Abigail Faulkner’s Desperate Plea from Prison: 52 Ancestors 2026 “A Document with Personality”

 

Convicted of Witchcraft and Afraid for Her Family: A Petition Filled with Fear and Fury

Abigail Dane Faulkner: 1652-1729 (7^th Great-grandaunt)

 

I recently blogged about John Dane’s role as a juror in the Salem Witch Trials in 1692. Among John Dane’s cousins who were convicted of witchcraft—possibly by John himself—was his cousin Abigail Dane Faulkner. She was sentenced to death, but thankfully her execution was delayed due to her pregnancy—even the judgmental Puritans could not justify killing an innocent unborn child along with its mother. Thus Abigail was still in prison when Massachusetts Governor William Phips disbanded the Court of Oyer and Terminer and forbade the use of spectral evidence in October 1692.

To provide some background, Abigail Dane was one of Reverend Francis Dane’s daughters. She married Francis Faulkner in 1675, and they had six children and were expecting a seventh when she was “examined” by the witchcraft court in August of 1692 after claims from girls, one only twelve years old, that she had bewitched them. She was encouraged to confess but she told the court that “God would not have her confess that yt she was not guilty of.”

Engraving of Salem Witch Trial scene--Wikimedia Commons

While Phip’s action basically brought a halt to the witchcraft trial proceedings, it did not lead to the release of those charged or convicted of witchcraft. They were still in the Salem prison as winter set in. Conditions were horrible. Several of those charged or convicted died from disease and the elements in the jail before they could be tried or executed. Desperate, afraid and angry, Abigail Faulkner wrote a petition to Governor Phips on December 3, 1692, begging to be released. It is an amazing document. Her despair and anger are obvious in every stroke of the pen. The transcript of her petition follows:

The humblee Petition of Abigall: Falkner unto his Excellencye S'r W'm Phipps knight and Govern'r of their Majestyes Dominions in America: humbly sheweth

That your poor and humble Petitioner having been this four monthes in Salem Prison and condemned to die having had no other evidences against me but the Spectre Evidences and the Confessors w'ch Confessors have lately since I was condemned owned to my selfe and others and doe still own that they wronged me and what they had \said against me was false: and that they would not that I should have been put to death for a thousand worldes for they never should have enjoyed themselves againe in this world; w'ch undoubtedly I shouled have been put to death had it not pleased the Lord I had been with child. Thankes be to the Lord I know my selfe altogether Innocent & Ignorant of the crime of witchcraft w'ch is layd to my charge: as will appeare at the great day of Judgment (May it please yo'r Excellencye) my husband about five yeares a goe was taken w'th fitts w'ch did very much impaire his memory and understanding but w'th the blessing of the Lord upon my Endeavors did recover of them againe but now through greife and sorrow they are returned to him againe as bad as Ever they were: I having six children and having little or nothing to subsist on being in a manner without a head to doe any thinge for my selfe or them and being closely confined can see no otherwayes but we shall all perish Therfore may it please your Excellencye your poor and humble petition'r doe humbly begge and Implore of yo'r Excellencye to take it into yo'r pious and Judicious consideration that some speedy Course may be taken w'th me for my releasement that I and my children perish not through meanes of my close confinement here w'ch undoubtedly we shall if the Lord does not mightily prevent and yo'r poor petitioner shall for ever pray for your health and happinesse in this life and eternall felicity in the world to come so prayes

from Salem Prison Your poor afflicted humble sevants Petition'r

Decem[ber] the 3d: 1692 *Abigall: Falkner

Abigail Dane Faulkner's petition to Gov. Phips

Abigail’s frustration and anger at her accusers is obvious in her opening statements. She notes that she was convicted based only on “spectral evidence”, the type of evidence Phips had just decreed would no longer be accepted. She noted that all the witnesses’ confessions against her had been withdrawn: “w'ch Confessors have lately since I was condemned owned to my selfe and others and doe still own that they wronged me and what they had \said against me was false: and that they would not that I should have been put to death for a thousand worldes.” The people who testified against her had admitted to herself and to others that they lied at her trial. Thus there was no legitimate evidence that she was a witch. She stated that “I know my selfe altogether Innocent & Ignorant of the crime of witchcraft…as will appeare at the great day of Judgment.” Abigail’s words ring with sincerity and her conviction that God recognizes her innocence.

The details she provides about her family situation are heart-breaking. She is in despair over her husband’s illness. She confesses, “my husband about five yeares a goe was taken w'th fitts w'ch did very much impaire his memory and understanding but w'th the blessing of the Lord upon my Endeavors did recover of them againe but now through greife and sorrow they are returned to him againe as bad as Ever they were…” It is hard to diagnose Francis Faulkner from the distance of 334 years, but it sounds as if he might have had a stroke, or that he suffered from debilitating depression or mental illness. Whatever the cause of his illness, in the past Abigail had been forced to take charge of providing for the children. Now there was no one to earn money, provide food, or do the backbreaking work required to just keep children alive in the unforgiving weather of a Massachusetts winter.

Her terror and desperation are obvious in the next line: “I having six children and having little or nothing to subsist on being in a manner without a head to doe any thinge for my selfe or them and being closely confined can see no otherwayes but we shall all perish…”

As a woman, she knows that she is considered less important than a man in the Puritan world. She closes her letter with flattery and kind words to the Governor, obviously trying to emphasize her respect and obedience to him as a man and a person of power. She begs him as “your poor and humble petition'r”  to “take it into yo'r pious and Judicious consideration” to free her. She closes with the following prayer for Phips: “yo'r poor petitioner shall for ever pray for your health and happinesse in this life and eternall felicity in the world to come…”

Governor's address on Abigail Faulkner's petition

It appears that her petition had effect. She was released at some point late in December 1692 after Phips received the document. The date of the release order is unknown. She was back home in Andover well before her baby was born in March of 1693.

I do not know if Abigail wrote the petition herself, or if she dictated it to a relative. Since her father was Cambridge-educated, he probably taught all his children to read and write, so it is possible she may have hand-written the document. What I do know is that her feelings, personality and strength of will are apparent in each sentence, no matter who prepared the final document.

 

Sources:

Salem Witch Trials Documentary Archive and Transcription Project. Salem Witchcraft Papers: SWP No. 052: Abigail Faulkner, Sr.. University of Virginia. https://salem.lib.virginia.edu/n52.html

Historical Sketches of Andover. Chap. 3, Witchcraft at Andover. Pg. 217-218. https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/21636/images/dvm_LocHist007471-00133-0?usePUB=true&_phsrc=FrD715&_phstart=default&usePUBJs=true&currentPageIsStart=&useCurrentPageInfo=&showinfopanel=true&pId=248

Salem With Trial Engraving. Wikimedia Commons. https://picryl.com/media/salem-witch-trial-engraving-444cbd

 

The Wrong Side of History and the Wrong Side of Family: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt “What Surprise Me Most”

 

John Dane Jr. Sitting in Judgment of His Cousins in the Salem Witch Trials

John Dane Jr. 1642-1707 (Maternal 7^th Great-Granduncle)

 

While researching my 8^th Great-Grandfather John Dane, I ran across information about his son John Dane, my 7^th Great-Granduncle, that absolutely stunned me. He served as a juror for some of the Salem Witch Trials, which meant he was hearing testimony against and rendering verdicts upon his own cousins, who were the children and grandchildren of his uncle, Reverend Francis Dane. Some of those cousins were sentenced to death. How could a good Puritan like John Dane turn against his own family in this way?

I have been unable to find birth records for John Dane, but his gravestone states he died in 1707 in his 65^th year, which would indicate he was born in 1642 or 1643. His parents were John Dane and Eleanor Clark of Ipswich, Massachusetts. He was the oldest of their two sons. He left several parcels of land in his will, so it appears he was engaged in farming.

John Dane married Abigail Warner on December 27, 1671, and they lived in Ipswich. The couple had six children—three sons and three daughters—over a period from 1673 to 1691.

The Salem Witch trials began in 1692. Under English law, a Court of Oyer and Terminer was called up to hold inquiries into all charges of treason, felonies, and misdemeanors. The name comes from the French phrase oyer et terminer which literally means “to hear and to determine.” Massachusetts Governor William Phipps called for the court to be appointed to hear the witch trials, and local officials were told to summon a pool of jurors. Each community was asked to contribute jurors, with local magistrates responsible for issuing the summonses.

I have found some of the summons paperwork, but John Dane Jr.’s name was not on the Ipswich summons. He may have been called up at a later date, covered by a different summons document. Since the jurors were issued summonses requiring them to serve, John Dane had little choice in the matter. He had to participate once he was summoned. In a small society like early colonial Massachusetts, the Puritan culture demanded conformity and obedience.

Cover of the book where the jurors' letter appears

Some records from the period provide partial lists of jurors. John Dane’s name is on at least one of the lists I located. But most significantly, John Dane Jr. was one of twelve signatories on a 1697 letter expressing regret for their actions as jurors. While the original letter did not survive, a transcription was printed in a 1700 book titled “More Wonders of the Invisible World” by Robert Calef. The letter reads as follows:

“Some that had been of several juries have given forth a paper, signed with our own hands in these words. We whose names are underwritten, being in the year 1692 called to serve as jurors in court in Salem, on trial of many who were by some suspected guilty of doing acts of witchcraft upon the bodies of sundry persons.

We confess that we ourselves were not capable to understand, nor able to withstand the mysterious delusions of the powers of darkness and prince of the air, but were for want of knowledge in ourselves and better information from others, prevailed with to take up with such evidence against the accused as on further consideration and better information, we justly fear was insufficient for the touching the lives of any, Deuteronomy 17.6, whereby we fear we have been instrumental with others, though ignorantly and unwittingly, to bring upon ourselves and this people of the Lord, the guilt of innocent blood, which sin the Lord saith in Scripture, he would not pardon, 2 Kings 24.4, that is we suppose in regard of His temporal judgments. We do, therefore, hereby signify to all in general (and to the surviving sufferers in especial) our deep sense of and sorrow for our errors in acting on such evidence to the condemning of any person.

And do hereby declare that we justly fear that we were sadly deluded and mistaken, for which we are much disquieted and distressed in our minds, and do therefore humbly beg forgiveness, first of God for Christ’s sake for this our error. And pray that God would not impute the guilt of it to ourselves nor others. And we also pray that we may be considered candidly and aright by the living sufferers as being then under the power of a strong and general delusion, utterly unacquainted with and not experienced in matters of that nature.

We do heartily ask forgiveness of you all, whom we have justly offended and do declare, according to our present minds, we would none of us do such things again on such grounds for the whole world, praying you to accept of this in way of satisfaction for our offense, and that you would bless the inheritance of the Lord that He may be entreated for the land.

Foreman, Thomas Fisk

Thomas Perly, Senior

William Fiske

John Peabody

John Batcheler

Thomas Perkins

Thomas Fisk, Junior

Samuel Sather

John Dane

Andrew Elliott

Joseph Evelith

Henry Herrick, Senior

 

End of the letter in the Wonders book.

I can certainly understand why John Dane would have longed for forgiveness. Rev. Francis Dane and all his children and grandchildren must have felt betrayed by John’s work on the jury. Francis Dane barely escaped being charged with witchcraft himself. Two of his daughters, Abigail Dane Faulkner and Elizabeth Dane Johnson, were accused and convicted, but escaped death. In addition, five of his grandchildren were charged with witchcraft: two of Abigail’s daughters, ages 12 and 9, and Elizabeth’s two daughters and one son, ages 22, 14 and 11. In addition, Francis’ daughter-in-law, Deliverance Haseltine Dane, was charged. Two of Francis’ nieces by marriage, Martha Carrier and Elizabeth How, were convicted and hung. The Dane family suffered greatly. It would be hard to excuse John Dane’s complicity in this suffering.

I find it interesting that the jurors stated that they felt unable “to withstand the mysterious delusions of the powers of darkness”. They seem to be blaming the devil for compelling their actions. They probably did feel compelled, but more by the opinions of their neighbors and friends who believed in the witchcraft charges. The jurors probably feared becoming targets themselves if they didn’t find the persecuted people guilty.

John Dane's headstone, courtesy of Findagrave.

John Dane died in 1707 and is buried in Hamilton Cemetery in Essex County, Massachusetts.

Sources:

“The Apology of the Salem Jury,” 1697. More Wonders of the Invisible World, or The Wonders of th Invisble World, Display’d in Five Parts. Collected by Robert Calef. Printed in London for Nath. Hillar, at the Princes-Arms, in Leaden Hall Street. 1700. https://archive.org/details/morewondersofinv01cale

The Founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Page 202. https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/23628/images/dvm_GenMono005699-00116-0?usePUB=true&pId=197

Findagrave Listing for John Dane. Photo by Adrian Theirry. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/52810448/john-dane/photo#view-photo=267987016

John Dane’s Commonplace Book: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt: A Source I Want to Understand Better”

A Life Story Told in Verse and Prose

Johne Dane: 1612-1684 (Maternal 8^th Great-Grandfather)

 

I have been fascinated for years by the commonplace book of Reverend Francis Dane, one of my 8^th great grandfathers. Commonplace books were widely used in the 17th century by scholars, writers, and educated people as a tool for reading, learning, and remembering information. They often contained quotations, passages copied from books and other written material, personal observations, and drafts of such things as sermons. I discovered that Francis was not the only Dane brother to use a commonplace book. John Dane, another of my 8^th Great-Grandfathers, wrote his own commonplace book in the late 1600s. Miraculously, both these books were preserved by Dane family members over the centuries. Both have been photographed and digitally uploaded by American Ancestors, making them available online for all modern-day researchers. John Dane’s commonplace book is a wonderful primary source that I would love to study and better understand.

To provide some background biographical information, John Dane was born in Hertfordshire, England in 1612, the son of John Dane and his wife Frances Bowyer Dane. He left England as part of the Puritan migration, probably arriving in the Massachusetts colony around 1635, although some sources list a date as late as 1638. His widowed father and brother Francis followed him to the colony around 1636. John settled in Ipswich, while his father settled in Roxbury and Francis Dane in Andover.

John Dane married Eleanor Clark around 1637. They had six children: sons John and Philemon, and daughters Mary, Elizabeth, Priscilla Rebecca and Sarah. The Commonplace Book was written in 1682, two years before John Dane’s death, as a form of personal history for his children.

Cover of John Dane's Commonplace Book

American Ancestors’ Digital Library and Archives describes John Dane’s commonplace book as follows:

“Vellum bound book with a lappet. Contains two narratives, one in rhyme and one in prose, some religious meditations, and advice to the author's children in rhyme. The record contains some notes on sermons by Mr. Dennison, Mr. Hubbard, and Mr. Gerrish. There is also some short hand. The narratives provide the author's recollections of his childhood in England, his life as a taylor's apprentice while a young man in Hereford (England), settling in New England, and life in Ipswich, Massachusetts.

The book opens with a sort of introductory page that sets out what he will be including in the book. It reads:

 “By John Dane, senner, of Ipshwitch,

And Chiriergen, in the yer of our Lord, 1682;

Containing sum poems in waie of

Preparation for death, besides the obsaruaton

Of seauarall prouedensis in the Cose of

His lyfe, and aded seaueral meditations.

 

He that liues out full seauenty years,

And has fullfild that number,

His after time that doth apere

Is of grefe and great wonder. (psalms the 90:10)”

The book has 265 pages, which are quite small, the book being only fifteen centimeters or about six inches tall and three and a half inches wide. The cover has his signature on it.

Here is a page of the “shorthand” referenced in the description above. It looks more like a code than shorthand, but whatever John Dane called it, he was obviously using it to prevent anyone from reading what he had written. I wonder what this four-page-long passage contained.

"Shorthand" section of the commonplace book

The “two narratives” are brief memoirs of his life. He described his early years as ones of rebellion and foolish behavior. He had a sort of epiphany when he experienced a severe reaction to a bee sting. He was forced to consult a chiriergen (a seventeenth century term for a surgeon) for help with the swelling in his hand. The man made an impression on him, and after a few more adventures, he returned home to his parents and became a dutiful son and good Puritan. He then wrote about his decision to emigrate to the colonies, and his struggles upon arrival. He even reached such a point of despair that he considered taking his own life. But he persisted, and felt that the “special hand of God” had helped him. He concluded,

“Thus God hath all along preserved and kept me all my days. Although I have many times lost His special presence, yet he hath returned to me in mercy again...

Oh, loving relations, have care of quenching such notions of God’s spirit, lest you bring sorrow and affliction onto your heads and hearts, as many others have done, to their great grief and sorrow; and I can speak it, to the grief of my soul, by woeful experience.”

Portion of Dane's Poetry Narrative 

It appears John Dane hoped his narratives would help to guide his descendants in their own lives.

While John Dane began his work life as a tailor (he spells it taylor) in England, he became a chiriergen in the colonies. In the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary, Noah Webster defined the word, which he spelled chiurgeon, as “A surgeon; one whose profession is to heal diseases by manual operations, instruments or external applications.” Did John Dane’s experience with the chiriergen in England following his bee sting spur his career change? One of his sons, Dr. Philemon Dane, received medical training and followed his father into the practice of medicine.

The Commonplace book apparently was inherited by John Dane’s daughter Sarah, who married Daniel Warner. She gave the book to her grandson, Philemon Warner Jr. The inside cover was inscribed by Philemon as follows: "Philemon Warner, Junr, his book, given him by his grandmother Warner, Janry 20th, 1741.” The memoir portion of the book was eventually transcribed and published in 1854 as A Declaration of Remarkable Providences in the Course of My Life by John Dane of Ipswich 1682.

I have read portions of John Dane’s verse and prose narratives. I would like to read the other sections of the commonplace book, and examine the narratives with more care. There are so many wonderful details about John Dane’s life in this handwritten account that can help me better understand life in the seventeenth century and Puritan culture and beliefs.

 

Sources:

https://digital.americanancestors.org/digital/collection/p15869coll26

A Declaration of Remarkable Providences in the Course of My Life by John Dane of Ipswich 1682 to which is added a pedigree of the Dane family, and a few notes by a member of the New England historical-genealogical society. Prepared for the NEHG Register. Boston. Samuel G. Drake. 1854.

Beyond Narrative: the Conversion Plot of John Dane’s A Declaration of Remarkable Providences. Neuman, Meredith Marie. Clark University. Early American Literature. Vol. 40, No. 2 (2005), pp. 251-277. University of North Carolina Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25057399

The Chesley Family’s Connections to UNH: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt “A Spot on the Map”

 

The Students and President of the University of New Hampshire Walk in the Chesley’s Footprints

Benjamin Chesley: 1743-1831 (Maternal Fifth Great-Granduncle)
James Chesley: 1778-1825 (Maternal First Cousin 6x Removed)
Sally Runnels Chesley: 1779-1838 (Wife of Maternal First Cousin 6x Removed)
Abigail Flanders Chesley: 1803-1842 (Wife of Maternal 2^nd Cousin 5x Removed)

 

While researching the family of my fifth-great-granduncle Benjamin Chesley for the previous two posts, I ran across some interesting connections between the Chesley family and the University of New Hampshire. The land the university is built upon used to belong to Benjamin Chesley and his descendants, and specific locations on the campus map of today correspond to locations that were significant to the Chesley family.

I first discovered this connection to UNH when I read the following statement in a research document cited below (See Nascimento):

“What is now the UNH President’s Residence has been continuously occupied since Lieutenant Benjamin Chesley built it as his home in 1764. After more than a century of private ownership, the property was deeded to UNH (at the time, New Hampshire College of Agricultural and Mechanic Arts) where it has continued to house generations of university presidents.”

Benjamin referred to the home as his “mansion” in his will. He left the house and surrounding land to two grandsons, William and Valentine Chesley, the sons of Benjamin’s son James Chesley. Benjamin’s will stated:

“I give bequeath and devise to my two grand Sons viz: William Chelsey and Valentine Chelsey sons of my Son James Chelsey, deceased, their heirs and assigns forever all my lands in Durham with my mansion house in which I now live, and all the appurtenances thereunto belonging, together with my grist mill and all my right to the Saw Mill at Durham falls.”

Benjamin died in 1831, and sadly young Valentine Chesley died a year later on December 30, 1832. Valentine left all his property, except for a new house he had recently built, to his brother William. Therefore, we know that William Chesley owned the house and land that eventually was deeded to the University. It is unclear who inherited the property following William’s death in 1879. The house and land in Durham were not mentioned in William’s will, so he may have sold it or given it to his son years before his death. Some of the property must have eventually come into possession of the Mathes family, as the large house that became the university president’s residence was known as the Mathes House.

The home built by Benjamin Chesley that became the UNH President's residence. This house burned down in 1903 and was replaced with the present brick home.

The land was deeded to the university by Benjamin Thompson in 1891, whose connection, if any, to the Chesleys is unknown. The university was then known as the New Hampshire College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts. The college president moved into the large wooden house that Benjamin Chesley had built, pictured below. Sadly, just as a new college president was moving into the home in 1903, the building caught fire. Since it was built of wood, the fire completely destroyed the house, leaving the new president homeless and also without most of his family’s possessions, which also burned. The wooden home was replaced by a large brick house on the same lot which still serves as the UNH President’s official residence.

Another university building with connections to the Chesley family is the Memorial Union Building (MUB), which is essentially the university’s student union. It is located across Main Street from the President’s House, on a small hill. That high ground had been known locally as Chesley’s Hill, as it was part of the Chesley lands.

Memorial Union Building on area once known as Chesley Hill

The final connection to the Chesley family is a sad and disturbing one. Apparently the Chesleys had a small family burial ground on their land. This cemetery was located on land transferred to the University under the Thompson will. All that is known about the burial ground is the information contained on three Applications for Disinterment that the University filed in August 1943, requesting permission to exhume three Chesley graves and move them to a cemetery in Lee, New Hampshire, five miles away. Among the family members who were disinterred was James Chesley, son of Benjamin Chesley and the father of Valentine and William Chesley who inherited the land that now houses the University. James and his family had once lived in Chesley “mansion” and died in 1825.

 

Also disinterred was Sally Runnels Chesley, James’ wife and William and Valentine’s mother. Sally died in 1838. The final grave belonged to Abigail Flanders Chesley, William’s first wife, who died in 1842. So obviously William still owned the house and farmland in 1842 when his wife died. However, by 1860 he was living in Dover, New Hampshire, so the property had probably changed hands at some point between those two dates.

 

Looking at the Application for Disinterment forms, the burial ground was described as lying near a University building called West Hall. I learned that East and West Halls were two large dormitory buildings that stood near Chesley Hill. They were torn down in the 1970s. Rather than construct new buildings on the site, the University chose to listen to student demands and turn the area into a park named East West Park, which lies behind the MUB. The locations are visible on the map below. The president’s House and the MUB are marked with red, and the larger East West Park area that once included the Chesley family cemetery is highlighted in yellow.

 

Why did the university need to move these three graves? I can find no records indicating that there were plans to build in the area, and when West Hall was torn down, nothing replaced it, so the land wasn’t needed for a specific project. I found posts on Facebook showing that UNH campus property contains other small family cemeteries, but those have not been removed. Why was the Chesley cemetery targeted? I could find no press coverage reporting on the removal of the Chesley cemetery. And I noted that the work was scheduled for the summer break, so there were no students to witness century-old graves being desecrated. It seems as if the University was trying to hide what they were doing. Were descendants of the Chesley family contacted before the disinterment? Did they know what happened to their ancestors’ graves?

I wonder if the graveyard contained any other family members whose markers may not have survived. Records indicate that Benjamin Chesley, the man who built the original UNH president’s house, was buried on the property. The location was described in a book on Durham’s history (see citation below) as follows: “Lieut. Benjamin Chesley…owned land west of the mill road and south of the Mast Road. He was buried in the northwest corner of the present field, near the pasture wall.” Benjamin’s wife, Deborah Randall Chesley, died just a year before him. Was she buried there as well? And was his burial site “near the pasture wall” the same location as family burial ground that was excavated?  Did the university conduct a proper archeological excavation of the area to check for other remains? I find it hard to believe that in a century of owning the property, the Chesley family only laid three people to rest there, all within a twenty-year period between 1825 and 1842.

I also wonder exactly what happened to the bodies of James, Sally and Abigail Chesley. They were supposedly removed to “Giles” Cemetery in Lee, New Hampshire by a funeral home company called, rather ironically, Tasker and Chesley. I looked for Findagrave’s Giles Cemetery information, and discovered that the cemetery is now called Old Parish Cemetery, but had several other names over the years including Thompson, Gluke and Giles Cemetery, as well as First Parish Burial Ground.

 

Findagrave had listings at Old Parish Cemetery for the three Chesley family members, but the only photos and information on their Findagrave entries were the disinterment applications filed by the University. There were no photos of the graves. This suggests that the graves are unmarked, since nearly all the Old Parish cemetery markers have been photographed and GPS- located. It appears that the Chesleys were reinterred without their headstones, assuming they were properly reinterred at all. What did the university and the gravediggers do with their headstones? Were they destroyed during the disinterment?

Were no photographs taken of the burial ground before the graves were dug up? Are there any records of the purchase and location of the grave sites in Old Parish Cemetery? Is there any proof that these people were ever properly reburied? The least the university could have done is pay for proper markers in the Old Parish Cemetery after digging these people up. I feel the Chesleys were treated quite disrespectfully despite their historic ties to the University’s land. It is all quite disturbing.

Perhaps I will contact the University’s archivists and see if they can find any information on the disinterment and reburial of the Chesleys. There must be some sort of record explaining the decision, the reasoning behind it, and the procedure the University followed. Old Parish Cemetery records and Tasker and Chesley Funeral Home records should also be checked for information on the 1943 reburial.

It’s rather a shame that the University has no plaques or signs on campus recognizing the original owners of the University’s land. The Chesley home and family burial plot are now just spots on the campus map. Students have no idea they are walking in the footprints—and perhaps on the former graves-- of one of Durham’s founding families.

 

Sources:

A Photo Essay of Material Culture from the UNH President’s Residence. Emilia Nascimento. https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1149&context=spectrum

Family of Lieut. Benjamin Chisley of Durham New Hampshire. https://newhampshiregenealogy.com/strafford/genealogy-of-the-chesley-family-of-durham-new-hampshire.htm

History of the Town of Durham, New Hampshire (Oyster River Plantation) with Genealogical Notes. Vol. 2, pg.62. by Stackpole, Everett Schermerhorn; Thompson, Lucien; Meserve, Winthrop Smith. Publisher: Town of Durham. 1913. Ancestry.com.

Findagrave.com. Entries for James, Sally and Abigail Chesley.

A Will and a Way Before Death: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt “A Record I Read Differently Now”

Benjamin Chesley’s Will: Multiple Codicils, Six More Years of Life

Benjamin Chesley: 1743-1831 (Maternal Fifth-Great-Granduncle)

 

While researching the previous post on my fifth-great-granduncle Benjamin Chesley’s, which dealt with his signing eight petitions to various branches of government between 1787 and 1820, I ran across his will. I had seen the document during earlier research on his family, and it had made me question his purported death date. I decided to re-examine the will and try to resolve the discrepancies that had confused me in the past.

The will in question was written and signed in October of 1825. Wills of that era were normally written shortly before death, when the testator was in failing health and realized the end was near. As a result, some trees gave Benjamin Chesley a death year of 1825. Even Ancestry’s algorithm used the will to suggest a death year of 1825. But other records and trees—including mine --used a death date of 1831.

There were three possible explanations for the six year difference in death years. First, the person who wrote the will was not the correct Benjamin Chesley—I already knew there were several men with that name living in Massachusetts and New Hampshire during that time period, so it was a distinct possibility. Second, perhaps I had the wrong death date for Benjamin Chesley—perhaps he really did die in 1825 and the Chesley who died in 1831 was a different man. Third, Chesley actually wrote the will six years before he died, contrary to general practice of the time.

My first step to determine which possible explanation was correct was to read the will and identify the beneficiaries. Did they match my Benjamin Chesley’s children, or were there different children listed that would show the will was written by a different man?

The beneficiaries were as follows: Benjamin’s wife, Deborah.

Sons Isaac, Benjamin, Miles, Valentine, Israel and Thomas. He also leaves property to his son James’ sons William and Valentine—James had already died in 1823.

Daughters: Deborah Stone, Susanna Chesley, Nancy Hart, Molly Woodman and Abigail Hall. He also leaves the sum of $50 to Nancy Hart’s daughter (his granddaughter) Mary Chesley. He also left the paltry amount of $1.00 each to his grandchildren who were born to eldest daughter Abigail.

The sons primarily received land in the will. Benjamin seems to have had extensive land holdings in a variety of locations in New Hampshire, including Durham, New Durham, Middleton, and towns in Rockingham County including Nottingham, Barrington and New Market. In addition, his grandsons were to inherit a grist mill and saw mill at Durham Falls. The daughters primarily received money.

The beneficiaries perfectly correlate to Benjamin and Deborah’s eleven children in my tree. The name “Miles” in the handwritten copy of the will in the probate records looks more like the name “Moses”, and that is how AI transcribed it. However, I think it should read “Miles” as all the other records for that son show his name as “Miles”. Miles did have a son named Moses so perhaps an error was made in probate court when they copied the will into the court records.

This evidence persuades me that the will was indeed written by my fifth great-granduncle Benjamin Chesley. The next thing I needed to check was the date on the probate records. Was the will probated in 1825, or in a later year? When I took the time to examine the entire probate file, I discovered that Benjamin had added two codicils to his will in later years.

The first codicil was dated December 30, 1828, three years after the original will was signed. The codicil made two changes to his original will. First, Benjamin made an additional bequest to his daughter Nancy Hart, writing:

“And I do hereby give and bequeath unto my daughter Nancy Hart in addition to the provision made for her in my said Will the use and occupancy of my Hill house so called settled in said Durham together with the use and occupancy if one half acre of land and around said house where she shall chouse so long as she remains a widow and no longer.”

Signature section of First Codicil to Benjamin Chesley Will

He goes on to specify that Nancy must actually live in this house, and that she does not have permission to rent it out and collect the rents. He also directs his grandsons William and Valentine (sons of his dead son James) to provide Nancy with what is “sufficient for one to be wintered and summered and kept the year round.”

The second section of the codicil amends a provision Benjamin had made to Sally Chesley, the widow of his son James Chesley. He had given her “one full third of all my estate as might have happened to her by her husbands decease to whom she a former will” during her natural life. In other words, she would receive a life interest to one third of what her husband would have inherited from Benjamin. The remainder of James’ would-be inheritance was to go to James and Sally’s sons, William and Valentine Chesley. Benjamin amended this bequest to give her a full one-third of the property, not just a life interest, with the proviso that she not remarry.

Second Codicil to Benjamin Chesley will with date of codicil and date of probate highlighted

The second codicil was dated June 24, 1830, just a month after the death of Benjamin’s wife, Deborah Randall Chesley. The second codicil made the following changes: Benjamin leaves daughters Nelly Woodman and Deborah Stone fifty dollars each in addition to the bequests in the previous will. He also references his wife’s death and eliminates a clause in his original will giving his wife power to distribute the residual assets of the estate among his children as needed. Instead, he gives daughters Susannah Chesley and Mary Hart any residue of the estate, divided equally between them.

Section of Second Codicil noting the death of Benjamin's wife Deborah

The will and two codicils were presented to the probate court for execution on May 16, 1831. Benjamin died February 5, 1831. The probate date three months later seems reasonable.

After rereading the will and codicils, I feel I can understand why Benjamin Chesley chose to make his will long before his eventual death, which wasn’t typical in the early nineteenth century. He had a considerable estate to dispose of—extensive property, businesses, and money. He seems to have been a planner. He wanted to ensure that everything was prepared well in advance of his death. In addition, his son James had died unexpectedly young just two months earlier in August 1825. This probably prompted Benjamin to worry that death could strike him suddenly as well. He wanted to provide security for James’ widow and children.

He continued to think about how to best distribute his possessions as the years passed, and made adjustments to the will as his priorities and his family’s circumstances changed. I can also now see that he took responsibility for his family members, caring for his son’s widows and his grandchildren as well as his own children. I’m glad I took the time to re-examine and reassess this fascinating document.

 

Sources:

Probate Records, 1773-1946; Probate Indexes, 1773-1989; Author: New Hampshire. Probate Court (Strafford County) Will of Benjamin Chesley. https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/8996/images/007131964_00155?treeid=46986934&personid=322240494464&usePUB=true&usePUBJs=true&pId=253469

Community Petitions: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt “Neighbors and Community”

 

Benjamin Chesley and Neighbors Band Together to Petition the Government in 1780s-1810s

Benjamin Chesley: 1743-1831 (Maternal Fifth Great-Uncle)

 

I recently discovered a new resource on Ancestry: a database titled “New Hampshire, U.S., Government Petitions, 1700-1826”. While the database had been available since 2021, I had never seen an Ancestry hint related to it, so had never examined the documents. While researching my fifth-great-uncle Benjamin Chesley, I found a hint that showed he was a signatory on a petition sent to the state government objecting to a planned road project in 1792. The document was fascinating, and I was able to find eight additional petitions my ancestor signed around the same time period. The petitions provide a window into the way neighbors and communities banded together to address concerns in the early decades of our nation.

Petitions bearing Benjamin Chesley's signature

Benjamin Chesley was born in Durham, New Hampshire on January 24, 1743, to parents Thomas Chesley and Mary Hill Chesley. He was one of their eight children. He married Deborah Randall, another of my fifth-great-grandaunts. He farmed and owned land in several locations. Benjamin and Deborah had eleven children, and lived in the Durham area.

The earliest petition I found that contained Benjamin’s signature was dated March 30, 1787.  The petition was simple and direct: the concerned residents of Strafford County asked that “his Excellency the President and the Honourable Council of the State of New Hampshire” to appoint Ebenezer Smith to the vacant office of Register of Probate. Smith was, the petitioners wrote, “a person well qualified for the office and whom we desire to be appointed…” A year before the U.S. Constitution was ratified, the citizens of a small county in New Hampshire already had enough confidence in their state officials that they believed petitioning them regarding appointments would have effect.

Another petition from 1787 speaks to some conflict within the community.

“The subscriber inhabitants of the County of Stafford being informed that some persons have petitioned your Honors to remove the Hon.ble George Frost Esq from his seat a Judge of the Inferior Court of Commonplace for said County which we conceive to be owing to prejudice---therefore we beg leave to suggest to your honors…from our knowledge and observation the sd [said]Frost has acted in his office afor’d [aforementioned] impartially and to general satisfaction and that his removal therefrom will not in our opinion be for the interest of said County. Wherefore we pray your honors he may be continued in office and we as in Duty Bound will pray so.”

Benjamin Chesley's signature is top center

Benjamin was the topmost signator, with his relative George Chesley signing directly beneath him. I recognize numerous other names among the signators who were either relatives by marriage or neighbors of the Chesleys, including Winthrop and John Bickford, Robert Burnham, Valentine and Benjamin Mathes and Christopher Nutter. This was obviously a situation they all felt strongly about. Someone in the area was trying to cause trouble for this judge out of “prejudice”. Perhaps the judge had ruled against the “persons” in question and they were seeking revenge, or they anticipated he would rule unfavorably against them in a future case. The community obviously did not approve of the tactics these “persons” were employing, and decided to make an end run around them.

The 1792 petition, the first one I had discovered on Ancestry, reveals some conflict between communities and regions. The petition objects to proposed road construction plans, suggesting that the portion through their community of Durham was ill-advised and poorly planned and will not benefit them. It reads as follows:

“The subscribers, being inhabitants of the Town of Durham in said State—will that every necessary alteration should be made in our Public highways—and anxious that the intended communication between Concord & this Town should take place—Yet, must beg leave, humbly to remonstrate against the alterations proposed by your Honor’s Committee in running through said Town—

The nature of our ground is such, that very little of it can be improved for Roads, without great expense—And we think it almost impracticable ever to make a good road on the land they have run upon—but are certain, that it will require many years, with large sums of money, to make it possible with safety—

Besides, we cannot conceive the advantages that will accrue to the Public from the amendments, will be adequate to the injury the Ton must sustain—as we shall be obliged to purchase the land for the new road at an extravagant price, and likewise forced, not only to support that, but also the old one for the benefits of individuals long since settled upon it, as greater parts of whose interests must fall a sacrifice to the proposed exchange—When the saving in distance will never exceed one hundred rods. If that’s soon to be lost by the Travelor in passing over hills and through mires, which abundantly be found. The way now occupied is free from hills, and with much labour for a hundred years, is now a very good Road—vastly better, we presume, than the new one will be the same number of years hence.

For those reasons we humbly pray that much of the Report of your Honour’s Committee as respects the alteration of highways in said Durham may not be received or accepted by your Hounours and we as in duty will ever pray---

Durham 21st May 1792”

1792 peitition signature page

As we can see, the problems of 1892 are much like those of 2026, with taxpayers objecting to how the government intends to spend tax dollars, demanding that the money be spent wisely and without extravagance or waste, and that the projects benefit everyone.

The final petition that caught my eye was one of the last ones Benjamin signed. Apparently, much like today, people were being nominated to hold office in 1813 merely on the basis of their political allegiances, without questioning whether they possess any skill or experience for the job. The residents who would suffer as a result of the political appointment, objected, writing in part:

“…your petitioners humbly share that there is a petition about to be presented to your Excellency and the honorable counsel recommending a man by the name of John Jenkins Jr of Barnstead in said county of Strafford as a suitable person for a justice of the peace--- and as your Excellency and the honorable council are unacquainted with both petitioners and candidate we have thought it our duty to lay before you the true character of the said John Jenkens as he is surley [surely] a partey man and instead of being a peacemaker he often meddles with matters that he ought not and (as Solomon saith) “is like one who taketh a dog by the ears” and if he finds at any time that any two persons are at variance he will generally be meddling either as a pettafoger [pettifogger] or like a busybody in other mens matters in order to enhance the dispute and blow up the flame of discord and keep the fire burning therefore we do think that it would be derogatory to the character of your Excellency and the character of the honourable council that we are not induced to make this remonstrance by any prepossession of prejudice against the said John Jenkins Jr or influenced by political divisions but we think we are influenced by the love of peace & harmony and for the benefit of society and we most earnestly hope that the name of your Excellency and the name of the honorable Secretary will not be so debased as to be placed on a commission with the name of the aforesaid John Jenkins Jr .”

These petitions show how, in the very early history of our nation, the citizens felt confidence in the country’s institutions and the rule of law to bring their concerns before their government and ask for redress. They did not fear reprisal—they confidently signed their names. These petitions were probably passed from person to person in a community, which is why the signatures of family members and neighbors were clustered together.

I wish I shared my ancestor’s confidence that our government cares about our concerns. While I send emails to my senators, my Congressional representative, and my President and Vice President, I doubt that they care. They all seem far more concerned with lining their own pockets and those of the extremely wealthy than in serving the interests of their constituents. I hope that someday I will once again believe, like my fifth great-granduncle Benjamin Chesley did, that my government truly is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Benjamin Chesley died in 1835 at the age of eighty-eight. He is buried in Durham, New Hampshire.

 

 

Sources:

New Hampshire, U.S., Government Petitions, 1700-1826.

Box 46: 1819. May 1819; Box 23: Dec 30, 1786-Aug 1787, March 1787. Accessed on Ancestry.com.

Multiple Susannahs, Multiple Mistakes: 52 Ancestors 2026 Prompt “Multiples”

 

Two Susannah Chesleys Married Two John Smiths in Two Different Colonies, Causing Two Times the Confusion

Susannah Chesley: 1677-1746 (Maternal 7^th Great-Grandaunt)
Captain John Smith: 1669-1744 (Husband of Maternal 7^th Great-Grandaunt)

 

I have been using Ancestry’s Tree Checker tool to identify and correct errors in my tree. The program recently suggested that Sarah Chesley, a 7^th great-grandaunt, was a possible duplicate. The program suggested Sarah was the same person as her sister Susannah. While I rejected that possibility, as I glanced at Susannah’s Fact page in my tree, I noticed some peculiarities. It turns out that I did have duplicates in my tree, but it wasn’t Sarah being the same as Susannah—it appeared I had combined two different Susannah Chesleys. They were both born in the 1670s and both married men named John Smith. But they were born in different colonial towns to different parents. I had made a rookie mistake: accepting Ancestry hints without verifying them, blindly following other people who had combined the two women.

My Susannah Chesley was born in 1677 in Durham, New Hampshire, to parents Thomas Chesley and Elizabeth Thomas Chesley. Susannah married John Smith on June 17, 1694. He was born January 9, 1669 to parents Joseph Smith and Elizabeth Bickford Smith of Oyster River.

Map of Oyster River area in late 1600s.

The other Susannah Chesley was born in 1668 in Stonington, Connecticut. Her parentage is unclear. She married John Smith in 1691. That John Smith was born July 13, 1672 in Watertown, Massachusetts, also supposedly to a Joseph Smith and Elizabeth Bickford. Obviously that was incorrect, as Joseph Smith and Elizabeth Bickford lived in New Hampshire. I found another researcher,  Brad Stauf, who had compiled information on the Connecticut family and listed John Smith’s parents as Daniel Smith and Mary Grant of Massachusetts. I find his evidence, posted on Findagrave, persuasive.

So I had determined that the two John and Susannah Smiths lived in two different colonies. Each couple had given birth to multiple children, and I had erroneously added both sets of children to my tree. To my horror, I realized I had poor Susannah giving birth to fifteen children over the space of twenty years. It was a hideous mess. My tree even had three children—Jerusha, John and Joshua-- born in the same year in different states, and had several similar sounding children’s names (John Joseph, Josiah. Joshua)—how was I going to untangle this? How had I failed to notice that some children were born in Stonington, Connecticut and others in Oyster River, New Hampshire, 170 miles away? People simply didn’t travel back and forth over such distances in the 17^th century.

Map of New Hampshire, 1700s

I found one source, an old family genealogy book titled “The Smiths of Oyster River” which had a list of children the editors attributed to the Oyster River Smith family. This was a wonderful starting point, and it was reinforced by another book entitled Colonial Families of the United States of America, which listed the same eight children.

I began clearing up my mistakes by removing any of Susannah’s children that were born in Stonington. The names piled up: Hannah, Jerusha, Joshua, Margaret, Daniel, Esther, Ephraim, Josiah, Silas, and Lucy. I removed ten children that were from the Connecticut family.

That left me with only five children that had likely been born in Oyster Rive to the correct Susannah Chesley and John Smith. All five—John, Elizabeth, Joseph, Samuel and Benjamin—were on the lists of children from the two genealogy books. But the books listed an additional three children who needed to be added to the tree: Hannah, Ebenezer and Winthrop.

I then set out to find primary sources for the eight Oyster River Smith children. I was able to find birth records for all eight children. Additional records, including their deaths, marriages and children, were more spotty. But at least I was able to verify that John and Susannah Chesley Smith gave birth to those eight children in the Durham/Oyster River area of New Hampshire.

I also found some interesting information about John Smith in a genealogy book by Ballard Smith, Jr. (see citation below) that gives a small glimpse into the Smith family’s lives.

Ballard Smith wrote: “It was [John Smith] who ‘defended so successfully’ the garrison at the mouth of Oyster River, then commanded by his father, the attack upon it being made when he was but just finishing his honeymoon, his marriage to Susanna Chesley having been consummated but a few weeks before. It is to be presumed, however, that there was neither much opportunity nor leisure for overmuch sentiment in those days, with the new and untrodden lands to be brought into the service of civilization and the constant incursions of hostile savages to be prepared for at all seasons, and to be resisted vigorously when made.”

What a way for poor Susannah to start her married life—under attack by native tribes. I hope that there was a bit more “sentiment” involved despite the danger. At least they and the house survived the attack. The garrison stood until the late 1880s.

Painting of the Smith Garrison House, Unknown artist, 1890s

Ballard Smith noted that John Smith was “unusually active and industrious” and that despite “the small patrimony that his father left him, he had amassed a very considerable fortune” over his lifetime. He wrote:

“Capt. John commenced his business life as a land surveyor, in which connection his name is frequently met with in the town records, and, with the farm at Lubberland as the homestead, gradually added to his property, until he became one of the largest real estate owners and wealthiest men in his section. He owned almost the entire shore of Great Bay from Lamprey River to Crommet's Creek, nearly four miles in extent…”

Illustration of early 1700s surveying equipment similar to what John Smith used

In addition to real estate, John Smith operated two profitable sawmills along the Lamprey River. He also served as Selectman of the town of Dover repeatedly during the period between 1711 and 1727. Ballard Smith also approvingly noted his ancestor’s generosity, writing:

“He seems to have kept "open house" at the garrison, and tradition glows with its accounts of the liberality and hospitality displayed by the father and sons at the old homestead. They seem to have made an excellent use of their large wealth.”

Crommet's Creek, New Hampshire. Land possibly owned by John Smith

John Smith died May 14, 1744. Susannah Chesley Smith died two years later on March 24, 1746. He was 75 years old and she was 69 years old. I have found no record to indicate where they were buried, which is not surprising as there were few formal cemeteries at that time.

I am so glad that Ancestry’s Tree Checker sent me on this journey. Not only did I correct multiple errors in my tree, but I also found interesting information about a colonial family and life in 17^th century New Hampshire.

Sources:

Colonial Families of the United States of America, 1607-1775. Mackenzie, George Norbury, and Nelson Osgood Rhoades, editors. Volume III. “John Smith”. Page 516. 1912. Reprinted, Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1966, 1995. Ancestry.com.

Findagrave notes by Brad Stauf on Connecticut and New Hampshire John Smiths. https://www.ancestry.com/mediaui-viewer/collection/1030/tree/46986934/person/322298746932/media/8e62f29e-d62c-45e7-bafa-3f916b8cfde0?galleryindex=1&sort=-created

A genealogical record of the Smiths of Oyster River from the first settler in 1630 to 1874: with some account of the immediate ancestors of Hon. Valentine Smith and his descendants / Ballard Smith, Jr.. Durham, NH : Courier-Journal Print, 1874. Ancestry.com.

Painting of Smith Garrison House, Unknown Artist. Circa 1890.

The Practical Surveyor or the Art of Land Measuring Made Easy. Wyld, Samuel. London. J. Hooke and J. Sisson. 1725. Illustration.

Map of Oyster River, 1600s. https://www.durhamnh.gov/