Holbrook line: Stephen Paine 1716-1797

 This is the last Stephen Paine in our line, I believe.  At least, he's the last ancestor with that name that I've located as of today.  This Stephen was born on August 17, 1716 in Providence Plantation, Rhode Island, the son of Stephen and Sarah Vallett Paine.  I have seen Sarah referred to as the widow Vallett so it may be that she has a maiden name yet to be discovered, but I have also seen that her parents were Jonathan Vallett and Elizabeth Belcher.  I haven't explored that possibility.  

When Stephen was born, Glocester was it's own community but not officially separated from Providence until 1739.  He was, however, considered a freeman of Glocester in 1738 so the town did have some autonomy prior to the "official" date.  We don't know what the religion of Stephen's birth family was.  Glocester was the center of the "New Light Baptists" and he would surely have been influenced by the beliefs of his neighbors if he wasn't actually one of the group.  At least some of his children were New Light Baptists (among other things, they believed in baptism, preferably by immersion, as adults, rather than the sprinkling done at infant baptisms in more traditional churches).  

Stephen married Sarah Thornton, daughter of Benjamin Thornton and a disputed wife who was possibly a Gurney by birth, on July 15, 1739, and the couple had at least six children together, the last born in 1752.  I've not found an indication of Stephen's occupation so I'm going to say he likely farmed, and may have had another job besides, as many men of the time did.  

That is as much as I know about Stephen until the time of the American Revolution.  We know he was a lieutenant serving under Captain Abraham Winsor (probably the father of his daughter in law) in the train band in 1775.  He was almost 60 years old at the time, so it's more than possible that he also had other military experience, possibly in the French and Indian War.  However, I have not been able to document that at all, so the earlier military experience idea is just speculation at this point.  Also, we don't know whether he served during the Revolution, as again, evidence is lacking.  Glocester was a divided town during the Revolution.  Most residents were patriots, but there were several of the New Light Group who were pacifists.  His son, Nathan, whom I wrote about recently, was one of the pacifists.  Also, at Stephen's age, he probably would have been excused from duty had he requested it, as 60 year old men were not up to the rigors of a military campaign as a general rule.  

Sarah Thornton Paine died in 1772, but Stephen lived until December 29, 1797, which gave him plenty of time to swap war stories and to watch the new country being born.  I have not located his will or inventory, which should tell us much.  Like his wife, he died in Glocester.  

This is not a lot of information to fill in the "dash" of Stephen's life,  There may be more records available than I have located (there almost always are) but at least this is an outline to use when researching the answers to many of the questions we have about Stephen.  

The line of descent is:

Stephen Paine-Sarah Thornton

Nathan Paine-Lillis Winsor

Deborah Paine-Enos Eddy

Joseph Eddy-Susan Lamphire

Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard 

Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick

Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook

Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen

Their descendants

Holbrook line: George Haile, maybe ours

 Full disclosure:  I have not yet found anything other than geographical location and name patterns to prove that this connection is truly ours.  But it does seem plausible, and even if George turns out to be an uncle or cousin rather than a great grandfather, his history is interesting enough that it deserves a blog post.  As usual, one of the difficulties is that the name is spelled several different ways.  Another is that some of the earliest records are gone.  (And for me, some of the books I need to refer to for this man are not available to me at the moment.  Hint:  I need to make a trip to The Genealogy Center at the Allen County Public Library.)  

There is some confusion about where and when George was actually born, mostly because his parents are not confirmed.  I've found several men born in the right time frame, but none seem to have been born at what is believed to be his birthplace, in Kent, England.  There is a William and Rose Bond Haile of King's Walden, Hertfordshire, England, who was born on July 13, 1601, and most trees that are available are saying that these are his parents.  However, none of his alleged children carry those names forward, so I'm a little suspicious of that identification.  Also, neither of those locations is reasonably close to Bristol, Somersetshire, England, where he set sail from in 1620.

He came to Virginia as an indentured servant, but I've not been able to determine who his master was, nor whether he was indentured in England or only after he arrived in Virginia.  And it gets murkier, because some claim he married Mary Elizabeth Blood in 1620, in Bristol, and some say it was 1626, and in Virginia.  Others agree that his wife was Elizabeth, but do not attempt to date the marriage.  Obviously the correct documentation has not yet been found.  (And there's always the possibility that he married one woman in 1620, lost her to death, and married again in 1626.) Still others think that our George came a bit later, and the boy or man who immigrated in 1620 was a different George.  

George's children are believed to be John, Thomas, and Nicholas,  with Audrey and Ellin sometimes listed as well.  George must have acquired land because he sold 300 acres in 1651, to Thomas Mallett.  Four years later, he was in court where he was ordered to pay the estate of Thos Coggin, deceased, 300 pounds of tobacco.  From this comment, it seems likely that he raised tobacco, although tobacco was a form of currency at the time and he may have merely owned it.  

George was "above 60 years of age on July 22, 1661, when he was exempt from the levy. Two lines below that, in "Northumbria Collectanea 1645-1720", there is a reference to Mr. Nich (Haile), who "wanted satisfaction of Walter Price for entertaining his runaway servant, January 11, 1668/69.  While this doesn't prove a father-son relationship, it does indicate that the two were in the same general location during the same time period.  

George died November 6, 1671 near Reedville, in Northumberland County, Virginia. If he was the George who arrived in 1620, he lived through some extremely trying times as the native tribes tried to drive the colonists from the continent.  There were periods of warfare, the threat of wild animals, and diseases like swamp fever and malaria to combat.  George would have been 70 years old, perhaps older, when he died so his outlived many of the people who came on the same ship with him, whenever that was.  

Obviously there is a lot of work still to be done with George.  We need his will or estate papers, and would love to see an inventory.  We'd love to figure out just who his parents were, and how his wife or wives were.  And we'd love to know details about his every day life.

The (supposed) line of descent is:

George Haile-Elizabeth

Nicholas Haile-Mary

Mary Haile-Charles Merryman

John Merryman-Martha Bowen

Martha Merryman-Alexis Lemmon

Alexis Lemmon-Rachel Stansbury

Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick

Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black

Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard

Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook

Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen

Their descendants

Harshbarger line: John Wyatt 1663-1714

 It's time to leave the Harshbargers of Switzerland, Germany and Pennsylvania, and head south to Virginia.  I am pretty sure this man has roots in England, perhaps even noble roots, but I've not been able to find the connection (if any) to my satisfaction.  So what we have is just a glimpse here and there of a man who was born and died in Gloucester County, Virginia.  

We don't know who John Wyatt's parents were.  The "information" on line (unsourced, hence the quotes) is about equally divided between John and Jane Osborne Wyatt, or William and  unknown wife (possible first name of Anna) Wyatt.  I suspect that the John and Jane theory is more one of wishful thinking, because that John does appear to tie back to nobility.  William must have had something on the ball, because he was referred to by the end of his life as "Major".  A 1944 article in Tyler's Quarterly Magazine does state that John is Major William's son, but I don't know the source that author used to draw that conclusion.  At any rate, William is currently a brick wall, too. 

If the birth year of 1663 for John is correct, he would have been 13 years old when Bacon's Rebellion broke out.  That was an attempt, briefly successful, to overthrow the colonial governor of Virginia, fueled partly by dislike, fear, and hatred of native Americans, and partly by economics.  Most of those who were rebels were farmers, indentured servants, and slaves, so it was partly a class war also.  I don't know where this left the Wyatt family, but due to William being a Major who survived the rebellion, my guess is that this family was on the side of the governor.  Further adding to that speculation is the fact that Governor Berkeley retreated to Gloucester County, north of Jamestown, when the town was burned.  He must have felt safe there, or at least safer than other places would have been.

We know that John married Anne Jones, daughter of Rice Jones, because her father's will specified John and Anne's son, John Jr., by name..  The marriage took place before 1693.  The couple is thought to have had at least three children-John, Thomas, and Ann.  Other children have been assigned to John but they are generally located in a different part of Virginia and unless John was a traveling man, they are unlikely to be part of this family.  

Most of the crops raised in Gloucester County fed the family and their slaves or servants.  We don't know if John held slaves, or indentured servants, but since the main cash crop of Virginia was tobacco, it is likely that John was part of that social strata.  

Many sites say John died in 1684, but this would be a different John, because our John wasn't married until 8 or so years later.  (The John who died in 1684 may be the John who is erroneously supposed by some to be our John's father.)  The correct date for our John's death appears to be August 3, 1714.

There is still much to be learned about John, and it's possible that some of this blog post is not entirely correct.  Records seem to be muddled and I've done my best to not report those things that clearly tie to another John Wyatt, due to impossible dates.  But most of all, I'd like to know whether John ties in, in any way, to the famous Wyatt family.  Meanwhile, we need to remember that part of the family line goes to Virginia and England, and appreciate the different cultures in our blood.

The line of descent is

John Wyatt-Anne Jones

Thomas Wyatt-Sukey Edmondson

John Wyatt-Alice Gordon

Jean Wyatt-William Farmer

Margaret Farmer-Solomon Eliot Bennett

Mary Bennett-John Harter

Clara Harter-Emmanuel Harshbarger

Grover Harshbarger-Goldie Withers

Cleveland Harshbarger-Mary Beeks

Their descendants

Beeks line: Thomas Aldridge 1680-1726

 I've so far assembled very few facts for Thomas Aldridge.  Most of what I know could be summarized in one paragraph, but even though I don't know a lot about him, he's important in the Beeks family line and deserves at least a few lines until I can uncover more information.

Thomas Aldridge was born or baptized November 5, 1680 in Anne Arundel County, Maryland.  His parents were Nicholas and Martha Besson Aldridge, and he was the first of the couple's ten known children. He was likely named for Martha's father, Thomas Besson, who had passed away in 1679, about the time that Nicholas and Martha were married.  

Nicholas's land was on the South River in Anne Arundel County, and it is likely that Thomas, as the oldest son, inherited the land but I've not yet found records for that.  The South River is south of Annapolis, and empties into the Chesapeake Bay, so Thomas would have had ample opportunity for both hunting and fishing during his early years.  I speculated in the post I wrote about Nicholas that he was probably a tobacco farmer, and that he may well have held slaves.  The same holds true for Thomas, but I don't have any records to say "yay" or "nay" to this supposition.

Thomas married Elizabeth Purdy, daughter of Johan and Mary (maiden name unknown) Purdy, on July 15, 1703 at All Hallows Parish, Anne Arundel County.  This church had been established some years earlier, and it was Anglican (Church of England, now Episcopalian) in belief and practice.  This was a very different religious and social environment from other Beeks ancestors, who lived further north and were Quaker, or Baptist, or Puritan, or Dutch Reformed, in belief.  

Thomas and Elizabeth had at least seven children, all baptized at All Hallows Church.  We don't know how regular their attendance was, nor have I learned what their assigned seats (assuming this church assigned seats, which is probable) were.  That information would help us determine their social status in the community.

As far as I've learned so far, Thomas seems not to have been active in civic or military service.  Control was in the hands of a wealthy few, and Thomas may not have belonged to the top echelon.  

Thomas probably died in December of 1726.  Some trees use December 1762 but I suspect that is a typographical error.  I've not found a will so I can't make any kind of judgement, but I will keep looking.  We do know that the last known child was born in 1723, but that may be because Elizabeth had reached the end of her child-bearing years.  (There was a Thomas Aldridge in Baltimore County who died in 1714.  I have been unable to identify him but none of the names mentioned in that will correspond with our Thomas's known children.)

This is as much as I know or suppose about Thomas Aldridge.  I like to think that he lived a happy life, providing for his family and enjoying his beautiful surroundings, with time to fish or hunt as he wished.  I appreciate knowing that his descendants fought in the American Revolution, eventually released their slaves, and contributed to America's growth.  But I'd sure like to find some more facts!

The line of descent is

Thomas Aldridge-Elizabeth Purdy

John Aldridge-Eleanor probably Watkins

Jacob Aldridge-Elizabeth Soper

John Simpson Aldridge-Mary Lakin

John Simpson Aldridge-Lucinda Wheeler

Darlington Aldridge-Leah Folsom

Harvey Aldridge-Margaret Catherine Dunham

Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks

Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger

Their descendants

Holbrook line: Samual Perrin 1670-1743

 There are several people named Samuel Perrin who lived in various locations in Massachusetts and Connecticut in overlapping time periods, so I hope I have this figured out correctly.  Samuel Perrin was born March 10, 1670/71, in Rehoboth, Massachusetts.  He was the son of John and Mary Polley Perrin, and was the grandson of immigrant John Perrin (Peryn, Perrine and more variations).  

Rehoboth is located in the southern part of Massachusetts that is quite near to the eastern border of Rhode Island, and this may have been where Samuel grew up.  However, John and Mary both died in Roxbury, Massachusetts, so it is possible that the family had moved there, perhaps during King Philip's War, and therefore Samuel would have grown up mostly in Roxbury.  Samuel had at least nine siblings, so wherever they lived, it was a large family. with Samuel being the second oldest.  He was 17 years old when his youngest sister was born, and was possibly living with another family by then, if he wasn't needed in his father's trade.

It was in Roxbury that Samuel married Mehitable Child, daughter of Benjamin and Mary Bowen Child.  (Mary's ancestry goes back to royalty, and Benjamin was important enough that he was referred to as "Mr."  Samuel must have looked like an up and coming young man, for the Childs to approve him as a son-in-law.  I've not found precise marriage records, but it appears that the two were married in late 1694 or early 1695, as their first child was born in September of 1695.  

By that date, Samuel and presumably Mehitable had gone to what is now Woodstock, Connecticut although at the time it was located on land claimed by Massachusetts.  Several families from Roxbury, including other Child and Bowen families, went together to form a new settlement.  Samuel is one of those recognized as an early resident, arriving probably in 1694.  

There are several references to Samuel Perrin in "History of Windham County, Connecticut" by Ellen D Larned.  Our Samuel had a son Samuel born in 1698, and it is possible that some of the references may be to this son, but the earlier ones would definitely be our Samuel.  He purchased 300 acres of land "at a very early date" from the Wabbequasset proprietors.  This was in the southern part of Woodstock, and references to Samuel Perrin of Pomfret, which bordered Woodstock, may or may not be to our Samuel.  It was our Samuel who was one of three men who purchased 300 acres in 1699, valuable land because of numerous pine trees that produced turpentine.  Samuel is one of those referred to as "businessmen" of Woodstock.

In 1710, Samuel (ours) was on a committee to build, or perhaps to oversee the building of, two new schoolhouses in south Woodstock.  By then, he and Mehitable had nearly completed their family of eight children, and getting their children educated (according to the standards of the day) would have been very important to them.  A new meeting house/church was built in 1721, and Samuel was assigned a pew indicating that he had the fourth highest standing in the town.  (Mehitable would have been assigned a similar spot.)  

I cannot tell whether it is our Samuel or his son Samuel who pledged to donate fifteen pounds, a substantial sum, to the United Society or Company for Propagating Christian and Useful Knowledge" in 1739.  This appears to have been a library of some sort.  Even if it was the younger Samuel who made this donation, it indicates that in the Perrin family, education was a priority, as was religion.  

Samuel died March 11, 1743/44 in Woodstock.  In his will, he describes himself as "of Woodstock, Worcester County, Massachusetts", because Woodstock didn't become part of Connecticut until 1749.  He wrote his will May 7, 1734 and it was probated May 8, 1744.  (I wonder if the 1734 date is correct but that is what the record says.)  He described himself as a yeoman, but had significant assets to distribute.  To his wife, he left 15 pounds per annum plus the use of the west end of the house, garden and necessary yard room, during her widowhood.  If she remarried, she was to be sent on her way with forty pounds.  To his three sons Samuel, Abraham and John, he left 15 shillings each "having formerly advanced very considerable sums to each of them for their comfortable settlement in this world."  To daughters Mary Peak and Mehitabel Peak he left 100 pounds each, have already advanced money to thgem.  Son Nathaniel was to receive 5 acres of land at Planting, where Nathaniel had already started an orchard.  The remaining land, livestock, and utensils of husbandry were to be divided between Nathaniel and Peter.  Sadly, I've not found an inventory but this at least gives us a feel that Samuel was not a poor man. 

Mehetable (spelling as in Hale Collection), wife (widow) of Samuel, died September 7, 1752, presumably having received her 15 pounds each of the intervening years.  

There's quite a bit we still don't know about Samuel, but we know enough to recognize his importance to his family, to his community, and to his posterity.  

The line of descent is:

Samuel Perrin-Mehitable Child

John Perrin-Abigail Morris

Benjamin Perrin-Mary or Marcy

Mary Perrin-David Fay

Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard

Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy

Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick

Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook

Their descendants

Holbrook line: Benjamin Thornton abt 1681-1742

 I confess that there is much about Benjamin Thornton that is unknown, and much of what is "known" is undocumented, or at least I haven't found records yet.  Therefore, this will be a short post but it will serve to remind us of this part of our family history, and will remind family historians that even in New England, which kept pretty good records ever since the earliest days, much has slipped through the cracks of time.

Benjamin Thornton was born in Providence (Plantation), Rhode Island about 1681.  His father was John Thornton, but there is some dissent about the name of his mother.  Many sites show Sarah Thurston, although I've not found any records showing her name, so take this with a grain of salt.  Likely her name was Sarah, though.  John died in 1695 and his wife sometime after that, so Benjamin was left fatherless as a young teenager-not quite a man but it was surely time for him to be learning a trade, if he was not already doing so.  Benjamin was the youngest of the eight children, so he may have been kept at home a little longer than the other children, but all good things must come to an end.

Benjamin became a stonelayer.  I'm not sure whether this is the same thing as a stone mason, who cut, dressed, and placed stone, or whether he simply placed stones that were already cut.  One would be a laborer's job and one would imply some skill and training.  It's hard to know what "stonelayer" meant 300 years ago, and how precisely the word was used.  Benjamin had land as early as 1699, if this is the same Benjamin Thornton (there was at least one other Benjamin in Providence at the time, so I'm not sure we are talking about the same man).  It's possible this is land that he received when his father died in 1695.

 Benjamin married about 1699.  His wife's name is a matter of controversy.  There is a documented marriage of "Benjamin Thornton Jr" to Elizabeth Herendeen Gurney, but this marriage took place in 1738, when Benjamin was about 57 years old.  (It is likely this applies to another Benjamin, just as the records of Benjamin as a freeman in the 1680s also apply to a different Benjamin.) Most trees show Benjamin's wife to be a Gurney, possibly Mary, but I don't know what the basis is for that "fact". Benjamin and his wife are thought to be the parents of perhaps as many as six children.  He is sometimes credited with an additional daughter, Mary, who was born four years after Benjamin's death, so that is an error, either in date or in attribution. 

He seems to have sold the parcel he acquired in 1699 in 1707 but must have acquired additional land, for he sold 60 acres to Experience Mitchell in 1715. In 1742, he sold his son David 23 acres of his, Benjamin's, homestead, excepting "four rods" for a burying place.  This may have been in preparation for his death, which occurred sometime that same year. The land David purchased was in Glocester, which had just formed out of Providence Plantation.  It's possible this had been Thornton land for generations.  

There is much about Benjamin that I don't yet know-his religion, his possible military service, the names of his mother and his wife, and his degree of participation in town affairs.  I've not located a will nor an inventory.  We do know, however, that he worked to support his family, and that he lived in what was at the time an area still being developed into a town.  He was one of the men who helped build America, and this family.

The line of descent is:

Benjamin Thornton-possibly Mary, possibly Gurney

Sarah Thornton-Stephen Paine

Nathan Paine-Lillis Winsor

Deborah Paine-Enos Eddy

Joseph Eddy-Susan Lamphire

Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard

Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick

Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook

Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen

Their descendants

 

Harshbarger line: Benedict Kepner 1714-1778

 Benedict Kepner would probably be easier to trace if there weren't at least two alternate spellings for his name (Kepler, Kebler, probably Kebner).  However, we do know enough about him that we can pretty well trace him and place him at a few times and locations.  That is more than we can do for some ancestors.

Benedict was born in Suzfeld, Karlsruhe, Baden-Wuerttemberg (what is now Germany) on or before June 29, 1714.  (That date may be a baptismal date.)  His parents were Benedict or Bernard and Anna Barbara Schlagmann Kepner, and he was the youngest of their eleven known children.  Soon after Benedict was born, probably in 1715, his parents and most of the family took the enormous step of moving across the ocean to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  By now, some of the children may have been close to thirty years old and it's not clear whether they all came or not, but at any rate, it would have been a large family group that traveled together.  I can feel the pain that Anna Barbara went through.  (She died in 1718, just a few short years after arriving here, and I can't help wondering whether the trials of the voyage had anything to do with her death.)

Benedict's father seems to have stayed in the Philadelphia area for his life, but Benedict himself had other plans.  He married Maria Salome Weicker or Weickert in 1734, and they settled in Bern township, Berks County, where he farmed and owned and operated a grist mill.  (Some records, because he is identified as a miller, actually show Miller as the surname but this is an incorrect interpretation of the original record.)

Benedict and Maria Salome had at least eight children together.  The family was Lutheran, with some of the children being baptized by the Reverend Daniel Schumacher,  (As an interesting aside, this man had no ministerial training and was a fraktur painter by trade.  He often did certificates of baptism and marriages, incorporating his art.  I wonder if any were done for this family?)   I've been unable to locate a specific church for the Kepners, but at least we know they were Lutheran.  

I've not located any specific information about the family during the French and Indian War, but it is quite likely that they were affected in one way or another.  Benedict may well have been in the militia, called out to guard settlers and defend forts, perhaps even going on expeditions.  Many people in the area left for safer shelter until the worst of the violence was over.  Did Benedict send his family away?  So far I've been unable to determine that.  Wherever they were, it would have been a terrifying time as about 100 people in the county were killed by the natives during the war.  

Benedict was 50 years old when he took a naturalization oath in 1764.  Four years later, there are tax records that show he had 150 acres of wooded land, 40 acres cleared, and 10 that I can't make out the heading for.  In the same record, it's indicated that he had two horses, 5 cattle, and 4 sheep, and also a mill.  He was taxed at 10 pounds, which is the second highest total on the page. He may not have been what we would consider prosperous, but he was probably at least in comfortable circumstances, at the time.  

A few years later, in 1771, he moved to Cumberland County with his sons John and Benjamin, perhaps as a widower.  He is said to have died back at his old home in Bern township in 1778, but records seem to be lacking.  It is possible that he died in Cumberland County but was buried "back home", perhaps beside his wife.  

I've not found a will for Benedict, so we don't know whether he still held real estate or the mill when he died.  I'd like to know, just because I'm curious, whether he lived entirely within the German communities, or whether he learned English.  I wonder whether or not he was literate.  I especially wonder about his experiences during the French and Indian War.  But at least we know a few details about his life, and can be grateful that he is part of the family.

Full disclosure:  At least one researcher does not think that Bernard Kepler, whom I list as a son, was Benedict's son.  This person believes Bernard to be a son of Johannes Jurg Kepner, who was a brother to Benedict.  I am not at all convinced of this, but would love to see documentation if it's available.

The line of descent somewhat tentative, I guess) is:

Benedict Kepner-Maria Salome Weickert

Bernard Kepler-Maria Elizabeth Lindemuth

Andrew Kepler-Anna Maria Kraemer

Mary Kepler-George Harshbarger

Lewis Harshbarger-Catherine Mentzer

Emmanuel Harshbarger-Clara Ellen Harter

Grover Harshbarger-Goldie Withers

Cleveland Harshbarger-Mary Beeks

Their descendants

 

Holbrook line: John Eames, unknown dates

 I'm sure hoping someone will be able to help me with John Eames, the son of John and Abigail Rosemorgie also seen as Morgan) Eames.  I have dates that don't add up, and places where he supposedly lived, that seem not to have records for him.  And for the few sources that I have, I can find them in only one place, not duplicated elsewhere.  Usually that could be a red flag, but it could also just mean that John was a man who lived under the radar, or who lived in several different locations.

John was probably born or baptized August 15, 1701 in New London, Connecticut.  I have seen other families claiming this John Eames as theirs, and perhaps the confusion is easily cleared up.  At least some of those have John married to Ann Stebbins, in 1726.  She died November 6, 1732, having given birth to two children.  Perhaps it was the same John Eames who married Rachel Comstock in New London on April 4, 1736.  She was about 19 years younger than John, and may well have been a relative of John's first mother in law, who was Bethia Comstock Stebbins.  John and Rachel had at least four children together, perhaps raising John's first two children also. 

About the only solid fact I have is that John admitted his fault when his first son, Daniel, was baptized in 1729, at the Congregational Church, and that he was admitted to the church on September 18, 1743.  This appears to have been without "owning the covenant"; the requirements for church membership were not as stringent as they had been earlier.  

I have not been able to determine a death date for John.  None of the wills I've found for "John Ames" appear to match in terms of wive's names, or children's names.  It is possible that he had moved out of the area before he died.  It's also possible that he was living in 1790, in one of the three John Ames's households who were listed in that census, or perhaps with a daughter.  He was obviously not the John Ames who died in 1735 (that appears to have been his father), and he doesn't seem to be the one of Preston, Connecticut who died in 1768.  

Although I don't know much specifically about John, I've just finished reading a book called "For Adam's Sake" by Allegra di Bonaventura. There is much social history in the book that would apply to John, such as the Great Awakening and the New Lights and the Rogerenes, as far as religion goes.  There is also a good explanation of how families were raised, with children being sent to live with other families at a young age in order to learn a trade or act as a servant to learn how to run a household.  This may well have occurred with the Eames family, especially with the two oldest.  We simply don't know.  The book also details the relationship New London had with slavery.  We don't know whether or not John held one or more slaves, but many people in the town did.  It's a very interesting book and if you are at all interested in early New London life, I recommend it.  

I would love to hear from other Eames researchers or family members, who may have additional information to help us fill in the many blanks in our knowledge of this ancestor.  Meanwhile, we know that he lived and died, and left a family that eventually led to our family.

The line of descent is:

John Eames-Rachel Constock

John Eames-Elizabeth Longbottom

Hannah Eames-James Lamphire

Susan Lamphire-Joseph Eddy

Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard

Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick

Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook

Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen

Their descendants 

 

Beeks line: Samuel Smith 1644-1719

 Family historians need to be careful when they research, when they draw conclusions, and when they share them.  Even with all these efforts, sometimes they still lead people astray.  As has happened several times in my research, I've found that at least two different men named Samuel Smith have been merged into one.  In this case, it's understandable because they were born around the same time, and in the same general location.  I hope I have untangled them enough to give accurate information here.

Samuel Smith, the son of pastor and millwright John Smith and his wife Susannah Hinckley, was baptized  October 24, 1644, about six moths after he was born, in Barnstable, Plymouth County, Massachusetts.  He was the first of the couple's 13 known children.  Samuel grew up in Barnstable, probably learning his father's trade or at least being exposed to it.  Barnstable was a town that was not quite as anti-Quaker as the other towns and villages in Plymouth Colony, but Samuel was brought up as a Puritan and likely a Separatist (Pilgrim).  As such, and as the first son, he would also have learned the basics of reading and writing, although we don't know how literate he actually became.

Samuel's mother died, probably in or following childbirth, in 1667 and nine years later his father, and two of his brothers moved to New Jersey, where they helped found the town of Woodbridge.  There Samuel married Esther (also seen as Easter) Dunham, the daughter of Jonathan and Mary Bloomfield Dunham, who are Beeks ancestors on a different line.  They were married about 1680, with four children being born during the next nine years.  Sadly, Esther died August 14, 1690, leaving those four children motherless.  

I should note that it's possible Samuel had an earlier marriage, as he would have been 36 at the time he married Esther, which is late for that time period.  One researcher thinks it possible that Samuel went to Woodbridge as a widower with three children.  

However, it's possible that he simply delayed marriage in order to help his father raise his youngest five or six siblings.  If this is the case, then Samuel had at least some experience in raising young children, but he remarried in less than two years.  His second (or possibly third) wife was Elizabeth Pierce, whom he married about 1691; I've found three different dates for the marriage and am not sure which is correct.  (I am also not sure who were parents were.  I had a whole blog post written about the Daniel Pierce who married Elizabeth Shedd, but that does not appear to be correct, because Daniel named his daughter in his will as Elizabeth Mixer.  I'm still researching that. It's possible that she was the daughter of Daniel Pierce, but a different one than named above.) 

Samuel was granted 103 acres of land when the village of Woodbridge was founded, and he was also given a lot (number 27) in the fourth division of land in 1717, as one of the original founders.  I've not found records of the other two divisions but he may well have received lands, possibly woodlot or meadow, in those divisions also.  His home was across the commons from the meeting house, and was used on more than one occasion as the location for meetings of the town government, when the meeting house was too cold for the men.  

One account listed at least eight men who would have been present at the meeting, so we can think that the Smith home was not small.  If it had no other advantages, it at least had a fireplace, and some sort of seats-chairs or benches-for the men.  

Samuel was given minor positions in the town, although they required some skills.  At various times, he was constable, and overseer of the highway.

One aspect of Samuel's life gives us reason to pause.  In 1717, he paid 50 pounds current New Jersey silver to purchase Phebe, a "Negro woman".  We don't know if this was his first and only slave, nor do we know why he purchased her.  It's possible that Elizabeth was not well and needed help.  I've not found information yet indicating whether this would have been unusual for Woodbridge, or whether there were additional enslaved people in the town.  We do know that he still held a Negro girl at the time that he wrote his will, which was December 16, 1719.

Although we know when he wrote his will, we don't know when Samuel died.  The will was not probated until October 15, 1729.  In it, he mentions just three of his seven (or ten) children; the three youngest.  He had likely given his other children land, or money, or other goods as they married and started their own families.  

This is what is known about Samuel.  There are at least three other bits of "information" floating about the internet that are unproven.  He is sometimes referred to as "Rev. Samuel Smith."  I've found no indication that is correct, but I have found other men with the same name who were "Reverend".  He is said to have been a member of the New Jersey Assembly in 1709, 1716, and 1718, but I've been unable to verify this.  (There was a Samuel Smith from Burlington who was a member of the Assembly and who died in 1718, so there may be reason for the confusion.) And finally, there is a family tradition that Samuel Smith operated a tavern in Wellfleet, Plymouth Colony before going to Woodbridge.  There was a Samuel Smith in Wellfleet but I have been unable to confirm that is was our Samuel Smith; the references I have found point to an 18th century man.)

Samuel doesn't need to have been a pastor, or a member of the New Jersey Assembly, or an early tavern owner, for us to appreciate his life.  He was a respectable citizen who raised a large family, who contributed to his town, and who seems to have stayed out of any trouble with the law.  I'd love to actually view his will and inventory.  He also has to be considered a pioneer; Woodbridge was on the frontier when it was founded during King Philip's War, and was west of the still small town of New York.  There were wild animals (bears, wolves, probably panthers or other large cats) to deal with and native Americans who were used to thinking of the land as theirs.  He led an interesting life.

The line of descent is

Samuel Smith-Elizabeth Pierce

Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph

Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham

Samuel Dunham-Hannah possibly Ruble

Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight

Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese

Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge

Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks

Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger

Their descendants