A Relatively Short Summary of the Fire Place History Club's "Notice of Motion"

From Richard Thomas:

After the Town had filed its Verified Answer to the Club's Verified Petition, the Fire Place History Club filed a "Notice of Motion" indicating its intention to move the Court for an order directing Summary Judgment in favor of the Club.

In the Notice of Motion, the Fire Place History Club contended that all necessary factual issues are settled or so one-sided that they need not be tried.

The Town had claimed that it had no obligation to remove the grass and weeds from nine of the ten cemeteries on the Fire Place History Club's list because these nine graveyards were "private cemeteries." The Town further implied that in order to be a public cemetery, a cemetery must have been one formed by a cemetery association (or, at least, the Town implied that in order for any of the cemeteries on the Club's list to have "a public nature,"

they must have originally operated under the cemetery association laws of the State of New York).

The Club's Notice of Motion made the following points:

1. The Town had contended that it is only through the sale and purchase of mapped lands or plots to the public, such as provided for in the Rural Cemetery Act of 1847, that a cemetery can be rendered "public." The Rural Cemetery Act of 1847 was the first general cemetery association law passed in New York State.

In the motion, the Fire Place History Club showed that the history of Section 291 (Town Cemetery Law) pre-dates that of cemetery association law by several decades.

The first sentence of the current Section 291 derives directly from a Revised Law of 1828 (which itself was a re-enactment of a law passed in 1826). When that law became effective, it applied to cemeteries that had existed in 1813 and earlier. The Town had stated that the provisions of Section 291 applied only to "public" cemeteries, so there must necessarily be conditions that can cause a cemetery to have "a public nature" other than the single method stated by the Town; that is, the "sale and purchase of mapped lands or plots to the public." The sale of plots to the public became an activity sanctioned by law long after the first sentence of Section 291 was written, a sentence which has changed very little in its wording over a span of 182 years.

2. The Fire Place History Club then described three other methods by which a "private cemetery" might acquire "a public nature."

a. A cemetery acquires "a public nature" when it is purchased by a public governmental entity. A "private cemetery" can no longer be "private"

if it no longer has a "private" owner.

One of the cemeteries on the Fire Place History Club's list, the Rose cemetery, is on land owned by the Town. In its Verified Answer, the Town acknowledged that it had a duty to care for that cemetery.

In its Verified Answer, the Town had referenced an Opinion of the State Comptroller. In that opinion, the State Comptroller stated that even though the governmental entity owning a cemetery might not be the Town, it was still the Town's responsibility, under Section 291, to remove the grass and weeds and preserve, care for, and fence the cemetery. Section 291 places the obligation of preserving and maintaining such cemeteries on the Town, even when the property on which they are located is not owned by the Town Section 291 places the duty on the Town of caring for such cemeteries, "by whomsoever owned."

Four additional cemeteries on the Fire Place History Club's list were acknowledged by the Town to be owned by other governmental entities. The Town claimed it had no responsibility for caring for these cemeteries, but the Opinion of the State Comptroller shows that claim to be invalid.

b. A cemetery acquires "a public nature" when the property where it is located reverts to the people of the State of New York as a result of the title having failed "from a defect of heirs." Under the Abandoned Property Law of the State of New York, a cemetery on a property for which no one any longer holds the title escheats to the people, and thus it acquires "a public

nature."

The "public nature" is acquired upon there being a defect of heirs, not when some public agent files to acquire the title to the property for the State of New York. In fact, no public agent can make such a filing until after the property has reverted to the people.

So the "state of having a public nature" can exist for a cemetery whether or not any public agent may have claimed title to it for the state; that "public nature" exists from the time when there existed "a defect of heirs." At that moment, the land "reverted to the people." Land that has reverted to the people is undeniably public land, "by whomsoever owned," and when such land is a cemetery, it is the duty of the Town to remove the grass and weeds from it and preserve, care for, and fence it.

Four of the remaining cemeteries on the Club's list were declared in an affidavit filed by the Town to have no known owners. A burial ground can be private only if there exists a private owner who controls who may be buried in it and regulates access to it. The Town is unable to show that there are any longer any living persons who hold title to any of the four cemeteries.

Thus, these properties have reverted to the people and have "a pubic nature."

The cemeteries on those properties, being owned by the people, are public cemeteries which the Town must maintain and preserve.

c. A cemetery can acquire "a public nature" by "public user." An opinion of the State Comptroller in 1965 affirms that a cemetery may become public by "public user." That opinion implies that use of a cemetery by the public for a period of fourteen years can cause a cemetery to take on "a public nature." Unless an owner takes some positive action "amounting to an interruption to the "adverse user," the continued enjoyment and use of the cemeteries by the public over an extended period of time can establish "a public easement interest" in them.

The remaining cemetery on the Club's list was shown to be just such a cemetery, and therefore one that the Town was obligated to maintain and preserve. In fact, all ten cemeteries had been shown by the Town's own actions to have been adopted by the Town through its caring for and maintaining them from as early as 1937. The public had continued to use the cemeteries even after the Town ceased caring for them, so the public user easement had not been extinguished. All ten cemeteries were cemeteries of "a public nature" based on this fact alone (regardless of whether or not any heir might someday be found). These cemeteries are cemeteries, by whomsoever owned, for which the Town must remove the grass and weeds and which the Town must preserve, care for, and fence.

[Note: In addition to the three methods given above through which a cemetery may acquire "a public nature," and the single method given by the Town --- through a cemetery association operating under the laws for such associations passed in 1847 and later, there is a fifth way, through a special act of the New York State legislature. This fifth method is represented by an act incorporating the Westfield cemetery in 1843 and by an act reviving the Utica Cemetery Association in 1844.]

Fire Place History Club Responds to Town of Brookhaven on Cemetery Maintenance Suit

January 25, 2010

On January 13, 2010, the Fire Place History Club of Brookhaven hamlet, NY, received a response to their lawsuit against the Town of Brookhaven forcing the Town to maintain the historic cemeteries in Brookhaven and South Haven Hamlets, as required by New York State law. The efforts of the Fire Place History Club are documented elsewhere in this blog, and are further documented at the BrookhavenSouthHaven.org cemetery pages.

Immediately on receiving the Town's response, a subcommittee of the Fire Place History Club was formed to prepare a response. Dr. Richard A. Thomas, a retired physicist, took on the task of researching the specific objections in point of law raised by the Town of Brookhaven. He spent several days on this research and prepared a paper for our attorney, Regina Seltzer. After reviewing his research, she decided that it was appropriate to ask for a summary judgment in favor the Fire Place History "on the grounds that Brookhaven Town violated its lawful Town duties as explicitly set forth in Cemeteries Town Law Section 291 and that respondents have raised no triable issue of fact a summary determination is appropriate based on the pleadings, papers and admissions ...." She further concluded that the Town's answer, denying knowledge or information as to allegations in our original filing and objections in point of law "are shameful, blatantly false fabrications, without any basis in fact, intended to mislead the Court."

The subcommittee—Marty Van Lith, Richard Thomas, and John Deitz then met with Regina Seltzer for over four hours on Sunday afternoon, drafting the reply to the Town's specific contentions. This document was then filed with the Supreme Court of the State of New York at Central Islip on Monday, January 25, 2010.

The argument section of this filing is found in the first link. This version, a pdf file, is identical to the court filing except that a few typographical errors have been corrected. Since it is based on the original word processing document, it is considerable smaller than the scanned versions. The second (11 MB), third (12 MB), and fourth (7 MB) links are scanned pdf versions of the actual documents, including affidavits and exhibits, as filed with the court.

1-Arguments

Actual scanned documents included in the 25 January 2010 filing:
2- Arguments and Affidavits 3- Exhibits 4-Orginal Town Response
If you are having difficulty downloading these documents from this blog, please go to this page

---

At a luncheon meeting of the Fire Place History Club on Tuesday, January 26, 2010, Regina Seltzer discussed the suit with club members. It should be noted, Regina is doing this work pro bono. She is also a former Town of Brookhaven councilwoman.

L-R: Jeb Barry (head split), George Koch, Bob Brown, Betty Bundy, Richard Thomas, John Deitz, Diane Martens, Marty Van Lith, Regina Seltzer, Ron Kinsella, Eban Ludlow, Faith McCutcheon, and Anita Cohen

Town of Brookhaven Responds to Cemetery Maintence Suit

January 13, 2010

In July of 2009, the Fire Place History Club filed a lawsuit with the New York State Supreme Court in an effort to force the Town of Brookhaven to maintain the ancient historic cemeteries in the hamlets of South Haven and Brookhaven, NY. This action followed three years of efforts to get the Town to maintain the cemeteries in accordance with State law, and repeated promises by Town officials that they would do so—but with no substantitive action. The efforts of the Fire Place History Club are documented elsewhere in this blog, and are further documented at the BrookhavenSouthHaven.org cemetery pages.

The Brookhaven Town Attorney, on 13 January filed a response to the July court filing—nearly six months after the original filing with the court—obviously an attempt to delay in the hope of discouraging that the reasonable requests of ordinary citizens.

Their response was essentially that the Town had no obligation maintain the cemeteries, and the that the Fire Place History Club had no standing to sue the Town.

To view the Town of Brookhaven's January 2010 response, click

Cover Letter and Affidavits | Town Arguments | Exhibit D

The Town arguments document included all their Exhibits except Exhibit D. Exhibit D is a copy of an inventory of all cemeteries in New York State prepared by the Association of Municipal Historians of New York State. Ironically, it's preface contains the following:

I suspect that the Association of Municipal Historians would be appalled that their informative inventory would be used by the Town as one of the justifications for not maintaining historic cemeteries.

The Fire Place History Club is proceeding with the suit, and has organized a sub-committee to work with our attorney Regina Seltzer on the document.

Newsday: Fire destroys Brookhaven's historic 'Red Barn'

A story in Newsday was published Wednesday, 20 January 2010, and can be viewed at the link above or as an archived version. There is a good picture, much better than my camera is able to produce.

Burnett Barn Fire Followup

Tuesday Morning, January 19, 2010—I did not stay to the bitter end at the fire scene Monday night, but Tuesday morning pretty well reveal the inevitable.

Photo by Marty Van Lith

I believe that is Jen Puleston Clement examining the scene. In the background is the Hawkins Barn, carefully restored by Tom & Ellen Williams.

Photo by Marty Van Lith

The following is a digitally enhanced picture taken as I approached the scene from across the farm field from the Rowley's backyard. While it doesn't show much detail, and the fire department is already applying large quantities of water, the extent of fire involvement is obvious.

Photo by John Deitz

Finally, a pen and ink sketch of "The Red Barn" by nearby neighbor Ann Wiswall:

One correspondent said the fire brought back memories of the Phillips barn fire of several decades ago (the house at 334 Beaver Dam Road.). Does anyone remember when this fire actually occurred?

Burnett Barn in Brookhaven, NY Destroyed by Fire

The historic Burnett Barn in Brookhaven hamlet was destroyed by fire Monday evening, January 18, 2010.

The barn was originally a part of the Burnett Farm. This barn was constructed about 1900, likely replacing another barn on the farm. It was one of the few remaining barn structures in the Hamlet -- once largely a farm community, and is typical of the small farm barns of the late 19th, early 20th centuries. It had been used for many informal community events, and most recently as the centerpiece of the HOG (Hamlet Organic Garden).

When I first realized that the fire department was responding to my neighborhood, I looked out the windows to see if I could see anything. Flames were leaping into the air some 60-70 feet at what I thought might be the Burnett barn. By the time I got my shoes on, found the camera, and got out the door (maybe 3-4 minutes), the fire department had already knocked the flames down considerably.

But it was clear that the building was totally involved when they arrived.

Even though they quickly brought the fire under control, it regularly flared up again. It was clear that the building was not safe to enter, and there were several rooms and a partially concealed attic space.

I'll get more pictures tomorrow.

STOP LEVY’S “LUNACY VILLAGE” aka “Legacy Village”

From: Yaphank Taxpayers & Civic Association, Inc.
<yaphankcivic@yaphankcivic.org>
Subject: Please sign our on-line petition
STOP LEVY’S “LUNACY VILLAGE”
URGENT ACTION REQUIRED

Please sign our on-line petition to the Suffolk County Legislature. It is critical that the voice of all Suffolk County citizens is heard by our Legislator’s. They must IMMEDIATELY and PERMANENTLY, with urgency, HALT the sale of the currently designated “Legacy Village” taxpayer-owned County property in Yaphank, as surplus.

http://www.petitiononline.com/Lunacy/

Additional information can be found on our web-site at www.yaphankcivic.org

Thank you.

Our mailing address is:
Yaphank Taxpayers & Civic Association Inc.
P.O. Box 41
Yaphank, New York 11980
Add us to your address book
Copyright (C) 2009 Yaphank Taxpayers & Civic Association Inc. All rights reserved.

Hugh H. and Nancy Harrison Deeds (and Phillips dock and Phillips stack yard)

The following communication is from Richard A. Thomas who has been researching the deed history for some of the more prominent properties in Brookhaven and South Haven Hamlets. The following specifically refers to the old Harrison Property on Beaver Dam Road in Brookhaven. This site encompasses Historic sites Br17, "Fireplace Farm" [Elisha King house]; Br30, Wellington Compound "The Meadows;" tho old Philips Dock Road, and other adjacent sites—essentiially all the property from site Br17 to the Great South Bay. This posting will eventually be incorporated into the history section of the main site, BrookhavenSouthHaven.org.

I finally looked at the following deeds which I copied while at Riverhead on January 5.

Liber 554 of Deeds, page 74

Liber 554 of Deeds, page 230

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 232

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 234

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 238

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 241

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 244

The first two deeds convey property to Hugh H. Harrison.

The next five deeds convey property to Nancy Harrison, but in each of these five deeds the same items are conveyed. They differ only in who is conveying those parcels to her. This is probably the result of five different groups of people having a possible claim to the lands described in the deeds, so a deed is obtained from each group to secure clear titles to the parcels.

Liber 554, p. 74.
In this deed, Hugh H. Harrison obtains land along the south side of Beaver Dam Road. The property being acquired had previously been purchased by Elisha E. King (or an ancestor of Mr. King) and mortgaged by him to Francis S. Woodhull. When the Elisha King family fell into default on their mortgage, a complaint was filed and the property was sold at auction.
Hugh H. Harrison purchased the property at auction in Riverhead for $810 on 28 May 1904.
The property is not square according to the description. The southern border is 150-ft wide, and both the western and eastern borders are 150-ft long, but the width of the property along Beaver Dam Road is only 100-ft.
I think this must have been an error, but it is an error that is repeated in all of the confirming deeds.



In the picture, the pink line is about 100-feet long and the yellow lines are 150-feet long (to scale). It's possible, of course, to construct a four-sided lot with 100 feet along one side and 150 feet along the other three sides, but it wouldn't fit the Harrison property very well.
The deed states that the northwest corner of the tract is at the northeast corner of a right-of-way. The right-of-way may be Phillips Dock Road, but this north-south portion of the shell road is never called that in any of these deeds.

Liber 554, p. 74

This Indenture, made this 28^th day of May in the year of our Lord 1904,

Between

Oscar F. Fanning, Referee in the action hereinafter mentioned, of the Village of Riverhead in the County of Suffolk, New York, of the first part,

and

Hugh H. Harrison of the City of New York, in the County of New York, New York, of the second part.

Whereas,

At a Special Term of the County Court of Suffolk County, held at Village of Patchogue, on the 14^th day of April 1904,

it was among other things, ordered, adjudged and decreed by the said Court, in a certain action then pending in the said Court, between Francis S. Woodhull against Elisha E. King, Ezra B. King, and Agnes M. King,

That all and singular the premises described in a mortgage executed by Elisha E. King to Francis S. Woodhull, and recorded in Suffolk County Clerk’s office, in Liber 267 of Mortgages at page 259, and being the same premises mentioned in the complaint in said action, and in said judgment described, or such part thereof as is sufficient to discharge the mortgage debt, the expenses of the sale, and costs, of said action, and which might be sold separately without material injury to the parties interested, be sold at public auction, according to law and practice of said court, by and under the direction of the said Oscar F. Fanning, who was appointed a Referee in said action and to whom it was referred by the said judgment , among other things, to make such sale, that the said sale be made in the County where the said mortgaged premises, or the greater part thereof, are situated,

that said Referee give public notice of the time and place of such sale, according to the course and practice of said Court, and

that any of the parties in said action might become a purchaser or purchasers on such sale,

that the said Referee execute to the purchaser or purchasers of the said mortgaged premises or such part or parts thereof as shall be sold, a good and sufficient deed or deeds of conveyance for the same and pay taxes, assessments, or water rates which were liens upon the property sold etc.

And Whereas,

The said Referee in pursuance of the order and judgment of the said Court, did on the 28^th day of May 1904, sell at public auction at the Bank Building in the village of Riverhead, Suffolk County, New York, the premises in the said order and judgment mentioned, due notice of the time and place of such sale being first given pursuant to said judgment; at which sale the premises hereinafter described, were fairly struck off, to the said party of the second part for the sum of Eight Hundred and Ten Dollars ($810.⁰⁰) the highest bidder therefor.

Now, this Indenture Witnesseth,

That the said Referee, the party of the first part to these presents, in order to carry into effect the sale so made by him as aforesaid, in pursuance of the order and judgments of said Court, and in conformity to the Statute in such case made and provided, and also in consideration of the premises, and of the said sum of money so bidden as aforesaid having been first duly paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hath bargained and sold and by these presents doth grant and convey unto the said party of the second part, all the right, title and interest which the said Elisha E. King mortgagors aforesaid, had at the time of the execution or recording of said mortgage, it being their interest in said premises which was so sold and is hereby conveyed in and to All that Tract or Parcel of Land, situate in the Town of Brookhaven, County of Suffolk, and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Commencing at the northwest corner of said tract at the north end of a certain fence and adjoining the highway known as Fire Place Neck Road and at the northeast corner of a right of way running thence southerly by the fence as it now stands, one hundred and fifty feet, thence easterly one hundred and fifty feet, thence northerly one hundred and fifty feet to the main street or Fire Place Neck Road, thence westerly by and with said street or road one hundred feet to the place of beginning.

To Have and to Hold, All and singular the premises above mentioned and described, and hereby conveyed unto the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns forever.

In Witness Whereof, The said party of the first part, . . .

The next deed is also to Hugh H. Harrison. There is a new person recording the deeds and he misspells "thence" consistently in this deed, but in the following deeds, he alternates between the correct and incorrect spellings.

The property conveyed is 12 acres of meadow that lies along the Great South Bay. To the west of the property is the property of Sylvester Gordon and to the east and north lies other properties of Philetus Phillips and Urania Buckingham, heirs of Nancy Swezey.

Liber 557, p. 230

This Indenture, made this 7^th day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four

Between

Philetus Phillips and Hannah A. Phillips, his wife, of Yaphank, Suff. Co., N.Y. parties of the first part,

and

Hugh H. Harrison, of the City of N. Y. party of the second part.

Witnesseth, that the said parties of the first part, in consideration of One Dollar, ($1.00.), lawful money of the United States, paid by the party of the second part, do hereby grant and release unto the said party of the second part his heirs and assigns forever.,

All that tract or parcel of land, situate in the Village of Brookhaven, County of Suffolk, and State of New York, Bounded and described as follows:–

Commencing at the Northwest corner thereof and adjoining the property of Sylvester Gordon, and running thense southerly by and with the said Sylvester Gordon property to the Great South Bay, from which point extending Easterly by and with the Great South Bay, to the property of Philetus Phillips, Urania Buckingham and the heirs of Nancy Swezey, these Northerly by and with said property of the parties above named, to other property of these said parties, and from thense Westerly by and with the said property of the said parties to the point or place of beginning,

being a certain piece of parcel of meadow by estimation containing twelve acres, be the same more or less and including all rights of way, easements and other appurtenances which said parties of the first part have in and on the land of adjoining property to reach the premises in question.

Together with the appurtenances, and all the estate and rights of the said parties of the first part in and to said premises.

To have and to hold the above granted premises unto the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns forever.

And the said parties of the first part do covenant with the said party of the second part, as follows:–

First – That the parties of the first part are seized of the said premises in fee simple, and have good right to convey the same.

Second – That the party of the second part shall quietly enjoy the said premises.

Third – That the said premises are free from incumbrances.

Fourth – That the parties of the first part will execute or procure any further necessary assurance of the title of said premises.

Fifth – That the said parties of the first part will forever warrant the title to said premises. In Witness whereof the said parties of the first part have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written.

In presence of Philetus Phillips L. S.

Roswell Davis Hannah A. Phillips L. S.

State of New York, County of Suffolk, Town of Brookhaven, s.s. On this Seventh day of July, in the year One thousand nine hundred and four; before me the subscriber, personally appeared the within named Philetus Phillips and Hannah A. Phillips his wife, to me personally known to be the same persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and they duly acknowledged to me that they executed the same. L. S. Roswell Davis, Notary Public, Suffolk County, N. Y.
Recorded 29^th August 1904 @ 8 A. M.
Solomon Ketcham Clerk

The next five deeds all convey identical parcels to Nancy Harrison. The deed conveys

1) a parcel of 14.5 acres. This parcel would appear to contain within it the original parcel along Beaver Dam Road purchased by Mr. Harrison for $810. Instead of starting at the northeast corner of the right-of-way, the description starts 20 feet east along Beaver Dam Road from the northeast corner of Joseph H. Carman's property. This implies that Phillips Dock Road was 20-feet wide. In the deed in book 554 at page 74, the description went around the property counterclockwise. In this larger property, they go around the parcel clockwise, first going east along Beaver Dam Road. The description doesn't tell how far to go in feet, just go until one reaches the land of "Charles Newey and wife." Then go south by the land of Newey, Egbert Swezey, and William H. Corwin, continuing to go south until one reaches Phillips Dock Road. The path doesn't follow the north and east sides of the road to the beginning point though. It appears to go to places west of the road, finally reaching the east fence of Joseph Carman's property, then north along that fence, then crossing the right-of-way by going 20-ft east, then up the east side of the right-of-way

Although the description names Phillips Dock Road for the right-of-way going east and west along part of the southern border of the parcel, it does not call the 20-foot wide piece going north and south at Beaver Dam Road Phillips Dock Road. In fact, it doesn't even call this "20-foot wide" piece a right-of-way.

2) The second parcel is a "share of meadow" that once belonged to Mordecai Homan. (Mordecai's name is spelled oddly here. In this one it is spelled "Mordeci" and in the following confirming deeds it is spelled "Mordecia." This parcel lies to the west of the piece that was purchased by James I. Davis, the building mover of Blue Point. (The parcel that James I. Davis would later own is described here as the meadow land owned by William B. and Charles S. Rose.) This second parcel includes the west bank of the Carmans River where it empties into the Great South Bay. (The western boundary of the William B. and Charles S. Rose parcel starts at Phillips Dock and runs southerly until it hits the west bank of the Carmans River at a point north of where the river empties into the Great South Bay.)

3) The third item conveyed in the deed is "all the right and privileges to the dock conveyed by William Phillips, deceased, to James M. Seaman by deed April 11, 1886."

The deed then mentions that Emma M. Davis is not conveying a piece of property that lies within the boundaries of parcel 1. That is the property that had been owned by Elisha King and which his family lost in the mortgage default. Nancy's husband had already purchased that parcel in May at the auction sale.

Liber 557 of Deeds at page 232

This Indenture, made the 9" day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four

Between

Emma M. Davis of Middle Island, Suffolk County N.Y. party of the first part,

and

Nancy Harrison of New York City, N. Y. party of the second part.

Witnesseth, that the said part- of the first part, in consideration of One Dollar, ($1.00.), lawful money of the United States, paid by the part- of the second part, do hereby remise, release and forever Quit Claim unto the said part- of the second part, — heirs and assigns forever.

All that tract or parcel of land, situate in the Village of Brookhaven, County of Suffolk and state of New York, bounded as follows:

Beginning twenty feet from the Northeast corner of the land of Jos. H. Carman; thence Easterly by the highway that leads to the river at Squawsucks and to the land of Charles Newey & wife, thence Southerly by the several lands of Newey, Egbert Swezey, Wm H. Corwin to the road that leads to Phillips dock; thence Westerly by north side of said road to a row of cherry trees on the east side of Phillips stack yard — thense northerly by line of stack yard to a locust stake, thense westerly to the land or fence of Joseph Carman; thence Northerly by said Carman’s land bought of Wm B. Rose; thense easterly twenty feet; thence Northerly parallel with Jos. H. Carman’s line to the place of beginning.

Containing fourteen and one half acres more or less, subject to all rights of way belonging to other persons.

Also the following described share of meadow land formerly belonging to Mordeci Homan, dec., beginning at the Northwest corner of the Meadow lands of Wm B. and Chas. S. Rose; thense Southerly by the line ditch to the west bank of the Connecticut River; these southerly by the west bank of said river to the Bay; thense by the South Bay to the half share of Wm Phillips, dec., Meadow; _ thense Northerly by said Wm Phillips Meadow) to the south side of the road that leads to Phillips docks; thence easterly by the road to the place of beginning.

Also all the right and privileges to the dock conveyed by Wm Phillips dec. to Jas. M. Seaman by deed April 11, 1886.

Excepting nevertheless the piece of property which is included within said boundaries now or formerly owned by Elisha E. King and which property is described as follows:

All that tract or parcel of land situate in the Town of Brookhaven, County of Suffolk and State of New York bounded and described as follows:–

Commencing at the Northwest corner of said tract at the North leed of a certain fence and adjoining a highway known as Fireplace Neck Road and at the Northeast corner of a right of way running thense southerly by the fence as it now stands One hundred and fifty feet; thence Easterly one hundred and fifty feet, thense Northerly One hundred and fifty feet to the Main Street or Fireplace Neck Road; thense Westerly by and with said Street or road One hundred feet to the place of beginning.

Together with the appurtenances, and all the estate and rights of the said part- of the first part in and to said premises.

To have and to hold the above granted, bargained and described premises unto the said part- of the second part, heirs and assigns forever.
In Witness whereof; the said part- of the first part ha- hereunto set h- hand and seal the day and year first above written.
　
In presence of Emma M. Davis L. S.
Leila M. Danes

State of New York, County of Suffolk, s. s. On the 9" day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four before me, the subscriber, personally appeared Emma M. Danes to me personally known to be the same person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and she acknowledged to me that she executed the same.
Leila M. Danes, Notary Public.

Recorded 29^" August 1904 @ 8 A. M.
Solomon Ketcham Clerk

The "personally appeared Emma M. Danes" is an error made either by the notary or by the copier in recording the deed. The notary public's surname is "Danes," but the surname of the party of the first part is "Davis."

Then follow four deeds that describe the same three items and include the same "excepting out" of the Elisha King property within parcel 1. These are presumably deeds from others that might have some claim to one or more of the items conveyed in the deed above.

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 234

This Indenture, made the 12 th day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four.

Between

Miller P. Davis and Bertha – Davis, his wife, of Glen Cove, Nassau Co., N. Y. and Nellie Woodbury of Patchogue, Suff. Co., N. Y. parties of the first part,

and

Nancy Harrison of Brookhaven, Suff. Co., N. Y. Party of the second part.

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 238

This deed is unusual, since the party of the first part is an infant. The "Emma M. Davis, infant" is assumed to be a different person from the "Emma M. Davis" of the deed on page 232, since the Emma M. Davis of the deed recorded at page 232 signed it.

The meaning of the phrase "the above named infant by Arthur Phillips, her committee, heretofore present to the Supreme Court" is unclear. It probably just means that Arthur Phillips, for the infant's committee, has presented a petition to the court. This is the only deed that gives a price other than $1.00. In this deed Nancy Harrison is to pay $41.66 2/3 (incorrectly written $41.66 2/2 the second time it appears, but a dotted line has been placed under the incorrect digit "2").
I wonder how Nancy Harrison paid the 2/3 of a cent. Nancy Harrison is obviously paying three groups a total of $125. That gives each of the three groups $41.6666666666 . . . In Missouri, we had mills; the red mills were worth 0.1 cent and the green ones 0.5 cents. They were used for paying the fractions-of-a-cent portion of sales tax. But even with mills, it would still not have been possible to pay 2/3rds of a cent.

This Indenture, made the 12 th day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four.

Between

Emma M. Davis, an infant, by Smith W. Conklin, her Special Guardian of the first part,

and

Nancy Harrison of Brookhaven, Suff. Co., N. Y. Party of the second part.

Witnesseth, Whereas the above named infant by Arthur Phillips, her committee, heretofore present to the Supreme Court of Suffolk County a petition praying for the sale of the right, title and interest of the said infant in the premises in said petition mentioned and hereinafter described.
Upon which petition an order of the said court was made at a term thereof held at Judge's Chambers in the Village of Patchogue, County of Suffolk, bearing date the 8th day of July 1904; appointing Smith W. Conklin, above named, the special guardian of such infant for the purposes of the said application and directing that it be referred to Andrew Heyman, Esq., a referee, to ascertain the truth of the facts in such petition alleged and
thereupon; after the said special guardian had given the security by law required, and the same had been duly approved and filed, such proceedings were afterward had, that by an order of the said Supreme Court made at a term thereof held at Judge's Chambers in the County of Suffolk, bearing date the 9th day of July, 1904, it was, among other things, in substance ordered that the above named Smith W. Conklin as special guardian of such infant, be authorized to contract for the sale and conveyance of the right, title and interest of the said infant in such real estate, for a sum not less than that specified in the referee's report in such order mentioned, and that such sale, with the name of the purchaser and the terms thereof, be reported to the said court before the conveyance of such premises should be executed, and
whereas the said special guardian upon terms in the manner authorized by the said last mentioned order contracted for the sale of said premises with Nancy Harrison for the sum of $41.66 2/3 that being the highest sum offered for the same; and
thereupon the said guardian made his report on oath of such agreement to the court, pursuant to the requisitions of the last recited order, upon which an order was made at a term of said court, held at the Judge's Chambers in the Village of Patchogue, County of Suffolk, N. Y. bearing the date the 9th day of July, 1904, confirming such report, approving, and confirming such sale and directing the same to be carried into effect and ordering the said guardian to execute, acknowledge and deliver a deed of said premises to the said party of the second part on his complying with the terms on which, by said agreement, the same was to be delivered, and,
whereas, the said party of the second part has complied with the said terms:
Now, therefore, this indenture witnesseth that the party of the first part, by Smith W. Conklin her special guardian, for and inconsideration of $41.66 2/2 to him in hand paid, before the ensealing and delivery of these presents, has bargained, sold, granted, released, and conveyed, and by these presents does bargain, sell, grant, release and convey unto the said party of the second part his heirs and assigns forever:

All that tract or parcel of land situate in . . .

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 241

This Indenture, made the 21" day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four.

Between

Philetus Phillips and Hannah A. Phillips, his wife, of Yaphank, Suff. Co., N. Y. parties of the first part,

and

Nancy Harrison of the City of New York, N. Y., party of the second part.

Liber 557 of Deeds, page 244

This Indenture, made the 19" day of July in the year One thousand nine hundred and four.

Between

Urania - Buckingham, of Suffolk County, New York, party of the first part,

and

Nancy Harrison of the City of New York, N. Y., party of the second part.

The person who wrote out the deeds used a double quotation mark for the "st", "nd", "rd" and "th" of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, so he didn't have to get the right letters. He sometimes used "part-" to stand for either "party" or "parties." He uses a hyphen when he doesn't know the middle initial of an individual, as is the case for "Bertha Davis" and "Urania Buckingham."

Richard