A few final thoughts about the case of Peter Weare's "fraudilent deed":
-Apparently the Selectmen of Hampton, New Hampshire weren't very optimistic that
the Governor would rule in their favor. They presented their petition on Nov 13, 1709,
but had begun selling off town land lots to help pay the 50 pounds judgement against the
town plus whatever other court costs.
-Peter Weare and his father Nathaniel visited John Marston in Andover on May 13 1708 and said
that Marston was "in his right senses" when they saw him. But John Marston's will was filed with
the Essex County, Ma. Court at Ipswich three days earlier on May 10 1708, presumably three days before John's death. I have a copy of his probate file.
-I'm somewhat bemused that the Governor and his Council so readily accepted Nathaniel Weare's
word about witnessing the transaction. He was, after all, Peter Weare's father. I can understand the Hampton selectmen thinking the deck was stacked against them. We can't know for certain from
across three centuries what was going on, but it sure seems fishy to me.
- I have not as yet found any record of the transaction between John Marston and Francis Page,
nor of the one between Marston and Peter Weare.
-Finally, as to how I am related to some of the people involved in all this:
John Marston was my 8x great grandfather.
Francis Page was also my 8x great grandfather
Peter Weare was a distant cousin. His granduncle was my 11x great grandfather, also named
Peter Weare.
Showing posts with label Marston family. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marston family. Show all posts
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Thursday, June 23, 2016
"A FRAUDILENT DEED" PART 2
After finding that document concerning a petition by the town of Hampton NH to Governor
Dudley over a land deal between my ancestor John Marston and Peter Weare, I went looking
for more information on Google. Let me be honest here. I am not the best at understanding the
intricacies of some colonial documents, so I was looking to find something that would help me
make sense of the details in the town's petition. Luckily I found this explanation in Joseph Dow's
History of the Town of Hampton, New Hampshire :
LAWSUIT ABOUT LAND AT THE NEW PLANTATION.
About this time, a controversy, which excited considerable interest, arose between Peter Weare and the freeholders and commoners, whom he "arrested," for not performing a grant to John Marston, late of Andover. At a meeting held by them, February 23, 1709, to consider the case, they authorized the selectmen to appoint an agent, with power of attorney, to defend them; agreeing that all charges incurred should be paid by the commoners, in proportion to their rights in the commons, and raised by the selectmen for the time being. Nathaniel Weare and Abraham Cole dissented.
This case was tried the next summer and decided in favor of the plaintiff, costing the defendants more than £50. The following autumn, the selectmen, in behalf of the freeholders and commoners, petitioned Governor Dudley concerning the case. The facts, as sot forth in the petition, dated November 13, were these : The suit was brought in consequence of the town not laying out a tract of land at the New Plantation, which at the date of the petition was in the town of Kingston. The grant in question had been made to John Marston, who had sold all his rights in Hampton, more than forty years before, to Dea. Francis Page, who had been in possession till the summer of 1708, when Weare produced a paper, purporting to be a deed of conveyance to him from John Marston, written and signed at Andover, and the same day acknowledged in New Hampshire, before Nathaniel Weare, Esq., the father of the grantee.
The validity of this deed was doubted. It had not been produced till after Marston's death, and it was represented as questionable, whether he was alive on the day of its date. It was also stated, that for several years previous to his death, ho had not, by reason of age, been of a sound and disposing mind and memory; that he had not been able to attend public worship, and far less able to travel in so short a time to New Hampshire, a distance of nearly twenty-live miles, to acknowledge a deed; nor would it have been necessary, for there were several Justices nearer, and, indeed, directly on his way. The petitioners further allege, that some of Marston's near relatives heard him say that Peter Weare had been to him, for the purpose of buying this land at the New Plantation, but that he had refused to sell it. Under these circumstances, it would seem reasonable that the plaintiff should have been required to prove the authenticity of his deed; but he insisted that, in order for a successful defense, it devolved on the town to prove that he had never received from John Marston any such deed. This might not have been easy to prove. The selectmen, therefore, as the agents of the freeholders and commoners, asked that Nathaniel Weare, Esq., should be required to state positively, whether he had ever seen John Marston in this province, since the date of the deed, claimed to have been given to his son, Peter Weare. Being questioned on this point, he stated before the governor and council, that Marston acknowledged the deed to his son, before him, at Andover, the 13th of May, 1708; and he declared that Marston was "then in his right senses."
This testimony, if not satisfactory, was direct and decisive, whatever may be thought of the validity of an acknowledgment made before a justice, when he was out of his jurisdiction.
On the 15th of September, the freeholders and commoners appointed Lieut. John Smith, Isaac Green and Ens. Samuel Marston, a committee, to join with the selectmen in selling some of the lots that had not been disposed of, in the north and west divisions, to satisfy the judgment that Peter Weare had obtained against the commoners, and to pay other charges incurred in the case. If the sales of these lots should fail to furnish a sufficient sum to pay all demands against them, then an assessment should be made ou all to whom shares of the commons had been granted.pp174-175
History of the Town of Hampton, New Hampshire: From Its Settlement in 1638, to the Autumn of 1892, Volume 1 Salem Press Publishing and Printing Company, 1894 - Hampton (N.H.)
I'll have some thoughts & conclusion in the next post.
To be continued...
Dudley over a land deal between my ancestor John Marston and Peter Weare, I went looking
for more information on Google. Let me be honest here. I am not the best at understanding the
intricacies of some colonial documents, so I was looking to find something that would help me
make sense of the details in the town's petition. Luckily I found this explanation in Joseph Dow's
History of the Town of Hampton, New Hampshire :
LAWSUIT ABOUT LAND AT THE NEW PLANTATION.
About this time, a controversy, which excited considerable interest, arose between Peter Weare and the freeholders and commoners, whom he "arrested," for not performing a grant to John Marston, late of Andover. At a meeting held by them, February 23, 1709, to consider the case, they authorized the selectmen to appoint an agent, with power of attorney, to defend them; agreeing that all charges incurred should be paid by the commoners, in proportion to their rights in the commons, and raised by the selectmen for the time being. Nathaniel Weare and Abraham Cole dissented.
This case was tried the next summer and decided in favor of the plaintiff, costing the defendants more than £50. The following autumn, the selectmen, in behalf of the freeholders and commoners, petitioned Governor Dudley concerning the case. The facts, as sot forth in the petition, dated November 13, were these : The suit was brought in consequence of the town not laying out a tract of land at the New Plantation, which at the date of the petition was in the town of Kingston. The grant in question had been made to John Marston, who had sold all his rights in Hampton, more than forty years before, to Dea. Francis Page, who had been in possession till the summer of 1708, when Weare produced a paper, purporting to be a deed of conveyance to him from John Marston, written and signed at Andover, and the same day acknowledged in New Hampshire, before Nathaniel Weare, Esq., the father of the grantee.
The validity of this deed was doubted. It had not been produced till after Marston's death, and it was represented as questionable, whether he was alive on the day of its date. It was also stated, that for several years previous to his death, ho had not, by reason of age, been of a sound and disposing mind and memory; that he had not been able to attend public worship, and far less able to travel in so short a time to New Hampshire, a distance of nearly twenty-live miles, to acknowledge a deed; nor would it have been necessary, for there were several Justices nearer, and, indeed, directly on his way. The petitioners further allege, that some of Marston's near relatives heard him say that Peter Weare had been to him, for the purpose of buying this land at the New Plantation, but that he had refused to sell it. Under these circumstances, it would seem reasonable that the plaintiff should have been required to prove the authenticity of his deed; but he insisted that, in order for a successful defense, it devolved on the town to prove that he had never received from John Marston any such deed. This might not have been easy to prove. The selectmen, therefore, as the agents of the freeholders and commoners, asked that Nathaniel Weare, Esq., should be required to state positively, whether he had ever seen John Marston in this province, since the date of the deed, claimed to have been given to his son, Peter Weare. Being questioned on this point, he stated before the governor and council, that Marston acknowledged the deed to his son, before him, at Andover, the 13th of May, 1708; and he declared that Marston was "then in his right senses."
This testimony, if not satisfactory, was direct and decisive, whatever may be thought of the validity of an acknowledgment made before a justice, when he was out of his jurisdiction.
On the 15th of September, the freeholders and commoners appointed Lieut. John Smith, Isaac Green and Ens. Samuel Marston, a committee, to join with the selectmen in selling some of the lots that had not been disposed of, in the north and west divisions, to satisfy the judgment that Peter Weare had obtained against the commoners, and to pay other charges incurred in the case. If the sales of these lots should fail to furnish a sufficient sum to pay all demands against them, then an assessment should be made ou all to whom shares of the commons had been granted.pp174-175
History of the Town of Hampton, New Hampshire: From Its Settlement in 1638, to the Autumn of 1892, Volume 1 Salem Press Publishing and Printing Company, 1894 - Hampton (N.H.)
I'll have some thoughts & conclusion in the next post.
To be continued...
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
"A FRAUDILENT DEED" PART 1
Here's an interesting story I ran across the other day that concerns some land my 8x great
grandfather John Marston owned in Hampton, New Hampshire, and what might have been
a bit of trickery pulled off by Peter Weare, who I believe is a distant cousin.
The particulars come from the New Hampshire Provincial and State Papers, Vol. 9:
Petition of Abraham Drake and others about a tract of land in Kingstown.
To his Excellency Joseph Dudley Esq. Capt. Generall and
Governour in Cheif in & over Her Majestys province of
the Massatusetts Bay & New Hampshir &c
The petition of ye selectmen of ye Town of Hampton in New Hampshire in behalf of ye freeholders & Comissioners of ye sdl town Humbly Sheweth
That your petitioners this last sumer had Judgment given in favour of Mr Peter Wear at two Courts the Charge where of cost them more than 50 pounds, for not laying out a Tract of land at a place formerly called New-plantation since called Kingstown which sd Grant was to John Marston who sold all his Rights in Hampton unto one Deacon Page more than 40 years since which sd Page hath ever since enjoyed his Rights & devisions of lands in Hampton above sd untill this last sumer ye said Peter Weare produced a pretended deed of conveyance from yc sd John Marston Writen & Signed at Andover & ye same day acknowledged by his Father Nathaniell Wear Esq. in New Hampshire by sd John Marston, which Deed is much to be suspected for a fraudilent Deed, for yt if ye said John Marston were living at ye time of ye Date of sd Deed which is much questioned, yett certainly he was dead before any such instruments appeared, and it is farther evident by testimonies of ye Reaverent Mr Barnard minister of ye town togeather with other principle men of Andover, yt ye sd John Marston by Reason of age had not been able for some years before his death to go to ye publick worship not of a disposeing mind & memory much less able to travill in so short a time to acknowledge a deed in New Hampshire when there were so many justices in his way thether, besides severall other tcstimoneys who are of ye sd John Marstons neer Relation who heard him say yt Mr Wear had been at him to sell him a piece of land at New plantation, but he would not do it. Wee therefore lay this our humble petition before your Excellency, together with ye Above mentioned Evidences and pray yt as ye said Nathaniell Weare Esq is in publickc place of trust, and whose signing an acknowledgment is of more value than two creadable Witnes & without which no Deed by Law can be executed nor Recorded, we pray yt ye said Esq. Weare may answer possitively whether he ever saw ye said John Marston of Andover in this province of New Hampshire since ye Date of ye said Deed made to his son Peter Wear by sd Marston, that so ye truth may appear, it being ye truth of all Testimony or Record yt makes them vallued, and ye said Esq. Wear hath been summoned to ye Court & paid his charge, yet will Say nothing but puts to prove possetively yt Marston did not grant to his son Peter or yt he was not .in ye province of New Hampshire to acknowledge it &c. The proceeding to ye finding out ye truth wee have no cause to dought but your Excellency will Justly do & your petitioners shall ever pray as in duty bound
Abraham Drake
John Moulton
Peter Johnson
Samuel Dow
Selectmen
Dated 13" of November 1708.
Certificate of Nathaniel Weare.
16 November 1708.
Nathl Weare Esq. being Exam'd before his Excellency the Governor and Council Whether he took the acknowledgment of one John Marston, formerly of Andover decd to a Deed of Conveyance from the said Marston to Peter Weare dated the thirteenth day of May one thousand seven hundred and seven and now produced in court, and where the said Marston was when he acknowledged the said Deed and at What time.
Mr Weare Answered that he being at Andover the 13th day of May 1707 he went to the House of the said John Marston about noon and exhibited the above said Deed to the said John Marston since decd he being then in his Right senses and the said Marston did then & there of his own free & voluntary Will acknowledge the same to be his act and Deed.
Examd before publick Councill the i6,h Nov' 1708. pp336-337
Provincial and State Papers, Volume 9 Town Papers AMS Press New York, (no publication date.)
So, what did this all mean?
An explanation will be in my next post.
grandfather John Marston owned in Hampton, New Hampshire, and what might have been
a bit of trickery pulled off by Peter Weare, who I believe is a distant cousin.
The particulars come from the New Hampshire Provincial and State Papers, Vol. 9:
Petition of Abraham Drake and others about a tract of land in Kingstown.
To his Excellency Joseph Dudley Esq. Capt. Generall and
Governour in Cheif in & over Her Majestys province of
the Massatusetts Bay & New Hampshir &c
The petition of ye selectmen of ye Town of Hampton in New Hampshire in behalf of ye freeholders & Comissioners of ye sdl town Humbly Sheweth
That your petitioners this last sumer had Judgment given in favour of Mr Peter Wear at two Courts the Charge where of cost them more than 50 pounds, for not laying out a Tract of land at a place formerly called New-plantation since called Kingstown which sd Grant was to John Marston who sold all his Rights in Hampton unto one Deacon Page more than 40 years since which sd Page hath ever since enjoyed his Rights & devisions of lands in Hampton above sd untill this last sumer ye said Peter Weare produced a pretended deed of conveyance from yc sd John Marston Writen & Signed at Andover & ye same day acknowledged by his Father Nathaniell Wear Esq. in New Hampshire by sd John Marston, which Deed is much to be suspected for a fraudilent Deed, for yt if ye said John Marston were living at ye time of ye Date of sd Deed which is much questioned, yett certainly he was dead before any such instruments appeared, and it is farther evident by testimonies of ye Reaverent Mr Barnard minister of ye town togeather with other principle men of Andover, yt ye sd John Marston by Reason of age had not been able for some years before his death to go to ye publick worship not of a disposeing mind & memory much less able to travill in so short a time to acknowledge a deed in New Hampshire when there were so many justices in his way thether, besides severall other tcstimoneys who are of ye sd John Marstons neer Relation who heard him say yt Mr Wear had been at him to sell him a piece of land at New plantation, but he would not do it. Wee therefore lay this our humble petition before your Excellency, together with ye Above mentioned Evidences and pray yt as ye said Nathaniell Weare Esq is in publickc place of trust, and whose signing an acknowledgment is of more value than two creadable Witnes & without which no Deed by Law can be executed nor Recorded, we pray yt ye said Esq. Weare may answer possitively whether he ever saw ye said John Marston of Andover in this province of New Hampshire since ye Date of ye said Deed made to his son Peter Wear by sd Marston, that so ye truth may appear, it being ye truth of all Testimony or Record yt makes them vallued, and ye said Esq. Wear hath been summoned to ye Court & paid his charge, yet will Say nothing but puts to prove possetively yt Marston did not grant to his son Peter or yt he was not .in ye province of New Hampshire to acknowledge it &c. The proceeding to ye finding out ye truth wee have no cause to dought but your Excellency will Justly do & your petitioners shall ever pray as in duty bound
Abraham Drake
John Moulton
Peter Johnson
Samuel Dow
Selectmen
Dated 13" of November 1708.
Certificate of Nathaniel Weare.
16 November 1708.
Nathl Weare Esq. being Exam'd before his Excellency the Governor and Council Whether he took the acknowledgment of one John Marston, formerly of Andover decd to a Deed of Conveyance from the said Marston to Peter Weare dated the thirteenth day of May one thousand seven hundred and seven and now produced in court, and where the said Marston was when he acknowledged the said Deed and at What time.
Mr Weare Answered that he being at Andover the 13th day of May 1707 he went to the House of the said John Marston about noon and exhibited the above said Deed to the said John Marston since decd he being then in his Right senses and the said Marston did then & there of his own free & voluntary Will acknowledge the same to be his act and Deed.
Examd before publick Councill the i6,h Nov' 1708. pp336-337
Provincial and State Papers, Volume 9 Town Papers AMS Press New York, (no publication date.)
So, what did this all mean?
An explanation will be in my next post.
Tuesday, June 07, 2016
SOME NEW OLD PICTURES
The other day my distant cousin Kimberly Gautreau received a mixed bunch of tintypes and photographs. Unfortunately there were no names on them, so Kimberly asked me to take a look at
some she had posted on her Facebook page. There was one I recognized right away as being a picture
of my 3x great grandfather John Cutter West, and another that I am pretty sure is Arvilla(Ames) West,
John's wife. I already had pictures of them both from my Aunt Dorothy that I could compare with the ones Kimberly had.
Here's the picture I already had of John:
And here's the one Kimberly has:
This is the picture of Arvilla I already had:
And here's the new one that I believe is her:
Looking at the two, I see similarities in the nose, mouth and forehead, but especially the droop in her left eye. Or am I imagining things?
I was unable to help Kimberly identify the rest of the pictures which probably are members of the family of Abel Gage Marston and his wife (my 2x great grandaunt)Ann Matilda West, who was John and Arvilla's oldest daughter.
Thank you Kimberly for letting me share these on my blog!
some she had posted on her Facebook page. There was one I recognized right away as being a picture
of my 3x great grandfather John Cutter West, and another that I am pretty sure is Arvilla(Ames) West,
John's wife. I already had pictures of them both from my Aunt Dorothy that I could compare with the ones Kimberly had.
Here's the picture I already had of John:
This is the picture of Arvilla I already had:
I was unable to help Kimberly identify the rest of the pictures which probably are members of the family of Abel Gage Marston and his wife (my 2x great grandaunt)Ann Matilda West, who was John and Arvilla's oldest daughter.
Thank you Kimberly for letting me share these on my blog!
Friday, May 09, 2014
GPS GENEALOGY ROADTRIP
Now that mud season is over and the weather is turning warmer, I'm trying to get out
more. One of my problems is that I am not really comfortable driving long distances
on the highways. I've had no reason to for the last twenty five years or so since I could drive the secondary roads back and forth to work. I'm trying to reacclimate myself so
I can visit some places further away like the cemeteries where my Middlesex, Worcester, and Essex counties ancestors are buried. I've loaded the street addresses into my GPS, and on a whim today I set out for North Andover and Methuen, Ma.
After about an hour or so of whiteknuckle driving I reached the Old North Burial Ground in North Andover. My Dad's maternal line, the Barkers, came from the area and I was hoping to find some of them buried there, but the first headstone I saw belonged to an ancestor from a different family line, 9x great grandfather John Stevens. He was born in England in 1605 and died on 11Apr 1662. I didn't see a stone for his wife Elizabeth (Parker)Stevens but she outlived him by thirty years so she probably remarried. Also, the stone is in excellent condition so I'm wondering if it is a replacement for an earlier one.
I did find plenty of Barkers, mostly collateral line cousins, but I also found two direct Barker ancestors: my 7x great grandparents Benjamin Barker and Hannah (Marston) Barker.
Barker.JPG)
Nearby I found the headstones of two of their children, my6x great grandaunt Alice Barker
and 6x great granduncle Benjamin Barker Jr.
The cemetery was in good shape for the most part, although there was sad evidence of
worse times in the past.
After taking 62 photos I got back into my car and followed the GPS directions to the Meeting House Hill Cemetery in Methuen where 6x great grandfather Jonathan Barker is buried, I should have checked before I left my house because if I had, I would have known the cemetery was closed to the public. I drove around it outside the stone walls and chainlink fence, then got directions home from the GPS and left. Roughly an hour and a half later I was home after dealing with the start of rush hour traffic on the highway.
I'd left my apartment around 11:30am and was home a little after 3:30pm.
I'll have to find some more cemetery locations to enter into the GPS!
more. One of my problems is that I am not really comfortable driving long distances
on the highways. I've had no reason to for the last twenty five years or so since I could drive the secondary roads back and forth to work. I'm trying to reacclimate myself so
I can visit some places further away like the cemeteries where my Middlesex, Worcester, and Essex counties ancestors are buried. I've loaded the street addresses into my GPS, and on a whim today I set out for North Andover and Methuen, Ma.
After about an hour or so of whiteknuckle driving I reached the Old North Burial Ground in North Andover. My Dad's maternal line, the Barkers, came from the area and I was hoping to find some of them buried there, but the first headstone I saw belonged to an ancestor from a different family line, 9x great grandfather John Stevens. He was born in England in 1605 and died on 11Apr 1662. I didn't see a stone for his wife Elizabeth (Parker)Stevens but she outlived him by thirty years so she probably remarried. Also, the stone is in excellent condition so I'm wondering if it is a replacement for an earlier one.
I did find plenty of Barkers, mostly collateral line cousins, but I also found two direct Barker ancestors: my 7x great grandparents Benjamin Barker and Hannah (Marston) Barker.
Nearby I found the headstones of two of their children, my6x great grandaunt Alice Barker
and 6x great granduncle Benjamin Barker Jr.
The cemetery was in good shape for the most part, although there was sad evidence of
worse times in the past.
After taking 62 photos I got back into my car and followed the GPS directions to the Meeting House Hill Cemetery in Methuen where 6x great grandfather Jonathan Barker is buried, I should have checked before I left my house because if I had, I would have known the cemetery was closed to the public. I drove around it outside the stone walls and chainlink fence, then got directions home from the GPS and left. Roughly an hour and a half later I was home after dealing with the start of rush hour traffic on the highway.
I'd left my apartment around 11:30am and was home a little after 3:30pm.
I'll have to find some more cemetery locations to enter into the GPS!
Sunday, December 13, 2009
COUSIN QUEST
I've written before about how I've been contacted by distant cousins
as a result of my blog or because of Facebook. Last week I mentioned
my distant cousin Michael who shares my descent from Minuteman
John Ames had found me through West in New England. A few days
after I posted that, I heard from my cousin Betty. She's the great
granddaughter of Hiram West, brother of my great great grandfather
Jonathan Phelps West. And earlier this year through Facebook I connected
with Zac and Farell who are descended from Jonathan's brother Leonidas
West.
I was sitting here trying to come up with something to blog about today
and a thought struck me: there were other children of John Cutter West
and Arvilla Ames and perhaps their descendants might someday come
looking for their ancestry. So I'm going to post what I know about my
West ancestors' siblings in hopes that one day another cousin will find this
blog.
First up, Anne Matilda West, the oldest daughter. She married Abel Gage
Marston and here's pretty much all I know about their family so far:
1-Ann Matilda West (4 June 1828-23 March 1913)
+Abel Gage Marston (19 April 1817-27 October 1883)
. . . . 2-Leander A. Marston (19 October 1847-)
. . . . 2-John W. Marston (5 May 1849-29 April 1910)
. . . . +Susie Duran Bigelow (-)
. . . . 2-Celinda G. Marston (1 August 1851-12 March 1912)
. . . . +Llwellyn Hall (-)
. . . . 2-Francene F. Marston (24 July 1853-)
. . . . +B.L. Akers (-)
. . . . 2-Nora Matilda Marston (4 January 1855-8 April 1943)
. . . . +Joel L. Merrill (-)
. . . . 2-Arvilla W. Marston (-)
. . . . 2-Walter E. Marston (4 December 1860-)
. . . . +Esther Austin (-)
. . . . 2-Laura C. Marston (21 March 1862-)
. . . . 2-Martha A. Marston (25 July 1864-)
. . . . 2-Ellen I. Marston (21 January 1867-)
I'll post one of these "Cousin Quest" articles every Sunday for the next
month or so,and maybe move on to the West great granduncles next.
as a result of my blog or because of Facebook. Last week I mentioned
my distant cousin Michael who shares my descent from Minuteman
John Ames had found me through West in New England. A few days
after I posted that, I heard from my cousin Betty. She's the great
granddaughter of Hiram West, brother of my great great grandfather
Jonathan Phelps West. And earlier this year through Facebook I connected
with Zac and Farell who are descended from Jonathan's brother Leonidas
West.
I was sitting here trying to come up with something to blog about today
and a thought struck me: there were other children of John Cutter West
and Arvilla Ames and perhaps their descendants might someday come
looking for their ancestry. So I'm going to post what I know about my
West ancestors' siblings in hopes that one day another cousin will find this
blog.
First up, Anne Matilda West, the oldest daughter. She married Abel Gage
Marston and here's pretty much all I know about their family so far:
1-Ann Matilda West (4 June 1828-23 March 1913)
+Abel Gage Marston (19 April 1817-27 October 1883)
. . . . 2-Leander A. Marston (19 October 1847-)
. . . . 2-John W. Marston (5 May 1849-29 April 1910)
. . . . +Susie Duran Bigelow (-)
. . . . 2-Celinda G. Marston (1 August 1851-12 March 1912)
. . . . +Llwellyn Hall (-)
. . . . 2-Francene F. Marston (24 July 1853-)
. . . . +B.L. Akers (-)
. . . . 2-Nora Matilda Marston (4 January 1855-8 April 1943)
. . . . +Joel L. Merrill (-)
. . . . 2-Arvilla W. Marston (-)
. . . . 2-Walter E. Marston (4 December 1860-)
. . . . +Esther Austin (-)
. . . . 2-Laura C. Marston (21 March 1862-)
. . . . 2-Martha A. Marston (25 July 1864-)
. . . . 2-Ellen I. Marston (21 January 1867-)
I'll post one of these "Cousin Quest" articles every Sunday for the next
month or so,and maybe move on to the West great granduncles next.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)