Dear Tim, in response to your request of last month, I have conducted research on more of your New England colonial ancestral lines. To answer your question of March 5, both Gary Roberts? “500 NE Immigrants” and Farris? “Plantagenet Ancestry” are superlative publications, the best in their field on this particular subject. I will pass the 1632 marriage record of Edmond Freeman to Elizabeth Raynier on to Bob Anderson Simon Crosby the Emigrant(1914)remains the best work on this family; his wife Rachel(Brackett)was living In Billerlca when his estate was settled In 1726, but her date of death has not been recorded, nor did I find any evidence of it In probate or land records.

The best material thus far on Ralph Shepard of Dedham is The Shepard Families of New England(1971). Since then, a 1992 article in The American Genealogist cited his marriage In 1632 to Thanklorde Perkins, at London. But I have not found any evidence that he was the man born in Dronfield in 1603, son of an Isaac Shepard. You did not provide a citation for this link, and I did not see It anywhere else. Unless that citation provides convincing proof, I can only conclude that Ralph Shepard?s English origins are not yet known.

John Brooks Threlfall?s Twenty-Six Great Migration Colonists to New England (1993), a reliable source, provides much detail on Edward Johnson?s marriage to Susan Munter about 1620, and further lineages for both of them. This Is the best source for those lineages.

Regarding Thomas Brigham, The Great Migration refers us to The History of the Brigham Family, Volume II(1927), which provides proof of the marriage of John Brigham to Constance Watson, her parents? names, and the earlier English lineage for John Brigham.

The original, and still the best source, for John Page?s origins and his marriage to Susan Syckerling Is G.Andrews Moriarty?s 1947 NEHGS Register article. He makes a convincing case, though absolute proof is lacking, and I am not completely convinced either(there would be 8 years, for one thing ,between the baptism of this John In 1586 and that of your John?s known wife Phebe in 1594). Susan?s parents were the same as mentioned on your chart; they are further identified in the parish & probate records cited in the article.

The English origins and parentage of Edmund Rice are not yet known(as you may be aware, his wife Thomasine(Frost)?s ancestry is well proven). The best clues thus far are in Bob Anderson?s 1985 article in The Genealogist, which are also alluded to in a 1991 American Genealogist article. These Infer that Edward Rice, who married Thomasine In 1618, may have been a brother of Henry Rice who married her sister Elizabeth Frost in 1 605(Elizabeth subsequently married secondly In 1621 after Henry?s death, Phiiemon Whale). I have some difficulty with Philemon?s wife being 14 years older than he(we could narrow it to being 10 years older, but no less)as cited in the article, nor do I think It Impossible that Edmund was perhaps Henry Rice?s son by a first wife and not his younger brother(Edmund did name his eldest son Henry), but the connections between the families both In England and America are apparent, and perhaps further English research will lead to an explanation. But as of now, Edmund?s parents cannot be identified.

Smith & Sanborn?s The Ancestry of Eva Belle Kempton, Part IV(2000), which gives much detail on William & Godethe Gillman, Thomas Ewer?s maternal grandparents; and Robert Anderson?s The Great Migration 1634-35, Volume II(2001)show that Thomas Ewer?s “father in law” Thomas Lothrop, who helped to administer his estate In 1667, was actually his STEPFATHER(this term was used often for stepparents at that time), who had married his mother shortly after his father?s early death. Thomas Ewer?s wife Hannah remains unidentified.

I am not certain If all Quaker records have been searched, which might yield more clues; also any manuscript deeds, etc. which might be found in Cape Cod archives or published In its genealogical journals. I found a website commentary which elaborates a bit further on Thomas Ewer: http://pages.prodigy.com/bobbie-hall/otis.html EWER

5. Respecting the family of Thomas Ewer, 2d, little is known. He removed to Sandwich early. In 1659 he had a family and resided near Spring Hill. He was a Quaker, and for refusing to take the oath of fidelity, and for attending Quaker meetings, was fined 20,10 pounds, which with expenses amounted to 25,8 pounds. In payment the Marshall seized a debt due him from Richard Chadwell for labor, 7,13; In money taken out of his house, 6,17; Clothing, new cloth, with other goods particularly named, 10,18; total 25,8 pounds. From the new cloth taken (four yards of Kersey) George Barlow, the Marshall, had a coat made, and which he wore at Court. Ewer, seeing him have it on, asked the Magistrates, ‘Whether they [owned?] George Barlow in wearing his cloth.” To this question Gov. Prentice replied: “That if he could prove that George Barlow had wronged him, he might seek his satisfaction.” For this question he was sentenced “to be laid neck and heels together.” Which, says Bishop, was the injustice he received at their hands. The Court records give a different version of the matter. He was sentenced to lye neck and heels together during the pleasur of the Court. “for his tumultuous and seditious carriages and speeches in Court.” The Magistrates being informed that he was an infirm man, and was troubled with a rupture, the sentence was not executed. Bishop is usually accurate, but in this case he omits a material fact and leaves a wrong impression on the mind of his reader. He adds that Ewer?s axe, with which he wrought, worth three shillings, was taken for a tax of ten pence to the country, and that at another time, half a bushel of grain, out of his bag at the mill, for a similar tax, for the same amount. These were assessments legally made to pay the current expenses of the Colony. Ewer was abundantly able to pay, he resisted the execution of the law, to which no constitutional objection was made, and if his axe or his grain was taken to pay, neither he nor his apologist, Mr Bishop, had a right to complain. The Quakers had right and justice on their side, when they refused to pay fines imposed for not taking the oath of fidelity, or for attending meetings of their own society; but when they refused to pay their proportion of the public expenses, they were clearly in the wrong, and those of their number who resisted, were not only guilty of doing wrong to their country, but to their religious associates; because by thus resisting they prejudiced their claim for sympathy as sufferers for conscience sake.

In 1658 Thomas Ewer and most of the leading members of the Society of Friends in Sandwich were disfranchised and ordered to leave the town. Ewer continued to reside there till 1660. In 1661 he is spoken of as of Barnstable. In that year he bought a part of the farm and meadows on the west of the Crocker land, then owned by Mr. Dimniock, originally laid out, I think, to Thomas Hatch. This small farm his descendants have continued to own till recently. The goods seized by the Marshall were such as a tailor usually keeps, and I infer from this that he learned the trade of his father. He died in 1667, aged 34, leaving a widow Hannah and a family of children. 1 find no record of their names. Thomas Lothrop, the father-in-law of the deceased, and Shubael Linnell, were appointed guardians of the children.

6. Thomas Ewer, 3d, probably son of Thomas, 2d, married three wives. He married his first wife about the year 1682; she died in a few years, and he married, in 1689, Elizabeth, daughter of the first John Lovell, and for his third wife he married, Sept 18, 1712, Wid. Sarah Warren.

Smith & Sanborns? The Ancestry of Eva Belie Kempton, Part IV(2000) gives the best treatment of Immigrant Walter Powers, whose parentage remains unknown. It also identifies the first wife of his son Thomas Powers as Elizabeth Gould, daughter of Francis & Rose Gould. A 1971 Genealogy of the Gould Family gives the best treatment of Francis & Rose; the section on James Cole In The Great Migration Begins adds a further reference to Francis Goole in 1644.

Mansfield Genealogy 1980)remains the best work on this family. The land and probate records of Robert Mansfield and his wife Elizabeth show that they had only 4 children; Elizabeth, Andrew, John & Joseph. The Robert you have as a child on your group sheet is a duplicate for the father. And I find no evidence of a son Samuel.

Blake-Glidden Ancestry(1948)does say that Elizabeth, daughter of Waiter & Susan Cole of Lavenham, married a John Fuller; but I cannot find proof that it was John Fuller of Cambridge. I had thought I found more on this problem one or two reports ago, perhaps from a Register article, but cannot now recall It. I would not make Waiter & Susan your ancestors until & unless better evidence emerges, since John Fuller was a very common name at that time.

I am pursuing some more leads as to Francis Moore, and will forward any results to you in a postscript.

This concludes my report; I trust the new information will be helpful to you. The above searches entailed 15 hours? research and $25 in photocopy & postage expenses, for a total of $475.00. Please advise as to your wishes for any further research; It has been a pleasure to continue researching your New England family lines, and I shall look forward to corresponding again In the future.

Sincerely,

R. Andrew Pierce