The Search for Hans Kagi s Land. By Dale Keagy

Transcription

1 The Search for Hans Kagi s Land By Dale Keagy August, 2018

2 THE SEARCH FOR HANS KAGI S LAND INTRODUCTION AND AUTHOR S FOREWORD I have discovered that there is no such thing as simply dipping one s toes into the waters of family study. The waters become a current, then a rip-tide, and finally a maelstrom that offers no escape. At least that has been my experience with the curiosity generated from my reading a published family history many years ago that cast the family s American patriarch, Hans Kagi, as the improbable husband of a Scots-Irish lass named Rebecca Patterson in early 18 th Century Lancaster County in the heart of the Swiss-Mennonite colony there. For me, the marriage s appeal was that the Kagis did not make much historical impact while the Patterson story was a swashbuckling adventure by comparison. It was the great stuff of a romance novel and I really wanted to be related to the Pattersons. But the union was so improbable that in the light of reason I could not believe it even though it was an accepted part of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of on-line family trees. I met a like-minded doubter Michael Kagay at the Lancaster Mennonite Historical Society s 2017 Family Conference marking the 300 th anniversary of the 1717 Mennonite migration (which included Hans) and we resolved to look into the matter. Six months, hundreds of hours, and 75 pages later we had a paper titled The Search for Hans Kagi s Spouse, which demonstrated to our satisfaction that the Kagi-Patterson union did not take place and that Hans had married Anna Kendig, most likely a fellow traveler from the Palatinate and a faithful Mennonite. But I remembered a word of advice offered by a seminar presenter from that same Mennonite Family Conference: Never leave family members until you ve accounted for all their land. Indeed, during our search for Anna Kendig, we had come to use the catch-phrase, Follow the Land, because in a Mennonite culture that avoided public record-keeping, land records seemed to be the only constant. The transactions were not always clean or in accordance with established rules, but eventually things got sorted out even if it took 100 years or more. But there is no existing record of Hans having sold land so Anna s name was not a part of any recorded land document. Our conclusions about Hans marriage were based on strong circumstantial evidence and deductive reasoning. While we had referenced some of Hans land acquisitions in our narrative, the accounting was not complete. I could not leave this family member without finishing that task. I decided that Spouse needed the sequel that chronicled The Search for Hans Kagi s Land. I fall back on the same writing style used in Spouse, which involved a sequential development of evidence and thought process. Because reference is made mostly to actual land records, which are either reproduced or cited in-text, there will be no footnotes. These are original conclusions. So, after solving this mystery, what comes next? The final of the Trilogy? Dale Keagy August, 2018

3 PART I - LAND ACQUISITION IN COLONIAL PENNSYLVANIA The search for Hans land could easily be sidetracked into a discussion of Pennsylvania s founding, William Penn s vision for it, and the associated world history context. This information is, of course, relevant and fascinating, but such a study is not a part of the immediate task at hand. For purposes here, the only background needed is from knowing that William Penn received a land grant in the New World from King Charles II of England in payment of a debt the Crown owed to Penn s father. The younger Penn a Quaker had a particular interest in selling land in Penn s Woods (Pennsylvania) to persecuted religious sects from Europe. It was Penn s experiment in religious freedom that attracted exiled Swiss- Mennonites from Western Germany. Hans Kagi was such a Mennonite who arrived in 1717, settling in what is now Pequea Township in Lancaster County. Records (which will be shown in Part III) show that upon his arrival, Hans purchased 100 acres from the Penns. Acquiring land from Proprietor Penn was a unique process, unlike modern land transactions where an owned tract is conveyed from seller to buyer. Obtaining a land parcel from the Penns was in effect creating it for the legal record. Except for large blocks of land set aside for the Penn family as Manors or as pre-designated towns, Pennsylvania was not pre-divided into parcels for sale as in the developmentlike plots of modern times. Typically, a prospective buyer would find an appealing piece of land, apply for it with a description, have it mapped and calculated for acreage, and then purchase it at a pre-defined cost per acre from the Penns or Penn land agents. There were four basic and sequential steps that a prospective colonial settler would follow. Return Application Warrant Plat Patent Figure 1 Original Land Acquisition in Pennsylvania Application: First a request was made for the issuance of a warrant, which was an authorization for a land survey. The term application should not automatically bring forth the image of a pre-printed from with boxes to be filled in with vital information. An application in the earliest colonial times could have been a slip of paper or note with or without applicant s signature. Warrant: A warrant is an order from a legally constituted governmental authority. In this context, it is a formal document or certificate that authorized land identification and measurement by a surveyor. The warrant is the first step toward ownership and reserves the land, but it does not convey title until the entire process is complete. Survey: The survey involves two steps: a narrative (compass headings, distances, and landmarks with a calculation of acreage) and a map. Surveyors created the narrative and from the narrative, a mapmaker sketched the information into a map or Plat. The Plat was most often in isolation from the land around it, mentioning neighboring lands for reference but not showing them. Patent: This was the final, official deed from the Penns, which conveyed clear title and all rights to a private owner. Issuance was predicated upon full payment of amounts due. A patent is a grant from a sovereign entity or, in the cases of the Penns, a proprietor which defined the original owner. Unpatented land remained the Proprietor s until patented. After the land had been patented (obtained from the Proprietor) with a valid title it could be re-sold by the patentee in a traditional land-sale transaction. The subsequent ownership conveyance document is commonly referred to as a deed. The original ownership document is the patent. In a simple world, there could only be one patent for a given parcel of land in its history. But in practice, there were often more than one patents as land was returned (for a variety of reasons) and re-patented to a new owner.

4 If all land transactions followed the outlined sequence and all records survived, land accounting would be fairly straightforward: find the register where all the steps were listed and referenced, and then look up the original documents. But securing original land in Pennsylvania did not always go from beginning to end without some unique feature or variation particularly in the early years. And the search for Hans land was often sidetracked by one or more of these complications. They will be explained as the evidence develops and mysteries are solved. By mid-eighteenth-century, the process had been refined to the point that Warrant Registers were in common usage. These registers provide references and audit trails to all underlying documents supporting the steps outlined in Figure I.1. And Warrant Registers and resultant Warrant Maps were crucial to unraveling the Kagi land mystery. But before warrant registers were in use in the time when Hans Kagi and his Mennonite shipmates were establishing farmsteads recordkeeping and transactions were adaptive to the circumstances at hand. Colonial Land Surveys That pre-revolution records survived is a small miracle. The Penn land office was in Philadelphia. When the British invaded, the Commissioners had only hours to load records into boxes and wagons and evacuate them to Lancaster where the records that made the journey were reorganized. The reassembly and indexing work continues by PA State Archive staff to this day. A brief explanation of the surveying process will be helpful, because understanding the basics is vital to interpreting the evidence. Emphasis is given to basics here. Information is provided only as needed to understand and appreciate the presented documents. As described in Figure I.1, survey of original land began with a surveyor receiving a Warrant an order for action from the land office. The Warrant showed that the claimant the Warrantee had paid the necessary fees and included a viable description of the land the settler wanted to purchase or Patent from the Proprietor (the Penns). It was the surveyor s job to then create a technical description that gave the mapmaker information necessary to create an accurately scaled sketch, or Plat. As a practical matter, the early sequence involved the settlor finding the land even settling on it and then going to the land office to begin the acquisition process. Of course, the best land was taken first staked and claimed and Hans plantation was prime land; he was one of the early settlors in the Conestoga/Pequea region of what is now Lancaster County. The surveyor would begin his description based on a reference point like a tree, mark, fencepost, or other easily identifiable landmark. Then he walked the property outline recording distances and directions using a compass and a rope or chain, moving from one reference point to another. Often the reference points were relative to previously surveyed property reading something like along the line of xyz property And often measurements were from stakes, stumps, gouges in trees, or posts in the ground indicating how the prospective buyer was helping the surveyor by staking his claim. The common unit of measure was a perch, which was a distance equal to 16.5 feet. The unit of direction was relative to the degrees on a compass assuming a North, South, East, or West orientation.

5 A survey document is really a sophisticated treasure map describing a walk around a land parcel. The description provides valuable information about neighbors. With only a basic understanding of the simple geometry involved, recorded survey information which is also part of a land deed and patent can be a vital part of family research. In the earliest surveys, the direction increments were in headings or in arcs of degrees. Because there are 360 degrees in a circle, early surveyors only had the option of using 32 possible directions as they described their walk over the prospective property. This led to inaccurate drawings, which had to be corrected later when the full compass range (360 possible directions) was used. (See Exhibit A.) Surveying new land was strenuous work requiring a team to carry and lay out the chains and often clear obstacles as they went. Resurveys were impeded because many landmarks (the pile of rocks, the hickory tree, or the post) had disappeared over time. Also, it was common to use neighboring property lines as reference points and neighbors could have subdivided or sold their original land thus creating confusion. And understood boundary lines moved as roads were built and informal agreements evolved. All these issues come into play in the search for Hans land. Reading Deeds A deed is a written record that represents a conveyance of property from a grantor to a grantee, a seller to a buyer, or (in the case of a will) from a testator to a legatee. A deed does not necessarily involve the conveyance of land, but these kinds of deeds are most often the subject of genealogic research and the term deed in common usage implies a land sale. Often, the most valuable Deeds are Releases where the heirs of a deceased release the executors of the claims as beneficiaries of the estate. These Deed/Releases are valuable not only because they name the deceased s children, but because they often give the names of the deceased daughters spouses. Sometimes, this is the only way they become known. The search for Hans land gathered valuable information from two kinds of land deed/conveyances: Deed Indentured A conveyance for consideration. The grantor gives up land or land rights to the grantee in return for value received, usually money. Deed Poll A conveyance without consideration. The grantor gives up land or land rights and gets nothing in return, as with a gift or land passed to an heir in a will. Hans expressed a wish that his land be passed to his sons in his 1748 will, which was the single most important piece of genealogical evidence he left behind. In this document, he lists his children sons and daughters and the land he owned at the time of his death. He also disclosed that he had a living wife, but did not name her. (Hans Will is discussed further in Part II.) But with respect to deeds involving Hans land sales, there is no record; Hans could have bought and sold land off the books and someone later memorialized the transactions in resurveys, warrant applications, or patents. But this would be speculation. Although it cannot be said with certainty that Hans never bought land from another settlor or sold any of the land he owned, it can be said with certainty that no such transaction was recorded with a Pennsylvania Recorder of Deeds, an office created in 1717 to establish some form and order to such transactions. But there was no requirement that deeds be recorded

6 until much later around Land conveyances were eventually recorded, but a search for genealogical information from land records requires casting a wide net sometimes going forward hundreds of years. Form of Deed The Colonial bar was not highly regulated. Some of the training was casual and a wide variety of language and writing styles can be seen in early deeds. Punctuation and spelling were not standardized and paragraphs, indentation, or headings were rarely used. But, regardless of writing style, there was a standard deed format. An explanation is offered here sufficient to interpret and use the deed evidence offered in this study. Although the lack of paragraphing and punctuation makes them hard to find, a land deed consisted of the following sections. Part I: The Premise Most useful genealogic information comes from the Premise, which is also subdivided into standard sections (typically without the benefit of modern-style punctuation). Figure 2 Parts of a Deed Indenture Declaration: The Deed and the Premise can start with something straightforward like: This Indenture made this Twenty Seventh Day of July in the Year of our Lord or something more poetic like Be it known to all Heretofore Present that... But the declaration will set the stage for what follows and, writing style aside, describes the nature of the document and gives the date that agreement was reached. This is not the date the document was recorded at the County courthouse. Grantor: This is the party of the first part or the seller. Clues here could include the spouse s first name and joint owners, which were often executors or heirs. Part I The Premise Part II/III Habendum et Tenendum Part IV Reddendum Part V - Execution Grantee: This is the party of the second part or the buyer. The same information can be found here as would be found in the recitation of the Grantor. Consideration: This is the amount the buyer pays for the land. As a piece of evidence, it could show whether there was a profit on the land and, therefore, a clue to the buyer s and/or seller s net worth. Object to be conveyed: This is a description of the land to be conveyed, including the acreage and the survey information (landmarks, compass points, and measurements). Stipulation: For forensic purposes as with this search the stipulation is very useful. It is here that the property s background, origin, creation history, and sometimes a listing of previous owners are shown. Depending upon the attorney s writing style, this part could be a treasure-trove of genealogical information, particularly with a property that has a complicated history. It would not be uncommon for all the mysteries of a deed pedigree to be solved in the Stipulation. Part II/III: Habendum Clause This clause is sometimes times described as Habendum et Tenendum, which is Latin for To Have and to Hold. As a practical matter, the appearance of a Habendum Clause is perfunctory. In complex transactions it describes a qualification in title transfer, but in most deeds the transfer is simple and clean. Pennsylvania land deeds require a Habendum clause, which usually begin with the English translation

7 To Have and To Hold. But for genealogical purposes its best use is as an indication that the seemingly endless stipulation clause has finally concluded. This is helpful because periods, paragraphs, or itemization had yet to make a consistent appearance in legal writing. It is rare that wading through the verbiage of an Habendum clause is worth the effort. Part IV: Reddendum This is a reservation or restriction in the conveyance. Again the Latin translation is a help in explaining its use. The phrase comes from the Latin Redendus or that must be given back or yielded. Again this is not typical in a deed, but if included there is some interesting genealogical information to be had. For example, a reddendum could state the property is sold, except that a widow has the right to stay in the house for her natural life, which is now called a dower right. This information can add considerably to a life story. Part V: Execution This is a lead-in to the end of the document and includes the signers and witnesses. This section should not be overlooked as a clue source. It could indicate whether the signer was literate or was required to use a Mark. Witness identification, too, can be informative, because they could be neighbors or relatives and provide leads to clusters. All the clue sources described here were used in accounting for Hans land activities and locating his land. Several deeds were consulted in this study, which provided clues to early ownership history. As expected, the significant clues were in the Premis section, which led back to early Kagi patents. And it was the trail of patents that ultimately established the Kagi property locations.

8 PART II THE SEARCH BEGINS The obvious challenge with Colonial era genealogical research is the lack of records that have become a modern-day standard. The concept of keeping vital statistics like births, deaths, and marriages at the governmental level is not seen. The most reliable record keepers of the day were the churches, and every denomination had its own standard of care. The colonial Lutherans and Moravians, for example were outstanding recorders, as were Presbyterians. Mennonite genealogical records were kept mostly in the family Book of Martyrs but they were not formally organized at a denominational level. This practice was not a part of early Mennonite tradition. It is a common characteristic of persecuted religions, because records were a road map for oppressors. It took several generations to purge this mind-set. The starting point for Hans-related research, then, begins with a land record a constant the English brought with them to the New World. For the English, land ownership was defining. It defined wealth, social status, and tax obligation. Establishing its ownership was paramount and records were a necessity. Information about land ownership came from the documents referenced in Part I, but also came from Wills. And if someone died without a Will, land information came from a required estate accounting. Fortunately for Kagi researchers, Hans at least left a will, which created a search starting point. (See Exhibit B.) The transcribed sections (extracted from Exhibit B) relative to the land search read: 1. I give and bequeath unto my well beloved Son Abraham Kagey my Plantation whereon I now Lives upon to Possesst by him & his heirs and assigns for Ever, Containing two hundred acres. 2. I give and bequeath unto my son Henry Keagy Two Hundred Acres of Land to him his heirs and assigns for Ever joining Ye Above sd Lands 3. I give and bequeath unto my Eldest Son Jacob and my Son Rudolph, my tract of Land Situate on Ye West side of Susquehannah River joyning Yorktown to be equall Divided between them For the purpose of research and presentation here, the search will be for three land tracts as listed in Hans will and will follow its language in naming them. The tracts existed as three separate parcels in Hans thought process and were, therefore, presumed to involve three distinct transactions. They will be referred to as: 1. The Original Plantation (Accounted for in Part III): The working theory here is that this tract is the first land Hans purchased upon arrival and where he built his home. It is also assumed that this is where Hans widow remained till her death and where son Abraham was expected to care for her. (See Exhibit B for complete will transcription; a significant burden of mother-care was imposed on Abraham.) 2. The Addition (Accounted for in Part IV): This is assumed to be a parcel Hans added to his farm some years after the original acquisition to accommodate a growing family and sons coming of age. It is presumed that, following the Will s language, this is the land Hans left to son Henry.

9 3. The York Land (Accounted for in Part V): This land would have been purchased later in Hans life when the Penns opened York County for settlement. This is the land he left jointly to sons Jacob and Rudolph. These suppositions and assumptions are presented here only as working theories, consistent with the search process. They will be verified (or corrected) by subsequent research as this presentation ensues.

10 PART III THE PLANTATION The search begins assuming that the Will reference to the Plantation whereon I now lives upon is the land Hans purchased from the Penns upon his 1717 arrival. (Of course, Hans could have moved from Parcel 1 to Parcel 2 during his life and died while living there, but this is not intuitive; he most likely stayed where he first settled.) Following the land procurement process of the time (described in Part I) he would have identified the land he wanted (possibly settled on it first), described it in an application, obtained a Warrant, delivered the Warrant to a surveyor who created a description ( a Return), and from the description a mapmaker sketched a Plat, resulting in the issuance of a Patent. And ideally, all these transactions would be recorded with originals or copies available for inspection. Of course, that would be too easy. Some records either did not survive, or the ideal paperwork process was not followed. In fact, land transactions around the time of Hans arrival and before rarely followed what was later considered the prescribed process. The irregular was the norm. Record of Hans original land purchase (recorded as Hans Kaiggey) appears in the Chester County Old Rights register where reference is made to a return (a narrative) of land surveyed on October 23, (See Line 7 of Figure 3 following). Figure 3 - Hans Kagi s Original Tract: Found in Chester County Old Rights Register Chester County Old Rights Register Accessed (online) PA State Archives page designation K-26 The relevant document entry from Figure 3 reads: Figure 4 Transcription of Chester County Old Rights Register Referencing Hans Kagi s Original Survey Number Name of Purchaser Kind of Paper Acres Date of Warrant Date of Survey Name of Patentee Patent Records Survey Records Bk Vol Pg Bk Vol Pg 7 Kaiggey Hans Return 100 October 23, 1717 D This is the first variation from the patent procurement norm as represented in Figure 1. Original transactions before 1733 are listed in County Old Rights Registers and there are usually a few missing parts. Counties involved in Old Rights treatment were Philadelphia, Bucks, and Chester. What is now Lancaster County was once a part of Chester County, where Hans Return is recorded. This reference source gives no reference to a Warrant or a Patent; only to a survey. The survey notation leads to the Survey Book D

11 Figure 5 Original Kagi Plantation Survey Return Survey Book D The original record in Figure 5 was found in the Pennsylvania State Archives, a transcribed copy of the original survey record attested to by Jacob Taylor, the Surveyor General. This document is a Return of Survey. This narrative, which would not pass muster in later surveys because of its lack of specificity identifies Hans original 100 acre tract mostly in terms of his neighbor s land and a post. The back of the Return includes the helpful notation that the Patent reference is A This notation should lead to a recorded copy of Hans original land Patent, the point at which this property was created for the purpose of Pennsylvania land records. There is no indication as to when the Patent reference was added to the back of the Survey Return. (Note: the document in Figure 5 is re-copied as a part of an Pennsylvania Department of Internal Affairs project authorized in 1833; it is shown here because it is more readable than the original, but a photograph of the actual survey from the Pennsylvania Archives can be found at Exhibit C.) There is no sketch included in the Survey Book. This is not unusual for early transactions. Also, note that Surveyor Taylor was using the earlier 32-Part compass heading system (See Exhibit A) and not the more accurate. 360-degree system of later surveys. Again, this was not uncommon, but this was not an exact survey; property lines shifted slightly over the years. There are two existing owners referenced in the first Kagi land Survey Return (Figure 5): Melker Penerman and Thomas Simons. These are important clues, which will add considerably to solving the land puzzle. The Land of Melchior Brenneman Figure 6 Back of Survey Return The Melker Penerman referred to in the Figure 5 transcription is Melchior Brenneman, a significant historical figure in the area. His life and land ownership are comparatively well documented and researched. Area Mennonites met at his house for worship services and the family later donated land for the construction of the New Danville Mennonite Church, which has survived the 300 years since its founding and thrives to this date. It boasts one of the largest Mennonite congregations in Lancaster County. Geopolitically, the New Danville tracts were part of Strasburg, then Conestoga Township, and finally in modern-day Pequea Township. This is why the survey document references Strasburg. Melchior took up 500 acres in the western end of what became known as the Swiss-Mennonite Colony, south of modern-day Millersville. The area was (and is) known as New Danville but the nearest modern-

12 day village is Conestoga. Because his plot was large and in the central area of the New Danville cluster, his land is referenced as adjoining in several early deeds. Melchior s land holding is worthy of additional study; it is important to locating Hans original plantation. Melchior s original survey return is indexed in the Chester County Old Rights Register on page P-35 as Penerman and appears as follows: Number Figure 7 Transcription of Chester County Old Rights Register Referencing Melchior Brenneman s Original Survey P-35 Name of Purchaser Kind of Paper Acres Date of Warrant Date of Survey Figure 8 Melchior Brenneman Survey Return Survey Book D Name of Patentee Patent Records Survey Records Bk Vol Pg Bk Vol Pg 7 Pennerman Melchior Return 500 November 21, 1717 D The survey also appears in the survey book as a Return (narrative) and not as a sketch but there is reference to the Kagi and Simons land along with other neighbors. (See Figure 8) If one would walk the directions along with the survey narrative, the Kagi/Simons plots would be on the southern boundary of the Brenneman property. This walk can be better visualized by following the survey directions in Figure 8 as applied to the plot map in Figure 9, both of which are now introduced. The Figure 9 map is reproduced from the Shenk Family History Path of Faith: A 300 Year Heritage. This is a well-documented work that includes a detailed history of many land parcels in the New Danville area. Shenk coins the phrase The New Danville Grants to identify the parcels chosen for detailed research. Their owners had a strong connection to the New Danville Mennonite Church and the Shenk family. The New Danville Grant designation has no official meaning. Unfortunately for Kagi family researchers, Shenk did not include Hans Kagi s land in his study, which traced twelve tracts from the original patents to their current owners. Nevertheless, Shenk s 1717 recreated map is a good visual aid and a starting point for initially locating Hans original plantation. With it, the original Kagi land is seen relative to a modern day surviving landmark; the New Danville Mennonite Church.

13 As another way of verifying that this was Hans original plantation, the acreage can be calculated from his 1717 survey narrative (See Figure 5). This description was used to modify the Shenk Map in Figure 9 by walking the perimeter as the survey instructs. With apologies to geometry teachers everywhere, Hans land can be described as a distorted parallelogram (actually a 4-sided polygon) with the dimensions of 141 perches by 111 perches by 136 A perspective on the size of Hans Farm - What is 100 Acres? In the middle ages the amount of cleared land a man could plow with an ox in100 days In Colonial Times 16,000 square perches 4,356,000 square feet 484,000 square yards About 1/6 of a square mile 78 American football fields perches by 127 perches. A rudimentary calculation of acreage can be derived by seeing the property as a parallelogram with the dimensions of approximately 139 perches by 119 perches, which gives an area of 16,541 perches 2, which is about 103 acres, equal to the 100 acres plus or minus that Hans purchased in Of course, the calculation and geometric assumptions offered here are crude, but the intention is only to further verify that this is Hans land and confirm its approximate shape. Note that early 18 th century surveys given the issues of terrain, equipment, and compass approximations were far less accurate than one might assume. And boundary lines over time could be fluid as early landowners cleared and set up their parcels for farming. In subsequent surveys, the shape of Hans farm and its boundaries change, but there is no doubt that the plot shown in Figure 9 is Hans original land..

14 The Melchior Brenneman land (to Figure 10 Melchior Brenneman Land Patent the north of Hans original plantation see Figure 9) offers additional location confirmation. Figure 10 is a photo of the original Brenneman patent, now owned by the Lancaster County Mennonite Historical Society. It reads: William Penn True and Absolute Proprietary and Governor in Chief of the Province of Pennsylvania and Territories thereunto belonging To all unto whom these presents Shall come Sends Greetings Whereas by Vertue of a Warrant from my present Commissioners of Property bearing date the Seven & twentieth day of September in the Year One thousand Seven hundred and Seventeen there was surveyed & laid out on the Nineteenth day of October then next ensuing unto Melker Penerman Late of the Palatinate of the Rhine in Germany by now of the Township of Strasburg in the said Province a certain Tract of parcel of Land Situate in the sd Township Beginning at a post at a Corner of John fforrers Land and Running by the Same North by West fifteen perches to a Post then by Hans Moyer s Land West South West two hundred and thirty perches to a third Post then South by East three hundred & eight perches to a fourth post thence East North East by the Lands of John Kaigey & Thomas Simmons Two hundred and eighty four perches to a Black Oak thence North by West By the Lands of Martin Kindig and Benedictus Venerick two hundred and eighty four perches to a black Oak thence West by South by the John fforrer Land ffifty three perches to the pace of Beginning Containing ffive hundred acres. With the exception of a change in intervening change in ownership of Samuel Guldin s land to Martin Kendig, the Brenneman patent matches the Shenk map (and the original Hans Kagi survey at Exhibit C) and clearly locates Hans Kagi s original plantation as shown in Figure 9. Verifying the information recorded in Hans original Patent A (See Figure 11) completes the verification of the original plantation s location. Although in very poor condition, an examination of the original patent book reads: William Penn True and Absolute Proprietary and Governor in Chief of the Province of Pennsylvania and Territories thereunto belonging To all unto whom these presents Shall come Sends Greetings Whereas by Vertue of a Warrant from my present Commissioners of Property bearing date the Seven & twentieth day of September in the Year One thousand Seven hundred and fifteen 17 there was surveyed & laid out on the twenty fourth day of October then next ensuing unto Hans Kaiggey Late of the Palatinate of the Rhine in Germany by now of the Township of Strasburg in the said Province a certain Tract of parcel of Land beginning at a post standing in a line of Melker Penerman s land and at a corner of Thamas Simon s land thence South by East by the said Thomas Simons land 107pchs to a post thence West by South.

15 The conclusions is unequivocal; this parcel in New Danville is Hans Kagi s original purchase. What is now known: The accumulation of evidence to this point shows that: Hans Kagi purchased 100 acres of land in what is now Conestoga Township in 1717 the approximate shape shown Figure 9. Figure 11 Hans Kagi Original Recorded Patent - A (Page 1) in in The enduring modern day landmark to locate Hans original land purchase is the New Danville Mennonite Church, which is to its northeast. His immediate neighbor to the north was Melchior Brenneman. His immediate neighbor to the east was Thomas Simmons Although not known with certainty, it is deemed safe to assume that this tract is where Hans built his house and lived his entire life. Again, it is speculative, but this is presumably the land he wished his son to receive in by his will and the land where Hans wife Anna (Kendig) lived till her death. What is not (yet) known: What is not known (to this point) is how this 100 acres grew to the 200 acre property he wished his beloved son Abraham to own. (See Exhibit B). Proof that the 200-acre plot in question is the original 100-acre plantation (where Hans settled in 1717) plus a 100-acre addition comes from the survey records specifically C (See Figure 12 following). The narrative on this survey reads The above described land situate in Strasburg Township in the County of Lancaster containing Two Hundred and eleven acres and the usual allowance for roads was surveyed to John Kagee by order from the Commis rs of property the 7 th of October 1729 It was around this time that Hans and Anna were raising a family they had four sons by this time and were likely looking to the future. Presumably Hans had accumulated enough wealth at this time for an addition.

16 The survey map shows a single 200-acre parcel that incorporates the original 100-acre plantation plus 100 acres to the south. Although some of the neighbors changed in the intervening years, Figure 12 Survey C : Original Plantation Addition 100 Acre Expansion South complete the patent process. It could mean that the record simply did not survive. What was located as additional confirmation of the 200-acre expanded original plantation was (son) Abraham Kaigee s repatenting of this parcel on 2- March 1749, following Hans death. There are notations on the reverse of the Figure 12 survey indicating that Abraham was using the document to resolve the land ownership issues created by Hans passing. reference to reconstructed warrant maps shows that this is the original plantation now enlarged. There is no doubt. However, it is not known for certain when Hans family began farming the land; it could have been sooner. It is only known that there was a re-survey of the land ordered in At some point, Hans should have patented this expansion, but this record was not located in the PA State Archives. This does not mean Hans did not Figure 13 Location of Hans Kagi s Expanded Original Plantation It is possible that Hans could not pass ownership to his sons by Deed Poll (inheritance) because he was not a naturalized British citizen. This would be consistent with Abraham s re-patenting the Note: With the exception of Hans Kagi plantation expansion, the 1717 property ownership from Figure 9i s reproduced here.

17 land. Had the land passed to him via Hans will, he would have owned the land and patenting would not have been necessary. Abraham s subsequent ownership is discussed further in Part IV of this study. The expansion to the original plantation is confirmed with finality in a discussion of Abraham s subsequent patenting, discussed in Part IV. In any case, the task-at-hand is complete; Figure 9 can be revised to show Hans enlarged plantation in Figure 13. The location of the expanded plantation is known with absolute certainty.

18 PART IV - THE ADJACENT LAND Hans refers to the second tract, which he wanted Henry to own, as Two hundred Acres of Land to him his heirs and assigns for Ever joining Ye above sd Lands. Here Hans is referencing a 200 acre parcel that adjoined his original 100-acre plantation (which had grown to 200 acres by a subsequent acquisition as explained in Part III). By the process of elimination from recreated warrant maps, a working hypothesis is that this adjacent parcel the land he wished son Henry to have was the original claim of Thomas Simons. (See Figure 9 preceding and references in Original Kagi and Brenneman surveys in Figures 10 and 11.). This hypothesis is easily proved. The Land of Thomas Simons Simons did not arrive as a part of any Mennonite migration, nor was he a Palatine Swiss-German. He was an Englishman who preceded Hans into Conestoga Township. His heritage can be deduced from reference to surveys returned in favor of his grandson (also named Thomas), who settled on several tracts in the Mount Joy area of what is now Lancaster County. A 1718 survey from that region s Welch Tract (Survey D77-266) reads: Resurveyed the 31 st of May 1718 by virtue of a warrant from the Commissioners of Property dated the 30 th of the same month and year unto Thomas Symons late of the County of Pembroke a Tract of Land in the Welch Tract in the County of Chester laid out for 200 acres (in right or in part of five hundred acres the Original Purchase of his grandfather Thomas Symmons) A search of warrants, surveys, and tax records of the period show only two Simons with several clearly connected spelling variations active in Chester County (Lancaster County) land transactions; the grandfather and the grandson. Figure 14 Thomas Simmonds Survey D As to 200 acres of land in the New Danville area, the starting point is a blanket warrant attributed to Thos. Simmonds (D ) reproduced in Figure 14. The relevant text grants a Thomas Simmonds the authority to take up within the County of Chester one or two hundred acres of vacant land according as he shall think fit for which he agrees to pay to the Proprietors use ten pounds Mony of the this Province and the Yearly quit-rent of one Shilling Sterling for the hundred acres and in proportion if he takes the rest Since all other surveys and warrants attributed to Simons are accounted for with maps placing them in the Mount Joy area, this warrant would be the blanket warrant, which Simons used to claim land in the New Danville tracts of what is now Pequea township.

19 As further proof of his proximity to Hans Kagy: he appears as a Landholder in surviving Chester County tax records as Thomas Simons in 1719/20 (page 10) and as Thomas Simonds in 1720/21 (page 24). The 1720/21 entry is the most revealing because it is in the same sequential listing with Melchior Brenaman and Hans Keague, The tax collector was listing the properties as they appeared geographically and Brenaman, Keague, and Simons are in sequence. The blanket warrant Simons obtained required a subsequent detailed survey, which is shown in Figure 15. To understand the significance of this document, some additional comments about Colonial Era surveys are called helpful. Figure 15 Thomas Simons Pequea Valley Land Subsequent Survey C Top Half This style of mapping is called cathedral mapping or a land plat which shows the outline the metes and bounds of the property in question only. However, it is common to reference neighboring properties with reference to their respective surveys. This is a good way of confirming the location of the plot in question. This survey confirms three ways that the Figure 15 survey is the same Simons property noted in Figure 9. (1) D is the 1714 survey of Samuel Guldin s land; (2) D is the 1717 survey of Melker Penerman s land; (3) D is the 1717 survey of Hance Kaigey s original plantation with 100-acre epansion). Another consideration is scale; cathedral maps are not always drawn to scale, nor are they drawn to a northern orientation. They are drawn so they can fit on the paper space available. To combine surveys in a traditional plot plan a connected tract map one must redraw all the plats following the instructions of each survey together. This is mentioned because the eventual placement of the Simons plat in New Danville (to be shown later) will not look like this map. Hans Kagy s Ownership of the Simons Tract So, while Simons survey establishes that it is adjacent to Hans Kagi s original plantation on its west side, it does not confirm that Hans Kagi eventually owned it such that he could design to give it to a son in his will. Proof of Hans acquisition comes from at least two sources:

20 1. A notation on the bottom half (Figure 15) Simons survey references its assignment to Hans Kaigy (See Figure 16) This graphic is a copy of the original, but an inspection of the original survey (in the Pennsylvania Archives) shows nothing additional except that the notation was added in a different hand. The notation R.L. 139 is a mystery. The matter was researched by the Archives staff with no conclusion. It matches with no known indexing or Figure 17 Thomas Simons Pequea Valley Land Subsequent Survey C Reverse Figure 16 Thomas Simons Pequea Valley Land Subsequent Survey C Bottom Half reference system and appears to be in the nature of a random doodle. But the important information is clear; Simonds assigned his warrant to Hans Kagi giving Hans the right to patent the land. The metes and bounds referenced in survey C are consistent with what is assumed for the Simons land. 2. A notation on the Survey s reverse side also refers to Simons assignment of his blanket warrant to Hans Kagy, which appears to be in June 1741 (crossed out). The image shown in Figure 17 is transcribed copy of the original, but an inspection of the original from the Pennsylvania Archives shows different hands over time. The notations are consistent with a complex transaction that led to son Abraham s eventual ownership of the Simons addition, but for the matter at hand, Figure 17 is one more piece of evidence that confirms Hans assumption of the Simons warrant. What appears to have happened here is that Hans Kagy obtained rights to neighbor Simons s warrant so that he (Hans) could expand his farm. Simons had not yet patented the land or he would have sold the land in a deed indenture transaction. It is likely that Hans began farming it sooner as his family began to grow, but this is speculation. The Simons family had no recorded presence in the New Danville region after 1721; their activities were in the Mount Joy area. Perhaps Hans was renting the land from the Simons grandson or taking care of the taxes and/or quit rent Simons had obligated himself in his 1716 blanket warrant. (See Figure 14.) But

21 these are only possibilities and not relevant to the mission of confirming that the land was eventually owned by Hans Kagi. But even with the strong circumstantial evidence presented to this point, there has been no proof presented that Hans Kagi owned the 200-acre Simons farm; only that he owned warrant rights. Abraham Kaigee s Ownership The proof comes from the actions son Abraham took after Hans death actions necessary to perfect ownership issues. These actions are consistent with the assumption that Hans was not naturalized and, therefore, could not pass land title to his children through his will. While he made his intentions clear, it would seem that neither Abraham or Henry could claim legitimate ownership at Hans death by virtue of his will. So, Abraham executed patents on 2 March 1729 that resolved the matter. Patent A (Original Plantation with expansion totaling some 200 acres): The patent language is constructed as an original ownership document. It describes the metes and bounds in the same language used in Figure 12 the expanded property, which is a distorted parallelogram with sides that measure (East side 279 perches; North side 141 perches; West side 240 perches; South side 139 perches) with the same landmarks. This is with no The final proof of the location of both parcels comes from Abraham s re-patenting of the parcels following Hans death. This implies that Hans Will did not effectively pass title perhaps because he was not a naturalized British citizen or for some other unknown reason. doubt the original 100-acre plantation with the 100-acre expansion re-patented to Abraham Kaigee. What is significant in this transaction is the patent makes no reference whatever to Hans Kagi or any of the transactions in this tract s pedigree. It was as if Abraham was the first owner. This is circumstantial evidence that Abraham did not gain ownership of the land through inheritance. In fact, he had to pay for it: 32 pounds, 17 shillings, two pence not a small sum for the day. An odd amount to be sure, but it is not known if the payment could have settled some outstanding obligation attached to the land. In any case, Hans 1748 Will did not seem to grant Abraham land title, implying that Hans was not naturalized and could not have passed the land to Abraham in that way. Patent A (Simons Addition totaling some 200 acres): The original patenting of the Simons land had to be resolved. This patent references the Simons blanket warrant executed between Simons and William Penn and the subsequent survey. Most importantly it includes this language in the Premis: And the said Thomas Simmons did since the said survey of the said tract bargain sell and afsign over all his rights of title in and to the

22 same tract and premifis unto John Kaigee, late of Lancaster County Yoeman and the said John Kaigee being since lately deceased the right of and in the said tract of land and premifis is now legally vested in Abraham Kaigee son of said John Kaigee The document goes on to describe the land by metes and bounds, describing the property s perimeter from white oak to post in the exact language of the original survey shown in Figure 16 (above). The document goes on to confirm the warrant transfer arrangement just described and puts the matter of the Quit Rent obligation (which was attached to the original Simons warrant) to rest. Quit Rent has its origin in Feudal England describing a relationship between a tenant farmer and the manor owner of King. But in Colonial America it was a sort of rent obligation into perpetuity. It was seen in some early colonial land transactions and Simons had agreed to it when he obtained his blanket warrant. The question of who was paying it in the ensuing years is unknown perhaps no one but Abraham wanted to be free of the obligation. After the property description and description of the warrant transfer between Simons and Hans Kaigee, the document continues: Now at the instance are request of Abraham Kaigee that we unto be pleased to grant him a confirmation of the same. Know ye that in consideration of the sum of twenty pounds one Shilling lawful Money of Pennsylvania to our Use paid by the said Abraham Kaigee the Receipt we hereby acknowledge and thereof acquit and for Ever Discharge the said Abram Kaigee and heirs and Afsigns by these Presents and of the yearly Quit Rent herein after mentioned & reserved We have given granted released and confirmed An by these Presents for us our Heirs and Successors Do give grant release and confirm unto the said Abraham Kaigee his Heirs Afsigns The said Two Hundred Acres and one half of an Acre Land as the same is now bounded & described as afores. Apparently the intent of this transaction was to memorialize and validate the Hans Kaigee/Thomas Simons warrant transfer and to finally settle the matter of the quit-rent, past, present, or future. The document also established Abraham Kaigee as the owner of the Plantation addition. When the dust settled, Abraham Kaigee, son of Hans, owned both the 100-acre original plantation including the 100-acre expansion and the 200-acre Simons addition. There is no mention of son Henry Kagy in any of the ownership documents, despite Hans will instructions.

23 The inferred conclusion is that Hans could not pass ownership through his will because he was not a naturalized British citizen. In effect, the land reverted to the Penns and had to be repurchased, which Abraham did an expensive proposition that perhaps Henry could not afford. But this potential family drama is not within the scope of this study and is left for another day. Abraham owned all 400 acres. Henry could have farmed 200 acres as Hans wished and worked out a side arrangement with Abraham but Henry never owned the land. It is now known for certain where the Hans Kagi Lancaster County farms were located. This phase of the search is concluded. A plot diagram that overlays current topography is shown in Figure 18. Note the proximity of the New Danville Mennonite Church at the North east corner, an enduring landmark. Although part of the southern tracts have been developed, most of the farm endures and will continue because it is under an agricultural preservation zoning limitation.

24 Figure 18 Location of Hans Kagi s Lancaster County Farms New Danville Mennonite Church Original Plantation 100 acres Plantation Addition (Simmons Warrant) 200 acres Plantation Expansion 100 acres

25 PART V - THE YORK LAND The third parcel referenced in Hans will was located in what is now York County described as my tract of Land Situate on Ye West side of Susquehanah River joyning Yorktown Locating this parcel proved to be the most elusive of the three tract searches. And while the introduction to this study committed to avoiding historical digressions, such a detour is necessary to establish context. Settlement West of the Susquehanna River By 1730, much of the desirable farmland in modern day Lancaster County had been claimed. The Susquehanna River a few miles west of Hans plantation was the de-facto western boundary of the Penn Colony. It was at this time that Penn s sons, Thomas, John, and Richard (now the proprietaries) took steps to expand the colony across the river into what is now York and Adams counties. Penn s charter clearly identified these lands as proprietary, but there was no established ownership process for the few settlers that had ventured across the river divide. Combined with the Penn s short-term interest was a long-term concern about encroachment by the Maryland proprietary to the south. The Pennsylvania-Maryland border had yet to be agreed upon (ultimately established by the Mason-Dixon Line) and Thomas Cresap an aggressive Maryland land agent was actively settling Marylanders in what the Penns saw as their land. The Penns commissioned Samuel Blunston, a prominent Lancaster County surveyor, to explore and identify large neighborhoods of habitable new lands those near creeks and streams and administer a pre-warrant system for the contemplated expansion. A complicating factor was the younger Penns commitment to honoring their father s pledge of treating Native Americans honorably. The family would not formally issue warrants or patents to European settlers until agreement was reached with the Six Nations Tribes. The Blunston Licenses and Hans Acquisition The interim solution was to establish some order by issuing pre-settlement documents in anticipation of the formal opening. These documents came to be known as Blunston Licenses. Between 1734 and 1736 Blunston issued such licenses to 284 adventurous souls, giving them the right to apply for warrants and survey land when the Penn s reached agreement with the indigenous population. Hans Kagi was among that group. Figure 19: Blunston License Register Hans Kagi Purchase 1734/35.

26 The transcription for Hans Blunston license register reads: March 4 (1734/35) No Survey Figure 20 Blunston Register Transcription 600 On the West Side of the Codurus where Thomas Linore Hans Kaighe (acres) first settled having purchased his Improvement This recording shows that Hans had a license a pre-warrant which he purchased in 1735 for 600 acres on land where a Thomas Linore had once settled as a pioneer/squatter of sorts. When Linore settled on this land, he had no ownership right. It is unknown what happened to Linore, but his status is not relevant to this search. Hans Kaighe was formally slated to become the eventual owner or patentee. Figure 21 - Warrant For Hans Kagi s York Land When the land officially opened for settlement, Hans did take the next step and purchase a Warrant (recorded in 2 nd Warrant Book H 238.) Here Hans is recorded as Hans Haghy, both in the Warrant Register on the Warrant (Figure 21) Now that the land was formally opened, the next step in the procurement process was to obtain a survey, which Hans did. (See Figure V-4) The accompanying survey narrative reads as follows: A Draught of Hans Kagie s* Land Situate in Manchester late in the County of Lancaster but since the division of same in Ye County of York Containing Four Hundred & eighty acres of land & the allowance of six p cent for roads &c. But Virtue of the Honorable Proprietaries Warr t bearing the date the 24 th Mar Figure V-4 Survey of Hans Kagi s York Land Survey d the 7 th April 1742 To Nicholas Scull Esq r Surv r Gen l By Tho Cookson Dep Sup t *Say Hans Haghy While Hans had the option or license to purchase 600 acres, he purchased a lesser

27 amount 480 acres of prime - mostly flat - land with an abundance of water. Figure V-5 Hans Kagi York Location 480 Acres Again, it would be speculation to describe Hans activity on the land. York Town was about 15 miles from his Conestoga Township farm and few if any Swiss-Mennonites were involved in the expansion. It is unlikely that the land had been cleared at the time of Hans purchase, most of the region s early settlers being hunters, trappers, and Indian traders. He could have purchased the land for his sons. He could have purchased it on speculation. He would have been in his 40s at the time and would certainly have been capable of farming the land, particularly with four sons. But there is no evidence that other than land ownership Hans established a presence in York County. The York Land Disposition Regardless of its use, when Hans died in 1748, he passed the rights to his sons, Jacob and Richard, who disposed of it shortly thereafter. On August 1, 1751 they sold the land and all rights to John Wright, James Wright, and William Willis who were prominent in York Town s early history. The passage of warrant rights was valid because at this point it did not represent land. The original deed on file at the York County Historical Society reads in part: WHEREAS John Kegay late of the County of Lancaster Yeoman deceased obtained in his lifetime from Samuel Blunston Esquire a Grant and a Warrant from the Secretary s office to survey a tract of land now lying in York County which was surveyed according to the said warrant but the survey was not returned which land is thus bounded to west southward by the

28 town land of Yorktown, next by the land of Francis Worley north by the land of John Smith and Charles Jones and on the east by Codorus Creek AND WHEREAS The said John Keagy by his last will and testament in writing duly published under his hand and seal bearing the date the eighth day of May one thousand seven hundred forty eight did give and bequeath in the words to the effect following (ITEM I give and bequeath unto my eldest son Jacob and my son Rudolph my tract of land situate on the west side of Susquehannah River joyning Yorktown to be equally divided between to be valued by the Elders or such men as they choose and they to pay each of them abovesaid to) as by the said will in the registers office at Lancaster may more fully appear NOW THIS INDENTURE WITNEFSETH that the said Jacob Kegay and Phryna his wife and Rudolph Kegay for and in consideration of the sum of eleven hundred pounds current lawful money of Pennsylvania to them or some of them in hand paid or secured to be paid by the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis or one of them on the perfection hereof the receipt whereof they do hereby acknowledge and whereof acquitt and discharge the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs [assigns] and [adminstrators] HAVE granted bargained sold aliened released and confirmed and by these present do grant bargain sell alien release and confirm unto the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis ALL that the before mentioned tract of land so bounded as aforesaid with all houses edifices buildings and improvements thereon be the same more appearances thereunto belonging and the reversions and remainders Rents Offices and Profits thereof and all the estate right title interest property claim and demand whatsoever of them the said Jacob Kegay and Phryna his wife and Rudolph Kegay of in and to the same and every part thereof by virtue of the said survey and grant and will or otherwise together with all deeds evidences and writings relating to the premises and the full benefit of the aforesaid John Keagy to survey six hundred acres more or less. And with this transaction, the York Land leaves the family and for the purposes of this study, the accounting is complete. Note, however, that this land is a significant parcel in both York County and U.S. History. The City of York was the Capital of the United States for a two-year period during the Revolution and Hans warrant claim was adjacent to the original Yorktowne, no doubt in the wanderings of most of the Founding Fathers. Hans warrant purchasers included William Willis, a brick maker, who cast the bricks for the Colonial Courthouse where the Continental Congress met and the Articles of Confederation were signed. The Willis House was built on Hans claim and is preserved as the first brick structure built in York County. It also includes part of the Prospect Hill Cemetery, which includes Federally owned Soldiers Circle, which holds the remains of soldiers killed at the Battle of Gettysburg. Most of the grant s southern portion is the athletic complex of York High School. THIS CONCLUDES THE SEARCH FOR HANS KAGI S LAND

29 APPENDICES Documents following are included for reference and convenience. They were used in formulation the conclusions of this study

30 EXHIBIT A EARLY COMPASS HEADING DESIGNATIONS Early survey compass designations used increments of degrees from a North, South, East, or West orientation. As a result, early survey lines and acreage calculations were not accurate. With this system, the surveyor only had 32 possible descriptions for his walk around a property. Later surveys used the full range of the compass. The improved accuracy resulted in frequent corrections of property boundary lines and revised plat drawings. From the highly recommended source: Hively, Neal Otto. (2000): How to Plot Land Surveys. Self Published.

31 EXHIBIT B-1 THE WILL OF HANS KAGI- TRANSCRIPTION I John Kegay in the County of Lancaster and province of Pena, Township of Conestogoe being very sick & weak in body but of Perfect mind and memory Thanks be unto God for it, do make this my Last Will and testament & desires it May be Recevd by all as such. Imprimis it is my Will and I do order that in Ye first Place All my Just Debts and funeral charges be pad and Satisfied. Item [1] I give and bequeath unto my well beloved Son Abraham Kagey, my Plantation whereon I now Lives upon to Possesst by him & his heirs and assigns for Ever, Containing two hundred acres, Ye land & Plantation is to be valued by two or three men chosen by Ye Elders of our Church or Meeting & whatsoever they shall value it at above a hundred Pounds he shall pay unto my Ex rs hereafter mentioned within four years after my Death. his Mother shall live with him dureing & he shall Provide firewood for her & he shall give fifteen bushells of wheat every year & six bushels of malt. Three Barrells of Syder, half a barrel of stilld Liqure, one hundred weight of meat, Either Beef or Pork at her choice to be paid to her yearly & every year dureing her pleasure to live with him, He shall Keep a Cow for her and give her her choise of Ye Cowes; Every he Shall Keep a mare for her dureing Ye Term & shall give her four Apple trees Every year bearing fruite at her own Choice & give her half an acre of ground for flax and half Ye Garden. Transcription appearing in Franklin Keagy s History (1899) compared to microfilm copy of original ledger book of wills. Some variations in capitalization and conjunction are left unresolved since they do not affect content. Paragraph and item notations [#] have been added to facilitate reference and discussion. Colonial legal terms to understand when reading this will: Imprimis = first and most importantly Ye = the; Ex rs = Executors (responsible for administering the deceased s wishes Asafsd = as previously described Sd - said In items 1, 2, and 3 Hans passes land ownership to his sons. However they are required to pay an amount into Hans estate at fair value. Whether such payment is to liquidate outstanding debt or to finance his widow s care is not known. Abraham is charged with his mother s care and he is required to live on the homestead with her and provide her with enumerated staples. Henry is given a 200 acre adjacent farm but is required to live on and also pay fair value for it. Jacob and Rudolph were given Han s recently acquired York County land, but also required to pay fair value. (Jacob and Rudolph sold the York land shortly after Hans death. Item [2] I give and bequeath unto my Son Henry Kegay Two hundred Acres of Land to him his heirs and assigns for Ever joining Ye Above sd Lands to be valued by our Elders as aforesd & he to pay accordingly within four years after he shall Settle upon or ocquepie Ye Same. Item [3] I give & bequeath unto my Eldest Son Jacob & my Son Rudolph, my tract of Land Situate on Ye West side of Susquehanah River joyning Yorktown to be equall Divided between them to be valued by the Elders or Such men as they choose asafsd & they to pay Each of them as above sd to.

32 Item [4] I give and bequeath unto my daughter Susanah Ye Sum of one hundred pounds Lawful money to be paid within five years after my decease. Item [5] I give & bequeath unto my daughter Anne the Sum of one hundred pounds Lawful money to be paid when she Comes of Eage. Item[6] I give unto daughter Barbara Ye Sum of one hundred pounds Lawful money, and I do appoint Jacob Myers & Jacob Beam my whole and Sole Executors of this my Last Will and Testament. In witness whereof I have hereunto Set my hand and Seal this 8th day of May 1748 Jh o. J.K his X Mark Kegay, [L.S.] Each of Hans daughters receive 100 at different times. Whether this is a function of their age or cash flow issues in Hans estate is not known. Hans naming of executors is important. Jacob Beam is a key figure in his life mosaic. He was a shipmate and (the present authors believe) a brother-in-law. Signed Sealed & Delivered in the Presence of us ye Subscribers Adam Ponneman & John Jones. Personally appeared before me Adam Ponneman & John Jones, the witnesses to ye above Will, & the Said Ponneman on his Solemn affirmation and the sd John Jones on his oath declard they were present and saw and heard John Keagy the testator Sign. Seal. publish and declare the Same as his last Will & Testament and the at the doing he was of Sound and disposing mind and memory according to Ye best of their Knowledge. 31 October Before THO COOKSON Dep Regr Following at Exhibit B-2 is the Original Will of Hans Kagi. It was located and restored by Lancaster County Archives Staff for this project.

33 EXHIBIT B-2 THE WILL OF HANS KAGI (ORIGINAL)

34

35 EXHIBIT C COPY OF HANS KAGI S ORIGINAL YORK LAND SURVEY RETURN

36 EXHIBIT D - DEED TRANSCRIPTION HANS KÄGI YORK LAND SALE This indenture made the twenty first day of August in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty One BETWEEN Jacob Kegay of the County of York in the Province of Pennsylvania Yeoman and Phryna Kegay his wife and Rudolph Kegay his brother of the one part and John Wright of County of York Esquire and James Wright of the County of Lancaster Esquire and William Willis of the County of York and aforesead Yoeman of the other part. WHEREAS John Kegay late of the County of Lancaster Yeoman deceased obtained in his lifetime from Samuel Blunston Esquire a Grant and a Warrant from the Secretary s office to survey a tract of land now lying in York County which was surveyed according to the said warrant but the survey was not returned which land is thus bounded to west southward by the town land of This document was discovered in its original form in the rare document section of the York County Historical Society and transcribed. This is the 600 acres Hans purchased as a part of William Penn s effort to expand his Holy Experiment across the Susquehanna River. Yorktown, next by the land of Francis Worley north by the land of John Smith and Charles Jones and on the east by Codorus Creek AND WHEREAS The said John Keagy by his last will and testament in writing duly published under his hand and seal bearing the date the eighth day of May one thousand seven hundred forty eight did give and bequeath in the words to the effect following (ITEM I give and bequeath unto my eldest son Jacob and my son Rudolph my tract of land situate on the west side of Susquehannah River joyning Yorktown to be equally divided between to be valued by the Elders or such men as they choose and they to pay each of them abovesaid to) as by the said will in the registers office at Lancaster may more fully appear NOW THIS INDENTURE WITNEFSETH that the said Jacob Kegay and Phryna his wife and Rudolph Kegay for and in consideration of the sum of eleven hundred pounds current lawful money of Pennsylvania to them or some of them in hand paid Although ownership of Hans 600 acres in York County passed to Jacob and Rudolph, they had no interest in keeping it. They inherited the property in 1748 and by 1751 had disposed of it. or secured to be paid by the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis or one of them on the perfection hereof the receipt whereof they do hereby acknowledge and whereof acquitt and discharge the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs [assigns] and [adminstrators] HAVE granted bargained sold aliened released and confirmed and by these present do grant bargain sell alien release and confirm unto the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis ALL that the before mentioned tract of land so bounded as aforesaid with all houses edifices buildings and improvements thereon be the same more appearances thereunto belonging and the reversions and remainders Rents Offices and Profits thereof and all the estate right title interest property claim and demand whatsoever of them the said Jacob Kegay and Phryna his wife and Rudolph Kegay of in and to the same and every part thereof by virtue of the said survey and grant and will or otherwise together with all deeds evidences and writings relating to the premises and the full benefit of the aforesaid John Keagy to survey six hundred acres more or less. TO HAVE AND

37 TO HOLD the said hereby granted land and premises with the appurtences unto the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs afsigns as tenants in common and not as joint tenants to the only proper use and behoof of them the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs afsigns as tenants in common and not as joint tenants forever. AND the said Jacob Keagy for himself and his heirs [assigns] and [administrators] and for the said Phryna his wife and the said Rudolph Kegay for himself his heirs [assigns] and [administrators] do covenant promise and grant to and with said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs and afsigns as follows (to wit) that they now have in themselves good right and full power to make this present grant and release in manner and from aforesaid notwithstanding any act or thing by them or any of them done or suffered to the contrary AND that the said Jacob Kegay and Rudolph Kegay their heirs [assigns] and [administrators] shall and will with all convenient speed before the said purchase money shall be paid at their own proper cost and charges procure for the said John Wright James Wright and William Willis their heirs and afsigns a patent or grant under the great seal of the said province in all point executed in due form of law for all the land contained in the said survey freed and discharged from all just rents to the date or title thereof and from all other titles pretenses and encumbrances whatsoever had made done or suffered by them or either or any of them IN WITNESS whereof the parties aforesaid have hereunto interchangeably set their hands and seals the day and year first above written sealed and delivered in the presence of us the words (and the full benefit of the narrator granted to the said John Kegay to survey six hundred acres more or less) being first interlined by the above named Jacob Kegay and Rudolph Kegay.

38 EXHIBIT E MELCHIOR BRENNEMAN ORIGINAL SURVEY

39 EXHIBIT F - Survey Book C-107 Page John Kagee (Plantation) by Order Dated October 7, 1929 and Reverse Assigned to Abraham Kagee by Warrant of March 2, 1748/9 and Returned October 18, 1749

40

41 EXHIBIT G - Survey Book C-107 Page Thomas Simmons by Virtue of a Warrant dated December 25, December 1716/17 and Reverse: Surveyed to Thomas Simmons Assigned to Hans Kaigy

42

43 O EXHIBIT I - BLUNSTON REGISTER PAGE 13

44 EXHIBIT J - HANS KAGI YORK LAND WARRANT