Facsimile of John Whitney's signature
By Jared L. Olar
December 2007
Updated November 2018
Our Whitney ancestors are the descendants of an English immigrant to Connecticut named Henry Whitney (c.1620-1673), who first appears on record in 1649 in Southold, Long Island, then a part of the Colony of Connecticut. Nothing is known of Henry's parentage or ancestry in England, but the Whitney surname is very old and widespread in England, originating from the placename of Whitney-on-Wye, a village in Herefordshire near Wales. The village of Whitney-on-Wye is first mentioned in the Domesday Book in A.D. 1086, where it is called Witenie. The village's name apparently comes from the Anglo-Saxon words hwit ("white") and ey ("water"), and thus would be a reference to the River Wye. In the Middle Ages there was a landed family of English gentry who took its name from the village of Whitney, and thus was known as "de Whitney," "of Whitney."
No doubt many Whitney families today are branches of the landed Whitneys, and perhaps even our ancestor Henry Whitney was himself descended from them, but in the absence of records there is no way to tell if or how Henry originated from the old Whitneys. There were, however, several unrelated Whitney families in medieval England. This is shown by the results of Y Chromosome DNA tests of Whitney males living today. Besides the unrelated Whitney families, though, DNA testing has shown that the three main Whitney families in America -- the descendants of John Whitney of Watertown, Massachusetts (by far the largest American Whitney family), the descendants of Henry Whitney of Long Island, and the descendants of Samuel Whitney of Bermuda -- may have been distantly related, perhaps originating from a common male ancestor who lived in the Middle Ages if not earlier. All three families belong to the R1b1a2 (R-M269) haplogroup, one of the most common y-DNA haplogroups in Europe.
The standard work on the genealogy of the Henry Whitney family in America is Stephen Whitney Phoenix's 1878 The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations. Phoenix's work on the American descendants of Henry Whitney is solid and generally reliable (despite occasional errors), and it is the basis for our Whitney genealogy shown below. Phoenix also includes an extended chapter on the Whitney surname in England (pages ix-xxii) which provides a great deal of interesting and useful information on English Whitney families. However, the chapter also attempts to trace Henry Whitney's English ancestry, claiming that Henry's parents were a certain Thomas Whitney and Mary Roach of Berkhampstead St. Mary in Hertfordshire, and then tracing Thomas Whitney's ancestry back 35 generations through both historical and imaginary Whitneys of Cheshire and Herefordshire to a line of early medieval Welsh rulers who allegedly descended from the legendary Sir Predyr Exrog (Peredur ap Efrawg -- the Welsh version of Sir Perceval de Gales of the Round Table!), son of "Exrog, Earl of Eygas and Engagn" (a mistranscription of "Efrog, Earl of Ewyas and Ergayn") in the days of King Arthur.
This remarkable Whitney pedigree was the work of Mrs. Harriet Anne De Salis (1829-1908), whose unhappy forays into the field of English genealogical research during the 1870s have become infamous, for she deceived several American families seeking their ancestry in England by inventing pedigrees supported by spurious documents that she forged. As Paul C. Reed said in his study "Whitney Origins Revisited" (in The American Genealogist, vol. 69 (1994), pp. 9-14), "The purported ancestry of Henry Whitney of Connecticut is one long string of fraudulent citations, interwoven here and there with extracts from real records." For example, the early Welsh portion of the pedigree -- 22 generations -- was derived from The Golden Grove, a collection of Welsh pedigrees compiled by Hugh Thomas circa 1703. But several other alleged sources were quite simply fabricated by De Salis. Reed explained that after Phoenix published his Whitney Genealogy volume, he became suspicious of De Salis' pedigree chart and of the supporting documents that she had supplied him, so he commissioned the noted genealogist Joseph Lemuel Chester to investigate her pedigree and sources. In a letter that Chester wrote from London, England, on 16 Jan. 1880, Chester told of how he exposed De Salis' fraud and, going above and beyond his duty, personally confronted her and extracted a confession and a promise to cease her work as a genealogist. Chester wrote in his letter:
". . . It required but a single glance at the pedigree and her statements in the text, to enable me to determine that they were fictitious, as I saw at once that they stated what I knew to be impossibilities. A little investigation revealed all that she had done, and enabled me to determine exactly how she had done it. As this is now the third of her American cases which I have examined, with similar results, I felt not only justified but bound to interpose between her and my countrymen. I taxed her with what I had discovered, and now have her confession that the two wills of Thomas Whitney and Ann Roberts, the alleged father and aunt of the emigrant Henry Whitney, on which alone the pedigree is based (as you will see by reference to the books) are pure fabrications . . . . I have also her written pledge that she will never again seek or accept a commission from the United States . . . . After this experience, it is fair to presume that all of her other American clients have been treated in a similar manner."
Detailed explanations of De Salis' forged documents and fraudulent quotations and citations were presented not only by Paul C. Reed, but also in Thomas Kennedy Butcher's study, "The Pedigree of Whitney, reproduced in The Whitney Family of Connecticut, by Stephen Whitney Phoenix: An Investigation" (Henley-on-Thames: 1987). Butcher intensively dissects and debunks not only the wills that Chester mentioned, but a total of nine sources or documents that De Salis fabricated, while Reed gives a succinct list of those nine forgeries. For example, De Salis invented a link connecting Henry Whitney's purported ancestors in Saffron Walden, County Essex, to the ancient Cheshire Whitney family by forging a will for a fictitious woman named Margery Aesden of Dariton -- this fake will was fabricated using information from the authentic will of Thomas Whitney, cleric, of Westminster, former abbot of the monastery of Deulacres, Stafford. Both Reed's paper and Butcher's investigation are available at the website of The Whitney Research Group.
Although the parentage and ancestry of the immigrant Henry Whitney is unknown, Reed's 1994 study, "Whitney Origins Revisited," briefly discusses potential avenues of research that could lead to the discovery of Henry's ancestry, as follows:
"A Thomas Whitney, found in 1505, 1510, and 1517, and earlier in the reign of Henry VII (1485-1509), married Anne Brooke, daughter of John Brooke, of Leighton, Cheshire, and Jane Meverell, of Throwlegh, county Stafford (Ormerod, 3:454). It would be through this connection that the only possible royal descent for this family might present itself. That the family spread beyond Cheshire is clear from the will of Geoffrey Whitney, son of an earlier Geoffrey. Born at Coole Pilate about 1548, he attended both Oxford and Cambridge, was under-bailiff of Great Yarmouth, county Norfolk, 1580-86, and admitted to the university at Leyden 1 March 1586 (Joseph Foster, Alumni Oxoniensis ... 1500-1714, 4 vols. [London, 1887-92], 4:1623]; John and J. A. Venn, Alumni Cantbrigiensis, Pt. 1, 4 vols. [Cambridge, 1922-27], 4:396]; and Dictionary of National Biography). His will, dated 11 September 1600 and proved 28 May 1601 (PCC 33 Woodhall), mentioned many relatives, including his brother, Brooke Whitney, of Oxford and Berkshire (PCC 100 Byrde) [probably a great-grandson of the Whitney-Brooke alliance], Geoffrey Whitney, of Draiton, Shropshire (citizen and merchant tailor of London, PCC 15 Bolein), and Walter Whitney, citizen and plasterer of London (Commissary Court of London, Orig. Will, 1608), . . . .
"The only place the name Henry has been found in the earlier Whitney family is in this branch. Brooke Whitney married Magdalen/Mawdlen Stacey at St. Botolph Bishopsgate, London, on 11 July 1585. He had a son Henry born about 1588. A Henry Whitney Jr. married there by license in 1590. And the St. Mary Magdalen Old Fish Street Whitneys where the name Henry also appears are also connected to this Brooke Whitney. The most likely origin for the Connecticut immigrant seems to be in this family."
Brooke Whitney also had a son named Samuel, born circa 1598. In his father's will, Samuel was left money "if he returne to inhabitt in london" He might be the Samuel Whitney who was apprenticed to Mark Humble and was made free on 16 April 1619 -- the apprentice Samuel was described as a pointmaker and was said to be "In Virginia." Some Whitney researchers have proposed that there could be a connection between Brooke's son Samuel and Samuel Whitney, Gent., of Bermuda (c.1615-1674), who in turn may possibly have a connection to Henry Whitney of Connecticut (see below for further discussion and consideration of the somewhat dubious "Osman Deposition").
Turning now from the tenuous suppositions and possibilities of Henry Whitney's ancestry, we will now tell of his life and our descent from him. The following account of our Whitney line is derived chiefly from S. Whitney Phoenix's The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliation (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, augmented and sometimes corrected with materials from The Whitney Research Group.
1. HENRY WHITNEY, immigrant ancestor of the Whitney family of Connecticut, born circa 1610-1620 in England, died in 1673 (after 5 June 1672 but before 8 Nov. 1673) in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut. Henry Whitney was one of the early settlers of Southold, Huntington, and Jamaica, all on Long Island, first appearing in America at Southold in the 1640s or, reportedly, as early as the latter 1630s. Henry left Long Island in early 1665 and settled at Norwalk, Connecticut, where he remained until his death.
Several online sources claim without evidence that Henry was born on or about 4 May 1619 in Hertfordshire, England -- some say he was born at Berkhampstead St. Mary in Hertfordshire, others that he was born at Tring, Dacorum Borough, Hertfordshire. The ultimate source for the claim that Henry Whitney and his ancestors came from County Hertford, England, is the above mentioned infamous fraudulent genealogy that was concocted in 1875 by Mrs. Harriet Anne De Salis (1829-1908), who seems to have made a much better cook than a genealogist, for during her brief foray into genealogy she specialised in defrauding Americans of English descent by inventing fictitious medieval pedigrees for them. Apart from the fake De Salis pedigree, there is nothing to link the colonist Henry Whitney to Hertfordshire, England.
Henry's ancestry and his date and place of birth are unknown, but he must have been born circa 1610-1620 like several of his contemporary Connecticut colonists who were his neighbors and friends. As noted above, in his 1994 study, "Whitney Origins Revisited," Paul C. Reed proposed that the immigrant Henry Whitney may have been connected to a family of Whitneys who lived at St. Botolph Bishopsgate and St. Mary Magdalen Old Fish Street in London in the latter 1500s. Reed notes, "The only place the name Henry has been found in the earlier [Cheshire] Whitney family is in" the branch of Brooke Whitney of Oxford and Berkshire, brother of the Elizabethan poet Geoffrey Whitney of Coole Pilate, in Acton, near Nantwich, England. Brooke Whitney married at St. Botolph Bishopsgate in 1585 and had a son Henry circa 1588. There was also a Henry Whitney Jr. who married at St. Botolph Bishopsgate in 1590, and the name Henry also is found in the Whitneys of St. Mary Magdalen Old Fish Street who are known to have been related to Brooke Whitney.
Whether or not Henry Whitney of Connecticut came from London, the first certain notice of him in the historical record is on 8 Oct. 1649, when he along with William Salmon and Edward Treadwell signed an agreement for the purchase of three-fourths of Salmon's land at Hashamommock in Southold, Long Island, which was then a part of the Colony of Connecticut. However, it is possible that Henry Whitney may have arrived in Southold as early as the year 1636-1637, coming to Long Island about that time from the English colonies on the islands of Bermuda, St. Christopher (today St. Kitts), and Nevis. That is the scenario presented in an interesting -- albeit somewhat dubious -- document dated 18 March 1658 that is known as the "Osman Deposition." The reason for the doubt regarding this document's authenticity is that the original text cannot be found. The original was reportedly found in a private collection of papers of Southold settler Barnabas Horton, and it was last reported as being owned by a genealogist named Lester Dunbar Mapes (1866-1944), a descendant of Henry Whitney. A transcription of the deposition was printed in the 1939 tercentenary celebration book, "Southold Town 1636-1939 -- The Oldest English Town in the State of New York," but because the original document is lost, it cannot be determined whether or not it is authentic. Nevertheless, for what it is worth, the text of the "Osman Deposition" is as follows (emphasis added):
"March ye 18th, 1658 Swearinge be Ye Holy Evangelists that he [Thomas Osman] with his now father-in-law William Purrier, and his brother in ye law, James Reeve did go adventuringe in ye Chowan country [North Carolina] for sperrits resin in ye yeare 1636 and there did meet William Salmon, Thomas Reeve, Thomas Terrill, Thomas Benedict, Henery Whiteney and others who had come hither from ye Summer Isles [the Somer Isles, i.e., Bermuda and St. Christopher and Nevis in the Lesser Antilles] and ye said adventure failinge through ye overplus of adventurers, who had come hither prior to their co[m]eing. They did set sale with one Sunderland to a country the said Sunderland had from his master one James Ffarrett by letters patent from ye Earle of Starlinge. And ye said Osman does farther depose that ye said company with others whose names he has forgotten did set downe on ye necke called Hashammomack and did ingage in distillinge sperrits resin from ye trees in ye greate swampe and further Sunderland, Salmon, Whitney, and Benedict did from ye beginning owne ye said necke in equal shares and did so from our first sittingse down in year 1636-7. Signed: Thomas Osman in ye presence of: Barnabas Horton, Thomas Moor"
Despite the doubts surrounding the authenticity of the Osmon Deposition, the statements in the deposition are consistent with what is known of English colonial and trading activity in Bermuda, North Carolina, and Long Island during the 1630s. It also agrees with what we know of the activities of Henry Whitney, Thomas Benedict, William Salmon, and Thomas Osman in Southold. William Salmon, Thomas Reeve, and Thomas Terrill are known to have sailed from London to St. Christopher (St. Kitts) on the ship Matthew on 21 May 1635. Salmon is also known to have married the widow of Matthew Sinderland of Boston, Massachusetts, who is the "Sunderland" of the Osman Deposition. It is possible that Henry Whitney and Thomas Benedict also came to St. Christopher that year on another ship or ships. If Henry Whitney was in St. Christopher before coming to Southold, that raises the possibility that he was related to Samuel Whitney, Gent., of Bermuda (c.1615-1674) -- though DNA testing indicates that it could not have been a close kinship. The information in the Osman Deposition also raises the possibility that Henry Whitney's first wife was a sister of one of the men in the reported expeditions to the Chowan country and Long Island.
Henry is known to have married at least twice. From his earlier (presumably first) wife, (NN), he had a son, JOHN WHITNEY, born circa 1645 probably in England. All that is known of Henry's earlier wife is what can be gleaned from a letter dated 22 April 1652 at Southold, Long Island, that Henry wrote to John Winthrop Jr., Governor of the Colony of Connecticut, seeking medical advice for his wife's chronic health problems (apparently related to menopause and seasonal allegeries). The letter's cover is inscribed, "To the wourshipfull / in John wintrup live / ing at pequit give / this with trust." The text of the letter is as follows:
Wourthi Sir, Having this oppertunyti I have made bowld to write thes few lines unto you, hoping that God may make you an instryment of good to mee in the matter
which i write to you about: my wife have been for these many yeres much trubled in the spring of the yere and at the fall with a trubble of the head, not
a payne, but a swimming as it wear which as we conceve is ocashoned from a cloging at hir stomake, and sum times she is overcum with a sudden flashing heat and
she is much overcome with malencolly: I would intreat you if you know of anything that may doe hir good that you would send mee sumthing by goodman Elderkin
and I will send you sattisfaction by him: if you coceve that fisik may doe hir good there is no danger for hir to take it in respect of childbering for wee conceve
she is past that: and thus with my love Remembered to your worship I Rest yours to my power:
Henry Whitne
Southold this 22th of April 1652
Henry's wife probably died at Southold circa 1655. Henry remarried in the latter 1650s at Huntington, Long Island, to SARAH (SALMON) KETCHAM, daughter of Christopher and Anne (Taylor) Salmon, and widow of Edward Ketcham of Stratford, Connecticut, who had died circa 1655. Sarah's brother William Salmon was, like Henry, an early settler of Southold (as mentioned above; see also below), and was one of Henry's neighbors and friends. Henry and Sarah apparently had no children, and John is the only known child of Henry, suggesting that if there were other children they probably died in infancy or childhood.
Stephen Whitney Phoenix's monumental work, The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, pages 1-10, includes a detailed and footnoted biography of Henry Whitney. S. Whitney Phoenix's biography of his and our ancestor Henry is given in its entirety, with hyperlinks to a separate webpage for the biography's footnotes. I have added occasional bold emphasis to the biography:
Henry Whitney, the earliest of this family whom we can trace in America, was born in England, probably about the year 1620. No record of him has been found prior to 8 Oct. 1649, when he was associated with Edward Tredwell and Thomas Benedict in buying three fourths of William Salmon's land at Hashamommock, in Southold, Long Island. These four men made the following agreement, which is recorded in the town records of Southold, Vol. I, p. 89.
Wee whos names are vnder written inhabiting vppon the neck of land comonly called Hashamommock[1] considering that our Cumfort
and quiett setlement would consist et stand in the inioyment of good neigbourhood did make this agreement at our first sitting doune that
what man soever should desire to remoue and to endeauor to make sale of his accomodacons should put in such a neighbour as the other
Inhabitanc liveinge with him should approve of.
Entred the 17th of May 1660. WILLIAM SALMON F
p me WILLM WELLS. HENRY WHITNEY r
EDWARD TREDWELL T
THOMAS BENIDICK.
New Haven Colonial Records, Vol. II, p. 349-50, show that
Anthony Waters, attorney for John Concklin, Tho Osman & Tho Rider, inhabitants on the land called Hashamommock, plainteifs,
entred an action of the case against John Budd Senior, for breach of an ancient order made for ye prservation of good neighbourhood,
wch order or agreemt is as followeth. [Here follows the above agreement] John Budd junior appeared to answere the sute, May 28, 1660.
Thomas Rider had bought the right of Thomas Benedict; and Lieut. John Budd that of Edward Tredwell, both assignments being made on the record book without date, while Concklin and Osman must have obtained their rights from Henry Whitney, though the formal evidence of the transfer was not made till 1670, as follows:
I Henry Whitney Doe assine over vnto John Bud Juner, all my righte titel and interest in the within specified Deed only excepting
what I sould vnto Thomas Osman, as Wittness my hand the 24 May 1670.
The mark of r Henry Whitny.
John Budd Junr, doth hereby assign as abovesaid all his right title
and interest unto John Conckelyne Senior the day and year abovesaid.
Witnessed by JOHN BUDD.
ISAAC ARNOLD
BENJAMIN YOUNGS.
Entered upon Record the 24th of May anno 1670, by me Richard
Terry Recordr. � (See Town Records of Southold, L. I., Vol. I, fol. 86.)
Charles B. Moore, Esq., of New York, who has carefully studied the history of Hashamommock, thinks that Henry Whitney, while residing there, lived in the same house with Thomas Benedict.
As before stated, the date of his transfer of those lands gives no clue tothe time of his removal, but the Town Records of Huntington, L. I., show that he was an inhabitant of that place, 17 Aug. 1658, when he bought of Wyandance, sachem of Pammanake, "three whole necks of meshepeake Land," � "ffor the vse of the whole Towne of Huntington."
The following is a copy of the deed, endorsed "a deed for 3 Westward necks of Meadow," and "an Indian Deed for 3 necks westward of the six necks."
Bee it knowne vnto all men by this writing that I, Wyandance, sachem of Pammanake or by the English called Long Hand, doe by
these acknowledg to haue sould to Henery Whitne of Hvntington ffor the vse of the whole towne of Hvntington, I say I haue sould to him
for them three whole necks of meshepeake Land, I say I for myselfe and my heirs for ever have sould as aboue menconed, and haue sent
my agent Cheaconoe to deliver upon Condicions as followeth; ffirst thay shall pay or cause to be paid to me or my assigns these ffollow-
ing goods punctually, that is first twelfe Coats, ech coate being too yards of Trucking Cloth, twenty pounds of powder, twenty dutch
hatchets, twenty dutch howes, twenty dutch knives, Ten shirts, too hundred of mixes, hue paire of handson stockings, one good dutch
hatt, and a great faire Looking glas; and for Checanoe for his wages and going to marke out the Lands shall have for himselfe one coat
fower pownd of povdar, six pound of led, one dutch hatchet as alsoe seventeen shillings in Wampum, they must send by Checanoe which
being punctually paid then shall I delivar this deed which shall be for the ffree and qviet possession of them and theire heaires for ever and In
the mene time it shall remaine in the hands of Lyon gardon in witness where of we have hereunto sect our hands the day above writen.
Witnes
RICHARD BRUSH
AMBRES SUTEN
Huntington. Receaued this 23 of May 1659 from the Inhabitants of Huntington ffull satisfaction and payment for the medow I sould Last
to them which my man Chachenow marked out for them which Joynes to that neecke that Belongs to Mr. Stickland and Jonas wood
and soe goes Westward soe ffar as Chakenew hath marked being purchesed In Agust Last which was 1658.
Witnes WYANDANCE
CHEKENEW K his marke mark ^^
SASAKETAWUH S his marke The mantuk
The mark of Sacham
AMBRAS A SUTTEN TEUPPOWSHA his
The mark of 00
RICHARD O BRUSH mark.
While at Huntington, he built a grist mill, or "corne mill," for Rev. William Leverich, of that place, which led to some disagreement; Leverich asserting that the mill was not finished in season, nor in the way that the contract required, and Whitney that his pay had been unjustly withheld from him. He seems also to have been a leader in the movement which resulted in the dismissal of Mr. Leverich as minister of Huntington; and those causes led to several suits between the parties. Not much of the testimony is recorded; but before leaving the town, Mr. Leverich obtained permission of the court to put on record three long depositions signed by himself, his wife, and his son, giving their version of the causes which led to his dismissal. Some persons who have read these depositions have inferred that Henry Whitney had preached for the people of Huntington before Mr. Leverich was employed, and some of the testimony seems to harmonize with this supposition. The evidence shows that he was a frank outspoken man � once fined for speaking his mind too freely before the Court � but when a charge was true, he would acknowledge it, without waiting for proof from his opponent. His differences with Mr. Leverich were finally settled, as appears by the following receipt, a copy of which was furnished by Mr. James Riker, of Waverly, N. Y., from the original, yet preserved by one of the descendants of Mr. Leverich.
November : i : 1660 :
These presents witnes that I henery whitne of huntington doe acknowledg that I haue receued of mr william leuerich forty pounds
for the bulding of his mill and doe by these presents fully acquit and discharge the aboue named mr leuerich his eyers exceketors and
assignes from all debts dues and demands that euer haue bin betwixt him and me, from the begining of the world to this prsent daye
Witnes my hand HEXERY WHITNEY r his marke
Witnes JOHN STIKLIN ++ his marke
THOMAS BENNYDICK
The first allusion to his wife is found in the following extract from the Huntington Court Records, p. 23, from which it seems that he married a widow Ketcham; possibly Sarah,[2] the widow of Edward Ketcham, of Stratford, Conn., who died about 1655.
Jeune the 1 1. [1660]
The complaint of henary Whitne to the court agaynst Josef Whitmor[3] for steling of his daftars afections contray to her mothars
mind and using unlafull menes to obtayne his daftars Loue. The deposition of Eadward Frenshom; good cechom coming to us
when I was at Milford he hauing some discors about the bisnes he gaue Joseph Whitmor his consent to haue his dafter prouided he
ware in a seteled way of Leueng to mayntayne a wife.
The testimony of Samuell blackman; this dep. sayth being in company Joseph Whitmor and som othars he herd good Cechum say
ioseph wase a good Lad and shuld haue his daftar.
The court agreed that the matar apering so dark that thay can not se cas to prosed to giue in thare aprehenciones without Sara Cechum
do apear to give the cort to undarstand what she can say in the case to giue them furthar Light.[4]
He was defendant in two suits at Huntington, 25 Oct. 1660, both brought by William Ludlum, who had succeeded Mr. Leverich in the ownership of the mill, one of which was "an acsion of trespas for breking the mill and grinding seueral times with out his leue to his greate damage."
The defendant deny the breking of the mill but confesed he opened the dore, and went and groune his corne, his family being all scik,
none abell to beate, he went to inquier for the kei but coulde not her of it for he was gone to the south, and his family with himselue being
like to famish he was constrayned to doe it: yet notwithstanding he gaue the miller his just towle.
The vardit of the courte in this acsion is this they finde the defendant was necessitated to yt he did and the plaintiff sufered no damage.
His last appearance in the records of Huntington, was 25 Jan. 1661 [? 1661-2], as witness, with Edward ffrencham, to the will of Henry Scudder, of Huntington.
Soon after this he removed to Jamaica, Long Island, where, as we learn incidentally, he bought a home-lot of Richard Harker; which he afterward sold to William Smith and his son Joseph Smith. His name appears several times on the records of Jamaica; 9 Aug. 1662, as committee to buy boards and lime for the minister's house, and to hire a mason, if need require; 12 Dec. 1663, as committee to lay out the south meadows; 20 Dec. 1662, as grantee of an acre of land at the rear of his home lot; 2 March 1663 (stylo novo) as one of twenty-four who signed the deed of gift for a house and home lot, to Rev. Mr. Walker; and again, 5 Feb. [1663-4], as committee to lay out meadows.
December ye 13th 1664. The town have chosen Henry Whitney, Beniamin Coe, Thomas Smith, Joseph Thurstone, & Samuel Mathews
to be Townsmen for ye year ensuing & to order & cary on ye affaires of ye Town of publike concernment during the year, except giving off
lands & taking in off habitants.
Another record, without date, of a vote of the town to lay out to others, "yt lott of medow which was formerly Henry Whitneys," closes the history of his residence in Jamaica. He next appears at Norwalk, Conn., in the following record.
At a towne meeitinge heild the 24th of July, [16]65. * * * *
Also at the sayed meeiting � whearas Henry Whitney,[5] hath agreed and incaged with the towne to make, build, and erect a goode and
sufficient grounde corne mill, and that at the mouth of norwake River by the falles, and that upon certaine conditiones which conditiones are
to be fully drawen up by Tho. ffitch Leiftenant Olmsted, mstr ffenn in wrighting to be confirmede and signed by the Towne oir thosse
they shalle depute in their behalfe which conditiones weare fully agreed upon at the sayede meeitinge betweene the Towne and
Henry Whitney, and to be signede and confirmed by the sayed Henry Whitneye which sayed wrightings doe fullie expresse the tearmes and
conditiones of Both parties.
Allso at the sayed meeitinge the Towne voted and grantede unto the sayed Henry Whitney a home Lott consistinge of twoe accres the
sayed Lott to be Lay'ed out upon the mill plaine upon the right hande of the path Leadinge downe to the ould mill, being over
the Run Lett 2 or three rodd from the sayed Run Lett and allso from the cart way, and so the grant of the other Lott is relinquishede.
This lot lay near the mill, on the north side of Norwalk River, and was the first lot west of Mill Brook.
Norwalk Land Records, Vol. IV, folios 51 and 52, set forth the fact that the agreement between the town of Norwalk and Henry Whitney "being comprehended in one pair of Indentures of a like tennure not being recorded, one of them not to be found, and the other damnified by some unknown means, and not in a suteable capacity for a Record," the town voted, 24 Oct. 1706, that a new draft be made of the former agreement, and covenant made by James Olmsted, Samuel Smith, and Joseph Platt, the town's committee, and John Whitney, Senr. This was recorded 16 July 1709, and shows that "whereas the planters aforesaid hath given and granted unto ye said Henry Whitney the Old Mill House, with the Mill Stones and what Irons and other things belongeth thereunto," etc., the said Henry Whitney engaged "to make, Maintaine, Keep, and uphold a good sufficient ground corne Mill, and that at ye proper cost and charge of ye said Henry Whitney, his heirs, and assigns, and that upon the mouth of Norwalk River by ye Falls, and also a good sufficient Mill House over ye same with also a good sufficient Damn to ye said Mill, The said Planters by these presents allowing ye Ground to ye said Mill where it stands and also sufficient ground across ye River for ye said Damn and also ye use of ye stream of Norwalk River to ye said mill and also liberty to ye said Henry, his heirs and assigns, at all time and times to take from off the common land sufficient of timber for the said Mill and Damn," and he engaged "To Grind the Corne of ye aforesaid planters, their heirs and assigns and Inhabitants of said Town, well and sufficiently at all times hereafter, making good and well conditioned meal provided water may be obtained with the use of means, and to Take butt and no more than the sixteenth part for Tole of all sorts of Grain that shall be ground." The town also granted him several pieces of land.
At a Towne Meeitinge November the 9th [16]65, ordred and voted that Waltar Haite and Math Marvin see to lay out the home
Lott granted unto Henry Whitney, and allso to place out that peice of land which the town granted to Henry Whitney upon building
and mainteining a good sufficient corne mill.
At a Towne meeiting Des 13 [13 Dec. 1665] voted and ordered that Henry Whitney and Mathe Marvin see to finish the [meeting]
house, or cause the same to be done according as the towne [ma]nifested themselfs about the finishinge the same and for --- ---r of the
same the decons to descharge the same in currant pay.
His name appears in the rate, or tax list of 19 Feb. 1665 [1665-66]. The following entry appears in the records of "A Generall Assembly, held at Hartford, October 10th, 1667,"
This Court upon the petition of Wm. Haugh, have considered that case depending between him & Henry Whitney, and doe order
that there shall be payd unto the sayd Henry Whitney fower pownds out of the publique Treasury, and this to be an issue of the case
depending between the sd Haugh & Whitney about seizing of rumme. The Treasurer is desired to order him his pay at Norwalke.
� (Trumbull's Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, from 1665 to 1678, p. 73.)
At a Towne meting in Norwalk, Aprill 15th 1669, henery Whitne and Ralph Keeler was voted and chosen by the towne to vew the
pound which John Gregory Junr and Tho Bennydicke Junr., did agree to make, and the sayd men did take a vew of it at the same
time & found it to be finished according to bargin and accordingly made their report to the towne.
Also at the same meting voted and agreed that henery Whitne shall have libberty to make a fence vpon the bank of the other side of
the Riuer aboue the Lower cart waye for the seruing of his land.
At a Towne meting in Norwalk, May the 5th 69 . . . .
Also at the same meting it was agreed on that the grant that was formerly given to henery Whitney touching comonage should be
Recorded, namely that he is to have a Right in the comons and liberty for Keping cattell horses swine with all other priviliges for
fensing, or building, or Any other nesesaries he stand in need of, onely it is to be vnderstood that it is to stand & Remaine to the mill
as the other lands doe yt Are apropriated to the Euse.
He was one of thirty-three, named in "A true and perfect List of all the Freemen appertaininge vnto the plantation of Norwake. Taken this 11th of October, 1669, and to be presented unto the Honnored Court assembled."
At a towne meting in Norwalk, February 20th, 1672, [1672-73]
. . . . . At this fore sayd meting it was voted and agreed on that all the land lying between Samuel hayes his homlott & Goodman
Whitnes running along by the creek side, shall lye comon for euer & is never to be given out to Any man.
At the afore sayd meting it was voted and Agreed on that the pond that lies on the other side in the field, with the meddow aboute
it from . . . . . to Matthias Sention his lott shall belong to henery Whitne & his eyers to be layd to the mill as his other lands
are that are appropriated for that use: And this is to be for him to Improue as afore sayd, so long as the afore sayd henery Whitney and
his eyers doe maintaine a good suffitient gate into ye aforesayd field, to be well hanged so as it may open and shutt conueniantly.
This was his last appearance on the records of the town. He was one of the petitioners, 9 May 1672, for liberty to begin a new "plantation neare the back side of Norwalke." This was Danbury. Leave was granted, and the plantation was begun in 1684, but he did not live to take part in it.
He probably died in the autumn of 1673; but a careful search has failed to show the date; nor has anything been found to show any facts in the history of either of his wives, except that the second was a Widow Ketcham, and she was probably the same who survived him.
The Last Will and Testament of Mr. Hen. Whitne of Norwocke, made the 5th of June Anno 1672, Revoking all former wills.
I, Henery Whitnee being weake and crazy in body, but throwe mercy perfect in memory and vnderstanding: doe bequeath my body
to the dust, and to be decently Interred; my Immortal Soul into the hands of my mercifull redeemer, with an assured hope of a Joyfull
Resurrection vnto a blessed eternal life; being purchased by the pretios Blood and merrits of my dear Saueour.
And for that worldly estate that the Lord of his bounty hath bestowed vpon me, I doe will and bequeath as followeth,
It. � That all my Just debts be faythfully payd and discharged.
It. � I will and bequeath vnto my Sonn John Whitnee, the Mill and all the Lands belonging to the same; and that according to the terms
and Conditions that I receiued and obtayned the same of the towne of Norwocke.
It. � I will and bequeath vnto my said son John all my waring apparell; and alsoe all my working tooles.
It. � I will and bequeth unto my beloued wife, my homelot, with the dwelling house standing vpon the same During the time of her
widowhood, or the sum of ten pounds to be payd vnto her by my sonn John; shee being at her liberty either to take and accept of the
said home lot and house during her widowhood, or the sayd Ten pounds, yf shee shall accept of the sayd Ten pounds, then the said
homelot and house to remayne vnto my sayd sonn John; prouided my sayd wiue's acceptance is to be declared and made knowne vnto
my overseers or the major part of them, and alsoe to my sonn John, within one year after my decease.
It. � I will and bequeath vnto my beloued wife, all her waring Apparell and Linning.
It. � I will and bequeath vnto my beloued wife, and my sonn John, whatever cattle, swine, moueables shall remayne: my just debts
being payd out as aboue said ordered; and what moueables are not bequeathed, the aforesaid cattle, swine, moueables to be equally
deuided by my ouerseers vnto my said wife and sonn, prouided I doe give liberty vnto my sayd wife to haue and receiue in part of her
half, the fetherbed, fether boulster, pillow ruggs, two blankets, vallents & curtains, all being and appertayning to the great bedstedle, with
the said bedstedle, alsoe the strawebed and two blankets lying and being upon the trundle bed, with the said trundle bedsteadle; all the
said bedding & bedstedle to be apprized and set out by my ouerseers or the maior part of them, and that in an equall way and rate.
It. � I will and bequeth vnto my sayd wife, Ten bushels of wheat & alsoe Ten bushels of Indian corn; the same to be payd by my sonn
yearly during the term of seven years, prouided my said wife shall live so long and continnue a widowe, and alsoe that my said sonn
shall keep, continnue and enioy the mill.
It. � I do desire, order, ordayne and constetute Thomas Benedict, Senr., Walther Hoit, and Thomas ffitch, Sen. my beloved brethren
and friends, overseers of this my last will & testament, and doe by these prsents signe and confirm the same, the day and year aboue
written as witness my hand.
his
In the prsence of Henry r Whitne
RICHARD OLMSTEAD mark
THOMAS FFITCH, Sen.
A Inuentory of the estate of Henr Whitne Late of Norwock, Deceased, and apprized by Marke Sention, John Bouton, John Platt,
being desired and appointed thereunto by the select men of the towne of Norwocke.
Imprimis, in a Rugg, blankets and bedding 14 11 00
It. In Curtayns & Vallents 01 07 00
It. In Bedstedles 04 06 00
It. In Sheets and other Linnin 05 12 00
It. In Brass and Pewter 04 06 06
It. In Waring Apparel 10 06 06
It. In Iron pots & other Iron Moueuables 02 11 00
It. In husbandry Moueables & tooles 09 10 06
It. In Bookes 00 13 00
It. In Ammunition 02 14 00
It. In Two oxen five cowes 30 00 00
It. In a yearling and three calues 03 05 00
It. In a old horse 02 10 00
It. In swine smal & great 12 10 00
It. In the dwelling house, yards and home lot 45 00 00
It. In timber prepared for a barn 02 00 00
It. In the mill and upland and Meadowe belonging to the same as they are conditioned from the towne 60 00 00
It. In one parcel of Meadow conditioned from the towne 07 00 00
It. In carpenters tooles 07 00 00
It. In debts due to the estate 23 15 00
It. In Old Iron 00 12 00
It. In siluer more 00 07 00
---------
255 13 00
The estate indebted unto Mr. Hyat & Mr. Hudson about 10 00 00
In small debts 00 17 00
To the apprisers 00 10 00
Substract 11 07 00
---------
Total 244 06 00
Taken and apprised by
vs MARKE SENTION
JOHN PLAT
JOHN BOWTON
John Whitne the son of Henr Whitne
deceased hath attested upon oath to
this Inuentory before the Courte
Nouembr the eighth 1673
WILLM HILL clarke
The only known child of Henry Whitney was:
2. JOHN WHITNEY, born probably circa 1645.
2. JOHN WHITNEY, son of Henry Whitney, born circa 1645, probably in England, possibly in America but likely before his father Henry first appeared in America in 1649; died in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut, in 1720, prior to 11 Oct. 1720 when his son-in-law Joseph Keeler was appointed administrator of his estate. Like his father before him, John was a millwright and miller. On 12 March 1674/5 in Norwalk, Connecticut, John married ELIZABETH SMITH, died some time after 3 April 1741 in Connecticut, daughter of Richard Smith. John and Elizabeth had 10 children.
Stephen Whitney Phoenix's The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, pages 11-12, includes the following biography of John Whitney (emphasis added):
John Whitney was probably born before his father went to Southold, as the fact that he was of full age before 20 Jan. 1665-66, is indicated by the following vote:
At a Towne meting held the 20th of Jan. 1665, granted vnto John Whitne the sonne of Henry Whitney . . . . . oinse unto his
father's home lott extending from the . . . . Brow of the hill lying by the hi . . weigh Leading to the . . . . 2 Rodds
. . . cartpath by the sayd Falls.
He settled, with his father, in Norwalk; followed his business, of millwright and miller; succeeded him in the possession of the mill and homestead; and there married, 17 March 1674-5, Elizabeth Smith, dau. of Richard Smith.
Facsimile of John Whitney's signature
At a towne meting desember 27th 1677. At ye aforesayd meting it was voted and agreed on between the towne and the miller, John
Whitne, that the towns men are to carry their corne to the mill vpon the third and sixt dayes of the weak, comonly called Tuesday &
Fryday, which days he is to Attend to grinde in & if the sayd John can clere the mill of the corne that is brought in the aforesayd two
days, or before, then the Rest of the dayes of ye week he may take to atend his own ocations, but if he cannot clere the mill of the corne
sesonably brought in, he must clere it before he leaues.
He built a fulling-mill at Norwalk, which he gave, 14 Ap. 1707, to his son John Whitney, with needful conveniences of land and water,
to Injoye use and improve, so long as there shall be a grist or corne mill maintained by the sd John Whittney, Senr., or his heirs for to
grind the Inhabitants corne, According to his covenant with the sayt Towne and noe longer. This I do Grant unto my sayd sonn so long
as he or his heires shall se cause to maintaine a fulling Mill there where it now standeth and no Longer; provided allso that in case the
sayd John Whittney son of sayd John Whitney, senior, shall marry, and he Decease, and leave a widow, she shall Inioy the privilledges
above mentioned so long as she shall remain his widow, & noe longer, and then to return to his Eldest Brother surviving; and in case he
shall Refuse, then the next surviving, and so successively to all the Brethren of the sayd John Whittney Junior.
He sold to his son, John Whitney, 8 July 1712, in consideration of a bond to pay certain sums of money, the grist-mill, and land belonging thereto, taking, 9 July 1712, a life-lease of the premises. His son reconveyed the whole property, three days before his death; and a month later, the father secured the fulling-mill to the widow during the minority of her son, with remainder to him. He finally sold the grist-mill, 20 May 1713, to his son, Joseph Whitney, for which Joseph was to pay his father's debts, give him one half of all grain that should be received for toll at the mill during the father's life, if demanded; "and, after ye decease of ye said John Whitne, to maintain his mother, Elizabeth Whitne (if she survive) Honourably During her natural life, if she Remaine ye sd John Whitne's widdow," and within four years after John Whitney's death, pay to his heirs 50 pounds "in Provision pay at price currant equivalent to two thirds of said sum in money."
He probably died, at Norwalk, in 1720, as his son-in-law, Joseph Keeler [son of Samuel and Sarah (St. John) Keeler] , was appointed administrator of his estate, 11 Oct. 1720. His widow was a member of the First Congregational Church in Norwalk in 1725, and was living as late as 3 Ap. 1741, when her son Joseph Whitney, in a codicil to his will, provided for her future support; but the date of her death is not known.
Information on the children of John and Elizabeth (Smith) Whitney is found in Stephen Whitney Phoenix's The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, pages 13-20, including a lengthier biographical sketch of John and Elizabeth's son Henry Whitney on pages 13-16. The following information on John Whitney is excerpted from Phoenix's biographical sketch of Henry Whitney:
. . . [Henry's] father had already given to him, 18 Oct. 1709, "my now Dwelling House, Barn and Home Lott, containing four acres of land." He returned to his father, 19 Oct. 1709, a life-lease of the same, as follows:
For and in Consideration of Love, good will and Affection, which I have and do bear towards my Honoured and Well Respected
Father, Mr. John Whitney, of the aforesaid Town and County, Do give and grant, and by these presents do fully & absolutely give and
grant unto him, my said Father, John Whitney, the free use and Improvement of one half of ye now Dwelling House, Barn & Home Lott
that he now dwells in & Improves, During ye Term of his Natural Life, as also, ye Improvement of Half of said House, & what con-
venience may be needful in ye Barn unto my Honoured Mother, if she survive my said father, During her continuance of Widowhood.
[Henry] sold this property, 8 July 1712, to his brother, John Whitney, subject to the foregoing lease; and removed, among the early settlers, to Ridgefield, Conn., where we find his ear-mark recorded 1 Dec. 1712. . . .
It should be noted that Stephen Whitney Phoenix assigned a certain Samuel Whitney, born 1688, as a son of John Whitney. However, it was later found that Samuel was not a member of this Whitney family at all, but rather was a son of Nathaniel Whitney of Weston, Massachusetts, an entirely different colonial Whitney family.
John and Elizabeth had six sons and four daughters:
-- JOHN WHITNEY JR., born 12 March 1676/7 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 3 Feb. 1713 in Norwalk, married Elizabeth Finch.
3. JOSEPH WHITNEY, born 1 March 1679 in Norwalk, Connecticut.
-- HENRY WHITNEY, born 21 Feb. 1681 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 26 April 1728 in Ridgefield, Connecticut, married Elizabeth Olmstead, daughter of Mary (Benedict) Olmstead.
-- ELIZABETH WHITNEY, born circa 1684 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 17 March 1763 in Ridgefield, Connecticut, married Joseph Keeler.
-- RICHARD WHITNEY, born 18 April 1687 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Hannah Darling.
-- ANNE WHITNEY, born 1691 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 9 May 1773 in Sharon, Connecticut, married Matthew St. John.
-- ELEANOR WHITNEY, born 27 Jan. 1693 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 25 Jan. 1777 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Jonathan Fairchild.
-- NATHAN WHITNEY, born in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Sarah (NN).
-- SARAH WHITNEY, born in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 22 Oct. 1720 in Ridgefield, Connecticut, married Samuel Smith.
-- JOSIAH WHITNEY, born in Norwalk, Connecticut, died as early as 1750 in Norwalk, married Eunice Hanford.
3. JOSEPH WHITNEY, son of John and Elizabeth Whitney, born 1 March 1679 in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut, died 1741 in Norwalk, Connecticut. Joseph, a mill-wright, married on 6 July 1704 in Norwalk to HANNAH HOYT, born circa 1684 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died circa 1740 in Norwalk, daughter of Zerubbabel and Mehitabel (Rockwell) Hoyt. Joseph and Hannah had seven children, all born in Norwalk.
Stephen Whitney Phoenix's The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, page 13, includes the following biographical remarks on John Whitney (emphasis added):
Joseph Whitney, b. in Norwalk, Conn., 1 March 1678 [1678-9]; a mill-wright; married in Norwalk, 6 July 1704, Hannah Hoyt, "the daughter of Mr. Zerubbabel Hoyt," of Norwalk. She was a member of the First Congregational Church in Norwalk, in 1725. After the death of his brother, John Whitney, he came in possession of the grist-mill, by deed from his father, stipulating to pay all of his debts, and give him one half of all tolls which the mill should earn during his father's lifetime. His will was dated 21 March 1740-41; and he probably died in Norwalk, in 1741.
His great-grandson, James Whitney, when eighty years old, wrote an interesting letter, in which he speaks of him as follows: "He was a very excentric man, and I heard many anecdotes of him. One was as follows; he was called upon to name a street running from the foot of Pudding Lane to the bridge at the head of the harbor, by the mill; and this was his answer, �
From Hyatt's hill to Thacher's mill,
Was once a lonesome valley:
Since it's become a place of fame,
We'll call it Petticoat Alley,
and it went by that name when I was a boy, I believe over one hundred years later."
The children of Joseph and Hannah Whitney were:
-- HEZEKIAH WHITNEY, born 10 April 1705, married Margaret Harris.
4A. HANNAH WHITNEY, born 5 Nov. 1707, married DANIEL KEELER.
-- JOSEPH WHITNEY, born 6 Dec. 1710, married Mary Coit.
-- THANKFUL WHITNEY, born 1 March 1713/4, married Ebenezer Benedict.
4B. ELIZABETH WHITNEY, born 1717, married MILES RIGGS.
-- DAVID WHITNEY, born 24 June 1721, married Elizabeth Hyatt.
-- ABRAHAM WHITNEY, born 23 Feb. 1724, married Anne Plumb.
4A. HANNAH WHITNEY, daughter of Joseph and Hannah Whitney, born 5 Nov. 1707 in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut; died some time after 2 July 1766 probably in Wilton, Connecticut. About 1730, Hannah married DANIEL KEELER, born circa 1694 in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut, died in late Nov. 1764 in Norwalk, Connecticut, son of John and Mehitabel Keeler of Norwalk. Daniel and Hannah had five sons and six daughters. After Daniel's death, Hannah remarried on 2 July 1766 in New Canaan, Connecticut, to SAMUEL BETTS of Wilton in Norwalk, Connecticut. S. Whitney Phoenix's 1878 Whitney Genealogy, vol. I, page 22, shows the following genealogical remarks on Hannah Whitney and Daniel Keeler:
Hannah Whitney, b. in Norwalk, Conn., 5 Nov. 1707; married Daniel Keeler, a farmer, of Norwalk, son of John and Hittabel (Rockwell) Keeler, and g. son of Ralph Keeler, an early settler of Norwalk, and of John Rockwell, one of the first settlers of Stamford, Conn. They settled at New Canaan Society, in Norwalk, and were among the constituent members of the Congregational Church at that place, their names being the fourth couple on the list, having been recommended by Rev. Moses Dickinson, pastor of the First Church in Norwalk. His name often appears in the Norwalk Land Records, in the purchase and sale of land, chiefly in New Canaan. His will was made at Norwalk, 14 Nov. 1764, and he died soon after that date. She married (2d), 2 July 1766, at New Canaan, with Samuel Betts, of Wilton, in Norwalk; having made with him, 1 July 1766, a contract, by which, at his death, she and her heirs were to receive all goods which he received with her, and half of the linen and woolen cloth made by them, which should not be already worn or made into clothing. She probably went to Wilton, to dwell at his home.The children of Daniel and Hannah Keeler were:
-- DANIEL KEELER JR., born circa 1730 in Norwalk, Connecticut, died 24 Dec. 1803 in New Canaan, Connecticut, married Mary (NN).
-- HANNAH KEELER, born in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Benjamin Bolt.
-- DOROTHY KEELER, born in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Abram Hoyt.
-- ISAIAH KEELER, born 1735 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Melicent (NN).
-- LYDIA KEELER, born 1737 in Norwalk, Connecticut.
-- JEREMIAH KEELER, born circa 1740 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Elizabeth Weed.
-- MARY KEELER, born circa 1742 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married her first cousin JOSEPH RIGGS (see below).
-- DINAH KEELER, born circa 1744 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married James Canfield.
-- JOHN KEELER, born 29 Aug. 1746 in Norwalk, Connecticut, married Phebe Hoyt.
-- JOSEPH KEELER, born 29 Aug. 1746 in Norwalk, Connecticut, believed to have died unmarried.
-- ELIZABETH KEELER, born 1748 in Norwalk, Connecticut, possibly married Samuel Northrop.
4B. ELIZABETH WHITNEY, daughter of Joseph and Hannah Whitney, born 1717 in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut; died Aug. 1815 in Norfolk, Litchfield County, Connecticut. Elizabeth married on 26 June 1735 in Norwalk, Fairfield County, Connecticut, to MILES RIGGS, a sailor, son of Joseph and Sarah Riggs, born circa 1705 in New Jersey; fell overboard and drowned in New York Harbor while his sloop was docked during a gale on Christmas Eve 1753. The marriage of Miles and Elizabeth, along with the births of their first four children, are recorded in Rev. Elijah B. Huntington's Registration of Births, Marriages and Deaths of Stamford Families (Stamford, 1797).
John H. Wallace's Genealogy of the Riggs Family has this to say about how Elizabeth's husband Miles Riggs came to his death:
. . . He was in New York on the night of December 24, 1753, and a heavy gale springing up, he left his lodging about midnight and went to look after the safety of his vessel in Peck�s slip, where she was lying. By some misstep he fell overboard and was drowned. He died intestate, and his brother Joseph administered on the estate. The names of other brothers and sisters, as well as that of his wife Elizabeth, appear in the settlement of his affairs. His sloop was his chief possession in the line of personal property. His widow returned to Connecticut with her family, and in 1759 married David Rockwell.
A deed in the Norwalk land records, dated 5 Aug. 1754, states that "Elizabeth Wriggs, widow, of Norwalk" joined her Whitney brothers and sisters in conveying land at the upper end of Clapboard Hills, to Ebenezer Benedict. Elizabeth later remarried in 1759 to ENSIGN DAVID ROCKWELL, and lived with him at Ridgebury, in Ridgefield, where he died 30 May 1788. Elizabeth then married a third time circa 1791 to AGUR FAIRCHILD, who died in 1797. She then went to live with her youngest daughter, Esther (Riggs) Rockwell, in Ridgebury, until she was 94 years old, when she went to live with her son Miles Riggs in Norfolk, Connecticut. There she died at the age of 98.
The children of Miles and Elizabeth Riggs were:
-- JOSIAH RIGGS, born 18 May 1736, married Experience Davis.
-- JOSEPH RIGGS, born 18 May 1738 in Stamford, Connecticut, married his first cousin MARY KEELER (see above).
-- SARAH RIGGS, born 22 Oct. 1740.
-- ELIZABETH RIGGS, born 17 Dec. 1742, married Mr. Stewart.
-- MARY [POLLY] RIGGS, born circa 1744, married Ephraim Kimberly.
-- MILES RIGGS, born 20 May 1748, married 1st. Martha (Patty) Bull, married 2nd. Abigail (Cowles) Mills.
-- PRUDENCE RIGGS, born circa 1750, married 1st. Samuel Northrop, married 2nd. Mr. Leason.
-- ESTHER RIGGS, born Nov. 1752, married Abraham Rockwell, her second cousin -- ancestors of the illustrator Norman Rockwell.
Whitney Genealogy Resources:
The Whitney family of Connecticut, and its affiliations (1878), Vol. 1, Part 1, by Stephen Whitney Phoenix The Whitney Research Group (website designed and maintained by Tim Doyle and Robert L. Ward)