Henry Linnington

Henry Linnington was born about 1630 in England. He died after 20 Mar 1696/97 in Jamaica, Queens County, New York.

Parents: not known

Married:

• in 1655 in Hempstead, New York to Catherine Ellison. She was born 1634 and died WFT Est. 1664-1728. Her parents were Lawrence Ellison (or Allison) (ca 1595-1664) and Mary Rishton (ca 1596-1666).

Children of Henry Linnington and Catherine Ellison are: (source 916)

1. Catherine Linnington, married William Thorne 1684 in Long Island, N.Y.
2. Susannah Linnington, born Abt. 1658 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.; married John Hubbs 1676 in Long Island, N.Y.
3. Elizabeth Linnington, born Abt. 1661 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.; died 1730 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y; married Solomon Seaman, Sr. April 19, 1682 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.
4. Mary Linnington, born Abt. 1663 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.; married Richard Osborne
5. John Linnington, born Abt. 1665 in Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y.; married Mary

Court Frequent Flyer

Henry Linnington appears many times in the town records of Hempstead, Long Island, New York, beginning in 1657

"1658, July 6: At a Court holden at Hempstead. Whereas, Henry Linington, besides other evil practices unto the disturbance of Christian order and peace, and to the violation of the laws, to the great dishonor of God and to the evil example of the nations under which we live, hath solicited Deborah Sturgis; Be it therefore ordered that he shall forthwith be committed to the Marshal's custody (who is hererby authorized to apprehend him and in sure and safe manner to keep him in ward, until he shall give sufficient security in recognizance in the value of 500 guilders for his good behavior, in default thereof he is to be sent unto Manhattans, and within 3 months he is to be banished out of the town's limits.)

His bondsmen were his father and brother-in-law, Lawrence and John Ellison. To defend them harmless he bound himself, his chattels and estate, both moveable and unmoveable, to stand in caution and be security.

1659. -- At a Court held May 1: Whereas Lawrence Ellison hath entered into recognizance that Henry Linington should submit to the sentence of the Court pronounced against him, viz.: to depart the town, and mean time to be of good behavior, and so supplicates to have his bond cancelled, the Court doth order that the recognizance will stand in force until the sentence of the Court shall be performed."

Henry apparently went free on bond, but lived in a state of disgrace for more than one year, until he was restored the liberties of an inhabitant (Vol I, page 114]:

"At a Generall towne Meeting the 3rd of Oc't 1659 Holden at ye howse of Mr Richard Gildersleve, Magestrate

Vpon ye Supplication of Henry Linnington it was this day granted that all former proceedings ags't him should he remitted, and he was then received againe vpon promise of reformacon vnto ye Liberties of an Inhabitant.

Teste John James, Cle. Seal.

The 3rd of Oc't 1659.

Vpon A message sent by ye Governor by Cap'n Newton, & leut'nt steelwell, it was granted that all Vollentiers that were desirous to goe under pay ag'st ye Indians mighte have their liberty to goe out of this place but being in ye buysy time of harvest there was not any that went.

Teste John James [Seal.]

I can say

1 that hinerry Linnington Came as I was aboute my worke at the well, and asked mee to lie w't him and would have me goe in to the Barne w't him for that purpose

2 that he offered me 10 S to yeeld to his desirers and so he fell from that sum by degrees to half a busheell of mault and I withstood him, and tould him that it was a greate sinne and shame for him that had so good knowledge to sollisit any woaman to soe great A sinn,

3 he tould me that hee offered Largely, and said that he used to give sarah but 5 S atime

4 seeing his importunity w't me to go into ye Barne with him, I bid him goe and stay till I Came, and that while I slipt over to timmothy holsteads."

In 1660, he sells his half-interest in the mill to William Smith:

"fforasmuch as there is an agreement made betwixt William Smith on the one partie, and Henry Lininton of the other partie, That the Mill that is between them should bee prised by William Smith, with all things belonging to her housing and land and the hopper the shoow and the hoppe Excepted, According to ye above said agreement I William Smith do prise ye halfe of the mill at ffourty pounds sterling, to be paid in beaver or Cattell at Beaver prise, to bee paid ye twentieth day of October next ensuing ye date hereof, and thirty bushels of Indian Corne ye first of January ensuing ye date hereof, and twenty bushels of wheat to bee paid ye 16th of March next ensuing ye date hereof, To this agreement wee have hereunto both subscribed our hands

Henry Lininton

the mark of X William Smith

William Smith having prised ye halfe of ye mill, as above specified, the abovesaid Henry Lininton have resigned his halfe of the mill to William Smith, with ye Iron Barre, ye Mill bills, and ye Iron Sledge, with all privileges belonging to her, the things above excepted, and ye said William is by these presence to performe Henry Linintons Ingagements to the Towne. And for the true and Just performance hereof, I the said William Smith Do binde over my Mill, and in case I the said William Do not make payment according to the conditions before Expressed, that then ye Mill I wholly forfuit to Henry Lininton. In witness hereof I do here unto sett my hand this 3 of September, 1660..."

In December 1682, Henry Linnington successfully sued Matthew Beadle for the cost of wintering a heifer, being awarded 16 shillings plus court costs. Among those who testified was Jonathan Smith, Sr.:

"The testimony of Jonathan Smith Seeneer this deponant testifeth that I being at the mill and heniry linintun tould me that there was a stray Beast and he asked me if I knew hose it was and I tould him I thought it was mathu bedls and he desired me to telle mathu bedle of it and whin I cam hom I tould mathu bedle of it and mathu bedle desired me to desier heneri linintun to give har a little meat whil I com for her and I did so and severall tims hinnery ased me when matheu would com for and I tould him that matheu sayd he would com as sone as ever he could and the nex winter leat in the winter heneri linintun desired me to speack to mathew bedle to fetch his beast away and pay him for wintring of har for he could not tell whether it was his or no becas she was not marked and I tould mathu bedle again and he sayd he would fetch har as sone as he could and satisfi him for his pains: and farther saith not..."

In 1684, Henry Linnington was accused of slander:

"The deposetion of Thomas Smith of Jemeco [Jamaica, New York] in the case betwen daniel bedle plentive and Henery linintun defendant this deponant testifieth that he being at Henere linintuns mill I heard here linintun charg daniel bedle with staling a swine but whether it was a hog or a bore that he charged him with I cannot tell for thay ware discorsing of both and daniel bedle answared that he heard that he had often charged him but he could not prove it but now he could prove it and he would sue him for a slander and farther saith not..."

From "Colonial Hempstead", by Bernice Schultz, 1937, page 138:

"There was a law against bolting flour except in New York, as it was too difficult to regulate the quality of flour made in distant parts, but there were so many illegal bolting mills that the monopoly was rescinded in 1680. Hempstead had a number of such mills and was astonishingly well supplied with grist mills. Tide mills and wind mills were augmented by watermills which made use of every likely stream. Mill-rights were granted by the townmeeting, often including a tract of land and permission to build whatever ditches or sluiceways might be necessary. The miller was required to be ready for business within a given time, and was occasionally required to build a bridge over the stream. He received as payment one eleventh or one twelfth of the grain he ground, with the stipulation that if ever he should fail to keep a good mill the grant should revert to the town. Henry Linnington, intractable even in his own age, scorned to submit the projects inspired by his rugged individualism to his fellows' approval, and built himself a mill without applying for the right to do so. The meeting [June 16, 1690], at once sensitive to its prerogatives and eager to foster new enterprise, decided to offer him an agreement, which, in case of a refusal to sign, would be granted to someone else."

Links

• http://www.familyorigins.com/users/b/r/o/Christine-E-Brodnax-1/FAMO...
• http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/m/i/z/Michael-R-Mizzell/...

Sources

• 916. hesed1@aol.com, Joel Thomas Buchanan, Roswell, Ga.; Apr., 2000., (FamilyTreemaker.com / User Home Pages), "Electronic."

  ---

  
  

of Hempstead