Platting the Monocacy Road from Original 1739/40 Survey; Part 1: Eastern York County
I’ve platted the Monocacy Road from the original 1739/40 survey. This is Part 1; Eastern York County between Wrightsville and York. In future posts, I’ll plat additional parts of the Monocacy Road, in a similar manner, from the original survey, the whole way through York County and into Maryland.
Part 1 is displayed on three adjoining 1908 surveyed topographic map sections. This is the middle section. The end sections are displayed later in this post; they align together by matching the large blue A’s and B’s, for readers that care to print and piece together the whole road. I’ve displayed the platting in sections like this, so that sufficient detail can be seen.
This whole exercise started because I was curious if the Monocacy Road passed in front of the Schultz House, as Dr. Betz wrote about in 1902 and 1912 articles. Dr. Betz went on and on about the house being a tavern and all the famous guests that stopped there during Colonial times.
I was curious because when I was involved as a volunteer digger during the 2009 archaeological dig at the Schultz House, findings were not consistent with this house ever being a tavern. Quoting a line from Stephen Warfel’s Archaeological Report for site (36YO415), on page 38; “Simply stated, findings of the present project do not verify reported tavern use of the house.”
As seen above, the platted Monocacy Road from the original 1739/40 survey shows the primary road between the Susquehanna River and York Town did not pass in front the Schultz House, from the inception of that road. This casts additional doubt about the Schultz House being a tavern.
Related posts include:
- Found the Source: Henry Ford wanted to purchase the Schultz House of Springettsbury Township
- Camp Security, the Schultz House & Henry Ford
- Dr. Betz piqued Henry Ford’s interest in Schultz House of Springettsbury Township
- Early Ford Automobile in York was Serial Number 59
- Original Route of the Monocacy Road in Eastern York County?
- Questions answered on the Road to Monocacy posts
- Dr. Neal O. Hively Connected Draft Map of The Manor of Springettsbury
Continue reading for the end sections; starting in Wrightsville and ending up in York.
LancasterHistory.org (The Lancaster Historical Society) has the original Monocacy Road records. This is a photo of the upper part of page 279 of “Road Docket No. 1, from 1729 to 1742;” containing the Monocacy Road metes & bounds as recorded in 1739/40. These records are from the Quarter Sessions Courts of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, for the years 1729 through 1742.
The archival linen tape used to repair the left side of page 279 covers the first word in each line, however one can carefully hold the page vertical and look through it to determine the covered word. This section records the Monocacy Road metes & bounds between Wrightsville and the point where the Monocacy Road crosses the Big Codorus Creek. In 1741, the location where this first road west of the Susquehanna River crossed the Codorus Creek would be the site of the first town laid out west of the Susquehanna; i.e. York Town.
The original Monocacy Road metes & bounds are platted on a Topographic Map that was surveyed in 1908. They start in Wrightsville, shown immediately below, and continue southwesterly to York; shown thereafter. The road from 1739/40 virtually falls on top of the current Route 462, therefore this roadway has been in place for nearly 275 years.
Technical Note:
The historical declination is 6-degrees west of north for this location in 1740. My experience from platting many colonial deeds, clearly shows that a few colonial surveyors did not understand declination corrections, or the fact that the correction changes with time and location.
In platting deeds of many neighboring colonial properties, usually a few properties stand out as being incorrectly orientated compared to neighbors and/or roadways. A small rotation of the whole platted property, without altering size or shape, usually brings the errant property in line.
I count it as a correction to errant bearings from colonial times, as long as the rotation stays within the value of the declination and ALL bearings require an identical correction. In platting the Monocacy Road metes & bounds, a rotation of 2.1 degrees was required.
