I hate to use "ish" with a date. It shows my ignorance, or ability to find documentation to support a date. However, that's the way it is. The most specific date I found, which I can't support with a document, is October 24, 1637, likely in Hingham, Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts. There are even those who state that his parentage isn't known, or at least that his mother isn't known. However, most sources report him to be a son of Elder John Strong, whom I wrote about earlier, and his (possibly second) wife, Abigail Ford. Thomas, as still a young boy, moved in 1647 to Windsor, Connecticut, where his parents lived until 1659.
Thomas lost no time in marrying Mary Hewitt at Northampton on October 3, 1659. She was the daughter of Rev. Ephraim and Isabel Overton Hewitt (also spelled Huit, particularly in earlier records). Thomas's father was the elder of the church, or soon would be, and Rev. Ephraim was a strong Puritan pastor, so Thomas and Mary would seem to have been well-matched. However, Thomas's name is not on the list of those who first owned the Covenant, nor is Mary's. One wonders where they were spiritually, that they would not have joined the church immediately. I've not been able to learn the dates that they joined, but it must have happened, because Thomas was a tithing man in 1669 and possibly for years thereafter. (A tithing man was a sort of "law enforcer" for the church).
Thomas would have belonged to the militia of the town and would have been deeply involved in defending the town during King Philip's War. I have not found his name on any lists indicating he fought outside of town but every able-bodied man would have been needed. There were native American attacks on the palisades the men had built, and it was the spirit of the men (and women) inside that kept the rest of the townspeople safe (several died in the fields as some of the attacks began). Thomas is listed as a "trooper" for Windsor, Connecticut in 1658 under Captain John Mason, but I haven't been able to determine what that service would have entailed, or why it was needed.
Thomas and Mary had five children together before she died February 20, 1671. He then married Rachel Holton and they had at least eleven children together. The youngest was born after her father's death, which occurred on October 3, 1689. The estate papers are really hard to figure out, although they are mostly legible. Apparently nothing was filed until 1695. The estate seems to have been valued at over 400 pounds, more or less. Rachel or a committee, or both, attempted to divide the estate so that each of the children would have their portion, and so the younger children could be raised until put to work. I didn't locate an actual will, but she seems to be following some sort of directions from someone. (Rachel later remarried, so some of the adult children actually had a step mother and a step father)
From the inventory, it appears that Thomas was a farmer, as he had several plots of land, oxen, cattle, horses, sheep, and lambs. He may have been a shoemaker at one time, as there is the "remains of a last" in the list. The inventory was taken 6 years after his death, so it is not a perfect look at his holdings. Some goods, such as food and seeds, were used up in the meantime, as were cloths that were cut up for clothes for the children. There were two guns listed, but no Bible that I could see. Surely Thomas would have been able to read, though, as all Puritan boys were expected to meet this standard.
I wish we knew more about John Strong. His father overshadowed him and out-lived him, too. So was our John a meek and mild-mannered man, or was he strong and silent? Was he a source of help to the community during and after King Philip's war, when some had lost their husbands and fathers and many had lost their homes and crops? There is so much more I'd like to know!
The line of descent is
Thomas Strong-Mary Hewitt
Maria Strong-Samuel Judd
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Fun fact: Thomas Strong is the 8th great grandfather of Lady Diana. He is my 8th great grandfather, too. So that makes us ninth cousins, which is kind of fun.
Showing posts with label Fay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fay. Show all posts
Friday, July 3, 2020
Friday, June 12, 2020
Holbrook line: Medad Pomeroy 1638-1716
My last blog post was about Thomas Noble, an ancestor on our Allen side. In it, I mentioned that his widow, Hannah Warriner, had married Medad Pomeroy. I recognized that name so looked for the blog post I must have written about him, but there was nothing to be found. So, here it is. Medad Pomeroy is an ancestor on our Holbrook side. He was first married to Experience Woodward, from whom we descend. He was later married to Abigail Strong, who would be a sibling of our ancestor Thomas Strong, also on the Holbrook side. And finally, he was married to Hannah Warriner Noble, the Allen connection. We have quite a connection to this man, and it's time that I wrote about him.
Medad Pomeroy was born August 19, 1638 in Windsor, Hartford Connecticut, to Eltweed and Mary Rockett/Rockwood Pomeroy. The elder Pomeroys were with the very first settlers in 1633, when the settlement was first called Dorchester. Eltweed had some prominence in the town, and is noted to be the founding father of the Pomeroy family in America. Medad was one of at least eight children born to the couple. Eltweed was a fuller, but perhaps he provided his children with an apprenticeship, for Medad was a blacksmith and a gunsmith. It's unclear why Medad left Windsor to go to Northampton, Massachusetts (north of Springfield), but once there, he may have been taught by John Webb, who was the first blacksmith in Northampton but not necessarily a businessman. (One source says he arrived in Northampton in 1659 and was welcomed because of his blacksmithing skills. I've used a history of Northampton for most of the information in this post.) Medad eventually took over Webb's shop location, perhaps with Webb's approval. Medad also must have been given a decent education for the time. Although he didn't attend college, the positions he held in the town would have required reading, writing, and arithmetic skills.
As mentioned, Medad married three times. He married Experience Woodward, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Mather Woodward, on March 21, 1661 in Northampton, not long after his arrival in Northampton. (Henry was one of the first settlers of the town.) Medad and Experience had 11 children together, before she died, possibly in childbirth, at the age of 43. Medad next married Abigail Strong, and they had one son together. When Abigail died in 1704, he waited just a few months before marrying Hannah Warriner Noble. By this time, he was about 67 years old and Hannah was also in her 60's, so there were no children from this marriage.
Medad had one of the longest periods of public service to his town of any ancestor I've yet found. He was chosen selectman of the town 28 times, deputy to the general court seven times, treasurer from 1698 onward, and some years held as many as six elected offices at the same time. It was a small town, but he was still one of the prominent men in town. He was also clerk, responsible for keeping town records, for most of the period from 1665 until shortly before his death.
As if that was not enough honor, and work, he was also a deacon in the church, and a member of the militia who was involved in the Falls Fight, serving under Captain Turner. This fight involved the massacre of a native American village so is not necessarily something to be proud of, but it was part of his life and he would have lived with that knowledge for another 40 plus years. I wonder if he ever had nightmares, or whether he felt it was his duty to participate? His son Ebenezer was granted land in 1736 in reward for his father's service during this battle.
Medad wrote his will in 1708 but lived until December 30, 1716. There must have been some kind of prenuptial agreement because he left Hannah her choice of a cow, everything she had brought with her, and instructions that she was to draw from the estate anything that she needed. He left his sons and daughters anywhere from 20 to 80 pounds apiece, except that by the time he died, the estate was not worth nearly as much as he had expected. Perhaps in the interim, he had sold assets and given the proceeds to the children, but it's hard to know. His estate was valued at just 41 pounds, unless there were more pages to the inventory that didn't get filmed.
There is more to be told about Medad than I've included in this brief sketch. He was involved in at least one town controversy, and there were a couple of business ventures that don't seem to have gotten off the ground. But Medad seems to have been well-respected, an extremely hard worker, and an important part of the town he served so well. While recognizing that he had shortcomings, we can still respect this man, part of our past and part of our family.
The line of descent is:
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Warriner
Joseph Pomeroy-Hannah Seymour
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Medad Pomeroy was born August 19, 1638 in Windsor, Hartford Connecticut, to Eltweed and Mary Rockett/Rockwood Pomeroy. The elder Pomeroys were with the very first settlers in 1633, when the settlement was first called Dorchester. Eltweed had some prominence in the town, and is noted to be the founding father of the Pomeroy family in America. Medad was one of at least eight children born to the couple. Eltweed was a fuller, but perhaps he provided his children with an apprenticeship, for Medad was a blacksmith and a gunsmith. It's unclear why Medad left Windsor to go to Northampton, Massachusetts (north of Springfield), but once there, he may have been taught by John Webb, who was the first blacksmith in Northampton but not necessarily a businessman. (One source says he arrived in Northampton in 1659 and was welcomed because of his blacksmithing skills. I've used a history of Northampton for most of the information in this post.) Medad eventually took over Webb's shop location, perhaps with Webb's approval. Medad also must have been given a decent education for the time. Although he didn't attend college, the positions he held in the town would have required reading, writing, and arithmetic skills.
As mentioned, Medad married three times. He married Experience Woodward, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Mather Woodward, on March 21, 1661 in Northampton, not long after his arrival in Northampton. (Henry was one of the first settlers of the town.) Medad and Experience had 11 children together, before she died, possibly in childbirth, at the age of 43. Medad next married Abigail Strong, and they had one son together. When Abigail died in 1704, he waited just a few months before marrying Hannah Warriner Noble. By this time, he was about 67 years old and Hannah was also in her 60's, so there were no children from this marriage.
Medad had one of the longest periods of public service to his town of any ancestor I've yet found. He was chosen selectman of the town 28 times, deputy to the general court seven times, treasurer from 1698 onward, and some years held as many as six elected offices at the same time. It was a small town, but he was still one of the prominent men in town. He was also clerk, responsible for keeping town records, for most of the period from 1665 until shortly before his death.
As if that was not enough honor, and work, he was also a deacon in the church, and a member of the militia who was involved in the Falls Fight, serving under Captain Turner. This fight involved the massacre of a native American village so is not necessarily something to be proud of, but it was part of his life and he would have lived with that knowledge for another 40 plus years. I wonder if he ever had nightmares, or whether he felt it was his duty to participate? His son Ebenezer was granted land in 1736 in reward for his father's service during this battle.
Medad wrote his will in 1708 but lived until December 30, 1716. There must have been some kind of prenuptial agreement because he left Hannah her choice of a cow, everything she had brought with her, and instructions that she was to draw from the estate anything that she needed. He left his sons and daughters anywhere from 20 to 80 pounds apiece, except that by the time he died, the estate was not worth nearly as much as he had expected. Perhaps in the interim, he had sold assets and given the proceeds to the children, but it's hard to know. His estate was valued at just 41 pounds, unless there were more pages to the inventory that didn't get filmed.
There is more to be told about Medad than I've included in this brief sketch. He was involved in at least one town controversy, and there were a couple of business ventures that don't seem to have gotten off the ground. But Medad seems to have been well-respected, an extremely hard worker, and an important part of the town he served so well. While recognizing that he had shortcomings, we can still respect this man, part of our past and part of our family.
The line of descent is:
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Warriner
Joseph Pomeroy-Hannah Seymour
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, May 26, 2020
Holbrook line: Samuel Morris 1670-1745
Oh dear. I have been guilty of perpetuating an error in my blog posts, I fear. That of course is one reason I write these blog posts, to prove to my own satisfaction that I have the correct ancestry for each of the people I write about. Now I find that I must strike names from my tree, and go back to update a few of my earlier posts. At least through this line, we are not connected to the Mayo or the John Graves lines. So those posts are now "alternate facts", but I will leave the posts up, just adding an update, so that if someone else is researching those lines, they might be helped.
Now, let's turn to Samuel Morris. He was born in March, 1670, in Roxbury, Massachusetts to Edward and Grace Bett Morris. He lived there with his parents and seven siblings, until his father moved to Woodstock, Connecticut in 1685. His father was a man of considerable wealth and standing in both towns, so when his father died in 1689, Samuel inherited some lands, even though he was "only" a fourth son. The narrative gets a little confusing here, as Woodstock was originally known as "New Roxbury" and some of the records are not clear as to which Roxbury is being discussed.
It does appear that Samuel returned to Roxbury, or possibly had stayed there, and married Mehitable Mayo, daughter of John and Hannah Graves Mayo in 1694. Samuel inherited some of his father's land there and so it makes sense that he would have returned to the scene of his youth and lived there. He was made a freeman there in 1691. Samuel and Mehitable had at least seven children together, and she died February 8, 1703. That makes it impossible for her to be the mother of Abigail Morris, who was born April 2, 1707. Samuel had married Dorotha or Dorothy Martin, the widow Howe, in Marlboro of Middlesex County, Massachusetts on May 15, 1706. Dorothy had six children, Samuel had seven, and then had two children together, Abigail and Elizabeth, before disappearing from Marlboro records. All I know about Dorothy Martin Howe Morris right now is that her father was Thomas Martin, and he died in 1701. (Another ancestor to explore!)
We know that Samuel purchased lands in Marlboro before his second marriage, and we know that he purchased 1500 acres of land in 1714 from Governor Joseph Dudley, for 500 pounds English money. This was on the east line of the Town of Woodstock. On the same day, Samuel and Dorothy gave a deed of the old homestead in Roxbury to Colonel William Dudley for 500 pounds current money. This is when the Morris's finally removed to Connecticut. Samuel built a house with "fortifications". We're not told exactly what this meant, but generally it would mean one that had thick walls, and thin slits from which guns could be fired without exposing oneself to the "enemy". Situations with some of the native Americans were still tense, although the Nipmuck tribe which lived nearby seems to have been friendly. As far as we know, the fortifications were never needed.
Samuel was a highly respected man in Woodstock, but I must say he seems to have also been a grumpy old man in his later years. He felt that he was being double taxed as far as church rates go, being forced to pay for the meeting house, minister's salary, etc. in more than one town at a time, because he was assigned to a parish that was not of his liking. He claimed great difficulty in traveling the five miles to Thompson, citing swamps, mountains, and a river he had to cross to reach the meeting house he was forced to support financially. This complaint stayed in the court and on town records for several years, until eventually he was given half rates for the church he did not wish to attend. His grumbling may not have stopped, but the annual discussions did. It's believed he attended church at a location much closer to his home, in his later years, one that he could reach without difficulty.
Samuel built and maintained at least three bridges in the area, over a river and two streams on his 1500 acres. He also kept up a road on his property, and other than the church dispute, seems to have been a good neighbor.
Dorothy died July 28, 1742, and Samuel died January 9, 1745. Sadly, we are missing all probate records for Samuel, so we don't know whether he acquired additional land other than the 1500 acres, or what value his inventory showed. The records are thought to have been destroyed in a fire, but it's always possible that they will show up somewhere. We are left with records of a man who had enough wealth to build a fortified house, to build and maintain bridges, and to raise at least nine children. He was also a man who was willing to start over, in Roxbury and then Marlboro and then near Woodstock. His official death location is Thompson, Connecticut, because town limits expanded. As far as is known, he didn't leave those 1500 acres.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Morris-Dorothy Martin
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin=Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
And now, if you'll excuse me, I have some corrections to make!
Now, let's turn to Samuel Morris. He was born in March, 1670, in Roxbury, Massachusetts to Edward and Grace Bett Morris. He lived there with his parents and seven siblings, until his father moved to Woodstock, Connecticut in 1685. His father was a man of considerable wealth and standing in both towns, so when his father died in 1689, Samuel inherited some lands, even though he was "only" a fourth son. The narrative gets a little confusing here, as Woodstock was originally known as "New Roxbury" and some of the records are not clear as to which Roxbury is being discussed.
It does appear that Samuel returned to Roxbury, or possibly had stayed there, and married Mehitable Mayo, daughter of John and Hannah Graves Mayo in 1694. Samuel inherited some of his father's land there and so it makes sense that he would have returned to the scene of his youth and lived there. He was made a freeman there in 1691. Samuel and Mehitable had at least seven children together, and she died February 8, 1703. That makes it impossible for her to be the mother of Abigail Morris, who was born April 2, 1707. Samuel had married Dorotha or Dorothy Martin, the widow Howe, in Marlboro of Middlesex County, Massachusetts on May 15, 1706. Dorothy had six children, Samuel had seven, and then had two children together, Abigail and Elizabeth, before disappearing from Marlboro records. All I know about Dorothy Martin Howe Morris right now is that her father was Thomas Martin, and he died in 1701. (Another ancestor to explore!)
We know that Samuel purchased lands in Marlboro before his second marriage, and we know that he purchased 1500 acres of land in 1714 from Governor Joseph Dudley, for 500 pounds English money. This was on the east line of the Town of Woodstock. On the same day, Samuel and Dorothy gave a deed of the old homestead in Roxbury to Colonel William Dudley for 500 pounds current money. This is when the Morris's finally removed to Connecticut. Samuel built a house with "fortifications". We're not told exactly what this meant, but generally it would mean one that had thick walls, and thin slits from which guns could be fired without exposing oneself to the "enemy". Situations with some of the native Americans were still tense, although the Nipmuck tribe which lived nearby seems to have been friendly. As far as we know, the fortifications were never needed.
Samuel was a highly respected man in Woodstock, but I must say he seems to have also been a grumpy old man in his later years. He felt that he was being double taxed as far as church rates go, being forced to pay for the meeting house, minister's salary, etc. in more than one town at a time, because he was assigned to a parish that was not of his liking. He claimed great difficulty in traveling the five miles to Thompson, citing swamps, mountains, and a river he had to cross to reach the meeting house he was forced to support financially. This complaint stayed in the court and on town records for several years, until eventually he was given half rates for the church he did not wish to attend. His grumbling may not have stopped, but the annual discussions did. It's believed he attended church at a location much closer to his home, in his later years, one that he could reach without difficulty.
Samuel built and maintained at least three bridges in the area, over a river and two streams on his 1500 acres. He also kept up a road on his property, and other than the church dispute, seems to have been a good neighbor.
Dorothy died July 28, 1742, and Samuel died January 9, 1745. Sadly, we are missing all probate records for Samuel, so we don't know whether he acquired additional land other than the 1500 acres, or what value his inventory showed. The records are thought to have been destroyed in a fire, but it's always possible that they will show up somewhere. We are left with records of a man who had enough wealth to build a fortified house, to build and maintain bridges, and to raise at least nine children. He was also a man who was willing to start over, in Roxbury and then Marlboro and then near Woodstock. His official death location is Thompson, Connecticut, because town limits expanded. As far as is known, he didn't leave those 1500 acres.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Morris-Dorothy Martin
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin=Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
And now, if you'll excuse me, I have some corrections to make!
Friday, May 22, 2020
Holbrook line: Israel Joslin 1692-1740 Yes, this one!
These Joslin men! Honestly, if they had tried, they couldn't be any more confusing than they are. Did they live to play :hide and seek" and "Can you see me now? and "Will the real Israel Joslin please stand up"? Israel's father, Nathaniel, was hard to unravel because of several men in the same time and location with the same name. Israel follows that pattern, and many of the trees on line seem to have it wrong. We have to pay attention to time, location, and opportunity in order to sort the documentation and make sure we have this right. Of course, I could still be wrong and if someone can refute this, please contact me.
Our Israel Joslin was born April 2, 1692 in Marlboro, Worcester County, Massachusetts. He was the son of Nathaniel and Hester or Esther Morse Joslin. He may well have spent his entire life in the same location, although I haven't verified that yet. He died in Southboro rather than Marlboro, but Southboro split off from Marlboro so it's quite possible that Israel's land was originally in Marlboro.
As a boy, Israel was one of eleven children, and he must have enjoyed large families because it appears that he was the father of at least nine children. The lucky wife/mother was Sarah Cleveland (or Cleaveland), the daughter of Enoch and Elizabeth Counts Cleveland. They were married on April 29, 1719 in Marlboro.
Other than the birth of his children, Israel seems to have made little impact on the town he lived in, whether it was Marlboro or Southboro (the two towns are less than five miles apart, so Israel likely knew everyone in each of the two towns). I haven't yet checked the town records (they are in Salt Lake City but aren't available on line yet) but I would assume that he paid taxes, went to church, and served in some sort of militia or training band. That's what we know so far.
However, his will and inventory tell us a little bit more. He described himself as a yeoman in the will written August 29, 1740, less than two months before he died on October 23 of that same year. He was only 48 years old. What illness would have caused him to write a will at that age? Or maybe it wasn't an illness. He could have been hurt in an accident, or while serving in a military raid, or any number of other ways. But we can think that maybe it wasn't a sudden accident, like getting hit by lightning or drowning. Israel must have known or suspected it was coming.
By his description of "yeoman", we know he owned land, which is confirmed in his inventory, and we know he was not a servant. I haven't been able to verify yet that he was a "free man" and had the right to vote, because those records are also at Salt Lake City. But it's likely that he was in that category. His will is a little bit surprising, because he leaves everything to his wife Sarah. Typically husbands would leave the widow one third of the estate, as required by law, and then give instructions for how the rest was to be divided. This will, however, only says that after Sarah is deceased, this assets are to be divided among his children. Sarah was only about 38 and could reasonably be expected to re-marry, but that didn't matter to Israel. He must have trusted and loved her very much!
It is only when we look at Israel's inventory that we are able to start drawing a picture of him, and it seems that whatever else he was, he was a good steward of his land. He had considerably more clothes than did many of his fellow yeomen, and he had two Bibles and books that were by themselves valued at three pounds. He also had a pair of spectacles, bt we don't know whether he was near or far sighted. There were at least four beds with bedding, which is more than many households had, and
His inventory included just three pieces of land, and they are not very description. However, the appraisers assigned a value of 1200 pounds to his homestead, including all the lands attached to it, so this is where much of his wealth lay. The inventory was taken just a few days after his death. It totaled a little over 1678 pounds, which even after we take the new currency into account, wasn't a small estate. Sarah was set for life and could run the farm and raise their children.
Except, it's possible that our Sarah Joslin is the one who married David Bellows in 1745. He lived only until 1754, but was born in 1702 so was about her age, and was a husbandman when he died. Sarah declined to be the executor of his estate and I can find no further reference to her. I suppose it's possible that she married again and we just haven't traced her yet. It's also possible this is a different Sarah Joslin, but our Sarah seems to be the only one in the area and of the right age to marry David. I'd love to find the rest of her records, too!
The line of descent is
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Our Israel Joslin was born April 2, 1692 in Marlboro, Worcester County, Massachusetts. He was the son of Nathaniel and Hester or Esther Morse Joslin. He may well have spent his entire life in the same location, although I haven't verified that yet. He died in Southboro rather than Marlboro, but Southboro split off from Marlboro so it's quite possible that Israel's land was originally in Marlboro.
As a boy, Israel was one of eleven children, and he must have enjoyed large families because it appears that he was the father of at least nine children. The lucky wife/mother was Sarah Cleveland (or Cleaveland), the daughter of Enoch and Elizabeth Counts Cleveland. They were married on April 29, 1719 in Marlboro.
Other than the birth of his children, Israel seems to have made little impact on the town he lived in, whether it was Marlboro or Southboro (the two towns are less than five miles apart, so Israel likely knew everyone in each of the two towns). I haven't yet checked the town records (they are in Salt Lake City but aren't available on line yet) but I would assume that he paid taxes, went to church, and served in some sort of militia or training band. That's what we know so far.
However, his will and inventory tell us a little bit more. He described himself as a yeoman in the will written August 29, 1740, less than two months before he died on October 23 of that same year. He was only 48 years old. What illness would have caused him to write a will at that age? Or maybe it wasn't an illness. He could have been hurt in an accident, or while serving in a military raid, or any number of other ways. But we can think that maybe it wasn't a sudden accident, like getting hit by lightning or drowning. Israel must have known or suspected it was coming.
By his description of "yeoman", we know he owned land, which is confirmed in his inventory, and we know he was not a servant. I haven't been able to verify yet that he was a "free man" and had the right to vote, because those records are also at Salt Lake City. But it's likely that he was in that category. His will is a little bit surprising, because he leaves everything to his wife Sarah. Typically husbands would leave the widow one third of the estate, as required by law, and then give instructions for how the rest was to be divided. This will, however, only says that after Sarah is deceased, this assets are to be divided among his children. Sarah was only about 38 and could reasonably be expected to re-marry, but that didn't matter to Israel. He must have trusted and loved her very much!
It is only when we look at Israel's inventory that we are able to start drawing a picture of him, and it seems that whatever else he was, he was a good steward of his land. He had considerably more clothes than did many of his fellow yeomen, and he had two Bibles and books that were by themselves valued at three pounds. He also had a pair of spectacles, bt we don't know whether he was near or far sighted. There were at least four beds with bedding, which is more than many households had, and
His inventory included just three pieces of land, and they are not very description. However, the appraisers assigned a value of 1200 pounds to his homestead, including all the lands attached to it, so this is where much of his wealth lay. The inventory was taken just a few days after his death. It totaled a little over 1678 pounds, which even after we take the new currency into account, wasn't a small estate. Sarah was set for life and could run the farm and raise their children.
Except, it's possible that our Sarah Joslin is the one who married David Bellows in 1745. He lived only until 1754, but was born in 1702 so was about her age, and was a husbandman when he died. Sarah declined to be the executor of his estate and I can find no further reference to her. I suppose it's possible that she married again and we just haven't traced her yet. It's also possible this is a different Sarah Joslin, but our Sarah seems to be the only one in the area and of the right age to marry David. I'd love to find the rest of her records, too!
The line of descent is
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Euzebia/Luceba Fay-Libbeus StanardHiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, April 7, 2020
Holbrook line: Sergeant Samuel Judd 1653-1720
Well, OK, maybe he wasn't born in 1651. Maybe it was 1653. Records seem to be lacking. However, his father was Deacon Thomas Judd and his mother was Elizabeth, maiden name unknown. He was born in Farmington, Connecticut, which is just west of Hartford, and he was one of nine children. Since his father was the church deacon, it is probably safe to assume that this was a Puritan family. About 1670, the Puritan churches started having difficulties and we don't know how seriously Samuel took his religion, but presumably he would still have attended church even if he wasn't an official member of the congregation. There are church records but one has to be on site in Connecticut to view them, it appears.
Samuel appears to have been in Northampton, Massachusetts at the time of his marriage in 1681 to Mariah Strong, daughter of Thomas and Mary Hewett Strong, who were also of Northampton. He may have gone there with his father and step mother, because they also were of Northampton by the time they died. However it happened, Samuel became a resident of Northampton and stayed there for the rest of his life. I show that Samuel and Mariah had 10 children, He seems not to have been much involved in town service, other than as a juror on several cases. He was made a freeman on 684, so at least he had voting rights and responsibilities.
In his death record, Samuel is referred to as "Sergeant" Samuel Judd. I have tried to locate (on line) records that would tell us how he acquired that rank (generally, elected by the men) and where he might have served, but the only reference I found showed a Samuel Judd serving in 1709, This may or may not be our Samuel; he would have been 56 years old at the time. If Samuel was in Northampton in 1675, then he would surely have been involved in King Philip's War, because the town was attacked and some homes destroyed during that time. However, the town was heavily garrisoned and defended, so the whole town was not lost, and it doesn't seem that the townspeople fled. The colony was also involved in Queen Anne's War and King William's War, so Samuel may have taken part in battles there. He may also have responded to the native American attacks on Harfield and Deerfield later in the 1700s. It's frustrating to have all these possibilities and no answers! Maybe when the Allen County Public Library is able to re-open...
I did locate Samuel's will. It's a little unusual because he gives half of everything to his wife, Mariah, but if she re-marries she is to get only one third and then only for as long as she lives. Samuel did sign the will but it is printed rather than cursive writing. I don't know if that means anything; perhaps it only means that he was ill and uncomfortable when he signed it. I've not located an inventory but he also left each of his six daughters fifty pounds, besides what he left his wife and each of his three sons. It appears that he was doing OK financially, perhaps greatly helped by that bequest from his step mother. Mariah lived until 1751, so his sons waited a while for their bequests.
I would love to know more about Samuel, especially about his military service. I'd love to find his inventory, as well as church records that might tell us something of not only his religious character, but also where he was seated in the meeting house. That would give us an indication of his status in the town. This is a start, but only a start, to Samuel's story.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Judd-Mariah Strong
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Samuel appears to have been in Northampton, Massachusetts at the time of his marriage in 1681 to Mariah Strong, daughter of Thomas and Mary Hewett Strong, who were also of Northampton. He may have gone there with his father and step mother, because they also were of Northampton by the time they died. However it happened, Samuel became a resident of Northampton and stayed there for the rest of his life. I show that Samuel and Mariah had 10 children, He seems not to have been much involved in town service, other than as a juror on several cases. He was made a freeman on 684, so at least he had voting rights and responsibilities.
In his death record, Samuel is referred to as "Sergeant" Samuel Judd. I have tried to locate (on line) records that would tell us how he acquired that rank (generally, elected by the men) and where he might have served, but the only reference I found showed a Samuel Judd serving in 1709, This may or may not be our Samuel; he would have been 56 years old at the time. If Samuel was in Northampton in 1675, then he would surely have been involved in King Philip's War, because the town was attacked and some homes destroyed during that time. However, the town was heavily garrisoned and defended, so the whole town was not lost, and it doesn't seem that the townspeople fled. The colony was also involved in Queen Anne's War and King William's War, so Samuel may have taken part in battles there. He may also have responded to the native American attacks on Harfield and Deerfield later in the 1700s. It's frustrating to have all these possibilities and no answers! Maybe when the Allen County Public Library is able to re-open...
I did locate Samuel's will. It's a little unusual because he gives half of everything to his wife, Mariah, but if she re-marries she is to get only one third and then only for as long as she lives. Samuel did sign the will but it is printed rather than cursive writing. I don't know if that means anything; perhaps it only means that he was ill and uncomfortable when he signed it. I've not located an inventory but he also left each of his six daughters fifty pounds, besides what he left his wife and each of his three sons. It appears that he was doing OK financially, perhaps greatly helped by that bequest from his step mother. Mariah lived until 1751, so his sons waited a while for their bequests.
I would love to know more about Samuel, especially about his military service. I'd love to find his inventory, as well as church records that might tell us something of not only his religious character, but also where he was seated in the meeting house. That would give us an indication of his status in the town. This is a start, but only a start, to Samuel's story.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Judd-Mariah Strong
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, February 4, 2020
Holbrook line: John Brackett 1637-1686
As I first researched this ancestor of ours, I could find only enough information to perhaps fill out three sentences. I knew his parents, his birth and death dates (incorrect death date, as it turns out), his siblings and his wife and children. I knew the town where he lived and died. I knew that his father was a deacon and a jailer, and I thought maybe our John had gone undercover, so to speak, to escape his father's reputation.
But as I did a little more research, I found a few more facts, ones that show John standing on his own two feet and becoming his own man. It's not much, yet, but still, it's more than I knew at the beginning.
John's parents were Richard and Alice Blower Brackett. His father had come to Massachusetts in 1632, returned to England to marry in 1633 and then returned to New England in 1634 with his bride. John had one older sister, Hannah. He and his brother were baptized the same day, May 7, 1637 in Boston. It's not clear whether the two were twins, but if not, they were certainly close all their days. Five more siblings were born after John. Remarkably, all of the children of Richard and Alice lived to adulthood.
It's not clear how much John would have remembered of his earliest childhood days in Boston, because his parents moved to Braintree about 1641. John would have been only about 4 years old at the time of the move, and Braintree was probably the equivalent of the old home place, although of course both Richard and Alice could have talked about their own childhoods, in England.
John, however, looked to the future. He married Hannah French, daughter of William and Elizabeth French, on September 6, 1661 in Braintree. Sometime during the next few years, he moved his family 45 miles north, to Billerica. Billerica had been founded in 1655 on the side of a former native village, and although John didn't get in on the ground floor, he must have had good reason for going there. Four of his brothers and sisters moved to Billerica, and Hannah's father may have already been there. These moves took place for the most part in the early 1660's, although exact dates are hard to pin down.
We do know that John was "rated" in 1669 for 15 shillings to go to the maintenance of Mr. Whiting, the church pastor. This was a fairly low amount based on the list I found in an 1883 History of Billerica, but at the time John had been married for only about 8 years so is not likely to have had a large estate. I also found that he was a soldier, at least in the militia, during King Philip's War. His family, along with those of Daniel Shed Jr, Samuel Trull, and James Kidder Jr. were assigned to Sergeant Kidder's home when the town felt threatened. Two soldiers were also assigned there, for a total of 7 soldiers, so the implication is that each of the men mentioned were also soldiers. I also found note that Billerica had been abandoned after an attack, but I am not sure of the chronology of this, whether it was before or after the assignment of the various families to the garrison and strong houses. John was rated at three shillings in 1679, but again, this is soon after the war ended so it is hard to draw conclusions from this list.
Hannah died on May 9, 1674, the same day that her last daughter was born. Her father named the last daughter "Marah", which meant "bitter" in the Old Testament. However, with seven children to raise he needed a new wife, and he married Ruth Morse Ellis, widow, on March 31, 1674. She had three children of her own and then she and John had four children, three of whom survived. That was one large family. And Ruth would have been the one to take her four children, John's seven, and possibly the first of their children together, into Sergeant Kidder's house for what may have been a lengthy period of time during King Philip's War!
John died March 18, 1686 in Billerica, still less than 50 years old. He apparently didn't leave a will, and his inventory is confusing. It looks like it says that the first accounting was not complete and the marshal seized some of Ruth's holdings until it was completed to the court's satisfaction, but the final total was a little over 118 pounds. Ruth would have received 1/3 of that, and the rest divided up among John's children as they reached the age of majority. So there wasn't much to go around, but something is better than nothing.
I found nothing about John's religious beliefs but as this was still early in colonial history, and as his father had been a deacon, it's probably safe to say he was a Puritan and raised his children in the same beliefs. His inventory appears to show the tools, animals, and equipment of a farmer, although he may also have had a trade. I'd like to know more about him, of course. He was another of the salt of the earth type people who built New England and influenced America down to this day.
The line of descent is
John Brackett-Hannah French
Hannah Brackett-Joseph Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Jordan
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stanard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
But as I did a little more research, I found a few more facts, ones that show John standing on his own two feet and becoming his own man. It's not much, yet, but still, it's more than I knew at the beginning.
John's parents were Richard and Alice Blower Brackett. His father had come to Massachusetts in 1632, returned to England to marry in 1633 and then returned to New England in 1634 with his bride. John had one older sister, Hannah. He and his brother were baptized the same day, May 7, 1637 in Boston. It's not clear whether the two were twins, but if not, they were certainly close all their days. Five more siblings were born after John. Remarkably, all of the children of Richard and Alice lived to adulthood.
It's not clear how much John would have remembered of his earliest childhood days in Boston, because his parents moved to Braintree about 1641. John would have been only about 4 years old at the time of the move, and Braintree was probably the equivalent of the old home place, although of course both Richard and Alice could have talked about their own childhoods, in England.
John, however, looked to the future. He married Hannah French, daughter of William and Elizabeth French, on September 6, 1661 in Braintree. Sometime during the next few years, he moved his family 45 miles north, to Billerica. Billerica had been founded in 1655 on the side of a former native village, and although John didn't get in on the ground floor, he must have had good reason for going there. Four of his brothers and sisters moved to Billerica, and Hannah's father may have already been there. These moves took place for the most part in the early 1660's, although exact dates are hard to pin down.
We do know that John was "rated" in 1669 for 15 shillings to go to the maintenance of Mr. Whiting, the church pastor. This was a fairly low amount based on the list I found in an 1883 History of Billerica, but at the time John had been married for only about 8 years so is not likely to have had a large estate. I also found that he was a soldier, at least in the militia, during King Philip's War. His family, along with those of Daniel Shed Jr, Samuel Trull, and James Kidder Jr. were assigned to Sergeant Kidder's home when the town felt threatened. Two soldiers were also assigned there, for a total of 7 soldiers, so the implication is that each of the men mentioned were also soldiers. I also found note that Billerica had been abandoned after an attack, but I am not sure of the chronology of this, whether it was before or after the assignment of the various families to the garrison and strong houses. John was rated at three shillings in 1679, but again, this is soon after the war ended so it is hard to draw conclusions from this list.
Hannah died on May 9, 1674, the same day that her last daughter was born. Her father named the last daughter "Marah", which meant "bitter" in the Old Testament. However, with seven children to raise he needed a new wife, and he married Ruth Morse Ellis, widow, on March 31, 1674. She had three children of her own and then she and John had four children, three of whom survived. That was one large family. And Ruth would have been the one to take her four children, John's seven, and possibly the first of their children together, into Sergeant Kidder's house for what may have been a lengthy period of time during King Philip's War!
John died March 18, 1686 in Billerica, still less than 50 years old. He apparently didn't leave a will, and his inventory is confusing. It looks like it says that the first accounting was not complete and the marshal seized some of Ruth's holdings until it was completed to the court's satisfaction, but the final total was a little over 118 pounds. Ruth would have received 1/3 of that, and the rest divided up among John's children as they reached the age of majority. So there wasn't much to go around, but something is better than nothing.
I found nothing about John's religious beliefs but as this was still early in colonial history, and as his father had been a deacon, it's probably safe to say he was a Puritan and raised his children in the same beliefs. His inventory appears to show the tools, animals, and equipment of a farmer, although he may also have had a trade. I'd like to know more about him, of course. He was another of the salt of the earth type people who built New England and influenced America down to this day.
The line of descent is
John Brackett-Hannah French
Hannah Brackett-Joseph Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Jordan
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stanard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, January 24, 2020
Holbrook line: David Fay, 1679-1738
We're always glad for a little bit of information about an ancestor and always hoping for more. I have to admit that there is not one new piece of information in this blog post about David Fay, but perhaps something new will come on line tomorrow, or the day after. It's always a disappointment when all I can find is information that is already in print, but I'm happy to at least get this much written down for our family.
David Fay came from a family who may or may not have been French Huguenots. David's father, John Fay, came to America as an eight year old orphan boy boy, but his mother, Susanna Shattuck, had grandparents and even great grandparents who had come early to Massachusetts Bay Colony.
David was part of a large family. His father and mother had four children, but Susannah had previously been married to Joseph Morse and had ten children with him. Somehow, Susannah survived 14 or more childbirths, and three husbands, for she married Thomas Brigham after John's death. John was a brave man, too, to accept responsibility for the ten children of his new wife.
David was born August grew up in Marlboro or Marlborough Massachusetts, He wasn't born until 1679, but he would have grown up hearing stories of King Philip's War, and of how the family had fled to Watertown until peace was restored. He may have heard about the Praying Indians that lived within the town limits, and he may have learned about the treatment the natives received from the colonists.
On May 1, 1699, David married Sarah Larkin, daughter of John and Joanna Hale Larkin, in Watertown, Massachusetts. This was the town his family had gone to during King Philip's War, and it was here that he found the young lady he married. David was just about 20 and Sarah was just two years older, so this was couple was a little bit young for the time, but they made their marriage work.
David inherited land from his father after John Fay's death in 1690. This would have been held in trust for him until he reached the age of majority, which happened right around the time of his marriage. In 1695, he was still considered a minor at 16 years of age, and asked the court to appoint Joseph Morse, probably his half brother, as his guardian. The court approved.
After their marriage, David and Sarah went to Marlboro, where they lived all their married life. David was starting to accept responsibilities in town. In 1710, he joined the church, which was still quite a lengthy process, as the whole church had to listen to his testimony and then decide whether he was living a plain, Christian life. By no means was this an easy task, so David must have been respected in the town. (Possibly he joined the church so his children could be baptized, but he still would have needed the approval of the congregation,) He was on a committee to seat the church after that. This was a delicate job because seating was assigned based on how long one had been a member of the church, general reputation, and how much money one was giving, The town fathers generally sat at the front and the tenant farmers at the back, for instance.
David supported his family as a weaver, in addition to the farming that he did. He was given a grant of land by the town in 1710. David and Sarah had 12 children together. It was probably fortunate that David had grown up in a large family and had learned to roll with the punches. Sarah was one of five children, so this may have been an adjustment for her, but most women think "We can do just one more" so this may have been her attitude.
Starting in 1727, plans were made for a peaceful division of the town of Marlborough. David and Sarah lived in what became Southborough, so it's not correct to say they moved to Southborough. They lived on the same farm they had always lived on. In Southborough, David was a constable, and a selectman in 1730, 1733, and 1735. We also know that his family was assigned to Isaac Howe's garrison, for protection from the native Americans. This implies that David was probably in the militia, but we don't know whether they ever had to go to the garrison or not, or what alarms and skirmishes he might have been involved in.
David died April 10, 1738, before his fiftieth birthday. I have not found any record of probate or estate records for him, There could be guardian records for some of the younger children, too, but I haven't located them. Sarah died in 1755 at Southborough, without remarrying. She must have been busy, raising that family, and we can hope that the children, as well as her husband's siblings, helped take care of her as she aged.
That's what I know about David Fay. Since he was a Puritan, it's likely that he was literate and could read the Bible to his children, and write as needed. As a weaver, he may have needed to have computational skills also, to keep track of his sales and his inventory. We don't know about his military service and his grandparents haven't been satisfactorily identified. But we do know that he cared for his family, stayed out of trouble, and was elected to public office several times. He was another solid New England ancestor.
The line of descent is:
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
David Fay came from a family who may or may not have been French Huguenots. David's father, John Fay, came to America as an eight year old orphan boy boy, but his mother, Susanna Shattuck, had grandparents and even great grandparents who had come early to Massachusetts Bay Colony.
David was part of a large family. His father and mother had four children, but Susannah had previously been married to Joseph Morse and had ten children with him. Somehow, Susannah survived 14 or more childbirths, and three husbands, for she married Thomas Brigham after John's death. John was a brave man, too, to accept responsibility for the ten children of his new wife.
David was born August grew up in Marlboro or Marlborough Massachusetts, He wasn't born until 1679, but he would have grown up hearing stories of King Philip's War, and of how the family had fled to Watertown until peace was restored. He may have heard about the Praying Indians that lived within the town limits, and he may have learned about the treatment the natives received from the colonists.
On May 1, 1699, David married Sarah Larkin, daughter of John and Joanna Hale Larkin, in Watertown, Massachusetts. This was the town his family had gone to during King Philip's War, and it was here that he found the young lady he married. David was just about 20 and Sarah was just two years older, so this was couple was a little bit young for the time, but they made their marriage work.
David inherited land from his father after John Fay's death in 1690. This would have been held in trust for him until he reached the age of majority, which happened right around the time of his marriage. In 1695, he was still considered a minor at 16 years of age, and asked the court to appoint Joseph Morse, probably his half brother, as his guardian. The court approved.
After their marriage, David and Sarah went to Marlboro, where they lived all their married life. David was starting to accept responsibilities in town. In 1710, he joined the church, which was still quite a lengthy process, as the whole church had to listen to his testimony and then decide whether he was living a plain, Christian life. By no means was this an easy task, so David must have been respected in the town. (Possibly he joined the church so his children could be baptized, but he still would have needed the approval of the congregation,) He was on a committee to seat the church after that. This was a delicate job because seating was assigned based on how long one had been a member of the church, general reputation, and how much money one was giving, The town fathers generally sat at the front and the tenant farmers at the back, for instance.
David supported his family as a weaver, in addition to the farming that he did. He was given a grant of land by the town in 1710. David and Sarah had 12 children together. It was probably fortunate that David had grown up in a large family and had learned to roll with the punches. Sarah was one of five children, so this may have been an adjustment for her, but most women think "We can do just one more" so this may have been her attitude.
Starting in 1727, plans were made for a peaceful division of the town of Marlborough. David and Sarah lived in what became Southborough, so it's not correct to say they moved to Southborough. They lived on the same farm they had always lived on. In Southborough, David was a constable, and a selectman in 1730, 1733, and 1735. We also know that his family was assigned to Isaac Howe's garrison, for protection from the native Americans. This implies that David was probably in the militia, but we don't know whether they ever had to go to the garrison or not, or what alarms and skirmishes he might have been involved in.
David died April 10, 1738, before his fiftieth birthday. I have not found any record of probate or estate records for him, There could be guardian records for some of the younger children, too, but I haven't located them. Sarah died in 1755 at Southborough, without remarrying. She must have been busy, raising that family, and we can hope that the children, as well as her husband's siblings, helped take care of her as she aged.
That's what I know about David Fay. Since he was a Puritan, it's likely that he was literate and could read the Bible to his children, and write as needed. As a weaver, he may have needed to have computational skills also, to keep track of his sales and his inventory. We don't know about his military service and his grandparents haven't been satisfactorily identified. But we do know that he cared for his family, stayed out of trouble, and was elected to public office several times. He was another solid New England ancestor.
The line of descent is:
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Friday, December 20, 2019
Holbrook line: John Trumbull 1670-1751
This is another case of the glass being half full. We have some information about John, but not enough to really let us think we know him, or even much about him. Like many in his generation, he is more shadow than substance. But still...there is this information.
John was born November 27, 1670 in Rowley, Massachusetts to Joseph and Hannah Smith Trumbull. Joseph and Hannah soon moved to Suffield in what would finally be determined to be Connecticut, in time for Joseph to be considered a proprietor there. John would have been only five years old when King Philip's War broke out, and the family is believed to have left Suffield for a time. Joseph would have served at least in the militia, but I've not yet found record of it. John would have been the "little man" of the family during this crisis.
I don't know whether John ever served in the military, except I do know training bands were required so he was at least theoretically able to serve in any of the military expeditions and native American scares of the late 1600's and early 1700's. He married Elizabeth Winchell, daughter of David and Elizabeth Filley Winchell, in Suffield on September 3, 1696. He was a little older than normal for a first marriage, but he likely had been helping care for his younger brothers and sisters.
John, whose name is spelled Trumble in the town records, was probably low on the social status scale. Most of the town offices that he held were relatively low level-fence viewer, surveyor of highways (indicating at least a basic education), and on a committee to make sure all hogs were "yoak'd and ring'd". He cast several dissenting votes in town meetings, some having to do with land grants and at least one having to do with paying a "rate" (tax) to pay a "writing scoller" in addition to the usual schoolmaster. By 1722 he was appointed to a committee to see to it that the pews were made, and in 1725 was trusted with the office of constable. This was a civic responsibility that many tried to avoid, as in involved collection of rates, and if he were unable for any reason to collect, that he could be held to account. Sure enough, in 1728 there was discussion about his failure to collect rates from two men, one of whom was by then deceased.
We're not told the assignment of the pews in the meeting house, but later John was given permission to change pews with a man who had been assigned the second pew. Usually these front pews were based on wealth, but sometimes exceptions were made for people who were elderly, or/and hard of hearing, and that may be the case here.
Some of his land was appropriated for a highway, and typically he would have received land elsewhere in compensation, although I haven't found record of that. His land was on Feather Street, which may have been land inherited from his father, and also noted (I'm not sure whether this was separate land, or a different description) as being the Allyn Land at the Ferry. His son was a ferryman, so John may or may not have also held that occupation.
Find a Grave states that this couple had eight children. I am unable to verify that but it could well be true. If his estate records could be located, that would be most helpful, both as to heirs and to the size of his estate, perhaps as to the land he owned and an occupation. Was he an employee of the iron works, or was he a farmer? We simply don't know at this point. We do know that he died January 3, 1751/52, when he would have been in his early eighties. So he was part of the "hardy pioneer stock" from whom we descend.
Oh, one other descendant is John Wayne, the actor. He is John Trumbull's sixth great grandson, making him, I believe, a seventh cousin once removed to my generation.
The line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba or Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
John was born November 27, 1670 in Rowley, Massachusetts to Joseph and Hannah Smith Trumbull. Joseph and Hannah soon moved to Suffield in what would finally be determined to be Connecticut, in time for Joseph to be considered a proprietor there. John would have been only five years old when King Philip's War broke out, and the family is believed to have left Suffield for a time. Joseph would have served at least in the militia, but I've not yet found record of it. John would have been the "little man" of the family during this crisis.
I don't know whether John ever served in the military, except I do know training bands were required so he was at least theoretically able to serve in any of the military expeditions and native American scares of the late 1600's and early 1700's. He married Elizabeth Winchell, daughter of David and Elizabeth Filley Winchell, in Suffield on September 3, 1696. He was a little older than normal for a first marriage, but he likely had been helping care for his younger brothers and sisters.
John, whose name is spelled Trumble in the town records, was probably low on the social status scale. Most of the town offices that he held were relatively low level-fence viewer, surveyor of highways (indicating at least a basic education), and on a committee to make sure all hogs were "yoak'd and ring'd". He cast several dissenting votes in town meetings, some having to do with land grants and at least one having to do with paying a "rate" (tax) to pay a "writing scoller" in addition to the usual schoolmaster. By 1722 he was appointed to a committee to see to it that the pews were made, and in 1725 was trusted with the office of constable. This was a civic responsibility that many tried to avoid, as in involved collection of rates, and if he were unable for any reason to collect, that he could be held to account. Sure enough, in 1728 there was discussion about his failure to collect rates from two men, one of whom was by then deceased.
We're not told the assignment of the pews in the meeting house, but later John was given permission to change pews with a man who had been assigned the second pew. Usually these front pews were based on wealth, but sometimes exceptions were made for people who were elderly, or/and hard of hearing, and that may be the case here.
Some of his land was appropriated for a highway, and typically he would have received land elsewhere in compensation, although I haven't found record of that. His land was on Feather Street, which may have been land inherited from his father, and also noted (I'm not sure whether this was separate land, or a different description) as being the Allyn Land at the Ferry. His son was a ferryman, so John may or may not have also held that occupation.
Find a Grave states that this couple had eight children. I am unable to verify that but it could well be true. If his estate records could be located, that would be most helpful, both as to heirs and to the size of his estate, perhaps as to the land he owned and an occupation. Was he an employee of the iron works, or was he a farmer? We simply don't know at this point. We do know that he died January 3, 1751/52, when he would have been in his early eighties. So he was part of the "hardy pioneer stock" from whom we descend.
Oh, one other descendant is John Wayne, the actor. He is John Trumbull's sixth great grandson, making him, I believe, a seventh cousin once removed to my generation.
The line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba or Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Friday, October 25, 2019
Holbrook line: Nathaniel Joslin, of Marlsboro
There is so much erroneous information about our ancestor Nathaniel Joslin, on so many trees and websites, that I hesitate to write this post. I hope I have weeded out most of the false information and I think I can add a few details to his story. I would absolutely love to hear from anywone who knows more about this Nathaniel, the son of Nathaniel and Sarah King Joslin.
The first thing we don't know is when he was born. It was not Aril 21, 1658, as is often stated. That son Nathaniel died in 1667. We know our Nathaniel was the son of the above couple because he is mentioned several times in his father's will. But we don't know his birthdate, or location, or why it would have been omitted from town records that seem complete otherwise. Perhaps his name was on a scrap of paper that was stuck in the records, intending that it be recorded later, and the scrap of paper was mislaid. Another possibility is that Nathaniel was not Sarah's child, and so was not recorded, but there is no indication of that and surely it would have been noted somewhere.
Nathaniel married Hester Morse, daughter of Joseph and Susannah Shattuck Morse, on July 20,1682, and that is the first record we have of him. Presumably this would give him a birth date in the early 1660's. He was next named on a list of inhabitants in Marlboro in 1686, and would likely have been at least 21 years old to have made that list. So again, we point to the early 1660's. Nathaniel and Hester (also seen as Esther, same lady) were the parents of perhaps as many as eleven children, although that would mean Hester had children into her 40's, which is surely not impossible.
The list of inhabitants from 1686 that includes the names of both father and son, the two Nathaniels, is not one to be particularly proud of. The men of Marlboro wanted more land and not long after King Philip's War they began settling on land that was owned by the native Americans. The General Court told them their deed was invalid and declared null and void, but the men of the settlement connived, basically, to continue settling on those lands and tried to make it look legal. It wasn't. The land was in dispute for at least 23 years after the 1686 list, but I didn't find a final resolution, except the results were that the colonists kept the land.
Many of the settlers of Marlboro had ties to Lancaster, Massachusetts, which was burned by the natives in King Philip's War. Nathaniel Senior lost a brother, sister in law, and nephew during the massacre, and other townspeople lost family members, too. It was a raw wound. That doesn't excuse their later actions but it helps put it in a bit of perspective.
King Philip's War didn't end the difficulties with some of the native tribes, and in 1711 our Nathaniel was appointed to a committee to assigned families to garrisons. If the natives threatened the town, each family was to go to one of the stronger fortified homes in the area, where soldiers were also assigned. Nathaniel's family was assigned to Captain Kerley's garrison. We don't know if there was ever a time when the family was forced to go there or not.
Nathaniel must have had a good reputation, because he was chosen selectman in 1701, and also a good education, because he was town clerk from 1714 until 1725.
I've not found a mention of Nathaniel's occupation, nor have I found his will. (The will frequently attached to his name on websites is from Scituate, Plymouth, Massachusetts. That Nathaniel was a cousin of some sort to ours, and the similar death dates are a coincidence). If his will and inventory could be found, we could possibly answer the question of his occupation, find out if he had books, get a clue as to how he did financially, and perhaps get a clue as to his religion. It would be wonderful to find those estate records, just as it would be wonderful to find his birth record!
The line of descent is
Nathaniel Joslin-Hester or Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first thing we don't know is when he was born. It was not Aril 21, 1658, as is often stated. That son Nathaniel died in 1667. We know our Nathaniel was the son of the above couple because he is mentioned several times in his father's will. But we don't know his birthdate, or location, or why it would have been omitted from town records that seem complete otherwise. Perhaps his name was on a scrap of paper that was stuck in the records, intending that it be recorded later, and the scrap of paper was mislaid. Another possibility is that Nathaniel was not Sarah's child, and so was not recorded, but there is no indication of that and surely it would have been noted somewhere.
Nathaniel married Hester Morse, daughter of Joseph and Susannah Shattuck Morse, on July 20,1682, and that is the first record we have of him. Presumably this would give him a birth date in the early 1660's. He was next named on a list of inhabitants in Marlboro in 1686, and would likely have been at least 21 years old to have made that list. So again, we point to the early 1660's. Nathaniel and Hester (also seen as Esther, same lady) were the parents of perhaps as many as eleven children, although that would mean Hester had children into her 40's, which is surely not impossible.
The list of inhabitants from 1686 that includes the names of both father and son, the two Nathaniels, is not one to be particularly proud of. The men of Marlboro wanted more land and not long after King Philip's War they began settling on land that was owned by the native Americans. The General Court told them their deed was invalid and declared null and void, but the men of the settlement connived, basically, to continue settling on those lands and tried to make it look legal. It wasn't. The land was in dispute for at least 23 years after the 1686 list, but I didn't find a final resolution, except the results were that the colonists kept the land.
Many of the settlers of Marlboro had ties to Lancaster, Massachusetts, which was burned by the natives in King Philip's War. Nathaniel Senior lost a brother, sister in law, and nephew during the massacre, and other townspeople lost family members, too. It was a raw wound. That doesn't excuse their later actions but it helps put it in a bit of perspective.
King Philip's War didn't end the difficulties with some of the native tribes, and in 1711 our Nathaniel was appointed to a committee to assigned families to garrisons. If the natives threatened the town, each family was to go to one of the stronger fortified homes in the area, where soldiers were also assigned. Nathaniel's family was assigned to Captain Kerley's garrison. We don't know if there was ever a time when the family was forced to go there or not.
Nathaniel must have had a good reputation, because he was chosen selectman in 1701, and also a good education, because he was town clerk from 1714 until 1725.
I've not found a mention of Nathaniel's occupation, nor have I found his will. (The will frequently attached to his name on websites is from Scituate, Plymouth, Massachusetts. That Nathaniel was a cousin of some sort to ours, and the similar death dates are a coincidence). If his will and inventory could be found, we could possibly answer the question of his occupation, find out if he had books, get a clue as to how he did financially, and perhaps get a clue as to his religion. It would be wonderful to find those estate records, just as it would be wonderful to find his birth record!
The line of descent is
Nathaniel Joslin-Hester or Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Holbrook line: John Jordan of Guilford, Connecticut, Immigrant
The only mysteries we have about John Jordan are these: Who were his parents? When and where was he born? What did he do for a living? Was he literate? What happened to his will? In other words, we don't know much.
The first time we see John Jordan is on a ship heading from England to Guilford, Connecticut. This was the first town in New England to be settled directly and entirely by immigrants, rather than being an overflow of colonists who for one reason or another wished to leave their original home in New England. Henry Whitfield was the leader and pastor of this group. Whitfield was a pastor who was not willing to comply with government requirements in support of the Church of England. He and about 70 other people, including 25 men, signed an agreement while still on board ship regarding how the group would govern themselves. Among the names on that list is John Jordan. It is thought that his (probable) brother Thomas was also on board, but not yet of age to sign the compact.
Many of the men on the ship were young farmers, and until I find something to the contrary, I will postulate that John fell into this class. He and others like him were expected to grow crops to support the others, including Pastor Whitfield. Apparently life in Guilford went well, because when Charles I was executed in 1649, there were requests for Puritans to come back "home"/ Henry Whitfield answered that request, as did Thomas Jordan and a few others who were early settlers.
John, however, stayed in Guilford. He had married Ann Bishop, daughter of John BIshop (who was also on the original ship and signed the original compact) in October of 1639, probably soon after arriving in Connecticut. John and Ann had at least five children together. John was early a trustee of the lands of Guilford, and also a justice of the peace, so perhaps he had at least some education.
That is pretty much the end of his story, for John died in January of 1650. Indications are that he was likely a young man, perhaps around the age of 40. It's unknown whether it was an accident or an illness that killed him. He left a will, but it's been lost. His wife, Ann, married Thomas Clarke.
Please don't write a thesis stating that John's wife was Ann Bishop, daughter of John. Some think that she was his widowed daughter in law, which is possible, although I've seen no evidence for that. If that's so, we don't know who Ann's parents were, either.
I'm ending this blog post with one more mystery than I started with. However, we do know that John came to Guilford and stayed in Guilford. He helped get the new village started and so was important to the history of Connecticut, and to our family!
The line of descent is:
John Jordan-Ann Bishop
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first time we see John Jordan is on a ship heading from England to Guilford, Connecticut. This was the first town in New England to be settled directly and entirely by immigrants, rather than being an overflow of colonists who for one reason or another wished to leave their original home in New England. Henry Whitfield was the leader and pastor of this group. Whitfield was a pastor who was not willing to comply with government requirements in support of the Church of England. He and about 70 other people, including 25 men, signed an agreement while still on board ship regarding how the group would govern themselves. Among the names on that list is John Jordan. It is thought that his (probable) brother Thomas was also on board, but not yet of age to sign the compact.
Many of the men on the ship were young farmers, and until I find something to the contrary, I will postulate that John fell into this class. He and others like him were expected to grow crops to support the others, including Pastor Whitfield. Apparently life in Guilford went well, because when Charles I was executed in 1649, there were requests for Puritans to come back "home"/ Henry Whitfield answered that request, as did Thomas Jordan and a few others who were early settlers.
John, however, stayed in Guilford. He had married Ann Bishop, daughter of John BIshop (who was also on the original ship and signed the original compact) in October of 1639, probably soon after arriving in Connecticut. John and Ann had at least five children together. John was early a trustee of the lands of Guilford, and also a justice of the peace, so perhaps he had at least some education.
That is pretty much the end of his story, for John died in January of 1650. Indications are that he was likely a young man, perhaps around the age of 40. It's unknown whether it was an accident or an illness that killed him. He left a will, but it's been lost. His wife, Ann, married Thomas Clarke.
Please don't write a thesis stating that John's wife was Ann Bishop, daughter of John. Some think that she was his widowed daughter in law, which is possible, although I've seen no evidence for that. If that's so, we don't know who Ann's parents were, either.
I'm ending this blog post with one more mystery than I started with. However, we do know that John came to Guilford and stayed in Guilford. He helped get the new village started and so was important to the history of Connecticut, and to our family!
The line of descent is:
John Jordan-Ann Bishop
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, October 11, 2019
Holbrook line: John Graves of Roxbury, Immigrant
Just when I thought I'd written about all the immigrants who could be traced at all, here is John Graves. While much information about him is lacking, there is also much information that we know. We are really fortunate when an ancestor is included in Robert Charles Anderson's Great Migration project, because that typically gives us much information. We are also fortunate to have John's will. I haven't found his inventory yet, but I would love to do that. And I learned a fascinating term and a new occupation for an ancestor. Have I convinced you yet to read on?
John Graves was born probably about 1600 but it could be a few years either way because his birth records have not yet been identified. "John Graves" is a fairly common name. It is thought that he came from the area around Nazing, Essex, England. This is where John Eliot came from, and he was a close friend of the Apostle to the Indians. We know John had a sister named Lydia, and we know his mother came to New England also, but we don't know when she arrived or with whom.
John's occupation was "cowleech". I'd never heard of such a thing, but Google quickly informed me that he treated diseases in cows. Presumably leeching was one of the treatments. So he was an early form of veterinarian, although we don't know whether he treated horses, swine, or sheep also. Almost every household in early New England would have had a cow or two, so he was probably in demand, although I don't know whether that also meant he made money, or had any kind of status because of his job. I don't know if that indicates that he had any kind of formal education in the field, or whether he had learned as an apprentice, or how he got started in his career. Still, "cowleech". That's interesting.
Also interesting is John's marital status. Anderson thinks he may have had three wives. The first wife was Sarah Finch, with whom he had two children, John and Sarah. The second wife is unidentified. She was the mother of Samuel, Jonathan and Mary, and she died shortly after the family arrived in Roxbury. His third wife was Judith Alward, who was or had been a "servant girl". They were married in Roxbury in December of 1635 and their daughter Hannah was born September 8, 1636. The sad thing is that after son John's death a year after his father's, Hannah is the only child who can be traced.
John became a member of the church in Roxbury in 1635 and was made a freeman in 1637. He acquired several plots of land in the 10 years or so he was in Roxbury, apparently all as part of land divisions made by the town. He died November 4, 1644, as reported by John Eliot "John Grave, a godly brother of the church, he took a deep cold, which swelled his head with rheum and overcame his heart. (He and Thomas Ruggles) broke the knot first of the Nazing Christians. I mean they first died of all those Christians that came from that town in England."
In his will, John provided for his wife and for all the children except Sarah. It is possible that he omitted her because she had received a bequest from her maternal grandfather, or perhaps he had otherwise given her what he could. Judith went on to marry William Potter on June 2, 1646, and then Samuel Finch on December 13, 1654, and lived until October of 1683.
The line of descent is:
John Graves-Judith Alward
Hannah Graves-John Mayo
Mehitable Mayo-Samuel Morris
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Update May 24, 2020: John Graves and Judith Alward are now "former ancestors". Abigail Morris was not the daughter of Mehitable Mayo, so the lines above that are incorrect. See the post about Samuel Morris for further explanation.
John Graves was born probably about 1600 but it could be a few years either way because his birth records have not yet been identified. "John Graves" is a fairly common name. It is thought that he came from the area around Nazing, Essex, England. This is where John Eliot came from, and he was a close friend of the Apostle to the Indians. We know John had a sister named Lydia, and we know his mother came to New England also, but we don't know when she arrived or with whom.
John's occupation was "cowleech". I'd never heard of such a thing, but Google quickly informed me that he treated diseases in cows. Presumably leeching was one of the treatments. So he was an early form of veterinarian, although we don't know whether he treated horses, swine, or sheep also. Almost every household in early New England would have had a cow or two, so he was probably in demand, although I don't know whether that also meant he made money, or had any kind of status because of his job. I don't know if that indicates that he had any kind of formal education in the field, or whether he had learned as an apprentice, or how he got started in his career. Still, "cowleech". That's interesting.
Also interesting is John's marital status. Anderson thinks he may have had three wives. The first wife was Sarah Finch, with whom he had two children, John and Sarah. The second wife is unidentified. She was the mother of Samuel, Jonathan and Mary, and she died shortly after the family arrived in Roxbury. His third wife was Judith Alward, who was or had been a "servant girl". They were married in Roxbury in December of 1635 and their daughter Hannah was born September 8, 1636. The sad thing is that after son John's death a year after his father's, Hannah is the only child who can be traced.
John became a member of the church in Roxbury in 1635 and was made a freeman in 1637. He acquired several plots of land in the 10 years or so he was in Roxbury, apparently all as part of land divisions made by the town. He died November 4, 1644, as reported by John Eliot "John Grave, a godly brother of the church, he took a deep cold, which swelled his head with rheum and overcame his heart. (He and Thomas Ruggles) broke the knot first of the Nazing Christians. I mean they first died of all those Christians that came from that town in England."
In his will, John provided for his wife and for all the children except Sarah. It is possible that he omitted her because she had received a bequest from her maternal grandfather, or perhaps he had otherwise given her what he could. Judith went on to marry William Potter on June 2, 1646, and then Samuel Finch on December 13, 1654, and lived until October of 1683.
The line of descent is:
John Graves-Judith Alward
Hannah Graves-John Mayo
Mehitable Mayo-Samuel Morris
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Update May 24, 2020: John Graves and Judith Alward are now "former ancestors". Abigail Morris was not the daughter of Mehitable Mayo, so the lines above that are incorrect. See the post about Samuel Morris for further explanation.
Tuesday, September 3, 2019
Holbrook line: Joseph Trumbull 1647-1684
Joseph's father, John, didn't leave us a whole lot of clues about himself, and like father, like son. Joseph also stands mostly mute in the records I've found, other than birth, date, and death records. We are grateful for those, of course, but wish for more. It would be nice to find a will or estate papers, but so far they haven't been located. So this will be a short post.
Joseph was born March 19, 1647 in Rowley, Massachusetts to John and Elin or Elinor Chandler Trumbull (usually spelled Trumble during this time period). He was one of at least six children, and he apparently lived his whole life in Rowley until his marriage to Hannah Smith, the daughter of Hugh and Mary Smith. They were married May 6, 1669. The two were born just five days apart and may have known each other from a very early age.
By 1670 the couple had gone to Suffield to live. From the viewpoint of a family historian, that was a poor choice. Suffied at the time was part of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but it became part of Connecticut in the 1740s. That means records could be in either location, or in neither, as the search for a will is showing. I did find one reference to Joseph in the book "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702". On September 3, 1680, when Joseph would have been 33 years old, he was fined 10 shillings for been "overtaken by drink", and "being very sorry and acceccted with it Confessing it himselfe and proffering to satisfie the Law by paying ten shillings for the same", the guilty please was accepted and Joseph apparently stayed out of trouble for the rest of his life. It wasn't considered a serious offense, for just a few months later Joseph was made a freeman, giving him the right to vote.
One of the big mysteries is whether or not Joseph served in King Philip's War. I've found that he along with all or almost all the other town residents left town during the war, returning only after several months, to find the town burned to the ground. Joseph Trumbull had hidden tools from Major Pynchon's saw mill, and was paid for doing so. It must have been a terrifying time for the family, and for the other settlers in Suffield, who most likely had traveled south down the Connecticut River to a safer town like Hartford, or even further south. There were three small children at this time, so it wouldn't have been an easy time, either during the exile or during the rebuilding of their homes and their lives.
The only clue I've found so far about Joseph's possible participation is a suggestion that Joseph's early death may have been as the result of injuries suffered in a battle with native Americans, with no date given for that event. I don't know what the basis for that speculation might be. There are a lot of other causes for early death, including any number of diseases, other injuries, and underlying health conditions.
By the time Joseph died on August 15, 1684, he was the father of five children. Hannah delivered the last of their children just five days later. She was a young widow, with six mouths to feed, and she next married John Strong in 1686, and then Nicholas Buckland in 1698. Hannah lived until March 27, 1719 and died in Windsor, Ct.
I don't know enough about Joseph to speculate about his life. Based on the names of their sons, (Judah, Ammi, Benoni and John), I suspect that he, or Hannah, was deeply religious. Based on Major Pynchon's trusting him to hide the tools for the sawmill, he was trustworthy. And if he drank a little too much, so did most of the colonists, at one time or another. I suppose he had land and farmed, but that is a supposition. We know where he was, but not what he was. Still, as so often, something is better than nothing.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Trumbull-Hannah Smith
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia or Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendats
Joseph was born March 19, 1647 in Rowley, Massachusetts to John and Elin or Elinor Chandler Trumbull (usually spelled Trumble during this time period). He was one of at least six children, and he apparently lived his whole life in Rowley until his marriage to Hannah Smith, the daughter of Hugh and Mary Smith. They were married May 6, 1669. The two were born just five days apart and may have known each other from a very early age.
By 1670 the couple had gone to Suffield to live. From the viewpoint of a family historian, that was a poor choice. Suffied at the time was part of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but it became part of Connecticut in the 1740s. That means records could be in either location, or in neither, as the search for a will is showing. I did find one reference to Joseph in the book "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702". On September 3, 1680, when Joseph would have been 33 years old, he was fined 10 shillings for been "overtaken by drink", and "being very sorry and acceccted with it Confessing it himselfe and proffering to satisfie the Law by paying ten shillings for the same", the guilty please was accepted and Joseph apparently stayed out of trouble for the rest of his life. It wasn't considered a serious offense, for just a few months later Joseph was made a freeman, giving him the right to vote.
One of the big mysteries is whether or not Joseph served in King Philip's War. I've found that he along with all or almost all the other town residents left town during the war, returning only after several months, to find the town burned to the ground. Joseph Trumbull had hidden tools from Major Pynchon's saw mill, and was paid for doing so. It must have been a terrifying time for the family, and for the other settlers in Suffield, who most likely had traveled south down the Connecticut River to a safer town like Hartford, or even further south. There were three small children at this time, so it wouldn't have been an easy time, either during the exile or during the rebuilding of their homes and their lives.
The only clue I've found so far about Joseph's possible participation is a suggestion that Joseph's early death may have been as the result of injuries suffered in a battle with native Americans, with no date given for that event. I don't know what the basis for that speculation might be. There are a lot of other causes for early death, including any number of diseases, other injuries, and underlying health conditions.
By the time Joseph died on August 15, 1684, he was the father of five children. Hannah delivered the last of their children just five days later. She was a young widow, with six mouths to feed, and she next married John Strong in 1686, and then Nicholas Buckland in 1698. Hannah lived until March 27, 1719 and died in Windsor, Ct.
I don't know enough about Joseph to speculate about his life. Based on the names of their sons, (Judah, Ammi, Benoni and John), I suspect that he, or Hannah, was deeply religious. Based on Major Pynchon's trusting him to hide the tools for the sawmill, he was trustworthy. And if he drank a little too much, so did most of the colonists, at one time or another. I suppose he had land and farmed, but that is a supposition. We know where he was, but not what he was. Still, as so often, something is better than nothing.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Trumbull-Hannah Smith
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia or Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendats
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Holbrook line: David Winchell 1643-1723
49! That's how many references there are to David Winchell in the "Documentary History of Suffiel, and he didn't even arrive there until he was about 34 years old. Sometimes it's a feast, sometimes it's a famine. This is definitely a feast, even though the print in this book is incredibly small.
But let's start at the beginning. David Winchell was a first generation New Englander, born to Robert and Mary Phelps Winchell in Windsor, Connecticut on October 22, 1643. He was one of ten children born to the couple, although it appears that one died close to birth and one died as a toddler. The family lived in Windsor, and David married his wife, Elizabeth Filley, daughter of William and Margaret Filley there on March 1, 1672.
The young couple stayed in Windsor for a few years. David contributed to a fund for those who lost much in King Philip's War in 1677, and then no more is heard of him in Windsor. In fact, it appears that he was granted land in Suffield as early as 1671, so perhaps for a few years he lived in both places, or maybe it took a few years to get the house ready for his family. He and Elizabeth spent the rest of their lives in Suffield,which was originally part of Massachusetts Bay Colony, and he was chosen as constable, selectman or land measurer for 25 years. His home lot was on High Street in Suffield and it appears that he had several land acquisitions, including one as late as 1711. Except, some of the townspeople objected to that particular land grant and it was soon annulled.
David was on the committee to oversee the construction of the first meeting house in 1679, and on a committee to secure the second minister of the church. In 1692 he was on the list of those who were privileged to vote in town elections. This may or may not be the same as a "freeman", but it was close. Many of the assignments he accepted from the town were peace keeping type missions, where he was asked to help approach ministerial candidates, or unhappy ministers, or mediate a dispute about where a highway should go, or to help locate a school teacher for the town.
However, in Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts there is mention in two places of scrapes David was in. He was fined four pounds for scurrilous comments about the minister, and for pressing for a different constable in a town meeting, than was "contrary to the mind of the people". In 1681 Lt. Anthony Austin complained against David Winchell and two other men for defaming him and for taking the dispute to a town meeting Apparently the men apologized and that was the end of it.
So, peacemaker, disturber of the peace, church man, selectman, committeeman, land measurer, this is our ancestor. He and Elizabeth had eight children together. When he died at the age of 80, there were undoubtedly grandchildren and even great grandchildren to mourn him. Elizabeth died five years later, in 1728. I've not located a will that I was sure was his, or hers, and I would certainly like to do that. However, we have much to be proud of when we think of David Winchell, and we may even appreciate him more, knowing he was not quite perfect!
The line of descent is
David Winchell-Elizabeth Filley
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
But let's start at the beginning. David Winchell was a first generation New Englander, born to Robert and Mary Phelps Winchell in Windsor, Connecticut on October 22, 1643. He was one of ten children born to the couple, although it appears that one died close to birth and one died as a toddler. The family lived in Windsor, and David married his wife, Elizabeth Filley, daughter of William and Margaret Filley there on March 1, 1672.
The young couple stayed in Windsor for a few years. David contributed to a fund for those who lost much in King Philip's War in 1677, and then no more is heard of him in Windsor. In fact, it appears that he was granted land in Suffield as early as 1671, so perhaps for a few years he lived in both places, or maybe it took a few years to get the house ready for his family. He and Elizabeth spent the rest of their lives in Suffield,which was originally part of Massachusetts Bay Colony, and he was chosen as constable, selectman or land measurer for 25 years. His home lot was on High Street in Suffield and it appears that he had several land acquisitions, including one as late as 1711. Except, some of the townspeople objected to that particular land grant and it was soon annulled.
David was on the committee to oversee the construction of the first meeting house in 1679, and on a committee to secure the second minister of the church. In 1692 he was on the list of those who were privileged to vote in town elections. This may or may not be the same as a "freeman", but it was close. Many of the assignments he accepted from the town were peace keeping type missions, where he was asked to help approach ministerial candidates, or unhappy ministers, or mediate a dispute about where a highway should go, or to help locate a school teacher for the town.
However, in Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts there is mention in two places of scrapes David was in. He was fined four pounds for scurrilous comments about the minister, and for pressing for a different constable in a town meeting, than was "contrary to the mind of the people". In 1681 Lt. Anthony Austin complained against David Winchell and two other men for defaming him and for taking the dispute to a town meeting Apparently the men apologized and that was the end of it.
So, peacemaker, disturber of the peace, church man, selectman, committeeman, land measurer, this is our ancestor. He and Elizabeth had eight children together. When he died at the age of 80, there were undoubtedly grandchildren and even great grandchildren to mourn him. Elizabeth died five years later, in 1728. I've not located a will that I was sure was his, or hers, and I would certainly like to do that. However, we have much to be proud of when we think of David Winchell, and we may even appreciate him more, knowing he was not quite perfect!
The line of descent is
David Winchell-Elizabeth Filley
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, March 29, 2019
Holbrook line: Thomas Ford, Immigrant
Information is quite plentiful about Thomas Ford. The problem is that much of it is contradictory, or makes no sense. It's believed that he was born about 1587 in Bridport or possibly Symondsbury, Dorset, England. The two towns are located just inland from the English channel, with Symondsbury being about one and a half miles west of Dorset. Both towns were involved in rope and hemp making as their primary occupations, and both appear to have been quite small when Thomas was born. I have at least three sets of proposed parents for Thomas, so am not able to make even a guess at this point.
Thomas married first Joan Way, possibly, and secondly, Elizabeth Charde, daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth (possibly Bunckom) Charde at Bridport on June 19, 1616. Elizabeth had first been married to Aaron Cooke in 1610, and she had one child, a son, with him. In 1623, the family was living in Dorchester, Dorset, England, where they were taught by Rev. John White, a Puritan. Several of the families under his pastoral care traveled to America together, intending to settle together. Thomas and Elizabeth had five children together, all of whom came to America with their parents when they migrated in 1630 on the Mary and John. Aaron Cooke, Jr. also was with them, counted as one of their six children.
Thomas and his family settled first in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, where he was admitted a freeman on May 18, 1631, meaning he was a man of good standing, a member of the church, and owned property. The family stayed in Dorchester for another five years, when they moved to the new settlement of Windsor, Connecticut. Thomas was one of four men who purchased a large tract of land from native Americans, and he was granted fifty acres of land in Simsbury in 1637. The Fords lived in Windsor, however, and it was from here that he served as deputy to the general court for at least four years. Elizabeth died there in 1643. She left Thomas with several teenagers and slightly older children to guide into adulthood, although some had already married and established their own homes.
Thomas moved to Hartford, Connecticut about 1644 , where he married widow Ann Scott, and stayed there several years as the proprietor of an "ordinary", a combination tavern and inn, and then moved at some point between 1659 and 1670 to Northampton, Massachusetts, where several of his children had settled. He had one child with Ann. He died at Northampton in 1676, when he was about 89 years old, about a year after burying his third wife. His estate was valued at about 369 pounds, which was certainly more than many of his contemporaries left, although not enough to be called wealthy.
Thomas is an ancestor we can acknowledge with pride. He participated in the building of Dorchester and Windsor, and served in political capacities for several years. He was a man of strong religious beliefs. He raised several children, including a step son, and saw them well situated when he died. Of course I'd like to know more about him, but I am grateful to know this much.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Ford-Elizabeth Charde
Abigail Ford-John Strong
Thomas Strong-Mary Hewett
Martha Strong-Samuel Judd
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Thomas married first Joan Way, possibly, and secondly, Elizabeth Charde, daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth (possibly Bunckom) Charde at Bridport on June 19, 1616. Elizabeth had first been married to Aaron Cooke in 1610, and she had one child, a son, with him. In 1623, the family was living in Dorchester, Dorset, England, where they were taught by Rev. John White, a Puritan. Several of the families under his pastoral care traveled to America together, intending to settle together. Thomas and Elizabeth had five children together, all of whom came to America with their parents when they migrated in 1630 on the Mary and John. Aaron Cooke, Jr. also was with them, counted as one of their six children.
Thomas and his family settled first in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, where he was admitted a freeman on May 18, 1631, meaning he was a man of good standing, a member of the church, and owned property. The family stayed in Dorchester for another five years, when they moved to the new settlement of Windsor, Connecticut. Thomas was one of four men who purchased a large tract of land from native Americans, and he was granted fifty acres of land in Simsbury in 1637. The Fords lived in Windsor, however, and it was from here that he served as deputy to the general court for at least four years. Elizabeth died there in 1643. She left Thomas with several teenagers and slightly older children to guide into adulthood, although some had already married and established their own homes.
Thomas moved to Hartford, Connecticut about 1644 , where he married widow Ann Scott, and stayed there several years as the proprietor of an "ordinary", a combination tavern and inn, and then moved at some point between 1659 and 1670 to Northampton, Massachusetts, where several of his children had settled. He had one child with Ann. He died at Northampton in 1676, when he was about 89 years old, about a year after burying his third wife. His estate was valued at about 369 pounds, which was certainly more than many of his contemporaries left, although not enough to be called wealthy.
Thomas is an ancestor we can acknowledge with pride. He participated in the building of Dorchester and Windsor, and served in political capacities for several years. He was a man of strong religious beliefs. He raised several children, including a step son, and saw them well situated when he died. Of course I'd like to know more about him, but I am grateful to know this much.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Ford-Elizabeth Charde
Abigail Ford-John Strong
Thomas Strong-Mary Hewett
Martha Strong-Samuel Judd
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Holbrook line: John BIshop, Immigrant
John Bishop, our immigrant ancestor, is a hard man to pin down. There were several John Bishops in New England during the time period our John Bishop was there, and as usual, I believe some of his records have been merged with those of other John Bishops. I have not found a will, a deed, a hint of land ownership, a record of being a freeman, or marriage and birth records for him, for his wife, or for his children. So I'm going to pick my way carefully through the rubble and hope that I don't trip over the wrong John Bishop as I write this.
Our John Bishop was most likely born in or near Neen Savage, Shropshire, England about 1590. Need Savage is small enough that it's not described as a village, even now. It has the designation of "hamlet". It does appear to have a very old church and this is likely where John was christened. He may be the son of Richard Bishop but even that is not certain. All that we really know is that he somehow met and married Ann, whose last name may be Stevens, probably about 1619. They had four children together and set to work raising their family, with the children being born roughly from 1620 to 1630.
When they came to America on the Saint John in 1639, the children would have been 9 to 19 years old. They were certainly old enough to help establish the home they would live in, in the wilderness. John had traveled in the party of Reverend Henry Whitfield, and most if not all of the people on the ship followed him as they arrived at New Haven, Connecticut and then quickly settled on their own land in what became Guilford, Connecticut.
John was one of the six trustees of the town and one of the three whose name is signed to a deed for a large tract of land in 1643, when the purchase of land from the native Americans was finalized. He was a justice of the peace and may have held other positions that are no longer known to us. We don't know whether or not he ever became a "freeman" although it seems that a man with that kind of respect and service would have been made a freeman. From my 21st century eyes, it only makes sense but again, records are lacking and when he is referred to, his designation is "planter", whereas others are noted as "freeman". John lived out the rest of his days in Guilford.
That is really all that is known about John. He died sometime between February 7, 1659 and February 7, 1661 (I've seen dates of 1659. 1660, and 1661) and although I haven't located a copy of his will or inventory, I did find one for Ann, who died in 1676. Her estate was valued at slightly over 87 pounds. She named three children and a grandchild as heirs, and also left a small bequest to her servant, Thomas Smith. It wasn't unusual to have servants in that time, even for a not well off family, but it does show that John must have left her more than enough to live on.
We don't know whether John had an additional occupation other than planter, or how much land he might have owned, or whether or not he was literate (although he did sign his name to that deed with the Indians and he was a justice of the peace) or whether he was a regular church goer to the end of his life. But we do know that he was courageous enough to come to America, to settle and raise his family, and to take care of his wife, so those are all admirable qualities.
The line of descent is
John Bishop-Ann probably Stevens
Ann Bishop-John Jordan
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hatchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Our John Bishop was most likely born in or near Neen Savage, Shropshire, England about 1590. Need Savage is small enough that it's not described as a village, even now. It has the designation of "hamlet". It does appear to have a very old church and this is likely where John was christened. He may be the son of Richard Bishop but even that is not certain. All that we really know is that he somehow met and married Ann, whose last name may be Stevens, probably about 1619. They had four children together and set to work raising their family, with the children being born roughly from 1620 to 1630.
When they came to America on the Saint John in 1639, the children would have been 9 to 19 years old. They were certainly old enough to help establish the home they would live in, in the wilderness. John had traveled in the party of Reverend Henry Whitfield, and most if not all of the people on the ship followed him as they arrived at New Haven, Connecticut and then quickly settled on their own land in what became Guilford, Connecticut.
John was one of the six trustees of the town and one of the three whose name is signed to a deed for a large tract of land in 1643, when the purchase of land from the native Americans was finalized. He was a justice of the peace and may have held other positions that are no longer known to us. We don't know whether or not he ever became a "freeman" although it seems that a man with that kind of respect and service would have been made a freeman. From my 21st century eyes, it only makes sense but again, records are lacking and when he is referred to, his designation is "planter", whereas others are noted as "freeman". John lived out the rest of his days in Guilford.
That is really all that is known about John. He died sometime between February 7, 1659 and February 7, 1661 (I've seen dates of 1659. 1660, and 1661) and although I haven't located a copy of his will or inventory, I did find one for Ann, who died in 1676. Her estate was valued at slightly over 87 pounds. She named three children and a grandchild as heirs, and also left a small bequest to her servant, Thomas Smith. It wasn't unusual to have servants in that time, even for a not well off family, but it does show that John must have left her more than enough to live on.
We don't know whether John had an additional occupation other than planter, or how much land he might have owned, or whether or not he was literate (although he did sign his name to that deed with the Indians and he was a justice of the peace) or whether he was a regular church goer to the end of his life. But we do know that he was courageous enough to come to America, to settle and raise his family, and to take care of his wife, so those are all admirable qualities.
The line of descent is
John Bishop-Ann probably Stevens
Ann Bishop-John Jordan
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hatchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
Holbrook line: John Stebbins 1626-1678
I wrote in December 2015 about Rowland Stebbins, and then in June of 2017 about his son Thomas, who is our Stebbins ancestor in our Allen line. Now I'd like to write about John Stebbins, who is also a son of Rowland Stebbins, but is in our Holbrook line. This is one example I've found that shows both Allen and Holbrook ancestors descending from the same couple. I believe there are more examples but they don't come to mind right now.
John Stebbins came on the ship Francis in 1634, aged eight years old. His brother Thomas, 14, and his sisters Sarah, 11, and Elizabeth, 8, were with him. Also along for the ride were their parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and a servant, Mary Winch. The ship left from Ipswich, Suffolk, England, but it's believed the family was from Bocking, Essex, England.
Rowland seems to have stayed at Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony, for some time before moving on to Springfield, Massachusetts, in the Connecticut River valley. The family may have been there as early as 1639.
John married Ann Munden in Springfield on May 14, 1646 in Springfield, the same year he purchased land there. He purchased a house in 1651 but it's not clear whether the young family had lived elsewhere for five years, perhaps with her family (or his), or whether they were moving to better quarters. Ann died in 1656 in Springfield. John then married Abigail Bartlett on December 17, 1657. She was just 21 years old but was old enough to care for John's two children born by Ann, as well as the eleven children they eventually had together. 1656 was also the year that he moved to Northampton, Massachusetts, or at least the year he bought land there. He may have traveled back and forth between the two towns until he was married, and then brought his bride to that town.
He was a man of some wealth, or at least he was comfortably well off. He owned a sawmill, and was active in town affairs. I've seen him referred to as "Deacon John" which means he was active in church. He is also described as a carpenter, surveyor, bailiff, and as town selectman in 1675 and 1676. One source says that he was a soldier, and I've found his name on a list of soldiers in King Philip's War, but he would have been 50 years old or so, right at the division point for active service, then, so it may be that it was his son John Munden or Munson Stebbins who was the soldier then. That of course doesn't mean our John was not a soldier. There were constant skirmishes prior to the outbreak of King Philip's War, and John would have been expected to do his part in the training band or militia.
The manner of John's death was officially undetermined. It likely was a sawmill accident, or possibly a case of some sort of rapid fever, but at least two groups of women were allowed to examine the body before it was buried, to examine it for signs of witchcraft. A report detailing their suspicions was sent to the Court at Boston but there was no follow up done. Since John died in March of 1678, it's possible that the Court was still busy with the fall out from King Philip's War and had little time to devote to a full investigation. Still, even to know that someone thought his death was suspicious and that the local jury felt obliged to pass the information upwards, means that Northampton was not always a nice and friendly place in which to live. It was also a suspicious place.
John Stebbins was accused of what was basically abuse of his aged father, but was not found guilty. Another time, he accused a neighbor of harassing his wife. He served on at least two juries. As a reader of "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702" can easily determine, this community did not believe in "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." The entire community seemed to feel that it was a good idea to file court cases for the least little problem (such as animals getting out of their enclosures and "running amok").
I regret that my eyesight prevents me from giving an account of the settling of John's estate. It can be found on www.americancenturies.mass.edu/collection, in the Digital Collections. The settlement is dated September 30, 1679. It appears, if I'm seeing correctly, that he owned land in several locations and that his estate was valued at over 500 pounds. His widow, Abigail, lived until 1710 and presumably benefited from her widow's thirds, if not more.
So that's the short version of John's life. I'd love to know more about him and how he acquired the business sense he must have had. I'd like to know if he was literate. And I'd like to know how he kept his sanity, raising that many children!
The line of descent is:
John Stebbins-Abigail Bartlett
Sarah Stebbins-William Southwell
Ebenezer Southwell-Elizabeth Judd
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy Jr.
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia (Luceba) Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
John Stebbins came on the ship Francis in 1634, aged eight years old. His brother Thomas, 14, and his sisters Sarah, 11, and Elizabeth, 8, were with him. Also along for the ride were their parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and a servant, Mary Winch. The ship left from Ipswich, Suffolk, England, but it's believed the family was from Bocking, Essex, England.
Rowland seems to have stayed at Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony, for some time before moving on to Springfield, Massachusetts, in the Connecticut River valley. The family may have been there as early as 1639.
John married Ann Munden in Springfield on May 14, 1646 in Springfield, the same year he purchased land there. He purchased a house in 1651 but it's not clear whether the young family had lived elsewhere for five years, perhaps with her family (or his), or whether they were moving to better quarters. Ann died in 1656 in Springfield. John then married Abigail Bartlett on December 17, 1657. She was just 21 years old but was old enough to care for John's two children born by Ann, as well as the eleven children they eventually had together. 1656 was also the year that he moved to Northampton, Massachusetts, or at least the year he bought land there. He may have traveled back and forth between the two towns until he was married, and then brought his bride to that town.
He was a man of some wealth, or at least he was comfortably well off. He owned a sawmill, and was active in town affairs. I've seen him referred to as "Deacon John" which means he was active in church. He is also described as a carpenter, surveyor, bailiff, and as town selectman in 1675 and 1676. One source says that he was a soldier, and I've found his name on a list of soldiers in King Philip's War, but he would have been 50 years old or so, right at the division point for active service, then, so it may be that it was his son John Munden or Munson Stebbins who was the soldier then. That of course doesn't mean our John was not a soldier. There were constant skirmishes prior to the outbreak of King Philip's War, and John would have been expected to do his part in the training band or militia.
The manner of John's death was officially undetermined. It likely was a sawmill accident, or possibly a case of some sort of rapid fever, but at least two groups of women were allowed to examine the body before it was buried, to examine it for signs of witchcraft. A report detailing their suspicions was sent to the Court at Boston but there was no follow up done. Since John died in March of 1678, it's possible that the Court was still busy with the fall out from King Philip's War and had little time to devote to a full investigation. Still, even to know that someone thought his death was suspicious and that the local jury felt obliged to pass the information upwards, means that Northampton was not always a nice and friendly place in which to live. It was also a suspicious place.
John Stebbins was accused of what was basically abuse of his aged father, but was not found guilty. Another time, he accused a neighbor of harassing his wife. He served on at least two juries. As a reader of "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702" can easily determine, this community did not believe in "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." The entire community seemed to feel that it was a good idea to file court cases for the least little problem (such as animals getting out of their enclosures and "running amok").
I regret that my eyesight prevents me from giving an account of the settling of John's estate. It can be found on www.americancenturies.mass.edu/collection, in the Digital Collections. The settlement is dated September 30, 1679. It appears, if I'm seeing correctly, that he owned land in several locations and that his estate was valued at over 500 pounds. His widow, Abigail, lived until 1710 and presumably benefited from her widow's thirds, if not more.
So that's the short version of John's life. I'd love to know more about him and how he acquired the business sense he must have had. I'd like to know if he was literate. And I'd like to know how he kept his sanity, raising that many children!
The line of descent is:
John Stebbins-Abigail Bartlett
Sarah Stebbins-William Southwell
Ebenezer Southwell-Elizabeth Judd
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy Jr.
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia (Luceba) Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, December 4, 2018
Holbrook line: Joseph Morse 1610-1690 Immigrant
Perhaps I should be writing this about the Joseph Morse who died in 1646 in Ipswich, Massachusetts Bay Colony and who had a son named Joseph, mentioned in his will, but Robert Charles Anderson is not willing to state that Joseph of Ipswich is the father of Joseph of Watertown, Massachusetts Bay Colony, so I will only present that as a possibility. The Joseph Morse I will write of was born about 1610, somewhere in England and sailed on the Elizabeth from Ipswich, England in 1634.
Joseph was listed as 24 years of age at the time. He apparently went straight to Watertown and stayed there is whole life. He was admitted to the Watertown Church and was granted the status of freeman on May 6, 1635. He was a weaver by trade but also received several grants of land, including meadow and "upland" as well as a farm of 73 acres, all as grants. He may have rented these lands out or he may have farmed them himself. He was married by about 1637 to Esther or Hester Piece, daughter of John and Elizabeth (possibly Stoker) Pierce, also of Watertown. Joseph and Esther had at least seven children, six of whom lived until adulthood. This was a pretty decent survival rate for the time and indicates that Joseph and Esther were probably not "dirt poor", although they may have struggled during the early years. Another indication that the family was surviving economically was that they accepted at least one child into their care, who was three years old at the time and who became an apprentice at the age of five, unless these are two different children with the same father.
Joseph apparently did not take an active part in the civic life of Watertown, although he was a fence viewer for a term. Raising several children, carrying on a trade as well as (likely) a farming operation may have left him little time for public service. When Joseph died in 1689/90, his estate was very small, just a little over six pounds. He had already disposed of his land holdings and probably was living with or under the care of one or more of his children. Esther lived until 1694.
This is not much information to fill in the "dash" for a man who lived about 80 years. I have a book on my "to read" shelf about Watertown, and although I didn't find his name in the index, perhaps the book will be able to fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge of Joseph and how he lived. We do know that he farmed, he worked, he attended church, he voted, and he served as "master" to at least one child beside his own.
One other thing: He is listed as the ancestor of Calvin Coolidge and of Richard Nixon.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Morse-Esther Pierce
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Joseph was listed as 24 years of age at the time. He apparently went straight to Watertown and stayed there is whole life. He was admitted to the Watertown Church and was granted the status of freeman on May 6, 1635. He was a weaver by trade but also received several grants of land, including meadow and "upland" as well as a farm of 73 acres, all as grants. He may have rented these lands out or he may have farmed them himself. He was married by about 1637 to Esther or Hester Piece, daughter of John and Elizabeth (possibly Stoker) Pierce, also of Watertown. Joseph and Esther had at least seven children, six of whom lived until adulthood. This was a pretty decent survival rate for the time and indicates that Joseph and Esther were probably not "dirt poor", although they may have struggled during the early years. Another indication that the family was surviving economically was that they accepted at least one child into their care, who was three years old at the time and who became an apprentice at the age of five, unless these are two different children with the same father.
Joseph apparently did not take an active part in the civic life of Watertown, although he was a fence viewer for a term. Raising several children, carrying on a trade as well as (likely) a farming operation may have left him little time for public service. When Joseph died in 1689/90, his estate was very small, just a little over six pounds. He had already disposed of his land holdings and probably was living with or under the care of one or more of his children. Esther lived until 1694.
This is not much information to fill in the "dash" for a man who lived about 80 years. I have a book on my "to read" shelf about Watertown, and although I didn't find his name in the index, perhaps the book will be able to fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge of Joseph and how he lived. We do know that he farmed, he worked, he attended church, he voted, and he served as "master" to at least one child beside his own.
One other thing: He is listed as the ancestor of Calvin Coolidge and of Richard Nixon.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Morse-Esther Pierce
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 27, 2018
Thomas Hanchett, Immigrant
Thomas is another mystery ancestor. We know nothing of his ancestry although there are various theories. He was probably born about 1620, and probably in England, but right now that is as close as we can come to an origin for him, We know nothing of him until we find him being granted a house lot in Wethersfield, Connecticut on February 28, 1647. This was shortly before he married Deliverance Langton, daughter of George Langton on September 22, 1647. The marriage may have occurred in Springfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, but there seems to be no record available.
Thomas and Deliverance had four children, probably all born in Wethersfield, Thomas, John, Deliverance and Hannah. The granting of the house lot may indicate that Thomas was already a settler there, since the town was founded about 1637, or it may indicate that the town wanted him there for some reason, such as a skill or trade he might have had. I've found no record that indicates an occupation for Thomas.
In 1660, the family moved to Northampton, Hampshire, Massachusetts Boy Colony, where they lived on land granted them by Deliverance's father. Thomas took the oath of fidelity there, and was made a freeman in 1661, giving him the right to vote and hold office. The Hanchetts stayed in Northampton until about 1679, when they moved to Suffield, where Thomas was a founder. One source says that Hanchett also lived at New London, Connecticut and Westfield, Massachusetts. If this is accurate, then we have to wonder about Thomas. Was he difficult to get along with, did he have religious misgivings, or did he simply have a trade, such as millwright or home builder, that encouraged him to go where the new villages were forming? I hope to find more information about this.
Thomas is given the title of deacon in his death record. He served in that capacity at both Northampton and at Suffield. His Wikitree profile shows Thomas's signature, which is the only indication we have of a possible educational level.
Thomas died June 11, 1686 but so far I have not located a will or estate papers. Deliverance married Jonathan Burt that same year, and lived until 1711.
I'm hoping that a book about Thomas Hanchett will appear under the Christmas tree and perhaps after I read it I will have a better understanding of his life. We know, however, that he was one of those who chose to come to America, that he lived in frontier towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and that whatever he did for a living, he helped build our country.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Hanchett-Deliverance Langton
John Hanchett-Esther Pritchard
John Hanchett-Lydia Hayward
Hannah Hanchett-John Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Thomas and Deliverance had four children, probably all born in Wethersfield, Thomas, John, Deliverance and Hannah. The granting of the house lot may indicate that Thomas was already a settler there, since the town was founded about 1637, or it may indicate that the town wanted him there for some reason, such as a skill or trade he might have had. I've found no record that indicates an occupation for Thomas.
In 1660, the family moved to Northampton, Hampshire, Massachusetts Boy Colony, where they lived on land granted them by Deliverance's father. Thomas took the oath of fidelity there, and was made a freeman in 1661, giving him the right to vote and hold office. The Hanchetts stayed in Northampton until about 1679, when they moved to Suffield, where Thomas was a founder. One source says that Hanchett also lived at New London, Connecticut and Westfield, Massachusetts. If this is accurate, then we have to wonder about Thomas. Was he difficult to get along with, did he have religious misgivings, or did he simply have a trade, such as millwright or home builder, that encouraged him to go where the new villages were forming? I hope to find more information about this.
Thomas is given the title of deacon in his death record. He served in that capacity at both Northampton and at Suffield. His Wikitree profile shows Thomas's signature, which is the only indication we have of a possible educational level.
Thomas died June 11, 1686 but so far I have not located a will or estate papers. Deliverance married Jonathan Burt that same year, and lived until 1711.
I'm hoping that a book about Thomas Hanchett will appear under the Christmas tree and perhaps after I read it I will have a better understanding of his life. We know, however, that he was one of those who chose to come to America, that he lived in frontier towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and that whatever he did for a living, he helped build our country.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Hanchett-Deliverance Langton
John Hanchett-Esther Pritchard
John Hanchett-Lydia Hayward
Hannah Hanchett-John Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 6, 2018
Holbrook line: Stanard or Stannard?
It's long been a debate in our family as to whether our grandmother's name was to be spelled Stannard or Stanard. She used the spelling Stannard but her father and her grandfather used the spelling Stannard.
Here's the explanation, as found in The Colville Examiner of February 8, 1919, page 4, located on the Chronicling America website. (Colville is the county seat of Stevens County, Washington).
" "What's in a Name"-Is Easily Explained
"The correct spelling of our county school superintendent's name has been a matter of controversy-that is, among outsiders. In the office there is no controversy, for the county superintendent spells her name Stannard, and her father (her deputy) spells his name Stanard. Each states the reason for the particular spelling, and lets it go at that. But it has been a matter of supposition among many of the Examiner readers that this paper was not correctly reading proof when these names were spelled differently. And recently, in the Baptist church news, it did look rather queer to see Supt. L.E. Stanard in one line, Leader Miss Elizabeth Stannard in the next.
But the Examiner was correct in both cases, and if any argument arises, it may have to be settled by the Stanard ancestry (or Stannard). For it was along about 1800, when the grandfather of the present L.E. Stanard was an innkeeper in Madison County, York state, that the change of spelling originated. It seems that the innkeeper had ordered a sign for his inn, as was the old custom, and the signboard was one of a certain size, and the lettering was also of a certain size. The lettering proved too long for the board, hence to adjust matters the sing painter simply left out an n from the name, and behold-a nice sign, perfectly proportioned.
The innkeeper, to keep matters straight with his sign, then had to drop an n from his name, and he did so, although his three brothers did not. The succeeding generations of the innkeeper have maintained the spelling Stanard, but all the other relatives use Stannard.
The present county superintendent wishes to retain the original spelling, but her father says he was born Stanard, and Stanard he will remain. So each has a name, and a reason for the name, and the Examiner's proofreader is not to blame when a different spelling appears."
This is interesting for several reasons. First, it more or less confirms an old family story, but according to this article the change came 100 years earlier and a thousand miles away from Franklin County, Kansas, which is where we thought the change came. Secondly, we now have an occupation for Louis E Stanard's grandfather. This may be Libbeus Stanard, Jr., who was a veteran of the War of 1812, but wasn't born until 1785. It more likely was his great grandfather, Libbeus Stanard Sr., who was a veteran of the Revolutionary War and who died in Madison County, New York, in 1846. Either the "about 1800" date is incorrect, or it was actually the great grandfather who was the innkeeper.
The county school superintendent referred to is Elizabeth Stannard, elected in 1916, before women had the right to vote in national elections. I found a record on line in some sort of public document that stated in the 1918-1919 school year, there were 118 "districts", presumably each with a school, in Stevens County, Washington. Elizabeth was quite a woman, but no wonder she needed an assistant! Just visiting each school once a year would have kept her busy, but she also had to supervise and report on extracurricular activities, community centers, how many events were held and whether they were educational or patriotic, and various other busy work. She eventually left her job and went to teach high school in Spokane, Washington, where she retired after many years of teaching Latin.
Did anyone notice that I've sort of tied elections, and veterans, into this same post, which will post on election day, just a few days before Veteran's Day? It worked out nicely!
The line of descent would be
Libbeus Stannard Sr.-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard Jr.-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stannard (she actually did spell her name with two n's, also)-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
And now we know!
Here's the explanation, as found in The Colville Examiner of February 8, 1919, page 4, located on the Chronicling America website. (Colville is the county seat of Stevens County, Washington).
" "What's in a Name"-Is Easily Explained
"The correct spelling of our county school superintendent's name has been a matter of controversy-that is, among outsiders. In the office there is no controversy, for the county superintendent spells her name Stannard, and her father (her deputy) spells his name Stanard. Each states the reason for the particular spelling, and lets it go at that. But it has been a matter of supposition among many of the Examiner readers that this paper was not correctly reading proof when these names were spelled differently. And recently, in the Baptist church news, it did look rather queer to see Supt. L.E. Stanard in one line, Leader Miss Elizabeth Stannard in the next.
But the Examiner was correct in both cases, and if any argument arises, it may have to be settled by the Stanard ancestry (or Stannard). For it was along about 1800, when the grandfather of the present L.E. Stanard was an innkeeper in Madison County, York state, that the change of spelling originated. It seems that the innkeeper had ordered a sign for his inn, as was the old custom, and the signboard was one of a certain size, and the lettering was also of a certain size. The lettering proved too long for the board, hence to adjust matters the sing painter simply left out an n from the name, and behold-a nice sign, perfectly proportioned.
The innkeeper, to keep matters straight with his sign, then had to drop an n from his name, and he did so, although his three brothers did not. The succeeding generations of the innkeeper have maintained the spelling Stanard, but all the other relatives use Stannard.
The present county superintendent wishes to retain the original spelling, but her father says he was born Stanard, and Stanard he will remain. So each has a name, and a reason for the name, and the Examiner's proofreader is not to blame when a different spelling appears."
This is interesting for several reasons. First, it more or less confirms an old family story, but according to this article the change came 100 years earlier and a thousand miles away from Franklin County, Kansas, which is where we thought the change came. Secondly, we now have an occupation for Louis E Stanard's grandfather. This may be Libbeus Stanard, Jr., who was a veteran of the War of 1812, but wasn't born until 1785. It more likely was his great grandfather, Libbeus Stanard Sr., who was a veteran of the Revolutionary War and who died in Madison County, New York, in 1846. Either the "about 1800" date is incorrect, or it was actually the great grandfather who was the innkeeper.
The county school superintendent referred to is Elizabeth Stannard, elected in 1916, before women had the right to vote in national elections. I found a record on line in some sort of public document that stated in the 1918-1919 school year, there were 118 "districts", presumably each with a school, in Stevens County, Washington. Elizabeth was quite a woman, but no wonder she needed an assistant! Just visiting each school once a year would have kept her busy, but she also had to supervise and report on extracurricular activities, community centers, how many events were held and whether they were educational or patriotic, and various other busy work. She eventually left her job and went to teach high school in Spokane, Washington, where she retired after many years of teaching Latin.
Did anyone notice that I've sort of tied elections, and veterans, into this same post, which will post on election day, just a few days before Veteran's Day? It worked out nicely!
The line of descent would be
Libbeus Stannard Sr.-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard Jr.-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stannard (she actually did spell her name with two n's, also)-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
And now we know!
Friday, October 26, 2018
Holbrook line: John Perrin, Immigrant
John Perrin's origins are sketchy, but intriguing. Family stories say that he was of French Huguenot descent. His parents (but possibly these are grandparents, based on the birth date of "father John Perryn") were John Perryn and Anne Brunneau. His wife was Anne Hubert, daughter of Richard Hubert of France. The dates here almost work to say these families had likely escaped the French persecution of the Huguenots(Protestants) by fleeing to England. It's an exciting story, but one which seems to lack documentation at present. '
The first thing we know about John is that he was in Braintree, Massachusetts Bay Colony, in 1640. Family experts dispute whether or not he came in the Safety in 1635, but he was in Braintree in 1640. We don't know whether he had married Anne Hubert in England or whether they met on the ship or soon after arrival here. We do know that their daughter Mary was born at Braintree February 22, 1640/1. It's thought that she was the first born of their five known children, so that gives us an approximate marriage date of 1639, more or less.
John must have been well thought of in Braintree because he was one of the first men chosen, or allowed, to settle in a new town, Rehoboth, Plymouth Colony, so close to what became Rhode Island that some of his land was actually located there. He received several grants of land from the town, including home lot, woodland, fresh meadow, salt marsh, and new meadow. At various times, he was surveyor of highways, constable, townsman, and juror, so I'm thinking he had freeman status.
His estate was valued at 67 pounds in a 1643 settlement of town estates, but by the time of his death in 1674 his real estate was valued at 230 pounds and the total inventory at a little over 375 pounds. John was apparently a hard worker and a thrifty man. His will mentions his wife, two sons and two daughters. The first of two "Mary's" born to the couple had probably died young.
John died before King Philip's War, but the home he built in Rehoboth was apparently used as a garrison house during that conflict. His son John lived there at the time it was needed. A garrison house was generally built a little more stoutly than others in the vicinity, and usually had openings built into it that could be used to fire on any attackers. It may also have had a cellar or other hiding place on the grounds. I wonder if John built such a strong house with memories of the stories of his parents or grandparents and their trials in France in the back of his mind?
I wish I had more to say about John. Was he educated? What church did he attend, if any? Did he have a trade besides farming? There are always more questions, no matter what we are able to learn of the lives of these ancestors! Most of the material in this sketch came from Volume 96 of the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, with bits and pieces found elsewhere. And as always, some of it is speculation.
The line of descent is:
John Perrin-Anne Hubert
John Perrin-Mary Polley
Samuel Perrin-Mehitable Child
John Perrin-Abigail Morris
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libberus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first thing we know about John is that he was in Braintree, Massachusetts Bay Colony, in 1640. Family experts dispute whether or not he came in the Safety in 1635, but he was in Braintree in 1640. We don't know whether he had married Anne Hubert in England or whether they met on the ship or soon after arrival here. We do know that their daughter Mary was born at Braintree February 22, 1640/1. It's thought that she was the first born of their five known children, so that gives us an approximate marriage date of 1639, more or less.
John must have been well thought of in Braintree because he was one of the first men chosen, or allowed, to settle in a new town, Rehoboth, Plymouth Colony, so close to what became Rhode Island that some of his land was actually located there. He received several grants of land from the town, including home lot, woodland, fresh meadow, salt marsh, and new meadow. At various times, he was surveyor of highways, constable, townsman, and juror, so I'm thinking he had freeman status.
His estate was valued at 67 pounds in a 1643 settlement of town estates, but by the time of his death in 1674 his real estate was valued at 230 pounds and the total inventory at a little over 375 pounds. John was apparently a hard worker and a thrifty man. His will mentions his wife, two sons and two daughters. The first of two "Mary's" born to the couple had probably died young.
John died before King Philip's War, but the home he built in Rehoboth was apparently used as a garrison house during that conflict. His son John lived there at the time it was needed. A garrison house was generally built a little more stoutly than others in the vicinity, and usually had openings built into it that could be used to fire on any attackers. It may also have had a cellar or other hiding place on the grounds. I wonder if John built such a strong house with memories of the stories of his parents or grandparents and their trials in France in the back of his mind?
I wish I had more to say about John. Was he educated? What church did he attend, if any? Did he have a trade besides farming? There are always more questions, no matter what we are able to learn of the lives of these ancestors! Most of the material in this sketch came from Volume 96 of the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, with bits and pieces found elsewhere. And as always, some of it is speculation.
The line of descent is:
John Perrin-Anne Hubert
John Perrin-Mary Polley
Samuel Perrin-Mehitable Child
John Perrin-Abigail Morris
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libberus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)