William Rogers, Jr.
In February 1738, "William Radtgert, Jr." married Mary Werth or White at the Albany Dutch church. During the 1740s, at least two children were christened at that church. Later, he was a member and church warden at St. Peter's Anglican church. In 1765, he joined the minister in petitioning the city council for land on which to build a parsonage.
Although his namesake father may have lived into the 1740s, we believe that community-based information simply for "William Rogers" from the 1740s on probably relates to the life of William Rogers, Jr. Thus, in 1742, his name appeared on a list of freeholders living in the third ward.
In August 1746, "William Rogers" witnessed the will of Robert Roseboom. In July 1747, "Jr." witnessed the will of another Albany neighbor, widow Anna Poffie. A year later, his house in the third ward was referenced in the will of Dirck Ten Broeck. That home was on Market Street between the home of Roseboom and the Ten Broecks.
In 1756, the census identified him as a hatter. In 1763, his name appeared on a list of Albany freeholders. In 1767, his third ward property was accorded a moderate but substantial assessment (ten pounds). In that year, he applied for and received a lot located south of Foxes Creek "to hold a tanning pit there until it becomes useless." In November 1787, the Council declared that Rogers (along with many others) had held land there since 1768, that they had improved the tanning pit lots, and that they should continue to hold the property until the pits have become useless. That was the last recorded reference to William Rogers.
However, in June 1777, he was among those "prisoners" who took the oath of allegiance and was discharged. In May 1778, a William Rogers (turning seventy, a resident of Hoosic and a yeoman, and a former resident of Albany - with a large family), was a convicted horse thief. "Destitute," he petitioned the governor for mercy and relief. Three days earlier, his wife, Mary, presented a similar petition. In November 1779, he still was incarcerated. His teen-aged son, Benjamin, was similarly charged.
A surprising number of individuals of this name (representing a number
of distinct family lines) seem to be at risk at this time and in this
region. This William Rogers, Jr. would have been seventy in 1779!