Papers contain a great deal of information about the family’s land holdings. Primarily through the speculative efforts of Benjamin Chew and his son Benjamin Jr., the Chews owned thousands of acres of land throughout Pennsylvania, as well as substantial tracts in Delaware, Maryland, and New Jersey. Their land acquisition, spread out over the course of nearly a century, created a huge volume of paperwork. Many months of this project were spent sorting through and organizing the land papers. Within the collection, five series, containing approximately 30 linear feet of maps, surveys, and manuscript material, are devoted exclusively to land matters. As we come to the conclusion of this project, it seems appropriate to “speculate” on the various ways in which papers from these land series might be used.

The first use that comes to mind, and probably the one that is most self-evident, is how the Chew family itself affected, and was affected by, their extensive land holdings. In this regard, perhaps the most striking impressions one obtains from the land series documents is a sense of the family’s increasing financial difficulties over time. The question might be asked; “Did the ownership of such a large landed estate serve them well, or was it in some sense a hindrance?” While their properties made up a sizeable portion of the family estate, as their financial fortunes dwindled, one can note the increasing urgency in correspondence about the need to find buyers willing to pay the asking price. The family’s pecuniary needs, combined with the ever-increasing cost of maintaining their lands, in the form of taxes and other administrative costs, contributed to a financial squeeze. By the mid-nineteenth century, family members in charge of administering the land were emphatic with their agents about the need to sell the land. Turning to the question of what effect the Chew’s ownership had on the land itself, one might look to the papers for evidence on land settlement and development. A study of this type could also be extended to examine how late eighteenth-century land speculation played out over time, at least for one family. In this scenario, documents within the collection could be mined to help make a case for whether the family’s extended tenure over such large tracts of land had positive or negative repercussions.



Additionally, the land papers also provide numerous insights into family dynamics, such as the discrepancy between Benjamin III and his siblings over the settling of their father’s estate or the relationship between Henry B. Chew and his son Benjamin. Thus, the land papers might be used to supplement other information in the collection concerning inter-family relations. For example, papers from the land series help to complete the picture of how Benjamin III was replaced as chief executor by his brothers, Henry B. and William White, in addition to James M. Mason. In the case of the relationship between Henry B. Chew and his son Benjamin, personal correspondence between father and son provide the image of a demanding taskmaster, never quite satisfied with Benjamin’s efforts or behavior.

One further use of the land papers as they relate directly to the Chews is the examination of their land speculation. Like most speculative ventures, Benjamin Chew and his son invested a great deal of money into purchasing property with the hopes of making still larger sums. Considering the context of the times, when a large part of the Pennsylvania lands were purchased in the 1790s, and the financial collapse that so many other land speculators of the times suffered, the land papers might be used to unearth how one family was not swallowed by the economic forces that bankrupted some and sent many others to jail.

Expanding the focus beyond simply the immediate family, the land papers also provide a great deal of insight into people the Chews had contact with. With this in mind, the manuscripts might be searched for evidence documenting how the family dealt with those they did business with. For instance, one might examine the relationships between a well-to-do land owning dynasty and the many agents who administered their lands over time. The documents also provide a fair amount of information about numerous major and minor players involved in land speculation over the course of nearly a century. Related to this, the plethora of surveys and lists of land owners and renters lend themselves to a study of the patterns of land ownership and land conveyance.

Brainstorming on a still broader scale, and going beyond the Chews, one could envision using the land papers from this collection to act as a case study for various elements of land owning--with subjects ranging from wider inquiries into land speculation, to generalized patterns of settlement and land use. Potentially fruitful topics of study that would benefit from an examination of these papers include the subjects of land use over time, spurs and detriments to backland migration during the nineteenth century, and localized settlement of particular counties. This last usage of the papers extends, in particular, to the settling of many counties in Western Pennsylvania that were formerly dubbed “Depreciation” or “Donation” lands. For those interested in how the land itself was changed over time, the papers include numerous references to clear-cutting tree growth, agricultural development, and mineral discoveries occurring on, or near, the Chew property holdings. Because there is also a great deal of documentation concerning the difficulty of resolving and obtaining clear land title, these circumstances suggest an evaluation of land transference procedures. As a further possible use, the extensive account records available with the collection could be used for quantitative studies of land prices and rents over time.

These are just a few of the myriad of possible uses of the land papers within the Chew Family Papers.

We're on a Roll...

Avid blog followers may remember this post from back in August of 2008... Those oversized maps and documents that we unrolled for the first time so many months ago are finally receiving conservation treatment!

The rolled documents arrived to HSP housed in long plastic bags, tied at both ends with cotton tape.

Each document is removed from the bag, slowly unrolled and weights are used to hold the document open.

Most of the maps are covered with a layer of dust, soot, and dirt that is removed with vulcanized rubber erasers and Nilfisk vaccuum.

The documents are rolled around 4" diameter acid-free, lignen-free archival tubes with a layer of Microchamber paper and an outer layer of Tyvek. The tube is cut to size for each document using a hacksaw and then sanded smooth.

Cotton tape is used to secure the Tyvek around the rolled document. The newly-housed documents will be labeled and stored on shelves.

Greenwich Island Meadows surveys

Over the past few weeks, I have been working on the papers of the Brown and Johnson families that are included in the Chew Papers. Mary Johnson Brown Chew's family and ancestors owned large sections of what is now the First Ward of Philadelphia, Southwark, Passyunk, the Navy Yard, and Tinicum. David Sands Brown, among others, developed land along the Delaware River to accommodate his growing manufacturing businesses, which were headquartered in Gloucester City, New Jersey.


This survey shows William Jones' Meadow, which is part
of Greenwich Island (Surveyed by John Lukens, 1770)

This land passed down through the Johnson family from William Jones (a grazier in Kingsessing Township) to his daughters Mary (Morris, Pancoast) and Elizabeth (Garrett), then to Martha Morris, who married Joseph Johnson, a ship chandler. Johnson ran a booming business from his wharves in South Philadelphia during the late-18th century into the mid-19th century, and his descendants further developed the land as industrialization allowed for more manufactured goods to be moved from place to place. (Stay tuned for an upcoming post on the companies associated with David Sands Brown and the development of Gloucester City.)

As I was sorting through the various deeds that make up a large portion of the material in this series, I was trying to create a mental image of how all of these plots of land fit together. One day, I found a series of maps and surveys that helped me to create a picture of the area the deeds described, and I realized how vastly different the land is today. Aside from the Tinicum Wildlife Refuge, this land has given way to industrial development. Here are a few representations of William Jones' meadows as they were in the mid-1700s.


The first survey was done by John Lukens in 1768.
The second is the original survey done by Nicholas Scull in 1759.

Last night, as I was returning from the New England Archivists' Conference, my flight passed over the area that these surveys portray. I looked out the window and imagined what these waterways and marsh lands would look like without the grid of roads, parking lots, and buildings. I tried to conjure the land as the Swedes found it, before they drained marsh land for grazing. I perform these kind of thought experiments a lot as I sift through documents that shift my relationship to the land that I walk on every day, navigating the grid of Philadelphia's streets, or hanging in the air above this place that is at once so familiar, and so surprisingly new.


This lithographic plan shows the emergence of the South Philadelphia
that we know today. This "Plan of proposed Wharves & Docks with
Railroad Connections in the First Ward" was made for Titus S. Emery
by L.N. Rosenthal's Lithographic shop in 1867.

The Wilson Lands

Two weeks ago, among the Chew papers, I came across stacks of deed polls, each one of which effectively transferred 400 acres of land from its original owner to James Wilson. For those of you unfamiliar with Wilson, he is one of only six framers to have signed both the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. In addition, he was also a member of the first Supreme Court appointed by President Washington, and, beyond that, instrumental in the formation of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1790. Surprisingly, with all these founding credentials, he is still a relative unknown. A large part of that anonymity can be attributed to the documents I found, because they act as a representative sample of the vice that likely cost Wilson his founding reputation – land speculation.

To be sure, Wilson was only one of many leading figures from his generation that speculated in the “undeveloped” lands of the American West. Washington, Patrick Henry, Robert Morris, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin, along with many others, all were heavily involved in the practice that historian Alan Taylor maintains, “consumed the eighteenth-century American elite.” (Writing Early American History, 2005) Like Wilson, but perhaps not to the same degree, most of these speculators experienced the pitfalls of buying land on the early American frontier.

A good deal of their problems stemmed from the quantities of land they attempted to purchase and the way purchases were financed. In simplified terms, speculators typically tried to purchase massive tracts of land on credit – in many ways the same type of risk-taking that has resulted in our present day financial crisis. Using a process known as leverage, speculators bought land with mainly borrowed money. They acted under the assumption that, as land prices rose, they could then sell the land for more than the purchase price, thus being able to repay the original loan and pocket a profit. As with our own financial crisis, this type of risky behavior created an extremely unstable economic environment. When land prices were rising, an immense profit could be made, but when the prices were stagnant or falling, the original investment became a drain as borrowed money came due – essentially the same problem that took down Lehman Bros. and Bear Stearns.

Because Wilson’s land speculation rose to the point of obsession, he was particularly hard hit during the economic depression of 1796-97. Both he and Robert Morris, to name just two, spent time in prison because of massive land debts; in the process staining their reputation for posterity.

As for the multiple deed polls contained within the Chew papers, two questions arise: How did Wilson acquire all this land; and how did the Chew family end up with these documents? I am not certain of the answers to these questions at this time, but some clues are available within the documents themselves. First, the lands fell within Allegheny and Luzerne counties of Pennsylvania. Also relevant, the deed polls date from only two years,1794 and 1796. Additionally, the original warrant dates for when the land was first claimed by a private owner, all fall within the year 1792. It is important to note that this was just after the Pennsylvania legislature passed an act regulating the sale of land by limiting the number of acres an individual could buy; this, in an effort to keep lands newly open for sale out of the hands of speculators which could have effectively denied Wilson access.



However, if Elizabeth K. Henderson is correct, Wilson may have turned to underhanded means. According to her 1936 article on "The Northwestern Lands of Pennsylvania, 1790-1812," (PMHB, Vol. 60) she claims that Wilson got around the intent of the law by taking out land warrants under "fictitious names" and then transferring the land to his own name by way of the deed polls. That claim is difficult to confirm from the documents available. Another possibility is that Wilson, or his agent, may have obtained the lands from Revolutionary war soldiers who first obtained them as payment for their military service in lieu of monetary remuneration. In any case, Wilson ended up with these lands.

How the Chew family obtained the documents is, once again, uncertain, but likely has its roots in the massive borrowing Wilson did to finance his land ventures. It seems at least possible that Wilson borrowed money from Benjamin Chew and when he or his executors (Wilson passed in 1798) could not repay the debt, land title was transferred instead. Other evidence within the collection, such as account books and personal correspondence, may hold the key to solving this mystery. The answer to these questions, and many others await the interested researcher.

Posted by Dean Williams, Chew Papers volunteer

the subtle beauty of surveys

This project has introduced me to many types of materials and aspects of history that I was previously unfamiliar with. It has also been teaching me a lot about balance and letting go of rigid ideas of perfection. Some days, it is easy to get lost in the enormity of the task that is processing a 400 linear foot collection. I panic about deadlines and not meeting all of my goals.

Yesterday, as we were putting Benjamin Chew Jr.'s papers to rest, I found a number of folders of oversize material that still needed to be integrated. It would have been easy for me to become frustrated that I had forgotten where every piece of paper was, but then I opened one of the folders and found this:


Survey of Chewton, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, [n.d.]

I don't know why I am so affected by surveys. I have fallen in love with their subtle, sweet beauty. I am always moved by the depictions of trees and houses, the meticulous detail with which the surveyors rendered their subjects. It could be that I've developed this interest because of the sheer number of surveys in the collection, but I think it is more that they offer such a simple view of boundaries and the space between place and place.