Last summer, there was a reunion of sorts at the site of my g-grandfather Calvin's homestead. Issues and commitments at work prevented my being there, but my cousins tell me a good time was had by all…at least until my 94-year-old aunt got into a heated argument with an equally elderly former neighbor who had the poor sense to mention the trees his father had cut down. My cousins Carol and John, who at 65 and 70 are10 to 15 years older than me, but young enough to spring into action to keep the elders from going after each other with canes.
As I was in the middle of writing up our family history, Carol and John emailed me to see if I had any inkling about the source of the irritation. I did – follow me below the squiggle for the rest of the story.
In 1892, Calvin sued his neighbor (father of the 2010 man), alleging that said neighbor forcibly broke and entered upon a portion of Calvin's property, plowed it, trod down the grass, took down the fences, destroyed fruit trees, and otherwise injured the premises. The court awarded $50 damages and $22.50 costs. The neighbor did not contest the case, but appealed on a technicality. The case was heard by the Wisconsin Supreme Court on May 1, 1894; the Court found for Calvin, yet more than 120 years later, the respective heirs are still arguing the merits!
While this diary won't go into all of the genealogical flame wars I've discovered in my research, I thought I'd share a few of the stories tonight as a more entertaining alternative to some of the ones found elsewhere on DK4. Understand, I'm not saying pie fights are genetic, but I do think at times in the course of reaching a common goal people take their frustrations out on people who are in fact on their side.
As I've mentioned to this group before, my mother's family has been in America since colonial times…on her father's side I've documented her descent from the Aldens/Mullins families of the Mayflower; mom's maternal line goes back to my 8th g-grandfather John Cary—who arrived in Duxbury in the 1630s to become the town's first clerk and sometime Latin and Hebrew tutor to Gov. Bradford, and later moved to Bridgewater, MA.
So far, the Alden line is more obviously litigious, but evidence points to Cary's connection to a once-titled family, whose fortunes were beginning to wane in the 17th Century. The legend goes that the young man left home after a dispute with his stepmother over his share of the estate. A story from his descendant Moses Cary, writing in 1785, recounted in a 19th Century history of North Bridgewater contains the following anecdote:
When he first landed, it gave him a dreadful shock, for he was brought up delicately, and left a delightful country, and here he found himself not only in a strange land, but in a frightful wilderness and destitute of any of the comforts of life—saw no way to get a living but to go to work, though he was not brought up to any kind of labor. He was so full of trouble that he shed tears bountifully, which so moved the captain of vessel that he offered to carry him back again, but he said, No. I will never go back.
Back to the cranky line, in April 1616, my 10th g-grandfather William Mullins has with a warrant issued against him by the Dorking Privy Council whereby he was to appear before their Lordships. He appeared before the Council in May 1616 and was continued technically in their custody 'untill by their Honours' order he was dismissed. He did not survive the Mayflower's 1620 voyage by many months. He wrote his will before he knew his wife was also near death; the will provided: "Allsoe if my sonne William will come to Virginia I give him my share of land furdermore I give to my twoe Overseers Mr John Carver and Mr Williamson, twentye shillinges apiece to see this my will performed desiringe them that he would have an eye over my wife and children to be as fathers and freindes to them;" but he also had time to rant at one of his employees: "Allsoe to have a speciall eye to my man Robert wch hathe not so approved himselfe as I would he should have done."
William's son-in-law, John Alden also had his troubles with the law. During the course of his duties in administering the trading activities of the Colony on the Kennebec River, in 1634 he witnessed a trading dispute escalate into a double-killing, as Moses Talbot of Plymouth Colony was shot at point-blank range by trespasser John Hocking, who was then shot and killed when other Plymouth men returned fire. John Alden was held in custody by the neighboring Massachusetts Bay Colony for a few days while the two colonies debated who had jurisdiction to investigate the murders. Myles Standish eventually came to the Bay Colony to provide Plymouth's answer in the matter.
John's daughter Ruth—who was born in 1634, around the time of the Kennebec River incident--died before her husband, John Bass. John left a fairly detailed will…and included numerous bequests to various children, including his daughter (my 7th g-grandmother Ruth Bass Webb). His will did not sit well with some of his heirs, who filed a petition:
Joseph Bass and Ephraim Thayer and other children of John Bass, late of Braintrey
(Massachusetts), deceased, humbly pray that the will of the said late father may not
be proved, for the following reasons:
1. First, because he was under great insanity of mind at making the said will and Benjamin Webb, one of the Witnesses to ye said Will has declared that ye Testator
acted childish when he Executed the same.
2. For that he was persuaded by his son John Bass and wife to cut off his son Joseph
by making this new will and being Stricken in years was much awed by his
grandson, John Bass.
3. For that the Testator in his life settled some part of his Estate by deed upon his son
John and by his present will has given it to his Grandson Samuel Bass which
evidences that he was non compass mentis at the time the making of ye said will.
4. For that he has given his Wife but one fourth part of his Estate when the law of the
province sets forth one-third to the widow.
5. For that there is a legacy in Said Will uncertain which is given to his Grandson John
Bass son John when at the same time there is no such person in being nor any
probability that there will be at present.
6. For the Testator has give legacies to the Daughters of his children, Ruth Webb and
Hannah Adams, both deceased, and has totally excluded their sons.
Joseph Basse, Boston, Massachusetts, 22 October 1716
The court found that the petition was without merit, and the probate of the estate went ahead as John Bass set forth in his will.
Now, we need to leave Plymouth Colony to neighboring Massachusetts Colony. In the 1640s Gov. Winthrop and his son recruited some skilled iron workers to join the colony, and my 9th g-grandfather Quinton Pray was one of them. These ironworkers introduced a new, colorful set of characters to the new world. Noodling around early Essex Co. court dockets, there are numerous charges brought against these ironworkers, including Quinton.
Court Held At Salem. 20: 12: 1648., Present: Major-Generall Endicott, Mr. Richard Saltonstall and Capt. Robert Bridgis. Quinton (Quintweth) Pray and his wife fined 50s. for five oaths; Wit: Nich. Pynion and Rich. Bayly.
Court Held At Salem, 11: 7: 1649, By Adjournment. Quinton Pray, for striking Nicholas Penion with a staff, having an iron two feet long on the end of it, and breaking his head; for striking Thomas Billington, and for swearing, fined.* *Pinion fined 10s. at the Iron works. Quinton Prey deposed that he met Nichs. Pinion last Lord's day coming out of his corn, and heard him swear, by God, all his pumpions were turned to squashes, and by God's blood he had but one pumpion of all. Sworn 1: 7 mo: 1649, before Robert Bridges, & Rich. Prey also swore that N. Pinion at the same time swore by God's wounds. Jno. Chackswell deposed that at the same time he heard the said Nichs. Pinion swear, by God, and that he heard him say at another time that his wife had made away her clothes but he sworn, by God, he would make her know what she had done with them. Sworn before Rob. Bridges. & Rich. Greene deposed as next above, and also that the said Nichs. Pinion at the same time swore, by God's blood. Sworn 3: 7 mo:
1649, before Rob. Bridges. Wittnesses agt Pray strike Pinion & Tho. Billinton & Jn Dimond, Jn. Vinton, Henry Leonard, Jos. Jyncks, Nich. Pinion, Tobia Saunders, Jn. Dimond & his man. A warrant to Tho. Loose & us., ag Pinion foresayd and his wife, therefore, could not have Sd y Jn Chaskell would have,: been guilty of lascivious acts. A warrant to N. Pinion for striking Charles Hooke. Wit. Jno. Vinton and Jno. Jorum. A warrant to N. Pinion and Jno Vinto to witness against Quinton Pray for striking Jn. Dimond.
I think there is a movie script lurking here.
Massachusetts Colony under Gov. Winthrop also claimed part of Long Island (I wonder if they pronounced it Lawn Guy Land?), and yet another of my 9th g-grandfather's Josiah Stanborough was one of the original undertakers (ie founders) of the community of Southhold. Community records show that Josiah's son Peregrine (my 8th g-grandfather) stole some fruit out of neighbor's garden, and the local laws required he undergo a public whipping. Josiah refused to comply; as a result, Josiah was placed in the stocks and Peregrine ended up with a whipping anyway. Some years later, Josiah's wife died, and he married for his second wife a woman named Alce (I don't know whether this was a variation on Alice or Elsie), who was a widow with several children from her first marriage. When Josiah died in 1661, among other bequests his widow Alce was to receive a life interest in the land and after she died it was to revert back to Josiah's son Peregrine.
Even though Alce signed an acknowledgment that she had received the bequest specified in the will, she apparently was not satisfied. Court records show:
After March 2, 1662
[Page 36] Peregrine Stanborough plf in an action of the case against Mrs. Alce Stanborough Mary Wheeler and John Wheeler defends, concerning threatening words of dangerous consequence, and fraudulent actions.
In the action wherein Peregrine Stanborough is plf, & Mrs. Alce Stanborough John Wheeler & Mary Wheeler defends, the jury find for the plf for ye feloniously taking away of his goods and unjust molestation, the, of 10£ with increase of Cort charges further the jury finde the delinquents guilty of breach of saboth & breaking up of the plfs howse, which they leave to ye judgement of the Cort.
[Page 59] September the 5 1664
Wee the subscribed doe testify and affirm that sometime last winter Mrs. Alce Stanborough the wife of Josiah Stanborough deceased did owne and acknowledge to have received of Peregrine Stanborough, ye heyre and executor of him the said Josiah, the total of ye estate belonging unto her three children, which said estate was committed unto him ye said Mr. Josiah by the Cort at New Haven, unto whome hee the said Josiah became bound concerning it. And further we doe affirme that these also the children (who were the children of Thom. Wheeler of New Haven) did acknowledge before us that they were content with their mother (the said Alce Stanborough) her having received the said estate, their portions. And They did chuse her their guardian, unto which wee consented witness our hands Thurston Raynor John Howell.
Now, according to Southhold records Alce was frequently involved in legal disputes with other neighbors:
[Page 57] (Abstract) [At court June 7, 1664 complaines enterd by Alce Stanbrough agt Henry Pierson, also agt Sam. Barker. In the action of Alce Stanborough plf against Samuell Barker deft, the jury find for the plf ye heifer in controversie to bee delivered forthwith to her, with increase of Cort charges and damage 5 shillings.
[Page 58] In the action of Alce Stanborough against Henry Pierson the jury agree not.
Peregrine Stanborough married a young woman named Sarah James. Sarah's father was a clergyman in East Hampton on Long Island. The Rev. Thomas James Jr. was the son of another Rev. Thomas James who had arrived in Massachusetts in 1632. Apparently Thomas Sr. had a "melancholy and jealous disposition" and "a spirit of discord" arose in his first church and he was dismissed in 1636. He moved on to Virginia, and a similar situation arose. Thomas Sr. finally gave up and returned to England, where he managed to antagonize yet another congregation. He eventually switched to teaching rather than preaching.
Thomas Jr. was somewhat more successful in his Church; he obtained his church in the 1650s and remained there until his death in the 1690s. lived and worked for many years in East Hamton. Thomas Jr. apparently had his moments, however. According to a local history, as minister he was
entitled to a salary of fifty pounds per year, afterward raised to sixty pounds; besides this he was exempt from land-tax, had one-fourth of the whales which came ashore, and on Monday morning his corn was to be ground before anyone else's was touched. On the whale-question he was sensitive. A fine one came ashore on Napeaque Beach, and the English rulers at New York claimed it as theirs. The following Sunday he preached a sermon from the text 'Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark,' for which he was arrested and imprisoned in New York about six months. He gave the authorities a rasping for taking his part of the whale.
I hope to have some diaries about some of the more complicated lawsuits I've run across. Meanwhile, here's hoping my family's historic pie fights have been somewhat more platable to you all, I wish you a fine rest of the week!