hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register 4 4 Browse Search
George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. 6, 10th edition. 1 1 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Your search returned 5 results in 4 document sections:

h, dau. of Samuel Champney, 5 May 1737, and had Hannah, bap. 9 Ap. 1738, d. unm. 3 Feb. 1759; John, bap. 6 July 1740; Thomas, bap. 3 July 1743. John the f. was a tailor, and resided on the old homestead. He d. 16 Nov. 1754, a. 48; his w. d. 25 Nov. 1768, a. 61. 8. Daniel, s. of William (3), m. Margaret, dau. of Isaac Manning, 10 Nov. 1737, and had children, baptized as follows: Elizabeth, 29 Oct. 1739, m. her cousin Daniel Barrett, 5 Nov. 1761; Lydia, 24 Aug. 1740; Sarah, 22 Aug. 1742; Mar3, and he m. Sarah Parsons of Gloucester 27 Dec. 1774. His chil. were Samuel, b. 10 and d. 18 June 1758; Samuel, b. 14 Jan. 1761, d. 2 Dec. 1790; Joshua Gee, b. 11 Ap. 1762; Nathaniel, b. 19 Sept. 1765, lost in ship Tempest, 1781; George, b. 25 Nov. 1768, d. 17 Mar. 1771; Sarah, b. 22 Oct. 1775; Margaret, b. 7 May 1777; Hannah, b. 13 Nov. 1779; Jacob Parsons, b. 4 July 1782, d. 27 Jan. 1794; Nathaniel, b. 17 June 1784; Nathan and George, twins, b. 8 May 1786; Lydia, b. 8 June 1788. Samuel the
f. was a cordwainer and occupied the estate on the east side of Dunster Street until 1738, when he sold the southerly half to Samuel Danforth, having previously sold the other half to his brother Daniel Barrett. 7. John, s. of William (3), m. Ruth, dau. of Samuel Champney, 5 May 1737, and had Hannah, bap. 9 Ap. 1738, d. unm. 3 Feb. 1759; John, bap. 6 July 1740; Thomas, bap. 3 July 1743. John the f. was a tailor, and resided on the old homestead. He d. 16 Nov. 1754, a. 48; his w. d. 25 Nov. 1768, a. 61. 8. Daniel, s. of William (3), m. Margaret, dau. of Isaac Manning, 10 Nov. 1737, and had children, baptized as follows: Elizabeth, 29 Oct. 1739, m. her cousin Daniel Barrett, 5 Nov. 1761; Lydia, 24 Aug. 1740; Sarah, 22 Aug. 1742; Margaret, 17 Mar. 1745; Margaret, 7 Sept. 1746; James, 18 Dec. 1748; Daniel, 8 Sept. 1751. Daniel the f. was a carpenter, owned the northerly part of estate on the east side of Dunster Street from 1733 to 1737, when he sold it, with a new house, to And
arah. Joseph the f. was a ferryman, and afterwards a retailer in Charlestown, and d. 16 Ap. 1762, a. 48 years and six months; his w. Abigail d. 9 Oct. 1773. 23. Samuel, s. of Samuel (18), m. Margaret Gee of Boston 18 Mar. 1757; she d. 25 Feb. 1773, and he m. Sarah Parsons of Gloucester 27 Dec. 1774. His chil. were Samuel, b. 10 and d. 18 June 1758; Samuel, b. 14 Jan. 1761, d. 2 Dec. 1790; Joshua Gee, b. 11 Ap. 1762; Nathaniel, b. 19 Sept. 1765, lost in ship Tempest, 1781; George, b. 25 Nov. 1768, d. 17 Mar. 1771; Sarah, b. 22 Oct. 1775; Margaret, b. 7 May 1777; Hannah, b. 13 Nov. 1779; Jacob Parsons, b. 4 July 1782, d. 27 Jan. 1794; Nathaniel, b. 17 June 1784; Nathan and George, twins, b. 8 May 1786; Lydia, b. 8 June 1788. Samuel the f. grad. H. C. 1751, and settled in Gloucester, where he was Schoolmaster, Justice of the Peace, and Representative. He was appointed Naval Officer at Gloucester 23 Nov. 1776. He d. 15 July 1806; his w. Sarah d. 1808. 24. Samuel, s. of Samuel
t Boston would meet with chastisement. But now came the difficulty. There were on the tenth of November more than four regiments in Boston; what could be given them to do? They had been sent over to bring to justice those, whom Barrington called rioters, whom the King had solemnly described as turbulent and mischievous persons. But after long consideration, De Grey and Dunning, the Attorney and Solicitor General, joined in the opinion, Attorney and Solicitor Gen. to Hillsborough, 25 Nov. 1768. that the Statute of the Thirty-fifth of Henry the Eighth, was the only one by which criminals could be tried in England for offences committed in America; that its provisions extended only to trea- Chap. XXXVIII} 1768. Nov. sons; and that there was no sufficient ground to fix the charge of high treason upon any persons named in the papers laid before them. The law in England was more humane and just than the Colonial Office. The troops found no rebellion at Boston; could they make on