Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- book:006.matthew [2007/01/27 13:37] – jims
+++ book:006.matthew [2011/04/09 15:42] (current) – jims
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+[[005.richard|(<-- 5. Capt. Richard(2) Seymour)]] [[start|(Back to Start)]] [[007.john|(7. John(3) Seymour -->)]]
 ====== 6. Matthew Seymour ======
@@ Line 19: / Line 21: @@
 ^ Children by first wife (order of births unknown):((It is not certain that Sarah Hayes was mother of all the children.)) ^^^^
-| 14. | i. | [[014.MATTHEW]]<sup>4</sup>, b. abt. 1691, bapt. 7 Oct. 1694. ((The baptism of this child is recorded in the church records of Fairfield, Conn.)) ||
+| 14. | i. | [[014.matthew|MATTHEW]]<sup>4</sup>, b. abt. 1691, bapt. 7 Oct. 1694. ((The baptism of this child is recorded in the church records of Fairfield, Conn.)) ||
-| 15. | ii. | [[015.SAMUEL|SAMUEL]], bapt. 17 Nov. 1695((The baptism of this child is recorded in the church records of Fairfield, Conn.)) ||
+| 15. | ii. | [[015.samuel|SAMUEL]], bapt. 17 Nov. 1695, Norwalk, CT, d. 1751 New Canaan, Fairfield, CT((The baptism of this child is recorded in the church records of Fairfield, Conn.)), Nine children ||
-| 16. | iii. | [[016.Thomas|THOMAS]], b. abt. 1702. ||
+| 16. | iii. | [[016.thomas|THOMAS]], b. abt. 1702. ||
 | 17. | iv. | [[017.jehiel|JEHIEL]]. ||
 | | v. | HANNAH, d. at Ridgefield, Conn., 22 Aug. 1768; m. 7 June 1721, NATHAN<sup>4</sup> ST. JOHN, b. at Norwalk in 1692, d. at Ridgefield 10 Mar. 1749, s. of Matthias<sup>3</sup> (//Matthias//<sup>2</sup>, //Matthias//<sup>1</sup>) and Rachel (Bouton). ||
@@ Line 59: / Line 61: @@
 | | x. | SUSANNA((In the absence of dates it is probable that Catherine and Susanna and possibly Sarah were children of the second wife. Catherine.)) m. before Mar. 1742/3, JOSIAH RUSCO. ||
 | 18. | xi. | [[018.daniel|DANIEL]]. ||
+\\
+[[005.richard|(<-- 5. Capt. Richard(2) Seymour)]] [[start|(Back to Start)]] [[007.john|(7. John(3) Seymour -->)]]
+//The following information was supplied by Paul Carleton Seymour.//
+**Capt. Matthew Seymour (1669-1735)**
+I don't know about you, but when I read Thomas' will, it sounds like younger
+son John is the favorite.  Maybe it's just my imagination.  When I looked at
+John's history, it's said that he died in 1746 with "an unusually large
+estate".   But in our case, we're descended from Capt. Matthew, who was an
+ensign at the time of his father's death.
+As Thomas died in 1712, we see that a few years earlier, his oldest living
+son Matthew had already left Norwalk.    Capt. Matthew Seymour, in the
+tradition of his father and grandfather, founded yet another prosperous
+American town, this time Ridgefield CT, moving there in 1708 when he was 39
+years old.  Note that they dealt directly with the Indian chief.   I can
+only imagine what they traded for the land, but a quick internet search at
+the time of writing in 2010 shows that there's a house for sale on Seymour
+Lane in Ridgefield for just over a million dollars.  I guess we should
+expect that kind of appreciation in 302 years.  Also note the witchcraft
+superstitions, which occurred long after GGGGGGGG Grandpa Matthew's time.
+He was evidently a soldier in the Connecticut Militia as an Indian fighter
+long before the Declaration of Independence was issued.
+[[http://www.archive.org/stream/ancienthistorica00hall#page/100/mode/2up|
+http://www.archive.org/stream/ancienthistorica00hall]] Google Books, Ancient
+Historical Records of Norwalk, Conn.
+{{006matthew1.gif|}}
+{{006matthew2.gif|}}
+//At a Norwalk town meeting in 1718, Matthew, is picked as part of a 6-man
+committee to represent the town in a major political dispute.  Presumably
+the townspeople voted for the guys they knew to be impartial and fair.//
+{{006matthew3.gif|}}
+{{006matthew4.gif|}}
+{{006matthew5.gif|}}
+A group of 25 people from Norwalk, led by Matthew and 3 others, purchased a
+large tract of land from the Indians between Norwalk and Danbury in 1708,
+about 10 years earlier, which explains why the Norwalk residents would have
+to pay for their services now.  Ridgefield looks to be about 7 miles NW of
+Norwalk.
+Looking at the tree, we see that after his first five children were born in
+Norwalk, including Samuel, the sixth of Matthew's twelve kids was born in
+Ridgefield in 1708, but that his next daughter was born in Danbury in 1709,
+then later ones back in Norwalk, so he apparently returned back to his
+hometown.  I wonder if it was related to this trip back to resolve the
+dispute. It looks like he was very popular after resolving this issue and
+the Norwalk folks wanted him to stay on as one of their leaders.
+[[http://www.genesmall.net/Genealogy/Seymour/Book.006.Matthew.html]]
+"Matthew Seymour was a selectman of Norwalk for several years (//the board
+of selectmen is commonly the executive arm of the government of New England
+towns. The board typically consists of three or five members//) and deputy
+to the General Court from Norwalk in 1712 and 1713. //The General Court was
+the precursor to the State Legislature, and each town had 3-4 deputies, who
+were what we would call today, State Representatives.  //He was made
+lieutenant in 1710, and was chosen captain of the North Company Militia unit
+in Norwalk, 26 May 1729 //when he was almost 60//. In his will, dated 4 Jan.
+/5 and proved 6 Jan. 1735/6, he names wife Catherine, sons Matthew,
+**Samuel**, Thomas, and Jehiel, youngest son Daniel (who is under age and is
+to have the whole of the house after the decease of Catherine, his mother),
+and daughters Hannah St. John, Elizabeth Bouton, Ruth Smith, Sarah Bouton,
+Catherine and Susanna. He directs that some of the estate and "also my Negro
+man Bristoll" be sold. He appoints his wife Catherine and his brother John
+Seymour as executors. The amount of the inventory was £436. 5s. 1d."
+//I have no idea what 436 pounds would be in year 2010 dollars.  As I
+understand having a slave indicated some sort of wealth, but not an
+"unusually large estate" as was noted for younger brother John, here an
+executor.//