Washington's Headquarters in Newburgh: Home to a Revolution

By A J Schneckman

We know that Widow Hasbrouck opened her home to Washington in 1782, but the Hasbrouck family history itself has been distorted over the years by myths and legends. Much like the story of Washington chopping down the cherry tree, legend has it that the Hasbroucks and Washington would take a daily sojourn to the family orchards, where Jonathan Hasbrouck would first taste the general's fruit to ensure it was not poisoned. The truth is that Jonathan and Washington never met. In this revealing book, A.J. Schenkman finally dispels the rumors and relates the history of a prominent Newburgh family whose homestead ultimately became the nation's first publicly owned historic site in 1850.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Open Road Integrated Media
• Release date: Oct 1, 2009
• ISBN: 9781614236962

Book preview

INTRODUCTION

I gaze, but they have vanished; and the eye,

Free now to roam from where

I take my stand,

Dwells on the hoary pile;

Let no rash hand

Attempt its desecration—¹

—Henry Pickering, Washington’s Headquarters Newburgh

My curiosity about this period in American history started while I was a site interpreter at Washington’s Headquarters State Historic Site in Newburgh, New York. I remember one particularly grueling tour of the home. I had been up late the previous night working on a research paper for a college class and just wanted to get home to sleep. Once my group was in order, I escorted it out of the museum building toward the gray fieldstone house known as Washington’s Headquarters, Newburgh. I spoke for a few minutes about the role of the Hudson River during the American War for Independence and then discussed the house, which was altered for General Washington’s stay there. Once I assured myself that no one had questions, we moved toward the east elevation of the home facing the Hudson River. I took special care to point out the initials chiseled above the door, HB AD 1750, before unlocking it.

Unbeknownst to me or anyone else on my tour, a Hasbrouck descendant was among us. I recall that when I pointed out the initials, no one engaged me except for this woman, who revealed that she was a Hasbrouck descendant. Once inside the house, she asked me many questions about the Hasbrouck family and, at one point, commandeered the tour to discuss their lives at the home. I found this to be quite distressing, yet interesting at the same time.

As the tour concluded at the western elevation of the home, I walked over to formally introduce myself to Ms. Hasbrouck, who did not feel compelled to give her first name. On that day, Ms. Hasbrouck gave me an in-depth history lesson about Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck, his wife, Tryntje, and their family. Up until this point, Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck was only known for having built the house that his wife would vacate so that Washington could stay there. I found myself intrigued by this man and his descendants and the fact that he had become a stranger in his own home.

I do not remember when exactly my class schedule at college began to interfere with my work schedule, but in an effort to accommodate me, my site manager scheduled me to work at nights. After class, I drove down to Newburgh, cleaned the headquarters and, if time allowed, did research in the museum building’s library. Instead of researching General Washington, I found myself looking up information about Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck and his family. I did not limit my research to just Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck; I branched out my studies to include his son and other descendants who occupied the home before it became a state historic site. I came across some very old books that mentioned the Hasbroucks, but none was strictly about Jonathan. I surmised that there was not enough information in circulation about him.

It occurred to me as a site interpreter working at Washington’s Headquarters many years ago that other than being mentioned in a few booklets, Colonel Hasbrouck had become, in my opinion, little more than a footnote in the history of his home, Ulster County and New York. This footnote often connected him to an event that happened years after his death. Early on in my research, I quickly realized that during his lifetime, this individual was anything but a footnote; he was a distinguished militia officer and a prosperous merchant, as well as an emerging politician, during the early years of the War for American Independence.

In addition to being a wealthy merchant in one of the most important shipping points in New York, Jonathan Hasbrouck also hailed from a prominent family. One family member, Colonel Abraham Hasbrouck of Kingston, was one of the richest and most influential men in Ulster County. Abraham’s youngest brother, Jonathan, associated with other prominent men from Ulster County, such as William Smith, George Clinton and the Colden family. It is the diary that Abraham kept throughout his long life that gives the researcher today a rich source of information about not only Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck, but also the Hasbrouck family as a whole.

During my research on Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck, I came up with three primary reasons that were instrumental in banishing Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck to relative historical obscurity. The first reason is quite basic—Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck simply did not live long enough to partake in what is viewed as the single most defining event in the house’s history, General Washington’s residence at his home. This also explains why his wife’s accomplishments outlived those of Jonathan. Tryntje Hasbrouck outlived her husband by some twenty years, and it was Tryntje who opened the door for General George Washington.

A second reason for the historical obscurity of Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck is related to documentation. Very few family papers relating to Jonathan survive today. Those that have survived are mostly letters and accounts written about him or to him, but not by him. A monumental event occurring without his presence, and a lack of easily accessible available sources from which to construct his story, also explain the overabundance of myths and legends that, in many cases, distort Jonathan’s life. These stories are worth examining because they were passed down to generations of Hasbroucks and clearly show the stature that surrounded this man during his lifetime. The Hasbroucks maintain a connection to their house in Newburgh by using Washington as a conduit, hence keeping him a part of the history of the home.

I have chosen two of the many stories I have read and that have been told to me over the years to include here. The majority of these stories involve some sort of connection between the Washingtons and the Hasbrouck family. The following stories are perhaps the most well known and entertaining of them all.

One of the first stories told to me when I started my research involved Washington’s stay at the Hasbrouck home. Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck and General Washington shared many commonalities. They both not only loved fine horses and rides in the countryside, but they also had a distinct love for a fine peach. Historically, Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck’s land contained large orchards in which Jonathan grew apples and peaches. In fact, at least one traveler commented on the fine apple cider milled in and around Newburgh. Returning to our story, recalling the general’s love of a good peach, Colonel Hasbrouck, his sons and General Washington made a daily sojourn to the orchards to pick peaches.

The general of course had first pick of the best peaches. Once peaches were in hand, General Washington carefully watched the father and his sons consume the peaches and saved his for later to see if any of the men became ill. If no one became ill from the peaches, they were considered devoid of poisons and the general would consume his ration. Of course, it must be noted here that Colonel Hasbrouck was already deceased by the time of Washington’s stay at his home, and none of his family members lived in the home while Washington used it as a headquarters.

The facts are not always important in family stories, though they do serve a very important purpose. Family stories such as the one above can convey the social norms of the time period, as well as how the populace viewed popular events or people. It is quite apparent that if one was associated with Washington, one was considered to have quite a prestigious role in society. However, in the following story, the storyteller does not seek to exploit the Washington connection. Instead, he or she divulges the importance of Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck as a larger-than-life Patriot. This story occurred in 1777 and involved one of Jonathan’s daughters, Rachel.

The backdrop of the story is Henry Clinton ascending the Hudson River in October 1777 with a flotilla of warships. As they approached Newburgh, the village became alarmed, as did Jonathan Hasbrouck. It is here that our story begins, with the British approaching and Jonathan fearing for his family’s safety.

Once Colonel Hasbrouck began to hear cannonades in the distance, he summoned his daughter Rachel to his side. He instructed her to take all of the family’s valuable silver to the barn. Once Rachel arrived in the barn, he explained that she should saddle up her mare firefly.² He further instructed her not to stop until she reached her Uncle Abraham’s home in Guilford. He felt that the family’s silver would be safe from the British so far inland.

Rachel, on her way to her uncle’s home, did encounter Tories who attempted to stop her. One cannot help but conjure up visions of Paul Revere’s ride, or at least a loose association with it. Unlike Paul Revere, Rachel did outwit her captors. Another symbolic association that has been made from this story is one between Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck and the Roman Cincinnatus, a simple farmer who left his farm to defend his country.

While Rachel galloped to Guilford, Jonathan Hasbrouck and the rest of the family huddled in the cellar as shells from warships fell around them and the British took pot shots at their home. As in the first story, there are fundamental flaws in this tale. There is no proof that the home was shelled or singled out for any retribution.³

The final reason that Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck has been relegated to historical obscurity is a combination of the two reasons already outlined. In some cases, documents are not only scattered but have simply disappeared and thus created a huge hole in the life of Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck. An individual piecing together his life has two choices. The first choice is attempting to recreate Jonathan’s life based on accounts from those who were close to him and those who lived during the same time in the same locale, or to look into extended family documents. The second, less attractive option for historians was written by Jonathan P. Kaminski about George Clinton, a friend of Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck: in the absence of documents, the raw material from which history is written—historians tend to overlook individuals and events or worse, fill the void by inventing or repeating myths.⁴ These myths are epitomized by the above stories. It is important to point out that more extensive papers, directly or indirectly relating to Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck, might have existed at one time. Certainly, many valuable papers were lost in 1776, and again in 1777, when Abraham Hasbrouck’s home caught fire in Kingston, New York. Additionally, valuable sources were lost when the Hasbrouck house in Guilford was gutted by fire in the nineteenth century.

Once the State of New York purchased the Hasbrouck property in the mid-nineteenth century and proclaimed it the first publicly owned state historic site—Washington’s Headquarters, State Historic Site—this process was accelerated. With this designation as Washington’s Headquarters, the State of New York made it clear why the home had been preserved. Other than a mention of Tryntje Hasbrouck, the history of the Hasbrouck family and its connection to the new historic site found itself moved to the proverbial backseat.

During my research, colleagues have, quite frankly, blurted out, Who cares about Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck! If he was so important, he would not have been forgotten in the first place! History does forget important people; a primary example relates to Adriaen van der Donck. Historians have only recently realized his importance in the early settling of Manhattan Island, after he had spent centuries in relative obscurity. So why care