Our friend Terry Brown received a report from Nikki Paine of www.ancestryandheirs.co.uk in Ashford Kent, who has been researching Ralph Dayton. Nikki operates a registered professional service specializing in Kent family research. Both Terry and Nikki have graciously given their permissions to share with the whole Dayton family what has been found. Speaking for the family—“thank you” for your work and for sharing exciting discoveries!
PLEASE NOTE: There is so much content to report, I have picked highlights and will divide summaries of the report into at least two or three blog posts.
In addition to researching Ralph, Nikki reports that she has also been looking at the Tritton and Goldhatch families. After thorough investigation, no evidence was found to support a theory found in a few family trees on Ancestry® that Ralfe Tritton and Ralfe Dayton were the same person.
She also found no evidence that shows that Ralfe was a cousin of Robert Goldhatch junior, as stated in the Will of Alice’s brother Robert, who leaves his estate to his “cousin” Ralfe Dayton. We agree with her best explanation involving the definition of “cousin” as used in Elizabethan times (see http://www.shakespeareswords.com/cousin ).
Stay tuned for a most interesting and exciting discovery…enough so that I was inspired to interrupt my temporary hiatus. We may be getting closer to learning about Ralph’s departure!
We have some exciting news for descendants of David Dayton Jr. (1766-1807) and wife Chloe Skiff.
David was the son of David Dayton Sr. (s1739-1782) and wife Anne Francis and Chloe was the daughter of John Skiff and the elusive Eunice whose last name remains a mystery.
Jim is about seven weeks into a project that identifies as many of David Jr’s descendants as possible. He foresees this to be at least a three month process, and he has already identified over 1,500 descendants.
The plan is to limit the public table to include 5 generations from David Jr., in order to ensure that no living person is included. Limited information beyond these 5 generations from David Jr. may be available, upon request.
Jim encourages you to write him, if you know or surmise that you connect through David Jr. He asks for further information for descendants of David and Chloe, and he can also assist you with information which you may lack. He can be reached at email@example.com.
Stay tuned for details about an exciting project Jim is working on.
I regret that I am forced to take a hiatus from posting, as my continued recovery from knee replacement surgery has caused my work to pile up and will require my full attention to fulfill responsibilities at the university. I will continue to check messages and hope to return to posting on the blog before October. Thank you for your prayers.
Even though I’ve alluded to Abraham Dayton’s 1710 “circumstances” in two past posts—on December 13, 2016 and on January 12, 2017, it remains a most absorbing and baffling mystery—certainly one not easily ignored, and part of a much larger story.
Abraham must have considered himself destitute as he appealed to the New York State Senate for a license to collect charity, as recorded in the Executive Minutes of the New York Colonial Council, which reads simply: “Orders on petitions: by Abr’m Daiton of Brookhaven for a brief for charity.”
The original document is dated May 15, 1710, and states,
The Petition of Abraham Daiton of Brookhaven in the County of Suffolk for a brief for Charity being [read.] The same is referred to the Justices of the Peace of that County who are recommended to provide for him and his family as the nature of his circumstances require.
It appears as if Abraham might have already appealed for assistance for himself and for his family from authorities in Suffolk County, but for some reason he felt it necessary to appeal to the state, probably because help had not been forthcoming. Upon review, state authorities sent the appeal back to his home county with the recommendation that the county justices make provision for him and his family as the “nature of his circumstances require.”
Two years later, the Town of Brookhaven recognized the family’s need and granted “Katharine Dayton & her Eldest Son Jonathun” the use of town land. There was no mention of Abraham and interestingly, we do not hear anything more of Abraham for sixteen years.
The question remains—what was the “nature of his circumstances?”
Thank you for your patience and for your notes of encouragement while I’ve been sidelined the last few weeks. I think I have turned the corner now, after a few complications, and I am feeling better as I start physical therapy.
Along with our decision to publish our research came the recognition that we were not equipped or resourced to expand much beyond our own narrow line from Ralph, beginning with Samuel. It became our larger vision that other Ralph Dayton descendants might be inspired to investigate and tell the stories of Samuel’s siblings, connecting the ever-expanding branches.
For example, we know that both the Thomas Baker family coming from Alice Dayton and the Robert Dayton branch produced interesting, distinguished lines, although we are ignorant of the specifics. I know less about lines established through Ellen Dayton.
Ellen’s baptismal record was dated December 3, 1626 at Ashford, placing her birth between brothers Samuel and Robert. Ellen married John Linley and the couple had at least four children, according to Genealogies of Connecticut Families: From the New England …, Volume 1. Sarah and John Jr. were reportedly born at New Haven while Mary and Hanna were born at Guilford, CT. It was there that Ellen died a few days after Hanna was born on April 1, 1654.
In “Barnes Families of Long Island and Branford, Conn,” Donald Lines Jacobus suggests that Mary and Hanna were taken in by East Hampton relatives, although he doesn’t specify if he was referring to Aunt Alice, Uncle Robert or Grandpa Ralph. We assume Jacobus may have come to this idea after observing Ralph’s care for the girls in his 1658 will where he left 20 pounds to be divided between them.