Sunday, September 28, 2014

Chapter 35 Our Purdy Ancestors

In Chapters 15 and 22 in this Baker Family history blog we identified and discussed in some detail the lives of thirty-six of our ancestors who fought in the American Revolution. While researching our great grandfathers who fought during this war we came across the name of Jotham Purdy, one of our 6th grandfathers. What we discovered about Jotham was that rather than being an American Patriot he chose to remain loyal to the English Crown, and while he technically fought during the American Revolution and even lost his life in 1777, we chose to exclude him from our list simply because he did not fight on the "right side". He was a "Loyalist" and apparently our thinking at the time was that as such, he should not be included in our exclusive listing of our American Revolutionary War ancestors. While we are sure that the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution would whole heartily agreed with our thinking at the time, we have now changed our mind and we have decided to include an entirely separate chapter dealing exclusively with Jotham and our Purdy family ancestors beginning with our 10th great grandfather, Francis Purdy (?-1658) who immigrated to America from England in the 1630s.

Despite the fact that there is frequent mention of Francis Purdy in Purdy Family history books and in the hundreds of family trees on that show Francis Purdy as the progenitor of the Purdy line in America, we know almost nothing about the man.  Differing family trees show his birth year ranging from as early as 1587 to as late as 1627.  Many of these same trees provide exact dates for his arrival in America, his marriage date, and his death date. Unfortunately, none of the dates are known to be accurate.  All that we really know about Francis Purdy is that he married his wife Mary Brundish sometime before August 5, 1642 since on that date Mary was listed by her married name Mary Purdy in her late father's probate document. We also know that Francis Purdy was later living with Mary on land in Fairfield, Connecticut that Mary had probably received  as a dowry or inherited from her father. When Mary's brother John came of age in 1654 and thus was of the age that he could take title to his father's land by inheritance, he quit-claimed part of his inherited property to Mary, that section of the land she had been living on with Francis since their move to Fairfield.  In doing so, John Brundish acknowledged that part of the inherited land belonged to his sister. Finally, we know that Francis Purdy died in 1658 based on the fact that there is recorded an inventory of his estate dated October 20, 1658. Everything else that is written about our 10th great grandfather is pure conjecture.  But, this is our family history Blog therefore we are going to go ahead anyway and try to conjure up a possible story about the short life of our Francis Purdy.

According to Mary Brundish's baptismal record that was uncovered fairly recently, it showed that she was baptized on December 10, 1628 at the St Mary Church on Elm Street in Ipswich in Suffolk County, England, and if we assume that this is the same Mary Brundish who later married Francis Purdy, it means that Mary would have been only 12 or 13 years old when she married Francis in 1642. Considering that Mary's mother Rachel Hubbard Brundish had just lost her husband, Mary's father, a few years earlier it was probably not that usual in early Puritan New England for her mother to support, perhaps even arrange, for her young daughter's "marriage of convenience" especially if the new husband was an older and well established individual in a viable position to lookout for his new and very young thirteen year old bride. If we accept this logic it then supports the case that Francis Purdy might have been much older than his new wife although commonly accepted birth dates for Francis as early as 1587 seem highly unlikely since he would have been 55 years old when he married. The other qualification that the new husband be well established does not seem to hold true in the case of Francis Purdy. There are no surviving records of his becoming a "freeman," requiring his being at least twenty-one years old and a member of the Puritan Church, after he arrived in America nor are there any records showing that he owned land in either the Boston area, Wethersfield, or in Fairfield. In fact, after the marriage of Francis Purdy and Mary Brundish they lived on land that she had inherited from her father.  This seems to contradict any suggestion that Francis Purdy had been a well established individual prior to his marriage.  This being the case, we find it easy to support the suggestion authored by Alec Purdy, a Purdy descendant and family historian, who suggests that Francis Purdy may very well have been a friend of the Purdy family and perhaps even an orphan who had traveled with the family from England. He most likely was only a few years older than Mary and he possibly worked for Mary's father, John Brundish, in the tanning business. If this was true, Francis Purdy clearly was not yet a well established individual. He was likely a young man that Mary's mother trusted, young Mary liked, perhaps loved, and having them get married solved a minor problem for Rachel Brundish who had lost her husband John and was trying to care for four young children in addition to Mary.

If we accept the scenario that Francis Purdy lived with the Brundish family before he married young Mary Brundish, then it follows that what we know about the movements of John Brundish and his family in America would also apply to Francis Purdy. John Brundish and his wife Rachel are of course, my 11th great grandparents. We know that the Brundish family arrived in the Boston area sometime before 1635 and they were living in Watertown just outside Boston when John Brundish joined the local Puritan Church and became a freeman sometime in 1635. It is possible that John and Rachel may have immigrated as early as 1633 on the same ship as Rachel's two brothers, Benjamin and Samuel Hubbard.  Fortunately we know a great deal about the life of Samuel Hubbard thanks in part to his own writings but also as a result of the interest in him as an historical figure as he is recognized as one of the founders of the Seventh Day Baptist Church in America.  Samuel also was made a freeman in Watertown, Massachusetts on 4 March 1634/5 quite possibly at the same time as his brother-in-law John Brundish.  Samuel Hubbard through much of his life was known to be  a "religious agitator" so it is not surprising that he like so many other Puritans in the Boston area who were upset with the church leadership, joined a party of around 100 other Puritans in October of 1635 and marched through the wilderness to settle into several new communities along the Connecticut River, namely Hartford, Windsor and Wethersfield.  Again, it would appear quite likely that John Brundish and his family and possibly Francis Purdy accompanied Samuel Hubbard on the journal although while Samuel originally settled in Windsor, John Brundish likely continued on to the new settlement of Wetherfield, Connecticut located about 12 miles south of Windsor and just below Hartford.  We know that Samuel Hubbard met and married Tacy Cooper in Windsor and in the spring of 1636 they moved to join John Brundish and Samuel's sister Mary and their family in the then remote village of Wethersfield.

Despite the fact that John Brundish did not live long in Wethersfield, for he died sometime near the middle of 1639, he is nevertheless listed as one of the earliest settlers in Wethersfield. As previously mentioned John and Rachel Hubbard Brundish are my 11th great grandparents on my paternal grandmother's line. We find it exciting to discover that a number of other earlier settlers of Wethersfield were also my great grandfathers including two of the original "First Adventurers" who arrived in 1634, Nathaniel Foote (1593-1644), my 10th great grandfather on my maternal grandmother's line, and John Seeley (1602-1667), my 9th great grandfather on my paternal grandfather's line. Several other great grandfathers and their families arrived in 1641 including Samuel Boardman and Josiah Churchill. It is truly amazing that these ancestors and so many others during this period would have left a rather comfortable life in England to travel to an unknown new world and then shortly after their arrival, turn around and march 100 miles through a previously unexplored wilderness to end up settling a new community that they later named Wethersfield.  When they arrived they would find nothing other than a few remote Indian villages although they were blessed that the nearby Connecticut River was teeming with fish and the forest and fields were filled with animals and birds to hunt for food. They also found that the local Indians had previously cleared parts of the forest which immediately provided cleared meadow lands with fertile soil for planting their crops. They were also blessed unfortunately with incredible swarms of insects and the ever present diseases that seemed to follow them everywhere. Almost immediately they had to build shelters and plant their gardens since cold weather was soon to follow. They would have had to work long hard days with the whole family pitching in so as to be prepared to survive the winter.  The original Puritan leaders had been encouraged by the local Wongunk Indians to settle in the area, however these same Wongunks were soon chased out of the area and replaced by the more aggressive Pequots Indian tribe who were not at all happy with the Puritan settler's intrusion on their land.  The "Pequot War" that followed included an attack on Wethersfield on 23 April 1637 which resulted in six men, three women, and twenty cows being killed and two "maids" being taken captive. The war was eventually concluded with the complete defeat of the Indians. Fortunately none of my ancestors were killed during the attack. Unfortunately however, John Brundish, after three years of incredibly hard work building his home, his garden, and his business and surviving an Indian raid, died in mid-1639 probably following a serious illness, a not uncommon occurrence during these times. He was survived by his wife, one son and four daughters including oldest daughter Mary, and probably by Francis Purdy plus a few servants. Fortunately during his life he had accumulated some wealth that he was able to pass along to his wife and children. John Brundish was around 46 years old when he died.

Most references in historical writings on the Purdy family refer to Francis as "Francis Purdy of Fairfield." Fairfield, Connecticut was not founded until 1639 and while he is not listed as far as we can determine as one of Fairfield's earliest settlers and founders, we know that he married Mary Brundish in Fairfield sometime earlier than August of 1642 so he either suddenly just showed up in Fairfield and married 13-year old Mary, or he traveled with the Brundish family when Mary's mother, Rachel Brundish, remarried after her husband's death in 1639 and moved to Fairfield in 1641 with her children and her new husband. When John Brundish died he left his estate to his wife and children under the provision that the children's share of the inheritance would not pass to them until his daughters either turned eighteen or were married, and his son turned twenty-one. At the time of his death all of the children were under sixteen and Mary was the oldest. Since Mary was married at only thirteen, her share of the inheritance was turned over to her in the form of land in Fairfield plus probably a small sum of money.  Her mother was able to purchase the land from the proceeds of the sale of her late husband's considerable land holdings in Wethersfield. There are some who believe that Mary's father had purchased land in Fairfield before his death and a share of this land in Fairfield passed to his daughter Mary when she married. This is possible but considering that Fairfield was not even settled until the year of John Brundish's death, the probability that he purchased land shortly before he died seems unlikely.

Here again, we find support for the suggestion that Francis Purdy was not a man of means when he married, for his home in Fairfield was actually purchased using proceeds from his wife's inheritance. During the entire period that Francis Purdy lived in Fairfield from 1641 until his untimely death in October of 1658, his name is hardly mentioned in any of the Fairfield civil or church records. The 1645 probate document that Francis and Mary signed following their next door neighbor's death and Francis' own badly damaged probate record following his death are the only two surviving records that verify that Francis Purdy ever existed assuming that we ignore that his children survived and passed along his name. Francis Purdy was probably a farmer who worked hard to shelter, feed, and clothe his family but he never achieved any status or wealth in the community. In the 1654 witch trial of Goodwife Knapp, wife of Fairfield resident Roger Knapp, Mary Purdy's name is mentioned as being part of a delegation that went to meet with accused witch Goodwife Knapp in prison.  Mary Purdy is referred to in the writings as "Goodwife Purdy". The reference to Mary as a "goodwife" speaks to her lessor social status rather than referring to her as "Mistress Purdy" which would have implied a more elevated stature. While this alone is hardly proof of Francis Purdy own status in the community, it does seem to go along with our conclusion that he was not a major player in Fairfield, or in any of the other communities where he may have lived prior to his death. The fact that Mary Purdy believed in witches does suggest that the family was religious and likely Puritan although this is hardly surprising in Colonial New England in the mid 1600s.

When Francis Purdy died an early death in 1658 he left his wife with three sons and one daughter who were then without a father and without a bread winner. The oldest son, John Purdy, my 9th great grandfather, was only ten years old when his father died.  His mother Mary Brundish Purdy was just thirty. Mary had lost both of her parents and her only brother John had "run away" from Fairfield shortly after their mother had remarried following their father's death. Mary Purdy did what was expected of her and by 1659 she married for a second time to a man named John Hoyt, himself a widower with two daughters. Not surprisingly considering how our ancestors constantly migrated westerly, John Hoyt with Mary moved from Fairfield in 1664 to a new settlement that is now called Eastchester in southern Westchester County, New York about 10 miles from Rye, New York where they again moved and resettled in March of 1676. Mary Brundish Purdy Hoyt was born in England in 1628. She moved to America and the Boston area (Point A on map above) with her parents in 1633, and then resettled in Wethersfield (Point B) with her parents around 1636, then again relocated with her mother, brother and sisters, and her mother's new husband to Fairfield, Connecticut (Point C) in 1641. Then finally after Francis Purdy's death and her marriage to John Hoyt, she resettled in Rye, Westchester County, New York (Point D) in 1676.  There she lived until her death several years after the death of her second husband or until around 1686.  One thing that we enjoyed discovering is that one of the overseers of John Hoyt's will in 1684 was a man named John Brundig who we determined to be Mary Brundish's younger brother. Obviously John and his older sister had reunited when Mary and John Hoyt had moved to Westchester County in 1664. John Brundig or Brundish was one of the original founders of Rye, New York in 1660. He is also one of my 11th great grandfathers on an entirely different branch in our family tree from his sister although both branches converge in the Elmira, New York area as both Mary and her brother are great grandparents of my paternal grandmother Helen Spaulding.

Our Purdy family history continues with the story of my 9th great grandfather John Purdy, who was born around 1648 in Fairfield, Connecticut.  John was only around 11 years old when his mother remarried. When John Purdy's stepfather, John Hoyt and young John's mother, Mary, moved to Eastchester, New York in 1665, it appears that John, then around 17, moved with them along with his brothers and sister and step-sisters.  It was here in Eastchester where John Purdy met his future wife, Elizabeth Brown, who had probably moved there with her mother and older brothers from nearby Stamford, Ct about that same period of time. One of Elizabeth's older brothers, Hackaliah Brown, married in 1668 the daughter of John Hoyt, Mary Hoyt, who would have been John Purdy's step-sister. Obviously the Browns, Hoyts, and Purdys knew one another. John Purdy married my 9th great grandmother, Elizabeth Brown probably in the year 1668 or 1669 and one year later their first son was born, Thomas Purdy, my 8th great grandfather. Unfortunately, we know very little of the life of John Purdy, for equally unfortunately he too died young in 1678.  He was only around thirty years old when he passed away and one has to wonder whether he may have inherited some type of genetic defect from his father and maternal grandfather, both of whom died young, that lead to his early demise.  There again, the broad spectrum of illnesses that often lead to death that ran rampant in Colonial America, may have been his downfall. A common cold in 1678 may very well have moved quickly into pneumonia and with little to nothing available to cure the illness, an early and unexpected death might very well follow. One of the administrators of John Purdy's estate along with his wife, was his uncle John Brundig, his mother's brother.

Unfortunately, we know very little about the next two generations of our Purdy family line other than their names, birth and death years, and the names of their children.  In the case of Thomas Purdy, our 8th great grandfather and the oldest son of John Purdy, we do not even know the name of his wife other than Mrs Thomas Purdy. We refer to Thomas Purdy as John Purdy's oldest son although there is at least one family history story that gives his birth year as later than his only brother and reports that Thomas Purdy may have died young, apparently without children which would be pretty alarming considering that we believe that we are one of his great grandsons. In the book "ye historie of ye town of Greenwich . ." published in 1857, when writing about the Purdy family, the author completely dismisses our line of the Purdy family by reporting that John Purdy died with "no issue."  Fortunately the author was mistaken as John and Elizabeth Brown Purdy did have at least two sons. Their son Thomas Purdy lived in Westchester County his entire life probably farming on land that he inherited either from his mother or his wife's parents.  He fathered four sons that we know of including his youngest son, our 7th great grandfather Nehemiah Purdy, who was born in 1727. Thomas died at age sixty-six in 1782. His life was somewhat obscure, perhaps to the frustration of future family genealogists, but he was real nevertheless.

Nehemiah Purdy like his parents and grandparents before him spent his entire life in Westchester County, New York.  When he was around twenty-three years old in 1750 he married Mary Golding and together they had at least three sons and one daughter including their first born son, my 6th great grandfather, Jotham Purdy who was born in Westchester County on 10 September 1751.  Here again, we hesitated to state the exact number of children born to Nehemiah and Mary Golding Purdy since the numerous Purdy family trees in books and on report a wide range in the number of children in many of the families, particularly on our own line.  One of the problems for Purdy genealogists is that by the fifth generation down from Francis and Mary there were many dozens of Purdy individuals living in Westchester County many of whom shared the same proper name.  This of course, greatly complicates determining which son or daughter belongs to which set of parents which in turns has led to a great number of errors in the family trees. One thing is certain however, that the fifth generation of Purdys in America and particularly in Westchester County were faced with an important decision what with the onset of the American Revolution.  They had to decide which side they were going to support: the side that would remain loyal to the English Crown or the opposing side that wanted to separate from England and form a new independent American government. It is truly amazing how many brothers, sisters, and close cousins all living in fairly close proximity in Westchester County had such a wide divergence of opinion with respect to their loyalties.

We tend to believe, perhaps we were taught to believe in our high school history class, that most Americans living in the year 1776 supported the fight for independence from England.  If this was indeed the impression presented, it was not even close to the truth. At most only 40 to 45% of Americans supported Congress and their eventually decision to declare independence from England.  On the other hand around 15 to 20% of the 2-1/2 million people living in America at the time of the Revolution or around 500,000, supported remaining with the Crown.  These individuals tended to be an older and better established group who were more cautious and resistant to change. The remaining group, upwards of half of the people living in America at the time, were ambivalent and perhaps to busy in that daily lives to care one way or the other who controlled the governing of the county. Where one lived also had a lot to do with determining ones position.  In the Boston area for example, support for breaking away from England was widely supported whereas in New York City and the surrounding areas the opposite was true although not to the extend shown in the Boston area. Ones religion also helped determine to some extent ones position.  For example, families who were members of the Anglican Church probably favored remaining under British rule, whereas Quakers were not concerned one way or the other but especially would not have favored going to war for any reason.  We also find that ones heritage determined to some extent ones position.  People with Dutch backgrounds generally supported British rule where as people of Germany heritage tended the other way or were indifferent.

The largest block of Francis Purdy's descendants living during the period of the American Revolution resided in or around Westchester County, New York located about 30 miles north of New York City. New York was controlled by the British during most of the Revolutionary War.  It should not be surprising that there was substantial support for remaining under British rule in Westchester County considering its location before and during the war. This was also true within the Purdy family although in the end a majority of the family but not all by any means, came to eventually support the American Cause. According to the history book "Westchester County, New York, During the American Revolution" by Henry Barton Dawson published in 1886, on 13 April, 1775 a vote was taken in White Plains in Westchester on a motion favoring the King and opposing the positions taken by the Congress. The motion read in part, "we meet here to express our honest abhorrence of all unlawful congresses and committees, and that we determined at the hazard of our lives and properties, to support the King and Constitution..." Voting in favor of the motion were 28 members of the Purdy family. While not all Purdy family members who supported the motion eventually fought with the British during the Revolution, at least initially a large group of the family did not favor breaking away from British rule.  It would take an enormous amount of research, if such research were even possible, to determine the population of military age Purdy men living in Westchester County prior to the war.  What we do know according to the history book "New York in the Revolution" by James Arthur Roberts published in 1897 is that at least 28 Purdy men served as soldiers in the War against the British either in the Westchester County militia or in the Continental Army.  We could not determine the number of Purdy men who fought with the British, although they were a sizable group although a smaller number than the 28 men mentioned above. What we do know however, from the book by Henry Dawson, was that at least 15 Purdy families had their homes confiscated for supporting the British before and during the war, including the home of our 6th great grandfather, Jotham Purdy. We also know that a number of Purdy families who remained loyal to the English Crown during the war, emigrated to Canada at the end of the war including Jotham Purdy's brother Archelaus and his family, Jotham's sister Jemima and her husband and family, and at least three of Jotham's first cousins and their families. For reasons that we will discuss in the following paragraph, Jotham who was a Loyalist, did not emigrate to Canada.

Jotham Purdy was 22 years old when he married Margaret van Voorhees.  Margaret's 2nd great grandfather, Stevense Coerte van Voohrees (1600-1684) is the 8th great grandfather of my grandmother Helen Spaulding Baker. What is really interesting here is that this same man is the 9th great grandfather of my grandmother's husband, my grandfather, Charles Schenck Baker. This of course, would make my paternal grandparents distant cousins. Stevense Coert van Voorhees emigrated from Holland to New Amsterdam in 1660 just prior to the English assuming control of the city and the surrounding provinces and renaming the city New York. We wrote in an earlier paragraph that the people of Dutch descent particularly those living in the New York area tended to side with the Loyalists during and prior to the Revolutionary War. While Margaret's leanings as a Dutch descendant would not have been the deciding factor, the fact that Nehemiah Purdy and his sons including Jotham were probably farmers whose customer base likely lived in New York City and the fact that many of these customers were strong supporters of British rule in America, likely played a major role in how our Purdy ancestors felt about independence from English rule. That is, it may have played on their pocketbooks. We also suspect that the Purdy family had long ago dropped their Puritan heritage and based on the fact that it is known that some of the Purdy cousins were of the Anglican faith, I suspect that Nehemiah Purdy and his wife and sons and daughter were also all members of an Anglican Church or what was then called the Church of England.

At what point Jotham Purdy took an active role fighting with the Loyalists in support of the British we do not know. As we suggested, the family was probably opposed to American independence right from the beginning when the troubles began in the Boston area culminating with the Battle of Bunker Hill on 17 June 1775. It is also doubtful that Jotham played any military role when the British landed on Long Island the following summer and pushed Washington's army out of New York.  Nor is it likely that he participated at the Battle of White Plains that took place near his home in Westchester County on 28 October 1776. We suspect that despite our Purdy family's opposition to war against the British they had hoped to remain neutral although it was probably well known by all of their neighbors that they had British sympathies. What soon happened in Westchester and other areas of the country is that neighbors who supported independence from England started harassing their Loyalist neighbors including our Purdy family, perhaps by stealing their farm animals, damaging their crops, physical abuse, actual arrest and imprisonment, and in some cases confiscating and even burning their homes. This was during the period in American history when "tar and feathering" became the rage as many were looking to punish those that did not support the American cause. Whether Jotham Purdy joined the Westchester Chasseurs before or after the patriots burned down his family home, we do not know but either way it is likely that he was forced at some point to defend his beliefs.  The Westchester Chasseurs were led by a Colonel James DeLancey, a young man from a wealthy family in Westchester County who was just a few years older than Jotham. The Chasseurs, also known as the Westchester Light Horse, consisted of a group of Loyalists who rode on horse back and were recognized by the British and in some cases paid by the British for their services. Jotham Purdy's name appears on a list of fifty members of the Westchester Chasseurs who may have been the original subscribers to the group that was organized sometime in the year 1777.  The group became so hated by the patriots especially in Westchester County that they were referred to as the "DeLancey Cow-Boys" based on the fact that their raids on the local towns usually involved stealing food, farm animals, and obviously cows. It appear that their role in the war at least partially was to help gather up food for the numerous British forces in New York. James DeLancey's forces pestered the American troops throughout the entire Revolutionary War. Unfortunately, our ancestor Jotham Purdy's career as a Chasseur ended early as he was killed on 5 October 1777. The story is that he was shot by one of his neighbors who obviously must have been a patriot.  Jotham was only 26 years old when he was killed. He left behind his wife Margaret and two young children, 3-year old Margaret Purdy, and 10-month old Andrew Purdy, my 5th great grandfather.

What happened to the family following Jotham's death we do not know although they probably moved in with either Jotham's parents or with one of his siblings. Margaret Purdy was only 24 years old when Jotham was killed but she never remarried. She moved with her son and daughter following their marriages to Spencer, New York in Tioga County sometime in the late 1790s or early 1800s. She died at the age of 105 in Spencer on 9 November 1857. Margaret Purdy lived to see her granddaughter, Maria Purdy, marry Thomas Maxwell in Spencer on 12 September 1819 and she lived long enough to see all of her great grandchildren born including our 3rd great grandmother Susan C Maxwell who was born in 1823. Incredibly, she was still alive to see the birth of her great, great granddaughter and our 2nd great grandmother, Mary Catherine Sly who was born in 1844.  The story of Thomas Maxwell and his family and our Sly family ancestors is told in Chapter 13 of this Blog.

Jotham Purdy may not have been a "Patriot" but he was willing to fight to defend his family and his beliefs and we are proud of him and pleased to be able to relate this story of our Purdy family ancestors.




Monday, August 4, 2014

Chapter 34 - Our Ancestor Ralph Hutchinson

My great grandfather Eugene H. Ferree's middle name was Hutchinson.  His middle name was of course a family name; his mother's maiden name was Hutchinson as was the surname of one line of his male ancestors dating back to one Ralph Hutchinson who had immigrated to America in the early 1600s. Eugene Hutchinson Ferree's photograph appears on the left.

We have mentioned some of our Hutchinson ancestors in earlier chapters.  Eugene's grandfather, Mosely Hutchinson (1795-1861), and his great grandfather Silas Hutchinson (1758-1836), are both mentioned in Chapter 14.  Silas Hutchinson who was a drummer boy during the American Revolution, married Elizabeth Buell, a descendant of five of the passengers on the Mayflower thereby giving our family the distinction of being Mayflower descendants.  Silas was one of the earliest settlers in the wilderness community of Ithaca, New York when he moved there from his family's home in Connecticut in 1788. He later became the first and perhaps only doctor in the area.  Silas' and Elizabeth's son, my 3rd great grandfather, Mosely Hutchinson moved from Ithaca to Cayuga, New York where he became a farmer, a large landowner, an attorney and for a period a judge and a State Assemblyman. In Chapter 15 of this Baker Family Tree Blog we discuss the many of our ancestors who fought in the American Revolution including Silas Hutchinson the drummer boy mentioned above as well as his father Eleazer Hutchinson (1735-1813) who served as a captain in the Connecticut State Militia during the Revolution.  Our Hutchinson family tree line includes many hard working American pioneers.  The subject of this chapter however, is an individual who was the quintessential American pioneer who along with his family faced the hardships of the early American wilderness: building new towns in areas previously occupied by Indians and still under the constant threat of Indian attacks, food shortages, cold endless winters, illnesses and disease, and lose of children to early deaths. My 8th great grandfather Ralph Hutchinson was not to become a great American statesman nor a war hero.  He was just one of the many common men in the early days of our country's development who through hard work and devotion to family helped create our country. His story is told below.

Ralph Hutchinson's name first appears in Colonial American records on 8 August 1656 in Boston, Massachusetts when his name and the name of his new wife Alice Bennett, were recorded on a marriage document. As was the custom and the law during this period of history in Puritan controlled New England there was no actual church ceremony performing their marriage. There was only a civil ceremony officiated by a local magistrate who in their case happened to the governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Endicott.  Governor Endicott was well known to be a zealous Puritan and an avid opponent of the Anglican Church's custom of marriages being performed by the church. His objection was based on the simple premise that such church weddings were not mentioned in the bible. It seems that life in Puritan Boston during this period of history was tightly controlled.  A good number of the residents of the Boston area had immigrated to America seeking freedom to worship as they pleased but what developed in America at least early in the New England colony, was a very controlled type of freedom. One was free as long as one conformed to the Puritan rules. The Puritan authorities dictated much of how the citizens acted from what type of clothes they wore, to how they kept their hair (men to have their hair cut short), to their never attracting attention to themselves, and when and where they went to church and how they worshiped.  On the 26th day of March of 1657 there was a record of Ralph Hutchinson being fined 10 shillings for entertaining a John Gilbert in his home which we presume meant that John Gilbert spent the night. Apparently this was against the rules without permission and the authorities required that they be informed if strangers were in town. Ralph had violated these rules.  It is no wonder that so many of the early settlers migrated away from the Boston area to get away from such pressures. They had left England seeking freedom and what they found in the Boston area was a community where individuality and freedom of expression was tightly controlled by the leaders of the Puritan Church.  As we will see in a subsequent paragraph of this story, Ralph Hutchinson and his family were soon to leave the Boston community.

We have no historical documents that tell for certain Ralph Hutchinson's birth year, where he was born, the names of his parents, or when he emigrated to America.  We can only make educated guesses.  Based on his marriage date and his death date it is safe to assume that he was probably born in England between 1625 and 1630.  We believe that it is also a safe assumption that he emigrated as a child sometime before 1642 since after 1642 emigration to America from England came to a virtual halt as a result of the policies of King Charles I and the onset of the English Civil War.  Whether he came with his parents or as an orphan accompanied by Hutchinson relatives we may never know. Since he ended up learning the carpentry trade, we have to suspect that at a young age he may have been given over as an indentured apprentice where he learned to work with wood and tools perhaps to help build the many new homes that were under construction in the Boston area in the late 1630s and through the 1640s.  It is not hard to imagine that Ralph was related to one or more of the numerous Hutchinson families who had immigrated to New England in the 1630s. In the book "Genealogical Guide to Early Settlers to America" by Henry Whitlemore published in 1905, the author lists no less than sixteen men including Ralph with the surname of Hutchinson who settled in New England in the early years of the colony. Two of these men were named John Hutchinson which perked our interest since Ralph and Alice named their first son John perhaps after his grandfather John.  However, after further research we found no evidence suggesting any relationship with a John Hutchinson or any of the other Hutchinsons mentioned in the book. His heritage will have to remain a mystery.

The family history of Ralph's wife Alice, my 8th great grandmother, is even more obscure. Alice's surname listed on their marriage document was Bennett and we know that prior to her marriage to Ralph she was married to a Francis Bennett. Alice and Francis had four children before Francis' untimely drowning in 1655 off the coast of an island called Noddles Island.  Many years later the water around Noddles Island was filled in with dirt and the area is now part of Boston's Logan International Airport.  It is not known what Francis was doing out on the water although he undoubtedly fell out of a rowboat that he was using to get to and from the island and like so many of his contemporaries he probably had never learned to swim. Noddles Island was used for grazing animals and growing crops so he may very well have been on his way to tend to his cow or pigs. In his will he left everything to his surviving children which included money, land and his debts and he directed his wife to administer the estate for the use and care of their children.  The inventory of his estate revealed an interesting possibility.  One of Francis' debtors was a "brick-maker" which suggests that Francis Bennett was a bricklayer. Since we know that our Ralph Hutchinson was a carpenter we are presented with the strong probability that Francis and Ralph knew one another and Ralph therefore would have known his future wife, then Francis' wife, Alice Bennett before they were married.  We suspect that following their marriage Ralph moved into the small Bennett home joining both Alice and her 4-1/2 year old son James, and her 1-1/2 year old daughter Elizabeth. Alice and Francis Bennett had lost two of their four children during their six year marriage. Despite the fact that Boston was over 2-1/2 decades old at the time of the Bennett marriage, times were still tough especially for small newborn children. One final note is worth mentioning.  The Francis Bennett home remained in Francis' estate administered by Alice until 1697 at which time the land was sold and the money distributed to his heirs. What we find interesting is that apparently Ralph Hutchinson had no interest in remaining in the Bennett home, for less than three years following his marriage to Alice he left the Boston area with his new family and never returned.

The painting to the right shows a view of the Connecticut River and the Oxbow Bend in the river that is located just south of the Hutchinson homestead in Northampton, Massachusetts. Ralph Hutchinson's move to Northampton was probably not motivated solely by his distaste of the stringent rules imposed by the Puritan authorities in Boston. He and his family were after all Puritans although it is unlikely that Ralph was a stringent Puritan like so many of his Boston area contemporaries. As an indentured apprentice and an orphaned child it was unlikely that he had been subjected to a strong Puritan upbringing. It is rather more likely that it was Ralph Hutchinson's adventurous spirit and his belief that his carpentry skills would be put to a more profitable use in the new community of Northampton that was his real motivation for his departure to Northampton in the year 1659. Northampton was first settled in 1654 primarily by Puritan settlers already living in other communities in the Connecticut River Valley, communities such as Hartford, Windsor, and Wethersfield all to the south.  These early settlers recognized the value of the abundant fertile meadow lands along the various waterways, and the adjacent forested upland areas as well as the fact that large home lots were being made available at no cost at least to these early settlers. These were obviously very attractive features. During the first two years after the establishment of the community approximately twenty-five families had arrived, constructed their homes, set up their governing structure, and built their "Meeting House" that was to be used for both the public secular meetings as well as for public worship gatherings. Two of the earliest settlers of Northampton in addition to Ralph Hutchinson were my 9th great grandfathers. Thomas Root (1605-1694) and his family settled in Northampton in May of 1654. Thomas Root's granddaughter, Hannah Root, married Ralph's and Alice's son John Hutchinson. Hannah Root's sister Sarah married another son of Ralph's and Alice's, Samuel Hutchinson, my 7th great grandfather. The other of my 9th great grandfathers to settle in Northampton was Edward Baker (1610-1687) who settled there with his family in 1657. The story of Edward Baker is told in Chapter 26 of this Blog.  By the time that Ralph Hutchinson arrived in 1659 there were around fifty families living in Northampton. Since these families worshiped together and attended most of the weekly town meetings together they obviously would have known one another.  This is fascinating since Ralph and Alice Hutchinson were my mother's 7th great grandparents and Thomas and Elizabeth Root were my mother's 8th great grandparents and they definitely would have known Edward and Joan Baker my father's 8th great grandparents.  

Ralph Hutchinson's first trip to Northampton in 1659 was made without his wife whom he had left home in Boston pregnant with their second child. Their first son John, whom we previously mentioned had later married Hannah Root, was born in 1658 and he was only a year old when his father left for Northampton. Also in the Hutchinson household were Alice's children by her previous marriage, James Bennett who was seven and Elizabeth who was five years old.  Ralph obviously left his wife with her hands full when he made the 100 mile trek westward to Northampton and while the period of time that he was gone making arrangements to relocate is not known, what is known is that he and two other men sometime in 1659 were granted eight acres of land each. Their lots were located south of the Mill River and at the time, Ralph Hutchinson's new property was the southern most lot in the young six year old community of Northampton. Undoubtedly Ralph constructed a new log home for his family before returning to Boston to be with his wife and family before the birth of their second child, a daughter, who was born in February of 1660.

We know that Ralph and his family moved to Northampton shortly after the baptism of their new daughter Mercy in early March of 1660 for in July of 1660 Ralph Hutchinson was granted four acres of land on Elm Street in exchange for his providing 400 pieces of clapboard to be used as siding for a new and much larger meeting house that was to be built up the street from his new lot.  Ralph was obviously recognized as the town's new carpenter and since the town was without a saw mill this meant that all of the clapboards he was hired to provide had to be arduously made by hand.  We can only assume that Ralph was immediately recognized as a skilled carpenter which probably led to an expanding call for his services in this new growing community. In the historical records of Northampton Ralph is clearly designated to have been a 'carpenter' although it is not clear whether this meant that he built homes or that he simply prepared and supplied the wood building materials for the construction of homes and other structures.  We suspect the latter as Ralph was hired to make the clapboards for the community meeting house and considering that no saw mill existed in Northampton until around 1673 there was probably a huge demand in the community for milled lumber and the like all of which were manufactured by hand using only axes and hand saws. Some of the writings that we found on Ralph Hutchinson suggested that he built a home on his land on Elm Street, however we believe this to be incorrect since he acquired the land south of the Mill River prior to his grant of land on Elm Street and he undoubtedly built a home for his family before or soon after their arrival in Northampton.  We believe that the Elm Street property was granted as payment for the clapboards and the property was to be used as a staging area to construct the clapboards.  In any case, Ralph sold the property sometime prior to 1667 and possibly soon after the construction of the new meeting house.  The sale of the property obviously provided the Hutchinson family with always needed cash or equivalent tender.

Life in a new community like Northampton was not always easy nor was it exciting. Much of what we know about the early years of Northampton and Ralph Hutchinson comes from the book "History of Northampton" by James Russell Trumbull published in 1898.  This brief description from this book is worth reading although we suspect that it is a bit embellished:
"Their homes, nearly all built of logs, were but scantly furnished, and contained little beyond the bare necessities of life. Their flocks and herds supplemented what the soil provided, and the nimble fingers of the housewife, and her daughters, manufactured the fabric, as well as the garments that clothed the family. They lived quiet and contented lives, attending two services at the meeting house on Sundays, and town meetings regularly on week days, at least most of the time did, as often as the business of the community demanded attention. Their food was coarse, but nutritious. Corn and wheat and rye were the staple at every meal; meat was abundant, pork, beef, mutton, wild game and fish, were plenty; potatoes were unknown, but turnips, cabbages, beans and a few others vegetables, were used to considerable extent."

We suspect that Ralph Hutchinson received food such as wheat, corn, beef and pork and even furs as payment for his services more so than cash since the majority of the residents of Northampton were farmers and cash, consisting of gold and silver, was probably scarce or not even in circulation.  We also know that the Hutchinson family had an allotment of eight acres of 'meadowland' in addition to their eight acre home site. The meadow land was used for planting their vegetable garden, growing wheat and corn, and for the grazing of their livestock. Despite James Russell Trumbull's above description of what appears to be an abundant food source for the settlers of Northampton, an adequate supply of food was not always guaranteed considering the occasionally long and cold winters or the too wet or too dry summers that would have drastically reduced the growth of their gardens. The inclement weather, the undependable food sources, and disease and the total lack of medical attention was particularly hard on the younger children.  Young Mercy who was born in March of 1660 shortly before their move to Northampton, had to endure the long trek from Boston to Northampton, and two long hot summers and cold winters before she died in the spring of 1662 probably from some untreatable illness.  Only one month following the death of Mercy a second daughter was born to Alice and Ralph but she too died after only one year of life. Poor Alice. She had lost babies from her first marriage, then her husband died, and then two more babies died in the early years of her second marriage. We suspect that she and Ralph might take exception to Trumbull's statement in the above paragraph that "they lived quiet and contented lives . ."  Life was tough in the 17th century in Colonial America.

On the more positive side, many of the earliest settlers in Northampton and for that matter in the other early settlements along the Connecticut River had been wealthy farmers in England before they emigrated to America. Their reasons for emigrating have been discussed extensively in other chapters in this Blog.  They were Puritans and regardless of the drastic lifestyle changes resulting from their relocation, the importance of their being able to freely worship as they pleased overrode any of the obvious disadvantages. Many of these new settlers who became the leaders in the communities like Northampton were intelligent, educated, and highly motivated to lead in a manner that was in the best for the new towns.  They also encouraged their residents to get involved both by requiring attendance at the town meetings and by encouraging residents to serve on various committees. Most of the major decisions in the community such as a decision to build a new meeting house were decided by the majority and not by the sole decision of the few leaders. Attendance at the religious services on Sundays was also a requirement of living in Puritan controlled Northampton. While the Puritans encouraged hard work they also practiced charity and if a family was experiencing difficulties such as the loss of a father during hard times, families helped other less fortunate families.  Life in early Northampton was not always easy but it survived and eventually prospered largely as a result of the strong character of its inhabitants, our ancestors.

We have previously suggested that Ralph Hutchinson was not a wealthy man nor was he likely raised by a devote Puritan family. We also know that he was able to sign his name which means he was educated at least to some extent and we know that by 1661 he was recognized as a citizen of the community with all of the civil and political rights associated thereof. He was also a recognized member of the Puritan Church since he had obtained the status as a 'Freeman' in that year.  There are a couple of interesting records in the Trumbull history that might hint at Ralph's relationship with the Puritan Church or at least give us a little insight into his personality. In April of 1662, the townspeople voted to formally establish a church in Northampton and the written Covenant prepared setting forth their decision was signed by over seventy individuals including Alice Hutchinson but not by her husband Ralph. Ralph's failure to sign the covenant might suggest that he disagreed with the decision although we might also note that many of the other wives signed the Covenant without their husbands including newlywed Ruth Baker but not her husband Joseph, my 8th great uncle.  Edward Baker, my 9th great grandfather, also did not sign the Covenant.  Perhaps these men were satisfied that holding religious services every Sunday in the Meeting House was acceptable and that going to the added expense of formally establishing and building a new church in Northampton was unnecessary. This may very well have been Ralph Hutchinson's position for we find that in November of 1662 he signed a letter with eight other men declaring their descent of the town's decision to offer free land to the new church pastor, Joseph Elliot. Their argument was that the land had "previously been sequestered perpetually for the ministry" and that giving the land away to the current pastor was shortsighted and would add cost in the future when a new pastor had to be hired and provided a place to live. Ralph's thinking on this matter seems at least to this descendant, to have been correct.                        

The home that Ralph Hutchinson provided his family in 1659 was probably small, built of logs with a thatched roof that leaked in a downpour, a dirt floor, few windows, and a fireplace and chimney that barely keep the cabin warm in the winter.  However, as his family grew and Ralph with his carpentry skills, he was undoubtedly able to greatly improve and expand the home in the next few years by adding hardwood floors, installing clapboard siding, a few new glass windows, and a wood structured roof built and covered with wood shingles. We have to believe that the home was enlarged with the addition of a separate kitchen and new bedrooms to house the expanding family. Four additional sons were born to Alice and Ralph between the years 1664 and 1671 including Samuel Hutchinson, my 7th great grandfather, born in 1666 and Eleazar Hutchinson who died at the age of one in 1669.  By the time of the birth in 1671 of their last son, there were a total of seven children living in the Hutchinson household including James and Elizabeth Bennett, children from Alice's first marriage. Also located on the home site were probably a barn and a major workshop to house Ralph's expanding carpentry business. Unfortunately, the location of the Hutchinson homestead was not in an ideal location within the community. The meeting house and later the church were located just over a 1/4 of a mile east of their home, but the walk to the meeting house and church required traveling down a dirt road which must have been a sea of mud in the wet spring months and very uncomfortable in the cold winter months.  To make matters worse, they had to wade across the Mill River and while there was a vote to build a bridge across the river as early as 1662, the bridge was not built until 1673. The town justified delaying the building of the bridge and the terrible inconvenience it caused to the residents living on the other side of the river, including the Hutchinson family, by exempting them from having to pay the 'highway tax' for the maintenance of the roads. It is doubtful that Ralph would have accepted this logic. It is possible of course that the family may have traveled to church in a wagon so that at least the younger children and Alice would not have had to wade the river but it is unclear that this privilege of riding to church was allowed by the Puritans.  Ralph would have owned a wagon and horses for both his family's use but also to haul his finished lumber to his customers within the community. Nevertheless, the lack of a bridge across the river plus the inevitable spring flooding of the Mill River must have been an incredible annoyance for the family and hard to accept. But hard work and devotion to family by men such as our Ralph Hutchinson helped create our country and make it great and a reason to be extremely proud of our heritage. 

When the Hutchinson family settled in Northampton in 1659 there were just under 50 families living in the community.  Within the next ten years the total population of the village had more than doubled. As was typical in our country during this time period, the majority of the settlers were farmers with only a handful of the men in the community listed otherwise as merchants or tradesmen such as carpenters, shoemakers, masons, tanners, blacksmiths, and so forth. Ralph was one of only two men listed as a carpenter during the time period prior to 1661. As the population grew his work load as a carpenter obviously grew as well.  He undoubtedly benefited when the community built the new meeting house, the stockade fencing around the community, and the church, and he was specifically listed in the town records as having been hired in 1666 to help build a new grist mill. Notwithstanding his obvious workload on community projects, his largest volume of work would undoubtedly have been derived by supplying materials and labor helping to build new homes and farm structures including even wood fencing. In fact, it was not until 1670 when a major saw mill was constructed along the Mill River below "Baker's Meadows," that the demand for his hand milled materials would have been curtailed.  There are no existing records of Ralph Hutchinson's business other than his being described as a 'carpenter.' We suspect however, that he probably employed a few helpers, possibly even apprentices, to help with the work.  The family may have even provided housing on the property for these workers. Furthermore, Ralph's sons and his stepson James helped in some fashion despite their young ages and if they did not help in the carpentry business they definitely helped caring for the gardens and the livestock. By 1670, James Bennett was around 18, John Hutchinson was 12 and his brother Judah was 6 years old.  They all would have been required to work to their ability. Even Elizabeth Bennett who was 16 years old in 1670 would have helped her mother in the house and in the fields. The children would have been expected to work with the family six days per week although in the town of Northampton like the other communities in Puritan New England, the children were required to attend school particularly in the winter months when the workload was slower. 

When we think of the Puritan sons and daughters we picture them in a number of ways such as in a church pew with their parents, in a one-room school house in front of a strict teacher, working in a field with their parents, playing games in front of a fireplace in their cozy cabin, but foremost we think of them following the wishes of their devote parents and their church minister.  What we do not think possible is that one or more of these children would be arrested for vandalism and theft. Nevertheless, this happened to young 15-year old James Bennett along with two of his friends in the year 1667. James Bennett was only four years old when his mother married Ralph Hutchinson following the death of James' father Francis Bennett a year earlier. James could not remember his father and while he knew that his mother's husband was not his real father he still must have looked to Ralph Hutchinson as a father figure.  We have no reason to believe that Ralph Hutchinson was an overly authoritarian father although we know that he was a hard worker, opinionated, and he probably expected his employees and his children to following the rules. We have to assume that children 350 years ago were not really that much different than they are today and therefore it is not that unusual to find a 15-year old boy rebelling against parental authority. James Bennett along with his friend Godfrey Nims, broke into the home of a Robert Bartlett while the Bartlett family was away at church. The boys ransacked their home and stole "24 shillings in silver and 7 shillings worth of wampum."  The court records showed that they gave the valuables to a local Indian who had promised to take them to French Canada. Their plan was to run away. The Court ruled that the two boys were to be fined triple the value of what they robbed and they were each to be whipped, in James' and Godfrey's case, with 16 lashes each and in the case of the younger Benoni Stebbin boy since he had known about the planned robbery but did not report it, with only 10 lashes. Fortunately for James Bennett his step-father stepped in to plead his case and ultimately James Bennett was not whipped and Ralph Hutchinson agreed to pay a fine of five pounds. Five pounds would have been an enormous sum of money for the Hutchinson family in 1667. Fortunately in the longer term all three boys turned out to be good citizens in their adult lives although in each of their cases misfortune was to eventually befall their lives. James Bennett was killed by Indians in 1676 at the young age of twenty-four. He left behind a wife and a young daughter.  His good friend Benoni Stebbins was also killed by Indians at the age of 48 in the year 1704. Godfrey Nims died at the age of around 54 only several years following an Indian raid on his village where the Indians killed or captured his wife and most of his children. Life in New England in the late 1600s was not easy and it was filled with many dangers.  

It is hard to understand the motives of a group of men from Northampton including Ralph Hutchinson who filed a petition in 1671 with the 'General Court' requesting permission to start up a new community located on the Connecticut River about 35 miles north of Northampton.  Their petition was initially denied but after the petition was resubmitted the following year, their request was granted.  The new settlers including the Hutchinson family, started relocating to this new community, later to be called Northfield, the following year in 1673. Ralph Hutchinson in 1673 was in his mid-40s and he and his wife had six children including the two Bennett children ranging in age from two years old to twenty-two years old.  Why would they want to start from scratch again in this wilderness and somewhat mountainous area located just south of the New Hampshire and Vermont borders.  Undoubtedly this same question might be asked about the hundreds of thousands of families who moved westward across our country during the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. These pioneer families as they grew larger and the overall populations within the communities grew larger required more and more land to grow their crops and raise their livestock.  Ralph Hutchinson must have realized that while they currently lived in relative comfort in their home in Northampton, there was no way that their eight acres and their limited meadow lands would be of adequate size to support their children as they reached adulthood and started their own families. Already James Bennett was a young adult and Ralph knew that land around Northampton was either too expensive if it was even available or too far out from the community center and away from the fertile meadow lands to be desirable as a home site. On the other hand, there were large home sites available in Northfield where the land was fertile and the lots were free. 

Of the twenty 7-1/2 acre home-lots made available in Northfield, sixteen were initially occupied including one by the Hutchinson family. In 1675, two years after the initial settlement, James Bennett, who was then newly married, occupied a lot as did the James Root Jr. family (my 8th great grand uncle on my mother's side) and the Thomas Webster family (my 9th great grand uncle on my father's side.) Their original homes were either built of logs or rude frames covered with clapboards and the structures covered with thatch and then around this initial cluster of homes a stockade fence was constructed. The sketch above is a representation of how the initial Northfield community may have appeared shortly after its founding. It is unclear whether the Ralph Hutchinson home at least as of 1675 was within the area surrounded by the stockade fence. Clearly considering the homes, the Meeting House, the fort and the stockade fencing that had to be built, Ralph Hutchinson's talents as a carpenter must have again been put to good use. In addition to his own home construction, there was land to be cleared and crops to be planted and maintained.  What we find interesting is that during this period from 1673 when the family first moved to Northfield until the Indians attacked Northfield in September of 1675 shortly after the beginning of what was later to be called the King Philip's War, Ralph Hutchinson maintained the ownership of his home on South Street in Northampton.  It was as if he had a premonition of the troubles that were soon to befall his new community of Northfield.

We have discussed the King Philip's War in previous chapters in this blog most notably in Chapter 26 wherein we described the war and its impact on the Baker family in Northampton. The fact that there was an Indian uprising fifty-five years after the arrival of the Pilgrims should have come as no surprise to the Puritans in the late 17th century and definitely not to our present day historians.  Even before the landing of the Mayflower in 1620, European fishermen had unknowingly delivered germs such as smallpox, spotted fever, typhoid, and measles to the Indians tribes of New England and the diseases quickly spread and decimated the Indian population who had not developed any immunities against these diseases.  This damage was quickly followed by the newly arriving white men who rapidly displaced the Indians from their land and their sources of food. The Puritans justified the taking of the Indian land by claims that the tribes had sold their land, however the concept of a land sale was totally alien to the Indians.  By the time of the King Philip's War that began in 1675 the population of Europeans living in New England had grown to 80,000 whereas the Indian population had dwindled to around 10,000.  The first Indian attack occurred in June of 1675 against a few small homesteads near the small Plymouth colony of Swansea.  The attacks quickly spread through the other New England settlements including an attack on Thursday, September 2, 1675 on the small rural town of Northfield.

The settlers of Northfield were caught totally unaware when the Indians attacked and before they could all retreat to within the protected walls of their stockaded fort, six men and two boys were killed. Fortunately Ralph Hutchinson and his family were able to safely retire to the fort. In the meantime however, the Indians proceeded to burn the homes outside the stockaded area including the Hutchinson homestead. They also proceeded to kill all of the livestock and burn the fields. Realizing that a successful attack on the stockaded fort was impossible, the Indians eventually retired. The Hutchinsons and the other families including James Bennett and his new wife remained in the safety of the fort until the arrival of the militia sent to rescue them on Monday, September 6th. At this point and under the protection of the militia, the settlers abandoned Northfield and in the case of the Hutchinson family, they returned to their previous home in Northampton. Northfield was not to be resettled until 1682 and while Ralph and Alice Hutchinson did not return for the second settlement, three of his sons including my 7th great grandfather, Samuel Hutchinson, did resettle in Northfield.  In Samuel's case along with his wife Sarah Root and their children they later relocated in 1697 from Northfield to Lebanon, Connecticut.

Ralph's and Alice's troubles were not over when they returned to Northampton in mid-September of 1675 for only two weeks later on September 28th a group of Indians surprised, killed, and scalped a man and his young son who were cutting wood near their home.  The man was Joseph Baker, my 8th great grand uncle, son of Edward Baker.  Joseph's son was Joseph Baker Jr., his oldest, who was only nine years old when he was killed.  One month later on the 28th of October, the Indians again raided Northampton and once again Ralph, Alice, and their children were able to escape with their lives fleeing back to the stockaded fort area with the other citizens. While no one was killed during this raid, four homes along South Street plus the barns and other outbuildings were burned by the Indians and again the cattle and other livestock were slaughtered and the wheat and other crops destroyed.  One of the home sites burned belonged to the Hutchinson family. They ended up losing everything that they had not previous lost in the Northfield fire: their home, their furnishings, their clothes, their food supplies, and even Ralph's tools and wood supplies. They were now totally destitute and were it not for their neighbors who immediately offered them shelter and food who knows what might have happened to my Hutchinson ancestors. Unfortunately the Indian raids were not over and again in November Indian raids led to several more settlers being killed and more buildings burned. The Militia were quickly dispatched to Northampton where they spent the winter protecting the citizens and helping them further fortify their town. Once again Ralph Hutchinson's carpentry skills were again put to good use. The Hutchinsons and their neighbors whose homes were also burned applied for land grants within the fortified area and Ralph built a new home this time on the west side of King Street.  Ralph was in his late 40s when he once again had to start over. Alice's two children by her first marriage, James and Elizabeth, were both married by 1675 and were no longer living in the new Hutchinson household. John, Ralph and Alice's oldest son was about 17.  The other three boys were 11, 9, and 4 respectively. The family was still relatively young and life in this Connecticut River Valley community does not seem to have gotten much easier. We have no idea of how this string of tragedies may have affected Ralph and Alice's personalities and their joy of life in their later years. Alice had lost two children and her first husband by 1655 followed by the early deaths of two of her young daughters by Ralph. Within a two month period in 1675 she had two homes destroyed  followed a year later in 1676 by the death of her oldest son James who was killed by Indians. Their youngest son Moses Hutchinson was also killed by Indians in 1704 a year after the death of Ralph who died in 1703 in his mid-70s. Alice outlived her husband by a decade living into her mid-80s and finally passing away in 1714. She had outlived both of her husbands and eight of her eleven children.  While Ralph lived another twenty-eight years after the Indian attack in 1675 and the loss of his home, it is hard to imagine that he ever fully recovered.  There is no mention of Ralph Hutchinson in any history books following the record that he was granted land on King Street after his home was burned. Apparently Ralph was not involved in any committees with either the church or the governing of Northampton. While we are confident that he continued to work hard at least as long as his health permitted, he apparently kept to himself preferring not to engage in public services. As they both aged they eventually came to live with their son Judah Hutchinson and his wife Mary Bridgman whom he married in 1692. For a period while he was still single Judah lived in Northfield and he may have later returned to Northampton sometime after 1687 to help his parents and perhaps assume his father's business.  Both Ralph and Alice may have been buried on their own property and even if they were buried in a church cemetery we could find nothing in the historical records that provides us with a clue as to the location of their burial site.    

History books and especially the text books used in our schools, teach us about the movements of our ancestors and they hit the highlights and dates of the historical events such as the landing of the Mayflower, the first Thanksgiving, the founding of Boston, the French and Indian Wars, the Puritan teachings and so forth. However these text books at best gloss over the incredibly hard lives of our early American settlers. We think that if we were able to transport our present population back in time into the late 17th century of Colonial America, most of us would or could not survive the hardships that daily faced our great grandparents. We have in the course of our studies and in the writing of these chapters grown to enormously respect our ancestors. We must thank them for what they have given us and for the hardships that they had to face and overcome so that we may be the beneficiaries of the relatively peaceful and healthy lives that we enjoy today.


Sunday, August 25, 2013

Chapter 33 - The Ancestors of Christie MacDonald Gillespie

My mother died in February of 1973 after several years of battling cancer. She was only 56 years old when she finally succumbed to the inevitable. My father surprised us somewhat when not long after my mother’s death he began dating although now that I am 15 years older than my father was when my mother died, I now realize that my father at 56 years old was still a young man and very much an eligible widower. His decision to start dating again was really quite normal although some of his early choices of dates scared us a bit like his dating the chatty ex-wife of one of his long time friends and a date(s?) with one of our office secretaries. But soon enough he regained his sea legs and finally in the fall of 1974 he married a lovely woman by the name of Christie Gillespie Fanton. I had the unexpected and fortunate role of serving as his best man.

My father and my new step-mother enjoyed 26 years together until my father’s death in the year 2000. Chris outlived him by only two years. My wife and I had been married only five years when Chris joined our family and for our two sons who were very young when their grandmother died, Chris was the only grandmother that they knew while they were growing up from my side of the family. Since Chris was such an important person in our family I thought that it would be fun and after all it is my hobby, if I spend time exploring her ancestors. What I learned about her family tree was fascinating and a worthy subject for this next chapter in my family history blog. I also need to point out that one of Chris’s sons married my sister. This means
that my nieces and my grand nieces and nephews are all direct descendants of all of the individuals whose stories are covered in the following pages.

James J Gillespie (1825-1889) Chris’s great grandfather

James J. Gillespie and Diana Hawthorne Mitchell (1829-1905) were the great grandparents of Christie MacDonald Gillespie. Her great grandmother Diana immigrated to America with her parents, Joseph and Agnes Mitchell, and her six siblings from County Down, Ireland in 1847. Their arrival from Liverpool, England on the SS Bargue Louisa Bliss at the Port of Philadelphia on June 5th of that year was probably followed almost immediately by a long and exhausting train ride from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh a distance of almost 400 miles. Trains through Pennsylvania in the 1840s were just beginning to replace canals as the preferred mode of public transportation although at this early point in their development, trains were slow, conditions on board the trains were filthy and probably hot during the summer, and passengers were required to change trains on numerous
occasions. It is even possible that some portion of the family’s long trip across the state to Pittsburgh was interrupted by their having to transfer to a canal barge where rail service had not yet been made available to make their way via the canal to the next town where train service resumed. The Mitchell family had left Ireland at the height of the Irish Potato Famine. While it is estimated that a million of the 8 million Irish population starved to death in Ireland during the period of the famine from 1845 to 1850, the worst of the famine problems occurred in the southern and western parts of the island. The Mitchell family lived in County Down in Northern Ireland which while affected by the country’s problems was far less affected that other sections of the country. There is enough prima facie evidence to suggest that Thomas Mitchell and his family were not starving indigent farmers forced to leave Ireland for their survival. In fact quite the opposite is true for several reasons. First, it seems apparent that Thomas Mitchell had a plan when he left Ireland and that plan was to sail to America and settle in Pittsburgh. We know in hindsight that many Irish immigrants who settled in Pittsburgh and Allegheny County during the time period surrounding the potato famine, did not come as a direct result of the famine since most of the new immigrants came from the more prosperous counties in Ireland such as County Down and Ulster. Most of the Irish arriving in the Pittsburgh area were already skilled tradesmen and they came seeking the many new jobs in the area such as in the coal, steel and boat building industries. We can also surmise that Thomas Mitchell was comfortable enough financially to afford the cost of passage for his entire family to America plus the added cost of transportation to Pittsburgh. Finally, in the 1850 U.S. Census we find Thomas Mitchell living in what appears to be a single family home in Pittsburgh with his entire family as well as a young 28-year old Irish girl with a different surname who is most likely a household servant. This suggests that he was not forced out of Ireland for any reason other than to take advantage for himself and his family of the better conditions in America. Thomas was 50 when he arrived in America; his young daughter Diana who would soon marry James J. Gillespie, was listed on the handwritten ship’s manifest as a 20-year old female.

The early background of Diana Mitchell’s future husband, James J. Gillespie is a little more difficult to determine. Based on the US Census records from 1860 through 1880 we know that he was born in Ireland between the years 1824 and 1826. We also suspect that he emigrated from Ireland shortly after 1850 since we could not find him in the 1850 US census records. Furthermore, due to the commonality of his name, identifying him in the immigration records proved to be almost impossible. There were more than two dozen James Gillespie’s who immigrated to the United States from the British Isles around the 1850 period. Even the two most likely candidates, a James Gillespie who arrived in Philadelphia on June 5, 1847 and a James Gillespie who arrived in Philadelphia on January 16, 1850, may not be our James Gillespie since their listed birth years, 1827 and 1822 respectively, fall outside the range of birth years for James J. Gillespie listed in the census records. It is intriguing however, that the arrival date of June 5, 1847 for the one James Gillespie coincides exactly with the arrival date of his future wife Diana into the port of Philadelphia although we know that they arrived on different ships from different departure ports. Nevertheless, it would make a wonderful love story to discover that they met each other on the long train ride from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh. Alas, the actual truth shall remain a mystery.

There is strong circumstantial evidence to conclude that James J Gillespie like the Mitchell family was born in Northern Ireland. While there is some ongoing debate as to whether the surname “Gillespie” originated in Gaelic northern Ireland in the 5th century or in Scotland, in both cases there seems to be agreement that in Ireland the surname Gillespie is chiefly recorded in County Down, Providence of Ulster, in Northern Ireland. Even if the Gillespie ancestors originated in Scotland, they were probably among the 100,000 Scottish lowlanders who came to Ireland in the 17th century and settled in northeastern Ireland. It is even possible that our James Gillespie is related to the famous Irishman Sir Robert Rollo Gillespie (1766-1814) who was born in County Down and had an adventurous and distinguished career as a soldier in India where he was killed in action. Further evidence that James Gillespie was from Northern Island is that his family were Presbyterians and not Roman Catholics as were the vast majority of the Irish immigrants from other areas of Ireland during the period of the potato famine. One final and romantic speculation must be offered. Since it appears entirely possible that James J. Gillespie might have been born in County Down and we know that Diana Mitchell was born in County Down then we cannot entirely rule out the possibility that they may have known one another in Ireland and James followed her to America.

Despite the fact that we do not know the exact date of James Gillespie’s arrival in America, nor do we know how he met and when he married Diana, we know based on the census records that their first son Thomas Andrew Gillespie was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on July 1, 1852. That being the case, Thomas and Diana were probably married in the middle of 1851. When James Gillespie arrived in America he had already established his career as that of a carpenter. In the 1860 US Census he was listed as a “Master Carpenter” living in Pittsburgh’s 9th Ward. While there is no evidence that he ever served in the Civil War as a soldier, when he registered for the draft in the middle of 1863 he was listed as a white
“carpenter”, age 40, born in Ireland and living in Pittsburgh’s 9th Ward. In both the 1870 and 1880 US Census records he is listed as a “Lumber Dealer”. We learn from a book titled “Pittsburgh and Allegheny in the Centennial Year” published in 1876, that James Gillespie established in 1859 the firm of Gillespie and Mitchell that dealt in the manufacturing and sale of planed (finished) lumber. It is not clear as to who the Mitchell partner was as none of his Mitchell brother-in-laws appear to have been engaged in the lumber business at any time during their lives (per census records). Apparently, the partner must have been James’ father-in-law, Joseph Lindsey Mitchell, who probably loaned James the seed money to get his new business underway. The Gillespie and Mitchell factory was located on 21st and Railroads Streets in what is now downtown Pittsburgh and its location was ideally situated as it was directly on the Allegheny River and was surrounded by railroad tracks. This meant that the raw lumber (freshly cut trees) could be shipped in by barge down the river from the forested areas of western Pennsylvania and then unloaded directly onto the Gillespie and Mitchell factory docks.
Then after the trees were milled into “planed lumber”, they could be immediately loaded onto the train cars sitting on the adjacent railroad tracks for shipment to their customers. In the second half of the 19th century Pittsburgh was the epitome of a “factory town” and by today’s standards, an environmental disaster. The shorelines of the “three rivers” of Pittsburgh were lined with factories whose smokestacks polluted the air with carbon dust, and whose sewer drain pipes sent the untreated factory waste directly into the rivers. Many of the industries were huge contributors to the pollution especially the coal and steel industries that were to make Pittsburgh so famous. The residents of Pittsburgh, including the Gillespie and Mitchell families, lived nearby the factories and they must have experienced a daily “rain” of carbon dust on and into their homes, their yards, onto their freshly washed clothes that were hung out to dry, and no doubt into their lungs.

James J. Gillespie was probably not an educated man and it is possible that he was never taught to read and write or even sign his name. While we are not sure that it is our James Gillespie, there was a Naturalization paper signed on December 19, 1851 in the “Western District of Pennsylvania” by a “James Gillespie” from Ireland. He signed the form by placing his “Mark” on the bottom of the paper. We also know that at least two of James’ and Diana’s children, Thomas Andrew and David Lindsey Gillespie, had trouble in or never completed high school. On the other hand, both of these boys went on in their adult lives to become hugely successful businessmen, so I think that it is safe to assume that what James did was to embolden his children and these two boys in particular, with a keen business sense and the motivation and aggressiveness necessary to work hard and to let nothing stop them from achieving their goals.

Their son David Lindsey Gillespie, my stepmother Christie’s great uncle, went on to form his own lumber business in 1886 at the age of only 28. He ultimately became even more successful than his father and according to his biography included in the 1905 publication of the “American Lumbermen . . eminent lumbermen of the United States” he was “one of Pittsburgh’s leading and very successful businessmen. During its first year in the lumber business the Gillespie concern handled less than 3,000,000 feet, but in 1902 its output was 70,000,000 feet.” David Gillespie’s biography also tells us something about the end of his father’s business. It reads “The father was one of the largest retail dealers in western Pennsylvania, and until his mill burned down and serious financial difficulties followed, did the phenomenal business of those days, 3,000,000 feet a year.” According to the biography, the mill must have burned in 1775 because that is the year that David Gillespie stopped working for his father. While there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the biography with respect to the burning of the lumber mill, it is interesting to note that James Gillespie in the 1880 US Census, five years after the fire, still reported his occupation as that of a “lumber dealer” and in the 1876 publication referenced above about the centennial of Pittsburgh, it still lists the Gillespie and Mitchell Company as an existing lumber business. The factory probably did burn and James Gillespie probably did have financial difficulties trying to keep it going and maybe he was partially successful. He was however, 50 years old when the plant burned and perhaps his struggles thereafter to rebuilt his business may have accounted for his relatively early death at the age of only 64 on September 4, 1889. His wife Diana Mitchell Gillespie outlived her husband by 16 years finally passing away April 25, 1905. They are both buried in the Allegheny Cemetery located near their home and their business and a just few miles from the high rise buildings of present day downtown Pittsburgh.

My stepmother Christie’s grandparents, Thomas Andrew Gillespie (1852-1926) and Julia Burford Wall (1855- Aft 1940), were married in Pittsburgh on January 7, 1875. Their marriage is a fascinating combination of two individuals with two entirely different family backgrounds. Thomas’ family as we have seen, grew up in the heavy industry of Pittsburgh. They were hard driven businessmen with type A personalities and analytical thinkers who used the right sides of their brains. On the other side, Julia Wall’s brother, father, uncle, and grandfather were all artists who were all obviously creative thinkers. The modern belief is that predominately creative people use the left sides of their brains. So on January 5, 1875, the right brains headed up by Thomas’ father James Gillespie, socialized with the left brains headed up by Julia’s father William Coventry Wall (1810-1886). We could make up a great story about the wedding conversation, but we will not. Anyway, before we return to the Gillespie side of Christie’s family, we will have at look at the very interesting Wall side of her family.

William Wall (1767-1857) – Christie’s great, great grandfather

William Wall was born in Oxford, England in the year 1767. There is little known about his upbringing although some family historians believe that he was born to wealthy and educated parents and based on his later artisan calling, they might very well be right. The oldest son takes over the family business and the younger sons join the military, enter the ministry, or in William’s case, learn a trade. William was probably apprenticed at a young age and taught to paint and learn other art skills that were marketable such as working with stone carvings which were in high demand in England and used in the construction of cathedrals and other stone buildings possibly even at the university. He may also have been taught to sculpture the elaborate gravestones that were in common use in churchyard cemeteries throughout Oxfordshire.

William Wall was in his early 40s when he married 20-year old Lucy Hardiman around the year 1809. It seems likely that this was not his first wife although there are no known existing records to support an earlier marriage. Family historian Dr. Betty Jane McWilliams speculates that William meet his future wife while she was attending a school for young ladies that was being run by William’s mother. Whatever the circumstance of their meeting, William and Lucy had three children before they left England for America including Christie’s great grandfather William Coventry Wall who was born in April of 1810.

It is really a mystery as to what motivated William Wall to move with his family to America around the year 1820. Immigration to America from England and Europe in 1820 was practically at a standstill with only 8,385 new immigrants signing naturalization papers during that year. In 1820 the population of the United States is estimated to have been approximately 10,000,000 people with almost 99% of these American citizens born in this country. Unlike the early years of our country’s growth, there were no major driving forces in Europe such as persecutions or famines that motivated people to leave their homelands. During the decade of 1820 to 1830, only 143,000 new immigrants entered America. In the following decade of 1830 to 1840, immigration rose to 599,000 new arrivals, however in the 1840-50 decade immigration increased dramatically to 1,713,000 with almost 781,000 of the immigrants arriving from Ireland. We do not know what motivated William to leave England in 1820 but we know it was not likely due to poor conditions in Oxford or in England. On the other hand, beginning in the 1820s, the United States was gaining a reputation as an emerging industrial nation and this knowledge would probably have attracted artisans and skilled workers like William Wall to leave their homeland to try their luck in America.

It is still baffling as to why then 53-year old William Wall with his 30-year old wife and children, who ranged in age from 2 to 11, left their home in England. Once they arrived in New York City after their long voyage by sailing ship, they purchased a horse and wagon and proceeded to travel almost 400 miles over a system of dusty and rutted dirt roads to a new home in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania located about 45 miles southeast of the town of Pittsburgh. We have to wonder whether they had a master plan when they left England to eventually settle in Western Pennsylvania. If this were the case, the next mystery has to be why did the Wall family not sail directly to the Port of Philadelphia from England which would have been a far more logical thing to do if their plan was to settle in Mount Pleasant or Pittsburgh. By 1820 the final leg of the original “Pennsylvania Turnpike” was completed which allowed travelers a continuous trail from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh, a distance of 330 miles (at least on Interstate 70 today) which was a significantly easier and shorter than the trip from New York. The evolution of transportation through Pennsylvania is an interesting study. From the time period following the American Revolution to around 1800, travelers crossing Pennsylvania had to make their way along old Indian trails or down rivers such as the Susquehanna. The first turnpike in Pennsylvania began in 1792 and it connected Philadelphia to Lancaster. “Turnpikes” were “private” roads constructed by private individuals or corporations who hoped to show a profit from the fees that they charged travelers who wished to use their turnpikes. It is estimated that between 1800 and 1830 there were almost 200 turnpike corporations in existence in Pennsylvania. These turnpikes were in many cases poorly constructed and the weather and their intensive usage took a heavy toll on the road surfaces. By the 1840s, in an effort to reduce their long term maintenance costs, the road owners began covering the road surfaces with wood timbers hence the term “Plank Roads” was coined. Notwithstanding the major expansion and improvements to the road system in Pennsylvania in the early 1800s, hauling supplies via the roads was very slow and very expensive. While canal construction had begun in Pennsylvania as early as the late 1700s, it was not until the completion of the Erie Canal in New York State in 1825 did Pennsylvanians begin to construct canals in earnest. Following a huge infusion of cash by the Pennsylvania Legislature, by 1840 the “Main Line” canal officially opened that allowed canal service between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. While hauling goods and travelers via canals was vastly less expensive, unfortunately, as is often the case in our capitalist system, canal traffic in Pennsylvania peaked about the time of the opening of the Main Line in 1840 with the expansion of railroads. Hauling by rail was even less expensive than by canal, it was faster, and unlike the canals, rail service could continue through the cold winter months. Obviously, William Wall was unable to take advantage of the benefits of travel by rail or canal in 1820 and his journey to Mount Pleasant must have taken many weeks. James Gillespie on the other hand who traveled to Pittsburgh from Philadelphia in 1850 and his in-laws who made the same trip in 1847 were transported in relative comfort and arrived by rail in a matter of days. Today a drive on the Pennsylvania Turnpike from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh takes around 5 hours and the flight time on US Airways can be accomplished in just over one hour.

Town lots were original laid out for the village of Mount Pleasant in the year 1797 although the farm land surrounding the new village had been occupied many years earlier. By 1810 most of the town lots were sold and the village contained 34 log homes as well as a number of businesses including an inn and tavern, a blacksmith shop and livery stable, and a mercantile and feed store, and of course, on Church Street the “Meeting House” (the church) and the graveyard. William Wall was not the only tombstone carver in the area when he arrived in 1820, although as the quality of his work attests, his services were undoubtedly in high demand. One of his earliest commissions and perhaps his finest carving (see photograph) was for the tombstone for a man named Clement Burleigh who had died in 1822. Burleigh was one of the leading citizens of Mount Pleasant and it was he who had donated the land for the Meeting House and the graveyard back in 1802. William Wall went on to carve many more tombstones in at least seven cemeteries in both Westmoreland and Fayette Counties. His stones are recognized because of his engraved “signature” on the tombstones as can be seen in the photograph of the Burleigh gravestone.

Just as we wondered why William Wall left “the majestic spires of Oxford” and migrated to America and to Mount Pleasant, we have to wonder why in the early to mid-1830s William decided to leave “the bucolic charm of Mount Pleasant” and relocate to the urban factory town of Pittsburgh noted for “Its dark, satanic mills” and as Charles Dickens noted when he wrote about the city in 1842 that it had a “great quantity of smoke hanging over it”. William Wall was in his mid-60s years at the time and it seems incredible that he would want to retire to such an environment. The population of Pittsburgh in the mid 1830s was approaching 20,000 and the filth from the factories and the additional traffic created by the growing population must have seemed like pollution was increasing on a daily basis. That hardly seems like an environment that would endear an artist. We do not know the exact year that William Wall and his family moved to Pittsburgh. What we do know is that his oldest son, 25 year-old William Coventry Wall, married a Pittsburgh girl, Catherine Anne Perry Westervelt, on August 26, 1835 which suggests that the family moved the city sometime prior to that date. William Wall may very well have moved to the larger city to improve employment opportunities for himself and more importantly, for his children’s future who in 1835 numbered six and ranged in ages from 5 to 25 years old. The only evidence suggesting that William continued his tombstone carving business in Pittsburgh is that he was listed as a “carver gilder” on the 1850 US census. He was 83-years old in that year and to my knowledge no one has located any of his carvings in any cemeteries in the Pittsburgh area. When William died at the age of 90 in 1857 he was buried in the Allegheny Cemetery in Pittsburgh. Ironically and unfortunately no tombstone or great work of art was placed over his final resting place. His wife Lucy who survived her husband by eight years and at least three of their children, are buried in the same cemetery. Some historians have suggested that William Wall may have operated a school for artists both in Mount Pleasant and later in Pittsburgh. While we know of no documentation to support this belief, the knowledge that two of William’s sons, William Coventry Wall and Alfred S. Wall, went on to become nationally recognized artists, strongly suggests that their father both influenced his sons and most likely trained them in the art of painting. It is no real stretch of the imagination to assume that his teaching of art may have been extended to others.

William Coventry Wall (1810-1886) – Christie’s great grandfather

After William’s marriage to Catherine “Katie” Westervelt in August 1835, the couple apparently moved to Louisville, Kentucky where their first three daughters were born between the years 1836 and 1839 and where William operated a small arts and frame supply shop that specialized in “looking glass” or framed mirrors. The profits from the shop apparently helped William support his new and rapidly growing family while he continued to develop his skills as an artist. In 1841, William and his wife and three daughters returned to Pittsburgh where William again opened up a picture frame and arts supply store in the downtown area of Pittsburgh on 4th Avenue between Wood and Market Streets. According to Betty Jane McWilliams who wrote the book on the Wall family titled “The Four Walls”, newspapers at the time advertised William as a plain and fancy portrait and picture frame manufacturer and a seller of artist supplies, paintings, and engravings for sale. We have to wonder if possibly some of the engravings that were sold in the store were actually crafted by his father. William’s home fortunately was located across the Allegheny River in Allegheny City for in the morning hours of April 10, 1845 sparks from a outdoor fire started by a careless washerwoman started a fire at a nearby wooden structure at the southeast corner of Ferry and 2nd Street in downtown Pittsburgh and in a matter of minutes an out of control inferno was ignited that burned most of the day and destroyed almost one third of the “best half of the city”, almost 60 acres in total.
Hundreds of buildings including homes, factories, warehouses, stores, docks, and even a bridge were left in ruins including William C. Wall’s small shop that was located only a few blocks from where the fire began. While William probably lost the building and the entire contents of his store, the Great Fire of Pittsburgh of 1845 was for William at least sort of a blessing in disguise. Shortly following the fire William Wall painted several scenes of the city during the fire and of the destruction following the fire and he decided to have lithographs made of his paintings. The lithographs sold very well in cities as far away as Philadelphia and suddenly William found buyers starting to pay attention to his art work.

Over the next four decades William C. Wall crafted dozens of paintings and sketches. While he advertised that he would paint portraits and special paintings such as homes for a commission, his real love was that of landscape painting. In the late 1860s he was part of a group of local artists that included his brother Alfred S. Wall, who spent time together each summer painting scenes in a mostly unsettled area southeast of Pittsburgh near Johnstown, Pennsylvania. This group of painters later became known as the Scalp Level Painters named after the borough of Scalp Level where they spent their time painting. During his lifetime, William traveled extensively painting landscape scenes in the Monongahela, Allegheny, Conemaugh, and Susquehanna River valleys in Pennsylvania and as far north as New York where he painted a scene along the Erie Canal and a view of the Niagara Falls. The exact number of paintings that William C. Wall painted and sold during his lifetime is not known although the number probably totals upwards of 50 to 60 or more. A search on the internet identified at least 40 of his major art pieces and that list likely excludes many of the paintings that he did on commission for private buyers as well as paintings that have been lost or not identified as his. It also excludes the many decorative banners that he painted for the local fire companies in the late 1840s and theater scenery paintings that he did for the Pittsburgh Company. It is also reported that William Coventry Wall along with an artist friend of his painted dozens of paintings for a luxury river steamboat, the Grand Republic, that ran down the Mississippi beginning shortly after the end of the Civil War.
The majority of Wall’s known paintings are held by individual art collectors although a number of them are in art galleries such as the Carnegie Museum of Art in Pittsburgh where his famous paintings showing the Pittsburgh fire are on display. The current value of a William Coventry Wall painting is difficult to determine since his art work is seldom sold in public auctions and of course each painting in any case, would have a different value. It is estimated that a typical W.C. Wall painting will sell today for somewhere between $20K to $40K. On the other hand, his “View on the Allegheny River” (see painting to the left) sold for $59,375 in 2010 and his paintings showing the scenes of the 1845 Pittsburgh fire are worth considerably more.

One of his biographies that I encountered while researching William Coventry Wall described him as a “quiet family man.” I found this observation to be somewhat humorous and perhaps even contradictory considering that Wall had ten children and his life was constantly full of varied activities that must have taken up an enormous amount of his time. Not only was he consumed with his paintings, he also ran an artist supplies shop for much of his life and in 1850 he purchased a book store that he renamed Wall Book Depot. Furthermore, between 1856 and 1859 he worked in photography, he is listed as a member in the Masonic directory of the St John’s Lodge in 1860, and also in the 1850s he was elected President of the Buchanan and Breckenridge Club in Pittsburgh. James Buchanan and John C. Breckinridge were President and Vice-President of the United States between 1857 and 1861, just prior to Abraham Lincoln’s presidency, and they were Democrats who were known to have Southern sympathies, a rather unpopular position to hold in a Northern state like Pennsylvania just prior to the outbreak of the Civil War. In fact, John C. Breckinridge was later appointed as Secretary of War for the Confederate States during the period of the Civil War. We will withhold any harsh criticism of William Wall’s political leanings particularly considering that James Buchanan was and still is the only President of the United States from Pennsylvania and it was natural that he would be supported by Wall particularly prior to his election. Unfortunately history considers the James Buchanan administration to be one of the worst administrations in the history of our country. Bottom line I guess is that William Coventry Wall was an extremely busy “quiet family man.”

William C. Wall’s last known painting, “The Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Company of Homestead,” was completed in 1884. He was 74 years old at the time of the commission. The painting shows the steel plant with its rows of chimneys with black smoke rising in the air. At the time this was an accurate portrait of the steel plant and the painting probably greatly pleased the owners of the plant who had commissioned the painting. Today of course, environmentalist would be appalled at this scene and they would be demanding that our government shut down the plant (despite the fact that thousands of workers would immediately lose their job.)

William Coventry Wall died in a hospital on 19 November 1886. Two months earlier he had suffered a stroke which left him paralyzed on one side. The ultimate cause of his death however, was listed as kidney failure. His legacy of course, are his numerous works of art but we also must be impressed by the nature of this man who worked hard all of his life to support his family and who freely and willingly passed down his talents to many younger artists who were to follow him.

Thomas Andrew Gillespie (1852-1926) – Christie’s great grandfather

Thomas Andrew Gillespie, the oldest son of James J. Gillespie and Diana Hawthorne Mitchell, was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on 1 July 1852. Based on a book by George T. Fleming that briefly describes a history of the Pittsburgh Central High School from 1855 to 1871, we learn or at least there is a suggestion in this book, that Thomas Andrew Gillespie did not graduate with his high school class of 1866. Whether Thomas later went back to earn his diploma is not known although he is not listed as an 1867 graduate and by the age of 16 (almost 17) in June of 1868 he went to work as a clerk for the Pittsburgh Gas Company. We strongly suspect that in the Gillespie family the importance of getting a good education was secondary to the importance of obtaining employment, maintaining a strong work ethic, and aggressively pursuing ones goals. If Thomas failed to complete his high school education it does not appear to have slowed down his meteoric rise in the business work and it would appear that well before his 50th birthday and before the turn of the century, Thomas Andrew Gillespie had amassed a net worth of well over a million dollars. He was undoubtedly aided in his efforts to gain wealth by our country’s lack of any federal income tax before 1894, at which time a 2% income tax was applied on personal income over $4,000, and by the almost total absence of Federal regulations, corporate oversight and corporate income taxes. Furthermore, the period of 1865 to around 1900 has been called the “Gilded Age” in American history as a result of the huge leap during these years in our manufacturing output and the strong economic growth in our country. In the article in Wikipedia that discusses this gilded age in our country’s history, the author notes that this period was an “epoch of tycoons.” He was referring to the fact that conditions in our country were ideal for entrepreneurs, men such as Thomas Andrew Gillespie, who were willing to take a risk, who if successful in their efforts were able to accumulate vast sums of money.

Thomas Andrew Gillespie remained with the Pittsburgh Gas Company for only two months before he changed jobs shortly after his 17th birthday and accepted a position with Lloyd & Black Iron Manufacturing in August of 1868. In 1871, again sensing a new opportunity he went to work for the relatively young firm of Lewis, Oliver & Philips, a manufacturer of iron, wagon, and heavy hardware. According to “The Story of Pittsburgh & Vicinity” published in 1908, Thomas Andrew Gillespie worked as a “traveling agent” for this firm which I interpret to mean that he was a salesman. For whatever reason, Thomas left the firm in 1879 after eight years and at the age of only 27 he opened up his own business which according to his biography in the book mentioned previously, his new company “manufactured iron bolts and kindred articles.” A very similar business to the one he just left. Perhaps Thomas may have disagreed with this description of his company for in the 1880 U.S. Census he told the census taker that he was a “Tank Manufacturer.” Whatever the exact nature of his business, it is not surprising to learn that in the first ten years of Thomas’ working career, he was engaged in one way or another in the iron and steel industry, the industry so closely associated with Pittsburgh.

On 7 Jan 1875, James Andrew Gillespie married Julia Burford Wall, the daughter of the well known Pittsburgh artist William Coventry Wall and his wife Catherine. It is fun to speculate but there is no way of knowing for sure when and where James met his future wife Julia. She was two years older than James and came from an entirely different background. Both Julia and James were probably still living with their parents just prior to their marriage, at least they were at the time of the 1870 U.S Census, and their parents were not living in the same neighborhoods. At the time of their marriage James was a 22-year old, struggling self-employed businessman and it seems unlikely that he met Julia at a social function. On a purely speculative basis, we believe that Julia meet James because she either worked for his company or for a related firm and their encounters eventually lead to romance and marriage. However they met, their first son, Thomas Howard Gillespie, was born nine months and 21 days after his parent’s marriage. They went on to have a daughter, Jean Gillespie, born in 1886, and two more sons, Henry Lloyd Gillespie, father of our Christie MacDonald Gillespie, born in 1878, and James Parke Gillespie, born in 1889.

Perhaps as a result of his growing family and the need to have a steady source of income, James Andrew Gillespie closed his business in 1884 and went to work for a man named George Westinghouse who had purchased a charter from a company named Philadelphia Company which included the rights to install natural gas to many of the wealthy homes in Pittsburgh. George Westinghouse, who several years later founded Westinghouse Electric, must have seen something in James A. Gillespie who was only 32 years old at the time. During the period that James Gillespie worked for the company as a primary supervisor, the company went on to install underground gas lines to thousands of homes in Pittsburgh. Clearly, this position gave Thomas Andrew Gillespie, the confidence and experience that he needed to forge forward on his own in the future. We suspect that an inheritance from his father who died in 1889 provided some additional capital which allowed him in 1890 to form his own contracting company, the T. A. Gillespie Company.

Sometime prior to June of 1890, probably in mid to late 1889, the Gillespie family relocated to the Town of West Orange in Essex County, New Jersey. Their new home was located on South Valley Road in West Orange in a neighbor of new and expensive Victorian style homes. According to the 1930 US Census, their home had an assessed value of $200,000 which would have an equivalent value today well in excess of $1 million. We know that their home was large simply by the fact that in 1890 it housed the Gillespie family of six plus six servants ranging in age of between 28 and 40 years old. In the 1930 US Census, the census taker wrote opposite the names of the occupants of their home which then consisted only of Julia Gillespie as Thomas had died in 1926, and her servants, the words “Silver Spring Estate.” We assume that this was what the family had named their house and grounds. Their original home which we believe has been long demolished was probably located in the area where Silver Springs Road intersects with South Valley Road. Homes in this area are currently valued in the $250K to $400K range and we believe that they are much smaller than the original Gillespie estate. Thomas Gillespie’s home in West Orange was located about 1-1/2 miles from Thomas Edison’s mansion. Julia Wall Gillespie sold her Silver Spring Estate home around 1935 and she moved in with her daughter Jean and her husband and her grand children who were living in New York City. Julia was still living at their home at the time of the 1940 US Census.

Between 1890 and the time of his death in 1926, Thomas Andrew Gillespie accumulated great wealth largely we believe as a result of the success of his construction company, the T.A. Gillespie Co. The company specialized in what might be called “heavy construction” projects as opposed to “building construction.” This work consisted largely of water, sewer, and gas pipelines which they constructed throughout the eastern United States, as well as the construction of canals, locks, reservoirs, and dams, pumping stations, tunnels including tunnels for water aqueducts as well as for subways systems in and around New York City. The adjacent photograph that was taken in 1906 shows T.A. Gillespie Company workers installing a water pipe in Pittsburgh. Some of their more famous construction projects included several multi-million dollar contacts that were part of the construction of the Catskill Aqueduct built to transport water from the Catskills to New York City that was constructed between 1907 and 1916. T.A. Gillespie Company not only constructed a 4-1/2 mile underground aqueduct but in another contract provided a 1,200 foot tunnel for a portion of the water aqueduct installed under the Hudson River. In other large contracts the T.A. Gillespie Company built a huge water infiltration plant for the City of Pittsburgh, a canal at Messena on the St Lawrence River, and major subway tunnels both in New York and Brooklyn. The company was so highly respected that they were asked to joint venture with the MacArthur Company to submit a bid on the construction of the Panama Canal in 1906. MacArthur Company was one of the lead contractors on the construction of the Catskill Aqueduct and obviously had been so impressed with Gillespie’s work on the Aqueduct project that they invited Gillespie to work with them on constructing the Panama Canal. Unfortunately for both companies, their offer was not the low bid.

In 1913, the T.A Gillespie Company along with a few other firms was investigated by a committee of the New York Legislature for possible corruption, namely a charge that these firms had offered bribes to public officials to obtain public construction contracts principally for the construction of the New York subway system. No evidence of corruption was uncovered. What was really interesting in the course of the hearings were the comments offered by Theodore P. Shonts, President of the Interborough Rapid Transit, with respect to Thomas Andrew Gillespie and his company. These comments included the following statements: “Gillespie is the greatest sub-surface expert living in the work,“ and “ The greatest water pipe man in the engineering work,” and finally “. . a great organizer, great driver, and very skillful in the part of the work we had to do with opening all of the street.” It would seem that Thomas Andrew Gillespie’s success was clearly a result of his ability and the effectiveness of his company.

It also seems that Gillespie’s success was also due to his willingness to take high risks under circumstances where success might lead to high financial rewards. The type of construction contacts that he accepted were inherently risky and undoubtedly yielded profits in the 15% to 25% range. We also see that Thomas Gillespie invested in numerous other types of businesses. We encountered a few that we will mention although there were probably many others. In the early 1890s, Gillespie invested in the Central Tractor Company which operated a cable car in the City of Pittsburgh. In 1894, we find Thomas A. Gillespie listed as Treasurer of a company named American Steel Forge Company that manufactured wagon hardware. In 1914, Gillespie entered into a garbage collection contract with the City of New York. Thomas Gillespie concluded before he accepted the contract that he could recycle the garbage and actually sell the recycled end products which he thought would be grease and fertilizer, at a profit. One of the garbage collection contract terms was that he would pay the city for the right to collect the garbage. Unfortunately this little business failed and he ended up losing a lawsuit with the City and paying them $110,000. The largest and most visible of Thomas Andrew Gillespie’s extracurricular business operations was his $12.7 million dollar contact with the United States Government in 1917 to manufacturer munitions for the War, World War I. Unfortunately this business which operated at a plant in Middlesex County, New Jersey, ended rather dramatically on 4 October 1918 when an explosion caused a fire which set off a series of subsequent explosions over the next three days. Not only was the large manufacturing plant completely destroyed but hundreds of homes and other buildings surrounding the plant were also destroyed. Over 100 people died and hundreds more were injured. Thomas Andrew Gillespie obviously lost his huge investment in the T.A. Gillespie Company Shell Loading Plant. There is no record of any civil or personal lawsuits against Thomas Gillespie although it is known that the US Government paid out millions of dollars to area residents to cover the damages. After the war we do not hear much about the T.A. Gillespie Company and Thomas A. Gillespie. Thomas listed his occupation in the 1920 US Census as a “Manufacturer” and from other sources we know that he appears to have partnered with his old boss in some way, George Westinghouse, to manufacture washing machines. In 1920 Thomas Gillespie was 68 years old and he was undoubtedly considering retirement or at least refraining from taking an active role in managing his businesses.

What exactly happened to the T.A. Gillespie Company after 1920 and after Thomas Andrew Gillespie’s death in 1926 was not determined. We know that all three of Thomas’ and Julia’s sons were involved in the business at one time or another as was their daughter’s husband, their son-in-law, Harry Seaver Jones. Their oldest son Thomas Howard Gillespie and their son-in law, H. Seaver Jones, appear to have continued in the contracting business after Thomas’ death and most likely they worked together. In the 1920 Census they were both involved probably with Thomas in setting up the washing machine manufacturing business but then in both the 1930 and the 1940 census records they listed themselves as contractors, in one case as “Building Industrial” and in other case as “Contacting Municipal Line.” It is unclear what their second oldest son, Henry Lloyd Gillespie, did for a living although in 1917 he was listed as the Assistant General Manager of the T.A. Gillespie Shell Loading Plant a position that abruptly ended in 1918, and in the 1920 Census he listed himself a “Building Contactor Houses.” Henry died in 1929. There will be more about his life below. We know the least about the occupations of their third son and youngest child, James Parke Gillespie. In the 1930 Census, he was listed as a manufacturer of “Connector Machine [bolts?]” which was probably one of his father’s companies. No occupations are mentioned for him in the 1920 and 1940 census records. It does appear that none of his sons had the skills and drive of their father. It would also seem likely that the sons and the daughter inherited large sums of money when their father passed away in 1926 which by itself eliminated some or most of the need for them to carry on the business as a source of income and wealth at least in the manner that Thomas Andrew Gillespie pursued that goal.

We know from our research that Thomas Andrew Gillespie’s life was not all work and no play. He was a chairman or director of a number of unrelated companies to his own business which reflects the respect that others had of his abilities. He was a member of a number of associations and societies and he was an active member of the Presbyterian Church. For recreation he was an avid golfer and he loved the “sport” of motor boating and racing. From 1911 to 1913 he was Commodore of the Thousand Islands Yacht Club near his summer home on Basswood Island in the Thousand Islands that he had purchased in 1897. His summer home was described by one source as a “palatial summer home.” In a newspaper article dated 18 August 1907 it is reported that “Society will be out in force Monday afternoon, when the annual lawn fete for the benefit of the Boys Club of Clayton will be held at the summer home of Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Gillespie at Basswood Isle, nearly opposite this resort. The affair is always one in which the society set of the Thousand Island has shown the greatest interest.” Another article in the New York Tribune dated 25 July 1920 reports that “. . .a pleasant incident of the week was the picnic which Mr. and Mrs. Thomas A. Gillespie gave to about fifty guests.” We find again another article, this time in the Watertown Daily Times in June of 1920 that informs us that Thomas Andrew and Julia Wall Gillespie’s son, Thomas Howard Gillespie was the vice President of the Thousand Island Yacht Club and that visiting the club at that time was their son Henry Lloyd Gillespie and his wife, the former Christie MacDonald “of musical comedy fame.” What it does not say but I am sure was true, that also with Henry and Christie Gillespie was their six year old daughter Christie MacDonald Gillespie, my stepmother.

Thomas Andrew Gillespie was 73-years old when he died at his home on 28 January 1926.

Christie MacDonald (ca 1877-1962) – Christie’s Mother

All biographies that we researched on the life of Christie MacDonald listed her as born in Pictou, Nova Scotia on 28 February 1875 and the daughter of John MacLean MacDonald, a shipbuilder, mariner, and innkeeper, and Jessie MacKenzie. Unfortunately despite hours of research I could not find anything to collaborate her birth year of 1875 other than the statement in her various biographies that she began her stage career at age 17 in the year 1892 which conveniently places her birth year at 1875. Almost all other public records with respect to her birth year suggest that she was born later and if we accept as accurate the 1900 U.S. Census records that report her birth as February 1878, then in reality when she started her stage career in 1892 she would have been only 14 years old. This might suggest that her mother may have lied about her age so that her much too young daughter would be allowed to perform but we do not think that this was the case. There is however, sufficient evidence to strongly suggest that the birth year of 1875 is not accurate. The US and NYS census records in 1900, 1915, 1920, 1930 and 1940 show the year of Christie’s birth as 1878, 1880, 1881, 1882, and 1884 respectively and not surprisingly as Christie MacDonald got older she reported the year of her birth to the census takers as being later which made her much younger than her actual age. When Christie MacDonald Gillespie traveled overseas with her daughter in 1929 she reported on the ships log that she was born on February 28, 1880 and then a year later in the 1930 census she reported her birth as 1882. Even this birth year would have made her only 10 to 12 years old when she first appeared on stage in 1892 and it is obviously a fabricated birth year on the part of Christie. On the other hand, her marriage record to William Jefferson in 1901 shows her as being 23 years old or born in 1878. Apparently William and Christie traveled to Europe on several occasions and on the ship’s manifest on one of the voyages in 1905, Christie MacDonald Jefferson again reported herself as being 23 years old. It appears that she did not age a bit between her marriage date of 1901 and 1905. Her death certificate reports that she was 85 years old when she died in 1962 which would suggest a birth year of 1877. This date shows that at least her family members believed that she was not born as early as 1875 and we suggest that Christie MacDonald’s actual birth probably occurred on 28 February 1877. Despite all of the evidence to the contrary as to her birth year, the New York Times reported in her obituary that when she died in 1962 she was 87 years old. Perhaps we will never know the truth but assuming that 1877 is the correct year of her birth, this would have made her a very young performer on the stage at only 15 and as one observer noted she was “dainty as a moss rose.” Besides, who says a woman does not have the right to fib about her age although it does appear that Christie may have taken this “right” to the extreme.

The Cambridge Chronicle writing a brief story on 12 March 1898 about Christie MacDonald’s career reported that she came to Boston [with her mother and sister] when she was only nine years old and the family settled on Beacon Hill. Beacon Hill in the late 1800s was a far cry from the high-cost living area that it is today and it was in fact a location in Boston where many new immigrants in the late 1800s chose to live. Sometime in late 1895 or early 1896, the family relocated to Cambridge where the city directories in the years 1896 thru 1898 show them residing at 30 Massachusetts Avenue. Accepting that Christie MacDonald was born in 1877, then she moved to Boston around the year 1886. Since it does not appear that she was accompanied to Boston by her father John MacLean MacDonald, (at least her mother is listed as a widow in the 1896 city directory), it is possible that he may have died sometime before their departure and accepting that he had been a shipbuilder and innkeeper and had gained some wealth during his life, it seems reasonable to assume that Christie’s mother had some modest means to afford the move to Boston. Whether her decision to relocate to America and Boston was motivated by a desire to advance her talented daughter’s career is unknown and probably not likely, however the family’s move was undoubtedly based on her general conclusion that life in Boston was far better than a life for herself and her two young daughters in the rather backward and rural countryside of Pictou, Nova Scotia in the late 1800s. We must point out that we did find a few articles that implied that both of Christie’s parents moved to Boston and while this is entirely possible, we were unable to determine where and when her father John MacLean MacDonald died be it Nova Scotia or Boston.

Christie MacDonald displayed a singing ability at a young age and as she once reported to the New York Times, she sang in the choir at her church in Pictou even before the family moved to Boston. Her mother saw to it once in Boston that she would be able to continue her musical studies and while there are no records of her performances in those early years prior to 1892, Christie undoubtedly performed at her school, maybe at her church, and possibly even in some small local summer theater groups prior to enrolling at the age of around 15 in Pauline Hall’s company in 1892. Apparently Pauline Hall who was an established actress and singer was in Boston along with her fellow male actor Francis Wilson, and they were preparing for the revival of the musical Erminie that they planned to open later once the show was ready, on Broadway in New York. It seems that Christie MacDonald’s music instructor may have known Francis Wilson for he was able to arrange for Christie to audition with Wilson for a part in the musical. Francis Wilson liked what he heard in the audition and Christie was chosen to sing in the chorus. Christie was undoubtedly thrilled as her aspirations to go into the theater were well know to both her mother as well as to her friends. The performance of Erminie was on stage in Boston for only one month before the cast and set were loaded out for the move to Broadway. As the story goes, Jessie MacDonald refused to allow her young daughter to leave school and Boston and move with the show to New York.

Much of what we know about Christie MacDonald’s early theatrical career prior to her move to New York City in late 1898 we learn from an interesting book by Lewis C. Strand titled Famous Prima Donnas published in 1900. He begins by describing Christie’s eight years performing in the Boston theaters from 1892 until 1998 and in New York theaters in 1899 as a “soubrette experience” or as defined in other sources as one of having minor female roles in comedy. Over the eight year period Christie completed her high school education and performed in numerous theatrical productions in various theaters around Boston including the Tremont Theater and the new Columbia Theater and in a few short run shows in New York City in 1899. She was described by Mr Strand in his book as “ . . well known as a very amiable little lady with a fancy for short skirts and for frisky and vivacious characters, that sang prettily and danced nimbly.” She was not he went on to imply, destined to become a “prima donna” which was the term originally used in operas to designate the leading female singer and the one to whom prime roles were offered. This changed however, when Christie MacDonald was offered the lead role in the new musical comedy operetta The Princess Chic that opened at the New York Theater on 12 February 1900. Her new role was demanding both as an actress and as a singer and according to Lewis C. Strand in his book “she was from the first exquisite.” Unfortunately the show lasted for only 22 performances finally closing on 3 March 1900. Despite the lack of support for the show it did have the effect of elevating 22-year old Christie MacDonald into a new role as a Prima Donna. Christie MacDonald performed on Broadway in lead roles in sixteen major musicals between the years 1900 and 1920. Her final role in Florodora performed in the Century Theater in Central Park West in New York City lasted for 150 performances from 5 April 1920 until 14 August 1920 and it represented both her first stage performance since the birth of her daughter Christie MacDonald Gillespie back in 1914 as well as her final performance and the beginning of her retirement. She was around 43 years old when she retired. Incidentally, the Century Theater also retired a few years later in 1926 when it was demolished and replaced with an apartment building.

We believe that Christie MacDonald’s energy in her private life was not that much different than in her public life as presented in the numerous press releases during her stage career. In a 1911 theater magazine when they described her “mid-summer repose” with her husband at Basswood Island, summer home of her father-in-law Thomas Andrew Gillespie, they reported that she loved to play golf and drive fast motor boats. In one of her many obituaries Christie was described as a “. . . favorite guest at all parties.” Christie MacDonald was probably friendly and out-going from the time that she was a young adult especially after her move to New York City and the rise of her career. We believe that she enjoyed parties and the company of others yet at the same time she retained a certain amount of innocence and perhaps naivety in her life borne from her rather humbly upbringing, the loss of her father at an early life, and the strict controls placed upon her by her mother.

Christie MacDonald’s stage career was very busy in 1900, her first full year in New York, as she appeared in three different shows than ran consecutively with very little free time between the shows to do much other than practice for the next performance. Nevertheless, Christie found the time to meet and fall in love with a fellow actor, William Winter Jefferson who the son of another very famous actor at that time, Joseph Jefferson. Following the completion of Christie’s performance in Hodge Podge & Co, that ended in April of 1901, Christie MacDonald and William Winter Jefferson were married in a “quiet home wedding” ceremony in Buzzard’s Bay, Massachusetts on 12 May 1901 at the home of William’s parents Mr. & Mrs. Joseph Jefferson. Shortly following the wedding they sailed for Europe, visiting Germany, Switzerland, France, and England. In a very cute piece that ran in the Cambridge Chronicle on 5 October 1901 that was titled “A Dutiful Little Wife” the author of the article described a “chat” that he had with Christie wherein she talked about her honeymoon, her own love of horseback riding and her husband’s total “apathy to horseback riding.” She then goes on to describe with a certain amount of irony how much Mr. Jefferson became “infatuated” with playing croquet during their visit to England. It is impossible to conclude anything definitive from this little article about the “dutiful little wife” but it could be read that Christie MacDonald Jefferson was implying that her husband was a sissy (in the modern sense.)

Whether or not William Jefferson was a sissy we do not know, however what we do know is that eventually there was trouble in his marriage with Christie MacDonald. Christie remained busy with her career in the first half of 1902 performing in the musical The Toreador that ran from January through early May. We do not know how much time the Jeffersons spent together in late 1902 but what we do know is that sometime in early 1903 Christie had a brief and sad affair with a married man named Timothy Sullivan who was 15 years her senior and known for his extramarital affairs particular with young starlets like Christie. Sullivan was primarily a prominent and corrupt New York City politician within the Tammany Hall political machine that controlled New York City who had managed to get himself elected to the United States Congress in large part by rigging the voting to get himself elected. He also portrayed himself as a “prominent theater promoter” which probably explains how Christie and Timothy Sullivan came in contact. The affair resulted in Mrs. Christie MacDonald Jefferson having a baby by Sullivan who was born on 1 November 1903. This undoubtedly explains why Christie MacDonald had no listed performances in New York City during all of 1903. The unnamed male child was placed in the New York Foundling Hospital and put up for adoption. We found one family tree that lists the child as Anthony Marino, his adopted name, and lists the date of his death in Brooklyn as March of 1969. We were unable to verify the accuracy of this claim. [When we wrote this account of Christie's MacDonald's illegitimate child we had no reason to question the accuracy of the claim.  There seemed to be plenty of details such as dates, names, and even the name of the hospital where the child was born such as to suggest that the facts were well known and a matter of record.  As it turns out, this is not the case.  According to a family member, Christie MacDonald not only never acknowledged the 1903 birth, but after Christie's death, a claim was made by an individual claiming to be the illegitimate son who undoubtedly was hoping for a financial settlement from her Estate. The claim was thrown out of court.  In hindsight we probably should have done more to question the accuracy of the facts or at the very least done more research since all of the writings that we found about the illegitimate birth were written in the recent past. One of our primary sources was Wikipedia which is hardly noted for its accuracy. Over the past few days we have spent at least three or four hours searching the numerous newspaper and magazine articles available online and on that were written about Christie MacDonald during the 1903 period and we could not find any mention of Christie MacDonald giving birth to a child during that period.  It is possible of course that she was able to keep the fact that she was pregnant a secret or that the journalists were more discrete in 1903 and 1904 than they are today, but the fact remains that we could find nothing suggesting that she gave birth to a child much less having an affair with a married man. We will have to leave it at this point as an unresolved matter and one that really is not that important.]
While it would seem that Christie MacDonald’s affair and her baby would have destroyed her marriage to William Jefferson, at least short term it appears that they tried to make it work. She appeared on stage in An English Daisy in January and February of 1904 and in the spring she and William sailed for Europe for a long vacation that was obviously meant to mend their marriage. They returned to America on 1 August 1904. She then traveled to their summer home on Buzzard’s Bay on Cape Cod before returning to New York to prepare for another performance this time in the musical comedy The Sho-Gun which was to run from 10 October 1904 until 21 Jan 1905. In the meantime, William landed his first major role in a play that ran from August to November of 1905. We have to believe that they were both so busy as to make it virtually impossible to make their marriage work, if that were even possible. Immigration records show that they made one short final trip overseas together before returning on 18 April 1906. Our research did not yield the actual date their divorce was granted but we believe that it was sometime in early 1910 as Christie filed for a divorce in Buffalo, New York in late 1909. It is assumed that they had been separated for several years before the divorce settlement. William Winter Jefferson never remarried and he died at the age of 69 in 1946.

Christie MacDonald began dating Henry (“Buddie”) Lloyd Gillespie sometime in mid-1910. He was 32-years old, a year or so younger than Christie; he had never been married and by any standards he would have been considered an excellent catch. Henry was a graduate of Yale University and the son of the very wealthy contractor James Andrew Gillespie who undoubtedly employed his son as well as helped him financially in Henry’s many investment opportunities. In the 1900 U.S. Census 22-year old Henry was listed as a “Contractor” and undoubtedly he was working in some capacity for his father’s company. By the 1910 U.S. Census, Henry L. Gillespie listed his occupation as “Real Estate” which we interpret to mean that he invested in real estate opportunities. Five years later and following his marriage to Christie MacDonald, he then listed his occupation in the 1915 New York Census as that of a “Theatrical Manager,” again because he invested in theatrical products like his new wife’s shows on Broadway. During World War 1 Henry again changed occupations, at least on paper, when he listed his occupation on his draft registration card in 1917 as that of the “Assistant General Manager” of the T.A. Gillespie Loading Co. There is no evidence that suggests that he had any training or experience to handle this elevated position or his subsequent positions in the construction industry. Henry Lloyd Gillespie had the good fortune to have been borne the son of a multimillionaire whose father was generous with his money, and as such Henry had both the money to dabble in various investments and the ample free time to enjoy his good life. He undoubtedly was an excellent choice as a husband for Christie MacDonald.

For some reason Henry and Christie chose to keep their wedding a secret at least from the public. They began dating sometime before the grand opening of The Spring Maid at the Liberty Theater in New York City that began the day after Christmas in 1910. Their marriage actually took place in November of 1910 but it was not announced until the late spring of 1911 following the summer close of The Spring Maid. Henry and Christie were onboard a ship headed for Europe for their honeymoon when Christie’s sister Belle MacDonald made the surprise announcement to the press of the couple’s previous November marriage. The couple spent their honeymoon in France. They returned in late July spending a week at Henry’s family summer home in the Thousand Island before returning to New York on 7 August 7 1911.

Apparently the marriage of Henry Lloyd Gillespie to Christie MacDonald was a success at least at the beginning. Christie completed her performance in the highly successful The Spring Maid in February 1913 followed by another show Sweethearts that ran from September 1913 until January 1914. In February of 1914 the Gillespie’s announced that Christie was expecting a baby and understandably her stage career came to an abrupt halt. On 10 November 1914 their daughter and only child Christie MacDonald Gillespie was born. In the 1915 New York State Census we find them living in an new and exclusive apartment building at 800 Riverside Drive in New York City that was obviously large enough to house the entire family that included Henry and Christie, their 6-month old daughter, Christie’s 75 year old mother and her 36 year old unemployed and unmarried sister, and three servants. There is every reason to believe that Christie was delighted with this arrangement and the change in her life. Christie MacDonald appeared in her last major show Florodora that ran from 5 April 1920 until 14 August 1920 before retiring. She was at the top of her career when she retired in her early 40s.

As far as we can determine the marriage between Christie MacDonald and Henry Lloyd Gillespie was without any major problems. We do find it kind of unusual however, to discover in the immigration records that Henry traveled abroad every year to Europe beginning in the year 1926 and continuing until 1929, the year of his death, apparently without his wife Christie. This arrangement might be explained by the fact that Christie preferred to stay home with her young daughter. In the 1920 US Census, Henry listed his occupation as a “Building Contractor Houses” so it seems unlikely that he was traveling to Europe on business. While it is possible that Henry was returning to America without Christie every year because Christie elected to stay behind in Europe to extend her vacation, we did find it confusing that we found only one immigration record of Christie returning to America during the 1920s and that was in April of 1929 when she was traveling with her 15 year old daughter and without Henry who had returned in late January of that same year. Unfortunately, just days before Christie arrived back in New York, Henry died of pneumonia on 15 April 1929 at their temporary home which at the time happened to be at the luxury St Regis Hotel in mid-town Manhattan. Henry’s death was totally unexpected and he was only 51 years old at the time.

Christie MacDonald and her daughter Christie remained in New York City until the middle of the 1940s. We know primary from discussions with Christie’s daughter, my stepmother Christie MacDonald Gillespie (see adjacent photograph), that she and her mother traveled at lot during the 1930s both in Europe and within the United States, before my stepmother married George Ralph Spivey in New York City on 20 March 1943. Sometime after their marriage young Christie, who was now 29, and her new husband returned to his home state of California where their son John was born in 1944. Sometime after 1945, Christie MacDonald, the mother, purchased a home in Westport, Connecticut probably with her daughter and her husband George Spivey who had returned with their son from California. Christie’s and George Spivey’s second son Henry, whom they nicknamed “Buddie” after his grandfather, was born in Connecticut in 1948. Christie MacDonald and her daughter Christie lived together as they had done almost their entire lives until the Prima Donna’s death on 25 July 1962. Christie MacDonald was 85 years old when she passed away. She never really gave up the theater however, and as one obituary described her, she was an “active doyenne of the Westport theatrical colony, a frequent patroness of theatrical events and favorite guest at all the parties.” Somehow, this is not surprising.

Christie MacDonald Spivey lost George Spivey to death in 1949. She remarried a John Bradley Fanton in 1951 and they remained married until John’s death in 1970. Christie Fanton remained in her Westport house where she had lived with her mother and two husbands until she married my father in 1974 and together they returned to my father’s home in Lewiston, New York. She died on 9 January 2003 in Lewiston.

So ends the story of my stepmother’s very interesting ancestors.