Ruloff Van Der Kerr – Secret Service Loyalist

Especially in these days when the teaching of History is often neglected, even those who have some understanding of the Revolutionary War may have a simplified view that it was a conflict between the “Americans” (i.e. those living in the British Colonies in what is now part of the United States) and the British. In this simplified view, everyone living here in the Colonies was opposed to what the British were doing (levying taxes, etc.) and we were fighting the British soldiers and trying to kick them out.

I’ve noted in a prior blog (*1), that this was not a simple process and that the war had its beginnings in the mid-1760s and was not finally completed until 26 years later. But it was also complicated by the fact that not everyone in the colonies wanted to cut ties to Britain. As I noted in (*2), when the British invaded New Haven, CT, in July 1779, they decided not to burn the town as there were still many Tories living there and they did not want to destroy the houses of their friends.

This blog is about one of the Tories – my wife’s great*5 grandfather, Ruloff Van Der Kerr, who participated in the war on the side of the British.

The Van Der Kerr Family

I have not managed to find when the first member of this family came to New York (then New Netherlands), but it was some time in the early-mid-1600s (*3). It is not known if any of the family were impacted by the Pequot War in 1636-1638, but certainly that was part of the dynamic of the Dutch colonists as the Pequots had been aligned with them (*4). But when King Philip’s War took place about 40 years later, the Dutch would have been among those who sent Metacomet back to New England when he tried to escape to New York (*5).

The family did not have the Van Der Kerr surname originally, but were using the Dutch patronymic naming convention. But when the Dutch turned over their holdings to the British in 1662, they needed to use the surname convention and began using the Van Der Kerr / Van Der Karre / Van Der Kar name.

By the mid-1700s, the family had grown considerably and were spread all over the upper Hudson River valley – Albany, Greene, Columbia, Ulster, and Dutchess Counties. It’s pretty certain that family members had interaction with the few Indians (Native Americans) who were still in the area. As I had noted in (*6), the Mahican Indians at Shekomeko had been ministered to by some Moravian missionaries from Bethlehem, PA and when they were chased out of their homes in 1746 some of them went to a mission station in Schaghticoke. One of Ruloff’s cousins, Abraham Van Der Kerr, lived there not long after.

Ruloff was born in Loonenburg, now Athens, in Greene County, in 1745. He was the tenth of eleven children in his family. His father, Solomon, was one of thirteen children himself, so Ruloff had a large number of siblings and cousins.

Ruloff Van Der Kerr

Nothing much is known of Ruloff’s (also known as Ralph) early life, but rather than farming (which would have been a very common occupation at the time), he became a tanner and shoemaker. When the Revolutionary War broke out, first in the Boston area, then quickly spreading to other cities along the coast, those living in the upper Hudson Valley would have been insulated initially. But it would not be too long before it spread there as well – and everyone would have had to choose sides.

As best as I have been able to find out, all of Ruloff’s male siblings and cousins chose to be on the side of the Revolutionaries. I have found records of several of them in the muster lists for various units from Albany. But for some reason, which one can only speculate about, Ruloff decided to support the British. And not only did he support them, but he did so as a “secret agent” – working to enlist others in the cause.

Jessup’s Rangers

One of the loyalist groups with which Ruloff was associated was known as Jessup’s Rangers. This group was founded by Edward Jessup (*7, *8). Edward was born in Stamford, CT in 1735. He had moved with his family to Dutchess County, NY in 1744 and in 1759 served with a unit of British soldiers in the French and Indian War. After the war he moved to Albany County where he received a large land grant (500,000 acres) from the British Crown in recognition of his services. He later purchased an additional 1,150,000 acres. Having associated with the British and been awarded because of his service, it is easy to see why he continued to support them when the Revolutionary War began.

Edward and his brother Ebenezer formed their own corps, known as the King’s Loyal Americans. They fought with General Burgoyne at the battle of Saratoga, were taken prisoner, then paroled and went to Canada. There they formed a new regiment known as Jessup’s Rangers (*9) which took part in raids into New York.

Ruloff became associated with the Jessup brothers fairly early on as he was named in some court proceedings as early as June 1777 (*10). In these proceedings, Ruloff (identified therein as Rulph) is noted as being the head of a company of men who were commissioning others into service for the British under Colonel Hueston.

We also know that Ruloff was captured at least once, was jailed, and then likely paroled.

After the War

When the war ended, Ruloff found himself on the losing side. He fled and escaped up the [Hudson] River. He applied to the British government in 1788 for recompense for all that he had lost while in their service. A listing of what he applied for included:

·       Tanner and business tools

·       Wearing apparel

·       Money expended in Albany Gaol [Jail]

·       Money when being wounded and taken prisoner [i.e. medical costs]

·       Money expended in Secret Services

·       64 sides of leather taken when prisoner

·       Bank Account

·       Labor in Grade

The total of all of these was 360 pounds, 16 shillings, 3 pence.

[Expenses]

Meanwhile, Ruloff finally married in 1787, at the age of 42. He and his wife, Sarah Reynolds, who was only 20 at the time, went on to have eight children. It does not appear that he ever returned to NY to visit his American relatives. Only in 1830, following his death, did one of his grandchildren, my wife’s great*3 grandfather, move from Canada to Michigan.

Notes:

*1 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2019/08/war-is-long-process.html

*2 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-battle-of-new-haven.html

*3 - http://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2017/03/genealogy-story-vandecar-family.html

*4 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-pequot-war.html

*5 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2020/01/king-philips-war.html

*6 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2018/07/indians-moravians-and-ancestors.html

*7 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Jessup

*8 - https://loyalist.lib.unb.ca/node/4300

*9 - https://www.anamericanfamilyhistory.com/Dwinnell%20Associates/1781%20Jessup's%20Rangers.html

*10 – Calendar of Historical Manuscripts Relating to the War of the American Revolution in the office of the Secretary of State, Albany, NY, Vol II; printed by Weed, Parsons and Company, 1868

Current Cultural Impact on History

About two months ago I wrote a blog about “Black Lives Matter” (*1). Because it was the title of the blog, I capitalized those three words. But I’ve now come to realize that doing so may have contributed to one of the issues currently facing this country where a whole series of seemingly unrelated things have gotten intertwined and words/phrases have been redefined – somewhat deliberately.

The focus of my blogs is most often historical with genealogy playing a major role in my investigations. It may seem as I try to untangle these intertwined concepts below that I’m being political instead. But I ask that you keep reading, as I will end on a historical topic that is also intertwined here.

“black lives matter” v. “Black Lives Matter”

It wouldn’t seem that the simple difference of capitalization would make that much of a difference. But that’s some of the subtlety that is deliberately confusing. The uncapitalized words describe a concept that I support and which was the focus of my earlier blog. But the latter is the name of an organization. One of the key pages on the website of this organization (*2) is a list of 15 items that the organization is committed to. Each of these paragraphs starts with the word “We”. [Each of the bulleted items below are taken verbatim from this website.]

The first three describe some concepts that I can support and are what I misguidedly thought was the only focus of the organization.

·       We acknowledge, respect, and celebrate differences and commonalities.

·       We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people.

·       We intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.

But, in item six, there is a shift in emphasis. It starts subtly with a statement that seems to mirror the current federal EEO guidelines. But it goes beyond the EEO guidelines to include such topics as “immigration status”, etc.

·       We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location.”

Then in items seven and eight, it is no longer subtle:

·       We make space for transgender brothers and sisters to participate and lead.

·       We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

And by the time we get to items twelve and thirteen we see even further evidence of things that have nothing to do with “black lives”:

·       We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

·       We foster a queer-affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

Did you know that these ideals(?) were part of the whole BLM movement? I certainly didn’t. But it’s out there in their “what we believe” statement for all to see. Are you willing to get behind a movement that is fighting for such non-Black issues as “immigration status,” “dismantling cisgender privilege,” “disrupting [the] nuclear family,” and “queer-affirming?” When you see the protests taking place in some of our cities did you know that this is what they are fighting for?

Hijacked by Antifa?

When some of the initial protests started in Ferguson, MO, a few years ago, the crowds of protestors were primarily the local people in that city. But have you noticed that the composition of the crowds in the current protests? Look at the two pictures below – one from this summer and one from Ferguson.

[Protest picture]

[Ferguson picture]

In Ferguson, the protestors were nearly all local black residents. But the current protests are dominated by young, white individuals.

While there have been some reports that “Antifa” was responsible, there are two problems with this characterization. First, the term “antifa” generally applies to groups/individuals who are rarely militant or violent and most of them engage in commonly accepted forms of political activism. (*3) The other is that this “movement” is mostly unorganized and has no central leadership. Thus, when looking at those who arrested, trying to find a connection to antifa has had little actual results (*4, *5). In the protests in Portland, only one individual was arrested that had any purported connection to a national organization (*6). There has also been a claim circulating that these protestors are primarily teachers, but this has also been thoroughly debunked (*7).

But it is true that the protestors are mostly white, mostly young – various analyses indicating 26-28 years old on average (*6, *8) – and many appearing to be college students. Thus, nearly all the individuals are either part of the generation termed “Millennials” with the younger ones being part of “Generation Z”.

So, if it’s not antifa behind the protests, and they are not local black individuals, what things do these protestors have in common? I’ve not seen a definitive analysis, but it appears to me that there are several factors in play here. The individuals who are involved in these riots are far-left politically, and supportive of socialism or even communism. It’s been well-documented that the individuals in this demographic are more socialist than those in older generations (*9). One of their “heroes” is Bernie Sanders who made the news this past week when he proposed a 60% wealth tax on billionaires (*10). They are also the ones who have incurred large amounts of debt paying for college and want the government to pay off their debt.

I’m not going to try to do any deeper analysis, but it appears to me that this generation has forgotten, or chooses to ignore, the lessons of history – or perhaps they were never taught these lessons in the first place. And that brings me to my next point.

Slippery Slopes and the Cancel Culture

It was not that long ago that marriage was defined as the union of a man and a woman. In that religious definition, the ultimate end of a marriage was the birthing of children. But then those who were homosexual asked that they be able to share in the same benefits as those who were in heterosexual marriages. Initially, the “ask” was fairly low-key and only for the ability to have same-sex unions. Some on the religious right noted that this was a “slippery slope” which would lead to other requests, but regardless of their objections, same-sex partnerships were approved in many states.

However, the slippery slope proponents were right and soon the request was for not just same-sex partnerships, but “marriages”. Just one small step, just one small word! In the years since, just as predicted, we have been asked to move from just being “tolerant” to “accepting” (i.e. to approve of these same-sex relationships), and then to being required to “celebrate” (*11). Now there have been court cases where individuals with sincerely held religious beliefs are being sued and “forced” to participate in same-sex marriage celebrations (*12). It’s interesting, however, that such suits are entirely against Christians. No one has ever asked a bakery owned by someone who is Muslim to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. There seems to be specific targeting against conservative Christians.

Last year the Geneva Centre for Human Rights Advancement called for “celebration of cultural diversity,” in which the word “tolerance” is defined to include “acceptance” (*13). Yet another step on that “slippery slope.”

Now, somewhat suddenly, in 2020, we have moved even beyond the model of tolerance/acceptance/celebration to the new concept of being a “cancel culture” (*14). In this model, anyone who disagrees with or has ever held an opinion that is even mildly divergent from the “woke” politically correct individuals on the far left is attacked, shouted down, or otherwise marginalized. So, if you say something (or even said something in the past) that the woke mob doesn’t agree with, you will be “eliminated.”

Impact on History

As promised near the beginning of this blog, now we come to the area of my interest in history. So, what is the impact of BLM, Cancel Culture, etc. on history? Things are happening very quickly, but at least the following three things are going on all at once.

First, educators are being asked to remove the teaching of traditional history from our education system. As an example noted in (*15), the Illinois State Board of Education and local school districts are being urged to remove current history books and curriculum practices. George Santayana (*16), is famously quoted as “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This is often paraphrased as “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” By removing history from our educational system, the lessons of it will not be learned.

Second, since removing the teaching of history from our educational system will not have sufficient impact upon those from prior generations, the cancel culture is using force and violence to remove traces of it from the public square. They started with statues of Confederate generals and very quickly moved on to any monuments of Columbus, Washington, Jefferson, and nearly anyone of significance in US history. The “slippery slope” argument was even referred to by President Trump (*17), where it asks “Should Americans therefore disavow these founding fathers as scoundrels and national embarrassments, or accept them as men of their time, demigods with feet of clay, who bore their imperfections even as they sought to steer their country beyond them?” But rather than debate this in the public forum, the cancel culture is just acting violently and not allowing any debate.

Finally, having removed the teaching of history and any symbols that remind us of the past, there is a concerted effort to replace that which was removed with a new, revisionist view of that history. As noted in (*18), “[a] concerted effort to revise history to fit the modern social justice narrative and insert works of fiction in our education system – from kindergarten through higher education – is well underway.” This article is about the “1619 Project” where it is proposed that “6-year-olds will be learning a reframed version of America’s founding, shaped to fit today’s standards and train the next generation of social justice warriors.” I’ll refrain from further quotes and just ask that you read about it.

Three easy(?) steps – stop teaching the old, remove residual traces of it, and teach everyone a new “woke” version. And anyone who objects is shouted down and marginalized. How long will it be before we start “burning books” as well in order to remove further residual traces of our history?

I’m concerned. I continue to learn from history. And I continue to interpret current events in light of history which helps me to understand these events. If we banish it from our collective consciousness, then what will be the consequences?

Notes:

*1 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2020/06/black-lives-matter.html

*2 - https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

*3 - https://theconversation.com/what-or-who-is-antifa-140147

*4 - https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/06/11/what-is-antifa-trump-protests

*5 - https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/07/ap-analysis-of-200-portland-arrests-debunks-myth-of-anarchists-most-charged-with-nonviolent-offenses.html

*6 - https://www.krem.com/article/news/investigations/whos-being-arrested-at-portland-protests/283-2f4d1db1-6cc3-4e57-8bd9-75b5534c058e

*7 - https://www.factcheck.org/2020/08/false-claims-follow-old-portland-mugshots/

*8 - https://www.opb.org/article/2020/07/30/portland-oregon-protests-arrests-records-data/

*9 - https://news.gallup.com/poll/268766/socialism-popular-capitalism-among-young-adults.aspx

*10 - https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/06/sanders-billionaire-tax-bill-would-cost-bezos-musk-zuckerberg.html

*11 - https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1056916.pdf

*12 - https://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/commentary/when-tolerance-turns-coerced-celebration

*13 - http://www.ipsnews.net/2019/05/need-move-beyond-mere-tolerance-towards-empathy-truly-celebrate-cultural-diversity-says-executive-director-geneva-centre/

*14 - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/cabot-phillips-cancel-culture-distorts-history-to-portray-us-as-evil-nation-that-must-be-transformed

*15 - https://illinoisfamily.org/education/leftist-lawmakers-and-activists-call-for-the-cancellation-of-all-history-classes/?fbclid=IwAR0F_wNzylEgKfzpSdHEH5aMbdjG5kK9UYNhWklaGUUtzgIzQlF-JPzxjMk#.XylNKZSnFQU.facebook

*16 - https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Santayana

*17 - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40978515

*18 - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/cabot-phillips-cancel-culture-distorts-history-to-portray-us-as-evil-nation-that-must-be-transformed

Slave Owners in my Family Tree – Part 2

Recently I published a list of my Connecticut ancestors who owned slaves (*1). The source data for this information was the 1790 census. However, someone then posted a link to some information on this subject that is maintained by the Mattatuck Museum in Waterbury (*2). This list contains a all the individuals who owned slaves in Waterbury in roughly the period from 1700 to 1800. There are bios for all those who lived in Waterbury. I am related to all 16 of these individuals. Those which are direct ancestors of mine are bolded in the lists below, the other are mainly uncles or relatively close cousins.

·       Dr. Isaac Baldwin – (son-in-law of Rev. Mark and Sarah Leavenworth)

·       Deacon Stephen Bronson – first cousin, 7 times removed, grandson of Rev. John Southmayd, in addition, his wife was the daughter of Caleb Humaston

·       Deacon Thomas Clark – first cousin, 10 times removed, through his mother, Hannah Strong

·       Thomas Clark, Jr. – (son of Deacon Thomas Clark)

·       Timothy Clark – (son of Deacon Thomas Clark)

·       Dr. Edward Field – (son-in-law of Dr. Isaac Baldwin, grandson of Rev. Mark and Sarah Leavenworth)

·       Joseph Hopkins, Esq. – (son-in-law of Deacon Thomas Clark)

·       Caleb Humaston – great*7 uncle, his wife was the daughter of Rev. Samuel Todd

·       Rev. Mark and Sarah Leavenworth – Sarah is second cousin, 6 times removed

·       Isaac Newton – third cousin, 4 times removed through Thomas Hooker

·       Miles Newton – fourth cousin, 5 times removed through Thomas Hooker

·       John Nichols – (father-in-law of Rev. James Scoville)

·       Harmon Payne – first cousin, 7 times removed

·       Dr. Preserved and Lydia Porter – Lydia is first cousin, 6 times removed

·       Rev. James Scoville – great*6 uncle

·       Rev. John Southmayd – great*7 grandfather

This website also lists a number of individuals who lives in Westbury (now Watertown) which was part of Waterbury back in the 1700s. However, there is no biographical information for most of these, just a name with no dates, etc. However, I was able to confirm the relationship of all those with bios and a few others, so there are 15 more individuals who are part of my ancestral tree.

·       Ashur Blakely – first cousin, 7 times removed

·       Young Love Cutler

·       James Doolittle

·       Abijah Garnsey – husband of third cousin, 7 times removed

·       Deacon Jonathan Garnsey – (brother of Abijah Garnsey)

·       Captain Samuel Hickcox – first cousin, 8 times removed

·       Deacon Samuel Hickcox – (son of Captain Samuel Hickox)

·       Captain William Hickcox – (son of Captain Samuel Hickox)

·       Titus Hotchkiss – great*7 uncle

·       Elnathan Judd – fifth cousin, 6 times removed

·       Stephen Judd – fifth cousin, 6 times removed

·       Joshua Morse

·       Solomon Morse

·       Joshua Moss

·       Susanna Nettleton – first cousin, 7 times removed

·       Capt. George Nichols – (father of John Nichols)

·       Jonathan Prindle – great*6 grandfather

·       Theophilus Ransom

·       Benjamin Richards, Jr. – first cousin, 7 times removed

·       Lieut. Thomas Richards – great*7 uncle

·       David Jonathan Scott

·       Capt. E Scovill

·       David Skilton

·       Oliver Soughton

·       Lieut. Stow

·       Josiah Stow

·       Richard Treat

·       Rev. John Trumbull – great-nephew of great*9 uncle

·       Elijah Woodard

·       Israel Woodruff

·       Joseph Allen Wright

Notes:

*1 - https://ramblinrussells.blogspot.com/2020/07/slave-owners-in-my-family-tree.html

*2 - http://fortunestory.org/waterburysslaveowners/