Uncle Peg’s Chronicles
March 2, 2023
“Your Outline is Like Your Underwear”
Number of pages in Outline Descendant
Report: 161(up from 159 last chronicle)
Number of pages in the basic Descendant Report:
244 (up from 242 last chronicle)
Francis
Holmes is # 1. I am now # 339. # 336, where I was last week, is now Anne Marie Holmes
Gautreau.
Jonathan
Marquez (Frances Anne Holmes Ballantyne line) is last at # 501.
#
498, where he was last week, is now Kenneth D Williams.
This
should change weekly, if I’m doing my job.
Something
new in stats, just for fun:
I put the
names of all descendants of Francis Holmes who are either in our Facebook group
or on my mailing list for chronicles, in a bag. Spouses and friends are not
included as they do not get numbered in the program’s default. Those who have
no descendants are also not numbered, but I’ll include them with their parent’s
number. I pull out three names, and include them for two weeks. Next week, I’ll
draw three more. This is for fun, but if the three names I drew were not in my
tree that I am using now, I insert them. Win-win exercise.
The three I
drew last week are:
·
Marie Holmes Dockter is # 291,
up from # 288, who is now Peter Guy Holmes.
·
Melanie Holmes Bowes is # 461,
up from # 458, who is now Kevin Leaman.
·
Cindy Lutes Steeves is # 347,
up from # 344, who is now Douglas A Holmes.
New this week are: Dana Fogg, Amy Guynn, and James
Oksen
Dana Fogg, #431, is married to Sarah Bernd and has a son,
Benjamin. He is in the Charles R Holmes line, through his parents, Richard and
Prudence ‘Prudy’ Thornton Fogg. You and I met him at the 2016 reunion, if
you were there, along with his sisters, Phyllis and Jean. I’ve known about them
for years, and I was so happy to meet them. My mother wanted to call me
Prudence after Dana’s mother, but Dad vetoed that.
Well, those didn’t turn out very well, even with
editing. It’s a scan of a scan. That’s Dana’s birth announcement, made by his
artist Mama. On the picture of the baby it says: “A little Fogg just blew in.
The poem reads, “The rain may fall, the sun may shine, but we’ll have a “little
Fogg” all the time. My Gram kept this.
Amy MacKillop Guynn is # 452, and is in the Charles R Holmes line as well.
She is married to Brandon Guynn, and has two young sons; the oldest is in
elementary school. She’s one of the MacKillops who is descended from the
McKillops as well as the Holmeses, through her parents, Ray and Brenda Miller
MacKillop. I haven’t met her and her brothers, Mark and David, in person, but I
think (fuzzy memory) I met her father. My Mum was close to her grandfather and
his brother, so I’ve heard about them all my life.
James Oksen,
# 392, is in the William N Holmes line and is married to Audra Bogardus. He
has a grown daughter, Bryanna Oksen Murray, and a grown son, Trevor Oksen, and
at least two grandchildren. We met Jim at the 2016 reunion, when he reunited
with his Holmes cousins for a reunion within a reunion – said cousin, Glenn
Holmes. I think, if I figured it out right, second cousins once removed. Jim’s
mother, Sharon Holmes Oksen, married to James Oksen, is a sister of Glenn’s. Jim
seemed to enjoy himself immensely, and looking back at the photos, yes, I know
he did.
FYI, this
takes a lot of time, but it’s kind of fun. I do it on Tuesdays rather than
Thursdays. Watch for your name.
~
My genealogy goals for this week were:
·
Update Villa Warren’s ancestors and make the template I want and that
Elizabeth is pleased with.
·
Chronicle several times, and publish on Thursday morning.
·
Add a few more people to the tree so the stats move.
·
Start researching and writing
about Jonathan Maltbie for the “Where There’s a Will” article.
·
Continue working on my April
presentation, “Hook, Lines, and Sinker” for the genealogical society.
·
Revise Richard Holmes for Generations.
I updated Villa
Warren’s ancestors as well as Anna Heath’s. Thanks, Ann Marie, for the help. I
need to look them over with fresh eyes, and then, I think I am done compiling.
I just need to do the organization, send it off, and I will be tout fini.
I chronicled,
but procrastinated so had to do most of this all at once. The stats moved a
bit.
I am deep into
the life of Richard Holmes again. I am working on the umteenth revision. I have
checked and rechecked the transcripts, and now need to cut, cut, cut. I started
with 29 pages and I am down to 9 – my goal is 8 max. I regret deleting the map.
Thursday morning update: I think I am done.
I emailed Cindy for details about
the story of our grandfather, Floyd Holmes, almost drowning. That is for my
presentation in April. I will work on the presentation while I am in Ontario
and Julie and Marc are working.
“He (Floyd Holmes, our
grandfather) was walking home from Uncle Cecil’s and back then there was a log
that he had to walk on to cross the brook. It was cold and he had his hands in
his pockets. He lost his balance crossing the log and fell into the brook with his
hands in his pants pockets. He could not get his hands out of the wet pockets
but eventually managed to get upright and out of the brook. He used to tell me
to take my hands of my pockets. I thought it was because I was not being girly
but Mom told me that it was probably because he was afraid I would hurt myself
. . .
Several posts later . . . It was
his change! I remember Mum said he wouldn’t take his hands out because he had
change in his pocket, so he almost drowned.
I made a slide for my April presentation
about making an outline for an article:
“Your outline is like your underwear.
You want it to be neat and tidy, mended,
comfortable, a good fit, and discreet.
You don’t want to show it off.
But, just in
case, you want it be there.”
Do you think it profound, or in poor taste?
Hoping to add some humour so that this will be a fun workshop. Since working on
this workshop off and on, I’ve been intentionally making and bettering my
outlines. This last one about Great X many generations Uncle Richard really
paid off when it came time to revise, for I kept referring back to my purpose
statement. If what I said didn’t pertain to that – out it went. Stephen King
would be proud of me.
~
For those of you not in our Facebook group, I
want to tell you about Mary Ellen Mavrides Fielding, widow of Guy Fielding of
the Hattie Holmes line. Mary Ellen wasn’t feeling well, and upon visiting the
doctor and taking tests, they determined that she has stage four pancreatic
cancer. She will not have chemo. She also has several blood clots. She is
keeping us up to date and every day, if I don’t see something from her, I go
directly to her Facebook to check on her.
Her cancer is terminal. She has been given six
months. It is her wish to see her grandson, J J, who lives with her, graduate
this year. Of course, she is experiencing different emotions, but she tries to
remain cheerful and positive for the sake of her family. She is going home to
hospice care, and plans to do what she can, including going out. Her son Dan
and his wife Kimberly were with her on the weekend; not sure if they stayed.
Please keep Mary Ellen in mind. If you are in
our Facebook group, she does look at what I share. I know she appreciates
thoughts and prayers, and she also likes encouragement and pretties. So, if you
feel like posting photos of flowers or the like, go ahead. Talk to her!
Introduce yourself, tell her how strong she is, whatever.
~
I am going to share my article about Uncle
Richard with you. If you read it, please let me know if you see any typos and
whether or not it is clear to you. If not, I will cry. Not really, but it goes
to the editor soon.
Do not worry about typos or misspellings
within the will (in italics) – I have to transcribe exactly what I see. I have
checked that part many times.
WHERE THERE’S A WILL
Richard
Holmes c.1637 – 1704
His
wife, Sarah (Grant) Holmes c.1637- 1706
Compiled by Peggy Vasseur
“The Holmes’ of America may be proud of their Norwalk kinsman.
He was a brother of the founders of the Stamford and Bedford Holmes
families . . .”[1]
Tempers matched the
heat of the forge where John, Samuel, and William sat on well-worn stools. There,
they had whiled away many an hour with Richard, discussing everything from their
families, Sunday’s sermon, the militia, and whether or not there were witches
in Norwalk. They reviewed Sarah’s inventory. “You read the will?” growled one.
“Yes.” “You know what they are saying at the Court?” spat another. “Yes.” “Saw
Mrs. Olmsted the other day,” admitted the third, “and could hardly look her in
the eye. Like to throw this in the fire, but what can we do? Mehitabel deserves
better.”
“Let’s tell the judge how
we feel,” they decided. Dipping the quill into the inkwell, he began to write. “These may further inform the Honnored
Courtt Now sitting in Fairfield that therein one Mehittibell Warner
. . .”
Where
there’s a will, there may be problems. The probate of Richard Holmes’ last will
and testament must be linked to his wife’s inventory and probate. The history
leading up to these records; the complications arising from the administration
of it; and the decisions made regarding the distribution disturbed me. I felt
the need to preserve it for my family history. I do not believe the Prerogative Court considered Richard’s will and wishes whatsoever in making their
final decision.
First Settlers of Norwalk Memorial[1]
Richard Holmes, son of my immigrant ancestor, Francis
Holmes, left his boyhood home in Stamford, Connecticut, and moved to Norwalk,
Connecticut, purchasing his lot in 1657 from Thomas Smith. Rev. Selleck wrote,
“Richard Holmes, of Home-Lot No. 4, son of Francis, 1648, of Stamford, than
whom there was hardly a more important man in the settlement, was seemingly the
iron and brass-monger of the new colony, and lived next neighbor north of Mark
St. John. His grounds and the site of the ancient ‘Smithery’ are now partly
covered by the East Norwalk Methodist Episcopal Church. His industry – that of
nail, gun, lock and possibly blacksmith – was held in estimation by the
proprietors. On May 30, 1655, town meeting action was taken whereby two of
Norwalk’s principal men were deputed ‘for the fetching of the tools pertaining
to the Smith from Stratford.’ Mr. Holmes was a thrifty man, and his history is
of interest. It is inferred that he was not actually the first ‘smith,’ but he
must have succeeded, by only a short time, that primus artisan.”[1]
Richard married, about
1672, Sarah Grant, daughter of Seth and Elizabeth (MNU) Grant. They had no children of their own, but
raised two children: Mehitabel Warner, from a couple of weeks of age, and
Jonathan Stevens, from about four or five years old. Seth Grant arrived in New England from England in 1632, on the Lyon.
He first lived in Cambridge, Massachusetts. By 1636, he was an early settler of
Hartford, Connecticut. Seth Grant married Elizabeth, and they had two
daughters, Sarah and Elizabeth. Seth died about 1647 in Hartford. [1]
Sarah married Richard Holmes,[1]
and Elizabeth married Robert Warner.”[1] The copy
of the records of the family of Robert Warner and Elizabeth Grant, above, is
from the Connecticut Marriage Index.[1] This index
shows that after a few weeks of giving birth to her daughter, Mehitabel,
Elizabeth (Grant) Warner passed away on December 26, 1673. Mehitabel was,
according to this record, born on November 21, 1673. Elizabeth,
according to Connecticut Church Record Abstracts, died on October 27, 1673. Mehitabel
was baptized on September 9, 1673.
Mehettabell, d[aughter] Rob[er]t, b[a]p[tized] 9th mo[nth] 16th
day,1673; her mother d[ied] [Octo]b[e]r 27th day, 1673.[1]
There
is obviously an error somewhere. If Mehitabel was baptized on September 16th,
she could not have been born on November 21. The church record makes more
sense. Shortly after the death of her sister, Elizabeth, Sarah Holmes went to
Middletown to fetch her niece, Mehitabel. She and Richard raised her to
adulthood. Richard, in his will, stated that she still lived in his home. The
administrators of Sarah Holmes’ inventory stated in their endorsement that
Mehitabel Warner, the survivor of Richard and Sarah, was Sarah’s niece, and
that soon after the death of the child’s mother, Sarah went to Middletown and
brought the child home to her husband.[1] Jonathan Stevenson was the son of Jonathan Stevenson and his wife, Mary
Allen, widow of Thomas Allen. Jonathan Sr. died in battle when he was young,[1] and Richard and Sarah took his son in as a servant until he came of age.
When Jonathan’s mother remarried John Bouton shortly thereafter, Jonathan
stayed with the Holmes family. I believe, therefore, that Jonathan was an
indentured servant.
The Last
Will and Testament, Inventory, and Probate documents are at these links.
Last Will and
Testament, Inventory, and Probate Records of Richard Holmes at Ancestry
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/9049/images/007628167_00856?pId=1252065
Last Will and
Testament, Inventory, and Probate Records of Richard Holmes at FamilySearch
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-892K-TRF6?i=597&cat=359148
Inventory and Probate Records of Sarah (Grant) Holmes at Ancestry
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/9049/images/007628167_00862?pId=1252071
Inventory and
Probate Records of Sarah (Grant) Holmes at FamilySearch
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-892K-TRXC?i=638&cat=359148
The will at FamilySearch is written in one long
paragraph; I divided it for ease of reading. I am including a copy of the first
portion of the will. The rest will be my transcripts and commentary; you can
view the records at the above links. I have done my best to transcribe the
documents accurately; I may have made errors.
Norwalk October 31t day in [th]e year of o[ur] Lord 1704. In the Name of god amen know yee [tha]t
I Richard Holmes of Norwalke being by [th]e Good hand of god arrived at [th]e heel of my old age of
sixty years & upwards & now being under [th]e afflicting hand of god at present &
being sensible of my mutabillity and mortallity [tha]t may overtake me god only knows
therefore for good Consideration moving me thereunto whilst yet I have through
gods favour [th]e Use of my Right reason & of my perfect memory I do see
Cause and good reason to make my will to [th]e End I may dispose of my worldly
Estate before death so as may be to gods glory and my own peace and [th]e
Comfort of those [tha]t I shall leave behind: therefore this I declare to be my last will
and Testament as followeth
Impr[imi]s I
freely give and bequeath my poor Immortall Soul into [th]e hand of my great and
Good God that Gave it to [th]e armes of my great redeemer [tha]t so deerly
bought it and my poor and Crazy body to [th]e dust from whence it Came by a
Comly and decent buriall and as for my worldly Estate I dispose of
as followeth
[th]e which god hath Given me as follows . .
I do not
know the cause of Richard’s death, but I believe that he suffered from some
ailment for a while. He was well into his old age; he was under the afflicting
hand of God. He had cause and good reason to write his will. And, he had a poor
and crazy body. He was now about 67 years of
age. Although he attributes his poor health to God, he still calls Him good,
and as his redeemer, great. The Online Etymology Dictionary gives early
definitions of the word “crazy” as diseased or sickly (now obsolete).[1]
. . . I Will
and bequeath to my well beloved wife Sarah Holmes, all [th]e whole ____ of all my Whole Estate [tha]t I shall dispossesed of
making her hereby my Sole Executrix and Administratrix she first paying all my Just
debts and [th]e remainder to be and remain to her proper Use and bennifit
during [th]e time of her Naturall life: and at her decease I will and bequeath
unto her . . .
Richard made
his wife, Sarah (Grant) Holmes, his heir, executrix, and administratrix. Then,
he made provision for Sarah’s estate as well as his own. I cannot transcribe
one word or phrase in the first line.
. . . near
kinswoman Mehitabell Warner now with me my now dwelling house and home lot
barns orchard with all the fencing and Privilidges pertaining thereunto at my
wives decease allso I Give unto [th]e afores[ai]d Mehitabell Warner affores[ai]d
my ox hill lot now within fence and also I Give to [th]e affores[ai]d
Mehitabell my bogge swampe and meadow below pine hill allso I Give to her my Litle
Salt meadow lot near to Rocky Springs lyeing between John Fitch and Joseph
Gregory also I Give to her Annually one Load of Salt meadow haye of my halfe mile
Island meadow also I Give unto her Namely Mehitabell Warner after my wives
decease all of my moveable Estate therein being within doors and without as
well Catle horse kinde sheep and swine and household goods: . . .
Richard
referred to Mehitabel as Sarah’s “near kinswoman.” She was Sarah’s niece, whom
they raised from infancy. She was to
receive the bulk of Richard and eventually Sarah’s estate upon their deaths.
. . . my Smith tools Excepted allso I Except
som small Legacies to be paid out of my movable Estate at my wiffes decease as follows:
. . .
After
listing his real and moveable estate that he wished to leave to Mehitabel,
Richard made an exception of his smith tools. The last line of his will states
. . . “my Smith Tools above Excepted I now leave with my wife to dispose of as Shee
Shall see good.” He also stated that he wished to leave some small legacies to
other individuals.
. . . to
Jonathan Stevenson [th]e son of Jonathan Stevenson dec[ease]d ten pound [tha]t
was my Servant formerly whom I Brought up from a Childe also I Give to Samuell
Hayes Sen[io]r of Norwalke fourty shilings in provision pay or out of my
movable Estate And allso twenty shiling apiece to Thomas and Richard Bouton the
two youngest sons now of John Bouton Sen[io]r of Norwalke . . .
Jonathan
Stevenson Sr. married Mary Allen in 1684. After her husband’s death in 1689,
Mary, widow of Thomas Allen and Jonathan Stevenson, remarried widower John
Bouton[1]
and had two more sons, Thomas and Richard. These boys were the two youngest
sons of John Bouton, and half-brothers to Jonathan. Jonathan, Jr., was to
receive ten pounds, and the Bouton children twenty shillings each. I do not know why he willed
Samuell Hayes forty shillings.
. . .
Memorandum I also Give to [th]e s[ai]d Mehitable Warner [th]e one halfe of my
Cow lot so Commonly Called and all [th]e remainder of my Lands and meadows laid
out to me and do or hereafter doth or may Appertaine to me I Give and bequeath to
[th]e now daughters of my well beloved Brothers namely John Holmes Sen[io]r
of Bedford and Stephen Holmes Sen[io]r of Standford and their heirs for
Ever to be Equally divided to Each one of the s[ai]d daughters and now hereby .
. .
After he
willed to those individuals mentioned previously, whatever remained of his
estate was to go to his nieces, the daughters of his brothers, John Holmes Sr.
of Bedford, New York, and Stephen Holmes Sr. of Stamford, Connecticut or their
heirs, to be equally divided between them.
. . . I do Revoake
and make Void and Null all former wills whatever and make this my last will witness
my hand and Seal set to [th]e day and date above s[ai]d my wareing apparell I
Give to my Brother & now hereby John Holmes of Bedford if living if not
then to Brother Stephen Holmes my Smiths Tools above Excepted I now leave with
my wife to dispose of as Shee shall se good . . .
Richard made
null and void all former wills, but after he wrote the date, he had an afterthought:
his clothing. Nothing was disposable. His left his clothing to his brother,
John; if John predeceased him, it should go to his brother, Stephen. He left
the disposal of his smith tools to his wife’s discretion.
Signed Sealed and delivered Richard
Holmes [Seal]
In p[re]sents of us witnesses his R
mark
Joseph Gregory
His J mark
John Copp
Joseph
Gregory and John Copp witnessed Richard’s last will and testament. Joseph
Gregory and Richard Holmes made their marks. That
concludes the transcript of the last will and testament of Richard Holmes. Next
is the probate.
Richard Holms of Norwalk being
deceased The his will and Inventory being Exhibited to [th]e Prerogative
Court held In Fairfield decembe[r] 6: 1704 In order to A Setlement and with Reference
to [th]e s[ai]d will one of [th]e witneses not being present [th]e Court ses
Cause to defer [th]e [th]e probate of s[ai]d Will there of but do Aprove
[th]e s[ai]d Inventory and do order it to be Recorded
The first
problem I encountered
was that one of the witnesses to the signing of the will was not present on
December 6th. Therefore, the Inventory was approved, but the
approval for the probate was deferred. As there was no further mention of this,
the problem must have been rectified.
The Prerogative Court held In Fairfield
that this [thir]d of Jan[uar]y: 1704 having Considered [th]e the pleas
for & against [th]e Probate of [th]e will of Richard Holmes of Norwalk deceased
with also what further Testimony hath appeared Concerning [th]e s[ai]d Holmes
his Cappasity for make his will at [th]e time of making thereof and do allow
and approved of s[ai]d Will (it being sufficiently proved) and do order it to
be Recorded . . .
Nathan Gold Clerke
The second
problem I encountered
appears to be that the will was challenged; by whom is not stated. Joseph
Gregory and John Copp testified in court that they had witnessed Richard Holmes
sign his Last Will and Testament, and judged him to be in his right mind. After Judge and Clerk, Nathan Gold,
considered the pleas for and against the probate of the will, he considered it
sufficiently proved, and ordered it to be recorded. Note that the year 1704 was
actually 1705; January was prior to Lady Day. I
consider the lengthy process of the probate as problem three. Had it
been executed and distributed earlier, the rest of the complications might not
have occurred. It seems to have been set aside for a two-year interim. I go next to Sarah’s inventory and probate.
Sarah Holmes Widow Relict of Richard
Holmes of Norwalk dec[ease]d who was Executrix of his last will and Testament
being also dec[ease]d and the s[ai]d will not fully Executed the Prerogative
Court held In fairfield decembe[r] 4 1706: do Grant Power of Administration on
said Estate unto M[r]. Sam[ue]ll Haies
and John Bouton both of Norwalk they
to Execute and perform th[e] s[ai]d Will and make return of their Adm[inistration]
to [th]e Court In fairfield when Caled for by th[e] Court Also the Court do
Appoint and Impower the aforesaid Sam[ue]ll Haies and John Bouton to Adm[inister]
on [th]e Estate of the s[ai]d Sarah Holmes they to make A perfect
Inventory of [th]e her estate and the same to Exhibit to [th]e s[ai]d
Court within thre mounthes next After this date for A farther Setlement And the
s[ai]d Samuell Haies acknowledgeth him Selfe bound to [th]e Court In
[th]e Recognizance of fifty pounds for A faithfull discharge of their office
according to [th]e above Order of Court Here followeth An Inventory of the
Estate of Sarah Holmes Widow Relict of Richard Holmes late of Norwich dec[ease]d
The death of
the executrix of Richard Holmes’ estate is problem four. The Prerogative
Court appointed Samuel Hayes and John Bouton, both of Norwalk, to administer
and execute Richard’s estate and make a return of their administration. They
were also to administer the estate of Sarah Holmes.
on the 19 day of Desembe[r] 1706
An inventory taken By us whos Name
are Hear and underwrightin off the Estate thatt Sarah HoLms died posesed off whe
deseased on the 18 day off Novembe[r] att Norwalk in the year 1706 as Follows .
. .
In this
Ancestry version of Sarah’s Inventory, we find a record of Sarah’s date and
place of death. John Bouton, Samuell Hayes, and William Haines signed for
taking the inventory. The first portion included a few items of clothing,
valued at four pounds, fourteen shillings, and six denarii. The second portion
included the shop tools.
The
FamilySearch and the Ancestry versions differ slightly.
FamilySearch:
Also Smiths Tooles one pare of
Bellows 1£: 15s: Anvill 2£: 10
Grind Stone and winch 1£:
3s: other Small things tooles
Sledg hammers Tongs and Small tooles
at 2£: 6s:
Ancestry:
Shop Toolls or Smith
tools are as Foslows
one paier off Bellows
01£- 15s one viz 01£: Bick Horn 09S
Anuill 02£-
10s grind ston ____ 01£- 3s
other small toolls
____ Sleege Hammors
tongs and small tooll: att 02£- 06
The
appraisers gave more detail about the smith’s tools than they did in Richard’s
inventory, below: bellows, a vice, a bick iron, an anvil, a grindstone, a
winch, sledge hammers, tongs, and other small tools. There are two words or
phrases I could not make out.
The
beautiful calligraphy of Richard’s inventory at Ancestry is relatively easy to
read. [1]
allso we Find given to
her namely to the afforsaid Sarah Holms the
widow and Relect off Richard Holms Desesed in his Last will thatt he give to
his then Bloved wiff Sarah Holmes above said and to her disposeall his Smith
toolls ther in Being and she having disposed of a Small Hammer or to or the Lik
to a very Small matter as to inallew and the Remainder now Remaing we Doe
judge it nessesary to tak a strictt vew off them and have aprised them acording
to the first apyrizall of ____ persons Commpared thereunto according to Law and
finding the things in good order and and the aprizall there of to our
good satisfaction as just: withoutt any
wrong Don to any that may Be Conssrnd Hear after the withal . . .
Is this problem
five? The widow gave away a few of the smith’s tools, a hammer or two or
the like, that Richard had willed to her discretion. As I read it, the
appraisers took the tool inventory seriously, but doubted that anyone concerned
was done any harm. I believe they compared Sarah’s inventory to others, but there
is one word before “persons” I cannot transcribe. In Richard’s inventory, the
items related to his blacksmith business, his iron, steel, and other tools,
were appraised at fourteen pounds.
The Adm[inistration] of the Estate of
Sarah Holmes Late of Norwalk dec[ease]d: having Exhibited An Inventory of her
Estate to [th]e Prerogative Court held In fairfield decembe[r] [th]e 23:1706:
[th]e Court do accept of And Approve [th]e s[ai]d Inventory and do order it to
be Recorded and the Court do find that there is Clere devidable Estate
amounting to [th]e Sum of 12£:10s: There being as this
Court is Informed Sundry Children of Robert Warner late of Midletown dec[ease]d:
who are the next of kind In Equall degree to [th]e afores[ai]d deceased Sarah
Holmes the Court do therefore order that [th]e s[ai]d Estate shall be devided
and distributed to the Children of [th]e aforesaid Warner and their Legall Representatives
In Equall proportion and the Court do desire And Appoint Sam[ue]ll Haies &
John Bouton to make distribution of [th]e s[ai]d Estate according to [th]e
above order of Court and to Send an ac[coun]t hereof to [th]e severall persons
Who have Right to receive [th]e said Estate
There was no
signature of clerk or judge on this page.
The
Administrators, John Bouton and Samuel Hayes, exhibited the Inventory of
Sarah’s estate to the Prerogative Court on December 23, 1706, as instructed. This
is problem six. The Court learned that Sarah’s brother-in-law, the late
Robert Warner of Middletown, deceased, left several children. They were of
equal degree to their Aunt Sarah, the decedent. The Court made the decision to
divide the estate of Sarah Holmes in equal proportion to Mehitabel and her siblings.
How
disappointed the administrators must have been; how sick at heart for their
friends. Knowing Richard and Sarah personally, and knowing Richard’s wishes, they
had given an endorsement with their inventory to the court which read as
follows:
Thes may Further inform the Honnored
Courtt N[o]w sitting in Fairfield that this therein one Mehittibell
Warner now suruiffing who was a very nearly ReLatted this sarah holms above
named and was her owne sisters Child and Soon after the death of the Childs
mother this Richard Holms and his then wif Sarah holms the Child owne
antt went up to midilltown and Brought this child home to her Husband and as we
have offin heard them say that thay ded tak itt as ther own Child and ever senc
to our knowlidg they have Carfully Cared for her she namely the aforsaid
Mehittabell Warner and She hath Caried very Duttifull and Rescpectily towards
Her uncell and antt unto ther diying day and as her Honnred uncell hath
acknowlided Her also fore an Haire to his Estate we pray she may not Be dened
Her wright to this Her owne anntt and adopted mother Estate whom She so dearly Loved
John Bouton and Samuel Hayes, as well as William
Haines, had previously written that Mehitabel Warner was Sarah’s sister’s child,
and that soon after the death of the child’s mother, Elizabeth (Grant) Warner, Sarah
went to Middletown and brought her home to her husband. They wrote that they
had often heard them tell the story of how they took her in as their own child,
and had carefully cared for her. Mehitabel, in turn, had cared for her uncle
and aunt until their dying days. As her uncle acknowledged her an heir to his
estate, they had pleaded that she not be denied her right to her adopted
mother’s estate. What of the will
of Richard Holmes, whose instructions were specifically laid out for both his
death and Sarah’s? To whom did he wish his estate to go? First, he willed
everything to his beloved wife, and after her death, to Mehitabel Warner, the
bulk of his estate. Also, he bequeathed some legacies to others: Jonathan
Stevenson, the lad he raised as a servant; Samuel Hayes, a good friend; Thomas
and Richard Bouton, sons of John and Mary Bouton and half-brother of Jonathan;
his nieces; and his brothers. The names of
every one of the legatees except Mehitabel, to whom Richard wished to leave an
inheritance or legacy, are omitted in the distribution orders. It does not
appear that the judge even considered Richard’s last will and testament.
John Bouton of
Norwalke one of the Adm[inistrator]s: to [th]e Estate of Richard Holms dec[cease]d: is also deceased and Therefore the
Prerogative Court held In fairfield Jan[uar]y 27 1706 do Appoint John Benidick
of Norwalke to Joine with M[r] Sam[ue]ll Hayes in the worke of Adm[inistration]:
on [th]e Estate of [th]e s[ai]d Holmes and the Executing what
Remains to be don according the will of [th]e s[ai]d Richard Holmes and also to
Finish the worke of Administration and distribution of the Estate of the
deceased Sarah Holmes according [th]e order of Court decembe[r]: 23:
1706
Problem 7 was the sudden death of John Bouton,
one of the administrators of the two wills. I did not find his exact date of
death; Find A Grave gives January, 1707. Note that the date in the paragraph,
1706, occurred before Lady Day, so the year was 1707. The court appointed John
Benedict to assist Samuel Hayes in the execution and disposition of the estates
of Richard Holmes and Sarah (Grant) Holmes. What reasons did Richard give for
making his will? He wanted to dispose of his estate before his demise. A
Puritan, he willed his worldly goods for God’s glory. He wrote it for his own
peace of mind, and for the comfort of those he would leave behind. He chose
specific people as his legatees. He did not name his wife’s nieces and nephews,
aside from Mehitabel, in his will. Did the judge of the Prerogative
Court make the correct decision? I cannot state unequivocally that they erred,
but I do consider Bouton, Hayes, and Haines’ plea of endorsement to the Court on
behalf of Mehitabel Warner, by this time Mehitabel Olmsted, a good reason to
believe they erred. These men, according to their plea, knew Richard and Sarah
well. I like to think that these friends often sat in the blacksmith’s shop,
smoking their pipes, discussing the news, and swapping stories.
They knew that Richard chose Mehitabel as an heir, and
pleaded that she not be denied her right to her inheritance. Instead, she
shared it equally with her siblings, and the other legatees were ignored.
[1] Selleck, Rev. Charles M., A.M. Norwalk. Volume 1. Norwalk, Conn.:
Published by the Author. 1896. Pages
103, 104. https://books.google.ca/books?id=FulEAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA103&ots=fu_EqqLaZQ&dq=richard+holmes+norwalk&pg=PA102#v=onepage&q=richard%20holmes%20norwalk&f=false
[1] Find A Grave. First Settlers of Norwalk Memorial. Photo
added by Matthew Fatale.
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/5017/first_settlers_of_norwalk_memorial
[1] Selleck, Rev. Charles M., A.M. Norwalk.
Volume 1. Page 102.
[1] Ancestry. New England, The Great Migration and the Great
Migration Begins: Immigrants to New England 1620 – 1633. Volume II, G – O.
Images 130, 131; pages 804, 805.
https://www.ancestry.ca/discoveryui-content/view/53820:2496?_phsrc=lyz22435&_phstart=successSource&gsfn=Seth&gsln=Grant&ml_rpos=2&queryId=f6b3e640ef13e1d991879566d6f99c4d
[1] Ancestry. U.S., New England Marriages Prior to 1700 for Sarah
Holmes. Third Supplement to Torrey’s New England Marriages Prior to 1700.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/3824/images/flhg_supptorreysnewengmarr2-0164?pId=900178968
[1] Ancestry. U. S., New England Marriages, pre – 1870 (Barbour
Collection) for Robert Warner. Middletown Part II K – Z and No Surname 1651 –
1854.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/1062/images/VBMDUSACT1634_0027-0299?pId=409521
[1] Ancestry. Connecticut, U.S., Marriage Index, 1620 – 1926 for
Robert Warner. Middlesex – 1640 – 1808. Volume II, G – O. Film number
001513707. Image 204, page 85.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/61367/images/TH-1961-43914-4644-51?pId=16545
[1] Ancestry. Connecticut, U.S., Church Record Abstracts, 1630 –
1920 for Mehettabell Warner. Volume 070, Part 2 – Middletown. Image 279, page
606.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/3032/images/41107_620303988_0361-00279?pId=600300
[1] Ancestry. Connecticut, U.S., Wills and
Probate Records, 1609 – 1999 for Sarah Holmes. Image 863.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/9049/images/007628167_00863?pId=1252071
[1] Ancestry. Stevenson, John R, A.M., M.D. Thomas Stevenson of London,
England and His Descendants. New Jersey, Flemington, Hunterdon County:
Hiram Edmund Deats. 1902. Images 138, 139; pages 131, 132.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/61157/images/46155_b289915-00001?pId=1342841
[1] Online Etymology Dictionary.
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=crazy
[1] Ancestry. Stevenson, John R, A.M., M.D. Thomas Stevenson of London,
England and His Descendants..
[1] Ancestry. Connecticut, U.S., Wills and
Probate Records, 1609 – 1999 for Richard Holmes. Image 860.
https://www.ancestry.ca/imageviewer/collections/9049/images/007628167_00860?pId=1252065
I will be back in a couple of
weeks, as I go all aboard the train this Sunday, heading west. No
WORD on my tablet, so I can only research.
Here’s hoping all your underwear
is comfy.
