[18546] All data from Whitney.
[8972] All data from Hoyt's Issue Fall 1995 page 1214. Source WhiteGenealogy.
_Samuel, Sr. SMITH _______
| (1545 - ....)
_Samuel, Jr. SMITH __|_Anne BURLEIGH ___________
| (1575 - ....) m 1599 (1550 - ....)
_Samuel, III SMITH ____|
| (1602 - 1680) m 1624 |
| | __________________________
| | |
| |_Barbary MUMFIRDE ___|__________________________
| m 1599
_Phillip, Sr. SMITH _|
| (1632 - 1683) m 1657|
| | __________________________
| | |
| | _____________________|__________________________
| | |
| |_Elizabeth CHILIAB ____|
| (1602 - 1685) m 1624 |
| | __________________________
| | |
| |_____________________|__________________________
|
|
|--Samuel SMITH
| (1657 - 1707)
| _John FOOTE ______________
| |
| _Robert FOOTE _______|_Helen WARREN ____________
| | (1553 - 1606) m 1576
| _Nathaniel, Sr. FOOTE _|
| | (1593 - 1644) m 1615 |
| | | _John, Sr. BROOKE ________
| | | | (1544 - 1599)
| | |_Joane BROOKE _______|_Elizabeth Water WHATMAN _
| | (.... - 1608) m 1576 (1549 - ....)
|_Rebecca FOOTE ______|
(1634 - 1701) m 1657|
| _Thomas DEMMING __________
| | (1561 - ....)
| _Jonathan DEMMING ___|__________________________
| | (1580 - ....)
|_Elizabeth DEMMING ____|
(.... - 1683) m 1615 |
| _Thomas, Jr. GILBERT _____+
| | (1556 - 1642) m 1574
|_Elizabeth GILBERT __|_Elizabeth BELCHER _______
(1581 - ....) (1559 - 1645)
[14587] All data from McDowell.
_____________________
|
______________________|_____________________
|
________________________|
| |
| | _____________________
| | |
| |______________________|_____________________
|
_John, Sr. SMITH ____|
| (1621 - 1670) m 1643|
| | _____________________
| | |
| | ______________________|_____________________
| | |
| |________________________|
| |
| | _____________________
| | |
| |______________________|_____________________
|
|
|--Samuel SMITH
| (1661 - 1737)
| _George PARKHURST ___+
| | (1545 - ....) m 1568
| _John, Sr. PARKHURST _|_Phebe LEETE ________
| | (1571 - 1611) (1549 - ....)
| _George, Sr. PARKHURST _|
| | (1589 - ....) |
| | | _____________________
| | | |
| | |_Sarah __??__ ________|_____________________
| | (1572 - ....)
|_Deborah PARKHURST __|
m 1643 |
| _____________________
| |
| ______________________|_____________________
| |
|_Phebe MATHERS _________|
(1590 - ....) |
| _____________________
| |
|______________________|_____________________
[6873] All data from Lewis.
________________________
|
_John, Sr. SMITH _____|________________________
| (1621 - 1670) m 1643
_Philip SMITH _______|
| (1650 - 1708) |
| | _George, Sr. PARKHURST _+
| | | (1589 - ....)
| |_Deborah PARKHURST ___|_Phebe MATHERS _________
| m 1643 (1590 - ....)
_John, Sr. SMITH ____|
| (1685 - 1728) |
| | ________________________
| | |
| | _Daniel STEWART ______|________________________
| | | (.... - 1703)
| |_Dorcas STEWART _____|
| (1666 - 1719) |
| | ________________________
| | |
| |_Mary __??__ _________|________________________
|
|
|--Samuel SMITH
| (1713 - ....)
| _Robert, Sr. PEASE _____+
| | (1562 - 1623) m 1586
| _John, IV PEASE ______|_Margaret RODANS _______
| | (1608 - 1674) (1574 - 1644)
| _Thomas, Sr. PEASE __|
| | (1657 - ....) |
| | | _Malachi BROWNING ______
| | | |
| | |_Mary BROWNING _______|________________________
| |
|_Hannah PEASE _______|
(1690 - ....) |
| ________________________
| |
| _Joseph, Sr. MERRY ___|________________________
| | (1607 - 1710) m 1659
|_Bathsheba MERRY ____|
(1665 - ....) |
| _George, Sr. PARKHURST _+
| | (1589 - ....)
|_Elizabeth PARKHURST _|_Phebe MATHERS _________
m 1659 (1590 - ....)
[6860] All data from Lewis.
__
|
__|__
|
_Samuel, Sr. SMITH __|
| (1545 - ....) |
| | __
| | |
| |__|__
|
_Samuel, Jr. SMITH __|
| (1575 - ....) m 1599|
| | __
| | |
| | __|__
| | |
| |_Anne BURLEIGH ______|
| (1550 - ....) |
| | __
| | |
| |__|__
|
|
|--Samuel, III SMITH
| (1602 - 1680)
| __
| |
| __|__
| |
| _____________________|
| | |
| | | __
| | | |
| | |__|__
| |
|_Barbary MUMFIRDE ___|
m 1599 |
| __
| |
| __|__
| |
|_____________________|
|
| __
| |
|__|__
[14583]
All data from McDowell. "SAMUEL SMITH, called Lieutenant Samuel afterhis appointment in 1663, was born in England, probably near Hadleighin Suffolk, in 1601 or 1602 where he married about1624 one Elizabethwho d. in So. Hadley, Mass., Mar. 16,1686, age 84. He died in HadleyMassachusetts in Dec 1680, age 78. (His estate was inventoried inJanuary 1681) He came with his wife and four of his children in theship "Elizabeth" which sailed from Ipswich, Suffolk, England (seeJudds "Hadley") on April 30, 1634. He and his wife Elizabeth gavetheir ages as 32, and named their four children as follows: Samuel,Jr., age 9; Elizabeth, age 7; Mary age 4 and Philip, age 1. On boardthe same ship were families named Rayner, Kemball, Scott, Munnings,Mixer, Bradstreet, Underwood, all said to have been Suffolk people,and Lewis, Woodward, Bloomfield, Day, Hastings, Gouldson, Cutting andFirmin whose origins are unknown.
"Assuming a period of two to three months to complete a crossing ofthe Atlantic in those days, the family probably did not reach theshores of America earlier than late July or early August of 1634. Justwhere they landed is not known. Some say it was at Salem and indeed aSamuel Smyth(sic) is recorded (Annals of Salem by Joseph B. Felt, Vol.I, p. 167) as having been granted land and made a freeman in Salemsubsequent to 1637. But the "History of Salem" by Sidney Perley, Vol.II, page 11, says, "at a meeting of the whole town April 23, 1638there was grante to Samuel Smith 200 acres of land being 50 more thanhis former grant of 100 (sic) acres which was annulled"; then in afoot note it is stated that Samuel Smith was one of the very firstsettlers in Enon which became Wenham. He married Sarah who died in theautumn of 1642. On page 127 of the same Vol. II it is stated thatSamuel Smith built a house in Wenham where he lived until 1642 when hedied.
"This Salem record seems to dispose of the claim that the WethersfieldSamuel Smith first settled in Salem. That he was in Watertown is borneout by the fact that in September of 1634, which must have been soonafter his arrival from England, he was a freeman and an earlyproprietor in that town but with no evidence that he was a resident. (see Bonds History of Watertown, p. 1017.) Some have conjectured thathe immediately went to Wethersfield Connecticut, This writer doubtsthis because no permission was so early given by the General Court forremoval thence and being a freeman and therefore a church member ingood and favorable standing and with rights to vote in the town it isimprobable that he would have risked so much with his family of wifeand four small children in the face of so many other dangers anddifficulties. He could, however, have ventured alone leaving hisfamily with friends or relatives on the seaboard while making anexploratory trip and as we shall see later this writer suspects thatthis is what he did. The General Court gave its approval on May 6thand June 3rd of 1635 for removal of people from Watertown "to anyplace they shall think meet to make choice, provided they continuestill under this government" and it was after one of these dates thatit seems reasonable that Samuel Smith and his family departed. Adamsand Stiles in their monumental "Ancient Wethersfield", say on page 300of Vol I that they came "in 1635 or late 1634".
"How he made the journey is not known. He could have done it, as manydid, by overland route over Indian trails or he could have gone bywater which in some ways was more hazardous because of storms anduncharted channels which took their toll of coastal craft. Some senttheir house-hold goods by water but brought themselves, their horses,cattle and hogs by land. Winthrop's "History of New England", page 140Vol. I, tells of a party of sixty men, women and little children goingoverland to Connecticut in September of 1635 with their cows, horsesand swine, and arriving safely. Wethersfield is said to have beendiscovered by John Oldham and three others in the autumn of 1633.Those who came in 1635 and 1636 according to "Bonds History ofWatertown, Massachusetts", as listed on page 29 of Adams and Stiles"Old Wethersfield", include Samuel Smith and Lieutenant Robert Seeley.There is a strong implication that Samuel may have gone ahead of hisfamily. On page 30 - 31of Adams and Stiles "Ancient Wethersfield" isgiven a Iist of new arrivals in Wethersfield between 1636 and 1640 "nolater than 1645". In that list is Rev. Henry Smith and "his sonsSamuel and Philip". Since Rev. Henry had no son Philip and his sonSamuel was not born until 1638 or 39(see page 628 of Vol. II of Stiles"Ancient Wethersfield") and Samuel did have sons of both names whoseages in 1636 were 11 and 3 respectively (see page 647 of Vol. II ofStiles "Ancient Wethersfield") it is quite certain the Samuel andPhilip listed were sons of Samuel rather than of Rev. Henry. If thisbe true then here to evidence of them arriving later than their fatherwho came in 1635 or 36, thus solving the question of how he could havehoused them that first year in the Wilderness of Pyquag the Indianname of the settlement before it was renamed Wethersfield. Being thereahead of them he could have built a home for their arrival thefollowing year. A map of old Wethersfield with layout of streets andlots, 1633,_34, shows the Samuel Smith homestead as lying on BroadStreet between the households of Thomas Killbourn on the north andJohn Edwards on the south. The household of Rev. Henry Smith, thefirst pastor of the Wethersfield Church, also the households ofRichard Smith and William Smith are indicated on the map. None ofthese latter three Smiths are thought to have been related to Samuel.Nathaniel Foote and J. Churchill with whose families members anddescendants of the Samuel Smith family later intermarried, are shownbut not John Roote or Luke Hitchcock who came later. Robert Seeley,from whom the children of this writer's son directly descend, isshown, he having been one of the very early settlers of Wethersfield.
"Samuel Smith is called "The Fellmonger" in the early Wethersfieldrecords meaning very likely that he was a tanner by trade and a dealerin skins and furs of animals. The word generally refers to sheep peltsbut there could not have been many sheep in that wolf infestedwilderness at so early a date although there were some a little later.This writer rather expected to find that he was a representative orLondon fur traders who were becoming active in North America at thetime but no records to support this conjecture have been found. Hemust have been a man of some means because he figured in a goodlynumber of land purchases and sales in Wethersfield. On page 643, Vol.I of Adams and Stiles "Ancient Wethersfield" the statement is madethat Samuel Smith was "one of the wealthiest men Wethersfield". Thiswas in 1646. His son John in 1672 was admitted by town vote inWethersfield as an inhabitant to set up "a trade of tarnning in thistown". He had been living in Hadley and evidently had returned toWethersfield then or before.
"Samuel Smith served Wethersfield as a Deputy to the general Courtalmost continuously from November 1637 to May 1656. He also served asAssistant to the Connecticut Colony in March and April of 1638. (SeeConn. Colonial records )The General Court sat first at Hartford (April26,836) by authority of a commission from Governor Winthrop -Massachusetts to "govern the people of Connecticut for the space ofone year". Rev. Henry Smith was one of the governor's originalappointees and was living in Watertown Massachusetts at the time.Later the General Court of Connecticut which included the electeddeputies called itself the "General Assembly". In May of 1678 it wasknown as the "Governor and Council". In May of 1698 it was dividedinto two sections known as "The Upper House" which consisted of theGovernor or his deputy and his assistants and the "Lower House" madeup of the deputies of the several towns. In 1819 the Upper Housebecame Senators, the Lower House, Representatives.
"The Court in early days consisted of the Governor and least sevenchosen assistants and four deputies from-each town. It not onlyperformed legislative and adjudicative functions but also served asthe "Court of Elections" with power to choose the Governor and hisassistants. In February 1651 Samuel Smith served as a member of aParticular Court in Hartford, chosen to try John Carrington and hiswife for witchcraft. An indictment "thou deservest to dye" wasreturned but the sentences were probably not carried out.
"Samuel Smith figured in a number of land transactions and seems tohave been engaged in various commercial enterprises. In November 1649the General Court authorized him and "the rest of the owners of theshipp at Wethersfield to fit and make so many pipestaves as willfreight out said shipp the first voyage, etc.". Pipestaves were usedin the West Indies to make barrels for the shipment of molasses, rum,salt beef, pork and fish. The building of this ship had beenauthorized by the General Court and was probably the first ship builtin Connecticut. Thomas Deming, a ship carpenter, was probably themaster builder. The ship was named the "Tryall" and captained first byMr. Larribee, and the boatswain was Christopher Fox of Wethersfield.It appears that she was still in operation in 1662 plying as far asthe West Indles. On December 28, 1629 Samuel Smith Sr., NathanielDickinson and Mr. Trat (probably Richard Treat) were chosen by thetown to "seat men and women in the meeting house", an importantassignment in those days when social rank as practiced in old Englandstill influenced the settlers. Seating was done on the basis ofcommunity standing and could be done peaceably only by freeman mosthighly regarded both for integrity and social rank.
"On Mar. 28, 1653 in a town meeting Samuel Smith was one of thosechosen to meet with a committee from Mattabeseck (Middletown) to fixthe boundary line between the two settlements. Boundary matters weretroublesome in those days and required many adjustments to settleoverlapping and infringement problems that arose among the settlers.
"In May 1653 Samuel Smith was made a member of the Committee for Warin Wethersfield and sometime before 1658 was commissioned a Sergeantof the Wethersfield train band. The train band was an organizationformed to defend the town and its officers were chosen by thesoldiers, subject to confirmation by the Particular Court which dealtwith the lesser cases, offenders having the right of appeal to theGeneral Court. Wethersfield sent a contingent of men under the commandof Lieutenant Robert Seeley to fight the Pequots in 1637 and it issaid that Samuel Smith was one of the group but this writer has seenno definite proof of it. (Many early records of Wethersfield wereprobably lost at the time of the Stamford and Hadley migrations.)
"Wethersfield during the first twenty five years of its existencesuffered two church quarrels one in 1640-41 resulting in a largenumber of its citizens going to the Rippowam's Country (StamfordConnecticut) and to Saybrook (New Haven, Stratford and Milford), and asecond, in 1659 resuiting in an additional number removing themselvesfrom the Jurisdiction of Connecticut into the jurisdiction ofMassachusetts and founding Hadley {See petition reproduced with JohnDeming information. The meeting at which this latter removal wasdecided was held at Goodman Ward's house in Hartford on April 18,1659. Here a compact was signed by 59 men, 20 of whom, includingSamuel Smith Sr., Samuel Smith Jr. and Philip Smith were fromWethersfield. The signers agreed to remove themselves and families tothe new settlement on the east side of the river from Northhampton andto be dwelling there by the 39th day of September 1660. The Rev. JohnRussell Jr. Of Wethersfield was their spiritual leader and becametheir first minister at Hadley.
"The History of Northampton by Trumbull Vol. I, page76 refers to theagents of the Hartford Company, one of whom was Samuel Smith ofWethersfield, as purchasing, in 1659, the meadow of "Capewonke", laterknown as Hatfleld. It was then a part of Nanotuck (Nonotuck) includingNorthampton, a part of the grant made to the settlers fromConnecticut, largely Windsor and Hartford, who settled Northampton in1653. The price paid was 30 pounds in wheat and peas, delivered atHartford, and the payment is recorded as having been made promptly.(First Book of Deeds at Springsfield.)
"On November 9th, 1659, at Hartford and approximately at the same timeat Wethersfield and at the new plantation at Norwottuck (Hadley) whichby then included Capewonke, the settlers and the settlers to be, choseseven men, among-them Samuel Smith, "to order all public occasionsthat concern the good of that plantation for the year ensueing" (FirstBook of Records in Hadley)
"There were 48 original proprietors of the settlement in theNorwottuck Country, later called Hadley, including among them SamuelSmith and his sons Chileab and Philip. It will be noted that his sonsSamuel and John do not appear. John, it seems by the records, livedalternately in Hadley and Wethersfield. Samuel, Jr. is thought to haveremoved to New London and thence to Virginia and all track of himlost. (P. 647 Vol. II of Stiles "Ancient Wethersfield".)
"Samuel Smith's public life in the new Norwottuck plantation, laterHadley, began soon after his arrival, He and Peter Tilton were chosenTown Measurers on December 31, 1660 to lay out the lands for thesettlers, place stakes at the "front and rear" of every lot and keep arecord of them. During the same month at Norwottuck, along withNathaniel Dickinson, Andrew Bacon, Andrew Warner and William Lewis,Samuel Smith was chosen as one of the first Townsmen, now calledSelectmen. He attended the March 1661 session of the General Court atSpringfield as a juror. At the next meeting of the court on May 22,the town was named Hadley, after Hadleigh in Suffolk County, Englandfrom whence came some of the settlers including, probably, SamuelSmith and his wife, Elizabeth.
"The May 22, 1661 session of the court authorized the town of Hadleyto choose commissioners with power, and without jury to determinecivil actions not exceeding 5 pounds and to deal with criminal actionswhere the penalty did not exceed ten stripes for one offense,"provided said offenders may appeal their cases to the Springfield orNorthampton courts". The townspeople met, as authorized and chosethree commissioners or Deputies to the General Courts one being SamuelSmith, the other two Andrew Bacon and Mr. Wllliam Westwood. He waschosen again in 1663,1664, 1665, 1667, 1668, 1671 and 1673 and veryprobably, if the record was complete, in some other years as well. Hewas also made associate of the County Court for Hampshire County in1678 and 1679.
"Samuel Smith was chosen to be a Townsman or Selectman tine aftertime, his last election being in 1680 the year of his death. From therecords it would appear, also, that in the years when he did not serveas Townsman his talented son Philip served instead. In one year, 1675,when he did not serve, two of his son, Philip and Chileab were chosen.
"At its session of May 1663, the Court approved Samuel Smith asLieutenant of the Hadley Trainband to serve under Capt. John Pynchonof Springfield a position he held until 1678 when he resigned becauseor his advanced age. He served inactively in King Philip's War where,in 1676, his son John was killed by Indians at Hatfield and where, ayear later, his son-in-law, John Graves met the same fate. Thesetragic deaths were a portent of what was to come twenty years laterwhen on September 16, 1696 Elizabeth Foote Belden a granddaughter ofLieut. Samuel Smith was killed by Indians at Deerfield, Mass. and 6 ofher 14 children were either killed, wounded or captured by them. In1704, also, a great grandchild, Samuel Foote was ambushed and killedby Indians.
"Returning to the earlier period, Samuel's home in Hadley was said tohave served as a hiding place for the regicides, Whalley and Goffe,for a part of the time they were in Hadley. The authority for this isa letter dated March 26, 1793 written by Samuel Hopkins to Yale'spresident, Ezra Stiles. It's a reasonable conjecture because of SamuelSmith's prominence in Hadley at the time.
"On December 16, 1661 and for a number of years thereafter SamuelSmith "was chosen" rate makers that is to say, assessor. A plat of thevillage of Hadley for 1663 shows Liert. Samuel Smith and his sonsPhilip and Chileab owning lots of 8 acres each. (Judds Hadley, Part I,pp. 2h, 26.) Samuel's lot was valued at the top value of 200 pounds,Philip's at 150 pounds and Chileab's at 100 pounds. In1681, afterLieut. Samuel's death, his son Philip was the second largest and hisson Chileab the 5th largest tax payer in the town. In 1686 after theson Philip's death (by hideous witchcraft) the son Chileab Smith isshown to have been the largest taxpayer.
"In April 1664 Mr. Samuel Smith was empowered to purchase land "tosecure the north line of Hadley", (page 21Judds Hadley, Part I), at aprice not exceeding 200 pounds. He did not succeed and petitioned theGeneral Court at the, 1664 session for a gift of 1000 acres of landwhich could be added to the 200 pounds to satisfy the hard tradingowner. The petition was granted and transaction completed on this newbasis. The land is now a part of the town of Whately, Massachusetts.
"On January 14, 1667 Lieutenant Samuel Smith, together with Rev. JohnRussell and Aaron Cooke, was chosen at Town meeting to serve as atrustee of a fund offered by Mr. John Davenport of New Haven and Mr.William Goodwin of Hadley, acting as trustees under the will of thelate Mr. Edward Hopkins, for the establishment of a grammar school inHadley. (The Hopkins fund was divided between Hadley, Mass., Hartfordand New Haven, Conn. and Harvard University.) Samuel Smith was alsochosen with others, to serve on a committee to select the land thatwould be used by the school. His son Chileab was made a trustee of thegrammar school in 1686 following the death of Philip who succeeded hisfather as a trustee in 1681.
"Lieutenant Samuel Smith was an original members from 1669 to hisdeath, of the "Hadley School Committee for 50 years" which in effectwas a life tenure assignment and, therefore given only to those whowere the most trusted and highly respected in the town. He servedcontinuously on this board until his death in 1680 when his place wastaken by his son Philip. Philip's brother Chileab was added to theCommittee in 1687 and in 1720 the Committee consisted of fourcitizens, one of whom was Sergeant Joseph Smith and another, deaconJohn Smith, sons of John and Philip respectively.
"Another evidence of the respect and trust in which Lieutenant SamuelSmith was held by his fellow townsmen was the license they gave him in1671 to sell wines and strong liquors, a right that was sparinglygiven by the Selectmen and approved just as sparingly by the Court inthose days. In 1677 he was empowered to solemnize marriages, a righthe had had since 1661 but only to be exercised in the absence ofWllliam Westwood who was first given that authority.
"In May 1667 Samuel Smith, Rev. John Russell and Peter Tilton, actingin behalf of Hadley, appeared before the General Court in oppositionto the petition of the citizens of Hatfield to separate from Hadley.They succeeded for about two years to hold up the withdrawal but onDec. 22, 1669 Lieut. Samuel gas one of the signers of the agreementthat authorized the separation and brought an end to the controversy.About the same time, Feb. 19, 1669, he signed a citizen's petition tothe Governor and General Court of Massachusetts, opposing the decreethat levied imposts and customs on merchandise, cattle, horses andgrain entering Hadley. The next years May 3, 1670, with Rev. JohnRussell and Henry Clark he signed a petition "in behalf of the freemenof Hadley ", praying the General Court to make inquiry as to thereason for "God's displeasure" upon them One evidence or thisdispleasure, it seems, was the breaking away of dissenting members ofthe First Church of Boston to form Old South Church, an event thatstirred remote sections of the Massachusetts Colony. The memorialreferred to "the Lord's displeasure" and requested that "there be somepublic and solemn inquiry what it is that has provoke dthe Lordagainst us". (See History of Northampton by Tru,bull pp 215-216, Vol.I). The same source, page 572, lists Samuel Smith as one of those whocontributed to Harvard College, 3 lbs. Of flax values at 0-.03-00"from that line above and now all set down under our 3 lb. and halfmore is pck into the great barrell". This untranslatable gift seemssmall but it was about the average given by the 89 givers whose totalgifts were valued at 29-17-0.
"Lieutenant Samuel Smith and his sons Philip and Chileab werewell-to-do for their time. They were engaged in pursuits outside theirregular professions indicating that they had capital. In 1678 Lieut.Samuel and Philip had out on loans to John Pynchon, the most prominentman in Springfield, 50 and 25 pounds respectively, at interest. Theseamounts appear small today but in that early period they wereconsiderable sums
"A review of the Records or the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, Vol. IV,Part II and Vol. V, shows a number of instances where the GeneralCourt placed responsibilities upon Lieut. Smith and reposed confidencein him. He was at times assigned duties of dealing with the Indians,hearing their complaints and investigating their requests. The OctoberCourt of 1667 chose him as one of a committee of three to treat withthe Indians about, "setting of a chief or head over them and byadvising with them thereabouts to learn whom they account or desire tobe their chief that the English may have their recourse to forsatisfaction for injuries from them ... and in the case of the Indiansnot agreeing ... that the next General Court may appoint or declaresome meet man to be their chief or sachem".
"Another court record, 1663, tells of a committee of six members,including Samuel Smith, being appointed to lay our a fares of 250acres at Paucomptucke. This was the beginning of Deerfield,Massachusetts.
"In 1678 Lieutenant Smith requested, since he was "nearing 80 years ofage" to be "relieved from military trust". His request was granted andhis son Philip made Ensign immediately, and later in the same yearraised to Lieutenant. Samuel's death two years later, (the inventoryof his estate was taken January 17, 1781), indicates, perhaps, that hewas justified in seeking some repose after so extended and active acareer in the wilderness of a new world. The regret is that so littleis known about his wife Elizabeth who remained at his side through allof these hard years, bearing and rearing his children and enduring thehardships of those pioneer times with him. Not one word is writtenabout her trials and activities that this writer has seen. She diedMarch 16, 1686 at the age of 84 leaving a family, the descendents ofwhom in the next three hundred years, were to swarm over the landproducing worthy citizens and many distinguished ones, all Christianand God fearing.
"The children of Lieutenant Samuel Smith and his wife Elizabeth werefour sons and two daughters. Four of these children were born inEngland and two in Wethersfield, Connecticut.
Sources: Smith genealogy quoted above; LDS Ancestral File
__
|
_Samuel, Sr. SMITH __|__
| (1545 - ....)
_Samuel, Jr. SMITH __|
| (1575 - ....) m 1599|
| | __
| | |
| |_Anne BURLEIGH ______|__
| (1550 - ....)
_Samuel, III SMITH __|
| (1602 - 1680) m 1624|
| | __
| | |
| | _____________________|__
| | |
| |_Barbary MUMFIRDE ___|
| m 1599 |
| | __
| | |
| |_____________________|__
|
|
|--Samuel, IV SMITH
| (1625 - ....)
| __
| |
| _____________________|__
| |
| _____________________|
| | |
| | | __
| | | |
| | |_____________________|__
| |
|_Elizabeth CHILIAB __|
(1602 - 1685) m 1624|
| __
| |
| _____________________|__
| |
|_____________________|
|
| __
| |
|_____________________|__
[15278] All data from McDowell.
__
|
__|__
|
__|
| |
| | __
| | |
| |__|__
|
_Samuel, Sr. SMITH __|
| (1545 - ....) |
| | __
| | |
| | __|__
| | |
| |__|
| |
| | __
| | |
| |__|__
|
|
|--Samuel, Jr. SMITH
| (1575 - ....)
| __
| |
| __|__
| |
| __|
| | |
| | | __
| | | |
| | |__|__
| |
|_Anne BURLEIGH ______|
(1550 - ....) |
| __
| |
| __|__
| |
|__|
|
| __
| |
|__|__
[15170] All data from McDowell.
[15172] All data from McDowell.