12 Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences 



at Stony Brook (county seat), and know of no reason for that 

 date, except that the county was estabhshed in that year and the 

 administration of justice provided for. 



The only references we have found to original records which 

 mention a courthouse at Stony Brook are in Clute's Annals of 

 Staten Island, pages 167 and 459. On pages 130 and 168 Clute 

 mentions the discovery of two books containing these records, 

 but their whereabout is unknown at the present time. Unfor- 

 tunately Clute's reference, on page 167, to a " Court of Sessions 

 held in the Court House at Stony Brook " (see Appendix, No. 140) 

 leaves us in doubt as to whether these were the formal words 

 used in the original record, or only an inference. It is hoped that 

 these old record books, believed to have been in the county clerk's 

 office, may yet be found and this uncertainty removed. 



Of the many original early court records examined we have 

 found none that state in what part of Staten Island courts were 

 held. From an act passed June 27, 1704, and confirmed by the 

 Queen on May 20, 1708, " for the Erecting and Building a County 

 Jaile, and County House, in the County of Richmond," it would 

 appear that there was no courthouse in Richmond County in 1704, 

 for the act recites, "and whereas there is wanting in the said 

 County of Richmond, a County Jaile and County House" (37)- 



It is not improbable that courts were held at Stony Brook, for 

 Alexander Stuart, innholder, purchased property near Stony 

 Brook in 1707, and was appointed county clerk in 1708 (38) . He 

 probably had a house or tavern on the property, where it may have 

 been found convenient to hold court. 



Morris (i : 80) states: "There are several records in existence 

 of Court held at Stony Brook. The earliest mention of the Court 

 of Sessions being held in Richmond is dated September 2, 1729. 

 Previous to the erection of a Court House at that place the Courts 

 were held in private houses and taverns, as the following entry 

 will prove," etc. 



We conclude from the examination of such facts as we have 

 been able to collect in this matter, that the evidence is too uncer- 



