"Whether a Child born... Three Dayes under Seven Solar Months after Marriage Might be Baptized"

First Congregational Church, 
Shrewsbury, Massachusetts

If you find a 1746 baptism of a baby girl in church records, but no marriage for her parents, does it mean they never married? Or did it simply go unrecorded? Perhaps the record was lost or even destroyed? Considerations beyond record keeping can affect our research plan. In this case it is the practices of the early Congregational Church. They took me down quite the rabbit hole.

I am writing an article on a couple who had their first child in Marlborough, Middlesex, Massachusetts Bay Colony.  The town clerk recorded the birth in October of 1745, with both parents named––clearly a married couple. Why wasn't the child baptized within a few months of her birth, as was the practice? A full nine months elapsed between the birth and baptism, too short a time to be a second child by the same name. Her baptism names the child and a date, but provides no parents. Neither the town clerk nor the church holds a marriage record. A reasonably exhaustive search of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Rhode Island did not turn up a marriage for the couple.

A page-by-page reading of both the baptisms, marriages and deaths, along with the proceedings of the church council shed light on the situation. The parents were on the outs with the church! The couple were "restored to the church’s Christian Charity and Communion," i.e. reinstated as full members of the church, in April 1746, six months after baby's birth. Three months later the father "renewed the covenant," and on that same day the baby was finally baptized. Particulars about this family will be provided in the article, but here I am investigating church doctrine and how it affects the information we pull from church records.

Inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were not only subject to the laws of the colony, they also were required to comply with the practices and dictates of the Congregational Church. They followed a strict moral code of behavior, requiring regular church attendance, and baptism and marriage within the church. There were always those who did not comply, which accounts for the absence of some from the records. (1) The church dealt with them in a variety of ways, depending on the type of infraction, but usually either by counseling, or in severe cases, expulsion.

A Congregational church was not defined as the meeting house or building of worship, rather the church was the congregation itself, as bound together by their covenant. The covenant was a mutual agreement by which members pledged to follow “the Congregational Way,” supporting one another and fulfilling their duties to God. (2) John Cotton said in 1639, “It is [the people’s] mutual covenant with one another that gives first being to a church.” (3) Renewing or owning the covenant (used interchangeably) was done for a variety of reasons. A renewal does not mean that the covenant has expired, rather, it reaffirms what has already been promised at the child’s baptism. Whether done to mark the transition to full adult membership, to confirm beliefs or to atone for a transgression, renewing the covenant included a public confession made before the entire church body, along with a signed profession of faith. (4) Later, some were worked out in private with the minister, or submitted in written form.

Created with ChatGPT

Can we know why this couple had to be reinstated? What had they done? The most common reasons for renewing the covenant were:

1. Upon converting or first joining the church
Despite the apparent meaning of the word renewal, even brand new church members were sometimes asked to renew the covenant. Donna Campbell of Washington State University notes: “Solomon Stoddard, grandfather of Jonathan Edwards, extended the practice of renewal of covenant to those who had never been there.”(5) The father's origins are unknown, so it could be he had not belonged to a church previously.

2. Upon transferring to a new church
Those transferring were required to obtain an official letter of dismission from their previous church and apply for admission to the new one. Once accepted they might renew the covenant to affirm their status as full members in their new congregation, though it was not required, as long as their standing was in good order in their previous church. (6) Again, not knowing whether the baby's father was from, it is plausible that he had transferred in from another church, however he does not appear on any lists of admissions.

3. To comply with Church Doctrine
Since the congregation is bound together by the covenant, all members had to make a confession of their faith. This was called owning the covenant, and was somewhat akin to today's confirmation. Members who were baptized but had not yet made their confession of faith were considered unregenerate, or halfway members, not officially entitled to the privileges of full membership in the church. “These baptized but unconverted members were not to be admitted to the Lord's Supper or vote on church business (such as choosing ministers or disciplining other members) until they had professed conversion.” (7) Most important to genealogists, unregenerate members were not permitted to have their children baptized. (8)

The Halfway Covenant: As the seventeenth century wore on churches experienced an ever-increasing fall in membership numbers. Fewer people were willing to stand up and make a public profession of faith. They then were not allowed to baptized their children, and church membership began a steep decline. In order to stop the alarming decline in membership some churches began allowing unregenerate members to baptize their children. After years of controversy a compromise was finally hammered out in 1662: churches adopting the Halfway Covenant, allowed “adult, non-scandalous, unconverted children of full church members to have their children baptized.”

Some churches took decades to decide whether or not to adopt the Halfway Covenant. At a meeting on 2 September 1701, the First Church of Marlborough voted in the affirmative: 
“After a very deliberate and friendly Debate it was unanimously and Joyntly concurred in and agreed to tt all such Persons as shal offer thmselves or thr children to this Church for the Seal of Baptism shal be riceived, provided thy are not scandalous in conversation & are Orthodox in religion, and wil submitt to the Discipline of Christ in this Church.” (9)

In addition to individual cases, churches would periodically round up members and encourage them to renew the covenant. They often appear in lists of 50 or so people all renewing about the same time. Anyone who had not yet made a public confession of faith, including young adults could be included. (10)

If a couple were “non-scandalous, unconverted children of full church members” a church adhering to the Halfway Covenant would have allowed the them to baptize their child. If not, they would need to be “restored to the church’s charity and communion” after undergoing counseling sessions. Once re-admitted to the church they were well placed to own the covenant.

4. As an affirmation of faith during the Great Awakening.
One hundred years after the Pilgrims’ arrival Puritan spiritual vitality was starting to flag. Many saw the Halfway Covenant as a further loosening of values, leading to lower standards within the church. The Great Awakening was a religious revival, “a reaction against the increasing secularization of society and against the corporate and materialistic nature of the principal churches of American society… making conversion the initial step on the road to salvation." (11) Congregants were urged to renew their covenant with one another and with God,” taking them back to stricter times. (12)

Rev. Aaron Smith, minister of the Marlborough church in 1727, “had little sympathy with the Great Awakening,” and the church is said to have experienced very little of that fervor. (13) Records of the Marlborough Association of Ministers indicate that most members stood in opposition to the Great Awakening. (14) This left the Halfway Covenant in place so religious zeal is probably not the reason for a Marlborough citizen to own the covenant.

5. To be readmitted after having been expelled for committing a transgression. 
The most common infractions were theological disagreements and breaking the law (primarily pre- or extra-marital sex). (15) Offending members would be called in for conversation and counseling. If no resolution could be made they would be publicly chastised or even expelled. In order to be readmitted as full church members (“restored to the church’s charity and communion”) they would have to make a public confession. Only then would they have been allowed to own the covenant. Theological differences were worked out in private discussions but the same procedures would be followed.

If no marriage can be found it is possible one or both had strayed outside the strict dictates of the church. They may have simply been receiving instruction and counseling before being able to join the church. By far the most common offense would be fornication (unlawful sexual intercourse between two unmarried persons). (16) A birth seven months or fewer after marriage would instigate fornication charges. Records of both the Marlborough Church and the Marlborough Association of Ministers describe few proceedings against couples, but records are hardly complete for this period. (17) Genealogists should search for a reference to restoring one or both parties to the church’s charity and communion. 

"Sept. 1795 ––Here I cease to record & perpetuate the [dissuse?] of those who violate the seventh command, 
untill I am convinced that the other commands in the dialogue are less [?] than this –––––"

Sometimes they were dealt with informally, as in this 1728 case brought before the Marlborough Association of Ministers by the church clerk, “wherein He desir'd the Advice of the Association -- whether a Child born though but Three Dayes under Seven Solar months after Marriage might be baptized… It was advised to Baptize the Child.” (18) This would still require counseling for the couple and a subsequent renewal of the covenant. Rev. Ebenezer Parkman’s diary notes another case: “John Rogers and his wife restor’d to Charity, and his wife Baptized. O that God would keep alive the Impressions made this Day; and might they be Saving!” (19)

Sexual infractions were frequently pursued in the courts in the early eighteenth century, initially heard by a Justice of the Peace. (20) A case this minor would probably not have gone to court at all because there would be no costs to the town for damages or upbringing. (21) No fines were assessed against them by the town. Since they were married they did not need to charge the father with support of the child. (22) Further, as the century drew on civil prosecution of fornication dwindled and cases involving married couples were treated less harshly in the courts. (23) Appeals went before the Court of Common Pleas (civil), or the Court of General Sessions of the Peace (criminal). (24) Offenses other than promiscuity included cursing, breaking the Sabbath, drunkenness, gambling, disturbing the peace, not attending worship, and failure to support aged parents. (25) Thorough research in the Middlesex County court is worth the time. (26)

The church would never baptize the child of an unmarried couple, so if a baptism is found for a child but no marriage for them was recorded, it is likely they ran into trouble with church authorities over behavior. In this case I am fairly certain they just had baby girl a bit too early. 

Court records can shed light on the reasons for their alienation. Searches in the church council's procedural records rather than just baptisms and marriages are the key. The records of the church are available online via the Congregational Library (see Note 9). The Marlborough town clerk's records are available at FamilySearch: Marlborough, Massachusetts (Mass.) Bay Colony, Town Clerk,“Massachusetts, Town Clerk and Vital and Town Records, 1626-2001" (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-8979-QXH5) > Middlesex > Marlborough > Births, marriages, deaths 1693-1805.

----------

NOTES 

1. For a deep analysis of the doctrine and history of the Congregational Church in Massachusetts see: Cooper and Minkema, “Introduction”, and “The Evolution of Colonial Massachusetts Congregationalism,” The Colonial Church Records of the First Church of Reading (Wakefield) and the First Church of Rumney Marsh (Revere); online transcription, Colonial Society (https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/1426). 

 2. Covenant: Beyond Confrontational Politics,” web page, Harvard Square Library (https://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/featured-new/covenant-beyond-confrontational-politcs/). 

3.  “Congregational Polity 101,” web page, Harvard Square Library (https://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/congregational-polity/congregational-polity-101/). 

4. Cooper and Minkema, “A Primer of Early New England Congregationalism,” First Churches of Reading and Rumney Marsh, 16. 

5. Donna M. Campbell, “Brief Outline Notes on the Great Awakening, 1735-45,” web page, Washington State University (https://public.wsu.edu/~campbelld/amlit/awakening.htm) > Literary Movements > Timelines > American Authors. 

 6.  Cooper and Minkema, “Church Records and Religious Practice,” First Churches of Reading and Rumney Marsh, 39.

7. “Half-Way Covenant,” webpage, Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Way_Covenant).

8. Cooper and Minkema, “The Evolution of Colonial Massachusetts Congregationalism,” First Churches of Reading and Rumney Marsh, 19. For a deeper treatment, see James F. Cooper, Jr., Tenacious of Their Liberties (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), paperback printing 2002.

9. “Records of the First Church of Marlboro’, Mass., from the 20d. 8m., 1704 to May 23d, 1802, as Under the Pastoral Care of Robert Breck, Aaron Smith and Asa Packard, vol. 1,” Baptisms, 13, 1727, Damaris Bush, Hez., 16-10; New England’s Hidden Histories: Colonial Era Church Records, Congregational Library (http://nehh-viewer.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/#/content/Marlborough/viewer/Church20records2C2017041802/1) > “Church records, 1704-1802” > image 23/140; hereinafter cited as First Church of Marlborough. There are significant gaps. Page numbers are cited when possible but there are duplicate and inconsistent numbering systems, making predicting a page number impossible. Further, the records were filmed out of order in mixed up batches. In this case it is better to use image numbers.First Church of Marlborough, p. 9 or 7; (http://nehh-viewer.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/#/content/Marlborough/viewer/Church20records2C2017041802/1) > image 19/140.

10. Ibid. The page has 60 names and includes “The Names of such as offer thr Seed to Baptism,” specifically for those wishing to baptize their children.

11.  “Great Awakening,” webpage, Brittanica (https://www.britannica.com/event/Great-Awakening).

12. Cooper and Minkema, “Church Records and Religious Practice,” First Churches of Reading and Rumney Marsh, 34-39.

13. Levi A. Field, Historical Sketch of the First Congregational Church in Marlborough, Mass. (Worcester, Mass.: Levi A. Field, 1859), 30, pamplet; Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/historicalsketch00byufiel/page/n35/mode/2up).

14. Rev. Ebenezer Parkman, clerk, “Marlborough Association of Congregational Ministers,” Association Records, 1725-1802; Congregational Library (http://nehh-viewer.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/#/content/MarlboroughAssn/viewer/Association20records2C2017251802/1); hereinafter cited as Marlborough Association of Ministers. The Association was formed in 1725, a group of 6-8 ministers in the area who met to discuss ecclesiastical questions and hear cases laid before them by any member or "by others thought worthy." For a history of the association, see, Joseph Allen, The Worcester Association and its Antecedents: A History of Four Ministerial Associations: the Marlborough, the Worcester (Old), the Lancaster, and the Worcester (New) Associations (Boston: Nichols and Noyes,1868); (https://www.familysearch.org/library/books/viewer/605778/). Also, “Records, 1725-1802, Marlborough Association of Congregational Ministers,” finding aid; webpage, ArchiveGrid (https://researchworks.oclc.org/archivegrid/collection/data/214086136).

15. Douglas Showalter, emails to Polly Kimmitt, 17-20 May 2023, regarding Congregational doctrine of the mid-17th to mid-18th centuries. Rev. Showalter is a retired UCC minister, and an authority in Congregational Church history. He confirmed this interpretation of the significance of renewing the Covenant, the Great Awakening, the Halfway Covenant, and other doctrine.

16. Black, Black’s Law Dictionary, 781.

17. First Church of Marlborough,” all 140 pages read. Also, Marlborough Association, Records, 1725-1802, all pages read; New England’s Hidden Histories: Colonial Era Church Records, Congregational Library (https://congregationallibrary.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/marlborough-association-records-1725-1802/22340).

18. Marlborough Association, > images 17-18; (https://congregationallibrary.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/marlborough-association-records-1725-1802/22340).

19. Rev. Ebenezer Parkman, “The Diary of Ebenezer Parkman” online transcription, The Ebenezer Parkman Project (https://diary.ebenezerparkman.org/) > 8 May 1748; hereinafter cited as Rev. Parkman’s Diary. Rev. Ebenezer Parkman was an influential minister in Westborough from 1724-1782. His detailed diary contains over 2,000 pages of entries covering 1719-1782.

20. One known Justice of the Peace was William Ward: Rev. Parkman’s Diary, 27 Sep. 1738; if they exist his records have not been found. Another known Justice of the Peace, Abraham Williams only began in 1750, and left no justice of the peace records, according to Cyrus Felton’s list of Justices of the Peace. That includes Benjamin Woods 1731-1740: “Marlborough (Mass.): Records 1656-1889,” BIB ID 271808, 1 box, 10 octavo volumes, 2 folio volumes, folder #3, Documents, 1741-1867, American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Massachusetts. Records of other justices of the peace include: Nathaniel Harris and Fred E. Crawford, Records of the court of Nathaniel Harris one of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace within and for the County of Middlesex, holden at Watertown from 1734 to 1761 : together with a paper by F. E. Crawford read before the Historical Society of Watertown, November 14, 1893 (Salt Lake City: FamilySearch International, 2011).

21. Cooper and Minkema, “Church Records and Religious Practice,” The Colonial Church Records of the First Church of Reading, 36.

22. Marlborough, Massachusetts, Town Proprietors, “Town Records 1637-1803,” locked database viewable only at FamilySearch or an affiliate library, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/search/film/007902685?cat=304536), DGS 007902685, page by page reading from 1735-1750. 

23. Brendan Kiernan, “Fornication as Crime in 18th Century Massachusetts,” The Beehive; blog post, Massachusetts Historical Society (https://www.masshist.org/beehiveblog/2017/10/fornication-as-crime-in-18th-century-massachusetts/). Also, Melinde Lutz Sanborn, Lost Babes: Fornication Abstracts from Court Records, Essex County, Massachusetts, 1692-1745 (Derry, NH: Melinde Sanborn, 1992), ix.

24. Catherine S. Menand, Research Guide to the Massachusetts Courts and Their Records (Boston, Mass.: Supreme Judicial Court Archives and Records Preservation, 1987), 12-13, 48.

25. Melinde Lutz Sanborn, Lost Babes: Fornication Abstracts from Court Records, Essex County, Massachusetts, 1692-1745 (Derry, NH: Melinde Sanborn 1992), ix-xi.

26. Negative search results at (http://FamilySearch.org) in sessions from March 1745 to 1785 include: Massachusetts, Court of General Sessions of the Peace, Middlesex County, 1686-1748, mf 892252, DGS 7902602; Massachusetts, Court of General Sessions of the Peace, Middlesex County, 1735-1748, mf 143716, DGS 8126254 (from March 1744 to Dec. 1747) (images 481-542/559); Court records 1686-1748 (includes a few records of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas.) DGS 007902602; Massachusetts, Middlesex County, Clerk of Courts, “Colonial county court papers, 1648-1798,” Card index to court papers, W-Z 1636-1785, mf 541440, DGS 007716955; Massachusetts Inferior Court of Common Pleas, Middlesex County, “Court records, 1740-1750,” mf 892258, DGS 8298164.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research in the Right Place! The Importance of Jurisdiction

Abijah P. Marvin, History of the Town of Lancaster, Massachusetts: from the first settlement to the present time, 1643-1879, 2 vols (Lancaster, Mass.: Town of Lancaster, 1879), heavily annotated by Henry Nourse, with many handwritten pages inserted, vol. 1:2 pages after printed page 19;  Digital Commonwealth, Thayer Memorial Library (https://thayermemoriallibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/History-of-Lancaster-Vol-01.pdf) > image 45. See Nourse's history for the published version.

 

I am researching a couple whose children's births were recorded in Marlborough, Middlesex County, and Lancaster, Worcester County, Massachusetts Bay Colony, between 1745–1770. They bought or sold land in both towns, but also in Bolton and Templeton, Worcester County. Their deaths were recorded in Boylston, yet probate gives residence as Shrewsbury, both in Worcester County. Did they move? How many times? To follow this family, understanding the local jurisdictions is critical.

Most Massachusetts Bay Colony towns were formed when a group of proprietors petitioned the Massachusetts General Court for a grant of land. Grants stipulated that within two or three years settlers would clear some land, “plant” a church with forty or so members, and call and settle a minister. Towns and counties were constantly redefining themselves: annexing, splitting and changing their bounds.

The pace at which these towns grew and subdivided complicates genealogical research. The resulting boundary changes make it difficult to discern whether people recorded in different towns ever physically moved. Astute researchers will be sure to consult dates of residence and affiliate those with the correct town and even county. It’s no use searching in Worcester County when the town you want was originally in Middlesex County, for that is where you will find the records.

It is amusing to those living in the area today, but almost from the start Massachusetts residents felt crowded. As farmers they desired more land to grow crops and graze their cattle. But other factors drove the push for new towns. Doctrinal disagreements, stronger even than political disagreements are today, could motivate a a minister to relocate, often taking a good portion of the church members with him. Another catalyst was the difficulty of traveling long distances to church, especially in bad weather. As a result a second parish or precinct would form and eventually become a town in its own right.

A Thorough Borough Treatment
As early as 1656 the inhabitants of Sudbury, Middlesex County, petitioned the General Court: "God haveing given us some considerable quantity of cattle; so that wee are so streightned that we cannott so Comfortably subsist … wee have found A place which lyeth westwd about eight miles from Sudbury, which wee conceive might bee comfortable for or subsistence." (1) The petition was granted and Marlborough was established in 1660.

Over the next 100 years three more towns were eventually formed from Marlborough: Westborough, Southborough, and Northborough. I made extensive use of William Galvin’s The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Historical Data Relating to Counties, Cities and Towns in Massachusetts to form an understanding of the genealogy of the many towns involved in my research, and I highly recommend it or a similar one for your state. Town formations and annexations are nicely detailed, and there is a fine map showing the boundaries of every town. (1)

This map shows the towns as they lie today. Their geographical-style names are not intuitive and confuse their locations relative to one another. 

The name Southborough makes sense. Northborough does not. Why is Westborough west of Southborough, and not even bordering Marlborough? Finally, why is Marlborough in Middlesex County, but the other three towns in Worcester County? There is a reason for this and it concerns how and when these towns were set off.

The western precinct or borough of Marlborough was set off in 1717. At that time Westborough still included today’s Northborough, while the Marlborough that remained included today’s Southborough. So at that moment the names of Marlborough and Westborough were indeed indicative of the geographical relationship of two neighboring towns.

The southeastern section of Marlborough was set off as Southborough in 1727. By 1766 when the northern section of Westborough was set off as Northborough it left a muddle of names. This is summed up in this simple chart.

To add to the fun, the towns that were set off from Marlborough all joined Worcester County, while Marlborough remained in Middlesex. This is vitally important to researchers for both land and probate records. For Westborough, Northborough and Southborough, any records before 1731 will be in Middlesex County: after that, Worcester County.

Way Away in Nashaway

Further west the frontier town of Nashaway was settled in 1643 and established as the town of Lancaster, Middlesex County, in 1653. At least some portions of today’s towns of Harvard, Bolton, Clinton, Berlin, Hudson, Boylston, West Boylston, Sterling and Leominster belonged to old Lancaster. (3) In 1731 Lancaster joined the newly formed Worcester County, which itself was created from portions of Middlesex, Suffolk and Hampshire Counties. All of these towns are still in Worcester County, except Hudson, which was part of Marlborough at the time, so stayed in Middlesex.

The subject of my research generated records in three mother towns: Marlborough, Lancaster, and Shrewsbury. You can see that without having a precise location in Lancaster the research cannot be targeted. Nine towns covering four counties needs to be whittled down.

In 1717, a large tract between Marlborough in the east, and Worcester in the west; and Lancaster in the north and Sutton in the south, was granted to petitioners mostly from Marlborough and Sudbury. The town of Shrewsbury, Middlesex County, was established in 1723, but joined Worcester County at its creation in 1731. Its territory included portions of today’s towns of Boylston, West Boylston, Grafton, Westborough and Lancaster. Most important to my research, a second precinct of Shrewsbury eventually broke off to become Boylston, right around the time of death of my subject, hence his death in Boylston and probate in Shrewsbury.

The thick line in Figure 2 marks the boundary between Worcester County on the west and Middlesex County on the east. Colors roughly indicate towns born of three main mother towns through nearly four centuries of annexations and separations: Lancaster (yellow), Marlborough (red), and Shrewsbury (blue).

The importance of shifting boundaries and jurisdictions in genealogical research is critical. Both dictate which record holders and repositories are consulted. They define which laws applied to the research subjects, and allow for informed analysis of previous studies on the subject. Knowing the name of the town and county is not enough. We need to consider the date of the records required and investigate the dates of incorporation of towns and counties as well. You will save yourself a lot of time if you make sure you know where to look for the records.

--------
Notes

1. Mary E. Spalding, Franklin P. Rice, Colonial Records of Marlborough, Mass. (Boston, Mass.: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1909), 3, Petition to the General Court of Massachusetts by some inhabitants of Sudbury for the Plantation, May 1656; (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/26684/images/dvm_LocHist011282-00002-1) > image 3. 

2. William F. Galvin, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Historical Data Relating to Counties, Cities and Towns in Massachusetts (Boston, Mass.: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1997). 

3. “Map of Lancaster 1653-1883.” Lancaster, Mass., Henry Nourse, ed., The Early Records of Lancaster, Massachusetts, 1643-1725 (Lancaster, Mass.: Lancaster, 1884), 8; (https://archive.org/details/earlyrecordsofla1643lanc/ ) > image 20. Nourse drew the original map at the top of this post, and refined it when he published his own history of the town.

My New Writing Phase

Happy New Year!! Please ignore the eight+ year hiatus since my last blog post! During that time I focused on my professional work, but now I'm retired and in a writing phase, so am resurrecting it. To mark this transition I've updated the web address and the title of the blog. 

I was reminded of PollyBlog when a woman contacted me recently saying she found a sampler in a second-hand shop and she believed it was created by my ancestor. I didn't see the embroiderer or her parents in my chart so I tossed back a quick "so kind of you but not my ancestor."[1] To my chagrin she replied, quoting one of my blog posts! Oopsie!! I had completely forgotten about that post! The embroiderer was a granddaughter of James "Brine" Litchfield and his wife Elizabeth, but I hadn't bothered to add her to my database. There is an excellent Litchfield Family book so I was in no hurry to reinvent the wheel. [2] Also there are about 75,000,000 Litchfields in Scituate. It turns out that the embroiderer is a relative but not an ancestor, my first cousin four times removed. I am busy hunting down her descendants to see if they might be interested, and if they are I will update.

In my dotage I have much to organize and catalog. I want to pull together my tree on Ancestry, the tree on my computer in Reunion (with my main research log), research reports, and also this blog, where I've written stories not found elsewhere. I also have a paper archive of records and documents passed down that needs sorting and digitizing. My husband is doing a great job with the Kimmitt/Drapes ephemera, so now I need to get cracking on the FitzGerald/Barnes papers. We have too much to just pass on to our children. They won't have time or probably the inclination to sort through it all. If we don't do it it's likely to end up in a trash bin somewhere, so we must carefully curate!

This is why, after over eight years of silence, I'm reviving my blog! I've been a professional genealogist for over twenty-five years, focusing on report writing in many forms. Now that I've stopped accepting clients my goal is to write up the many brick walls I've busted over the years. I also hope to get our family into print for the benefit of future generations.

In the meantime I also plan to publish articles. I've got a small one coming out in the Winter 2026 New England Historical and Genealogical Register. It is just a transcription of an interesting booklet of some Marlborough, Massachusetts vital records not found in vital or town records. We are also just beginning to explore a more in-depth article, and I'm really excited about that!

I expect future posts here to be a melange: snippets about individual ancestors, or towns, or anything that would not make it into an article. I'll also write about organizing the results of my 40 years of research into something that will persist into the future. 

As for the sampler, stay tuned. I've traced descendants and reached out to one. We'll see if he would like it back!

_________________________

1. In my defense, I saw the email at about 11:30pm, after singing Messiah at Mechanics Hall in Worcester, Massachusetts. I should have held off until morning when I wasn't so simultaneously exhausted and exhilarated from the performance!

2. Wilford J. Litchfield, The Litchfield Family in America, 1630-1900 (Scituate, Massachusetts: Wilford J. Litchfield, 1901-06), five individual booklets privately bound together. Meticulously researched, with many transcriptions of land and probate records.

The Joys of DNA: It's a Girl!

This was my year to study DNA in more detail, so I enrolled in the Advanced Genetic Genealogy course at the July 2017 Genealogical Research Institute of Pittsburgh (GRIP). It was an informative and fun class, led by CeCe Moore and Blaine Bettinger. Late at night on the first day of class I visited 23andme.com to explore a tool mentioned in class that I hadn't played with much. When I navigated to the "DNA Relatives" page, imagine my shock when I saw this!

WHAAAAAA WHAT?

I nearly jumped out of my skin and had to stifle a squeal of delight. I messaged my match noting that we shared a goodly amount of DNA and I was ready to hear her story. Then I started my calculations. At 25% the relationship also could have been half sister, double first cousin or grandparent/grandchild. I was able to rule out everything but niece. I noted that the test taker's mtDNA haplogroup was A2g1 and in my initial late-night Googling found that meant either Asian or Native American maternal lineage. Well, well!  I was therefore sure this was not my sister's child. I have two brothers. One served in Vietnam, lived in Massachusetts and (died too young) in 2003. The other one lived in New Mexico for a while but is now in Massachusetts.

Tuesday morning I had a response that she was specifically searching for her father, so I asked if she could provide place and date of birth. In class I was all aflutter but luckily the material being covered was still pretty basic, so I spent the morning investigating.* I didn't want to scare my new relative by asking too many questions. At that point she had provided only a first initial and surname. The surname is Hispanic, and I located a possible candidate from Santa Fe, New Mexico born about 1985, but I couldn't be sure with only a first initial. It just so happens that brother lived in New Mexico in the 80s, so I could tell I was getting warmer. My match then emailed me her date and place of birth: 1985, New Mexico! Bingo, I found her dad!

Courtesy of Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce

I spoke with brother on phone and he was shocked! He had not known of this baby and initially had a hard time believing it, having heard that the DNA sites were "BS." I explained the difference between the ethnicity estimates which can be very imprecise, and the actual segment matching which leaves nothing to doubt, and he came around to the science at that point––that New Baby Girl Niece and I were a 25% match and he had a not-so-new child. I advised he just go let it sink in for a day.

From then on in I served as intermediary, trying not to push Newest Precious Niece to share too much about herself, but wanting to see that raw DNA file so that I could make a direct comparison, since brother had tested at Family Tree DNA. By uploading both raw data files to Gedmatch I could directly compare and there would be no doubt. After only a day brother was so intrigued that he was ready to meet her! I can only imagine what they both were going through at that time. I just know that I felt much as I did the on the days all of my nieces and nephews were born. This surprised me a bit! How can you instantly feel love for someone you've never met? It must be built into our genes. It took all of my self-control not to ask questions or be too creepily warm and welcoming, so I tried to just let her know that wow, but okay, we're on board!

My good friend (a psychologist) told me that both of them (and their families) would need at least a couple of months to come to terms with this news, so once I connected them by providing emails, I backed out of the situation completely. Brother broke the news to his wife and three children. And Adorable Accomplished Artsy Niece planned a trip north to meet her dad, accompanied by her good friend.

So I got to meet this Brand New Relative two days ago. Her name is Raelynn. She is lovely. I'm a little freaked out at how familiar she seems. She is a really nice young woman (and so is her friend). She is well educated, has good manners, is a great conversationalist, is artistic, has a good sense of humor, and a great job. The most amazing thing is that she managed to get my husband to talk, not an easy feat! As we spoke and she registered various emotions I could see the features of other family members skittering across her face.  She says her thoughts have often been drawn to coming north to visit, with images of seafaring people and stained glass windows. I don't discount these feelings and wonder what mysterious force could be giving her hints of her ancestry all along. Most of her paternal ancestors have lived near the sea, and she's got a number of sea captains and mariners in her ancestry, not to mention Mayflower.

I'm in love. We're all in love. Welcome to the family, Raelynn!

Raelynn, me, Myles (my husband), brother Tim

[I don't like this pic because I wasn't ready with my smile yet. I felt a lot happier than I look!]

* After lunch I started paying attention again!

Proof That You Can't Judge a Book By Its Cover

I recently attend the 41st Triennial Congress of the General Society of Mayflower Descendants in Plymouth, Massachusetts, along with ~599 other enthusiastic descendants of our earliest Massachusetts settlers. It was a great experience and many exciting developments of genealogical import were announced. More on that in a later post.

One little fun aspect was a freebie book table. I don't need any more books and I try not to browse, but they were from the Mayflower Society's library and so I had a gander. I picked up one called Vermont Guide since many of my clients' ancestors migrated up to Vermont and then to NY and I thought it might be of interest.

I opened to the first page and found the page below. So far, cover and inside match. No date of publication, and clearly about Vermont.

By thumbing through I learned that it is several booklets, only the first 50 of 173 pages of which are about Vermont!

The booklets are numbered sequentially and bound in order. They cover all of the New England states and those that are dated were published in 1926. For each town it gives the map reference, population, description, historical events and advertisements. So what we really have inside is well beyond a guide to Vermont. [Official National Survey Maps and Guide for Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and Southern New England  (Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island) (Chester, Vermont: National Survey Co., 1926).]

Why is my house always in the binding?!

On top of that, someone has added bits of extraneous articles that got bound right in with the booklets.

Above is a typical story of a house that remained in one place but fell into the jurisdictions of multiple states and counties over time--a not uncommon story.

Somebody also made annotations, especially Native American names of towns/areas. For Scituate it references the Bates' sisters house and the site of the Old Oaken Bucket.

The clip below is a bit of a head-scratcher and causes the immediate urge to Google, but I'll leave that to you!

So instead of simply a Vermont Guide we have a 1926 New England business directory specialized in travel, along the lines of AAA's guides, but with customized with personal notes. See what you can miss if you don't at least flip through the pages of a book?

St. Patrick's Missionary Society, Kiltegan Fathers

Courtesy of Saint Patrick's Missionary Society, "Our Work."

When Myles' family lived in Africa (circa 1960-1980) they were friends with some Catholic missionaries, both in Kenya and later in Nigeria. They called them the "Catholic fathers."  I was always a little surprised by this because father-in-law Brian was fairly rigid on his Church of Ireland theological doctrines. But he also enjoyed a good debate, so I expect he welcomed a discussion on the finer points of Biblical exhortations.

They maintained contact over the years through Christmas cards, phone calls, and even a few visits. Since Brian passed away last year Myles has been gently closing the various chapters of his father's life, and this was one that cried out for closure. So on a recent visit to Ireland we made it our mission (pun partially intended) to seek them out.

Idyllic countryside

Saint Patrick's Missionary Society maintains a retirement home for these missionaries in beautiful Kiltegan, County Wicklow. It's probably not accidental that it is located not too far from the ancient monastic city of Glendalough. After a long and winding drive through the gentle hills we arrived at what seemed to be a campus, and indeed, this is where they had all been schooled by the Saint Patrick Missionary Society. I like this concept and hope that someday the University of Massachusetts at Amherst will have my cohorts and me back for retirement, perhaps giving us our old rooms back!

Poor Father Lawler at first was puzzled as to why we were there. He was humble and honored by our visit and showed us around. Since we arrived half an hour before lunch he invited us to join him. They have a fine, efficient cafeteria and we enjoyed a healthy meal together. Father Lawler pointed out a few other priests that had served with him and Myles vaguely remembered them, too. A few of them joined us at our table. I loved seeing them perk up as the memories started to flow. They became quite animated and stood a little straighter by the time we left.

Reconnecting

Remembering Africa

It looked just like any other retirement home, but I had to marvel at the collective global experience of those men as I scanned the room. They have seen a lot of suffering, probably endured it themselves. And they've done a lot of good as well.

Well cared for in their old age

Of course as a genealogist I was drawn to the cemetery. The uniformity of the markers was striking but it seems a suitable resting place.

Row upon row of identical cross grave markers at the cemetery of the Kiltegan Fathers

As I sat among them I fervently hoped that they had been untouched by scandal, but sadly there was one case where a man was associated with another who had abused a young girl. These guys were once young, idealistic and brave, and I hate to think of all the good they have done being ruined by the corrupt, but that's the story of today's church. 

There are no more missionaries being trained here. The seeds these men planted 50 years ago have come to fruition and now missionaries hail from the very countries they served in--Nigeria, Kenya, Malawi, and more. 

Sheelagh Leslie Churton, 1925-2017: Tribute to an Extraordinary Woman

We lost Myles' Aunt Sheelagh (Auntie Tealy) a few weeks ago. She was precious to us and to everyone who ever knew her. A highly unusual example of a completely selfless person––tolerant, kind, nurturing, hard working, capable, and fun! Here is the tribute I read at her funeral last week, on June 8th at the Chester Crematorium. Sadly, her church, St. Mary Without the Walls in Handbridge, was closed for repairs. 

There is so much more to her than I was allowed to delve into in the precious six minutes I was alloted, but you get the gist. The majority of it was written by Teals herself. I just interjected here and there. I didn't mention her sense of humor. She had her feet planted firmly in the world of fun and enjoyment, so she was just a great person to hang around with. The vicar pointed out that another thing I missed was her incredible stillness. She NEVER got flustered, ever. Never got angry. She was never gossipy or hateful or jealous. She just existed to please others and in doing that, pleased herself and her God. 

Sheelagh once said “I can’t imagine a world without me.” Well, Teals, neither can we!…

Anyone who knew Sheelagh knew she was highly efficient. So it won’t surprise you to know she provided me with her obituary over 25 years ago! It’s how she wanted to be remembered and I am honored to be the one to present it, with a few tweaks, on this solemn occasion.

Sheila Leslie Churton, born July 9, 1925, premature and weighing just under 5 pounds, was teeny. When big sister Rosemary tried to say teeny, it came out Tealy. And the nickname stuck—for 91 years. It seemed everyone had a pet name for her—Churt was another big one. Professionally she was known as Sister Churton. And to everyone else she was just Sheelagh. But despite what it says on her birth certificate she did not spell it in the conventional way. Instead she adopted the Irish spelling of Sheelagh, as a nod to her mother’s Irish heritage.

She was the youngest daughter of Harry Leslie Churton and Elizabeth Mary Stephens Drapes. And she was so proud of her parents: Leslie was a Cestrian with deep roots here [Chester, England], son and brother of two mayors of Chester. He was an electrical engineer and met Elsie when he was sent to work in Ireland at the Asylum in Enniscorthy. In World War I he served in the Cheshire Regiment and lost an arm in battle. He adapted by taking a degree in law and joined the family firm of W. H. Churton and Sons.

In the days before dyxlexia was understood, Sheelagh suffered through her early school years and had sad memories of being shamed, forced to wear a dunce cap and ridiculed. She worked extra hard to compensate for her dyxlexia and took a domestic science degree.

But since the age of four she had always wanted to nurse, so she pursued her SRN at the QE Hospital. She took her first part midwifery at the City Hospital, Chester, and her second part in the slums of Birmingham, delivering 99 babies without losing a-one! Just as they do on Call the Midwife she rode her bike everywhere, but she said the show is a highly sanitized version of conditions at the time. She donated many a cardigan to families that had not even a rag in which to wrap their babies.

By 1950 she was appointed Ward Sister of the Medical Professional Unit at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and at 25 was one of the youngest ward sisters ever to be appointed.

Sheelagh never married, but that was not for want of proposals! She was tops in her field, and the demands of her profession precluded marriage. Eventually she decided marriage would have limited her ability to help so many people, and she was happy with her single life.

In 1960 she was sent to the US and Canada to gain experience in the care of patients undergoing open heart surgery.

Also in 1960, her nephew, Myles, was born in Africa. At eight he was sent to school in England while his parents remained in Kenya, surely a jarring experience for any child. It was then that Auntie Tealy became his surrogate mother. She came to see him on his sports days, brought him home for school holidays, nursed him when he had a relapses of tropical illnesses, and drove him to the airport, reassuring him that at 8 years old he could make that flight to Africa on his own!

In 1967, Glaxo Pharmaceuticals awarded her a scholarship to study nursing in the Far East, at one point even working with lepers. In Australia she served with the Flying Doctors Service. She had a great urge to travel, and felt privileged to have visited so many countries.

Before retiring, she worked in a hospice in Sheffield, studying the effect on children of a death in the family.

Once retired, she greatly increased her volunteer work, including

• cooking for the luncheon club at St. Mary’s Church,
• doing the Housebound Library, 
• helping with the homeless Soup Kitchen for 18 years, 
• helping with the Parkinson’s Society, 
• leading foreign visitors on tours of Chester, 
• and visiting families through the church’s Pastoral Link.

She had many interests, one of which was shell collecting, chiefly from the coral reef in North Africa and the southwest coast of America.

She was an avid travel photographer and her sensitive shots reveal the deep empathy she felt for all of humanity.

She was a keen sportswoman! In Birmingham she belonged to a hockey and tennis team and studied dance. Skiing, water-skiing, swimming and walking were also activities she enjoyed. She was in great shape her whole life, and at 90 could spring up from a low sofa better than most 40-year olds!

In her "auto-obituary," Sheelagh wrote: “Sheelagh attended the births of her three grand-nephews in America, supplying love, support and stamina to the family. She visited every year and enjoyed watching them grow up.”

What an understatement! What Sheelagh couldn’t describe was how much she was loved by those around her, especially our little family. I know each one of you has a story about her: how she came to care for a shut-in, to give the caregiver several days of relief—sometimes difficult patients, with the violent type of Alzheimers, sometimes, heartbreakingly, her own friends who were ill. Or children. And, as in my case, new mothers. She came to us as an aunt but transformed into a nurse when we really needed her. She was a phenomenal help, taking babies to change and “wind” them just when we were on the verge of collapse. She once pulled an all-nighter the day she arrived from England!

Of course our boys adored Aunty Tealy. She played endless imaginative games with them and spurred them on to be sensitive and creative fellows. I will always be grateful to her for the gentle love and nurturing she brought to us and to everyone with whom she came in contact.

Aunty Tealy, your favorite saying was “A place for everything and everything in its place.” Surely, there is a shining place for you in heaven today.

Justice of the Peace Records and Silvanus "Who's Your Daddy" Savage, Part 3

Continued from previous two posts... This is Part Three of a Three-Part Post.

Click here for Post One

Click here for Post Two.

 

...in which we've seen the originals and transcriptions of two separate complaints of paternity sworn against one man, Silvanus Savage. The two complaints were sworn on the same day, 27 May 1802, in Princeton, Worcester County, Massachusetts, to a Justice of the Peace name Michael Gill. First, Debby Smith fesses up on the same day she delivers a baby girl. She was very likely interrogated during her labor. Next thing you know, Polly Clark chimes in, accusing Silvanus of fathering a son she had borne on the 22 February previous. Both women give the date of conception: Polly was first, on 20 June 1801, and Debby on 9 October 1801, both in Princeton.

So, Silvanus and Polly conceived a boy on 20 June 1801 who was born 22 February 1802 (about 9 months gestation). Silvanus and Debby conceived a girl on 9 October 1801 who was born 27 May 1802 (only 7.5 months gestation). Polly did not mention Silvanus' name during her labor and waited until the day Debby gave birth to make her complaint.

RESEARCH FOCUS

What was the impact of these two births upon Silvanus Savage and his descendants? What constraints did the law place upon Silvanus? Was he whipped, fined, imprisoned? How old were the women at the time, were they under age? Contemporaneous sources should be consulted to ascertain whether the births were correctly registered, and whether any of these four people (Debby Smith and her daughter, and Polly Clark and her son) reappeared in Silvanus Savage’s life at any later time.

ANALYSIS

Princeton’s Boundaries and Jurisdiction

1759, set off from Rutland

1771 Incorporated as a town

1810 Part of Hubbardston annexed

1838 Part of unincorporated lands known as “No Town” annexed

1870 Part of Westminster annexed

Justices of the Peace

In Massachusetts the Justice of the Peace was the official to whom minor complaints were made. He was entitled to take depositions, impose fines, order property seizures, perform marriages, and try small cases (no jury). Since this lowest court was usually held in the justice’s home, the resultant records are scattered about in repositories and private collections, and are extremely difficult to locate. These complaints would initiate a subsequent court case, so a search in the Worcester County Courthouse may prove fruitful.

Excellent Resource

An excellent resource to consult on illegitimacy and fornication cases in early Massachusetts is: Melinde Lutz Sanborn, Lost Babes: Fornication Abstracts from Court Records, Essex County, Massachusetts 1692 to 1745 (Derry, New Hampshire: Melinda Lutz Sanborn, 1992).

Sanborn’s book covers Essex Co. 1692-1744 and contains hundreds of unrecorded marriages. Though the county is different, and time period earlier, the law did not change substantially. She also has a useful discussion on Massachusetts law on illegitimate births in which she reveals, for example, that a disproportionate number of servants, African-Americans and Indians are represented in these types of cases. In addition, she states:

"In the case of an unmarried woman, the law required that she state when, where, and with whom she conceived the child, and whether she had any other partners. The midwife and another witness were to repeatedly question the mother during her labor, asking her to name the father. It was believed that while facing death in labor, the mother would not lie. Even if the accused father denied he was such, he would be convicted..."

"People found guilty of fornication could be fined, or whipped, or both. The fines varied... but were generally higher if the unmarried man named was from some other jurisdiction, or if the woman refused to name her partner. The assumption in the latter case might be that her partner was married and she was protecting him from the much more serious charge of adultery. Repeat offenders were sometimes not given the option of a fine, but simply whipped."

"Unmarried fathers were ordered to pay maintenance charges on a child through its sixth birthday. At that time, the child was eligible to be put out into service and would no longer be a charge on the town if the mother could not support it."

Legal Considerations

According to Blackstone, a "bastard" in the legal sense of the word is a person not only begotten, but born out of lawful matrimony. Had Sylvanus married either of these women, her child would have been born legitimate. Bastard children are entitled to maintenance from their parents. To protect the public from their support, the law compels the putative father to maintain his children. We would want to search for some evidence of both Silvanus’ payments to his children and whether or not he was sentenced.

Considered as nullius filius, a "bastard" has no inheritable blood in him, and therefore no estate can descend to him; but he may take by testment, if properly described, after he has obtained a name by reputation. But this hard rule has been somewhat mitigated in some of the states where, by statute, various inheritable qualities have been conferred upon bastards.

"Bastards" can acquire the rights of legitimate children only by an act of the legislature, therefore legislative records should be consulted, perhaps twenty or so years after the births until approximate period of parents’ deaths.

Children born out of marriage may be legitimated by the subsequent marriage of their father and mother. Legitimation may even be extended to deceased children who have left issue, and in that ease, it enures to the benefit of that issue. Children legitimated by a subsequent marriage, have the same rights as if born during the marriage.

The illegitimacy of these children makes genealogical research more complicated and it would be essential to check the court records for further proceedings against Silvanus and/or the mothers. Did either of these children ever try to establish heritable rights with either parent? A search of probate and guardianship records could indicate the succession of any land Silvanus might have possessed. Did he ever marry? Was his will contested by either of these children?

More Questions

Was Silvanus a Native American, servant or African-American? What names were the babies given? Did they grow to adulthood and produce families? Did they try to claim on property or probate? Did the mother’s go on to marry other men, have other children? It would be essential to follow the census records and see if the name Savage appears in Princeton. Vital records are essential as well.

Quality of Data

The data in this record is of varying reliability. It was given contemporaneously with the events, by women who most definitely would have known the truth, and therefore it would be considered of high quality. When analyzing documents we usually make the assumption that people are telling the truth. However, these women were in a highly vulnerable state. It would be in their interest to accuse any man of fathering a child so that they would not be alone in the support of the child. Whether they named the correct father or not would depend upon their state of mind at the time. There are at least two reasons for naming the correct father: hope of coercing him into marriage, and basic honesty (fear of Divine retribution). Yet there are incentives to naming another man as father: revenge for some past act, hope of cornering a more desirable man into marriage, possible drunkenness at the time of the conception, and perhaps even hysteria. In any case, they were biased and their testimony should be questioned.

The two records would therefore vary in reliability. Debby Smith swore on the day she gave birth, probably whilst in labor, that Silvanus Savage was the father of her child. Midwives were encouraged to drag the name of the father out a laboring unwed mother’s pained lips. So Debby could have just succumbed and told the truth, she could have blurted out the name of some man she didn’t care for or she could have named one she coveted. There is really no way to ascertain the level of truthfulness, so we just assume truth.

Polly, on the other hand, swore out her complaint two months after having given birth. And she swore it on the same day that Debby had her baby and Silvanus was named as father. Polly, in essence, jumped on the Silvanus bandwagon. Further research into court records may or may not reveal Polly’s real motivations

Evidence

This is an original source containing primary information and providing direct evidence of the fact that these mothers claimed Savage as the father of their babies. It is also direct evidence of the birth dates of the babies, and the names of the babies’ mothers. It tells us that Silvanus Savage was a Princeton blacksmith in 1802 and that he had been in Princeton at least on 20 June 1801 and 9 October 1801, if the women were telling the truth, and we assume they were. It also places the women in Princeton on the dates in their depositions.

It does not provide enough evidence to state that Silvanus was the father of either child, however. A search for court records might reveal whether Silvanus was ever sentenced, whether he paid support for his two babies and whether he ever married either of the women, but we will never really know. We can only assume, based on the weight of the evidence.

This case cries out for DNA follow-up.

RESEARCH PLAN

Ascertain town boundaries and dates of annexation, using: William Francis Galvin, Historical Data Relating to Counties, Cities, and Towns in Massachusetts (Boston: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1997).

Check for previous studies in the literature on Silvanus Savage. Start with, Jeremiah Lyford Hanaford, History of Princeton, Worcester County, Massachusetts; Civil and Ecclesiastical; from its first settlement in 1739, to April 1852 (Worcester: C. Buckingham Webb, 1852).

Search online catalogs at NewEnglandAncestors.org, FamilySearch.org, bpl.org, worldcat.org, PERSI, and AmericanAntiquarian.org.

Locate all relevant censuses from earliest to last one of children (1790-1880) on Ancestry.com, HeritageQuest (accessible at participating libraries), and at NARA Waltham facility.

Consult for implications of illegitimacy in the culture: Melinde Lutz Sanborn, Lost Babes: Fornication Abstracts from Court Records, Essex County, Massachusetts 1692 to 1745 (Derry, New Hampshire: Melinda Lutz Sanborn, 1992).

Were the births properly registered at the time, specifically listing both parents? What surnames were the babies given? Did they live to adulthood? Did either one name a child after him? Whom did he eventually marry? Did he have other children? What did he name them? Search for births, marriages, and deaths in MAVital Records to 1850 online, and in VR Tan Books series for Savage, Smith, and Clark. Search in the “Massachusetts Vital Records1841-1910” online database at the New England Historic Genealogical Society (NEHGS).

Were there any court cases filed against Silvanus for these two illegitimate births? Did he get charged with a crime, serve punishment and/or go on to support them? Was he accused of the same or any other crime by anyone else? Were either of the mothers accused of a crime or obliged to pay support? What are the implications for land and probate: did the babies later contest Silvanus' will, even though they were not eligible to inherit? A trip to the Worcester County Courthouse, is definitely in order!

Examine newspapers of the time. The American Antiquarian Society holds a wealth of original newspapers. Also check online databases such as GenealogyBank.com and Newsbank, 19th Century Newspapers at NEHGS.

Look into church records. See if there was a permanent minister in Princeton. Did he keep a diary? Is there a diary from anyone in town at that time? The Congregational Library in Boston has a wealth of documentation on early churches. Examine cemeteries, look for their graves and note how their burial plots are laid out.

Consider DNA testing for any known descendants of Sylvanus, Debbie, and Polly.

You can see there is plenty to do-- I've generated a huge research plan with just these two documents. Justice of the Peace records reveal the most intimate details of people's lives. These three young people lived over two centuries ago, yet their troubles are timeless. In any case, let us hope that babies, mothers and even Silvanus, managed to pull together a happy life, despite the setbacks.