Thursday, December 22, 2011

Line 13.4 John Dyer / Down by the River

While moving back and forth between Rhode Island and Massachusetts, the Dyers seemed to have to have gravitated to the “home” church. John Dyer was born in Rhode Island, home of the Baptist church and seems to have drove into the river and was baptized into that church.

John Dyer son of Samuel Dyer and his wife Mary Cotta, was born 27 December 1726 probably in North Kingstown, Rhode Island
John married Mary Hickey 1754 in Newport, Rhode Island.
John died 28 April 1784 in Sturbridge, Worcester, Massachusetts
John and Mary Dyer had the following known children:
1.   James Dyer born 23 April 1756. He died. He married Mary Marcy daughter of Moses Marcy and sister to Sybil Marcy.
2.    Thomas Dyer was probably born in Woodstock, Windham, CT around 1759-1761. He married Sybil Marcy daughter of Moses Marcy and sister to Mary Marcy. He died 26 March 1810 North Woodstock, CT
3.    Moses Dyer born 05 January 1764 in Woodstock, Windham, CT. He married Cynthia Adams. He died 1830 in Grantham, Sullivan, NH.
4.    Mary (Molly) Dyer born May 27, 1766 in Sturbridge, MA
5.    Ruth Dyer probably born in Sturbridge, MA. She married Martin Spencer.
6.    Susanna Dyer
7.    Tamar Dyer
8.    John Dyer
9.    Lucy Dyer

Researching the Dyers often brought about difficulty in that they seemed to settle in places that didn’t keep or preserve vital records. The issue of proving their lines is difficult because of this.  John was probably born in Rhode Island, as was his father. Once the line began to fall in place with some detective work on the part of several Dyer researches determining John’s faith story became a little bit clearer. I had began to wonder if in living in Rhode Island, John turned to the Baptist sect of Christianity over his historical Quaker one, especially since his great-something grandmother, Anne Hutchinson’s religious leanings were very similar to that of the Baptist. When it became clear that the early assumption that John Dyer of Rhode Island was our ancestor rather then the same named John who married Anna Payson, a search was on as to whom he married. A marriage record was found in the Second Baptist Church records of Newport Rhode between John Dyer and Mary Hickey in 1755, an event preformed by the Rev. Nicholas Eyres. Since Baptist leanings run in the Dyer line, this discovery by several other genealogists was an “ah-ha” moment in many ways. The Quaker Martyr’s line turned back to Roger Williams’ and Grandma Anne’s theology.

Sometime after the birth of their eldest son, James, the family moved to Windham, Connecticut or Massachusetts. Moses, their third child, was born in Woodstock, Massachusetts, as was possibly another child. In May of 1765 The Dyer family, consisting of John, his wife Mary and children James, Thomas and Moses moved to Sturbridge, Worcester County, Massachusetts when they were mentioned in the Worcester County, Massachusetts, Warnings a list of new settlers. “1765 Aug. 20 DYAR, John, w. Mary, ch. James, Thomas, Moses, from Woodstock. May 23, 1765."

The John “DYRE” of Sturbridge, who enlisted into the regiment there at the start of the Revolutionary War, is thought to have been my ancestor John Dyer, although he would have been about 50 years old at the time. John’s son James had already enlisted by the time John “Dyre” enlisted. Later, John’s two sons, Moses and Thomas would also enlist. John enlisted on 1 May 1775, less then a month after the Battle at Concord and Lexington started the Revolutionary War. The Dyers knew what was going on in Boston and other rebellious areas of Massachusetts, probably visiting the local tavern for news of impending events that lead to the war. John’s service in the rebellion was spastic as was that of most colonial soldiers. He serviced for three months and 8 days from his enlistment date but returned two months later on 7 Oct 1775. It is likely he came home for the harvest and then returned when the harvest was safely in the barn. A John Dyer is found in the Second Massachusetts Brigade under Captain Adam Martin in January 1778. It is reported that John was “sick in camp” In February to May of that year is reported as being on “fulough” possible to recover from his illness but also to be home for planting season. John then returned to serve as a private from May to August. He may have, again returned home for the harvest. No more records have been found for John Dyer. He may have felt he had done his duty or he have begun to feel his age.

During times of war, people tend to gravitate back to their faith. Hopefully this was true for John. The Revolutionary War was a hard war on its warriors. The colonial army was poorly paid and had little weaponry beyond what the soldiers supplied themselves. John was in his fifties and although that is not an old man, he was middle age and was probably much more affected by the cold and harsh conditions then a younger man. He certainly realized that Death was a close companion and that he could very well be standing before his Maker soon. His heritage was one of steadfast ancestors who took their faith very seriously and stood firm in the face of adversity. He very well may have taken comfort in his own steadfast faith.

John Dyer survived the war but only by about a year and a half. He must have been pleased that God spared his soldier sons. His estate papers were dated “1st of April 1784” although that is most likely a mistake, as he didn’t die until the end of April.  In part they read: “To the Hon. Joseph Dorr Judge of Probate...In We the Subscribers have made Choice of Roland Clark Junr. to Administrator on the Estate of John Dyer of Sturbridge Late Deceased which we suppose must be rendered Insolvent We your Humble Servants, James Dyer, Moses Dyer, Mary Dyer, Thomas Dyer." The war years must have cost John more then his health as he died in debt. The list of people he owed money to reads like an extended family gathering as not only was his son James Dyer is listed but Moses Marcy who was James’ brother-in-law and Jedediah Marcy Esq. who was James’ wife, Mary’s uncle. Interestingly, he also owned money to a Dr. James Walcott who may or may not have been related to the Walcotts who were the ancestors of Martha Ann Braman who would marry James Harvey Chubb a descendant of John Dyer. The estate papers also named John’s surviving children as James Dyer, Thomas Dyer, Mary Dyre, Moses Dyer, Ruth Spencer, John Dyre, Susanna Dyre, Tamar Dyre and Lucy Dyre.

1.   Estate Papers for John DYER
2.   Leslie McLain Dyer, Fort Lauderdale, FL
3.      "Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors in the War of the Revolution" page 125
4.   Marshall Johnson, 411-C Green Lanes, Harringay, London N4 1EY United Kingdom, E-mail:
5.   "Worcester County, Massachusetts, Warnings 1737-1788" intro Francis E.    Blake
6.   Internet
7.   Vital Records of Rhode Island 1636-1850, Newport Co., Vol. 4 by Arnold
8.   "Muster Roll Data Sheet"
9.   Series A. Case 18223, Administrator of estate of John Dyer
10. Newport RI town council records per Andrew Pierce On Fulough in New England" [MRDS] May-Aug, served as pvt. in Capt. Adam MARTIN's company from Sturbridge, MA. [MSR]

Saturday, December 3, 2011

Line 13.2 SamuelDyer Jr.; Back to the Established Faith

I suspect that Samuel Dyer Jr. at least had a leaning toward being a Quaker in his youth as his parents were both strong Quakers. However, in his adulthood Samuel’s, as well as some of his siblings turned back to the established church of Boston. Whether it was because their beliefs were leaning toward Calvinists rather then the Antinomians is hard to determine as Samuel went back to the more tolerant Rhode Island.

Samuel Dyer son of Samuel Dyer and his wife Anne Hutchinson, was born
Samuel married first Lydia Williams about 1687 in Boston, Suffolk, MA
He married second Mary Cotta, daughter of John Cotta and his wife Mary Moore and widow of Hugh Sampson.
He died 15 July 1724 in Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island and was buried in Common Burial, Newport, Newport, RI
Samuel and Lydia Williams Dyer had the following children:
1.      Lydia Dyer born 17 November 1689. She married John Simpson 17 March 1719/1720
2.      Elizabeth Dyer who married Samuel Knight 3 November 1712 in Boston
Samuel and Mary Cotta Dyer had the following children:
3.      Samuel Dyer born about 1691 in Boston, Suffolk, MA
4.      William Dyer in Boston, Suffolk, MA
5.      Mary Dyer born in Boston, Suffolk, MA
6.      Mary Dyer born 20 April 1699 in Boston, Suffolk, MA married John Thorning
7.      Anne Dyer born 30 May 1701 in Bristol, Bristol Co., Rhode Island and died there 11 June 1701
8.      Anne Dyer born 01 October 1702 in Bristol, Bristol Co., Rhode Island
9.      Edward Dyer born 20 April 1705 in Bristol, Bristol Co., Rhode Island

Samuel Dyer was born about 1665, probably in Boston, Massachusetts where his family was living at the time. He seems to have continued to live in Boston during his first marriage to Lydia Williams, the mother of his first two daughters. Lydia was the daughter of Joseph and Lydia Williams of Boston. Her two daughter, “Lydia Dyer of Boston, spinster” and Elizabeth, the wife of Samuel Knight of Boston were named in a deed her father’s made in 1712.

Samuel married his second wife, Mary the daughter of John Cotta who was a tailor and his wife Mary Moore. Mary Cotta was the widow of Hugh Sampson and had two sons, Jeremiah born in 1688 and Hugh Jr. born in 1690. Mary was named in her father’s will of January 1722/3 (proved 6 January 1723/4) as “daughter Mary wife of Samuel Dyer of Rhode Island”. Samuel gave a deposition which was undated stating that he was the husband of John Cotta’s daughter Mary, who was Mary Sampson, a widow in 1692. Samuel also mentions his stepson, Hugh Sampson.

Samuel and Mary moved with their children from Boston to Bristol, Rhode Island about 1700. Their three youngest children were born there. Samuel’s daughters by his first wife may not have gone with them when they went to Rhode Island. Or the two sisters may have gone back to Boston when they grew up as they were back in Boston in 1712. Elizabeth married there that year and Lydia a few years after that.

Samuel was a housewright or carpenter in Boston. He owned lands in Newport, which he sold in 1687 and 1722. The land he sold in 1687 to a Charles Dyer of Newport for 200 pounds, which included a house and orchard. Samuel had property and connections in both Massachusetts and Rhode Island. I have not been able to figure out if he continued in the Quaker faith or gravitated toward the more establish church in Boston. He was a member of the established church of Boston, which he joined with his second wife in 1691. Mary’s faith may have been the factor in the Dyer family joining with the Church of Boston but like many second and third generation colonist, Samuel’s zeal seems to have settled as the mystic of the new world became just home. Going back to Rhode Island may have been more of a financial move then a spiritual one. On the other hand Samuel lived out his life in Rhode Island. His grandmother, Mary Dyer had fled to this colony with the Hutchinsons and Roger Williams who is consider the founder of the Baptist Church. Maybe while in Rhode Island he embraced the Baptist following as several generations later, his descendant, Ida May Chubb Mendoza was a strong Baptist.  His children for several generations lived in Rhode Island continuing the Dyer connection to a colony started by religious rebels.

1.  New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Clarence Almon Torrey
2.  The American Genealogist Vol. XXII, "Some Untraced Dyers" by Helen L. Stark, of Penn Yan, NY
3.  Vital Records of Rhode Island 1636-1850, Bristol Co., edited by James H. Arnold.
4.  NEHGR April 1991 "The Ancestry of Katherine Hamby, Wife of Captain Edward Hutchinson of Boston, MA" by Wayne Howard Miller Wilcox, page 258
5. "The Wives of Samuel Dyer" by Frederick W. Wead, Esq., of Boston, MA, "The American Genealogist, page 163, Vol. ___, 19___
6.      Internet "Register Report - Hutchinson" by Sam Behling
7.      The American Genealogist, Vol. 22 #4, pp210-218, deed per Descendants of William & Mary (Barrett) Dyer of Rhode Island
8. Deed of Joseph Williams of Boston, dated 6 Dec 1712

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Line 13.1, Samuel Dyer, Son of a Martyr

Line 13.1
Samuel Dyer
Son of a Martyr

Samuel Dyer was the son of Mary Barrett Dyer. He must have lived a turbulent childhood, but had a strong role model in his mother, if not his father as well.

Samuel Dyer son of William Hutchinson and his wife Mary Barrett, was born
Samuel married Anne Hutchinson, daughter of Edward Hutchinson and his wife Catherine Hamby, and granddaughter of William and Anne Marbury Hutchinson
He died in Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island
Samuel and Anne Dyer had the following children:
1.      William Dyer born 07 March 1662/63 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. He died 22 July 1738, in Truro, Barnstable, MA. William married Mary Taylor in Barnstable, Barnstable, MA where Mary had been born in 1660.
2.      Samuel Dyer born 1665 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 15 July 1724 in Newport, Newport, RI. He married Mary Cotta.
3.      Nathaniel Dyer born 1667 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 21 April 1729 in Newport, Newport, RI. He married Elizabeth Parrott.
4.      Edward Dyer born 1770 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. and probably died in North Kingstown, Washington, RI and married Mary Greene.
5.      Elisha Dyer born 1672 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. in North Kingstown, Washington, RI
6.      Anne Dyer born about 1673 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. and died Newport, Newport, RI after 1717. She married Carew Clarke of Westerly, Washington, RI
7.      Henry Dyer born 1674 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. and died there before 1743. He married Mary Rice
8.      Barrett Dyer born 1678 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. and died there 07 December 1753 where he is buried in the South Burying, Boston, Suffolk, MA. He married 1. Hannah Steward, 2. Elizabeth Mann Bull and 3. Abigail Blake

Samuel Dyer was born 1635 in Boston, MA but lived part of his childhood and young manhood in Rhode Island. His Quaker teachings were evident in an October 11, 1659 court record that as far as the military was concerned he had a Quaker reaction. In 11 Oct 1659, Samuel and brother Mahershallahashbaz (is that a mouthful or what) came before the General Court of Trails in Portsmouth, Rhode Island, facing charges of “larceny against the state” because they refused to serve in the military. They spent some time in prison before their trail so when they were found guilty, the judge felt they had been punished enough. Quakers were and still are pacifist who refused to serve in the armed forces or take part in wars.

For all his Quaker upbringing and leanings, however, Samuel attended the Second Old North Church in Boston along with his most of his children. This church was officially known as Christ Church and was Boston’s second Anglican Church. The name “Anglican” at this time would have meant that church had English roots. It was still a
“puritan” church in 1635 and indeed until the end of the 17th century. The Puritan church, per say, decreased in prestige as the “cleansing” of the faith turned toward banishments, hanging and torture. A gentler faith emerged by the 18th century and the puritan church produced the Presbyterian denominations as well as being parent to the Congregational Churches in New England and later the rest of the United States. Some Unitarian congregations, as well, have puritan roots. However, in Samuel’s lifetime, the Puritans still had a strong hold on the religious sector of life in Boston and much of New England. Samuel seems to have been an active member of Christ Church and except for his run in with the “law” because of his pacifism, he must have conformed his beliefs to the Puritan church. Samuel’s family history and his own run in with the law, may have tempered his tongue if not his faith. The son of a woman hanged for her beliefs, might realize that a little conformity didn’t necessarily mean he had to give up the differences in his Christianity. It just meant he wasn’t so vocal about it. Christ Church now considers itself an Anglican Church, the Church of England, the very church that persecuted the Puritans. The irony of this is, of course, the very ideology that the Puritans were trying to escape, ended up replacing them. And the irony of Samuel Dyer’s Christianity is that he returned to the very religious structure that caused so much pain in his own family line. But eventually Samuel did leave Boston and returned to Rhode Island sometime after his youngest child was born.
In 1661, Samuel signed papers relating to Misquanicut lands in Narraganset County, Rhode, Island. His wife was left land in Narragansett in her father’s 1676 will and it may have been the natural thing to go back to Rhode Island. All but his oldest son returned with Samuel and Ann. Samuel died in North Kingston after 1678. Anne ended up in Newport, probably to live with one of her children, and died there in 1717.

1. Internet Frank E. Dyer
2. New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Clarence Almon Torrey
3. G. Michael Anthony, Oregon 1669
4. "William Dyer, a Rhode Island Dissenter---- from Lincoln or Somerset" by William Allan Dyer
5.] The True Story of Mary Dyer, New England Historical and Genealogical Register Vol. CIV Jan. 1950
6. Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island by John Osborn Austin, 1982
7. Second Supplement to Torrey's New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Melinda Lutz Sanborn
8. Family Tree Maker's Genealogy Site "Ancestors of Harold Wheeler Bradley" at
9.  NEHGR April 1991 "The Ancestry of Katherine Hamby, Wife of Captain Edward Hutchinson of Boston, MA" by Wayne Howard Miller Wilcox, page 258
10.  The Great Migration, Vol. II, C-F by Robert Charles Anderson and George Sanborn Jr. and Melinde Lutz Sanford, NHGS

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Line 13. William Dyer. A Martyr's Husband

A word needs to be put in for poor old William Dyer, the man who loved and tried to protect his strong-willed and determined wife. He is overshadowed by his dramatic wife, but nonetheless played an important part in the history of early Massachusetts and Rhode Island colonies.

William Dyer was the son of William Dyer of Kirby Lathrope, Lincoln, England
He married Mary Barrett 23 October 1633 at St. Martin-in-the-fields, London, England
William died after 1669 in Newport, Newport, RI

William was probably born in Kirby Lathrope, Lincolnshire, England that is now a tiny town with an old ancient church, a pub and not much more. William’s father was very prosperous yeoman and Churchwarden at the old church. William probably had a good education as he prospered himself being a “milliner” who sold imported goods from Milan, Italy and other artistic areas. In 1624/5 he was apprenticed to William Blackborne of London for a term of nine years. Mr. Blackborne was a fishmonger. It is not known how William became the apprentice to Mr. Blackborne but it may well have been through his Hutchinson relatives in Alford, Lincolnshire, England who had London connections. Eight years later in 1632, William signed a lease to rent space in the New Exchange which had been formally used by Mr. Blackbone. The lease was for two and a fourth years. It is not known exactly when William and Mary Dyer left for the colony of Massachusetts but interestingly enough they were there by 1635, which would have been at the end of the lease.

“Willyam Dyer milliner and Marie his wife” were admitted into the Boston church on 13 December 1635. In March of the next year, William became a freeman of Boston. They joined the church two years later on 15 November 1637 when the Rev. John Wilson was the pastor. Shortly after that, the lives of the Dyers, the Wheelwrights and the Hutchinsons would change forever. The Dyers choose to follow Anne Hutchinson’s teaching. The Boston church, feeling threatened by Mrs. Hutchinson’s theology, disenfranchised and disarmed her followers on 15 November 1637. William Dyer was among the men who were disarmed.

The Hutchinsons and Dyers are considered the founders of Portsmouth, Rhode Island, buying land from the local Indians. William Dyer remained active in the governing of the new colony, acting as Clerk of the Assembly in 1648, Attorney General in 1650-3 and Deputy to the General Assembly from Newport, Rhode Island in 1655 and 1662. He was Commander in Chief of the Naval Forces of Rhode Island, which was formed in order to combat against the Dutch in 1653.

William and Mary Dyer made their fateful trip to England in 1651. John Clarke, Roger Williams and William Dyer traveled along with Mary, to England in an attempt to revoke William Coddington’s governorship of Rhode Island. The attempt was successful and William Dyer returned to Rhode Island in 1653 with the news, leaving Mary behind to further her Quaker education. Interestingly enough, Coddington later became a Quaker as well.

William Dyer probably sat at the feet of George Fox, founder of the Religious Society of Friends or Quakers, along with Mary. He was a devote Quaker but not the zealot that Mary was. His life must have been roller-coaster ride of emotions, being on one hand proud of his dear wife’s determination and on the other fearful for her and what her dramatic nature would bring about. William’s letter of 30 August 1659 shows a loving husband who cared for his willful wife. He wrote:  Having received some letters from my wife, I am given to understand of her commitment to close prison to a place (according to description) not unlike Bishop Bonner's rooms ... It is a sad condition, in executing such cruelties towards their fellow creatures and sufferers ... Had you no commiseration of a tender soul that being wett to the skin, you cause her to thrust into a room whereon was nothing to sitt or lye down upon but dust .. had your dogg been wett you would have offered it the liberty of a chimney corner to dry itself, or had your hoggs been pend in a sty, you would have offered them some dry straw, or else you would have wanted mercy to your beast, but alas Christians now with you are used worse [than] hoggs or doggs ... oh merciless cruelties. You have done more in persecution in one year than the worst bishops did in seven, and now to add more towards a tender woman ... that gave you no just cause against her for did she come to your meeting to disturb them as you call itt, or did she come to reprehend the magistrates? [She] only came to visit her friends in prison and when dispatching that her intent of returning to her family as she declared in her [statement] the next day to the Governor, therefore it is you that disturbed her, else why was she not let alone. [What] house entered she to molest or what did she, that like a malefactor she must be hauled to [prison] or what law did she transgress? She was about a business justifiable before God and all good men.”
William’s letter continues with much grief at the treatment of his wife and her fellow Quakers but also questions her persecutor’s own theology. “Have you a law that says the light in M. Dyre is not M. Dyre's rule, if you have for that or any the fornamed a law, she may be made a transfresso', for words and your mittimus hold good, but if not, then have you imprisoned her and punisht her without law and against the Law of god and man ... behold my wife without law and against Law is imprison' and punished and so higly condemned for saying the light is the Rule! It is not your light within your rule by which you make and act such lawes for ye have no rule of Gods word in the Bible to make a law titled Quakers nor have you any order from the Supreme State of England to make such lawes. Therefore, it must be your light within you is your rule and you walk by ... Remember what Jesus Christ said, 'if the light that be in you is darkness, how great is that darkness.' “
William continued on for several paragraphs. If nothing else, William was a sound defender of his wife and of their faith. It is a letter of a man who holds his beliefs strongly and loves his strong-willed wife with conviction. He stood beside her in the battle between Boston and Anne Hutchinson’s teaching. He stood beside Mary again as Boston railed against her Quaker teachings.

William survived his wife by nearly ten years. He was left to raise his youngest children by himself. There must have been grief in the Dyer household, but there must also have been a pride in their wife and mother’s martyrdom and conviction.

My Dyer line:
William Dyer of Kirby Lathrope, Lincoln, England born about 1580
William Dyer 1609 – 1670s married Mary Dyer the Quaker Martyr
Samuel Dyer 1639 – 1677 married Anne Hutchinson 1643-1717
Samuel Dyer 1665-1724 married Mary Cotta 1668-1729
Samuel Dyer born 1695, wife unknown
John Dyer 1726-1784 married Mary Hickey 1735-1784
James Dyer 1756-1835 married Mary Marcy 1766-1844
James Dyer born 1781, wife unknown
Sarah Dyer 1808-1893 married Joel Chubb

1. Internet  Frank E. Dyer
2. New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Clarence Almon Torrey
3. New England Historical and Genealogical Register July 1940 page 300
4. "William Dyer, a Rhode Island dissenter---- from Lincoln or Somerset" by William Allan Dyer
5.  The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, Vol. CIV Jan 1950 "The True Story of Mary Dyer"
6. Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island by John Osborne Austin, 1982
7. Little Compton, Rhode Island by Benjamin Franklin Wilour, Vol. I
8. The Great Migration, Vol. II, C-F by Robert Charles Anderson and George Sanborn Jr. and Melinde Lutz Sanford, NHGS

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Line 12, Mary Barrett Dyer, More Rope in the Family Tree

Mary Barrett Dyer, friend of Anne Marbury Hutchinson and willing to die for her faith, was an emotional and determined woman who made her mark on America. Conflict seemed to follow her around but on the whole Mary was a woman who stood her ground, was faithful to her God and friends and who was would not quit.

Mary Barrett, daughter of unknown parents.
She married William Dyer 23 October 1633 at St. Martin-in-the-fields, London, England
She died 01 June 1660 in Boston, Suffolk County, Massachusetts
Mary and William Dyer had the following children:
1.   William Dyer born and died in London, Middlesex, England in October 1634
2.   Samuel Dyer who married Anne Hutchinson, granddaughter of Anne (Marbury) and William Hutchison and daughter of Edward and Catherine (Hamby) Hutchinson
3.   Daughter Dyer born 17 October 1637 in Boston, Suffolk, MA
4.   William Dyer born about 1642 in Boston, Suffolk, MA. He died about 1687 in Sussex Co., PA. He married Mary Walker and was the father of at least five children.
5.   Mahershalalhasbaz Dyer born 1643 in Newport, Newport, RI. He married Martha Pearce.
6.   Henry Dyer born about 1647 in Newport, Newport, RI and died there February 1689/90. He married Elizabeth Sanford, the daughter of John and Elizabeth Sanford
7.   Mary Dyer born about 1647 in Newport, Newport, RI and died Aft. 26 January 1678/79 in McHenry Ward, New Castle co., Delaware. She married Henry Ward and was the mother of at least two children.
Mary Barrett Dyer’s life was a life of legends, mystery and determined faith. Little is known about her early life, her birth or parentage. A supposed brother has been recently been discovered but aside from that her life before her marriage to William Dyer is a blank. For years there was speculation that she was the daughter of Lady Arabella Stuart by her secret marriage to Sir William Seymour. But this, though a romantic tale, has proven to be just that. What ever background Mary came from, she was a woman of great emotion and determination and equal to any drama a royal descendant could deliver. Mary was also a “comely” woman, as John Winthrop described her. It’s not hard to imagine this energetic woman, as the heroine in a dark drama. She had not only the personality for drama, but, most likely, the physical make up of a movie star.

 William Dyer married Mary Barrett in St. Martin-in-the Fields chapel in London, England on 27 October 1633. William must have been a dynamic man, himself, for he was not only a milliner in the New Exchange but also a member of the Fishmonger’s Company in London, England. In New England, he stood up for Mrs. Hutchinson and Rev. Wheelwright, along with Mary and in Rhode Island he served as Clerk of the Assembly, Attorney General and Deputy to the Rhode Island General Assembly. Both William and Mary were well educated and of good families.

Mary’s troubles in Boston began within a few years of arriving in the New World. Shortly before leaving England, she gave birth to a son named William who baptized in London on 24 October and buried three days later. Her second son, Samuel who would married the granddaughter of Anne Marbury Hutchinson, was born in Boston, a healthy child who would grow into a man and follow his mother’s religious footsteps. However, Mary’s third child was the most unfortunate of all. Mary was probably already a friend of Anne Hutchinson by the time she was carrying her third child. Anne, being a midwife, had probably helped her Mary through all her pregnancies in Boston. On October 17, 1637, Mary went into premature labor. Anne, Jane Hawkins and one other woman were called to help with the difficult birth, which produced a badly deformed and stillborn daughter. Because a deformed, dead child might be considered a punishment from God or an indication that Mary had been involved in witchcraft or other ungodly behavior, Anne, the other midwifes and William agreed to keep the birth and details secret. Anne sought advise from the Rev. John Cotton about how to deal with the burial of the child and whether the birth should be recorded. The Rev. Cotton didn’t hold to the belief that a deformed child was proof and punishment of the parents’ sins, advised Anne to bury the child secretly. English law said, "If any child be dead born, you yourself shall see it buried in such secret place as neither hog nor dog, nor any other beast may come unto it, and in such sort done, as it may not be found or perceived, as much as you may." Jane Hawkins and Anne Hutchinson burial of the child remained a secret for five months.

In November of 1637, Anne Hutchinson and her followers were disenfranchised. Mary and William Dyer were among her supporters. How it must have pained Mary to see her friend publicly scorned. In March the following year, Anne Hutchinson was excommunicated from the church. As she left the church, Mary Dyer walked with her. One woman outside the church asked, "Who is that woman accompanying Anne Hutchinson?" Someone else cried, “She is the mother of a monster!” John Winthrop on hearing this called John Cotton over and questioned him. John confessed that he and God and Anne Hutchinson had buried the stillborn child “too deep for dog or hog”. However, it wasn’t too deep for Winthrop who immediately ordered it exhumed. A large crowd watched as the decaying, deformed body was lifted from the ground. He later wrote about the “monster.”
    "It was a woman child, stillborn, about two months before the just time, having life a few hours before; it came hiplings [breach birth] till she turned it; it was of ordinary bigness; it had a face, but no head, and the ears stood upon the shoulders and were like an ape's; it had no forehead, but over the eyes four horns, hard and sharp, two of them were above one inch long, the other two shorter; the eyes standing out, and the mouth also; the nose hooked upward all over the breast and back, full of sharp pricks and scales, like a thornback; the navel and all the belly, with the distinction of the sex, were where the back should be; and the back and hips before, where the belly should have been; behind, between the shoulders, it had two mouths, and in each of them a piece of red flesh sticking out; it had arms and legs as other children; but, instead of toes, it had on each foot three claws, like a young fowl, with sharp talons."

With, no pity from the people of Boston, the poor body of her stillborn child, sealed Mary’s fate. Winthrop considered the child a sign of God’s displeasure in Mary and her husband. Mary, most likely would have left Massachusetts with the Hutchinson party even if there had been no stillborn child, but the tragedy played itself out to a greater degree because of the child. Mary and William and their young son, left Boston with the Hutchinson and several others and relocated to the wilderness of Rhode Island.
In Portsmouth, Rhode Island, the Dyers settled into exile. The men there quickly drew up and signed the Portmouth compact. There, Mary gave birth to four more sons and a daughter. In 1650, William and Mary along with Roger Williams and John Clarke returned to England for political reasons. I have not been able to determined if any of their children went with them but it is possible that at least the youngest may have gone as they could only have been, at most four or five years old. Samuel, the oldest, would have 15 and old enough to leave behind to care for the farm. While in England, Mary meet George Fox who had founded the Society or Friends, or Quakers, who theology was similar to Anne Hutchinson’s. Mary quickly became a follower and joined the Friends church. When William Dyer was ready to go home to Rhode Island, Mary stayed behind to learn more about Fox’s theology.

George Fox, born in 1624, was a young man with big thoughts. At age 19 he left his trade as a cobbler and began wandering about England in search of truth. He developed the belief that God’s light worked through him and other true believers “without the help of any man, book, or writing.” He denounced “man made” religion, creeds, rites and such. He used the biblical “thee” and “thou” that distinguished Quakers up until the twentieth century. Mr. Fox also believed that Christ could enlighten any man or woman. Mary, an intelligent woman, must have been very attached to this thinking, especially in view of her friendship with Anne Hutchinson and the banishment from Boston.

While William Dyer returned to Rhode Island in 1653, it was another five years before Mary came home. By the time she returned she was a full pledge Quaker. Mary’s timing couldn’t have been worst. John Endicott, a strong-willed man who felt that a different religious view point, especially one as unstructured as the Quaker’s, could be the downfall of Boston’s church-state partnership. Mary Fisher and Ann Austin had been the first Quakers to taste Endicott’s bitter pill. They were jailed as soon as they left their ship and then sent back to England on the next ship out. In 1656, Christopher Holder, John Copeland and six other Quakers were met by the same hostile welcome when they disembarked in August. Endicott was amazed at their Bible knowledge and Holder’s legal knowledge. Holder and Copeland demanded they be released, as they were aware that there was no law permitting their imprisonment. Endicott, however, felt threatened by the Quakers and did what he felt he had to safe guard the souls of Boston. In late 1656 and 1657, the Massachusetts General Court passed laws against “the cursed sect of heretics…commonly called Quakers”. The colony was allowed to banish, whip and cut off ears or tongues in order to control the sect. All this was done before Mary and Anne Burden, another Quaker, arrived in Boston on a third ship. The two women were taken from the ship and escorted to a dark, windowless cell. Their books and papers were burned.

Mary was able to get a letter out of the prison to let her husband in Rhode Island know of her plight. Nearly three months later, an irate William Dyer marched into Endicott’s home demanding the release of his wife. While William had been disenfranchised by Boston, he was still an important man in the colonies and Endicott was compelled to release Mary into her husband’s care. But William was given strict instructions to take Mary home and to keep her out of Boston.

Mary had a martyr’s complex, for sure. She set about preaching about the “inner light” to anyone who would listen. Of her beliefs, Mary wrote: "Was ever the like laws heard of among a people that profess Christ come in the flesh? . . .Of whom take ye counsel? Search with the light of Christ in you, and it will show you of whom, as it hath done with me and many more. . ."
Brave Mary ventured into Massachusetts where she was banished from New Haven for her “false” preaching. Her fellow Quakers who had been banished back to England, had returned to New England and were preaching to and being banished from Massachusetts towns. Holder ended up in Salem where he challenged the church there with his Quaker theology. Governor Endicott’s men caught up with Holder in Salem, nearly killing him as he was being arrested. Samuel Shattuck saved his life, but for his effort he was taken to jail, along with Copeland. Shattuck was released soon after but Holder and Copeland remained in jail for several months. Holder and Copeland, like Mary, would not quit. By June of 1658 they were back in the Boston jail. Katherine Marbury Scott, a sister of Mary’s friend, Anne Hutchinson, protested when Holder’s ear was cut off and landed in jail herself. Boston authorities were being a bit tired of the relentless persistence of the Quakers and quickly made being a Quaker a crime that was punished by death. A year later in June of 1959, Marmaduke Stephenson of Rhode Island and William Robinson of London, accompanied by Patience Scott (Katherine Scott’s daughter whose sister would later marry Christopher Holder) and Nicholas Davis began to preach in Massachusetts. On entering Boston, they were thrown into jail. Mary Dyer, of course, on learning that her friends had been jailed, immediately returned to Boston, where, of course, she was jailed.

William Dyer learned about his wife’s incarceration and wrote a scathing letter to Endicott and the Boston Magistrates, which can be read in William’s profile [line 13] following Mary’s. William’s influence once again saved his wife and the other Quakers. The Puritans leaders banished the Quaker, threatening execution if they came back to Boston. Davis and Mary Dyer returned to Rhode Island but some of the Quakers remained in Boston and continued to preach. Within a month, they, of course, were arrested. Mary Dyer, Hope Clifton and Mary Scott walked back to Boston to plea for their friends’ freedom. As Mary Dyer spoke to Christopher Holder through the prison bars, she was arrested again, tried along with the imprisoned men and condemned to death.
The Quaker trio would not repent and on 27 October 1659 the two men, Marmaduke Stephenson and William Robinson were hanged. Mary, bound, blindfolded and with a noose around her neck, once more was spared again by a family member, this time her son, William Dyer, with the help of Governor John Winthrop, Jr. of Connecticut and Governor Thomas Temple of Nova Scotia.  Mary was released into the custody of her son. There is speculation that Mary’s near-death experience was all a scheme to scare her into leaving Boston, at least in by the Governors and leaders of Boston. Her reprieve read: “Whereas Mary Dyer is condemned by the Generall Court to be executed for hir offences, on the petition of William Dier, hir sonne, it is ordered that the sajd Mary Dyer shall have liberty for forty-eight howers after this day to depart out of this jurisdiction, after which time, being found therein, she is forthwith to be executed, and in the meane time that she be kept a close prisoner till hir sonne or some other be ready to carry hir away within the aforesajd tyme; and it is further ordered, that she shall he carried to the place of execution, and there to stand upon the gallowes, with a rope about her neck, till the rest be executed and then to returne to the prison and remain as aforesaid.” Mary wrote the General Court and refused the reprieve.
When she returned to prison and understood the ground of the reprieve, she refused it, and the next morning she wrote to the General Court ”My life is not accepted, neither availeth me, in comparison with the lives and liberty of the Truth and Servants of the living God, for which in the Bowels of Love and Meekness I sought you; yet nevertheless with wicked Hands have you put two of them to Death, which makes me to feel that the Mercies of the Wicked is cruelty: I rather chose to Dye than to live, as from you, as Guilty of their Innocent Blood.” 
The citizens of Boston were amazed at Mary’s courage and determination. Their voice against harming Mary caused the officials to put her on horseback and send her on her way back to Rhode Island where she promptly left and wintered on Long Island. In the spring of 1660, Mary set out once more for Boston where she arrived on 21 May and was once more brought before Governor Endicott. He tried once more to get Mary to deny her faith but she once more refused. The governor condemned her to die. Mary’s family tried once more to intervene but their petition was denied. At nine o’clock on June 1, Mary was taken from the jail and walked to the gallows that stood on the Boston Common. As she walked up the ladder she was told that if she denied her faith she could save her life. She replied “Nay. I cannot; for in obedience to the will of the Lord God I came, and in His will I abide faithful to the death.”
With Mary’s death, the hanging of Quakers ended. Hanging men was one thing, but even the starch Puritans population couldn’t stomach hanging a woman. As for Mary herself, she was quit the drama queen but one with a flare and strength that you can’t help but admire her faith even in the face of death. She stands as one of the most remarkable women of her time.

1. By the Name of Dyer by William Allen Dyer 1940
2. NEHGR, Vol. CIV, Jan. 1950, page 40 "The True Story of Mary Dyer" by G. Andrews Moriarty
3. Dyer Search, Summer 1990, page 44 "William and Mary Barret Dyer; The Monster Story" by Johan Winsser
4. "Mayflower Families; Mary Dyer"
5. The Great Migration, Vol. II, C-F by Robert Charles Anderson and George Sanborn Jr. and Melinde Lutz Sanford, NHGS
6. William Dyer's Letter of 30 August 1659 to Boston Magistrates for release of Mary Dyer from prison
7. Martyrdom of Mary Dyer (d. June 1, 1660) from Smitty's Genealogy, Quaker, and Civil War Pages

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Line 11.1 Anne Hutchinson Dyer; A legacy of friendship

The second Anne Hutchinson in my genealogy was born with the name of Hutchinson. She was the granddaughter of Anne Marbury Hutchinson and daughter of Edward Hutchinson. Although she didn’t leave the historical mark her grandmother did and little is known of her, she is important to my line and to the faith stories of my ancestors. She married the son of Mary Barrett Dyer and thus joined together two families that were already bound by history and loyal friendship.

Anne Hutchinson, daughter of Edward Hutchinson and his wife Catherine Hamby, was born 17 November 1643, in Boston, Massachusetts.
She married Samuel Dyer, son of William Dyer and his wife Mary Barrett, before 1675 and probably in Boston.
Anne married second David Vernon who was born 01 September 1643 probably in London, England and died 28 October 1715 in Newport, Rhode Island
She died 1717 in Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island
Anne and Samuel Dyer had the following children:
1.   William Dyer born 07 March 1662/63 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 22 July 1738 in Truro, Barnstable, MA. He married Mary Taylor the daughter of Henry Taylor and his wife Lydia Hatch
2.   Samuel Dyer born about 1665 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 15 July 1724 in Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. He married Mary Cotta
3.   Nathaniel Dyer born 1667 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 21 April 1729 1724 in Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. He married Elizabeth Parrott.
4.   Edward Dyer born 1670 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 1724 in North Kingstown, Washington, Rhode Island. He married Mary Green as born 8 Jan 1677. She was the daughter of William Greene and Mary Sayles who was the was the daughter of Mary Williams who was the daughter of Roger Williams, who came to Rhode Island as the same time as William and Mary Dyer, Edward’s grandparents. Mary Sayles married 2. the Rev. John Holms.
5.   Elisha Dyer born 1672 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died after 1744 in North Kingstown, Washington, Rhode Island. He married
6.   Anne Dyer born 1673 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 1717 in Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. She married Carew Clarke, the son of Joseph Carew.
7.   Henry Dyer born 1774 in Boston, Suffolk, MA 1724 and died after 1740 in Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. He married Mary Rice.
8.   Barrett Dyer born 1678 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died there 07 December 1753. He married Hannah Steward.
Anne and her second husband, David Vernon had:
9.      Daniel Vernon born 1682 in Kingstown, Washington, Rhode Island and probably died young.
10.  Samuel Vernon born 06 December 1683 in Kingstown, Washington, Rhode Island. He died 05 December 1737 in Newport, Newport, Rhode Island. He married Elizabeth Fleet
11.  Catherine Vernon born 03 October 1686 in Kingstown, Rhode Island and died March 1769.

Church records in Boston, Massachusetts record Anne Hutchinson’s birth and baptism as an infant. “Anne dau. of Edward and Katherine Hutchinson born 18th 9th month”  “Anne dau. of Edward Hutchinson, the younger, aged about 2 days, bap. 9 day 9 mo.” Edward is called the younger, as his Uncle Edward Hutchinson, also lived in Boston.

Anne was named in her father's will: In his will of 17 July 1675, Edward Hutchinson included a bequest to 'my daughter Anne Dyer' "...I give unto my daughter Anne Dyer whom I have already given her portion in land, what bedding or other household stuffe I have at Narragansett as also one Maire ther sud as she shall choose.”

Anne became a Quaker. She married the son of Mary Dyer [See Barret Line 12] the Quaker Martyr and her husband William Dyer. The younger Dyer couple ended up back in Newport, Rhode Island where both Anne, her first husband Samuel Dyer and her second husband, David Vernon, were all buried. Anne and Samuel Dyer were both born in Boston and probably returned to the more tolerant Rhode Island at the time that Samuel’s mother became a martyr. However even in Rhode Island the family faced some persecution for their faith. [See Samuel Dyer, Dyer Line 6] Little is known about Anne’s second husband, David Vernon, but it is highly likely that he too was a Quaker.

Anne died at Newport, R.I., 10 Jan. 1716/7, and buried there with her second husband and two Vernon children, in a narrow plot surrounded by cypress trees. She lived a good long life dieing at the age of 74 and leaving a will that was proved 1 June 1717. She named her sons, Samuel, Elisha, Henry and Barrett Dyer and daughter, Catherine Vernon. Court records show that her son Edward Dyer and daughter Anne Dyer, wife of Cary Clark, were probably left out the will because they had already received valuable gifts from her before her death.

1. Internet Frank E. Dyer
2. New England Marriages Prior to 1700 by Clarence Almon Torrey
3. Genealogical Guide to the Early Settlers by Henry Whittemore
4.  Boston Vital Records 1630-1699
5.  Internet "Register Report - Hutchinson" by Sam Behling
6. NEHGR April 1991 "The Ancestry of Katherine Hamby, Wife of Captian Edward Hutchinson of Boston, MA" by Wayne Howard Miller Wilcox, page 258
7. "Some Untraced Dyers" additional material, Vol 26, 1950, page 56 of the American Genealogist
10. The Great Migration, Vol II, C-F by Robert Charles Anderson and George Sanborn Jr. and Melinde Lutz Sanford, NHGS
11. Will of Edward Hutchinson Senr. of Boston, 1675

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Line 11, Edward Hutchinson; Return from banishment

Line 11
Edward Hutchinson
Return from banishment

Although not as historic as his mother, Edward was indeed his mother’s son, fighting, in a quieter way, for freedom of belief. He had been raised at his mother’s knee, studying the Bible and learning to delve into its wisdom. He had followed her into banishment and then set out on his own, only to return to Boston, where he, like his mother would lose his life by the hand of American Indians.

Edward Hutchinson baptized 28 May 1613 in Alford, Lincoln, England, son of William Hutchinson and his wife Anne Marbury.
He married Catherine Hamby 23 October 1636 in Ipswich, County Suffolk, England where Catherine, the daughter of Robert Hamby and his wife Elizabeth Arnold was born in 19 October 1615.
He married secondly Abigail Firmage or Vermais the daughter of Alice (Blessing) Firmage. Abigail married first Robert Button by whom she had four children, including Abigail who was the second wife of Barnabas Lathrop, son the Rev. John Lathrop. Abigail died August 10, 1689 in Boston.
Edward died 19 August 1675, Marlborough, Middlesex, MA and was buried at Spring Hill Cemetery, Marlborough, Middlesex, MA
Edward and Catherine Hutchinson had the following children:
1.      Elisha Hutchinson who was born and died in 1637, Boston, Suffolk, MA
2.      Elizabeth Hutchinson born 04 November 1639 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died there 16 September 1718. She married Edward Winslow son of John and Mary (Chilton) Winslow and grandson of Mayflower passenger James Chilton.
3.      Elisha Hutchinson born 16 November 1641 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died there 10 December 1717. He married Hannah Hawkins.
4.      Anne Hutchinson born 17 November 1643 Boston, Suffolk, MA and died in 1717 in Newport, Newport, RI. She married Samuel Dyer, son of William and Mary (Barrett) Dyer (Line 12)
5.      William Hutchinson born November 1645 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died young.
6.      Catherine Hutchinson born 12 May 1648 Boston, Suffolk, MA. Died young.
7.      Susanna Hutchinson born 19 May 1649 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 26 May 1716 in Newport, Newport, RI. She married Nathaniel Coddington son of son of Governor William Coddington and his wife Ann Brinley
Edward and Abigail Hutchinson had:
8.      Edward Hutchinson born January 1651/52 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died
9.      Catherine Hutchinson born 13 February 1652/53 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and married Henry Bartholomew who was related to both William Bartholomew who came on the Griffin with Edward Hutchinson Sr.’s family and to Elizabeth Scudder  who married John Lathrop’s son.
10.  Benjamin Hutchinson born 08 April 1656 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died there 1675.
11.  Hannah Hutchinson born 16 May 1658 in Boston, Suffolk, MA and died 15 January 1703/04 in Taunton, Bristol, MA. She married Peter Walker

Edward was born in the year1613 in Alford, County Lincoln, England, where all his siblings except his youngest brother were born and baptized. He, as well as the rest of his family, came over on the Griffin with John Lathrop, John Cotton and William Bartholomew.

Nearly immediately, he became involved with community affairs and was made a freeman of Boston and admitted to the First Church of Boston. Two years later he returned to England where he married Catherine Hamby. Catherine came from a family with lines back to the Second King Henry of England. The trouble in Boston was beginning to brew by the time Edward returned there with his bride. The young couple followed his parents to Rhode Island but did not stay long. The town of Boston was forgiving and they received the young couple, returning the family property and allowing Edward to be active in the community. Edward, however, was much more tolerant of differences in theology and showed more sympathy to the Quakers and others who, though Christian, leaned toward teachings outside of the Puritan theology. It is to be expected, that Edward still sympathized with his mother’s teachings and his tolerance toward the Quakers and Baptists proved that. While he returned to the people who had banished his family, his experience must have tempered his heart, as he proved to be far more tolerant towards those who expressed theology outside the Puritan expression. His daughter, Anne Hutchinson (named for her grandmother) [see line 11.1], married the son of the Quaker martyr, Mary Dyer [who see, line 12].

Edward became known as Captain Hutchinson because of his activities in the militia. In the summer of 1675 the Boston militia was sent to negotiate with the Nipmuck Indians. “King Philip” the warrior son of Massassoit who had befriended the Pilgrims at Plymouth and then Boston. “Philip” as the colonist knew him, was called Metacom, Pometacom or Metacomet in his native tongue. With the arrest and death by illness of Philip’s brother Wamsutta, the warrior had an excuse to attack the English colonist, which led to the English colonist burning a Pokanoket village.

Philip aside, Edward Hutchinson had a good relationship with the Indians near Boston. He trusted them and they him. As an employer, the Indians who worked for him found him fair and respectful. The government of Boston often asked Hutchinson to negotiate with the natives of New England when the situation called for negotiations.

Because of the peaceful relationship the colonist had had with the native population while Massassoit (for whom Massachusetts was named), the war between the two peoples groups came as a surprise to the colonist. Many Indians were still friendly toward the colonist, but the threatened Nipmuck felt differently. Under Philip, they retaliated with violence. Capt. Thomas Wheeler and Capt. Edward Hutchinson went out to negotiate with the Nipmuc who ambushed them

Ephraim Curtis of Boston was sent to negotiate with the Nipmucs but was surprised by empty villages. The Nipmucs, unknown to Curtis, had already attacked the village of Mendon and had joined the rebellion that became King Philip’s War. Curtis did met up with Muttawmp, the Nipmuck chief in July who forged friendship, all the while knowing some of his warriors were attacking Mendon. He and Curtis arranged for a meeting in Boston. Curtis must have sensed something was not quit right as on returning to Boston, he sent Captain Edward Hutchinson and Captain Thomas Wheeler, 30 solders and Christian Natick Indians as guides, to continue the negotiations with the Nipmucks. They found the village empty. Curtis and the Naticks found the village near Brookfield. Negotiation didn’t go well except that Muttawmp agreed to meet with Hutchinson in Brookfield on the following day.

The Nipmuck, once again, had moved their camp and the stubborn English Captains decided to follow. The Indian guides, knowing ambush along the narrow swampy trail, protested. Hutchinson and Wheeler, however, decided to ignore the warning and walked into an ambush just 400 yards into their journey. The fleeing Englishmen were blocked on their retreat by other Nipmuc. Hutchinson and Wheeler as well as several of their men were wounded. Their saving grace was a Natick guide who took over command of the company out of the swamps. Edward Hutchinson died of his wounds several days later. Captain Wheeler survived and his son wrote an account of the skirmish.

A rustic gravestone in honor of Edward Hutchinson was erected by the Daughters of the Revolutionary War in 1921. It reads in part:

AVGVST 2 1675

Through Edward’s line, Massachusetts would once again be touched by the Hutchinsons. His grandson, Thomas Hutchinson became governor of the colony of Massachusetts and again causing dissension in that state. Thomas, a loyalist in a fiercely rebellious state, was force to leave Massachusetts, like his great-grandmother.

1. "The Hutchinson Family of England and New England, and its Connections wit the Marburys and Drydens" by Joseph Lemuel Chester, New England Historical and Genealogical Register (NEHGR)
2. A Brief Genealogy of the Hutchinson Family by W. H. Whitmore from the Genealogies of RI Families from the NEHGR Vol I
3. Ancestral Roots of Certain American Colonists Who Came to America Before 1700 by Frederick Lewis Weis
4. "Family History, the Marbury Family"
5. Vital Records of Boston, 1630-1699
6. "Hutchinson Ancestry" by David C. Blackwell
7. Internet "Register Report - Hutchinson" by Sam Behling
8 Will of Edward Hutchinson Senr. of Boston, 1675
10 New England Historical and Genealogical Register April 1991 "The Ancestry of Katherine Hamby, Wife of Captain Edward Hutchinson of Boston, MA" by Wayne Howard Miller Wilcox, page 258
11. Find a Grave
12.  "Memoir of Governor Hutchinson, "New England Historical and Genealogical Register" Vol. I, October 1847, No. 4