PROBATE RECORDS
OF THE
PROVINCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
VOL. 1
1635-1717
STATE PAPERS SERIES
VOL. 31
ALBERT STILLMAN BATCHELLOR
Editor of State Papers
OTIS GRANT HAMMOND
EZRA SCOLLAY STEARNS
Assistants
CONCORD, N. H.
RUMFORD PRINTING CO.
1907
JOINT RESOLUTION relating to the preservation and publication of portions of the early state and provincial records and other state papers of New Hampshire.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
That His Excellency the Governor be hereby authorized and empowered, with the advice and consent of the Council, to employ some suitable person — and fix his compensation, to be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated — to collect, arrange, transcribe, and superintend the publication of such portions of the early state and provincial records and other state papers of New Hampshire as the Governor may deem proper; and that eight hundred copies of each volume of the same be printed by the state printer, and distributed as follows: namely, one copy to each city and town in the state, one copy to such of the public libraries in the state as the Governor may designate, fifty copies to the New Hampshire Historical Society, and the remainder placed in the custody of the state librarian, who is hereby authorized to exchange the same for similar publications by other states.
Approved August 4, 1881.
——————————
Albert S. Batchellor, Editor of State Papers:
You are hereby authorized to arrange, transcribe, and superintend the publication of such abstracts of the early records of wills and probates of persons and estates relating to the provincial period of New Hampshire as are available, the material being so prepared as to avoid the transcription and publication of merely formal and immaterial parts of documents, and arranged in a chronological order, beginning with the earliest accessible papers and records.
You will also cause such explanatory notes, citations, tables of contents, and indexes as you may deem useful to be prepared and made a part of this work.
This I deem proper to be done, and these directions are given in accordance with the authority vested in me as Governor by the provisions of the joint resolution relating to the preservation and publication of portions of the state and provincial records and other state papers of New Hampshire approved August 4, 1881.
Given under my hand at Concord this 2nd day of January,1897.
CHARLES A. BUSIEL, Governor.
PREFACE
——————————
It is common knowledge that until 1771 the province of New Hampshire had not been divided into counties. By the act passed April 29, 1769 (Laws, 1771 ed., p. 204), the original five counties of Rockingham, Strafford, Hillsborough, Cheshire, and Grafton were created. The county act took effect March 19, 1771. Rockingham, Hillsborough, and Cheshire were organized thereby, but the organization of Strafford and Grafton was not to take place until such time as the Governor and Council might deem it advisable. Meanwhile all civil affairs of the territory assigned to these two counties were administered by the officers of Rockingham county. This status was terminated in 1773, when Gov. John Wentworth caused Strafford and Grafton to be organized. All the probate records of the province that had been preserved from the colonial period continued in the custody of the probate office at Portsmouth. With all the other records and archives of the province they were removed to Exeter July 4 and 6, 1775, for greater safety, in accordance with a vote of the Provincial Congress passed June 28, 1775, and there remained, until by the act of March 11, 1897 (Laws of 1897, p. 47), and the act of March 10, 1899 (Laws of 1899, p. 299), they were removed to Concord and placed in the official custody of the Secretary of State. The great importance of the probate files and records has been recognized more clearly, and the demand for measures rendering them available for public examination has become more manifest and emphatic in recent years. It was in response to these influences that the records were restored to the state archives, where they might be arranged, indexed, and otherwise opened by some practical method to a reasonable state of access and utility. Inasmuch as prior to 1771 the exercise of those governmental functions which are ordinarily regarded and treated
vi PREFACE
as county affairs was by officers of the central government, and over the entire province, it is unquestionable that the official records of affairs appertaining to that administration should now be regarded and treated as state archives.
The General Court was slow in giving practical effect to the true view of the subject, and the documents remained for a period of one hundred and twenty-five years in the custody of one of the five original counties. Under the act of March 10, 1899 (Laws of 1899, p. 299), and the act of March 21, 1901 (Laws of 1901, p. 645), these documents are being subjected to such methods of indexing and arrangement as will; in time, make an end of those conditions which have rendered their contents practically inaccessible. It has been deemed advisable to present the probate records in printed form, constituting a series of volumes in the State Papers series.
The assembling of material for the present volume, the making of copies and abstracts, and the arrangement and indexing have been committed entirely to the editor's assistants, Mr. Otis G. Hammond, and Mr. Ezra S. Stearns. The search for material for the work has extended far beyond the state archives. Between the period of 1623, the date of the first settlement of the colony at Little Harbor, and 1641, when the first union of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire was consummated, no material for the work has been recovered except Capt. John Mason's will, and it is probable that none was recorded. Careful investigation has been extended to the records of the neighboring counties of Maine and Massachusetts, to the records and files of England, and to other collections of ancient documents in which it might be expected that anything relating to wills and probates in New Hampshire might be discovered. This method has been pursued with the utmost industry and discrimination that was practicable in such an undertaking for the entire period covered by the documents presented in this volume.
The probate records which have come into the custody of the state are in conformity with the requirements and proceedings of
PREFACE vii
a court such as was established from 1693 to 1775. These records are all in our archives, except the scattering estates of New Hampshire people that were extracted from the registries of old Norfolk, Essex, Suffolk, and Middlesex counties in Massachusetts, and York county in Maine. A few wills were probated and estates settled in all these counties, without apparent reason except that of personal convenience. Some of the wills in Suffolk county records are those of mariners who sailed from Boston and did not return. Their wills, made and left in Boston before sailing, were probated there. The same may be true of some in old Norfolk and Essex records, which are located in Salem, Mass.
Every document in the book, so far as possible, is taken from the original in the files now in the office of the Secretary of State. In such cases no citation to the original is made, as the present arrangement of these papers is not considered permanent. But in all cases where, in default of the original, the recorded copy has been used, or where the document has been derived from a source outside the state, or from a source within the state but outside the official files of originals, citations have been carefully made.
All wills are printed in full, with the exception, only, of that part of the preamble which states no material fact. Such omissions are indicated by stars, thus, * * *. Each will is followed in chronological order by abstracts of all formal documents relating to the settlement of the estate, and by complete copies of such documents as could not wisely, or without injury to the narrative of facts therein, be reduced. All abstracts will be found enclosed in brackets, and it has been the effort of the editors that in the process of reduction only formal or legal verbiage should be eliminated, and all matters of record which would be of interest or value to the lawyer, the historian, or the genealogist retained. It has not been deemed wise to publish inventories in detail.
This volume, in which the material is represented in its chronological order from the beginning, necessarily covers several periods
viii PREFACE
in which the results are unsatisfactory on account of the loss and dispersion of the records, if records were made, and at other periods for the reason that in all probability no records were made or files preserved. The succeeding volumes which are in contemplation will present the records and documents of that part of the colonial period between 1718 and 1771. As the material presented in the first volume will have special value on account of its antiquity, that which is to follow will be attractive and useful on account of its unbroken continuity and approximate completeness.
ALBERT S. BATCHELLOR,
Editor of State Papers.
HISTORICAL NOTE
——————————
From 1623 to 1641 there was no organization of any colonial government in New Hampshire, although John Mason, the landed proprietor, had authority by his patent purporting to empower him to erect a government. The proprietor died in 1635. If he organized any colonial, provincial, or proprietary government under his patent, no records of it have survived. It is altogether probable that nothing of the kind occurred. Indeed, at a later period it was declared that the powers of government contained in Mason's patent and others contemporary with it were invalid in respect to the grant of powers of government. The reason assigned for this decision was that, while the Council of Plymouth had powers of government in the territory of its New England jurisdiction, it was not competent to delegate those powers. (See opinion of the Chief Justices, 1 N. H. Prov. Papers, 336; 1 N. H. Prov. Laws, Introduction, xxviii.)
From 1635 to 1641 the Masonian interests languished, largely because there was no efficient or disinterested representative of them in the colony. Two independent local governments had developed in the Pascataqua region, the lower one, Strawberry Bank, being what might be termed the Portsmouth group of settlements, and the upper one, constituted of what were afterwards known as the Northam or Dover plantations. Exeter followed as an independent plantation in 1638, while Hampton was planted by Massachusetts as one of its own townships in 1635, on territory over which it claimed jurisdiction. (See notes on the independent town governments established at Portsmouth and Dover, and their constitutions, 1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 744.)
As one of the results of the union of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire, begun in the fall of 1641 by the entrance into it
x HISTORICAL NOTE
of that part of New Hampshire represented by the two Pascataqua towns and the Pascataqua proprietors, and consummated as to the entire territory of New Hampshire by the accession of the Exeter colony in 1643, one system of laws, subject to the reservations in behalf of New Hampshire embodied in the articles of union (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, xxx), became operative over the towns and people of the entire territory of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire. The theory that there was no uniform system of laws or usages governing the transmission of property by will, and the orderly descent and distribution of estates of deceased persons, in the New Hampshire settlements in the first period (that between 1623 and 1641 being taken tentatively as the first period) is supported by a recital of the previous conditions, which is given as a preamble to a certain act relating to the settlement of estates in the laws of Massachusetts Bay (Col. Laws of Mass., 1660 ed., reprint, p. 200), which, omitting archaic forms and expressions is as follows:— "Whereas it is found by experience that some men, dying, having made their wills for the disposing of their estates, that the said wills are concealed and not proved and recorded; and some others dying intestate, no administration is sought for nor granted in any legal way, and yet the wives, children, kindred, or some friends of the deceased, or some others, do enter upon the lands and possess themselves of the goods of the said deceased, and the same are many times sold or wasted before the creditors to whom the deceased was indebted know of whom to demand, or how to recover their just debts; for prevention of such unjust and fraudulent dealings." A remedial act follows this preamble. The declaration was made at a point of time so early in the period of the union that presumably it is descriptive of what was the subject of general knowledge in a considerable part, if not all, of the previous history of this jurisdiction. It may also be regarded as a partial explanation of the paucity of probate records in the first colonial period. The act which follows the preamble above quoted bears date not later than 1649, only eight years sub‑
HISTORICAL NOTE xi
sequent to the beginning of the union of the two colonies, and only six years after the accession of Exeter, which completed the extension of the union over New Hampshire in its entirety. The body of the act is as follows:
"It is ordered by this court and the authority thereof that if any executor nominated in any will, and knowing thereof, shall not, at the next court of the county which shall be above thirty days after the decease of the party, make probate of any will of any deceased party, or shall not cause the same to be recorded by the recorder or clerk of that county court where the deceased party last dwelt, or if any person whatsoever shall not within the same time take administration of all such goods as he path or shall enter upon of any party deceased, or if any person or persons shall alienate or embezzle any lands or goods before they have proved and recorded the will of the deceased, or taken administration and brought in a true inventory of all the known lands, goods, and debts of the deceased, every such person so administering or executing shall be liable to be sued, and shall be bound to pay all such debts, respectively, as the deceased party owed, whether the estate of the deceased were sufficient for the same or not, and shall also forfeit to the country so many sums of five pounds as shall be months betwixt the next court of that county, after the death of the party as aforesaid, and the proving of such will and recording it, or the taking of such administration. And if any person shall renounce his executorship, or that none of the friends or kindred of the deceased party that shall die intestate shall seek for administration of such person's estate, then the clerk of the writs of such town where any such person shall die shall, within one month after his decease, give notice to the court of that county to which such town doth belong of such renouncing of executorship or not seeking of administration, that so the court may take such order therein as they shall think meet, who shall also allow such clerk due recompense for his pains, and if any such clerk shall fail herein, he shall forfeit forty shillings to the treasury for every month's default. (1649.)
xii HISTORICAL NOTE
"2. And because many merchants, seamen, and other strangers resorting hither oftentimes dying and leaving their estates undisposed of, and very difficult to be preserved in the interim from one county court to another, it is therefore ordered that it shall and may be lawful for any two magistrates, with the recorder or clerk of the county court, meeting together, to allow of any will of any deceased party to the executors or other persons in the will mentioned, so as the will be testified on the oath of two or more witnesses, and also to grant administration to the estate of any person dying intestate within the said county to the next of kin, or to such as shall be able to secure the same for the next of kin, and the recorder or clerk of court shall inform the rest of the magistrates of the county at the next county court of such will proved or administration granted, and shall record the same. (1652.)
"3. And it is ordered that, when the husband or parents die intestate, the county court of that jurisdiction where the party had his last residence shall have power to assign to the widow such a part of his estate as they shall judge just and equal, as also to divide and assign to the children or other heirs their several parts and portions out of the said estate; provided the eldest son shall have a double portion, and where there are no sons the daughters shall inherit as co-partners, unless the court, upon just cause alleged, shall otherwise determine." (1641-49.)
The Body of Liberties of 1641 was adopted in December, and subsequent to the union of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire. Article 11 of that body of laws is as follows: "All persons which are of the age of 21 years and of right understanding and memories, whether excommunicate or condemned, shall have power and liberty to make their wills and testaments and other lawful alienations of their lands and estates." Art. 79, 81, 82. Col. Laws of Mass., 1660 ed., reprint, p. 51; 1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 753, 761.
These are among the important landmarks in the establishment of a new system of probate law in the united colonies of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire. The more important features
HISTORICAL NOTE xiii
of the development of this law are presented in the contemporary publications and compilations of 1660 and 1672. (Col. Laws Mass. Bay, 1672 ed., reprint, 1, 157; 1660 ed., reprint, 119, 200.) New Hampshire became a part of Norfolk county. In the period of the union, therefore, the probate records were made and kept at the shire town or towns, as they were designated. Governor Washburn, in his Judicial History of Massachusetts, p. 32, says, "They (county courts) had also probate jurisdiction, and as such proved wills, granted administration, and the like. Appeals in such cases lying from their decisions to the court of assistants. (White's Prob. 9.) This exercise of probate jurisdiction continued as long as the old charter was in force. The clerks of the courts were, ex officio, recorders, and in the intervals of the court the recorder and two of the magistrates were authorized to grant letters of administration and probate of wills. (Ib.)"
It appears by the same authority (p. 30) that "It (court of assistants) had also appellate jurisdiction in matters of probate which had been determined in the county courts." The territory separated from this union by the decree of Charles II, contained in the Cutt commission of 1679. was subject to no other system of colonial law in the, period beginning 1641 and ending in Oct., 1682, than the laws which were known and published in the Laws of Massachusetts Bay, with the exception or modification of the organic law promulgated in the Cutt commission, and the local law commonly known as the Cutt code. It is significant on the question of the continuing validity and operative force in New Hampshire of the laws of the two colonies as united under one government in the period above mentioned that article 14 of the Cutt laws provided that "For directions to the courts, judges, and all other officers it is ordered that those laws by which we have formerly been directed and governed shall be a rule to us in all judicial proceedings, so far as they will suit with our constitutions and be not repugnant to the laws of England, until such acts and ordinances as have been or shall be made by this assembly and
xiv HISTORICAL NOTE
approved by the honorable President and Council may be drawn up and legally published." (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 28.)
No provisions were enacted in the Cutt laws relative to wills and probates, or the descent, settlement, and distribution of estates of deceased persons. It must be presumed, therefore, that the laws, usages, and forms which related to these affairs in the time of the union remained unchanged, at least to the time of the inauguration of the Cranfield government in Oct., 1682. In the commission of Charles II to President Cutt, after the part constituting the President and Council a court with a very ample jurisdiction, the following appears in the text, "So always that the forms of proceeding in such cases and the judgment thereupon to be given be as consonant and agreeable to the laws and statutes of this our realm of England as the present state and condition of our subjects inhabiting within the limits aforesaid, and the circumstances of the place, will admit." (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 4.)
The temper of the people of New Hampshire at this time towards such directions as those here emanating from the crown may best be inferred from a declaration in the copy of the Cutt laws which was retained in the province, the clause to be quoted not appearing in the copy that was sent home. It appears in the preamble of the laws, and is as follows, "It is therefore ordered and enacted by this General Assembly and the authority thereof that no act, imposition, law, or ordinance be made or imposed upon us but such as shall be made by the said Assembly and approved by the President and Council from time to time.", (1 N. H. Prov. Papers, 382.) If there were any doubt as to the determination of the controling majority and the government of the province of New Hampshire to adhere to the colonial laws of the time of the union, modified only by their own voluntary enactments, in preference to the laws of England, wherever one might conflict with the other, such a doubt would seem to be dissipated by the testimony of Richard Chamberlain, for a time secretary of the province, in a letter to Mr. Blaithwaite, secretary to the Lords Committee of Trade and Plantations, of date May 14, 1681. Mr. Chamberlain
HISTORICAL NOTE xv
says: "I first took exception to the whole system (Cutt laws) in general being collected mostly out of the Massachusetts laws, and surely it could not well stand with the mind and pleasure of His Majesty that we here should cast off obedience to their (the Massachusetts) jurisdiction and yet voluntarily submit to and yoke ourselves so inseparably to their laws." (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 785.) The 1679 commission to John Cutt and his Council for the government of New Hampshire in terms constituted the President and Council the supreme court, with a very comprehensive jurisdiction. They evidently construed their powers to include the administration of the probate law. It appears by the records that the President and Council transacted the probate business, the councilors sometimes acting individually. Such business seems to have been disposed of in court also in 1681. The records and files for this period, however, are meagre. Under the conditions then existing, and the attitude of the representatives of the people towards the laws at the time of the union, it would be expected that probate procedure and probate decrees would be found conformed to that system.
The termination of the first union occurred in the winter of 1679-80. Reasons have already been adduced indicating very conclusively that no change was desired or attempted in the probate law in the period under the commission of President Cutt. It is hardly open to question that, with regard to probate law, usages, and forms "The former laws we [they] were ruled by [were] to stand till others [were] made." (Cutt laws, art. 14.) It does not appear that any other enactment was made under his government affecting the previously existing system of probate law.
The next period is that included in the administration under the commission to Lieut.-Gov. Edward Cranfield which subsisted between Oct. 4, 1682, and May 25, 1686. The Cranfield commission in terms abrogated the Cutt commission. The Cranfield instructions, by article 26, in terms repealed the Cutt laws. It is not known that this document in its complete form has ever been in the New Hampshire archives since 1684. The one that appears to have taken
xvi HISTORICAL NOTE
its place at that time was very much abbreviated, as it contained only six articles besides the preamble, while the full text, it now appears, contains thirty-nine articles and a preamble. The draft which was probably put on file about 1684 in the province records omits article 26, by which the Cutt laws were repealed by the King's edict. The copy containing the full text has not been printed on this side of the Atlantic. The abbreviated copy of` 1694 is the one that has appeared in the state publications, and has been subject to reference in the archives. The full text was discovered and procured from the English archives in April,. 1906, by this department. (Note to the case of Hutchinson v. Manchester Street Railway, 73 N. H., 279.)
The Cranfield commission authorized the Lieutenant-Governor to constitute courts and appoint judges. Under this authority there is evidence that Cranfield established a court of probate, and that: he, and after him, Barefoote, assumed the office of ordinary, with Chamberlain, the province secretary, as register of the court.
An attempt was made in the winter of 1682-3 to construct a body of local statute law for the province, but there was a rupture between the Lieutenant-Governor and the assembly when the undertaking had proceeded to the 26th article. He was not able to obtain the attendance of the assembly for legislation after this time, except on one occasion, at the special instance of the King for the enactment of one bill especially desired by the home government. (I N. H. Prov. Laws, 48, 807.) In the fragment of a body of statute law, the construction of which appears to have been begun in the first year of the Cranfield administration, there is no reference to the probate law. The Lieutenant-Governor, after his. rupture with the assembly, avowed his purpose to govern the province by the laws of England. The history of his administration, however, shows that all his attempts to govern them failed, and that his administration was broken down by the antagonism of the people, by his own incompetency, by his personal interest in the Masonian claim, by his alienation of the support of Randolph, and by the want of confidence towards him which developed in the
HISTORICAL NOTE xvii
home government. His attempt to resort to the laws of England, and to impose them upon the province as embodying the rules by which they were to be governed, if practicable in any degree with a competent and discreet administrator, was out of the question with this executive. (Farmer's Belknap's Hist. of N. H., chap. 8. F. B. Sanborn, Hist. of N. H., chap. 4. Memoir and correspondence of Edmund Randolph, edited by Robert Noxon Toppan, passim.)
It was in the time of this administration that the first charter of the Massachusetts Bay colony was vacated on scire facias in the court of chancery in England. It was formerly the opinion of the Massachusetts courts that the annulment of the charter wrought a repeal of the laws enacted under it. (Storer v. Freeman, 6 Mass., 438.) This opinion seems to have been adopted by Judge Bellows in the case of Clement v. Burns, 43 N. H., 619.
The current of later opinion is very strongly against this theory. (See article by Prof. E. N. Washburn on the effect of the vacation of the charter upon the laws enacted under it, 13 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceed., 451; argument of the Attorney-General of New Hampshire in the case of Percy Summer Club v. Astles before the U. S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire, pp. 8o, 95, 156; Commonwealth v. Alger, 7 Cush., 76; reporter's note, 9 Gray, 17; 66 N. H., 25.) There is, on the whole, little basis for the supposition that either in Massachusetts Bay or in New Hampshire the preference of the people for their own laws relating to the descent and distribution of property and the making and administration of wills had been removed or affected to any considerable extent by the abrogation of the charter, the validity of which was denied here and disputed in Parliament, and by what transpired in New Hampshire in the Cranfield regime, which had been almost farcical in the attempted exercise of governmental powers, and from every point of view obnoxious to the great majority of the people.
The next period in the constitutional history of the province is
xviii HISTORICAL NOTE
covered by the Dudley-Andros administrations under the commission of King James II constituting the Dominion of New England. The powers of government conferred by the commissions and instructions, first by the preliminary commission to Joseph Dudley and Council, and second in the more elaborate commissions and instructions to Sir Edmund Andros, resulted for the time being in a radical change in the structure of the colonial organizations in New England. This involved the discontinuance of separate province and colonial governments in Massachusetts, Plymouth, New Hampshire, and several other colonies. In the Judicial History of Massachusetts Professor Washburn says, (p. 86) "The president [Dudley] took upon himself the probate jurisdiction as Supreme Ordinary, but to save the trouble of parties attending at Boston he appointed judges of probate and clerks in the remote counties to act in his stead." Continuing in the same volume, the author says, (p. 95) "He [Andros] assumed to be the Supreme Ordinary, and though it became extremely oppressive for all persons having any business of this kind to come to Boston, as by his orders they were compelled to do, and although the fees to be paid by the parties were greatly increased, yet it ought to be acknowledged that he did much to introduce a regular system of forms in the proceedings in probate courts, which before that had been loose and uncertain. He personally attended to the administration of estates exceeding fifty pounds, and the ordinary fee for the probate of a will was fifty shillings." Several orders relating to probate affairs were passed in the brief time of the administration of President Dudley and his Council, occupying only six months, between May and December, 1686. These are reproduced in 1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 92, 142, passim, particularly 105, 124, 125.
In the time of the Andros administration, which commenced Dec. 20, 1686, and was terminated by a popular uprising April 18, 1689, the subject of probate affairs was taken up in a formal act of date June 1, 1687, entitled "An Act for probate of wills and granting letters of administration." The full text appears in N. H. Prov. Laws, 206.
HISTORICAL NOTE xix
The people of Massachusetts have been very generally disposed to regard the Dudley-Andros administration of 1686-89 as a usurpation. The Bay colony, immediately upon the downfall of the Andros government, resumed the government which was in existence at the time of the inauguration of the Dudley administration in May, 1686. The laws by which they had formerly been governed were revived by an express act. This, of course, included the laws relating to wills and probates. (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 294. See Smith's reports, 503.) The deposition of Andros left New Hampshire without a colonial government. The people were unable to unite upon a government for themselves. Government was relegated to the town organizations. This status continued during a period of about ten months. A union was effected between the towns and people of New Hampshire and those of Massachusetts Bay. This is commonly described as the second union. The exact status of probate jurisdiction in New Hampshire at this time is somewhat problematical. (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 259-399.)
The period of the second union extended from Feb., 1690, to the time when this relation was terminated by new commissions for a province government in New Hampshire and a new charter for Massachusetts. The probate jurisdiction had reverted in the time of this second union to the counties. Its exercise, according to the records now accessible, was in pursuance of the same rules, methods, and forms as had prevailed in the time of the first union. This statement, of course, applies to New Hampshire as well as to Massachusetts Bay. The promptitude and facility with which both colonies readapted themselves at this time to the laws which they had established, and which were in conformity to their own polity, are significant as to the deep root which the jurisprudence of the time of the first union had taken in the statute law and in legal usages. The first colonial period for both New Hampshire and Massachusetts Bay was concluded at this time by the interposition of a new charter in the one, and under a new commission permanently re-establishing a province for the other. The enactment of colonial statute law was resumed, with results which had
xx HISTORICAL NOTE
the effect on the whole rather to rehabilitate and confirm the ancient local statute law than to supersede it by important or extensive innovations. (See Oliver's Puritan Comm., 78, 79, 80; Adams's Emancipation of Mass., 197; arg. of Att'y-Gen. cited supra, 26 and 46.) It might be expected that probate jurisdiction would be provided for by the erection of a court performing its functions without very much variability from 1692-1775. Allen's commission and instructions, as Usher claimed, invested the Governor or his Lieutenant with power to erect courts and make appointments for them. (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 505.)
It appears as early as 1693, by the act entitled "An act for the settling and distribution of intestates' estates and such as prove insolvent," that the court of probate was already established. (1 N. H. Prov. Laws, 566.) This fact is again recognized in 1701, in the act entitled "An additional act passed for the settlement of intestates' estates, thereto added insolvents' estates, how to be disposed of," Id. 683. In the Laws, ed. of 1716, p. 4, "Act for the settlement and distribution of the estates of intestates," the judge of probate is again referred to as then in the exercise of an apparently settled jurisdiction. In the Laws, ed. of 1771, p. 104, the same act reappears. During this period, that is from 1692-1775, the Governor and Council constituted a supreme court of probate. (3 N. H. Prov. Papers, 683, 717.)
Referring to Usher's letter Jan. 11, 1696-7 (2 N. H. Prov. Papers, 209), it would appear that Story had an appointment from the home government as judge of probate; that Usher desired to have the commission returned, and that he assumed the right to appoint. This would indicate that the Governor was claiming the right to appoint the judge of probate, and that possibly there was an issue of authority on this point between the Lieutenant-Governor and the home government. On p. 207, same volume, it appears that Packer was removed from the office of lieutenant-colonel and judge of probate by John Hinckes, President of the Council, acting as Governor, and the Council. It appears further, same volume, pp. 242-243, that Nathaniel Fryer had been appointed ordi-
HISTORICAL NOTE xxi
nary, inasmuch as Hinckes and his Council were turning the probate records over to him by an executive order. In the absence of anything but fragmentary minutes of the proceedings of the Governor and Council as an executive body it may be difficult to trace, especially in the official probate records and files, the personnel of this court, but there is probably data among the records and files of the probate court by which the judges and registers from 1692 to the revolution may be identified with substantial accuracy.
ALBERT S. BATCHELLOR,
Editor of State Papers.
LIST OF ESTATES
—————————————
Abbott, ———, 1711 670
Walter, 1667 96
Walter, 1675 169
Aborn, George, Hampton, 1654 25
Adams, Charles, Durham, 1694/5 405
Charles, Durham, 1695 412
Peter, 1672 133
Alcock, Job, Portsmouth, 1712 690
Samuel, Portsmouth, 1704 524
Almary, Robert, Portsmouth, 1711/12 679
Amazeen, John, Newcastle, 1700 467
Ardell, William, Exeter, 1709 647
Atkinson, Joseph, 1678 227
Austin, Joseph, Dover, 1662/3 56
Joseph, 1680 242
Avery, Thomas, 1681 256
Ayers, William, Portsmouth, 1716 791
Babb, Philip, Isles of Shoals, 1671 125
Backway, Benjamin, Newcastle, 1699 445
Baker, John, Portsmouth, 1697 433
John, Portsmouth, 1709 635
Joseph, Isles of Shoals, 1672 138
Banfield, John, Portsmouth, 1707 608
Barefoote, Walter, Newcastle, 1688 322
Batchelder, Alexander, 1660 46
Ann, Portsmouth, 1660 50
Stephen, 1673 141
Beal, Edward, Newcastle, 1706 563
xxiv LIST OF ESTATES
Beard, Joseph, Dover, 1703/4 519
Thomas, Dover, 1678 227
William, 1676 176
Beck, Caleb, Portsmouth, 1694/5 405
Henry, Newcastle, 1686 302
Bennick, Arthur, 1683 263
Berry, ——— , 1654 25
William, Rye, 1717 800
Bickford, John, Isles of Shoals, 1662 55
John, Durham, 1685/6 296
John, Newington, 1715 773
Temperance, 1694 391
Thomas, Dover, 1706 569
Binmore, Philip, Dover, 1676 171
Rebecca, 1680 241
Bishop, ——— ,1679 234
Blagdon, James, Star Island, 1715/16 785
Blake, Jasper, Hampton, 1673 142
John, Hampton, 1715/16 786
Timothy, Hampton, 1715 777
Boone, John, 1680 242
Boulter, John, Hampton, 1703 509
Nathaniel, Hampton, 1695 406
Nathaniel, Jr., Hampton, 1689 328
Boyes, Richard, 1677/8 206
Brackett, Anthony, 1691 357
Braddock, Robert, 1677 201
Bray, Richard, Exeter, 1666 86
Brewster, John, Portsmouth, 1691 364
Broad, William, Portsmouth, 1665 83
William, 1677/8 209
Bronson, George, 1657 34
Brooking, Godfrey, Isles of Shoals, 1682 258
William, Portsmouth, 1694 403
Broughton, John, Portsmouth, 1706 554
LIST OF ESTATES xxv
Brown, Henry, Portsmouth, 1696 419
Buckley, Richard, Portsmouth, 1706/7 575
Bullard, Augustine, Portsmouth, 1706 567
Bunker, James, Durham, 1697 432
Joseph, Durham, 1717 806
Burnell, Tobias, 1674/5 160
Burnham, Robert, Durham, 1691 360
Button, William, 1693 387
Canney, Joseph, 1690 339
Thomas, Jr., 1677 186
Carpenter, Lawrence, 1677 184
Cass, ———, Hampton, 1712 682
John, Hampton, 1674 147
Cate, James, Portsmouth, 1677 201
Cator, Edward, 1670/1 124
Edward, Newcastle, 1691 353
Champion, Claude, Isles of Shoals, 1687 317
Chapman, John, Hampton, 1705/6 546
Chase, Abraham, 1676 180
James, Hampton, 1703/4 522
Joseph, Hampton, 1704 526
Thomas, Hampton, 1652 23
Thomas, Hampton, 1712 685
Chesley, George, Durham, 1710 665
Philip, 1695 413
Samuel, Durham, 1708 627
Thomas, Durham, 1697/8 434
Thomas, Durham, 1704 535
Church, John, Jr., Dover, 171 672
Churchwood, Gregory, 1670/1 123
Clapham, Arthur, 1678 225
Clark, Edward, 1675 167
John, Portsmouth, 1694 391
John, Newcastle, 1700 460
xxvi LIST OF ESTATES
Clark, John, Exeter, 1706 547
Samuel, Portsmouth, 1686 303
Clement, Job, 1682 259
Job, Dover, 1716 793
Clifford, Bridget, Hampton, 1679 234
Cloutman, Edward, Dover, 1717 810
Coffin, Robert, Exeter, 1709 645
Colcord, Edward, Jr., 1677 190
Cole, Isaac, Exeter, 1706/7 579
William, Hampton, 1662 53
Combes, Alexander, Portsmouth, 1707 598
Cotton, John, Hampton, 1710 656
John, Portsmouth, 1714 736
Seaborn, Hampton, 1684 , 274
Thomas, Portsmouth, 1689/90 326
William, 1678 229
Cowell, Agnes, Portsmouth, 1681 253
Edward, 1677 203
Edward, 1692 370
Cox, Moses, Hampton, 1682 261
Cram, Benjamin, Hampton, 1707/8 618
Jonathan, Hampton, 1703/4 520
Crawford, Mungo, Newcastle, 1712 699
Susan, 1649 17
Cromwell, Philip, Dover, 1708 624
Crowder, John, Portsmouth, 1652 24
Cuddington, Stockdale, Hampton, 1650 20
Cummings, Richard, Portsmouth, 1678 219
Currier, Richard, Isles of Shoals, 1708 631
Cutt, Eleanor, Portsmouth, 1684 282
John, Portsmouth, 1680/1 245
Richard, Portsmouth, 1675 161
Samuel, Portsmouth, 1698 438
Ursula, Portsmouth, 1694 395
LIST OF ESTATES xxvii
Dalton, Philemon, Hampton, 1656 33
Ruth, Hampton, 1665 84
Samuel, Hampton, 1681 257
Timothy, Hampton, 1657/8 36
Timothy, Jr., Hampton, 1662 53
Dam, John, Dover, 1687 316
Daniell, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1683 266
Davis, David, 1699/1700 454
Hopkin, Portsmouth, 1711 670
John, Durham, 1685 290
John, Durham, 1702 493
William, 1697 426
Dearborn, Godfrey, Hampton, 1680 243
Thomas, Hampton, 1710 657
Demashaw, Hector, Isles of Shoals, 1677 186
Dennett, Alexander, 1698 437
John, Portsmouth, 1709/10 653
Joseph, Portsmouth, 1714 748
Derry, John, Durham, 1697 427
Deverson, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1705 542
Dew, John, 1674 152
Dimond, Thomas, Star Island, 1707 593
Doe, Nicholas, 1691 355
Dole, Benjamin, Hampton, 1707 589
Dolloff, Christian, Exeter, 1708 626
Dore, Richard, Portsmouth, 1715/16 783
Dow, Henry, Hampton, 1659 38
Joseph, Hampton, 1703 502
Samuel, Hampton, 1714 734
Simon, Hampton, 1707 601
Downes, Thomas, Dover, 1711 669
Drake, Abraham, Hampton, 1714 728
Robert, Hampton, 1663 58
Drew, Francis, Durham, 1694 401
Francis, Dover, 1717 799
xxviii LIST OF ESTATES
Drew, James, 1674 160
Samuel, 1669 115
Thomas, Durham, 1694 394
William, Durham, 1669 115
Dudley, Samuel, 1682/3 262
Theophilus, Exeter, 1713 706
Durgin, William, Dover, 1702 494
Duston, Thomas, 1678 225
Edmunds, John, 1696 419
Thomas, 1696 419
Elkins, Gershom, Hampton, 1714 732
Henry, Hampton, 1667 95
Henry, Kingston, 1707 608
Ellins, Anthony, 1681 253
Elwell, Joseph, Newcastle, 1701 484
Estow, William, Hampton, 1655 30
Evans, Ebenezer, Portsmouth, 1686 301
Robert, Dover, 1696/7 424
Fabes, Elizabeth, Newcastle, 1711 669
John, Newcastle, 1696 418
Fabyan, George, Portsmouth, 1692/3 381
Fellows, Samuel, Hampton, 1707 599
Samuel, Jr., Kingston, 1715 776
Fernald, Joanna, 1660 44
Thomas, Portsmouth, 1711 671
Ferryman, William, 1700 468
Field, Darby, 1651 23
Joseph, Dover, 1690 338
Fifield, Benjamin, Hampton, 1706 560
William, Hampton, 1714/15 753
Fletcher, John, Portsmouth, 1695 410
Fogg, Samuel, Hampton, 1671/2 129
Foggett, Philip, 1664 78
Follett, Nicholas, Portsmouth, 1700 461
LIST OF ESTATES xxix
Follett, William, Durham, 1690 339
Folsom, Ephraim, Exeter, 1709 646
John, Exeter, 1692/3 380
John, Exeter, 1715 786
Samuel, Exeter, 1701/2 493
Footman, Thomas, 1667 105
Foss, John, Dover, 1699 450
Frost, John, Star Island, 1713 710
Fryer, Joshua, Newcastle, 1703 507
Nathaniel, Newcastle, 1704/5 537
Fuller, Giles, Hampton, 1673 142
William, Hampton, 1690/1 351
Furber, Jethro, Portsmouth, 1686 304
Jethro, Newington, 1715/16 785
Joshua, Portsmouth, 1708 622
William, Dover, 1699 451
William, Dover, 1707 604
Gale, John, Portsmouth, 1687 319
Garland, John, Hampton, 1671 127
George, James, Portsmouth, 1716 795
Gerrish, John, Dover, 1706 554
Richard, Portsmouth, 1717 808
Gibbons, Ambrose, Durham, 1656 32
Giles, Matthew, Durham, 1667 101
Gilman, Daniel, Exeter, 1683/4 269
Edward, Exeter, 1655 29
Edward, Exeter, 1690 335
John, Exeter, 1700 462
Moses, Exeter, 1701/2 489
Stephen, Kingston, 1712 689
Goddard, John, 1667 100
John, 1672 137
Godfrey, Isaac, Hampton, 1710 663
John, Hampton, 1697 426
William, Hampton, 1667 108
xxx LIST OF ESTATES
Goodwin, Robert, 1677/8 208
Gordon, Alexander, Exeter, 1697 430
James, Exeter, 1714 744
Gore, William, 1686 308
Goss, James, 1688 320
Gove, Edward, Hampton, 1712 680
Graffam, Samuel, Portsmouth, 1715 777
Graffort, Bridget, Portsmouth, 1701 473
Green, Edmund, 1668 109
Henry, Hampton, 1700 465
Isaac, Hampton. 1712/13 703
Gresham, Noah, 1677/8 206
Griffith, Caleb, Portsmouth, 1710 662
Grout, Gabriel, Portsmouth, 1707 600
Grubb, Gabriel, 1677/8 208
Hall, John, Greenland, 1677 195
John, Dover, 1700 459
Joseph, Greenland, 1685 293
Ralph, Dover, 1706/7 583
Samuel, 1690 336
Hallwell, Henry, Durham, 1663 60
Ham, William, Portsmouth, 1672 140
William, Portsmouth, 1693 388
Hanson, Isaac, 1683 265
Thomas, 1666 85
Thomas, Dover, 1710 659
Harford, William, Dover, 1717 800
Harris, John, Portsmouth, 1710 667
Thomas, England, 1667 98
Harrison, Nicholas, Dover, 1707/8 620
Hart, John, Portsmouth, 1664/5 81
Harvey, Joachim, 1678 226
Onesiphorous, Isles of Shoals, 1672 137
Richard, 1678 216
LIST OF ESTATES xxxi
Haskins, William, 1712 682
Hatch, John, Portsmouth, 1701 481
Hatherly, Henry, 1676 180
Hayward, Hugh, Bristol, Eng., 1713/14 720
Heard, James, Kittery, Me., 1677 188
John, Kittery, Me., 1677 188
John, Dover, 1687 312
John, Dover, 1707 588
John, Dover, 1716/17 797
Samuel, Dover, 1697 431
Hearle, William, Portsmouth, 1689 327
Herbert, Sylvester, Newcastle, 1683 265
Hill, Richard, 1677/8 206
Valentine, 1662 55
Hilliard, Benjamin, Hampton, 1677 199
Emmanuel, Hampton, 1657 35
Timothy, Hampton, 1712 682
Hilton, Catherine, Exeter, 1676 172
Edward, 1670/1 124
Edward, Exeter, 1699 443
William, Exeter, 1690 344
William, 1700 470
Winthrop, Exeter, 1710 668
Hinger, Marker, 1660 46
Hinkson, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1664 75
Hobbs, Henry, Dover, 1698 437
James, 1680 242
Morris, Hampton, 1706 559
Hobby, Sir Charles, Boston, Mass., 1716/17 798
Hockaday, Nathaniel, Isles of Shoals, 1664 78
Hoddy, John, Portsmouth, 1684 280
Holdridge, Isabel, Exeter, 1689 328
Holland, Edward, Star Island, 1684 286
Roger, 1677/8 207
xxxii LIST OF ESTATES
Horne, John, Dover, 1710 659
William, Dover, 1691/2 365
Hoskins, William, Newcastle, 1713 710
Howard, James, Portsmouth, 1708 628
Howell, Abraham, Portsmouth, 1699 451
Hudson, John, Newington, 1717 803
Huggins, John, Hampton, 1670 118
Robert, Dover, 1705 545
Hull, Dodavah, 1682 258
Dodavah, Portsmouth, 1716 796
Reuben, Portsmouth, 1689 331
Hunking, Hercules, Star Island, 1659 40
John, Portsmouth, 1681 254
Mark, Portsmouth, 1667 102
Hunkitt, John, Hampton, 1670/1 125
Huntress, George, Newington, 1715 765
Hussey, Christopher, 1684/5 287
Jackson, Clement, Portsmouth, 1708 621
John, Portsmouth, 1660 46
John, Portsmouth, 1690 346
Nathaniel, Portsmouth, 1715 769
Thomas, 1691 353
Walter, Durham, 1697/8 436
William, Portsmouth, 1672 136
Jaffrey, George, Portsmouth, 1706/7 581
James, Thomas, 1671 126
Jenkins, Henry, 1670 120
Stephen, Durham, 1694 394
Jenness, Francis, Hampton, 1714 738
Joce, Christopher, Portsmouth, 1676 177
Jane, Portsmouth, 1689 330
John, Portsmouth, 1694 392
Richard, Portsmouth, 1707/8 613
Johns, Catherine, 1660 46
LIST OF ESTATES xxxiii
Johnson, Edmund, Hampton, 1650 20
James, Newcastle, 1678 213
Peter, Hampton, 1674 157
Thomas, Durham, 1661 51
Jones, Francis, Portsmouth, 1713 712
George, Exeter, 1694/5 406
James, 1686 302
John, Portsmouth, 1667 107
John, Dover, 1706 553
Thomas, Newcastle, 1712/13 702
Jordan, Robert, Newcastle, 1678/9 231
Keais, Samuel, Portsmouth, 1716 796
Kelly, Abraham or Andrew, Newcastle, 1709 635
Kendrick, Joshua, 1662 56
Kennard, Edward, Portsmouth, 1712 700
Kenniston, John, 1677 191
Kent, Oliver, Durham, 1670 120
Kimming, John, Exeter, 1708 625
King, Richard, Portsmouth, 1653 25
Thomas, Exeter, 1666/7 93
William, Isles of Shoals, 1664 75
Knight, John, Dover, 1694 397
Knowles, John, Hampton, 1693/4 390
Ladbrook, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1684 285
Lang, Robert, 1715/16 785
Langdon, Tobias, Portsmouth, 1664 81
Larriford, John, 1672 133
Lavers, George, Portsmouth, 1683/4 268
Lawrence, David, Exeter, 1709/10 649
Leach, James, Portsmouth, 1696/7 423
Leader, Richard, 1668 110
Lear, Tobias, 1677/8 204
Leavitt, Hezron, Hampton, 1702/3 499
Isabel, Hampton, 1698/9 449
xxxiv LIST OF ESTATES
Leavitt, Nehemiah, Exeter, 1715 763
Samuel, Exeter, 1707 594
Thomas, Hampton, 1692 370
Leggett, John, 1665 83
Leighton, John, Dover, 1712 693
Thomas, Dover, 1671 126
Thomas, 1677 200
Lemon, William, 1660 45
Lewis, John, Newcastle, 1700/1 472
Philip, Greenland, 1700 468
Libby, James, 1678 227
Light, Henry, 1677/8 207
John, 1685/6 300
Lines, John, Isles of Shoals, 1674 153
Lissen, Nicholas, Exeter, 1714 749
Lloyd, Allen, Portsmouth, 1672 137
Allen, Portsmouth, 1701/2 492
Edward, 1663 60
Locke, John, Hampton, 1706/7 584
Lovering, John, Dover, 1668 110
Lowe, John, Portsmouth, 1713 709
Ludecas, Mrs., Dover, 1664 75
Lux, Audrey, Portsmouth, 1688 321
William, Newcastle, 1684 280
Mann, Michael, Portsmouth, 1687 318
Mansfield, Henry, 1678 227
Manson, Richard, Portsmouth, 1702 495
Robert, Isles of Shoals, 1677 185
Marden, John, 1698 440
Rachel, 1706/7 580
Marsh, Henry, Durham, 1715 768
Marshall, Robert, 1663 60
Marston, James, Hampton, 1705 540
John, Hampton, 1699/1700 457
LIST OF ESTATES xxxv
Marston, Thomas, Hampton, 1690 337
William, Hampton, 1672 141
William, Hampton, 1701 485
Martin, John, 1664 72
Martyn, Matthew, 1677 182
Richard, Portsmouth, 1692/3 376
Richard, Jr., 1691 353
Mason, Elizabeth, Hampton, 1697 429
John, London, Eng., 1635 1
Robert Tufton, Portsmouth, 1692 372
Matthews, Benjamin, Durham, 1710/11 669
Francis, Durham, 1704 533
Isaac, Portsmouth, 1716 790
Walter, 1678 211
Maud, Daniel, 1654/5 27
Maverick, Antipas, Exeter, 1678 226
Meader, Nathaniel, Durham, 1705 539
Melcher, Edward, Portsmouth, 1695 409
Mills, Ann, Portsmouth, 1716 788
Richard, Portsmouth, 1715 782
Mingy, Jeffrey, Hampton, 1658 37
Moody, Joshua, Portsmouth, 1693 384
Moore, John, Jr., 1677 184
William, Exeter, 1700 471
Morgan, William, Exeter, 1712 701
Morrill, Nicholas, Portsmouth, 1697 434
Morris, Thomas, 1701 487
Moses, Aaron, Portsmouth, 1713 716
Moulton, Daniel, 1671 125
Henry, Hampton, 1701 483
John, Hampton, 1649/50 18
John, Hampton, 1706/7 585
William, Hampton, 1663/4 66
Mussell, Robert, 1663/4 61
xxxvi LIST OF ESTATES
Nelson, Matthew, Portsmouth, 1713 707
Nichols, James, 1651 23
Nock, Henry, Dover, 1713 708
Silvanus, Dover, 1716 788
Thomas, 1667 100
Thomas, Dover, 1676/7 180
Nute, James, Jr., Dover, 1691 361
Nutter, Hatevil, Dover, 1674 157
Odiorne, John, Newcastle, 1706/7 578
Philip, Isles of Shoals, 1703 513
O'Shaw, Daniel, Newcastle, 1715 764
James, Newcastle, 1716 790
Otis, Nicholas, Dover, 1697 427
Richard, Dover, 1704 536
Richard, Jr., Dover, 1701 488
Owen, John, Portsmouth, 1704 524
Page, Francis, Hampton, 1706 571
Robert, Hampton, 1679 236
Stephen, Hampton, 1713/14 718
Thomas, Hampton, 1686 305
Paine, John, Boston, Mass., 1693/4 389
Thomas, Newcastle, 1694 396
Palmer, ———, 1661 53
Christopher, Hampton, 1706/7 582
William, 1685 292
Parker, Noah, Portsmouth, 1708 627
Samuel, 1656 32
Partridge, John, Jr., Portsmouth, 1698 437
Nehemiah, 1690/1 348
Pearl, Nicholas, Dover, 1706 558
Pease, Samuel, Exeter, 1706 570
Pendleton, Bryan, Portsmouth, 1677 191
Penny, Henry, Portsmouth, 1708/9 634
LIST OF ESTATES xxxvii
Pepperell, Andrew, Newcastle, 1713/14 724
Perkins, Abraham, Hampton, 1683 263
Abraham, 1715 776
Abraham, Jr., 1677 187
Humphrey, Hampton, 1712 691
Jonathan, Hampton, 1688/9 326
Perryman, Edward, 1677/8 207
Peverly, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1670 115
Philbrick, James, Hampton, 1676 171
Thomas, Hampton, 1663/4 71
Thomas, Kingston, 1712 688
Timothy, Kingston, 1713/14 722
Phillips, Israel, 1678 226
John, 1641/2 13
Pickering, John, Portsmouth, 1668 111
John, Jr., 1714/15 755
Pierce, John, Dover, 1676 175
Pike, John, Dover, 1709/10 651
Joshua, Portsmouth, 1716/17 799
Nathaniel, Portsmouth, 1714 731
Pitman, Ezekiel, Dover, 1706/7 575
William, Durham, 1682 260
William, Portsmouth, 1693 382
Plaisted, Ichabod, Berwick, Me., 1715 759
Elisha, Portsmouth, 1690 337
John, 1707/8 617
Plimpton, Henry, 1652 24
Polly, Edward, 1715 769
Pomeroy, Joseph, 1674 152
Thomas, Portsmouth, 1714 731
Pottle, Christopher, Hampton, 1709 647
Quick, Nathan, 1677/8 208
Rackley, William, Portsmouth, 1699 442
Ralph, Clement, Durham, 1667 97
xxxviii LIST OF ESTATES
Rand, Francis, 1689 333
John, 1694/5 405
John, Durham, 1698 438
Remembrance, 1694/5 405
Samuel, Newcastle, 1706/7 581
Randall, Jacob, 1702 495
Peter, Portsmouth, 1697/8 436
Read, Robert, Hampton, 1664 73
Reyner, John, Dover, 1669 112
John, 1677 200
Rice, Henry, Dover, 1711 673
Richards, Mary, Portsmouth, 1702/3 499
William, Portsmouth, 1694 404
Rider, Phineas, Newcastle, 1681 253
Roberts, Thomas, Dover, 1673 145
William, Dover, 1676 170
Robinson, James, Newcastle, 1710 657
John, Exeter, 1675 169
Roby, Henry, Hampton, 1686/7 308
Samuel, Hampton, 1717 804
Rollins, James, Dover, 1685 293
James, Portsmouth, 1700 468
Samuel, Portsmouth, 1694 402
Thomas, Exeter, 1706 564
Rose, Roger, Portsmouth, 1705 543
Rouse, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1712/13 705
Rowe, Richard, Dover, 1703 510
Royall, Teague, 1677 186
Rutherford, Robert, Portsmouth, 1715 769
Rymes, Samuel, Portsmouth, 1711/12 675
Sadler, Anthony, 1650 20
Sampson, Andrew, Portsmouth, 1708 621
Sanborn, John, Hampton, 1692 374
William, Hampton, 1692 374
LIST OF ESTATES xxxix
Savage, Elizabeth, Portsmouth, 1708 632
Scribner, John, Dover, 1674 156
Seeley, John, 1670 120
Severett, Joanna, Portsmouth, 1690/1 345
Philip, Portsmouth, 1689 328
Seward, ——— , 1681 257
John, Portsmouth, 1705 546
Richard, 1662/3 57
Richard, Portsmouth, 1667 103
Sewall, Edward, Exeter, 1684 285
Edward, Exeter, 1712 698
Thomas, Exeter, 1712 692
Shaw, Benjamin, Hampton, 1717 810
Caleb, 1715 772
Roger, Hampton, 1660 47
Sherburne, Ambrose, 1676 175
Henry, 1681 252
John, Portsmouth, 1690 341
John, Portsmouth, 1691 362
Samuel, 1691 362
Shipway, John, Portsmouth, 1683 266
John, Portsmouth, 1690 342
Shortridge, Richard, Portsmouth, 1712 701
Simonds, Thomas, 1674 151
Sinclair, John, Exeter, 1699/1700 454
Sleeper, Moses, 1680 242
Sloper, Richard, Portsmouth, 1711 671
Smart, Robert, Exeter, 1703 508
Smith, Israel, Hampton, 1706 551
James, Durham, 1714 728
John, Hampton, 1709 636
Joseph, Hampton, 1712 694
Nicholas, Exeter, 1673 146
Nicholas, Exeter, 1715/16 782
Robert, Hampton, 1699/1700 457
xl LIST OF ESTATES
Snell, Agnes, 1681 257
George, Portsmouth, 1706 551
Richard, Boston, Mass., 1691 358
Stanyan, Anthony, Hampton,. 1688/9 326
Start, Thomas, 1674 160
Steele, Francis, Exeter, 1717 807
Stevens, Caleb, 1675 168
Nathaniel, Exeter, 1708 633
Stevenson, Joseph, Durham, 1694 396
Thomas, Durham, 1664 78
Thomas, Durham, 1694 395
Stileman, Elias, Newcastle, 1695 414
Lucy, Newcastle, 1699/1700 452
Richard, 1679 234
Richard, 1691 353
Stockbridge, John, Hampton, 1715 779
Story, Charles, 1714/15 754
William, 1661 52
Swaine, Francis, 1665 83
Hezekiah, Hampton, 1670 117
John, Newcastle, 1699 443
Mary, Newcastle, 1704 535
William, 1692 366
William, Jr., Hampton, 1657 35
Swett, Benjamin, Hampton, 1677 199
Tanner, John, Portsmouth, 1669 112
Taprill, Abisha, 1678/9 230
Tarleton, Ruth, Newcastle, 1707/8 611
Tasker, Mary, Durham, 1699/1700 455
William, Dover, 1699/1700 456
Taskett, Samuel, Durham, 1704 534
Taylor, Henry, 1649 18
William, 1677/8 204
Thing, Jonathan, 1674 155
Jonathan, Exeter, 1695 407
LIST OF ESTATES xli
Thorner, Henry, Wapping, Eng., 1657 35
Tibbetts, Henry, 1683 267
Jeremiah, Dover, 1677 182
Tomlin, Richard, Portsmouth, 1708/9 634
Towle, Joshua, Hampton, 1714 746
Philip, Hampton, 1696 421
Philip, Hampton, 1709 640
Trickey, Ephraim, Dover, 1701 482
Isaac, Dover, 1712 690
Joseph, Dover, 1713 713
Thomas, 1675 169
Trueworthy, ——— , 1673 142
Tuck, Edward, Hampton, 1653 25
Robert, 1664 79
Tucker, John, Star Island, 1670 121
Philip, Portsmouth, 1695 409
Richard, 1679 241
Richard, Newcastle, 1694 392
Tuckerman, Otho, Portsmouth, 1664 74
Turpin, Thomas, 1650 20
Tuttle, John, Dover, 1663 60
John, Dover, 1717 814
Twombly, Ralph, 1684/5 286
Tyng, Edward, Boston, Mass., 1677 193
Urin, William, Star Island, 1664 73
Varney, Humphrey, Dover, 1713 714
John, Dover, 1713/14 717
Vittery, Peter, London, Eng., 1682 258
Wakeham, John, 1691/2 366
Thomas, Portsmouth, 1698 441
Waldron, Alexander, Newcastle, 1676 174
Isaac, Boston, Mass., 1686 302
Walford, Jeremiah, Portsmouth, 1660 43
xlii LIST OF ESTATES
Walford, Thomas, Portsmouth, 1666 87
Thomas, 1678 222
Walker, Joseph, 1683 267
Robert, Portsmouth, 1714 747
Samuel, 1704/5 537
Wall, James, Hampton, 1659 41
Mary, Hampton, 1702/3 497
Wallis, George, Portsmouth, 1685/6 295
Walton, George, 1685/6 299
Ward, Thomas, Hampton, 1678 217
Watson, Robert, Durham, 1695/6 416
Webb, George, Dover, 1651 22
Webster, John, Portsmouth, 1662 55
Wedgwood, John, Hampton, 1654 26
Wentworth, Samuel, Portsmouth, 1690/1 349
Samuel, Jr., Boston, Mass., 1712/13 705
William, Dover, 1697 426
West, Edward, Newcastle, 1677 198
John, Newcastle, 1695 414
Martha, Newcastle, 1678/9 233
Westbrook, John, Portsmouth, 1697 431
Weymouth, James, Isles of Shoals, 1678 209
James, Newcastle, 1706/7 576
William, 1654 25
William, Star Island, 1703 508
Wheeler, John, Durham, 1706 550
Whidden, John, 1681 257
Samuel, Greenland, 1713/14 725
White, John, 1646 15
Whittemore, Joel, 1711/12 674
Wiggin, Andrew, Exeter, 1703/4 514
Bradstreet, Exeter, 1709 641
Thomas, Exeter, 1664 77
Thomas, Exeter, 1695/6 418
Thomas, Exeter, 1700 470
LIST OF ESTATES xliii
Wight, Thomas, Exeter, 1665 83
Wilcomb, Eleanor, Isles of Shoals, 1699 445
Wilford, Gilbert, 1676 177
Willey, Samuel, 1679 233
Stephen, Durham, 1696 420
Thomas, 1681 257
Williams, Henry, Hampton, 1711/12 674
Robert, 1676 176
Wilson, Humphrey, Exeter, 1698 440
John, Exeter, 1699/1700 456
Thomas, Exeter, 1642/3 13
Thomas, 1662 55
William, Hampton, 1710 662
Wincoll, John, Portsmouth, 1715 778
Windsor, Samuel, 1687 319
Wingate, John, Dover, 1683/4 270
John, Dover, 1714 751
Moses, Dover, 1695/6 417
Oliver, England, 1664 76
Winsley, Samuel, Kingston, 1710 666
Woodis, John, Portsmouth, 1670 119
Woodman, John, Dover, 1705 545
Woodward, James, 1647 16
Wright, Nathaniel, Stratham, 1716 791
Wyatt, John, Portsmouth, 1670 119
York, Richard, Dover, 1672 134
Young, John, Exeter, 1697 432
John, Exeter, 1704/5 539