Shortly after the 1658 death of Ralph Dayton at North Sea (Northampton), Phillip Leeke of New Haven made certain that the particulars of his purchase of lands from Ralph almost ten years earlier were properly recorded. Why did he do this—had the purchase been incomplete or disputed?
It is curious that in 1652, at least two years after Ralph had moved from New Haven to East Hampton, the official record in New Haven still referenced property in Ralph’s name. As you might remember, while still living in New Haven, Ralph had been in a boundary dispute with Richard Platt while Ralph was attempting to purchase lands from Platt in 1649—we wonder if this had something to do with Ralph’s removal to Long Island sometime before March of 1650 (when he was ordered to represent East Hampton at Hartford, to collect receipt of sale and body of laws).
Apparently Leeke anticipated some kind of challenge from Ralph’s descendants. We conclude this because, almost 70 years later, the record implies that perhaps at least one of Ralph’s heirs still felt the transaction was unsettled. Ralph’s grandson, Abraham Dayton of Brookhaven returned to Connecticut to convey to his son-in-law Rogers,
all such Right Estate Title Interest Claim and demand which I now have or ought to have of in and unto any Housing fences Lands Commons or common Rights or any other Estate by any ways or means what so ever belonging to me in the Township of New Haven
Notice the phrase “ought to have.” Is it possible Abraham (Samuel Dayton’s son) could be referring to this same property in 1726? Consider that this statement is the only connection between Abraham and New Haven that we have found. Please let me know if you have found any other reference, thanks.