Irish took up their abodes on the outskirts of civilization. This was not because the Quakers sent them there, as has been asserted, to protect their own settlements from the Indians, or because the Scotch-Irish did not wish to live near the Quakers, who were continually finding fault with them, but for the same reason that now takes the emigrants to the West,-i.e., because there good land is cheap, and large families can be supported at a small expense. They took with them their religion and their schools, and those in Pennsylvania extended their settlements across the mountains and down the valley into Maryland and Virginia. There they met with their brethren from Virginia and Carolina, and penetrated into the country now included in the States of Kentucky and Tennessee. Excepting in a general way the records of this emigration are difficult to trace, and are only found by examining old deeds, wills, and in family tradition. It must also be remembered that in no way, in the same sense of the word, did the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians settle a colony as the Puritans settled Massachusetts, the Quakers Pennsylvania, the Catholics Maryland, or the Episcopalians Virginia. They belonged to a later wave of emigration than any of the above, and when they arrived on this side of the Atlantic, governments were firmly established. The consequence is that there are no early governmental records that can be quoted as giving expression to their views. Besides this, the worldly condition of many of the emigrants was not such as would permit them to take an active part in political affairs, as the elective franchise was then limited by a property qualification, and some of those who might have claimed the right to vote were too deeply engaged in providing for their families to take an active part in politics. It was not, therefore, until they gained a foothold, and by their thrift, energy, and enterprise made their settlements important, that they exercised any influence in colonial affairs. When this point was gained they brought into public life an element directly antagonistic to the established order of things, and no one can deny that they were instrumental in bringing about the War for Independence, which they loyally supported. What the result of their influence would have been in Kentucky and Tennessee, where they were pioneer settlers, had it not been for the Revolution, we can only surmise. After that, civil and religious liberty were such cardinal principles of government, that it is not safe to attribute them to any one class. The material for the history of the Scotch-Irish in this country we fear has been largely destroyed. Some portion of it may yet exist in private letters, in church records, and in the diaries that some of their ministers wrote while travelling from one settlement to another. Much can also be accomplished by preparing memoirs, as full of original material as possible, of early settlers in various parts of the country, and this, we trust, will be one of the chief efforts of the ScotchIrish Society. EARLY GROUND-RENTS: CHESTNUT STREET, SOUTH SIDE, BETWEEN FRONT AND SECOND STREETS. Since the discovery of the original charter to the city of Philadelphia, much interest has been shown in Humphrey Murrey, named therein as first mayor. That he was a man of considerable education, and either of much wealth or great political influence, is evident from the selection of him as chief magistrate, and from the extensive grants of land which he obtained throughout Philadelphia. One of these grants was a narrow but valuable strip of property extending along the south side of Chestnut Street from Front to Second. In 1703-4 Murrey disposed of this tract in lots on ground-rents. The following, rearranged from an old chart endorsed " Amount of Groundrents on Chesnut St. Real estate of I. P,"-probably Israel Pemberton,-shows the original grantees, and some of the purchasers of the lots, and owners of the ground-rents at various periods. As a complete explanation of this ageworn document, which appears to have been written prior to the Revolution, would require an extended brief of title to each lot, it is simply inserted as it is, with a few such changes as are necessary to include it within our pages. 1 "There appears to be some mistake about this, as there is 30 ft. of Ground granted on Chesnut St. more than Murry's Lot contains, and by another Draught it apps. there is but 117 ft. west of Isaac Marriott's Lot,-the mistake apps. to be in Patk Ogilby's Lot." Swen Warner 1753 £2.2. Sold him Richard Murrey to Swen War 1754. William Moode 1753 £2.2. 1"1715. H. M. agreed with Frans Knowles to take £3.7.6 in lieu of the ab. £4.10. J. Knowles sold F. K. this lot-F. K. sold John Mifflin, J. M. sold Jos. Richards, J. R. sold W. Carter pt. of it 23 ft. front the assignee paying £2.11.9 -the remaining 7 ft was sold by F. K. to I. Marriott, whose relict Jane held it during her life with other ground." 2 "There does not appear to be any Ground where this lot is laid down." 3"The deed Murry to Marriott was formerly in the hands of Henry Vanaken. Isaac Marriott devised this lot to his wife Jane who died intestate without Issue, and without heirs then found." |