Thomas Stanton, of Connecticut
Citation
- William A. Stanton, "A Record, Genealogical, Biographical, Statistical, of Thomas Stanton, of Connecticut, and His Descendants, 1635-1891" (1891) (http://books.google.com/books?id=ohwwAAAAYAAJ).
Data
- Category: Derivative
Detail
- William A. Stanton
- Publisher: 1891
Images
Page: 9
- Pages: 9-12
-
Text: HISTORICAL PART.
CHAPTER I.
A SKETCH OF THOMAS STANTON, THE FIRST OF THIS FAMILY IN AMERICA, 1635-1677.
Part I.
A compilation of such facts relating to our first Stanton ancestor in America, as have been gathered from a multitude of sources, will form a proper introduction to this genealogy and history of his descendants.
From the New England Historical and Genealogical Register (vol ii, p. 113) we learn that January 2, 1635, Thomas Stanton took passage for Virginia in the merchantman Bonaventura, and that he recorded himself as being twenty years old. The ship's record shows no other passenger named Stanton. It is certain, therefore, that he came unattended by any relative bearing the same name. There was a John Stanton in Virginia prior to 1635; from 1652 to 1688 there are records of a Robert Stanton of Dorchester, Mass., and another Robert Stanton, a Quaker, was a resident of Newport, R. I., prior to 1645. This Robert of Newport died in 1672, aged 73 years. His descendants are now very numerous in the United States, and many of them are still Friends or Quakers. As Edwin M. Stanton, Lincoln's great Secretary of War. has been thought by many to be a descendant of Thomas. I will state here that he is in direct line from Robert of Newport. Savage and many of the older New England genealogists guessed that Robert was an older brother to Thomas, but there is not the slightest evidence to that effect, nor, so far as records go, do they seem to have even known each other or ever inter-visited.
There is no proof that Thomas was related in any way to any person in America, or that any relatives ever followed him to this country. There is a family tradition that before his death he received a legacy from his former home across the sea, but there are no records to prove even this. Undoubtedly there were on record in New London, Conn., many records and documents that would have been invaluable witnesses as to Mr. Stanton's origin, ancestry and youthful life. His will was probably recorded there and no other copy of it has as yet been found. But these New London county records were destroyed in 1781 by the traitor Benedict Arnold when he sacked and burnt New London town.
Our family history has thus been robbed of much that would be interesting and important; much still remains, however, and to this we will now address ourselves.
Evidently Mr. Stanton's stay in Virginia was very short. In 1636 he appears on record in Boston, Mass., serving as a magistrate. He may have traded and mingled a little with the Indians in Virginia, acquired some knowledge of their language, and then sailed for New England. We know that he subsequently visited the Indians in Virginia, for there was in the New London county records a curious document, without date, but apparently entered in 1668 or 1669. It reads as follows:
"Whereas Capt. Morrice hath reported and informed the King's Commissioner that Mr. Thomas Stanton, Senr. did, in Virginia, some 20 odd years since, cause a massacre among the Indians, whereby to gain their Beaver to himself, and the said Morrice named Richard Arye, mariner, to be his author:
"These may certify all whom it may concern that the said Arye being examined concerning said report, doth absolutely deny that he knew or reported any such thing to Morrice nor ever heard of any such thing about Mr. Stanton in Virginia to his remembrauce." This document was acknowledged in court by Richard Arye, and attested by David Wetherell, recorder.
The next we know of Mr. Stanton is in connection with the Pequoit War. Just before the war he had been serving Winthrop as Indian interpreter, while the latter was in command at Saybrook. July 4, 1636, Mr. Fenwick, Mr. Hugh Peters and Mr. Thomas Stanton bore instructions from Boston to Winthrop at Fort Saybrook, Conn. (going overland) as to the Pequoits.
The war followed immediately. From Caulkins' Hist. of New London, Conn. (p. 296), I copy the following tribute: "The services of Mr. Stanton, as interpreter during the Pequoit War were invaluable. He was moreover a man of trust and intelligence, and his knowledge of the country and of the natives made him a useful pioneer and counselor in all land questions, as well as difficulties with the Indians." In DeForest's Hist. of the Indians of Connecticut (p. iii) is another record of a second visit to Fort Saybrook, near the end of the war, when its commander was the historic soldier, Capt. Lion Gardner. DeForest says: "Sometime in April (1637) a small vessel arrived at the fort, having on board Thos. Stanton, a man well acquainted with the Indian language, and long useful to the colonial authorities as interpreter."
Mr. Stanton served through this war. Special mention is made of his bravery in the battle of Fairfield Swamp, where he well nigh lost his life.
He must have returned to Boston very soon after peace was secured, for Drake, in his History of Boston, names him as one of the magistrates in the trial of John Wheelwright, which took place Oct. 3, 1637.
The next seventeen months of Mr. Stanton's life were eventful ones, for in them occurred his marriage and settlement in Hartford, Conn. In June, 1636, Rev. Thomas Hooker and 100 other persons came from Newtown (Cambridge), Mass., and founded Hartford, Conn. In February, 1639, there were 127 property-holders in Hartford, and among them were Dr. Thomas Lord and his son-in-law, Thomas Stanton. It is not known whether Dr. Lord and his family came to Hartford with Hooker or at a later date. The time of Mr. Stanton's arrival and marriage is not known, but we do know that his wife was Ann, eldest daughter and third child of Dr. Thomas and Dorothy Lord.
Page: 12
- Pages: 12-13
-
Text: THE LORD FAMILY.
Part II.
Dr. Thomas Lord was b. 1585; Dorothy, his wife, was b. 1589. They were married in England in 1610, and came to America April 29. 1635, in the Elizabeth and Ann. Mrs. Lord died in 1676, aged 87 years. She sealed her will with the arms of the "Lord alias Laward" family. The arms are thus described:
"Ar. on a fess gu. between three cinque foils az. a. hind pass. between two pheons or."
The following copy of the first medical license granted in the New England Colonies will be full of interest to every reader, and especially so to us who are descendants of the herein licensed Doctor Lord.
"Courte in Hartford, 30th of June 1652.
"Thomas Lord, having ingaged to this Courte to continue his aboade in Hartford for the next ensuing yeare, and to improve his best skill amongst the inhabitants of the Townes uppon the River within this jurissdiction both for setting of bones and otherwise, as at all times, occassions and necessityes may or shall require; This Courte doth graunt that hee shall bee paid by the Countey the sum of fifteene pounds for the said ensuing yeare, and they doe declare that for every visitt or journye that hee shall take or make, being sent for to any house in Hartford, twelve pence is reasonable; to any house in Wyndsor, five shillings; to any house in Wethersfield, three shillings; to any house in Farmington, six shillings; to any house in Mattabeseck, eight shillings; (hee having promised that hee will require no more,) and that hee shall bee freed for the time aforesaid from watching, warding and training; but not from finding armes, according to lawe."
It will be of interest to learn a little as to the brothers and sisters of Mistress Thomas Stanton nee Lord. They were all born across the sea, and as follows:
Richard, b. 1611; Thomas, Jr., b. 1619; Ann, who m. Thos. Stanton, b. 1621; William, b. 1623; John, b. 1624; Robert, b. 1626; Aymie, b. 1629; Dorothy, b. 1630.
As this book is not a Lord Genealogy, I have made no effort to follow the fortunes of these brothers and sisters. A few facts, however, as to the senior brother Richard have an historic value. He was a merchant in Hartford, and was one of the body corporate to whom King Charles granted the Connecticut charter. April 20. 1662. He seemed to be of rather a pugnacious disposition, for on Oct. 12, 1643, he engaged his brother-in-law, Thomas Stanton, in a quarrel about trading for Indian corn. He used very threatening language, and drew his sword, but before he could use it he was arrested and fined five pounds by the Hartford Court. It would be interesting to know how Mr. Stanton conducted himself in this little broil, but we only know that the Court Record makes no case against him.
...
Page: 14
- Pages: 14-17
-
Text: THOMAS STANTON AGAIN.
Part III.
He is now married and residing in Hartford, Conn. In what follows I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to "Thee Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut from 1636-1677," as published by J. Hammond Trumbull at the order of the General Assembly of Connecticut. May. 1849.
In said records the name of Thomas Stanton is found over 60 times; his son John is referred to 14 times; reference is also made to his sons Thomas, Jr., and Joseph.
...
The following autograph is proof of the way in which Thomas spelled his name as well as of the sturdy character of the man. A fac-simile of the signature of Thos. Stanton of Hartford, Conn., to the Constitution of the Colony of Connecticut. Signed by him during the session of
"A genrall Cort at Harteford. 5th Apr 1638."
At said term of court the following record was made:
"It is ordered that Thomas Staunton shal be a publicke officer for to attend the Corte uppon all occasions, either Generall or prticuler, as alsoe any meetinge of the Magistrates to interprett betweene them and the Indians, as also is to have for it 10l pr Annum."
At this same session of Court he, with others, was sent on a mission to the Warranocke Indians. The same year (1638) Mr. Stanton was a delegate to an English and Indian Council-meeting at Hartford. Among other delegates were Roger Williams of Providence, Uncas of the Mohegans and Miantinomo of the Narragansetts. He also received ten pounds for past services to his country, and was given authority to represent Hartford in all trade for beavers at 1s. per skin.
Nov. 24, 1638, we find him at New Haven acting as interpreter for the Yorkshire colonists of Quinnipiac (New Haven) in their purchase of the land, where the city now stands, from the Indians. To the deed of said land is added the following declaration:
"I, Thomas Stanton, being interpreter in this treaty, do hereby profess in the presence of God that I have fully acquainted the Indians with the substance of every article and truly returned their answer and consent to the same, according to the tenor of the foregoing writing, the truth of which, if lawfully called, I shall readily confirm at any time.
(Signed) THOMAS STANTON."
This year Thos. Stanton, Jr., was born in Hartford.
In 1641, the second son John, was born.
In April, 1642, Mr. Stanton and his brother-in-law, Mr. Richard Lord, make a voyage to Long Island to trade and collect old debts. It would seem that these two were then in business partnership which may have been dissolved the next year by the quarrel already referred to. In 1643, the eldest daughter, Mary, was born in Hartford, and in 1644 Hannah was born.
The third son and fifth child, Joseph was born in 1646. That same year Mr. Stanton violates his license and sells some lead beyond the jurisdiction of Hartford. For this he pays a fine of five pounds. Because of his trading trips or for some other reason he is so long absent from Court as an official that a successor to him is appointed for one year, but in 1648 Mr. Stanton is re-engaged as Court Interpreter at a salary of five pounds per year.
The same year his sixth child, Daniel, is born in Hartford. In connection with that birth it is inferred that some trouble arose, for shortly after we find Mr. Stanton entering suit for 200 pounds in an action of slander against one Joane Sipperance, "to the utter undoing of his wife's good name, and almost taking away her life." Since he got judgment for only 20s. we conclude that while he had cause for complaint it was not quite so serious a matter as he thought.
We now find a possible explanation for the long absence from Court of Thomas in 1646. In 1648 he has decided to remove his business from Hartford to the south-eastern corner of the Colony, and the following record is a result of his decision.
"A Session of the Generall Courte, 6th of Febr. 1649.
This Courte, taking into consideracon the petition of Thos. Staunton presented to them, have graunted to him and doe order, that hee shall have libbcrty to erect a trading house at Pawcatuck, with six acres of planting ground, and libberty of feed and mowing, according to his present occasions, and that none within this jurisdiction shall trade within that River for the space of three years next ensuing; provided hee submitt him selfe to such other exceptions and cautions as the Governor and Deputy shall judge meett."
As soon as possible after receiving permission to do so Mr. Stanton built and occupied his trading-house on the Pawcatuck river, but for the time his family remained in Hartford. When they did move they went first to Pequot and then to what is now Stonington, Conn.
He probably went to Pequot with his family in 1651, and to his permanent residence at Stonington in 1658. If these dates are correct, his seventh child, Dorothy (b. 1651), was born either just before leaving Hartford or just after reaching Pequot. The three other children were born in Pequot, Robert in 1653, Sarah in 1655, Samuel in 1657.
About the time of the removal from Hartford, an interesting act of the General Court was recorded, which I now copy.
"Code of Laws, May, 1650.
"This Courte, judging it necessary that some meanes should bee used to convey the lighte and knowledge of God and of his Worde to the Indians and Natives amongst us, doe order that one of the teaching Elders of the Churches in this jurisdiction, with the helpe of Thomas Stanton, shall bee desired, twise at leaste in every yeare, to goe amongst the neighbouring Indians and indeavor to make knowne to them the Councells of the Lord, and thereby to draw and stirr them up to direct and order all theire wayes and conversations according to the rule of his Worde. And Mr. Governor and Mr. Deputy, and the other Magistrates are desired to take care to see the thinge attended, and with theire owne presence so farr as may be convenient in courage the same."
Page: 18
-
Text: The Stantons of Stongington.
Part IV.
Personal Names
| Person | Claim | Detail | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ann Lord | Name | Ann Lord [S366:702] [S662] [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:1] | secondary |
| Dorothy Bird | Name | Dorothy Lord [S662] [S2081] [S2082:3] | research |
| Mary Stanton | Name | Mary Stanton [S366:634] [S688:154] [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:58] | secondary |
| Dr. Thomas Lord | Name | Dr. Thomas Lord [S2081] | derivative |
| Thomas Stanton | Name | Thomas Stanton [S366:702] [S662] [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:55] | secondary |
| Thomas Stanton | Name | Thomas Staunton [S2081] | derivative |
Relationships
| Person | Claim | Detail | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mary Stanton | Father | Thomas Stanton (1616-1677) [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:58] | derivative |
| Mary Stanton | Mother | Ann Lord (1614-1688) [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:58] | derivative |
| Ann Lord | Father | Dr. Thomas Lord (1585-) [S662] [S2055:176] [S2081] [S2082:1] | research |
| Ann Lord | Mother | Dorothy Bird (1588-~1675) [S662] [S2081] [S2082:1] | research |
Events & Attributes