JONATHAN (#1) SINGLETARY (alias DUNHAM), s/o Richard

s/o Richard Singletary

JONATHAN SINGLETARY was the son of Richard Singletary, the immigrant ancestor. The question of his biological mother is under research and discussion at this time with possibly four scenarios. The date of his birth is complicated by facts presented within each scenario, and due to the complications of understanding the vital records which were recorded during the period of the Julian Calendar timetable resulting in double datings. Then there is the mystery why Jonathan Singletary adopted the DUNHAM surname in later life to become Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary) and why his children defaulted to the DUNHAM (alias SINGLETARY) surname and succeeding generations of his line continued to use DUNHAM as their surname. At that period of time, the term alias was not derogatory, but rather a means to insure inheritance, carry on a name, etc.

1638/1639 or 1639/1640
Jonathan Singletary, was born according to various records:

  • "SINGLETARY, Jonathan, s. Ric[hard] and Susanah, 17: 11 m: 1639"
    (Vital Records of Salisbury, Massachusetts To the End of the Year 1849, Topsfield Historical Society, Topsfield, Massachusetts, 1915, p. 218: "Salisbury Births")
  • 17 January 1639/40 [Julian Calendar] at Salisbury, Essex Co., Massachusetts (HOYT, p. 317),
  • "...Jonathan Dunham, alias Singletary, at Newbury, Mass., on January 17, 1640, of parents Richard and Hannah [sometimes an abbreviated name for Susannah...ash] Singletary." (Monnette, Pt.1)
  • Deposition dated 1662 of Jonathan Singletary, aged "about 23" against John Godfrey. (Upham's Salem Witchcraft, Vol. I, pp. 343-346)
  • "Jonathan, b. in Plymouth, in 1646; m. in 1669, Mary Bloomfild, also b. in Plymouth, in 1653, and later a resident of Hartford. Jonathan's early life was spent in Hartford, where he formed the acquaintance with Samuel Marsh, a son of John Marsh." (Isaac Watson Dunham, pp. 40-41, erroneously attempts to name Jonathan's father as "Thomas DUNHAM, son of Deacon John Dunham...")

    Jonathan Singletary (later Jonathan Dunham) is believed by many researchers to have been a child of Richard Singletary and possibly an unknown first wife, or perhaps the lady known as "Goodwife Singletary," or perhaps Humility Dunham. However, according to numerous records and the vital record given below his mother is given as Susannah Cook(e), who is known to have been married to Richard Singletary. Further study may bring new answers for a mysterious beginning.

    New Observation
    David M. Shields of Long Island
    21 Feb 2004
    Vital Records of Salisbury, Massachusetts
    To the End of the Year 1849

    Published by the Topsfield Historical Society
    Topsfield, Massachusetts
    Page 218: "Salisbury Births"
    "SINGLETARY, Jonathan, s. Ric[hard] and Susanah, 17: 11 m: 1639"

    Dave states: Note! 17 is the 17th day, 11 m is the 11th month. [Julian Calendar]
    In 1639, the 11th month was February of what we would now call 1640. That is why the dates are written 1639/40. This Vital Record states that Susanah was the mother of Jonathan."

    However, Patricia Junkin states, "The VR's can be mistaken or incomplete.

    The Vital Records of Haverhill, Pub. Topsfield Historical Society. 1911. Marriages: Richard Singletary and Susanna Cooke [bef. 1656]. Where is the later data to give us a marriage date? Yvonne [Burton] states she used the History of Milbury which gives Susanna as the second wife. Coddington also states Susanna was a second wife. The surname Singletary is so unique as to allow us to accept that "Goodwife" was somehow connected to Richard Singletary who alone, as most historians accept, in this area of Massachusetts possessed this surname.

    If the death date of Goodwife Singletary was taken from a tombstone that had deteriorated, and the vital record states 1638 or 1639, then the data seems imprecise and we cannot assume that she did not die in 1639/40; an obvious offering having died in childbirth. Per Marcia Briggs: "A Guide To Massachusetts Cemeteries" by David Allen Lambert, the oldest cemetery in Newbury is The First Settlers Burying Ground, first burial 1635. Indicates a survey was published in NEHGR 12:73 Newbury Burying Ground. From the Newbury Vital Records, Volume 2, page 721: Singletary, ____, Goodwife, ____, 1638 or 9. Therefore, if Goodwife died on 17 January 1639, you could reckon Jonathan's birth on 17 January 1639/40; 1 Jan-24 March being the adjusted dating. The date of Jonathan's birth is from Yvonne Brunton's book. In December 1662, Jonathan attest he is "aged about ___________-three years," consistent with being born in 1639. If we accept that Richard Singletary's wife died in 1638 or 1639, then an immediate marriage to Susannah to care for a baby is also reasonable. Even The Old Families of Salisbury and Amesbury, Massachusetts says only that "Richard Singletary....m. as early as 1639, Susanna Cook who was born ab. 1616 and d. April 11, 1682 (Hv-Haverhill) but the same source gives Richard's age at death as 102 years. By the way, how would Richard have known Susannah Cooke? In the 1932 Monette's "First Settler's," citing Oliver B. Leonard "Reliable authority places the birth of this Jonathan alias Singletary, at Newbury, Mass on January 17, 1640 of parents Richard and Susannah Singletary (Hannah is a typographical error)" Even this is problematic. Is there a record where Jonathan's mother is referred to as Hannah? This source also gives a 6 Sept. 1706 death date for Jonathan alias and to my knowledge no one knows when he died. We are at the mercy of transcribers."

    It is assumed that Jonathan grew to manhood in the family home of his father, Richard Singletary, in Salisbury, Newbury and Haverhill, Massachusetts, as indicated in the references above. It also appears he was reared by Susanna [Cook(e)] Singletary, perhaps his mother, if not, his step-mother. We can also probably conclude that he was probably reared in the strict religious atmosphere of the day. As we know, the religious freedom that was sought by so many of the European religious sects of the time was not practiced once the sect arrived in America. Their settlements did not allow for diversity of religious thought. There was a strict adherence to each's code of teachings, conducts, morals, etc., and these was strictly inforced by the practicing members of each sect. This fermented fear and dissension among many of the inhabitants. Veiled under the cloud of this environment Jonathan would experience some dark days in his life. What is not clear is where the young adult Jonathan was and what he did before his marriage.

    According to Plymouth Colony Records, Jonathan Singletary was accused of being a Ranter, an English radical group, which became prominent from 1649-54. ["Ranters embraced the concept of the 'indwelling spirit', a form of religious perfection. Whatever was done in the Spirit was justifiable to a Ranter. Man was free of Sin and the Law. This was commonly known as Antinomianism." (Source: Internet, 2004: English Dissenters: RANTERS]   This way of thinking and preaching was thus in contradiction of the religious values of the community of Plymouth and thus subject to Plymouth court intervention. Other practicing religious groups of Plymouth also suffered from persecutions by the Plymouth courts. (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    See also: Salem, A Brief History which speaks of Antinomianism

    Jonathan Singletary married 1657-1662 (MYERS, p. 530 says m abt. 1657)(HOYT, p. 317, says m abt. 1661) (Patricia Junkin says m by 1662) to Mary Bloomfield, eldest child and daughter of Thomas (#2) Bloomfield and Mary ???. (HOYT, p. 317 says Thomas Bloomfield, Jr. & Mary)   Mary Bloomfield was born "15 January 1642" and married "Jonathan Dunham, alias Singletary." (NYG&B RECORD, p. 58)   In speaking of Thomas (#2) Bloomfield, Jr./Sr., of Woodbridge, we find this remark: "He provided the daughter, Mary Bloomfield, which made him the father-in-law of that forceful individual, Jonathan Singletary, alias Dunham." (MONNETTE, pp. 495-496: Dedication...)

    14 March 2004, Patricia Junkin writes, "I have no evidence of the marriage of Mary Bloomfield to Jonathan alias before 1662 when Richard Singletary and wife Susana convey to Mary, wife of Jonathan of Haverhill 150 acres bounded by Theophilous Satchwell [court records] at the time of Jonathan's suit with Godfrey. Mary, according to the New York Genealogical and Biographical Records, was born 15 Jan 1642. To have a child born in 1659, Mary and Jonathan would have been married in 1658 making Esther their first child and Mary aged about 17 years. Not unusual, but if you account for naming practice [of that time period...ASH], for whom was Esther named? Yvonne [Burton] has a birth for Mary, whom she believes was the first child as Dec. 29 1661. There is a gap between a date of 3 Feb. 1663 for Sarah-Mary who m. William Ellison and an estimated birth of Ruth in 1666. Esther could have well been born in this space and have been of age to have married in 1680, age about 15-16.

    [NOTE of ash: In 1662, Richard & Susanna (Cook[e]) Singletary apparently conveyed land in Haverhill, Massachusetts to their daughter-in-law, Mary (Bloomfield) Singletary, and not to their son, Jonathan Singletary (later Dunham). It appears then that in 1702, Mary and the children of Jonathan & Mary (Bloomfield) Dunham as legatees, alias Singletary, reconveyed & gifted as a deed back to Jonathan this same land as "ye all & every part & percell of yt upland Low land & meadow land & ye premises withall ye rights appurtenances and privileges thereto belonging and any manner of way appertaining lying & being within ye bonds of ye Town of Haverhill" and "conveyed by ye aforesd Richard Singletary ye honored Father in Law to me ye said mother...". [See: 1702 below]

    Abt. 1659
    Esther Singletary, aka Esther Dunham (alias Singletary) was born to Jonathan Singletary (later Jonathan Dunham) & Mary Bloomfield. She married 1680 to Samuel Smith and apparently died before 1702.

    An encounter began between John Godfrey against Jonathan Singletary in 1659. Jonathan had signed a deposition against John Godfrey. (MONNETTE, Pt. 4, p. 501)

    With an Account of Salem Village
    A History of Opinions on Witchcraft and Kindred Spirits
    by Charles W. UPHAM
    Vol. 1, pp. 432-437
    (MONNETTE, Pt. 4, p. 501 cites Recs. Quart. Cts., Essex Co., MA, Vol. III, pp. 120+)

    "WILLIAM OSGOOD testifieth, that in the yeare '40, in the month of August, --he being then building a bar for Mr. Spencer,--John Godfree being then Mr. Spencer's herdsman, he on an evening came to the frame, where divers men were at work, and said that he had gotten a new master against the time he had done keeping cows. The said William Osgood asked him who it was. He answered, he knew not. He again asked him where he dwelt. He answered, he knew not. He asked him what his name was. He answered, he knew not. He then said to him, 'How, then, wilt thou go to him when thy time is out?' He said, 'The man will come and fetch me then.' I asked him, 'Hast thou made an absolute bargain?' He answered that a covenant was made, and he had set his hand to it. He then asked him whether he had not a counter covenant. Godfree answered, 'No.' W. O. siad, 'What a mad fellow art thou to make a covenant in this manner!' He said, 'He's an honest man.'--'How knowest thou?' said W. O. J. Godfree answered. 'He looks like one.' W. O. then answered, 'I am persuaded thou hast made a covenant with the Devil.' He then skipped about, and said, 'I profess, I profess!' WILLIAM OSGOOD."

    The proceedings against Godfrey were carried up to other tribunals, as appears by a record of the County Court at Salem, 28th of June, 1659:--
    "John Godfrey stands bound in one hundred pound bond to the treasurer of this county for his appearance at a General Court, or Court of Assistants, when he shall be legally summonded thereunto."

    What action, if any was had by either of these high courts, I have found no information. But he must have come off unscathed; for, soon after, he commenced actions in the County Court for defamation against his accusers, with the following results:--
    "John Godfery plt. agst. Will. Simonds & Sam. his son dfts. in an action of slander that the said Sam. son to Will. Simons, hath don him in his name, Charging him to be a witch, the jury find for the plt. 2d damage & cost of Curth 29sh, yet notwithstanding doe conceiue, that by the testmonyes he is rendred suspicious."

    "John Godfery plt. agst. Jonathan Singletary defendt. in an action of Slander and Defamation for calling him witch & said is this witch on this side Boston Gallows yet, the attachmt & other evidences were read, committed to the Jury & are on file. The Jury found for the plt. a publique acknowledgmt, at Haverhill within a month that he hath done the plt. wrong in his words or 10sh damage & costs of Court £2-16-0."

    In the trial of the case between Godfrey and Singletary, the latter attempted to prove the truth of his allegations against the former, by giving the following piece of testimony, which, while it failed to convince the jury, is worth preserving, from the inherent interest of some of its details:--

    "Date the fourteenth the twelfth month, '62.--The DEPOSITION OF JONATHAN SINGLETARY, aged about 23, who testifieth that I, being in the prison at Ipswich this night last past between nine and ten of the clock at night, after the bell had rung, I being set in a corner of the prison, upon a sudden I heard a great noise as if many cats had been climbing up the prison walls, and skipping into the house at the windows, and jumping about the chamber; and a noise as if boards' ends or stools had been thrown about, and men walking in the chambers, and a crackling and shaking as if the house would have fallen upon me. I seeing this and considering whit I knew by a young man that kept at my house last Indian Harvest, and, upon some difference with John Godfre, he was presently several nights in a strange manner troubled, and complaining as he did, and upon consideration of this and other things that I knew by him, I was at present something affrighted; yet considering what I had lately heard made out by Mr. Mitchel at Cambridge, that there is more good in God than there is evil in sin, and that although God is the greatest good, and sin the greatest evil, yet the first Being of evil cannot weane the scales or overpower the first Being of good: so considering that the author of good was of greater power than the author of evil, Godd was pleased of his goodness to keep me from being out of measure frighted. So this noise above-said held as I suppose about a quarter of an hour, and then ceased: and presently I heard the bolt of the door shoot or go back as perfectly, to my thinking, as I did the next morning when the keeper came to unlock it; and I could not see the door open, but I saw John Godfre stand within the door and said, 'Jonathan, Jonathan.' So I, looking on him, said, 'What have you to do with me?' He said, 'I come to see you: are you weary of your place yet?' I answered, 'I take no delight in being here, but I will be out as soon as I can.' He said, 'If you will pay me in corn, you shall come out.' I answered, 'No: if that had been my intent, I would have paid the marshal, and never have come hither.' He, knocking of his fist at me weary of my part, and so went away, I knew not how nor which way; and, I was walking about in the prison, I tripped upon a stone with my heel, and took it up in my hand, thinking that if he came again I would strike at him. So, as I was walking about, he called at the window, 'Jonathan,' said he, 'if you will pay me corn, I will give you two years day, and we will come to an agreement;' I answered him saying, 'Why do you come dissembling and playing the Devil's part here? Your nature is nothing but envy and malice, which you will vent, though to your own loss; and you seek peace with no man.' --'I do not dissemble,' said he: 'I will give you my hand upon it, I am in earnest.' So he put his hand in at the window, and I took hold of it with my left hand, and pulled him to me; and with the stone in my right hand I thought I struck him, and went to recover my hand to strike again, and his hand was gone, and I would have struck, but there was nothing to strike: and how he went away I know not; for I could neither feel when his hand went out of mine, nor see which way he went."

    It can hardly be doubted, that Singletary's story was the result of the workings of an excited imagination, in wild and frightful dreams under the spasms of nightmare. We shall meet similar phenomena, when we come to the testimony in the trials of 1692.
    Godfrey was a most eccentric character. He courted and challenged the imputation of witchcraft, and tookd delight in playing upon the credulity of his neighbors, enjoying the exhibition of thier amazement, horror, and consternation. He was a person of much notoriety, had more lawsuits, it is probable, than any other man in the colony, and in one instance came under the criminal jurisdiction for familiarity with other and immaterial spirits; for we find, by the record of Sept. 25, 1666, that John Godfrey was "find for being drunk."

    I have allowed so much space to the the foregoing documents, because they show the fancies which, fermenting in the public mind, and inflamed by the prevalent literature, theology, and philosophy, came to a head thirty years afterwards; and because they prove that in 1660 a conviction for witchcraft could not be obtained in this county. The evidence against none of the convicts in 1692, throwing out of view the statements and actings of the "afflicted children," was half so strong as that against Godfrey. Short work would have been made with him then.

    There is one particularly interesting item in Singletary's deposition. It illustrates the value of good preaching. This young man, in his gloomy prison, and overwhelmed with the terrors of supersition, found consolation, courage, and strength in what he remembered of a serman, to which he had happened to listen, from "Matchless Mitchel." It was indeed good doctrine; and it is to be lamented that it was not carried out to its logical conclusions, and constantly enforced by the divines of that and subsequent times.

    On 15 March 2004, Patricia Junkin posted this information to the DUNHAM-DONHAM Discussion List:

    "One might suggest he [Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary] was a man of principal, others a foolish and reckless spirit. I prefer to see him in the light of the time and he was no doubt a forceful presence from his youth, fired by the religious zeal of either the 'Ranting' Quakers or Anne Hutchinson¹s Antinomians, Ranters (an evangelical spirit that had flourished among Puritans in eastern Lincolnshire [England])."

    1661 December 29
    Mary [#1] Singletary was born 29 December 1661 in Haverhill, Essex Co., MA according to vital records. She apparently died as an infant or as a toddler. (HOYT, p. 317 gives birthdate, Haverhill, and "died young.")

    We know that about 1662, Jonathan, being about 23 years of age, became entangled in litigation with John Godfrey. He got into court trouble with John Godfrey after accusing John Godfrey of witchcraft. John Godfrey's predicament appears to have begun in 1640 with William Osgood and eventually a deposition given by William. Then came the encounter between Godfrey and Singletary in 1659, after Jonathan had signed a deposition against John. In return, John Godfrey sued 1 March 1664, at Ipswich, Jonathan and others for defamation and slander. This was followed by Jonathan being found guilty as the verdict was for the plaintiff, and Jonathan, the defendant, had to pay a fine or had to make a public apology at Haverhill. (MONNNETTE, Pt. 4, p. 501) The account of this matter is excerpted below, but whether he paid the fine or gave the public apology is unknown.

    1662 April 8
    On 8 April 1662, Richard and "Susan" (Susanna) SINGLETARY of Haverhill, Essex Co., Massachusetts conveyed 80 acres of land in Haverhill to Mary, wife of Jonathan Singletary of Haverhill...and NOT to their son, Jonathan. This land was bounded by Theophilus Satchwell. (MONNETTE, Part 4, p. 500) Why did the land go to Mary and not to Jonathan? Was Jonathan gone from the family or was this the period of time that Jonathan was imprisoned? Was Jonathan not yet settled, thus his tumultuous lifestyle against the teachings of the fathers of Salem, perhaps put him in jeopardy of loosing land placed in his name. Evidently his parents felt it best to place the land in the hands of his wife, Mary, for the protection of Jonathan & Mary's family. They certainly would not have known the outcome of their son's life, and possibly feared for his family's future well-being. Certainly this step speaks well for the character of Mary (Bloomfield) Singletary.

    1662 November

    "John Godfery v. Jonathan Singletarye"
    (Internet, 2004: Salem Quarterly Court: Records & Files)
    November 1662
    pp. 6-7

    "Concerning a bond that plaintiff assigned him, which bond was due from Edward Clerke to said Godfery, and for refusing to give him security. Verdict for plaintiff, the defendant to give security.

    John Godfery v. Jonathan Singletarye. Debt. For withholding 50s. in silver delivered to defendant a year past. Verdict for the defendant.*


    *Writ, dated Oct. 8, 1662, signed by Edmond Fawkner, for the court, and served by john Johnson, constable of Haverhill, by attachment of defendant's land lying about a mile beyond the river called Hook's meadow river, and abutting the river Marimak on one end and joining next to Goodman Souhell on one side. The warrant was left at Jonathan Singelltary's father's house, where Jonathan resided.

    John Godfery's bill of costs, going to Salibury and Bostone, witnesses sworn before Mr. Bradstreet, etc., 2li. 17s. 8d.

    Edward Youmans, aged about thirty years, deposed that he heard Godfre demand security of Jonathan Senlatary for the bond in controversy. Sworn, 21:9:1662, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Susana Singletary testified that 'as I had ocasion to com by thoms lilford where he was at worke he said unto me wt will your sonn Jonathan doe wth godfre he is resolued to have him to courtt about the band of corn yt he had of him of clark & he saith he will haue me for a witnes about it nay said I it doth nott much trouble me for he has giuen him ye corn if he can git it of clarke can you witness yt he pmised to giue godfre security for ye band of corn Thomas lilford said nay I hard him speak security but I doe not know for wt was.' Sworn, Nov. 22, 1662, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Execution, dated 29:9:1662, against Johnathan Singletarye in satisfaction of a judgment granted John Godfery at Salem court 27:9:1662, signed by Hillyard Veren, cleric, and served by John Johnson, constable of Haverhill, deputy of Samuell Archard, marshall of Salem."


    *Warrant, dated Nov. 20, 1662, signed by Richard Littlehale for the court.

    Jonathan Singletary's bill of charges, 13s.

    Susana Singletary, aged about forty-six years, testified that in her own house John Godfre assigned the band of corn, etc. Sworn, Nov. 22, 1662, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Edward Youmans, aged about thirty years, deposed that he met John Godfre the last spring with Johnathan Senltary coming out of Rouly, and the deponent asked said Godfre to lend him five shillings and he said he could not for he had lent Johnathan Senglatary all the money he had, etc. Sworn, Nov. 21, 1662, before Simon Bradstreete. On the reverse of this paper, 'In Chearlestown.'

    Richard Singletary, aged about sixty-three years, testified, Nov. 22, 1662, that 'as I was goeing to Salsbury this lad munday past along wth John godfre he was in a great pashon against Jonathan Singletary att his hous a while agoe & I had forty or fifty shillings in mony about me & Jonathan would haue borowed it of me & I was two or thre times agoing to lett him hauv it but I considered yt I had often use for mony at law & so I did not lett him haue aney.' Sworn before Simon Bradstreete."

    1663 Jan 12
    "On 12 Jan 1663 Jonathan received land in the third division of Salisbury, Massachusetts."  (MYERS, p. 530)

    1663 March

    "Jonathan Singletary v. John Godfry"
    (Internet, 2004: Ipswich Quarterly Court: Records & Files)
    March 1663
    pp. 27-28

    "Jonathan Singletary v. John Godfry. For not giving plaintiff a general acquittance. Verdict for plaintiff, an acquittance from the beginning of the world to Feb. 18, last.*"

    "*Writ: Jonathan Singletary of Haverill v. John Godfre; for not giving plaintiff a general acquittance, etc.; dated 27:12:1662; signed by Thomas Leaver, clerk, and served by Robert Lord, marshal.

    Jonathan Singletary's bill of charges, for journeys to Newbury, Ipswich, and Andever, 3li. 4s. 6d.

    Richard Singletary, aged about seventy years, deposed that he and Thomas Bloomfield being at Ipswitch upon Feb. 18, last, as agents for Jonathan Singletary, who was then in prison upon several executions of John Godfres, they tendered said Godfre a parcel of land in satisfaction of said execution. 'John Godfre sd ye Land I will neuer medle wth except ye Law Constraineth me to take it & so turned his back nay staye John sd one of us & lett us haue a few words wth you or Coming is to make A full and fineall end bettwene Jonathan & you if we Can wthout any more law well sayed godfre as for ye land I will not medle wth but if you will fetch me or pay me in goods for these executions which he is now in prizen upon I will giue him a full & generall aquitance of all debts & deues & all things,' etc. Godfrey said he would take the goods whenever they were brought to him. Sworn, 24:1:1662, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Theophilus Wilson certified to Godfres having received the goods, etc. Sworn in court.

    Thomas Blomfield testified that Godfre once offered to settle for a great deal less than was afterward paid, etc. Sworn in court."

    1663 March

    "John Godfery v. Jonathan Singletary"
    (Internet, 2004: Ipswich Quarterly Court: Records & Files)
    November 1662
    pp. 39-40

    "John Godfery v. Jonathan Singletary. For 8li. in wheat and Indian corn. Verdict for the defendant. The court accepted this verdict provided he except in his general acquittance to save said Godfrey harmless from Edward Clerke about his bond of 8li.*"
    "*Writ, dated 14:12:1662, signed by Hillyard Veren, for the court, and served by Robert Lord, Marshall.

    Record of the action, Edward Clark v. John Godfry, tried by the commissioners of Haverhill, June 10, 1662, for not coming to receive a parcel of wheat and Indian corn due upon bond, Mar. 1, last. Judgment for the defendant. Copy made by Richard Littlehale, cleric. 'When this action came to be called, John Godfry desired halfe an houres time of ye Comissionrs to call Jonathan Singlary wch was granted, & accordingly Jonathan Singletary did come to attend ye Case, as atteste Richard Littlehale, Cleric. and henry palmer one of the commissioners.

    Copy of deposition of Richard Singletary, sworn Nov. 22, 1662, before Simon Bradstreete, taken from Salem court records by Hillyard Veren, cleric.

    Abraham Whiticker deposed that some time last May, John Godfry said to him that he had given to Jonathan Singletary eight pounds which Edward Clark owed to said Godfry, but the latter said if he had it in his hands again, the said Singeltary should never have it. Sworn, 30:1:1663, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Jonathan Singletary's bill of charges, writing his father's and mother's evidences, going to Andever, Salsbury and Salem, and for his father-in-law giving bond, etc., 3li. 9s. 2d.

    Richard Singletary and Susanah, his wife, deposed 20:1:1663, that they asked Thomas Davis about the evidence that he had given in at last Salem court, and if he could testify that Jonathan was to give Godfre security for that corn. David said that he could not testify that he gave security for the corn, etc. Sworn, 27:1:1663, before Simon Bradstreete.
    Copy of deposition of Edward Youmans, sworn, 21:9:1662, before Simon Bradstreete, taken from Salem court records by Hillyard Veren, clericus.

    Copy of evidence in the action, John Godfry v. Jonathan Singletary, taken from Salem court records of 25:9:1662, made by Hillyard Veren, cleric.

    John Wooddum, Theophilus Wilson and Robert Lord, marshal, testified that when Jonathan Singletary and John Godfry were in said Wilson's house, Singletary was answering the said Godfry for the executions for which he was put into prison and agreed to end all, but Jonathan said, 'if I answer for all it may be when I com to haverell the counstable will serve them.' Godfry said he would give him an acquittance for them, so when the goods were delivered to John Godfry, Singletary put an attachment upon thme in an action of review. Sworn in court.

    Richard Singletary and Susanah, his wife, deposed, 20:1:1662-3, that John Godfre being occasionally at their house said, concerning the corn in controversy, that he thought he should never get it of Goodman Clarke for he would pay him in papers as he did the last year. Godfry said sever times, 'I had rather it were in a heape in ye streete & all ye towne hogges should eate it then he should keepe it in his hands.' Sworn, 27:1:1663, before Simon Bradstreete.

    Copies of depositions of Susan Singletary and Susana Singletary, sworn, Nov. 22, 1662, before Simon Bradstreet, taken from Salem court records by Hilliard Veren, cleric."

    1663 March

    "John Godfery v. Jonathan Singletary"
    (Internet, 2004: Salisbury Quarterly Court: Records & Files)
    March 1663
    p. 55

    "John Godfry was allowed costs, having been attached by John Singletary in an action of review, and no action entered." "John Emery, Elizabeth Emery, and Jonathan Singletary were publicly enjoined to appear at the next session."

    Another daughter, Mary [#2] Singletary, was born 3 February 1663/1664 in Haverhill to Jonathan according to vital records. (HOYT, p. 317) Mary Dunham (alias Singletary) would live to marry William Ellison (HOYT, p. 317, merely says "Ellison.

    On 15 March 2004, Patricia Junkin posted this information to the [email protected] Discussion List:

    "In 1665, Philip Carteret having been appointed governor of New Jersey, settled at Elizabethtown, which he made the seat of his government, dispatched agents into New England to publish the constitution and invite emigrants....several from Newbury.. settled in a township, which, in honor of the Rev. John Woodbridge of Newbury, was called Woodbridge..among the emigrants: Capt. John Pike, Thomas Bloomfield, Stephen Kent, George March, John Bloomfield, Nathaniel Webster. In that same year Jonathan Singletary and John Pike testify concerning a fence in Haverhill.

    Sometime between this and 1670, Jonathan removes to Woodbridge where a grant of land is made to Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary if he is to build a grist mill. The wording indicates he may have been previously in Woodbridge and he may very well have moved with his in-laws, the Bloomfields. It is at this point we find the first references to him as an 'alias.' "

    The Dutch surrendered to England in 1664.
    (Source: Internet, 2004, Chapter IV: THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN NEW JERSEY)

    In 1665, Philip Carteret (1639-1682), was commissioned by Sir George Carteret, his fourth cousin, as the first English colonial governor of New Jersey. He arrived in the colonies in 1665 and organized New Jersey as an English colony. There were colonial disputes over land titles and rebellions by tenant farmers. After the division of New Jersey in 1676, he was made governor of East Jersey. Philip Carteret was imprisoned by Sir Edmund Andros with disagreement over the right to collect custom duties. However, he was eventually restored to his governorship by the Duke of York (James II).

    Then around 1665, Jonathan and Mary removed to Woodbridge, Middlesex County, New Jersey with the BLOOMFIELD family. (HOYT, p. 317...abt. 1665) Apparently with the move came a surname change to DUNHAM, perhaps for anonymity and a different way of life, or perhaps for another reason lost forever in time.

    In 1668 thirteen men took the oath of loyalty to the English governor.

    Unis Dunham (alias Singletary) was born 1668-1669 probably in Woodbridge, Middlesex Co., NJ. Her death is recorded below which indicates she was in her 17th year. (DALLY, p. 327)

    1669 June 1
    Charter of the town of Woodbridge was granted by Gov. Philip Carteret. He had stipulated that a minimum of 60 families be settled and that a town quitrent be paid.
    (Source: Internet, 2004, Woodbridge, Middlesex Co., New Jersey, USA

    abt. 1670
    About 1670, Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary received a grant of land (270 acres) apparently on the condition that he is to build a grist mill.


    In New Jersey, Jonathan erected a grain mill in 1670, and here he appears to have led a respectable life for a time. Information from Roger Singletary, 14 Mar 2004, indicates the mill was located on Papiac Creek near Woodland, NJ and owned 213 acres of land in Woodbridge, NJ. A mill in the area would certainly have brought prosperity and growth to Woodbridge. A mill would have been a fundamental asset to the people in the area and surrounding areas in that time period. In itself, he, as proprietor, would have certainly added to his leadership in the area.

    During the Provincial and Colonial Eras.
    by Oliver B. Leonard
    Plainfield, NJ
    MONNETTE, Orra Eugene, FIRST SETTLERS of YE PLANTATIONS of PISCATAWAY and WOODBRIDGE, OLDE EAST NEW JERSEY, 1664-1714, The Leroy Carman Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1930, p. 194: Genealogical Notes of the Dunham Family: Dunhams of Woodbridge
    "As early in the Proprietary period of East New Jersey as 1670, reference is made in the old town book to 'Jonathan Dunham, alias Singletary, and Mary his wife, formerly of Hauesall [Haverhill] in ye Massachusetts colony.' It is recorded of him that grants of lands were made in his name in consideration of his building the first grist mill in Woodbridge Township during 1670-1, his toll to be 1/16 of the grist. The same year May 18 and following, Jonathan Dunham was a member of a jury sitting at Elizabethtown, and in 1671 he officiated as foreman of another jury. He became an influential citizen possessing sufficient acquired property holdings to entitle him to honorable political distinction."

    Courtesy of: Audrey Shields Hancock
    Thanks to Dave Shields of Long Island for being the HANCOCKs escort & tour guide.

    October 2000

    An old millstone
    from Jonathon SINGLETARY-DUNHAM's mill
    appears on the grounds
    of the Trinity Episcopal Church,
    Woodbridge, Middlesex Co., NJ

    "The old mill (built by Dunham in 1670) stood for many years, grinding for the comfort of several generations, and old timbers and mills stones used, were in existence in 1870." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    On 15 March 2004, Patricia Junkin posted this information to the [email protected] Discussion List:

    "From 1670, he [Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary] is Forman of the Jury, Overseer of Highways, refuses to obey the commands of the new Dutch controlled government and defends the interest of Woodbridge in a boundary dispute."


    "The same year [1671] in which Jonathan Dunham acted as a foreman of jury trying his peers for violation of law, he was chosen as overseer of Highways." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    "1671 Dec 28. Return of Survey by Robert Vauquellin, Surveyor General, of land for Jonathan Donham of Woodbridge (NJ Archives, 21:19)"

    Jonathan and Mary's brick home is said to have been built in 1671. "The residence of the Woodbridge miller was originally constructed of brick brought from Holland and used as ballast by the vessels. The house was standing for just two hundred years and looked so weird and strange that some were glad to see the builders reconstructing it, while others were sad when they saw the landmark disappear." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195) This excerpt appears to be telling us that a great renovation of the home of Jonathan Dunham occurred, but no date was given for this transformation except that 200 years later would mean ca 1871. We have no picture of this supposedly weird structure. Today (2000) the home serves as a rectory for the Trinity Episcopal Church. What a story could be told, if those walls could talk!

    Courtesy of: Audrey Shields Hancock
    Thanks to Dave Shields of Long Island for being the HANCOCKs escort & tour guide.
    October 2000

    Rectory of the Trinity Episcopal Church
    Once the home of Jonathan SINGLETARY-DUNHAM, the miller


    In 1672, Jonathan is said to have officiated as Clerk of the Township Court. (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    "1672 August 10. Patent. The Lords Proprietors to Jonathan Donham of Woodbridge carpenter for: 1) a houselot of 9 acres E. of the Meeting House Green; 2) 48 acres W. of the parsonage lands, N. of Thomas Lenard; 3) 120 acres of upland N. of Wilyam Cotter; 4) 36 acres of meadows not yet laid out." (NJ Archives, 21:19)

    "Freeholders: Jonathan Dunham, 1672, 213 acres"
    (MONNETTE, Pt. 4, p. 500: DALLY)

    "Jonathan Dunham the Son of Jonathan Dunham alias Singltary [sic] and Mary his wife and formerly of Haverell [sic] in the Massachusetts Collony [sic] was Born ye 24th of September Anno 1672." (DALLY, p. 327) A later entry (DALLY, p. 327) says: "The above said Jonathan Dunham Departed this Life September ye 6th 1706." This would be Jonathan Dunham, s/o Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary). (DALLY, p. 327)
    Note the reference to Jonathan as "Dunham alias Singleterry" in this vital record.

    1673 June 7

    On 7 June 1673 Thomas Blumfeild [Bloomfield] senior, father-in-law of Jonathan Dunham, and Jonathan Dunham [alias Singletary] himself were elected Representatives to the General Assembly of Woodbridge, NJ, and they took oaths. (New York Genealogical & Biographical RECORD, Vol. LXVIII, 1937, p. 58: THOMAS BLOOMFIELD OF WOODBRIDGE, NJ AND SOME OF HIS DESCENDANTS: Cites NJ Archives Vol. 21, p. 34 & Whitehead's History of Perth Amboy, NJ, p. 357)

    1673 July 20
    According to Dunham-Singletary Genealogy by Kenneth Royal Dunham, p. 42, "Stephen Kent Jr. of Woodbridge deeded to Jonathan Dunham 'alias Singletary of the same place, for part of his house-lot meadows on Papyack Creek, adjoining grantee, S. of the road to grantee's mill etc.'" Here we note that Jonathan is referred to as being "alias Singletary," and records of him in New Jersey appear to always indicate an alias.


    MONNETTE, Orra Eugene, FIRST SETTLERS of YE PLANTATIONS of PISCATAWAY and WOODBRIDGE, OLDE EAST NEW JERSEY, 1664-1714, The Leroy Carman Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1932, pp. 500-501: DUNHAM GENEALOGY: cites NJ Archives, Vol. 21, p. 277)

    "1673, July 20. Deed. Stephen Kent, junior of Woodbridge to Jonathan Dunham alias Singleterry of the same place, for part of his houselot meadow on Papyack Creek, adjoining grantee, S. of the road to grantee's mill, 2 acres on the Northside of said road 2 a. more."

    "In Woodbridge, it's pretty well acepted that the location of Jonathan's Grist Mill is unknown. I think the location of certain creeks and mill runs have been covered, relocated, moved or dryed up. The information about the location, describes terrain which no longer exists. People have been looking for years, and I would guess that developement has covered up any clues to it's whereabouts."
    (Source: Internet, 19 Mar 2004, [email protected]: David M. Shields of Long Island)

    "The situation of land is in a deed from Stephen Kent to Jonathan; the mill on the northerly side of the highway that went through a horse lott to Jonathan's mill....bounded by Samuel Dennis....on Papynik Creek "and a very little branch running out of it.." Have the original as much as it can be said to be the original."
    (Source: Internet, 19 Mar 2004, [email protected]: Patricia Junkin: Original from NJ Archives)

    By force of arms on 30 July 1673, the discontented Dutch retook New York. The English colonists were said to have had much trouble with Governor Carteret, now the former governor. "John Ogden and other deputies from Elizabethtown, Newark, Woodbridge, Piscattaway, Middletown, and Shrewsbury, petitioned the Dutch for a hearing, upon which, the latter granted the colonists all their former priveleges. The Dutch Generals and Council of War made John Ogden 'Schout' or Sheriff of the six towns, on Sept. 1, 1673, and on the same day he and Samuel Hopkins were directed to take an inventory of the estate of the late Gov. Carteret."
    (Source: Internet, 2004, Ogden Family: John Ogden)


    Jonathan Dunham from Jonathan Singletary

    MONNETTE, Orra Eugene, FIRST SETTLERS of YE PLANTATIONS of PISCATAWAY and WOODBRIDGE, OLDE EAST NEW JERSEY, 1664-1714, The Leroy Carman Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1932, p. 500: DUNHAM GENEALOGY: cites DALLY, p. 51

    "In the meeting of July 2d, 1674, the Piscataway trouble came up again. Daniel Denton and John Gilman, in behalf of the town, had begun a suit against the Woodbridge settlers in order to obtain the upland and meadow in dispute between them. The boundary line which separated the one township from the other had been drawn by Vanquellen, so that the coveted territory was thrown in the corporation of Woodbridge. The Piscataway people regarded this as unjust, and bitter feeling grew up between the sister towns as a consequence, manifesting itself in acts of petty spite--as we have previously related. This suit was the culmination of the Piscataway wrath. The Court for the trial was to be hld in Elizabethtown, on the 7th of July, and this special Town Meeting was occupied in getting ready for it. Capt. John Pike, Lieut., Samuel Moore and Jonathan Dunham were appointed by the Magistrates (and approved by the Freeholders) to be the attorneys for defending the interests of Woodbridge."

    "David Dunham the Son of the aforesaid Jonathan Dunham and Mary his wife was Born March ye 10th Anno. 1674" (DALLY, p. 327) (HOYT, p. 317, merely states "David.")

    "His acquaintance with persons and property in Woodbridge secured him the responsible position in 1674" as being an "Accessor or Rate-maker." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    "In settling the controversy between Woodbridge and Piscataway, over a disputed claim of the latter for some upland and meadow, in July 1674, Jonathan Dunham was appointed one of the attorneys for defending the interests of his town." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 196)

    1674 October
    After an absence of two years, Captain Philip Carteret returned to Elizabethtown from England. This ended the Dutch occupation that had occurred from July 1673 to November 1674. The newly appointed governer, Col. Edmund Andros, a relative of Carteret, arrived on the same ship. Sir George Carteret was confirmed via a royal mandate as the sole proprietor of East Jersey. (See: The Avalon Project at Yale Law School: His Royal Highness's Grant to the Lords Proprietors, Sir George Carteret, 29th July, 1674) This mandate was the basis for full control and thus the people were deprived of their original land grants made by former Governor Nicholls. All settlers were required to apply April 1st to May 15th, 1675 for resurveys and new patents, or have their lands and property confiscated.

    Information on Sir George Carteret
    Sir George Carteret
    Sir Georg Carteret 1599-1679
    Sir George Carteret
    Sir George Carteret 1615-1680
    Grant to Berkeley and Carteret

    1674/1675 Feb 1
    "On 1 Feb 1674/75 Jonathan Dunham was named one of the executors of the will of Obediah Winter, alias Grabum, of Woodbridge. (NJ Archives, 21:37)"3


    In 1675, Jonathan is said to have officiated as Clerk of the Township Court. (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195)

    Again in 1675, Jonathan Dunham with Samuel Dennis was again elected Representative of Woodbridge. (NYG&B RECORD, Vol. LXVIII, 1937, p. 58: THOMAS BLOOMFIELD OF WOODBRIDGE, NJ AND SOME OF HIS DESCENDANTS: Cites NJ Archives Vol. 21, p. 34 & Whitehead's History of Perth Amboy, NJ, p. 357)

    1675 September 21
    Was Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary) the same person as one Jonathan Dunning (alias Singletary) as some say, who was involved in the King Phillip's War?

    In 1676 the colony was divided between Carteret and a company of English Quakers who had obtained the rights belonging to John Berkeley (Lord Berkeley).


    "Nathaniel Dunham the Son of the Said Jonathan and Mary his wife was Born February ye 8th Anno. 1677" "Deceased May ye 14th Anno. 1678." (DALLY, p. 327)(HOYT, p. 317, merely gives one "Nathaniel," when in reality there were two.)

    On Sept. 7, 1677 John Ogden and Samuel Hopkins "complained that Robert Lapriere had removed divers goods from the house of Philip Carteret, which he refused to restore, and his arrest was ordered. Schout John Ogden was further ordered to summon James Bollen, 'late Secretary of the Province of New Yersey,' who must give up his papers within ten days under forfeiture of his property. Lapriere and one John Singletary, charged with disobeying commands, were arrested by Schout Ogden and sent to New York. They were examined on the 9th by Council, and four days later, John Ogden being present, they were convicted. Singletary was fined £5 and put on good behavior, and Lapriere, who was Governor General, was convicted of sedition and banished."
    (Source: Internet, 2004, Ogden Family: John Ogden)

    Deacon John Dunham of Plymouth
    and His Descendants

    Isaac Watson Dunham

    (MYERS, p. 531)

    "Jonathan Singletary, with Robert Lapriere was arrested on the seventh of September, 1677, by John Ogden, sheriff of Achter Col Colony for removing goods from Governor Phillip Carteret's house." He is said to have been condemned for the act.

    "On the 16th of July preceding he had been ordered by the Council of War for Achter Colony to pay five pounds costs and punished as a mad-man." Two of the council members were Captain Benajah Dunham, of Piscataway and John Pike of Woodbridge, plus others.

    Achter Col Colony: (Achter Col was the name the Dutch used when referring to Hackensack River.) In 1641 the Achter Col Colony, little more than a trading post was established via a land grant from the Dutch West Indies Company to Myndert Myndertse of Amsterdam (aka "Van der Heer Nedderhorst). It extended northward from Newark Bay toward Tappan, N.Y (now a part of Bergen & Hudson Cos., NJ). "Accompanied by a number of soldiers, Myndertse occupied his purchase, established a camp, and proceeded to civilize the Indians by military methods. It is needless to say that he failed." It is said to have been destroyed by Indians in 1643. "He soon abandoned the perilous undertaking of founding a colony, returned to Holland, and the title to this grant was forfeited."

    (Source: Internet, 2004, Genealogical History Of Hudson And Bergen Counties New Jersey: EARLY SETTLERS OF HUDSON COUNTY – Part A)
    (Source: Internet, 2004, the story of bogota)

    "Nathaniel Dunham ye 2nd, the Son of the aforesaid Jonathan and Mary his wife Born April ye 10th anno. 1679" (DALLY, p. 327)

    "Benjamin Dunham the Son of ye aforesaid Jonathan and Mary his wife Born August ye 22nd Anno. 1681" (DALLY, p. 327)(HOYT, p. 317, merely states "Benjamin.")

    About 1682

    Between 1682 and 1689, he [Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary] is 'frequently abroad in parts remote...'. (Patricia Junkin, 15 Mar 2004, [email protected])

    During this time period, Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary returns to Massachusetts in about 1682 and again becomes embroiled in a curious set of circumstances with a young woman by the name of Mary Ross whose parents were John and Mary Rosse of Boston.
    (Patricia Junkin, 15 Mar 2004, [email protected])

    1683 April 9
    According to Dunham-Singletary Genealogy by Kenneth Royal Dunham, pp. 42-43, Stephen Kent Jr. of Woodbridge sold another piece of land of his deceased father's "on the side of Papyack Creek, N. of the water well of Jonathan Dunham." [He does not state that this section of land was sold to Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary) as was the land sold previously [20 July 1673] Jonathan.  ash]

    Records and family histories indicate Jonathan was evidently separated from his wife for lengths of time and perhaps during that time he became the vagabond suggested in previous stories and articles. Much to the dismay of Plymouth Colony fathers, Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary) appears to have taken up residence there. He was warned by authorities to return to his family because of his disruptive behavior and his wandering place to place. Evidently his sojourn in Plymouth did not meet well with the inhabitants as his unruly and rascally behavior got him into serious trouble with the law. He was accused of "deseminating" corrupt principles, of "drawing away" another man's wife and doing as she bade him to do. Records indicate that John (at Mary Ross's bequest) shot and killed a dog of John Irish, at Little Compton, and that John & Mary made a fire at the house, threw the dog upon the fire, and burned other things in the house. He also is said to have discharged a gun in the home. For this action, the Court sentenced John to a public whipping at the post, and banished him from the Colony. Should he return, he was to be whipped and banished each time. Mary Ross was sentenced to be whipped and banished to her mother's home in Boston.

    The following Court Record of Plymouth, Massachusetts validates what has been said. So it would seem that Jonathan may have returned home to his wife and family soon after this encounter.

    COURT ORDER: Jonathan Dunham
    Gratia (Dunham) Mahony
    "Transcribed from the book as exactly as possible."
    19 April 2004
    Records of the Colony of New Plymouth in New England
    Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, M.D.
    Originally published in Boston in 1856
    Volume VI
    pp. 113-114

    Court Session July 1683, Govr. Hinckley
    "Wheras Jonathan Dunham, allies Shingleterry, hath longe absented himselfe from his wife and family, tho advised and warned by authoritie to repaire to them, and for some considerable time hath bine wandering about from place to place as a vagabond in this collonie, alsoe deseminating his corrupt priniples, and drawing away annother mans wife, following him vp and downe against her husbands consent; and att last hee meeting with and accompaning a younge woman called Mary Rosse, led by inthewsiasticall power, hee said hee must doe whatt shee bad him, and according did, both of them, on her motion, att the house of John Irish, att Little Compton, kill his dogg, against the declared will of the said Irish; and although hee put them out of his house, yett they would goe in againe; and according to theire anticke trickes and foolish powers, made a fier in the said house, and threw the dogg vpon it, and shott of a gun seuerall times, and burnt some other thinges in the house, to the hazard of burning of his house and younge children, keeping the dores and not opening them to the said John Irish when hee come with some of his naighbours to rescue the same; to the disturbance of his maties peace comaunded, and aganst his lawes.

    This Court centanced the said Jonathan Dunham to be publickly whipt att the post, and required him to depart forth with out of this collonie, which if hee delay to doe, hee shalbe tooke vp by the constable where hee doth vnessesarily stay, and be againe whipt and sent out of the collonie; and soe serued as oft as hee shall vnessesaryly returne into it to deseminate his corupt principles.

    And the said Mary Rosse, for her vnciuell and outrageous railing words and carriages to the Deputie Gour, and afterwards before the whole Court, superaded to her former anticke actings as aforsaid, is centanced to be whipt and conveyed from constable to constable out of this gourment towards Boston, where her mother dwells."

    [Note from [email protected]: Patricia Junkin, 7 April 2004, indicates the above is also transcribed in Dunham, Isaac Watson, Dunham Genealogy..., 1907, p. 42. She also states the transcription is found in the Woods and Baxter book, Court of Elections at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in the session of July, 1682.]

    It appears that sometime after his trial and punishment, Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary), returned to his family at Woodbridge.

    1689 December 2
    Jonathan Dunham and wife Mary signed over a deed for "A dewlling House and About six acres of Land with all other appurtenances & premises, scituate __in this within written conveyance..." to Mary Ross. James Seaton, a married man, signed as a witness who became entangled in a liason with Mary Ross before, during, or after this deed was conveyed to Mary Ross.

    [Copy courtesy of: Daryl VerStreate Jr., April 2004]
    Transcribed by Isaac Watson Dunham
    Deacon John Dunham of Plymouth, Massachusetts 1589-1669
    His Descendants
    Bulletin Print, Norwich, Conn., 1907,
    pp.40-77: Thomas Dunham
    pp. 43-44
    Perth Amboy, New Jersey
    Vol. V, Book D.D.

    "Woodbridge in East Jersey, December the Second Anno Domini one thousand Six hundred Eighty and Nyn. Know all men by these presents that I Jonathan Dunham of the Province, Town and Corporation above said with the Consent of Mary my wife. In consideration of a certain sum of Current Silver Money of Boston in New England the tenth day of August last past in Boston by us then and there Received and more Money Goods and Merchandise the Second day of November Last past here to us in hand and secured. The Receipt whereof I doe herby Acknowledge myself to be fully satisfied with and for other good and just Causes me thereunto moving have Given Granted and Sold unto Mary Ross formerly of Boston in New England, the daughter of John and Mary Ross formerly of Boston aforesaid, the which said Mary Ross now in this place Residing I the said Jonathan Dunham hath from me my heirs, executors and Assigns for Ever Alienated and to her said Mary Ross Granted bargained and Sold enfossed and confirmed and delivered unto her possessione my late dwelling place in Woodbridge with all that part of my house lot on the South side of the highway where the said House is now standing wiht a frmae for a dwelling house foure and twenty foot Square in Length bredth and height under the Top of the Roof and a frame for a Merchants Shop twelve foot square in Length bredth and height under the Top of the Roof to the frame of the said house as Near the Creek River or Water side as may be without Annoyance of floods and accomplished with all convenient speed the said Dunham being not to build any other frame for any other persone till this aforesaid he done on the said land which contained about six acres more or less of Upland Low ground, pasture and marsh with all fencings Edifices and Buildings Gardens Enclosures Apple trees and other trees Timber Wood Water stones Oar Mines and Minerals (the fifth part of Gold and Silver only excepted) with all outlets inlets and passages by land or water with all Improvements thereon made and all appurtenances and priviledges thereonto belonging And also my Freehold in this Town and Corporation of Woodbridge all aforesaid Privilledges premised from hence forth to be and Remaine in and unto the peaceable possession Improvement and sole disposal of the said Mary Ross her husband, her heirs, Executors Administrators and Assigns for ever as she shall see cause to order and dispose the same free from any former bargains sale mortgage or Intaignelement what soever without Sett disturbances or Mollestation by me the said Jonathan Dunham or Mary my wife or any of our heirs ever Laying Claims from by or under us or our heirs or by any of ours or their means approbation Sufferance or procurement and to their Warranty making good this sale and performance of ye premises herein contained. Wee the said Jonathan and Mary Dunham doe buid [bind] ourselves our heirs Executors and Assigns as witnes our hands here annexed and seales affixed
    Jonathan Dunham   Mary Dunham
    signed sealed and delivered in the presence of James Seatoun [Seaton/Seatown] & Ja. Emmott.

    1689 Dec 12
    A deed of trust from Jonathan Dunham to James Seaton involved property on Canoo Hill, which Seaton was to hold in trust for Jonathan's sons: Jonathan, David, and Benjamin Dunham. At the present, no one knows or understands why this trust was made.

    Rebecca (Adams) Seaton, wife of James Seaton, requests separation from her wayward husband, who has apparently taken Mary Ross as a common-law wife.

    1692/1693 March 13
    James Seaton's wife divorced him for desertion and adultery.

    "He {Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary] returned to Woodbridge by 1693 and resumed a position of authority there; his encounters in Massachusetts doing seemingly little harm to his reputation."
    (Patricia Junkin, 15 Mar 2004, [email protected])

    1693 January 13
    Mary Ross appears to reassign to Jonathan Dunham (alias Singletary) and his wife, Mary, the property given in deed dated 2 December 1689 as "Instrument to Jonathen Dunham to bee his owne voluntaire.."

    Mary Ross' Testimony Transcription
    Research & Transcription
    Courtesy of:
    Patricia Junkin
    (Credit given as requested. Thank you, Patricia.)
    6 April 2004
    as posted at [email protected]
    1693 January 13
    Instrument to Jonathen Dunham to bee his owne voluntaire Act & Deed before me John Pike
    [This is a record of which is written on the back of a Deed of Conveyance [See conveyance above...ASH] from Jonathan Dunham and Mary Dunham his wife to Mary Ross Recorded Liber D Folio (95), New Jersey State Archives]

    New Yorke Januarie the thirteenth Day Anno Dom: one Thousand six hundred and ninety three, Know all Men by These Presents Writeing on the back of this written ded of conveyance (bearing the date December the second Anno Dom one thousand six hundred Eightie nine) of A dewlling House and About six acres of Land with all other appurtenances & premises, scituate __in this within written conveyance Is expressed As by Jonathan Dunham of Woodbridge In the province of East New Jersey Carpenter and Mary his wife & was made unto mee Mary Ross the Daughter of John & Mary Ross formerly of Boston In New England. I the sayd Mary Ross with the Sayd Jonathan and his wife Mary Being at Boston in my Mother¹s House and minded to travel with them, being by her comitted to theire Christian Care, some years before the Conveyance was made & at its makeing, being with them at Woodbridge with childe by one Abraham Albin of Woodbridge ____ Aforesaid In which condition & the sharp cold of the then present winter etc. I could not without too much hazard then Admitt of an Imediate transport to Boston, ___ was then Like to bee urged hard upon mee, for prevention of which with the Illness that might fllwow, The sayd Jonathan according to trust Reposed in him, as Remains thereof, made this sayd conveyance to mee, I ____Enjoying that neither hee nore ___should suffer loss thereby, but that I would give him the sayd deed of conveyance with All its appurtenances & premises to bee full at his dispose ___they were before it was made; which accordingly before I enter marriage _____believe that I have done it, hee the sayd Jonathen _____helped mee throught the said winter I being with child and by the giveing & ___ following providing both mee and my childe but ______ In the case thereof when in the great trials of Spirit & body that ___met with,--I lost almost all my owne & my childes ___-according to my offer? then made of __esgning up the sayd Deed? with that & then ____with all my Interest therein to him the sayd Jonathan, if hee would but supply me with a few cloaths. In my then present want, for myself & childe and help mee on my way to Boston which then before Justice Samuel Hale I offer & hee accepted & performed partly by selling one Cow & A calfe & one yoake of fatt oxen for cloathes & monie to help mee on my Journey and partly by three pounds fifteen shillings hee payd to John Gibb for my transportation to Coles Harbour at the Narragansett Land & fuirnishing the said vessel with provisions & his own helpe In sayling--and partly otherwise, helping mee then forthwith far beyond what I then proposed and hee ccepted before the sayd Justice Hale and John Blumfield ___wherway Also this present the first of October one thousand six hundred & ninety viz the End of the sumer Aforesaid to whome for keeping between the sayd Jonathan & I in my present Straite I then delivered the within written deede of conveyance made by the sayd Jonathan Donham to me the sd Mary Ross of the within mentioned part of his house lott In Woodebridge with the dwellling house & all other th premises appurtenances & privileges therein Expressed Now Know Yee, that upon the Good Just and Lawfull considerations here above Expressed I the sayd Mary Ross for my self my Heires Exeators Administrators & Assignes have Resigned up and by this presents wrieing doe Resigne up all my right Title Interest In this forsayd deede of conveyance I ____ I In all respects relating thereunto In the same estte right title and enjoyment hee had & was In before the sayd conveyance to mee was made, the whole & sole dispose the house Land Freehold and All therein to me and mine granted henceforth to be & remaine unto the peaceable use and behoof of him the sayd Jonathen Dunham his Heires and Asigned forever free from anyMolestatione pretense of claime thereto made by mee my Heires Executors Administrators or Assignes or by mee or any of theire means of procurements by any other person or persones claiming from by or under me, or any of them. In witness whereof I have hereunto my hand annexed & my seale affixed Mary Ross her MR marke Signed sealed and delivered In the presence oof Mary Grigs her M marke, Elizabeth Hill her EH marke The agreement Resigning up to Jonathan Donham this written bill of sale with all he Right Title & claime of Marie Rose to the premises therein mentioned as is Abovee sd was by heer the sd. Mary Ros owned to be her owne free and solitary __& deede before me Samuel Hale, John Blumfield

    1702 New Jersey became a crown colony in 1702 with administration under the royal governor of New York. It wasn't until 1738 that New Jersey was separated from New York.

    1702 April 16


    Essex Deeds, Vol. 15, p. 202

    "Woodbridge in East New Jersey, America, April ye sixteenth anno Dom one thousand seven hundred & two know all men by these presents yt we Jonathan David Nathaniel and Benja Dunham alias Singletary & Mary Ellison ye sons & ye daughter of our honored Father and mother Jonathan & Mary Singletary alias Donham, our said Father being ye son of Richard and Susanna Singletary, who some years since Decd at Haverhill in the collony of ye Massachusetts Bay in America and our said mother being ye daughter of Thomas and Mary Bloomfield formerly of Newbury in ye aforesd collony who some years since In this Town of Woodbridge wherein we all are now living Inhabitants Deceased we all of us being of full age & Estate of men & women & we being all the children that our said Father & Mother have now living & ye said Mary ye mother of these aforesd five children I having Buried others five with ye consent of my husband I have Joyntly with my above named five Living Children and they and each one of them with me have Joyntly & severally & hereby do Joyntly & severally nominate Desire Constitue appoint & Impowere ye aforsd Jonathan ye son of ye aforsd Richard ye husband of me ye sd mother & ye father of us ye above named five living children viz Jonathan, David, Nathaniel & Benjamin Donham, alias Singletary & Mary Ellison. To alienate from our heirs & forever & from all & each one of us & ye all & every part & percell of yt upland Low land & meadow land & ye premises withall ye rights appurtenances and privileges thereto belonging and any manner of way appertaining lying & being within ye bonds of ye Town of Haverhill In ye Colony abovesd To us and each one of us Immediately mediately directly or Implicitely given granted & any manner of way to us conveyed by ye aforesd Richard Singletary ye honored Father in Law to me ye said mother and grandfather to us ye above named five children as by his deed of conveyance entered in ye Records for ye County of Norfolk In ye aforesd Collony and on ye Books kept for ye town of Haverhill may more particularly appear and for all ye said Land together or In parts & parcels as he shall se fitt we ye aforesd Constitutes do hereby give unto ye said Jonathan son of ye said Richard & Susannah full power and authority In his own name or In his own & our names as he shall see fitt to sign seal & deliver a deed or deeds of sale gift grant or conveyance for part or ye whole of ye said land & premises & in such manner and form and with such warrantee as he with ye grantees shall agree upon & ye same to enfeoffe In & Confirm upon ye said Grantee or grantees & into their possession to deliver as freely fully amply & absolutely as all of us being present & together with him ye said husband and father could & might do as also if he shall thinke fitt either before in or after ye conveyance of ye said land & premises, either by himself or by any other person or persons by him empowered by letter or letters of attorney to commence & enter & prosecute to ye utmost effect any action or actions, etc.

    Signed by
    Mary Donham M[ark] alias Singletary
    Jonathan Donham M[ark] alias Singletary
    David Donham M[ark] alias Singletary
    Nathaniel Donham M[ark] alias Singletary
    Benjamin Donham M[ark] alias Singletary
    Mary Ellison

    John Pike
    Elisha Parker

    Ack: Apr. 18, 1702, before Samll. Hale, Justice of the Peace; Thomas Pike, Town Clerk of Woodbridge."

    (Also found on-line at: The Parentage of Jonathan Dunham alias Singletary)

    There seems to be overwhelming evidence that for whatever reason, JONATHAN SINGLETARY of Massachusetts, was, in fact, the one and same JONATHAN DUNHAM of Woodbridge, Middlesex Co., NJ. "Why he changed his surname has not been explained. What may have been Jonathan Singletary's true character in early manhood among his New England ancestry, the writer cannot know. It is known that in New Jersey he was a respected and reputable citizen as Jonathan Dunham and commanded the esteem of his fellow townsmen." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195) "Mr. Dally, the Woodbridge historian has written that 'this Dunham was a man of great energy. When he determined upon an enterprise he pushed it forward to success with indomitable perserverance." (MONNETTE, Pt. 1, p. 195) This brings to mind a certain number of supposedly respected men of high influential power of the 19th & 20th centuries, who also practiced certain impropriaties within the realm of respectibility and still are accepted and placed upon a pedestal. Perhaps as time elapsed Jonathon mellowed in his attitudes and behaviors, and became a man of respectability, with his transgressions placed behind him.

    A memorial gravestone is placed in the front of Jonathan's house, now the rectory. This hopefully honors the good, respectable side of the ancestral grandfather of so many.

    Courtesy of: Audrey (Shields) Hancock
    Thanks to Dave Shields of Long Island for being the HANCOCKs escort & tour guide.
    October, 2000

    Memorial Marker for Jonathan Dunham

    About a half block away on the same grounds as Jonathan and Mary's homesite stands the Trinity Episcopal Church. This site we can probably safely assume was land once owned by the family, and where his children and grandchildren romped in the meadow. In the graveyard beside and in the rear of the church, we can find the DUNHAM surname and interrelated families engraved on gravestones of old.

    Courtesy of: Audrey (Shields) Hancock
    Thanks to Dave Shields of Long Island for being the HANCOCKs escort & tour guide.
    October, 2000

    Trinity Episcopal Church
    Woodbridge, Middlesex Co., NJ

    E-mail:  Audrey (Shields) Hancock

    Original Webpage Created: 10 April 2001
    Webpage Revised: 20 May 2004

    Tiny URL:

    Enter a long URL to make tiny: