__ _ BEACH _| | |__ | |--Thomas BEACH | | __ |_________| |__
Thomas Beacfh was first in New Haven, then in Milford, where he was an
after planter. The oldest child was born in New Haven, but the rest
were born in Milford, CT.
THOMAS BEACH1 OF NEW HAVEN
A Biography By Eugene H. Beach, Jr.
Reprinted from the Beach Family Journal, Vol. II, No. 3 (Fall, 1994)
Thomas Beach, the "Pilgrim" ancestor of this line, first findsmention in the records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven forsomewhat less than distinguished reasons. As a member of a fledglingsettlement in a potentially hostile wilderness, it was expected thathe and all other males of suitable age would be ready to defend thetown against attack. This meant making sure their firearms -undoubtedly heavy match lock muskets with a stand or "rest" requiredto steady and aim them - were in good repair. Thus, at "A Court holdenApril 7th, 1646," it is recorded that:
"Thom Beech defective in his rest fyned 6d."
Hoadly, Records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven, 1638-1649,pp. 229, 232
And while it might be hoped that this sire of so many future patriotsand pioneers might respond to this admonition and fulfill his civicresponsibility, such was not to be. On the contrary, exactly threemonths later, "At a Court held at Newhaven this 7th July, 1646," it isrecorded that:
"Ricd Newman, Fran: Browne, Robert Vsher, Wm Bassett & Thom Beech fortheir defects in their guns, fyned 1s a piece."
Hoadly, Records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven, 1638-1649,pp. 260-261
By the following spring, however, Thomas Beach's relationship withthe civil authorities appears to have improved. Thus, by an entrydated March 7, 1647, it is recorded he had then or shortly beforetaken the "Oath of Fidelity" and joined in the "Fundamental Agreement"or "Covenant," by which the Scriptures were made the basis for bothcivil and church law in the New Haven colony, Hoadly, Records of theColony and Plantation of New Haven, 1638-1649, p. 139. In so doingThomas Beach, like his brothers Richard and John before him, wasadmitted as a "planter" and made a "freeman" - one entitled to theprivileges of corporate citizenship and not, as has been erroneouslyassumed, indicative of a prior state of bound servitude
It is claimed by some, on the basis of unknown evidence, thatThomas Beach was, as of this time, "... a young man in 1648 andunmarried and resided with his brother Richard, who lived at thecorner of Meadow and Whiting Streets and that his brother John thenlived on the adjoining lot," Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, p.12. He does not appear further in the early New Haven records,however, until March 1, 1652, when he is mentioned in the transcriptof a trial involving one Bishop, accused of mistreating his servant,Samuel Andrews. Among other allegations, Bishop was claimed to haveforced Andrews to go barefoot in cold weather, with the result thatthe young man soon developed painful frostbite. Andrews ran away tothe home of Mistress Evans, who sought to provide for his needs. Thus:
"Samuel Lamb, servant to Mris. Evanc, aged about sixteen years,testifyeth vpon oath that his Mris. sent him wth Sam. Andrews, when hedwelt at Goodman Bishops, to Thomas Beech his for a pare of shooes forSam. Andrews,..."
Dexter, Ancient Town Records, Vol. I, p. 166
This establishes Thomas Beach's trade as that of a cobbler and not, assome have stated, a blacksmith, See: e.g., Elmer Taylor Beach, BeachIn America, p. 43.
Also in 1652 Thomas Beach married Sarah Platt, the daughter ofDeacon Richard and Mary (Wood) Platt, of Milford, Connecticut, BeachFamily Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, p. 12. She was born at Ware,Hertfordshire, England, and baptized there on September 11, 1635,Abbott, Families of Early Milford, Connecticut, pp. 547-548. Somesources give the date and month of the marriage as September 25th, butthe basis for this is uncertain, James, The Ancestry and Posterity ofObil Beach, p. 43. Miss Helen Beach, one of the authors of TheDescendants of Thomas Beach of Milford, Connecticut, claimed that theceremony took place in Milford, but no evidence for this has yet beenfound. It is clear, however, that the couple resided in New Haven forthe two years following their marriage, where their first child,Sarah, was born March 1, 1653/54. In this regard it should also benoted that at least one source has confused the date of Thomas Beach'smarriage with the date of daughter Sarah's birth, American HistoricalSociety, Encyclopedia of Biography - Connecticut, Vol. III, p. 91.
The next record which has been preserved concerning Thomas Beachis not only the most extensive, but also the most interesting since itconcerns an altercation and subsequent litigation between him and oneEdward Camp. At a term of the New Haven court held on November 2,1652, it is stated that:
"Thomas Beech declareth that he went to Richard Sperries farme vponsome occasion betwixt his brother Richard Beech and himselfe, andfound their Edward Camp, Ralph Lines, and Richard Beech: it seemesthey were talking of him when he came in, for Edw: Camp said when hesaw him, here hee comes; Edward Camp said to Thomas Beech that themessage he bid his brother Richard doe to him was false, and said heyou said you have something else to saye to me, therefore speake now,but Thom: Beech refused; Edwa: Camp urged him to speake but Thom:Beech would not, but said to Edward Camp, doe you hold yor tongue, Iwill not speake; then Edwa: Camp rose vp from the place where he satt,came to him and knitt his fist and threatened him, and he thought hewould haue beate him, saying shall you teach me to speake; after thishe went out to goe hom, and when hee was aboute three quarters of amile from ye farme homeward Edward Camp ouertooke him, and threw himdowne, and fell vpon him wth his cudgell, and beate him verey much,and said I will haue you know you rogue you shall not teach mee tospeake; ye impression of the blowes were apparrently seene as yeGouernor testifyed, Thom: Beech hauing showed him his arme, and theeffeccts of them he found in his body, being sore beatten aboute yebacke.
Edward Camp was bidden to speake for himselfe. He said hee desiredThom: Beech to produce his proofe: he was asked if he denyed it; hesaid Thomas Beech hath charged him, and let him prove it, and that isall he shall say. Wherevpon Ralph Lines, Richard Beech, and Rich:Sperry all testified that there was a quarrelling betwixt them in thehouse, and that after Thom: Beech was gone, Edward Camp eate somevictuall and went out, saying he would goe fetch his gune wch he hadleft in the woods; but that Edward Camp beate him they cannottestifye. The Gouernor told Edward Camp & informed the Court that thiscase is like the case of a rape, spoken of Deut. 22, there is nowitnes onely the testimoney of the maid and the effects found vponher; the damsell cryed and there was none to saue her; then none butherselfe to testifye, yet that was accepted; it is as when a manriseth vp against his neighbour; so in this case, there is no otherwitnes but the parties wronged; he testfies the thing and offers toaffirme it vpon oath, showes the print of the stroakes given him: andthe partie charged cannot cleere himselfe by any contrary affirmation;nor (if that were permitted) dares he deny the fact vpon oath; butwhen the Gouernor was aboute to prepare Thom: Beech for his oath, byshewing him the danger of perjury in such a case, Ralph Lines spakeprivately to Edward Camp, wherevpon Ed Camp said he did not desireThom: Beech to take oath. The Gouernor tould him if he would confessthe thing it might be spared, but if he put him to it, and knoweshimselfe guilty, the oath will be required at his hand; it were betterfor him if he did it, to confess it was in a passion and show hissorrow for it; Edward Camp said it was so; he did it in a passion, butit was but wth a small sticke that he strucke him wth, that he thoughtwould not hurt him. Thomas Beech was asked what he demanded fordamage; he said he left it to the Court, but he thinkes it hinderedhim five shillings in his labour, and the Court charges and time spentin runing aboute; wherevpon the Court by way of sentence Ordered thatEdward Camp paye to Thomas Beech (all his charges being included)twenty shillings, and that he paye also to the Towne for disturbingthe peace twenty shillings, but he was told had he not by a seasonableconfession somewhat mittigated the sentence, the fine would haue binehigher, and he must haue bine bound to the peace; that such as are aptto abuse their strength might be warned, and others traueling alone inye woods the better secured:/"
Dexter, Ancient Town Records, Vol. I, pp. 151-153
This record is significant since it establishes, by Thomas Beach's owndeclaration, his relationship to his brother, Richard Beach. From theperspective of those claiming descent from Thomas Beach it is equally,if not more interesting as an all-too-rare glimpse into the life andtimes of an otherwise distant and enigmatic ancestor. It would be amistake, however, to believe that the miscreant Edward Camp wasbrought so readily to justice. On the contrary, at a session of courtheld on December 7, 1652:
"Thomas Beech desired execution for twenty shillings that Edward Campwas by this Court ordered to paye him, but refuseth; wch the Courtwould have granted, but Mr Goodyeare promised Thomas Beech to paye himtwenty shillings, wth wch he was satisfied:/"
Dexter, Ancient Town Records, Vol. I, pp. 155-156
The next reference to Thomas Beach is that which records the birthof "Sarah Beech the Daughter of Thom. Beech... the firft of March1653/54," Vital Records of New Haven, 1649-1850, Part 1, p. 10. Withinthe next seven months, however, Thomas Beach, his wife and infantdaughter would depart New Haven for Milford, some eight miles to thewest. Thus, the old New Haven records contain this final mention ofThomas Beach, dated October 3, 1654:
"Francis Browne was complained of for absence at Trayning also. It wasanswered that he was carying away Thom: Beech to Milford."
Dexter, Ancient Town Records, Vol. I, p. 222
Given the sorry state of the roads at this time, at least one authorhas speculated that the family's journey was "probably by water,"Jacobus, Mary (Royce) Beach, p. 9. Indeed, the old New Haven recordscontain other entries which indicate that Francis Brown operated aferry. In any event it should be noted that this record, perhapsunknown to earlier historians, contradicts claims that Thomas Beachwas not in Milford until several years later, See: Savage,Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England, Vol. 1,p. 144 ["Thomas, Milford, 1658"]; Hibbard, History of the Town ofGoshen, Connecticut, p. 421 ["settled in M. 1657-58"]; Virkus,Compendium of American Genealogy, Vol. IV, p. 732 ["at Milford,1658"].
Thomas Beach's relocation to Milford was undoubtedly motivated byseveral considerations. For one thing it would mean his wife and childmight now be nearer to Deacon Richard Platt and his family. Foranother, the Milford town records for 1654 reveal the grant to:
"Thomas Beach, lately of New Haven, an acre of land to build a house[on the] condition that he doe sett up and follow his trade."
Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, p. 12
From the probate of his estate it is learned such a house was indeedbuilt, "with round stones," in that part of Milford called Old MainStreet, Beach Family Magazine, Vol. I, No. 1, p. 12; Vol. III, No. 1,p. 236. It was here that the remainder of Thomas Beach's children wereborn and where he at last died, in early 1662. According to one sourcehis death came on March 1st, but this is suspect; the same month andday also being erroneously given by the same source for his marriage,American Historical Society, Encyclopedia of Biography - Connecticut,Vol. III, p. 147. Note should also be taken of the error made byHibbard, History of the Town of Goshen, Connecticut, p. 421, whichasserts Thomas Beach died in 1677, even though his widow, Sarah(Platt) Beach, is known to have remarried Miles Merwin in 1665.
The place of Thomas Beach's burial is unknown. His estate was thefirst administered at Milford, with the initial inventory having beenfiled on May 31, 1662. Subsequent probate records indicate thefollowing:
"13 June 1666. Inventory of ye estate of Thomas Beach, late ofMilford, deceased, exhibited a house and land included and prized atThirty pounds, reserved for ye benefit of the children of ye sd Beachand securitie given for ye said Thirty pounds by Miles Murwin.
Whereas Miles Murwin hath given securitie to the Court for Thirtypounds to be paid to the children of Thomas Beach; These may Certifiethat J. Richard Plat have Received two & twenty pounds & ten shillingsof the sd Miles Murwin, & do hereby ingage to the Court to pay ye sdto the three sons of the said Beech when they shall come to age 21years. Dated 2 Apr. 1674; witnessed by Samuell Eells, Robert Plum;exhibited at Court 10 June 1674.
At Court May ye last 1662 (in Milford). The inventory of Thomas Beachhis goods & estate as prized by us George Clarke Jun'r & ThomasCamfield, 36:09:00. No will; Deacon Richard Platt informs that...Thomas Beach did owe... 36 pounds or thereabouts... the Care ofCompounding with ye Creditors and ye paym't of ye debts was left withDeacon Richard Platt & his daughter the widow of the deceased.
11 November 1674. Concerning this inventory... As also of the sdRichard Platts great parentall care of the mother & her smallchildren, & of his great paines taking to preserve a title of yeestate as he could by compounding with ye Creditors, and maintaineinghis daughter & soe many of her children as he did gratis; (yet) yehouse being built with round stones & standing without a tenant it waslike to fall, & ye fence much decayed, & hee seeing noe way how hecould uphold it, he did approve and advise with his daughtersConcurrense, yet the sd house & land be sold, and he out of his greatlove and respect to ye widow & her children, would have the product,as much as he could of it kept for ye use and behoofe of the mother &children, which not long after, the house & homelott w'th ye outlandwas sold, the house and homelott by Miles Merwin by ye order andconsent of Richard Platt & his sd daughter Sarah Beach, whoe was thenbecome ye wife of ye sd Miles Merwin, w'ch sd house & homelott wassold for thirty pounds to be reserved for the use of the 4 children ofthe sd Sarah Beach; and twenty two pounds & ten shillings is nowsecured in the hands of Deacon Richard Platt... and concerning yeseven pounds and ten shillings remaineing of the sale of ye house, itis in Miles Merwins hand."
Beach Family Magazine, Vol. III, No. 1, p. 236, citing County CourtRecords of New Haven, Vol. I, pp. 6, 81. See also: The Ancestry andPosterity of Obil Beach, pp. 44-45
The Court thereupon approved the sale of the house, appointed DeaconRichard Platt as administrator, and declared that "ye thirty pounds(it being the fruit of the bounty & love of the grandfather) to beequally distributed to the four children when they shall come tolawful age."
Sarah (Platt) Beach was admitted to full communion in the FirstCongregational Church of Milford on May 3, 1663. The following year,on September 4, 1664, she caused at least two, if not all of herchildren by her late husband to be baptized. She remarried, as noted,Miles Merwin in 1665, bore him four daughters, and died on March 15,1670.
i. SARAH, b. Mar 1, 1653/54; bpt. Sep 4, 1664; d.c. 1690; m. SamuelLyon, b. 1655, son of Henry Lyon from Glen Lyon, Perthshire, Scotland.
ii. JOHN, b. Oct 19, 1655; bpt. Sep 4, 1664; d.1709 at Wallingford,Connecticut; m. Dec 7, 1678, Mary, daughter of Jonathan Royce.
iii. MARY, b. Dec 27, 1657; d. before 1727.
iv. SAMUEL, b. Jun 5, 1660; d. Sep 9, 1728; m. Abigail _____, whoremarried 2nd. Reverend Samuel Andrews. No children by Beach marriage.
v. ZOPHAR, b. May 27, 1662; d. after 1709 at Newark, New Jersey; m.Martha, daughter of Deacon John Pratt of Milford, Connecticut.
NOTE: Some authorities credit Thomas Beach1 with a son Thomas, butthis is in error. The supposed "son" Thomas is in fact Thomas Beach2,the son of John Beach1.
Abbott, Susan Woodruff, compiler, Families of Early Milford,Connecticut, Genealogical Publishing Company, Baltimore, Maryland,1979.
Adams, Arthur, et al, editors, Vital Records of New Haven, 1649-1850,2 Volumes, The Connecticut Society of the Order of Founders andPatriots of America, The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Hartford,Connecticut, 1917 and 1924 [Part of the series, Vital Records ofConnecticut, Series I, Towns IV, Parts I and II].
American Historical Society, Encyclopedia of Biography - Connecticut,Vol. III, American Historical Society, Boston, Massachusetts, 1919.
Beach, Alfred E. and Beach, Cora M., editors, The Beach FamilyMagazine, Casper, Wyoming and Flint, Michigan, 1926 to 1932[publication ceased after Vol. IV, No. I].
Beach, Elmer Taylor, Beach In America, Ihling Bros. and EvarandCompany, Kalamazoo, Michigan, 1923
Beach, Helen and Beach, Mary E., The Descendants of Thomas Beach ofMilford, Connecticut, The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, Hartford,Connecticut, 1912.
Dexter, Franklin Bowditch, editor, Ancient Town Records: New HavenTown Records, 1649-1662, New Haven Colony Historical Society, 1917,Vol. I.
Hibbard, A. G., History of the Town of Goshen, Connecticut, Case,Lockwood & Brainard Company, Hartford, Connecticut, 1897.
Hoadly, Charles J., editor, Records of the Colony and Plantation ofNew Haven from 1638 to 1649, Case, Tiffany & Company, Hartford,Connecticut, 1857.
Jacobus, Donald Lines, Mary (Royce) Beach, The Tuttle, Morehouse &Taylor Company, New Haven, Connecticut, 1926 [Reprinted from the NewEngland Historic Genealogical Register, January, 1926, with additionaldata on the Beach and Royce/Roys/Rice families].
James, Alma Lewis, The Ancestry and Posterity of Obil Beach, BladePublishing Company, Fairbury, Illinois, 1936.
Savage, James, A Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of NewEngland, in four volumes, Little, Brown and Company, Boston,Massachusetts, 1860-1862.
Virkus, Frederick A., editor, Compendium of American Genealogy, 7Volumes, The Virkus Company, Chicago, Illinois, 1925-1942.
Founders and Patriots. Lineages
Vital Records of Connecticut
__ _Nathan BENNETT _| | |__ | |--David BENNETT | | __ |_Unknown ________| |__
_Abraham BENNETT _+ _Benjamin BENNETT _| | |_Jerusha WANZER __+ | |--Emeline BENNETT | | __________________ |_Susan MCCONNELL __| |__________________
_Edward BENNETT _ _Samuel BENNETT _| | |_Elizabeth ______ | |--William BENNETT | | _________________ |_Anna EVERDIN? __| |_________________
Rhode Island Vital Records, New Series
Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island
_Stephen BOSWORTH _+ _Joseph BOSWORTH _______| | |_Abigail WOOD _____+ | |--Reed BOSWORTH | | _Benjamin MALLORY _+ |_Medima\Medina MALLORY _| |_Hannah ___________
__ __| | |__ | |--Arthur BROWN | | __ |__| |__
__ _John ELLIS _______| | |__ | |--Elizabeth ELLIS | | __ |_Elizabeth COOMER _| |__
Abstracts of Rev. War Pension
_David FISKE _+ _David FISKE ____| | |_Sarah SMITH _+ | |--Sarah FISKE | | ______________ |_Seaborn WILSON _| |______________
Died in infancy.
_John HAYDEN __ _John HAYDEN _| | |_Susanna ______ | |--Lydia HAYDEN | | _William AMES _+ |_Hannah AMES _| |_Hannah _______
 Marriage: Anderson, 313.
Fifteen years before they were married, his son John married her
Ancestry and Posterity of Joseph Smith and Emm
Memoir of the life and character of Mrs. Mary Anna
Ancestry and Posterity of Joseph Smith and Emm
__ __| | |__ | |--Josiah HUMPHREY | | __ |__| |__
__ _Martin KEEP _________| | |__ | |--Hepsibeth KEEP | | __ |_Hepsibeth HOTCHKISS _| |__
Family Group Sheet
Family Group Sheet
Family Group Sheet
Family Group Sheet
__ __| | |__ | |--Christopher REYOUNGS | | __ |__| |__
Families of Old Fairfield
Families of Old Fairfield