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
Showing posts with label Trumbull. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trumbull. Show all posts
Friday, June 12, 2020
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
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, February 1, 2019
Holbrook line: John Trumbull, Immigrant 1612-1657
John Trumbull seems to be more of a mystery than I had thought. I have his birth information, and his parentage back for three generations. Or so I thought. Robert Charles Anderson, of "The Great Migration" series, seems to think that there were two John Trumble or Trumbulls, one in Cambridge-Charlestown, and one who went to Rowley. Our target is the man who went to Rowley.
So, we don't know who John's parents are, or where they were from, although the majority of the England births in the supposed time period for James that I could find were from either Yorkshire or Northumberland counties in England. The James Trumble who is frequent given as John's father was a kielsman, or someone who worked on freighters and lighters, small ships that worked around the docks. It was a low status, low paying job, and it seems to some that he would not have had the means to send his son to school for several years.
Our John Trumbull or Trumble surely had some education, for he was the first school teacher in Rowley, Massachusetts, where he was situated by 1639. His wife was Ellen or Elinor Chandler, believed to be the daughter of John Chandler and Ann Swan, and they married July 7, 1635 at Newcastle upon Tyne, Northumberland, England. She emigrated with her husband John and their first son John, but we don't know exactly when.
As indicated, John was a school teacher. He was made a freeman May 13, 1640. He was also town clerk from 1654-1656, (meaning, among other things, that his penmanship was decent) and a selectman from 1652 to 1654. By trade he was a cooper. He was also a deacon in the church.
John and Elinor had six children together. Elinor died before August of 1650, when John married Ann, the widow of Michael Hopkinson, and they had two more children, besides at least three of Ann's. It would have been a bustling household!
John's estate is rather interesting. There seems to have not been a will, so the court decided how the money should be divided. It shows that Ann's children, and Ann and John's children, mostly received more money than John and Elinor's children did. For instance, Jonathan Hopkinson received 25 pounds, while John, the firstborn of John and Elinor, received 15 pounds. The other children from that marriage received 8 pounds each. 55 pounds was allowed to the widow. It would be interesting to understand the reasoning process in deciding who got what, for typically a wife would receive one third of the estate, particularly if she still had children to raise. Ann got about one quarter of the estate's value.
The estate was valued at almost 226 pounds, minus debts of about five pounds. He had at least eight plots of land, including house, garden and orchards, several farm animals, over a pounds worth of books, a halberd, two swords, and a pair of bandoliers, a fowling piece, but just one bed with some additional bedding. The weapons were likely a requirement of all able bodied men. We don't know how able bodied John was toward the end of his life. If he was born about 1612, then he died about 45 years old, on March 16, 1657. I wonder what else he had hoped to accomplish with his life.
So we have some idea of John's life in New England, but almost none of his life in England. Perhaps someone is working right now to determine which John Trumbull is likely to be ours. It would be nice to know!
Our line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elinor Chandler
Joseph Trumbull-Hannah Smith
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
So, we don't know who John's parents are, or where they were from, although the majority of the England births in the supposed time period for James that I could find were from either Yorkshire or Northumberland counties in England. The James Trumble who is frequent given as John's father was a kielsman, or someone who worked on freighters and lighters, small ships that worked around the docks. It was a low status, low paying job, and it seems to some that he would not have had the means to send his son to school for several years.
Our John Trumbull or Trumble surely had some education, for he was the first school teacher in Rowley, Massachusetts, where he was situated by 1639. His wife was Ellen or Elinor Chandler, believed to be the daughter of John Chandler and Ann Swan, and they married July 7, 1635 at Newcastle upon Tyne, Northumberland, England. She emigrated with her husband John and their first son John, but we don't know exactly when.
As indicated, John was a school teacher. He was made a freeman May 13, 1640. He was also town clerk from 1654-1656, (meaning, among other things, that his penmanship was decent) and a selectman from 1652 to 1654. By trade he was a cooper. He was also a deacon in the church.
John and Elinor had six children together. Elinor died before August of 1650, when John married Ann, the widow of Michael Hopkinson, and they had two more children, besides at least three of Ann's. It would have been a bustling household!
John's estate is rather interesting. There seems to have not been a will, so the court decided how the money should be divided. It shows that Ann's children, and Ann and John's children, mostly received more money than John and Elinor's children did. For instance, Jonathan Hopkinson received 25 pounds, while John, the firstborn of John and Elinor, received 15 pounds. The other children from that marriage received 8 pounds each. 55 pounds was allowed to the widow. It would be interesting to understand the reasoning process in deciding who got what, for typically a wife would receive one third of the estate, particularly if she still had children to raise. Ann got about one quarter of the estate's value.
The estate was valued at almost 226 pounds, minus debts of about five pounds. He had at least eight plots of land, including house, garden and orchards, several farm animals, over a pounds worth of books, a halberd, two swords, and a pair of bandoliers, a fowling piece, but just one bed with some additional bedding. The weapons were likely a requirement of all able bodied men. We don't know how able bodied John was toward the end of his life. If he was born about 1612, then he died about 45 years old, on March 16, 1657. I wonder what else he had hoped to accomplish with his life.
So we have some idea of John's life in New England, but almost none of his life in England. Perhaps someone is working right now to determine which John Trumbull is likely to be ours. It would be nice to know!
Our line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elinor Chandler
Joseph Trumbull-Hannah Smith
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Thursday, October 11, 2018
Matthew Woodruff, Immigrant
Matthew Woodruff's beginnings are a mystery. There are at least three candidates for his parents. I am almost positive his parents are NOT Sir David Woodruffe and Lettice Dunscombe, which means I have a lot of deleting to do on my tree. There are, however, two additional candidates. One is David Woodruffe and Anne Rogerson, but I've not found anything to back that up. The other is Matthew Woodruff and Margaret Sanders.
Another problem is that we don't know his birth date. He died in 1682 and is termed then "a very old man". If that is true, the dates we have for his birth of 1612-1616 may not be correct. He may be older than that. The other possibility with the description of "a very old man" is that his health was poor and he appeared to be aged beyond his years. However, he didn't write his will until shortly before his death, which seems to indicate that he was reasonably healthy up to his final illness. So definitely, more research needs to be done about Matthew's origins.
The first we really know about Matthew is that he was generally in the area of Hartford, Connecticut in 1643, when he was a defendant in a law suit, the plaintiff being John Robinson. He was made a freeman at Hartford in 1657, but neither of these items prove that he actually lived in Hartford. He purchased land in Farmington in 1653, but he could have been there practically the whole time he was in America. Although I didn't find an official list of first founders of Farmington, it does appear that Matthew would have been considered one of the earliest settlers, if not a first founder.
Another puzzle about Matthew is the name of his wife. Her first name was Hannah, but her surname is variously given as Flagg, Baldwin, and Lambert. Baldwin seems to have the longest tradition about it, but I've not found evidence of that. Matthew and Hannah were married about 1642, and had six children together. I have conflicting information about Hannah. One source says she died in 1664, but Matthew's will, written in 1682, mentions his loving wife. If he remarried, perhaps that is one possible reason why there are varying names for his wife. Hannah joined the church in November of 1654 but Matthew didn't join until 1672. Presumably he had attended all along, but was not technically a part of the communion of believers until 1672.
Matthew wrote his will in September of 1682 and it was proven December 14, 1682, so he died sometime between those two dates. From his inventory, we can tell that Matthew was a farmer. His tools are described as tools for husbandry, so perhaps his status was that of husbandman. From coming to America as an unknown, perhaps as an indentured servant, he left an estate of about 250 pounds. He had not a lot of land, but his livestock carried a relatively high value, so he may have done more intensive livestock farming than some did. (Incidentally, the spelling used in the inventory is some of the most creative I have seen.) There were no books mentioned in his inventory. Son Samuel got the lion's share of the moveable goods, as well as some land, on the condition that he care for his mother.
Naturally I am not happy with this post. I'm writing it because half a loaf is better than none, but I would really like to determine Matthew's parentage, his age, and his hometown in England. He deserves that much.
The line of descent is:
Matthew Woodruff-Hannah possibly Baldwin
Hannah Woodruff-Richard Seymour
Hannah Seymour-Josepoh Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Another problem is that we don't know his birth date. He died in 1682 and is termed then "a very old man". If that is true, the dates we have for his birth of 1612-1616 may not be correct. He may be older than that. The other possibility with the description of "a very old man" is that his health was poor and he appeared to be aged beyond his years. However, he didn't write his will until shortly before his death, which seems to indicate that he was reasonably healthy up to his final illness. So definitely, more research needs to be done about Matthew's origins.
The first we really know about Matthew is that he was generally in the area of Hartford, Connecticut in 1643, when he was a defendant in a law suit, the plaintiff being John Robinson. He was made a freeman at Hartford in 1657, but neither of these items prove that he actually lived in Hartford. He purchased land in Farmington in 1653, but he could have been there practically the whole time he was in America. Although I didn't find an official list of first founders of Farmington, it does appear that Matthew would have been considered one of the earliest settlers, if not a first founder.
Another puzzle about Matthew is the name of his wife. Her first name was Hannah, but her surname is variously given as Flagg, Baldwin, and Lambert. Baldwin seems to have the longest tradition about it, but I've not found evidence of that. Matthew and Hannah were married about 1642, and had six children together. I have conflicting information about Hannah. One source says she died in 1664, but Matthew's will, written in 1682, mentions his loving wife. If he remarried, perhaps that is one possible reason why there are varying names for his wife. Hannah joined the church in November of 1654 but Matthew didn't join until 1672. Presumably he had attended all along, but was not technically a part of the communion of believers until 1672.
Matthew wrote his will in September of 1682 and it was proven December 14, 1682, so he died sometime between those two dates. From his inventory, we can tell that Matthew was a farmer. His tools are described as tools for husbandry, so perhaps his status was that of husbandman. From coming to America as an unknown, perhaps as an indentured servant, he left an estate of about 250 pounds. He had not a lot of land, but his livestock carried a relatively high value, so he may have done more intensive livestock farming than some did. (Incidentally, the spelling used in the inventory is some of the most creative I have seen.) There were no books mentioned in his inventory. Son Samuel got the lion's share of the moveable goods, as well as some land, on the condition that he care for his mother.
Naturally I am not happy with this post. I'm writing it because half a loaf is better than none, but I would really like to determine Matthew's parentage, his age, and his hometown in England. He deserves that much.
The line of descent is:
Matthew Woodruff-Hannah possibly Baldwin
Hannah Woodruff-Richard Seymour
Hannah Seymour-Josepoh Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, August 24, 2018
Holbrook line: Eltweed Pomeroy, Immigrant
I can't believe that I haven't written about Eltweed Pomeroy yet. Just the sound of his name has made me smile since the day I found him on our tree. Plus, there is scads and oodles of information about him, although of course there are still confusing details and missing facts. There is even a Pomeroy Family Association that honors his name, and a book written about Eltweed and his descendants. I've found a wonderful collection of riches while writing this post.
Eltweed Pomeroy was born in Beaminster, Devon, England shortly before he was christened on July 5, 1585. His father was Richard Pomeroy but the name of his mother is not yet known. (It is often given as '"Eleanor Coker" but that name is also attached to an earlier Richard Pomeroy, and I'll believe it only when I find documentation.) At any rate, Richard would have have at least one wife, and perhaps Eltweed is a name in her family.
We don't know anything about Eltweed's early life other than that he was listed as being a :fuller". The town was famous as a manufacturer of both linens and woolens, so Eltweed worked with woolens, in a manufacturing environment. He first married Johanna Keech on May 4, 1617 in Beaminster. They had two daughters, but Johanna and the two young children died of "the plague" by 1621.
He next married on May 7, 1629 in Sherborne, Dorset, England Margery Rockett (Rockwood), daughter of Thomas Rocket. The two towns are 17 miles apart, so one wonders how they met. However, they both must have been good Puritans and that may explain their marriage, as just a few monts later, in February of 1630, they were in attendance at a meeting of Reverend White's group of Puritans in the "New Hospital" at Plymouth. This was 96 miles from Sherborne, so the Pomeroys would have sacrificed much to get there.
We don't know exactly when the family came to New England but they were part of the Great Migration because Eltweed was made a freeman at Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, on March 4, 1632. While in Dorchester, he served as selectman, and constable, and on at least two town committees. He was referred to as "Mr. Pomeroy", indicating a degree of respect. The couple had eight children. Two may have been born in England, one possibly in Dorchester, and the rest were born in Windsor, Connecticut, which is where Eltweed took his family in 1636. He readily adhered to the teachings of the Reverend Ephraim Huit (Hewitt), another of our ancestors, when he came to Windsor in 1639. In fact, he built onto his own home a room for Isabel, widow of Ephraim Huit, and then bought it from her estate when she died. Sometime in 1659, there was an Indian raid and Eltweed's mare was stolen. He requested compensation and eventually (5 years later!) received wampum worth ten pounds. This was regarded as an acceptable form of money.
Eltweed owned land in Windsor, including two houses, which he gave to two of his sons.
His background in woolen textiles was valued in Windsor, and he appears to have acted as a sort of consultant, but he was primarily a blacksmith. Margery died in 1655 and after twelve years of widower status, he married Lydia Brown, the widow of Thomas Parsons on November 30, 1667. Eltweed They had no children, Eltweed was old by then, 82 years old when he married for the third time, and nearly blind.
Soon after the marriage, they apparently went to Northampton, Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay Colony, where Eltweed's son, Medad, lived. Eltweed died there on March 4, 1673, when he was 87 years old. I haven't found a will or an inventory yet, but I'll keep looking. It is possible that he owned next to nothing at the time of his death, since he had given much to his children, and was living with a son.
Eltweed is fun because FamousKin.com tells us that he is the ancestor of some pretty famous people-Harriet Beecher Stowe, Franklin D. Roosevelt, J.P. Morgan and son, Gloria Vanderbilt (and hence Anderson Cooper), and Henry Luce, among others. Some of these people were extremely wealthy, but I don't think we'd be welcome in their homes, except as paying guests. Still, it's fun to find connections like these.
Our line of descent is:
Eltweed Pomeroy-Margery Rockett
Medad Pomeroy-Experience Woodward
Joseph Pomeroy-Hannah Seymour
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Eltweed Pomeroy was born in Beaminster, Devon, England shortly before he was christened on July 5, 1585. His father was Richard Pomeroy but the name of his mother is not yet known. (It is often given as '"Eleanor Coker" but that name is also attached to an earlier Richard Pomeroy, and I'll believe it only when I find documentation.) At any rate, Richard would have have at least one wife, and perhaps Eltweed is a name in her family.
We don't know anything about Eltweed's early life other than that he was listed as being a :fuller". The town was famous as a manufacturer of both linens and woolens, so Eltweed worked with woolens, in a manufacturing environment. He first married Johanna Keech on May 4, 1617 in Beaminster. They had two daughters, but Johanna and the two young children died of "the plague" by 1621.
He next married on May 7, 1629 in Sherborne, Dorset, England Margery Rockett (Rockwood), daughter of Thomas Rocket. The two towns are 17 miles apart, so one wonders how they met. However, they both must have been good Puritans and that may explain their marriage, as just a few monts later, in February of 1630, they were in attendance at a meeting of Reverend White's group of Puritans in the "New Hospital" at Plymouth. This was 96 miles from Sherborne, so the Pomeroys would have sacrificed much to get there.
We don't know exactly when the family came to New England but they were part of the Great Migration because Eltweed was made a freeman at Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, on March 4, 1632. While in Dorchester, he served as selectman, and constable, and on at least two town committees. He was referred to as "Mr. Pomeroy", indicating a degree of respect. The couple had eight children. Two may have been born in England, one possibly in Dorchester, and the rest were born in Windsor, Connecticut, which is where Eltweed took his family in 1636. He readily adhered to the teachings of the Reverend Ephraim Huit (Hewitt), another of our ancestors, when he came to Windsor in 1639. In fact, he built onto his own home a room for Isabel, widow of Ephraim Huit, and then bought it from her estate when she died. Sometime in 1659, there was an Indian raid and Eltweed's mare was stolen. He requested compensation and eventually (5 years later!) received wampum worth ten pounds. This was regarded as an acceptable form of money.
Eltweed owned land in Windsor, including two houses, which he gave to two of his sons.
His background in woolen textiles was valued in Windsor, and he appears to have acted as a sort of consultant, but he was primarily a blacksmith. Margery died in 1655 and after twelve years of widower status, he married Lydia Brown, the widow of Thomas Parsons on November 30, 1667. Eltweed They had no children, Eltweed was old by then, 82 years old when he married for the third time, and nearly blind.
Soon after the marriage, they apparently went to Northampton, Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay Colony, where Eltweed's son, Medad, lived. Eltweed died there on March 4, 1673, when he was 87 years old. I haven't found a will or an inventory yet, but I'll keep looking. It is possible that he owned next to nothing at the time of his death, since he had given much to his children, and was living with a son.
Eltweed is fun because FamousKin.com tells us that he is the ancestor of some pretty famous people-Harriet Beecher Stowe, Franklin D. Roosevelt, J.P. Morgan and son, Gloria Vanderbilt (and hence Anderson Cooper), and Henry Luce, among others. Some of these people were extremely wealthy, but I don't think we'd be welcome in their homes, except as paying guests. Still, it's fun to find connections like these.
Our line of descent is:
Eltweed Pomeroy-Margery Rockett
Medad Pomeroy-Experience Woodward
Joseph Pomeroy-Hannah Seymour
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Holbrook line: William Filley, Immigrant
William Filley's birth date and location, and death date and location, are unknown. We can make some reasonable guesses, that he may have been born in about 1617, probably somewhere in Devonshire since that seems to be the only place where this surname is found, and he probably died in Windsor, Connecticut because he lived there for the great majority of his life in America. I have seen documents, which I can't decipher, which others have said give his parents as "Godfridus Bailey and Mary Filley Harris, but I am not at all convinced that this is our William. The location is wrong, for one thing, and for another, this would make William "illegitimate". I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm just saying that at this point, I'm not buying the story.
There are also varying stories as to when he arrived in America. One story says he arrived with Major Holmes in 1633, when a trading post was established at what became Windsor, and testimony in 1654 states that William had lived at Windsor "these twenty years". Most say he arrived in 1638 with the group led by Reverend Ephraim Huit or Hewett. I don't know whether the two stories are mutually exclusive, or whether William might have come early and then returned to England, before coming for the final time in 1639, If he was with the early group, then he may have been there for the Pequod War, whether or not he returned to England. (If he came with Rev. Huit's group, he apparently was not as much of a Puritan as the majority of those sailing were, since he didn't formally join the church until 1673.)
Pretty much everyone agrees that he was in Windsor by 1640, and that he married Margaret there in 1642. One might reasonably ask whom this Margaret was, but the silence in the records so far is complete. Nevertheless, we do know more about William Filley once he is married and settled down. He and Margaret had at least nine children: Samuel, John, Mary, Elizabeth, Hannah, Margaret, Abigail, Deborah, and William, born between 1643 and 1665. William acquired various tracts of land, "trading up", and in 1686 he and Margaret were shown to have had a house with six acres, another tract of 18 acres of farmland, a horse, two oxen, and one swine. This showed a relatively prosperous household for this time and place.
As far as his civic duties go, he was a constable for one term beginning in 1662, responsible for enforcement of the local laws and ordinances. It is likely that his name appears on town petitions but I haven't found them yet. We don't know when William, or for that matatere, Margaret, died, although it must have been after they were listed in the 1686 record mentioned above. Their children stayed mostly in the Windsor area for generations, and we may very well still have cousins there.
Every generation has been part of what makes America great, but he was one of the very earliest pioneers. My hat is off to him, and to Margaret!
Here's our line of descent:
William Filley-Margaret
Elizabeth Filley-David Winchell
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
There are also varying stories as to when he arrived in America. One story says he arrived with Major Holmes in 1633, when a trading post was established at what became Windsor, and testimony in 1654 states that William had lived at Windsor "these twenty years". Most say he arrived in 1638 with the group led by Reverend Ephraim Huit or Hewett. I don't know whether the two stories are mutually exclusive, or whether William might have come early and then returned to England, before coming for the final time in 1639, If he was with the early group, then he may have been there for the Pequod War, whether or not he returned to England. (If he came with Rev. Huit's group, he apparently was not as much of a Puritan as the majority of those sailing were, since he didn't formally join the church until 1673.)
Pretty much everyone agrees that he was in Windsor by 1640, and that he married Margaret there in 1642. One might reasonably ask whom this Margaret was, but the silence in the records so far is complete. Nevertheless, we do know more about William Filley once he is married and settled down. He and Margaret had at least nine children: Samuel, John, Mary, Elizabeth, Hannah, Margaret, Abigail, Deborah, and William, born between 1643 and 1665. William acquired various tracts of land, "trading up", and in 1686 he and Margaret were shown to have had a house with six acres, another tract of 18 acres of farmland, a horse, two oxen, and one swine. This showed a relatively prosperous household for this time and place.
As far as his civic duties go, he was a constable for one term beginning in 1662, responsible for enforcement of the local laws and ordinances. It is likely that his name appears on town petitions but I haven't found them yet. We don't know when William, or for that matatere, Margaret, died, although it must have been after they were listed in the 1686 record mentioned above. Their children stayed mostly in the Windsor area for generations, and we may very well still have cousins there.
Every generation has been part of what makes America great, but he was one of the very earliest pioneers. My hat is off to him, and to Margaret!
Here's our line of descent:
William Filley-Margaret
Elizabeth Filley-David Winchell
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Holbrook line: Hugh Smith, Immigrant
We have more information about Hugh Smith than about some of our other ancestors, but most of it is on this side of the Atlantic. I have a long line of ancestors for him going back many years past that, but it's unsourced and I don't trust it. So for now, we don't know Hugh Smith's parents, and we don't know where he was born. His likely birth date is 1613 or 1614, in England.
We likewise don't know exactly when he arrived in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, although he was probably here by 1640. We know he was made a freeman on March 18, 1642. He may have gone directly to Rowley when he arrived here, and he may have been following the Rev. Ezekiel Roger's group But it seems he wasn't in the first wave of settlers there, because when the first land allotments were given in 1643, he was given the minimum, when the original settlers were given more. Nevertheless, he was in Rowley early, and he stayed there the rest of this life.
His wife's name was Mary, and that is as much as we know about her up to the time she and Hugh started having children. They had seven living children when Hugh died in 1655. Samuel and John may have come with their parents from England, because the first recorded Rowley birth was of Mary, in March of 1642/43. They also had Sarah, Hannah, Martha, and Edward. There is a gap of 6 years between Martha and Edward so there may have been unsuccessful pregnancies, also.
We know Hugh was of some importance in the town because he was overseer of the poor in 1649 and again in 1654, and selectman in 1651. In 1653 he and Francis Parret and Joseph Jewett were appointed to help set out the borders between Rowley, Ipswich, and Topsfield. He gradually accumulated land and owned several plots at the time of his death. He was occasionally taken to task because his fences were in disrepair. In 1953, we find that he had four cows.
I was thrilled to find a copy of his estate on line, and even more thrilled to find that it has been transcribed. That handwriting was going to be hard to decipher, so I'm glad that someone else has done it (The Probate Records of Essex County, volume 1, page 236 and following, found on the American Ancestors website). He left Mary her third, plus five pounds to aid in the "bringing up of my youngest son". Oldest son Samuel was to have "half so much more in portion as any other of my children" and the balance was to be shared. His inventory included one mare, one ass, four sheep, two oxen, five cows, one cow and a bull, two heifers, six calves, one steer, and eight swine. He had 26 acres of land and a dwelling, the land being in four different parcels. For arms, he had one mustket, two swords, and one pouch. He had a large amount of wool on hand, so perhaps he was a dealer of some sort. There was eleven score and fourteen pound of wool in one batch, and thirtie pound of sheep wool, identified separately. He had one pair of looms but no mention of a spinning wheel, so it seems that this was more wool than the family would use. (Speculation only, and anyone is welcome to share an additional thought about this). His estate was valued at 234 pounds, 11 shillings, 8 pence, but there were also 51 pounds and 16 shillings in various debts.
The estate was finally settled in 1667. By this time, Edward was approaching 14 years of age and it may have been appropriate to settle at this age. Mary married Jeremiah Ellsworth in 1657, and lived until 1688. I'd sure like to know who Mary was, and I'd love to know who Hugh's parents are.
The line of descent is:
Hugh Smith-Mary
Hannah Smith-Joseph Trumbull
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
We likewise don't know exactly when he arrived in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, although he was probably here by 1640. We know he was made a freeman on March 18, 1642. He may have gone directly to Rowley when he arrived here, and he may have been following the Rev. Ezekiel Roger's group But it seems he wasn't in the first wave of settlers there, because when the first land allotments were given in 1643, he was given the minimum, when the original settlers were given more. Nevertheless, he was in Rowley early, and he stayed there the rest of this life.
His wife's name was Mary, and that is as much as we know about her up to the time she and Hugh started having children. They had seven living children when Hugh died in 1655. Samuel and John may have come with their parents from England, because the first recorded Rowley birth was of Mary, in March of 1642/43. They also had Sarah, Hannah, Martha, and Edward. There is a gap of 6 years between Martha and Edward so there may have been unsuccessful pregnancies, also.
We know Hugh was of some importance in the town because he was overseer of the poor in 1649 and again in 1654, and selectman in 1651. In 1653 he and Francis Parret and Joseph Jewett were appointed to help set out the borders between Rowley, Ipswich, and Topsfield. He gradually accumulated land and owned several plots at the time of his death. He was occasionally taken to task because his fences were in disrepair. In 1953, we find that he had four cows.
I was thrilled to find a copy of his estate on line, and even more thrilled to find that it has been transcribed. That handwriting was going to be hard to decipher, so I'm glad that someone else has done it (The Probate Records of Essex County, volume 1, page 236 and following, found on the American Ancestors website). He left Mary her third, plus five pounds to aid in the "bringing up of my youngest son". Oldest son Samuel was to have "half so much more in portion as any other of my children" and the balance was to be shared. His inventory included one mare, one ass, four sheep, two oxen, five cows, one cow and a bull, two heifers, six calves, one steer, and eight swine. He had 26 acres of land and a dwelling, the land being in four different parcels. For arms, he had one mustket, two swords, and one pouch. He had a large amount of wool on hand, so perhaps he was a dealer of some sort. There was eleven score and fourteen pound of wool in one batch, and thirtie pound of sheep wool, identified separately. He had one pair of looms but no mention of a spinning wheel, so it seems that this was more wool than the family would use. (Speculation only, and anyone is welcome to share an additional thought about this). His estate was valued at 234 pounds, 11 shillings, 8 pence, but there were also 51 pounds and 16 shillings in various debts.
The estate was finally settled in 1667. By this time, Edward was approaching 14 years of age and it may have been appropriate to settle at this age. Mary married Jeremiah Ellsworth in 1657, and lived until 1688. I'd sure like to know who Mary was, and I'd love to know who Hugh's parents are.
The line of descent is:
Hugh Smith-Mary
Hannah Smith-Joseph Trumbull
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Friday, September 1, 2017
Holbrook line: Robert Winchell, Immigrant
Robert Winchell is a bit of a mystery since as far as I can tell, his home in England, or possibly Wales, has not been located. He is believed to be the son of Thomas Winchell or Wyncoll and Beatrice. One birth location for Robert has been suggested as Dorchester, Dorset, England, but I am not able to find any documentation for that.
Robert and his wife Mary (generally said to be Mary Phelps) arrived in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony most likely in 1634. He was accepted as a freeman on May 6, 1635 in Dorchester. He acquired several pieces of property there but shortly after, probably in 1637, moved on to Windsor, Connecticut, where he also acquired land, including that given to the original proprietors in 1640. Two children were born to Robert and Mary before they arrived in Windsor, and six more after they made their home there. Mary must have been a busy lady!
Robert served several times on juries for Connecticut and at least once as an arbitrator, but as far as we know was never really involved in the government of the town or the colony. We do believe that he had some education, as he had an old Bible and about 10 books in his possession when he died.
We learn a little more from the inventory. It included two swords and some ammunition, but apparently not a firearm. This indicates that he had been excused from military duty, as all of the militia or training band was required to have firearms at all times.
Robert died March 5, 1667/1668, apparently owing a little more than the value of his estate. However, the oldest son, Nathaniel, did end up with the homestead, and the other sons were left something, even if it was just the forgiveness of a debt. His will was oral, which sometimes means the last illness was sudden and there was no time to call someone who could write it out .
The other thing we can tell about Robert is that he seems to have stayed out of trouble, at least anything major, for there is no reference to him in the court records that I have consulted. He was one of those who came to America and quietly helped build it, supporting his family and giving them a chance to make a better life for themselves.
The line of descent is
Robert Winchell-Mary
David Winchell-Elizabeth Filley
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Robert and his wife Mary (generally said to be Mary Phelps) arrived in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony most likely in 1634. He was accepted as a freeman on May 6, 1635 in Dorchester. He acquired several pieces of property there but shortly after, probably in 1637, moved on to Windsor, Connecticut, where he also acquired land, including that given to the original proprietors in 1640. Two children were born to Robert and Mary before they arrived in Windsor, and six more after they made their home there. Mary must have been a busy lady!
Robert served several times on juries for Connecticut and at least once as an arbitrator, but as far as we know was never really involved in the government of the town or the colony. We do believe that he had some education, as he had an old Bible and about 10 books in his possession when he died.
We learn a little more from the inventory. It included two swords and some ammunition, but apparently not a firearm. This indicates that he had been excused from military duty, as all of the militia or training band was required to have firearms at all times.
Robert died March 5, 1667/1668, apparently owing a little more than the value of his estate. However, the oldest son, Nathaniel, did end up with the homestead, and the other sons were left something, even if it was just the forgiveness of a debt. His will was oral, which sometimes means the last illness was sudden and there was no time to call someone who could write it out .
The other thing we can tell about Robert is that he seems to have stayed out of trouble, at least anything major, for there is no reference to him in the court records that I have consulted. He was one of those who came to America and quietly helped build it, supporting his family and giving them a chance to make a better life for themselves.
The line of descent is
Robert Winchell-Mary
David Winchell-Elizabeth Filley
Elizabeth Winchell-John Trumbull
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
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
Friday, May 26, 2017
Holbrook line: RIchard Seymour 1604-1655 Immigrant
First,the fanciful but probably not true, or at least not proven: Some believe that Richard Seymour was a descendant of the Seymours of Wolf Hall, recently a series on PBS television. Those Seymours were powerful people involved with even more powerful people, and they are fascinating. Our Richard may or may not be descended from them, but his own life is fascinating in its own way. Of course, I say that about all my ancestors!
Richard Seymour was baptized on January 27, 1604/05, the first child of Robert and Elizabeth Waller Seymour, at Sawbridgeworth, county Herts, England. This is right on the border with Essex county, and likely there were friends and relatives of the Seymours who lived just a few miles down the road but were from Essex and not Hertfordshire.
The next thing we know about Richard is that he married Mercy Ruscoe, daughter of Roger and Sarah Ruscoe of Sawbridgeworth, and the marriage occurred there on April 15,1631. Richard and Mercy had three children born at Sawbridgworth, from 1632 to 1636. Although I've not located immigration or transportation records, it seems likely that the Seymours (also spelled Seamer and Semer, among other variations) left England in 1638 and went to Hartford Connecticut, where many of the young town would have been old acquaintances from England. Many Hartford settlers had their origins in Essex County, and if these people had been worshipping together as Puritans, they would surely have known and loved their new/old neighbors.
Richard was not a first settler at Hartford, as his lot number was number 70, but he did receive a land allotment in 1639 so he and his family, which consisted of four sons (two daughters had apparently died in England), settled down in their new home, early in the town's history. His house was near the Ely home, and he also owned land toward West Hartford. He was elected chimney viewer in 1647, which was somewhat analogous to that of fire inspector today. The homes during this time period were built (except our pioneers used wood rather than the stone used in England) like those homes they'd left behind in England, meaning the roofs were thatched and prone to catching fire. It was Richard's job to make sure the families were taking safety precautions and to watch for fires that might start on the roof, especially around the chimney.
The land Richard had was "by the courtesy of the town", which meant in effect that he only had a life lease to the property, and could not pass it on to his sons. Possibly due to this fact, Richard joined a group of settlers who planned to settle a new area, Norwalk, also in what is now Connecticut. He signed an agreement for the settling and planting of Norwalk in 1650 and was settled there by 1652. Here his home was directly opposite the meeting house and Parade Ground, on the highway leading from Stamford to Fairfield. He is considered an original founder of Norwalk. He was elected townsman, or selectman, in 1655 but four months later wrote his will, when he was "very week and sike".
Richard Seymour's estate was inventoried October 10, 1655 and was valued at 255 pounds, 9 shillings, which is not bad for a man 50 years old. Most of the inventory is illegible but one can make out "books" valued at one pound. this would indicate probably several volumes, but maybe not more than 20. It would be intriguing to know what they were. Were they all religious books, or did he have some practical books also? His widow, Mercy, married Thomas Steele, one of the leaders of the Connecticut Colony. He died in 1665 and she outlived him, but records of her death have not been located.
So whether or not there is a connection to the Seymours of Wolf Hall, we certainly have a line to one of the early settlers of our country, and that is a good thing, too.
The line of descent is:
Richard Seymour-Mercy Ruscoe
Richard Seymour-Hannah Woodruff
Hannah Seymour-Joseph Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia or Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Richard Seymour was baptized on January 27, 1604/05, the first child of Robert and Elizabeth Waller Seymour, at Sawbridgeworth, county Herts, England. This is right on the border with Essex county, and likely there were friends and relatives of the Seymours who lived just a few miles down the road but were from Essex and not Hertfordshire.
The next thing we know about Richard is that he married Mercy Ruscoe, daughter of Roger and Sarah Ruscoe of Sawbridgeworth, and the marriage occurred there on April 15,1631. Richard and Mercy had three children born at Sawbridgworth, from 1632 to 1636. Although I've not located immigration or transportation records, it seems likely that the Seymours (also spelled Seamer and Semer, among other variations) left England in 1638 and went to Hartford Connecticut, where many of the young town would have been old acquaintances from England. Many Hartford settlers had their origins in Essex County, and if these people had been worshipping together as Puritans, they would surely have known and loved their new/old neighbors.
Richard was not a first settler at Hartford, as his lot number was number 70, but he did receive a land allotment in 1639 so he and his family, which consisted of four sons (two daughters had apparently died in England), settled down in their new home, early in the town's history. His house was near the Ely home, and he also owned land toward West Hartford. He was elected chimney viewer in 1647, which was somewhat analogous to that of fire inspector today. The homes during this time period were built (except our pioneers used wood rather than the stone used in England) like those homes they'd left behind in England, meaning the roofs were thatched and prone to catching fire. It was Richard's job to make sure the families were taking safety precautions and to watch for fires that might start on the roof, especially around the chimney.
The land Richard had was "by the courtesy of the town", which meant in effect that he only had a life lease to the property, and could not pass it on to his sons. Possibly due to this fact, Richard joined a group of settlers who planned to settle a new area, Norwalk, also in what is now Connecticut. He signed an agreement for the settling and planting of Norwalk in 1650 and was settled there by 1652. Here his home was directly opposite the meeting house and Parade Ground, on the highway leading from Stamford to Fairfield. He is considered an original founder of Norwalk. He was elected townsman, or selectman, in 1655 but four months later wrote his will, when he was "very week and sike".
Richard Seymour's estate was inventoried October 10, 1655 and was valued at 255 pounds, 9 shillings, which is not bad for a man 50 years old. Most of the inventory is illegible but one can make out "books" valued at one pound. this would indicate probably several volumes, but maybe not more than 20. It would be intriguing to know what they were. Were they all religious books, or did he have some practical books also? His widow, Mercy, married Thomas Steele, one of the leaders of the Connecticut Colony. He died in 1665 and she outlived him, but records of her death have not been located.
So whether or not there is a connection to the Seymours of Wolf Hall, we certainly have a line to one of the early settlers of our country, and that is a good thing, too.
The line of descent is:
Richard Seymour-Mercy Ruscoe
Richard Seymour-Hannah Woodruff
Hannah Seymour-Joseph Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia or Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)