By: Sarah Lindecke
Popular lore, as told by writers like Mary Gay Humphreys in her book Catherine
Schuyler, asserts that Margaret “Peggy” Schuyler (1758-1801), [1] the third child of Philip and Catharine Schuyler,
eloped. While four children in the family certainly did elope, Peggy was not
one of them. This is not to presume that Peggy’s marriage was banal or
unimportant. Her groom, Stephen van Rensselaer III (1764-1839), was the
19-year-old patroon of Rensselaerwyck. There are no known primary sources that
establish the circumstances of their marriage, a confounding problem for
historical researchers. Three questions spring to mind when considering how one
of the wealthiest men of the era’s marriage went unrecorded: What is the origin of the elopement story? Who
was her bridegroom? What kind of wedding did she have?Margaret Schuyler, Unknown Artist
Before Peggy likely even considered marriage, her brother-in-law,
Alexander Hamilton, wrote to her discussing the merits and conditions in which
marriage should be undertaken. Shortly after he’d married her sister, Eliza. He
wrote:
“But I pray you do not let her advice have so much influence as to make
you matrimony-mad. ’Tis a very good thing when their stars unite two people who
are fit for each other, who have souls capable of relishing the sweets of
friendship, and sensibilities. The conclusion of the sentence I trust to your
fancy. But its a dog of life when two dissonant tempers meet, and ’tis ten
to one but this is the case. When therefore I join her in advising you to
marry, I add be cautious in the choice. Get a man of sense, not ugly enough to
be pointed at—with some good-nature—a few grains of feeling—a little taste—a
little imagination—and above all a good deal of decision to keep you in order;
for that I foresee will be no easy task. If you can find one with all these qualities,
willing to marry you, marry him as soon as you please.” -Alexander Hamilton to
Peggy Schuyler, January 21st, 1781, Founders Online
Hamilton requested his sister-in-law consider her marriage
and not make any haste. He expressed his happiness with his choice of wife and hoped that Peggy would also be able to find a
suitable companion with whom she shared a similar temperament and
sensibilities. Peggy seemingly took her brother-in-law’s advice, because she waited
several years more before she married. Her husband, Stephen van Rensselaer III
(1764-1839), had inherited the lucrative Patroonship the Van Rensselaer family
had established in the 1630s. Stephen was six years younger than Peggy and a third
cousin. Their match, though no sources currently known romantically link
Margaret and Stephen prior to their marriage, had the potential to reinvigorate
family ties between Van Rensselaer’s and Schuyler’s. In early aristocratic New
York, these ties were important to keep wealth and land tightly controlled and
later protect from the dangers of “new money” merchants and politicians that
began to take political and social power from the 18th century elite
landholders.
The Van Rensselaer Patroonship was the most successful of the hereditary
land patents created by the Dutch West India Company and later granted by the
English Crown. While vastly prosperous throughout the 17th century, by
the last quarter of the 18th century the viability of this land
system was on the decline as wealth became more linked to banking and merchant
business. Politically and economically advantageous
marriages were important to protecting this system’s prominence. Near the end
of its lifetime in 1846, the Van Rensselaer Patroonship still held
approximately 1,000,000 acres of lands with 3,000+ tenants in both Albany and
Rensselaer counties.[1]
By modern standards, Stephen van Rensselaer III is considered one of the top
ten wealthiest Americans to have ever lived.[2] Stephen
van Rensselaer III was the second-to-last Patroon of Rensselaerswyck and he had
already partially inherited his birthright prior to his marriage father’s will,
Stephen could not take full control of the van Rensselaer Patroonship until he
reached the age of 21. At their marriage in 1783, Stephen was 19 years old,
compared to Peggy’s 24 years. Freshly graduated from Harvard, it would be two
years before he reached his majority.[3] Though he
may have shared in the work of the Patroonship he remained under the
guardianship of his uncle, Abraham Ten Broeck, and was mentored by Philip
Livingston. Furthermore, in the 18th century, it was typical for a
man to wait until his mid-twenties when he had a career before marrying.
A friend of Stephen’s—likely from
Harvard—Harrison Gray Otis (1765-1848) wrote:
“Stephen’s precipitate marriage has been to me a
source of surprise and indeed of regret. He certainly is too young to enter
into a connection of this kind; the period of his life is an important crisis;
it is the time to acquire Fame, or at least to prepare for its acquisition. It
is the time to engage in a busy life, to arouse the Facultys into action, to
awake from a lethargic Inattention, which is generally the consequence of
youthful pleasures, and make a figure upon the active Theatre. Instead of
this our friend has indulged the momentary impulse of youthful Passions, and
has yielded to the dictates of Remorseful Fancy.”
A map of the Manor Renselaerwick:
surveyed and laid down by a scale of 100 chains to an inch
by Jno. R. Bleeker, surveyor, 1767.
New York Public Library.
This quote is repeated in many
secondary sources, but it is unclear where the primary source is located, or if
the quoted section is taken out of context. Many historians have taken Otis’
thoughts as fact and presented their presumptions about the subtext of this
quote as fact. The actions of these writers are likely the cause of the
elopement rumor. Otis certainly questioned Stephen’s choice to marry but did
not recount other circumstances of the wedding. His concern was that Stephen
had made a choice to indulge in passion when they were meant to “engage in a
busy life”—namely politics or business—before marrying. Otis thought Stephen’s
choice to marry broke with the expectations for a man of the 18th
century. Stephen’s background removed many 18th century
prerequisites for marriage because upon reaching age 21, he would inherit [2] one of the largest fortunes in United States
history. Stephen did not need to establish himself in a career before marrying
because he already had extraordinary wealth, status, and name. A possible objection
to the match could have been Stephen’s age but there remains little primary source evidence that the
marriage blindsided or frustrated the Schuylers.
Later writers, like the distant
relative Maunsell van Rensselaer (1819-1900) and Catharine van Rensselaer
Schuyler biographer, Mary Gay Humphreys (1843-1915) spun the story even further.
In his book, Maunsell van Rensselaer writes about Killian van Rensselaer, a
relation working for Philip Schuyler at the time of the marriage. He suggested
that Killian van Rensselaer unwittingly became involved in the elopement plot and
assisted the couple. Without citation, Maunsell van Rensselaer suggested:
“[Stephen] was in love with Margaret Schuyler, daughter of the General, and
although only nineteen was anxious to be married. To this the father objected,
and the young couple settled the matter by getting married without delay.”[4]
He then repeats Harrison Gray Otis’s remark about the marriage. Mary Gay
Humphreys repeats the story of Killian van Rensselaer’s involvement as well as
Harrison Gray Otis’s sentiments in her own writing. Neither author cites
primary source documents to certify their stories.
More recent books include further
unsubstantiated claims. William Kennedy, in his 1983 book, O, Albany! wrote
“Angelica and Margarita, eloped out windows with their suitors.”[5]
More accurately, their younger sister, Cornelia, was reported to have done this
upon her elopement in 1797, as expressed in a letter written by her husband
shortly after the event. On the following page, Kennedy states, “Hamilton had
dalliances with both Angelica and Margarita during his marriage…” Both of these
references are without citation or validation, and it seems that Kennedy’s
story was picked up by subsequent authors. In his A Place in History: Albany
in the Age of Revolution, 1775-1825 (2010), Warren Roberts wrote:
“Margarita climbed out her second-floor room in her father’s mansion to elope
with her 19-year-old husband.” This also lacks citation.
What do we know, then, about this
marriage? Peggy and Stephen were married on June 6th, 1783. The
New York Gazetteer or, The Northern Intelligencer, a weekly Albany
newspaper, announced in their June 9th edition that the pair had
married.[6]
The Albany Dutch Reformed Church, of which Stephen’s step-father was domine, or
reverend, did not record their marriage, but did report the baptisms of two of
their children: Catharine (August 9th, 1784) and Stephen IV (March
29th, 1789).
Philip Schuyler’s
[3] [4] letters to Stephen in the following months are
short but express joy and family blessings. On July 7th, 1783,
Schuyler expresses concerns about Stephen’s health. He wrote “I hope you have
not had a return of [illegible] fever and that you are gaining strength.” and
subsequently asked that he “make my love to Betsy Peggy and the children.”[7]
Schuyler’s next letter, several days later on July 13th, 1783,
informed Stephen on political matters in Philadelphia with the profession that
he was “so incessantly engaged that I fear I shall not have the pleasure of
seeing you until about the 23rd.”[8]
On July 17th, 1783, Schuyler requested that Stephen not neglect an
opportunity to dine together.[9]
If the Schuylers harbored hurt feelings about their daughter’s untimely
marriage, it is unlikely that just a month later the letters between a
disappointed father to his new son-in-law would be so affable. Philip Schuyler by John Trumbull. 1
792. Yale University Art Gallery
In the case of elopements of his other children, such affability is not
present in Philip Schuyler’s letters. After eldest daughter Angelica’s
elopement, Schuyler expressed his displeasure with the circumstances to friend
William Duer. He complained, “Carter & my oldest daughter ran off and
married on the 23rd inst., unacquainted with his family, his
connections and situation in life, the match was exceedingly disagreeable to me
and I had signified it to him.”[10]
This letter shows that prior to Angelica’s elopement, Schuyler made clear his
displeasure with the coupling, and his ire remained for some time after their
marriage. Later, the elopement of his daughter Cornelia was similarly followed
by Schuyler’s clear expression of frustration. A month after Cornelia’s
elopement in 1797, he wrote: “I have…written a letter to my unhappy Cornelia…I
hope it will restore peace to her mind, if she can possibly enjoy it, with a
man of such an untoward disposition as her husband. I apprehend very much that
he will render her miserable…”[11]
Schuyler didn’t want Cornelia to feel as though her family harbored any grief
towards her, in respect to her elopement, and so Philip Schuyler wrote
specifically to her to “restore her peace of mind.” However, he asserts, just a
line later that feelings about his daughter’s new husband, George Washington
Morton, hadn’t and were not likely to improve.
Schuyler had concerns about Angelica and Cornelia’s husbands stemming
from the reputations of these men. John Barker Church, alias John Carter, and
George Washington Morton came from outside of Albany’s insular set of high
society and were not upstanding men in several respects. Stephen, by
comparison, was family and incredibly wealthy. Any negative feelings
surrounding Stephen and Peggy’s marriage do not survive in known
correspondence, so it is impossible to determine if there were blatant or
concealed objections to their marriage. From extant letters dated July 7th
and 13th of 1783, there are no discernable negative feelings
directed towards the newlyweds.
Reconstructed Van Rensselaer Hall
in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City.
Though the details of the wedding remain unknown, it is possible that
Peggy and Stephen were married in a family home. Peggy’s older sister, Eliza married Alexnader
Hamilton in the Blue Parlor in December 1780. As the future Patroon, Stephen
and his bride would have also had access to the lavish Van Rensselaer Manor [6] north of Albany. However, the location of their
wedding is unknown. It is possible that Eilardus Westerlo, Stephen’s stepfather
and the domine of the Dutch Reformed Church, presided over their wedding.
Though not a lot is known about the actual circumstances of Peggy and
Stephen’s wedding, it is unlikely their story was a dramatic elopement like
those of some of Margaret’s other siblings. Her marriage may have been
unexpected, but it was a union that recommitted family connections between
those in the highest echelons of Albany society.
[4]https://books.google.com/books?id=MZ1YAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=Stephen%27s+precipitate+marriage+has+been+to+me+a+source+of+surprise+and+indeed+of+regret.&source=bl&ots=UDsLJESJBA&sig=H02Yj4JooyMBJXpTmUnpB5Nt0tQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkorLoipjRAhXJq1QKHWEhASoQ6AEIHzAB#v=onepage&q&f=false page 54
[5] O! Albany by William Kennedy
pg 84
[6] To read the newspaper—the NYSL
has microfilms of editions of the newspaper OCLC 09672915
[7] July 7th, 1783, Philip
Schuyler to Stephen van Rensselaer III—likely NYPL
[8] July 13th, 1783,
Philip Schuyler to Stephen van Rensselaer III—possibly in the Campus Marius
Museum’s Slack Collection
[9] July 17th,
1783, Philip Schuyler to Stephen van Rensselaer III, Albany Institute of
History and Art, Van Rensselaer Family Papers.
[10] Philip Schuyler to
William Duer, July 3-5. 1777, New York Public Library, Philip Schuyler Papers.
[11] Philip Schuyler to Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, November 26th, 1797, Library of Congress, Alexander Hamilton Papers.
No comments:
Post a Comment