Sunday, April 10, 2016

Sheep & Wool Showcase at Clermont April 2016

On Saturday, April 23, the rolling hills and river views at Clermont State Historic Site will be alive with the sounds of music and laughter, the smells of hot food, and the brilliant colors of hand-dyed yarns.  The Chancellor’s Sheep & Wool Showcase will run from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. Tickets are just $8 per car. Friends of Clermont members pay $6 per car.

The Showcase, one of the historic site’s oldest and most popular annual festivals, has become a springtime tradition for many in the area.  For the first time, the showcase will welcome the hip family band Dog OnFleasThis quirky band plays honest, loose, and ingenious music for kids and their adult counterparts.  Clermont’s music stage will also welcome back Tamarack, playing traditional folk and Celtic music all morning.

More than two dozen independent vendors have registered for the shopping concourse.  Shoppers will be able to find richly-colored knitted and felted shawls, sweaters, and mittens.  There will also be a vibrant array of yarns, roving and fiber supplies, along with clever and useful craft accessories.  Booths bursting with handmade jewelry, pottery, and soaps will tempt guests from every corner.

Clermont’s demonstrations are the centerpiece of the Showcase, illustrating how wool goes from sheep to shawl.  Gather around farmer Fred DePaul as he shears three sheep throughout the day, explaining the history and technique that goes into the task.  Herding demonstrations with the highly-trained border collies of Wild Goose Chase will take place on the historic sheep fold in the afternoon, and the members of the Elmendorf Spinners Guild will be at work all day long.

The Showcase is a great place for children, with stories and crafts happening all day long.  Children can print their own tee shirts with Indian wood blocks or sign their name to the 2016 Showcase Quilt project.  It’s also a great place for them to meet their first sheep!

For more information about the Sheep & Wool Showcase, to volunteer, or for other questions about the Clermont, please call (518) 537-4240 or email

Clermont State Historic Site features the mansion, formal gardens, scenic Hudson River views and miles of hiking trails.  The Friends of Clermont is a private, non-profit educational corporation, founded in 1977 to support and supplement the museum education and historic preservation programs at Clermont State Historic Site.  Designated a National Historic Landmark in 1973, Clermont is one of six historic sites and 13 parks administered by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation in the Taconic Region.  For more information on New York State Parks, please visit our websites at or

Thursday, March 17, 2016

Katharine and Clermont: A Descendant Solves an Old Mystery

Katharine Livingston Timpson has been the subject of much discussion here at Clermont lately.  Katharine's split with her father, John Henry Livingston took her out of the country in 1905, where geography and time misted over many of the details of her life.

But ever since her great-grandson donated a collection of family portraits from England, and then we got reconnected with her grandson in America, we've been unearthing her nearly-lost history.  Most recently we were thrilled to have the inheritance of Clermont itself cleared up for us.

You see, Katharine's grandfather Clermont Livingston (at left) was the estate's owner during the latter half of the 19th century.  His will dictated that the estate be given to his only surviving child, John Henry.  At some point, however, he changed the will to pass the estate to his granddaughter Katharine, bypassing his son, but leaving him life tenancy and spawning a century-worth of rumors as to why.

After he died in 1895, Katharine gave Clermont back to her dad (okay--so actually she sold it to him for $1), but given the up-and-down nature of their relationship, the timing is everything.

If the relationship was in the rocky period of the 1920s, did John Henry push his oldest daughter--who was after 1900 well-established with her own house and a sizable trust fund--into returning the house to him so that it could go to his youngest girls?  Or if it was before 1905, was the relationship was in a good spot when Katharine (at right) sold her childhood home back to her father, and what was the motivation?

After Katharine's grandson found Grandfather Clermont Livingston's will, some of these questions could finally be answered.  Clermont's will did indeed first give the house to his son John Henry, but the will was changed just months after he married his second wife Emily (at left).  So it seems most likely that Emily was--as supposed--the sticking point between father and son.  As a non-Livingston, the possibility of her inheriting Clermont if John Henry pre-deceased her would have been unacceptable.

Looking further into the documents, our friend found us the answer: Katharine sold the mansion back to her father in 1897 "in consideration of love and affection."  A letter from Katharine's son reported that she did this over her father's "protests" so perhaps at the time John Henry had accepted his own father's decision.  Father and daughter had just spent several years together enjoying some international travel (at right in India) so you might imagine that their relationship was in a good place.

So it was after:
--the death of Emily, Katharine's "charming" step mother
--a whole bunch of international travel together
--Clermont was renovation with a new wing and a fancy veranda

And it was before:
--John Henry married his 3rd wife (whom Katharine did not like)
--John Henry's 2nd and 3rd daughters were born
--Katharine got married, had children, and moved away.
--Katharine's finances took a nosedive in the 1920s

Was this before or after John Henry refused his daughter's marriage to an Austrian navy man?  Now that, I just don't know.

Much later, after her father's death in 1927, Katharine (at right) attempted to get the sale of the estate reversed, saying that it had been made "under duress."  That's in direct conflict with the "consideration of love and affection," but after 30 years, Katharine's trust fund had practically run out, and she had five children's futures to secure.  It could be that the pressure lead her to remember the sale with different eyes.

I suppose not all the mysteries are cleared up, but at least now the chronology is clear.

Thursday, February 25, 2016

More Than a Just a Jerk: Henry Beekman Livingston and the Battle of Monmouth

Henry Beekman Livingston was a jerk. That is an undeniable fact. His terrible treatment of his wife, children, servants and slaves was well documented. His military career nearly came to an early end because of a personal dispute with another officer and it did end in what was essentially a temper tantrum. 
He was also a hero of the Revolutionary War. At the Battle of Monmouth, the last major battle of the war fought in the north, Henry may have very well saved the entire army from a crushing defeat.
In the fall of 1777 the Revolution had achieved a great victory at Saratoga, in which Henry played no small part as the colonel of the 4th New York Regiment, but also a difficult defeat when the British army under General William Howe took Philadelphia. After a mission to New York City to deliver a scolding letter to General Henry Clinton for the raid into the Hudson Valley (that ended with the destruction of Clermont), Henry joined his regiment and the rest of the Continental Army in winter quarters at Valley Forge.
Henry’s men suffered that winter from a lack of food and clothing. Henry pleaded for both from Governor George Clinton and his brother Robert, the Chancellor. Unlike many of the army’s officers Henry stayed with his men all winter. Toward the end of the winter his entire regiment was moved out of their huts at the main camp and placed in tents because of rampant sickness. Henry himself fell sick.

As spring came Henry and his men’s health improved. They began to train under the direction of the recently arrived, Baron Friedrich Wilhelm Augustus von Steuben (at right). In short they became professional soldiers.
In June of 1778 Henry Clinton, now commanding the main British Army, decided to abandon Philadelphia. George Washington decided to pursue him and make sure the British got back to New York City as quickly as possible. Before they marched the best officers and men in the army were chosen and formed into ad hoc battalions to serve as an advanced corps for the army under the command of General Charles Lee. Henry was given command of a battalion of 380 men.

After four days of marching in brutal heat Lee’s command finally made contact with the rear guard of the British Army on June 28, 1778. Lee gave the order to advance but almost immediately gave orders to retreat. Lee, had only recently been released from British custody having been captured in 1776, was at best to scared to risk a fight or at worst a traitor.[i] Many of the battalions fell apart as the men fled in a disorganized mob. Henry, however, held his men in line and led them in an organized retreat. This brought them under British fire but neither were the British able to pursue the retreating American army. Henry’s battalion major was killed. His lieutenant colonel succumbed to the heat.
The Marquis de Lafayette rode up with orders for Henry to take his men and screen the artillery the Americans had now brought up to fire on the British. Henry reluctantly took the “weak and faint” survivors of his already battered battalion into their new position. As Henry shouted encouragement to his men a British musket ball passed through his thigh. He remained on his feet though, either through sheet meanness or because he knew his battalion had no other officers who could command it.
Henry and his “picked men” stood their ground until a full 1/3, or around 127 of his original 380 men were dead, wounded or had collapsed from the heat. His force found itself flanked on both sides. Henry faced a rapid retreat, most likely unorganized and leaving the wounded to the dubious care of the British. Before he could give that fateful order though Washington appeared on the field with the main body of the American Army. The British army was soon driven off.
That evening as American troops were still harassing the last remnants of the British Army, Henry was given temporary command of General Enoch Poor’s brigade. He only lamented that they did not come into action again against the enemy as he would have taken “ample revenge”.
The Battle of Monmouth was over. The army was battered and bruised but Washington and his men held the field. They had proven that they could be trained to fight like professional soldiers and they had shown they could stand against the British Army.
Three days after the battle Henry wrote a letter to his brother Robert describing the battle as he saw it.[ii] It certainly reads more like a battle report to a superior officer than a letter to a brother. He closes by promising to write to the rest of the family when he has time and tells Robert he only wrote to him to prevent “their being annoy’d”.
All in all Henry Beekman Livingston did not have a good war. He frequently found himself in the thickest fights or under the most extreme conditions. It is entirely possible that his experiences in the war combined with his preexisting bad attitude contributed to his frequently brutal behavior after the war. Perhaps like the rest of his generation, he should be remembered as a full person, not simply a tenacious battlefield commander nor simply the pariah he became.

[i] Lee was probably a traitor. Information found in William Howe’s papers indicates that Lee gave the British a plan for beating the American Army.
[ii] A copy of this letter was obtained by from The David Library of the American Revolution. The original is in the Rutgers University Alexander Library.

Monday, January 25, 2016

The Man Named After the House: Clermont Livingston, Part 2

When Clermont Livingston inherited Clermont the estate from his father in 1844, it seemed like he was set up to become a country gentleman with a cozy little family life.  Instead of pursuing a public legal career, as the past four generations of Livingston men had done, Clermont snuggled into his childhood home like a warm security blanket.  He married a Livingston cousin named Cornelia that same year, and their first daughter Mary (called "Mamie" by her family) was born the next year in 1845.  A son, John Henry (known as "Johnnie"), followed in 1848.

But that was to be the sum total of his children, and Clermont's marriage was cut short when his wife became ill.  He moved the family for some time to New York City in the hopes of getting better care for her there, but Cornelia died from a "prolonged and painful illness" in 1851.

"Johnnie" and "Mamie"
around 1851 or 1852
The family returned to the Hudson Valley for comfort.  It is during this time that his son John Henry remembered his father as a sort of aloof figure who sat by day reading on his sofa in the shady dining room.  The widower began keeping his detailed farm journal, with almost-daily entries about the temperature, wind direction and speed, even the barometric pressure.  He buried himself in the success of his crops, detailing which did well where, and when the fruit was ready to eat.

Sylvan Cottage, where Clermont's
children were schooled with the
DePeyster children.
They struck up a routine for daily life.  Clermont engaged a teacher for his children and set up a little school for them and their dePeyster cousins.  According to John Henry, the routine was strict.  The children rose early, did their homework by 9am and headed off to school.  The dePeysters "always came late and never did their lessons, but we always had the best of times," he recalled later.

Clermont and his second wife Mary
Somewhere between 1860 and 1862, Clermont found a new partner.  Mary Colden Swartout Livingston had lived next door for years in Arryl House married to his cousin Montgomery Livingston.  But Montgomery had died 1855, and the two seem to have gotten married, although she was still referred to in letters from the children as "Mrs. Swartout."

Johnnie as a teenager,
headed for Columbia University
School ended at the little cottage by the estate's gate not long after Mamie got married in 1864 to none other than her classmate Frederic dePeyster.  Her Oak Hill grandmothers practically swooned with joy that the 19-year-old's husband-to-be was someone she'd known so long and that he was a local who would not move the girl far away.

The next April, already down two students in his school, Mr. Wolf the tutor had to say goodbye to his employer of eight years.  Clermont's oldest son Johnnie was 17 and ready to leave the cozy little cottage school for college at Columbia University.  Before he left, Mr. Wolf wrote a heartfelt letter saying he'd enjoyed working with the children and found Mr. Livingston an "appreciative" employer (we should all be so lucky!).

Believed to be
Catherine Hammersly
Just before Christmas 1865, Clermont had his first granddaughter, also named Mary--but called "May" by the family to distinguish her from the other two Marys.  Three years late in 1868, he got a grandson, whom his daughter dutifully named "Clermont."

Johnnie was married too in November of 1871.  His bride was Catherine Livingston Hammersly.  He went on his honeymoon traveling around Europe in 1872, amusingly at the same time as Mamie and her husband were enjoying an extended European getaway themselves.  Their letters home to "Papa" describe hotels and crossings and adventures.

Catherine Livingston

After all this excitement, loss began to visit the family almost all at once.  Johnnie's wife Catherine died shortly after giving birth to the latest granddaughter in the family (of course named Catherine, after her mother) in 1873.  Then not long after, in 1874, Clermont's oldest granddaughter May died as well, followed by Mamie's husband Frederick that same year. The loss is made especially poignant by 9-year-old May's early attempt at letter-writing, preserved by her grandfather:

January 31st, Saturday [1874]

Dear Grandpapa,

I want to know whether the little creek is open.  How is Pussie and Hannah?  and Sport?  We are going to have Goodhue to dine with us today and Johnnie Pole too.  What are you doing?
Clermont and Mary "May" dePeyster
around 1869 or 1870

How is Ninnie?  How are you and what are they all doing?  We are going to the theatre next Saturday.  I am well.  Clermont is pretty well.  We have a nice time Clermont says to say we play cards and dominos before breakfast with Grandma.  Clermie and I send our love to your and Aunt Annie and Aunt Emily.

Your affect

Only two years later, Mamie died as well, leaving eight-year-old Clermont as the last standing member of the family.  And sometime during all of this, Clermont's wife Mary Swartout died too, leaving Clermont Sr. a widower twice over.

Emily Evans Livingston
And so the Livingston family was left to regroup again.  Clermont Sr. began vacationing in Bar Harbor and at some point remarried a woman whom the family called "Aunt Annie."  He made updates to the family mansion, adding a towering mansard roof.  Johnnie pursued his legal career in New York.  Baby Catherine was sent to her maiden Hammersly aunts, and Clermont the little boy became Uncle Johnnie's charge at some point.

When John Henry married Emily Evans in 1880, something happened to the family dynamic that caused a permanent rift.  There isn't any record of it in Clermont's surviving documents, and descendants are still scouring family histories.

When Johnnie remarried, Clermont changed his will so that the Livingston mansion would go to his granddaughter Catherine, skipping over his son.  The mansion remained Johnnie's for life, but nevertheless he took his daughter, nephew, and new wife to live in Philadelphia for a while--far away from his father and any strife at his childhood home.  The family seems to have come back to the Hudson Valley for somethings--at the very least, they made some stylish new updates to the mansion's main rooms, but the estrangement seems to have been a deep one.  But we don't know why.

What happened that made Clermont Sr. so mad?  Why did he essentially cut off his only son?  Some descendants think it likely that Clermont Sr. wanted to make sure his granddaughter Catherine (a "true" Livingston) would inherit the home, instead of any potential children that Emily might have had.  The Livingston pride in their ancestral family home is not to be underestimated.  There are also some unpleasant suggestions that Clermont disliked his new daughter-in-law intensely and others that his relationship with his son was strained and critical.  None of these can be completely confirmed or denied.  Perhaps if his grandson Clermont had survived, the problem may have been solved differently, but the boy had died suddenly in 1889.

Either way, the intrigue was not put aside when Emily died in 1894 (leaving Johnnie a widower twice over, just like his dad).  Even with her out of the picture, the will continued to dictate that the family's estate would be given to Catherine (who was now going by "Kitty" and spelling her name Katharine).

Clermont passed away in 1895, leaving behind the muddy confusion of inheritance and estate management and all the rest of it.

Two years later, in 1897, twenty-four-year-old Katherine formally sold the mansion back to her father for one dollar "in consideration of love and affection," According to her children, this was "over the objections of her father" so perhaps Johnnie had accepted his father's will after all.

Sunday, January 17, 2016

The Man Named After the House: Clermont Livingston, part 1

For a long time all I knew about Clermont Livingston was that he was named after the house and that he kept a very detailed garden journal.

Clermont Livingston (pronounced like "Clement")  was the head of Clermont the estate from 1844 when his father died and officially through his own death in 1895--though during the last few decades, the family mansion was largely occupied by his children and their families, while he moved over to neighboring Arryl House.  I have long thought of Clermont through his son's eyes, since at Clermont we focus a great deal on that generation.  But of course he wasn't born old, and he is best connection to our Victorian-era past.

He was the privileged son of a wealthy NY statesman, the inheritor of the lost Steamboat legacy (the monopoly was broken in 1824), and the grandson of a founding father.  There was a lot of family pride.

Clermont in 1796, overlooking the Hudson River
But Clermont grew up to be much more reserved than other Livingston heads of household.  He was the only head of Clermont who never obtained a public office.  Who was this guy?  And why is era of leadership at Clermont the quietest in our records?

Clermont, the boy, was born in 1817 and grew up splitting his time between the Livingston estate on the Hudson River, Albany, and presumably New York City.  By the time he was born, his parents had lost four of his elder siblings, all under the age of five, and two years later in 1919 his teenage sister Mary died as well.  The surviving siblings that Clermont grew up with were:

-Margaret, 9 years his senior
-Elizabeth, 4 years his senior
-Emma, 2 years old, but died in 1828
-Robert E., 3 years younger
-Mary (again), 6 years younger

Betsy Stevens Livingston
was Clermont's mother
When Clermont was 12, his mother Betsy passed away at the age of 49.

At some point his father married Marry C. Broome, perhaps a contentious decision considering that Mary (b. 1810) was actually younger than his oldest daughter Margaret (b. 1808), and there are a few indications of weak relations which I'll mention later.

So Clermont's early tween years were marked by some pretty big upheavals.  Though certainly not uncommon for the time, the death of sister, followed quickly by that of his mother, and then accepting a new step mother couldn't have been easy for a kid.  Nevertheless, a little collection of 9 letters from his bachelor years suggest that Clermont had built some pretty close relationships with friends and family.

In 1835, at age 17 he was corresponding with his brother-in-law Edward Ludlow (Elizabeth's husband) about finding a housekeeper for their New York home, current events, and sharing gossip about neighbors and acquaintances.  He also kept up with his older sister Margaret, but he complained that Elizabeth did not write him directly.  Margaret's letters to her younger brother were newsy and familiar.  She referenced New Year's Day Visiting (interestingly using her sister Mary's first name, but giving the formal and distant title of "Mrs. Livingston" to her step mother).  She lamented that there was not enough snow for sleighing.  She bid her brother write her about their activities in Albany, where their father was a New York State senator.  And she updated him on her day-to-day:  

I have been very busy hunting up little knick nacks for the children's stockings, dressing dolls so Christmas day was a very merry one for the children, during the holidays they do nothing but play, at this moment there is such a noise that I scarcely know what I am writing about...and just now [they] nearly upset the ink stand over this paper..."

He talked about riding steamboats to and from Albany with his younger brother Robert in the summer to make "a few perchase's (sic)."  And cousin Edward Macomb reminded him of a promise Clermont'd made last fall when riding the steamboat up from New York that he'd be groomsman at an upcoming wedding.  Edward assured Clermont that although he did not yet know who the bridesmaids would be, "they will be without doubt very charming."

Clermont's relationship with Edward seems to have been one that was a little less formal than the ones he shared with his sisters.  The reference to "charming ladies" suggests a shared interest in women, and in a letter the next month (in February after the wedding) Edward described a "delightful dinner party at Mrs Gates" where "each gentleman had a fair lady on his right and left..."  While Edward was planning to move to Washington for business, he mused, "I have had many pleasant days at your delightful residence & hope to have many more."  Oh--and by the way, there's another wedding coming up in April, "when I suppose we shall have the pleasure of seeing you again."

Although the year is uncertain, Clermont responded to a "Ned" in February--and it seems possible that it was to Edward Macomb--when he wrote lamenting the news that "Strats" had "been so soon allured by the charms of the fair sex to desert the ranks of the bachelors."  He then wrote a little ditty, expecting his friend to set to music himself.  The slightly ribald poem ended with the lines:

Now on Matrimony's stream he floats
May he in short have his sport
Beneath the shade of the petticoats

And he signed it "Bunderbus."

By far the most jovial letters came from Clermont's friend William Tallmadge.  I can't seem to find anything about this young man, but he seems to be a peer who knew Clermont from their time in Albany, where Clermont's father served in state government.  He may even have been related to contemporary Albany statesman and abolitionist James Tallmadge Jr., but I can't be sure.

Anyway, William was full of jokes, and his letters are tinged with a youthful and good-natured sarcasm.  "This City is as void of news, as Connecticut is of Democrats," he wrote in April of 1838.  He too gossips about the interesting ladies in their acquaintance: "I saw Miss Caroline King yesterday in the street, she continues to look very handsome, and was particularly interesting..."  "Miss Boswick is very well at present." And he signs off his letter of April 27 remembering his care for Clermont's parents and then, inexplicably, "Give my best respect to friend Robert and tell him not to hang himself."

Subsequent letters continue to reference young ladies.  "Miss Skinner has just arrived in town and of course I shall treat her as she ought to be, she will visit our house this evening, and if you were here we might make quite a pleasant party..." he wrote in July of the same year..

The two shared more than just an interest in The Ladies though.  When William took ill in 1840, Clermont's letter revived and comforted him:  "I assure you...I have never received a word from a friend which gratified me so much..."  It seems the friends had made plans for yet another excursion to Saratoga Springs, but Tallmadge's "Billious attack" made him too weak and sick to join his friend.  Even sick, though, William was not without jokes:
Clermont Livingston eventually
grew his own "astonishing whiskers."

How is Mr. Robert, is he flourishing - has he that huge pair of whiskers you were speaking about - if he has, tell him to keep them until I come up.  I have a pair that may astonish the natives in your part of the country.

Clermont's life was not all ladies.  Both Margaret and Tallmadge mention Clermont being busy with his studies (although Margaret follows it up with "dancing in the evening").

Clermont continued to live with his father, at least through 1840; letters to him from his friend Tallmadge were address care of his dad Edward P. Livingston.  But he sometimes stayed with his sister Elizabeth and her husband Edward Ludlow in New York City, where the night life was surely more interesting.  Ludlow's letter to his brother-in-law in 1835 or 1840 (the two years in this timeframe in which December 10th, fell on a Thursday) indicated that he hoped Clermont and younger brother Robert would come stay with them again that winter.  And later in 1841, Clermont spent the Christmas holidays there again.

When Clermont's father died at the end of 1843, it was time to settle down.  Edward P. Livingston died intestate, making the process of sorting the estate decidedly more complex.  There seems to have been some confusion about what belonged to the step mother Mary Broome and what should have gone to Clermont's younger sister Mary.  Although the Widow Mary had taken a sizable inventory of household goods, little or nothing was left for the 21-year-old daughter.  If the relationship with the Livingston children's step mother had been strained before, having to engage the legal consultation of cousin Livingston Livingston (no, it's not a typo.  That's really his name) three months later probably didn't help matters.  For the record, cousin Livingston said Mary the Widow should have given a lot more to Mary the daughter.

In 1844, it seems that Clermont's youth was done, and it was time to settle down and become a gentleman farmer.  He got married that year to his pretty cousin Cornelia Livingston from Oak Hill and got down to the business of running the estate.  He saved his family estate from the Anti-Rent mess by selling off some land.  He saw to it his little sister Mary was taken care of (since her step mother was gone by now), and became the de facto head of the Livingston family at Clermont.

But of course, there was much still ahead of him.