UpDate - Vol. 12, No. 1, Page 6
September 3, 1992
Historical record; Story of 'stolen house' receives positive reviews
STOLEN: a one-story house in southern Delaware, near the Cypress
Swamp. Built between 1781-1784 by the late Benjamin Christopher,
measuring roughly 16 by 18 feet, with an unfinished loft, a very
good brick chimney and unglazed windows. The exterior was weather
boarded with inch cedar board and roofed with cedar shingles
pinned on with wooden pins. Last seen on the property of John
Jacobs, guardian of the Christopher children.
The house and surrounding land are the focus of The Stolen House,
a book by Bernard Herman, associate professor of urban affairs and
public policy and associate director of the Center for Historic
Architecture.
Published by the University of Virginia Press, the book was
featured in the July 12 issue of The New York Times, in which the
reviewer wrote "Bernard L. Herman, a University of Delaware historian,
has written a curious and mostly quite interesting book...What the
reader does get is a marvelous context...out of the records he pulls
whole masses of astonishing information...you will be richly
rewarded."
Selected as an editors' choice in the July 19 issue of The New
York Times, The Stolen House was described as "an account of an 1812
lawsuit (leading) to a historian's fascinating examination of economic
life when most Americans were poor and the few rich knew no shame."
Making his way through a labyrinth of documents, depositions and
court records, Herman has written about a lawsuit brought by
Christopher's seven surviving children against Jacobs, their guardian,
28 years after their father's death. Jacobs had married their widowed
mother two years after their father died, and she, in turn, died a few
years later.
The book not only provides a history of the house and the people
associated with it but opens up a window on life in southern Delaware
in the late 18th and early 19th century, when the inroads of
civilization were beginning to make their imprint upon the land.
According to Herman, forest and swamp dominated the landscape and
society. Lumbering was important, with large landowners, such as
William Hill Wells at the top of the social ladder, and woodcutters,
shingle makers, charcoal burners and wagoners at the bottom. The
lumber that was harvested and the products from the forest were then
shipped by schooners to cities such as Wilmington and New York.
The Christophers and Jacobs brothers belonged to the middle level
of the forest society as small landowners. In addition, Jacobs and his
brother owned a saw mill.
Today, Herman said, the land is drained and tilled with
agriculture as the main industry so that the landscape itself has
dramatically changed.
That Jacobs moved the house is an established fact. He not only
moved the house, according to the Christopher children, he felled the
best lumber, moved the fences and sold the land to his brother, who
acted as his agent.
The children said he had cheated them of their patrimony. Jacobs'
contention was he was burdened with bringing up eight orphans, that
the land was poor and that he was paying off the family's debts.
The case revolved around the testimony and depositions of
neighbors, and it is their stories and other legal records that give
insight into life in the early 19th century.
For example, when the Christopher children complained about the
removal of fences, this act had far-reaching consequences. Fences were
expensive and valuable and set off private land from public lands.
Furthermore, they protected crops from roaming feral pigs, cattle,
bears, deer and other foraging animals. The pigs, which were the
mainstay of the poor, in particular were a problem, and in one
incident were shot and killed in what Herman refers to as the Milford
massacre.
Using the house as an example, Herman describes other houses of
the time. "At least 85 percent of all housing in the area consisted of
one story frame or log buildings less than 20 by 25 feet in size,"
Herman wrote.
But, he cautioned "despite our tendency to imagine such buildings
as extremely crowded, it is a mistake to consider these small houses
hovels.... Many houses of less than 450 square feet were ornamented
with paneled hearth walls and contained fine pieces of furniture."
What was the outcome of the suit? By the time the orphans pressed
their claims, the land was fallow, the fences and the house gone, the
valuable trees cut, although through the memories of neighbors, the
farm could be reconstructed. Chancellor Nicholas Ridgley found neither
side convincing in their arguments, and he dismissed the suit, but
both sides had to pay court costs.
The stolen house no longer exists except in old documents, but it
has played an important role in recreating the past and giving a view
of life in southern Delaware 200 years ago, according to Herman.
-Sue Swyers Moncure