Putnam/ Dougherty family genealogy

Posts tagged ‘Timothy Putnam II’

52 Ancestors – Timothy Putnam- Revolutionary War Soldier

Who do I write about when I think about independence. We have many ancestors who were in this country during the revolutionary war and this past week the online Fold3 (Website) has made it possible to research their revolutionary files for free (until July 15th). I thought “great now I will be able to get some documentation on those who were fighting for our independence from England”. I started with one I knew had been involved: Abner Amsdale. Well of course there were listings for Abner Amsdale, but was he our Abner? Then I decided to see if any of my direct line for the Putnam’s were involved. We all had heard of General Israel Putnam but we know that he is not an Ancestor but a half brother to our line. My 5x great grandfather, Timothy Putnam born in 1732 he could have been involved or his son my 4x great grandfather Timothy born 1860, so I decided to pursue a Timothy Putnam. In looking for Timothy on Fold3 I found one from Mass. but my Timothy’s lived in New Hampshire during the conflicts.

I finally was able to see that a Timothy Putnam is listed in Charlestown New Hampshire’s list of Revolutionary War solders on a Rootsweb site. Listed as Company No. 1 Col. Benjamin Bellows’ Regiment, with Captain Able Walker.   According to this account, in the spring of 1777 Ticonderoga  was in danger and Capt. Able  Walker takes his company there to give defense. The listing given by Rev. Henry H. Saunderson  shows a Private Timothy Putnam. Timothy Putnam Senior would have been 45 and Junior would have only been 17. This could be either one. ( Ticonderoga is about 100 miles from Charlestown)

The confusion comes from the National Archives listing of Pensions and rolls from Massachusetts.

I was reading on line a history of Charlestown by Rev. Henry H. Saunderson that may or may not answer my question: is the Timothy listed for Massachusetts the same Timothy listed in New Hampshire.

and while the decision
of His Majesty was still pending, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay granted above thirty townships between the rivers Merrimac and Connecticut ; which to\^uships upon the running (that is determining)
of the divisional line in 1738, fell within the Province of New Hampshire ; and among them were those granted under the designations No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4 ; which are the present townships of
Chesterfield, Westmoreland, Walpole, and Charlestown ; which though they had fallen within the limits of New-Hampshire, were all subsequently settled in dependence upon their grants received from Massachusetts. The settlers therefore, as their grants had emanated from an authority which had no jurisdiction over the soil, had, as it was claimed, no valid title to their lands. And this they must have
known, as the final decree of his Majesty fixing the boundary line, bears date March 5th, 1740 ; and we find a petition of the proprietors of No. 4, dated Sept. 29th, 1740, to His Majesty, praying to be re-
annexed to the Massachusetts Province, to which they had supposed they belonged. This was before any considerable settlement had been made. But notwithstanding their title was uncertain, we find
that the settlement was still continued, though for the most part under different proprietors till 1753 ; when in consequence of the report of the Attorney and Solicitor General in relation to what was right and
proper to be done concerning those townships which had been granted by Massachusetts, in which it was substantially recommended, that proprietors who had made improvements on their lands, should be con-
firmed in the rights and privileges given them by their grants from that State, application was made by petition to New-Hampshire to that effect, which was readily and cheerfully granted. Thus Charles-
town was for between twelve and thirteen years after its settlement substantially a Massachusetts town.¹

A consideration may be that those listed in New Hampshire may have also been claimed by Massachusetts since many of them had resettled in New Hampshire from Massachusetts. Timothy Putnam Senior was born in Massachusetts and his father was from Danvers of Essex County. So possible because of close ties to the town they originated from could these men have moved about the country fighting in different regiments as the conflict continues? Also when we consider the designations during this period for the Colonies, Massachusetts Colony engages quite a large area.

Looking at the two depositions I read they specifically state Timothy Putnam of Danvers Massachusetts.

A Rufas Putnam claims that Timothy was with him at West Point (a battle?) for 3 months with Capt. Benjamin Peabody’s company of Col. N. Wade’s regiment in 1780.² That may have been the period that Benedict Arnold was in Command.

Then a Jonathan Porter of Danvers claims that Timothy Putnam was for 6 months in Rhode Island with him in Capt. Jeremiah Putnam’s company of Col Nathan Tyler’s regiment in 1779.³

I saw a painting online of General Rufus Putnam, was he the same Rufus on the pension documents for Timothy Putnam?

So was my Timothy so well known in his home town that he was reassigned to different companies during the war years that had men that knew him in Danvers and stated he was from there? Then again maybe I am looking at a cousin who has the same name that was still residing in Danvers. What do you think?

While I may not have learned if the records in at the National Archives are for my Timothy Putnam the challenge brought  about a great benefit in learning a lot more about the Revolutionary war period, battles, and individuals that  I had previously never pursued. Thanks Amy Johnson Crow for these challenges.

By Rev. Henry H. Saunderson.
2. Deposition from Rufus Putnam

3. Deposition from Jonathan Porter

52 Ancestors ~ #45 Timothy Putnam II

Okay, so this week’s challenge from “52 Ancestors 52 Weeks” that Amy Crow has issued, is to write about the ancestor closest to your birthday.  No one else was born on my birthday. So I had to look at those before and after my birthday. I picked Timothy Putnam II not only because he was born on 4 October 1760, he also was a stumbling block in connecting to our original immigrant.

Timothy Putnam is my paternal 4th great grandfather. He was the oldest son of Timothy Putnam (I) and Susanne Badger  born in Charlestown, Sullivan County, New Hampshire.  A lot is known about the Putnam’s of the Salem Witch Trials and Timothy II’s grandfather Seth Putnam was born to Thomas and Ann (Carr) Putnam near the end of the witch hysteria. Seth and his wife Ruth (Whipple) relocated to New Hampshire probably soon after their marriage since the eldest is noted as being born in Charlestown New Hampshire. Being the son and brother of two of the accusers I imagine he was anxious to leave all that behind, and being the eleventh child his prospects in Danvers, Massachusetts were limited.

Seth and Ruth went on to raise 8 children, Timothy II’s father Timothy I was their eighth child.

Timothy II married Sarah Hewitt 4 October 1778 and their first child Sarah (1) was born 4 Nov 1779 in Langdon, Sullivan county, New Hampshire. Timothy was just 19 years old and his wife Sarah was only 15 years old.

Their son Timothy III (2) (my 3rd great grandfather) was their second child born on 13 July 1781 in Langdon, New Hampshire.

Then Abraham (3) is born 27, July 1883. Samuel (4) 18 July 1785, Betsey (5) 3 May 1788, and Olive (6) 5 Feb. 1791. Olive dies two months later.

1790 US Census Charleston, Cheshire, New Hampshire

1790 US Census
Charleston, Cheshire, New Hampshire

Click on image to enlarge and note: This is the first US Census, Timothy Putnam is on the 7th line. According to this there is one male between 5 and 10 that would be correct for Timothy III, there are 2 males between 20 and 30, that would be correct for Timothy II and another male, this could possibly be a brother or a hired hand. Under the listing of male 60-70 one is noted, this would be right for Timothy I. Listed under females they show one age 10 to 20 this could be Sarah, (3) 13. There are 2 other females in the family listed 60-70. Well that just does not make sense. Sarah the mother should be about 26 while her mother-in-law would be about 54. and where are the other children? Maybe we need to look at Sarah’s family. Maybe Sarah and her children are actually at her parents home when the census was taken.

Their next child is Polly (7) born 27 May 1792, then Moses (8) 12 October 1796, John (9) 24 June 1799.

1800 US Census Charlestown New Hampshire

1800 US Census
Charlestown New Hampshire

On this census we find Timothy Putnam and family four up from the bottom of the page. The first column is for males under the age of 10. There should actually be two noted both John born in 1799 and Moses born in 1796. The next column is from 10 thru 15 and that should be Samuel. Next is age 16 thru 25 and works out good for Abraham and Timothy III. The next column is for 26 thru 44 and that works out for Timothy II. Under females we have 3 under 10, that only matches up to Polly. Betsy is 12 and should be in the next column and Olive died in 1791 so she would not be shown. Sarah the mother would be 36 and is probably listed in the next to the last column which is for females 26 thru 44.

Oliver (#10 child) is born 6 June 1802, Joseph (11) 16 November 1804, then Benjamin (12) 16 November 1804. They lose Benjamin on 6 August 1808 before his 4th birthday. Their last child Susannah (13) is born 30 June 1809. Sarah must have been one strong woman to survive all those births.

All of these children are listed in the town records as born in Langdon, Sullivan County, New Hampshire, yet the census taken during this period list the family in Charlestown. which is listed as Cheshire county through the 1820 US Census and Sullivan county starting with the 1830 census.

The province of New Hampshire was divided into five counties in 1771. One of these was named Cheshire. Charlestown was made a shire-town.  5 July 1827, the county was divided, the northern portion taking the name of Sullivan County.

The above info came from http://www.nh.searchroots.com/cheshire.html

1810 US Census Charlestown New Hampshire

1810 US Census
Charlestown New Hampshire

In this 1810 US Census for Charlestown we find 5 Putnam families. One is Samuel (4) Putnam and another is Abraham (3) Putnam But no Timothy. There is a Thomas Jr. could that be our Timothy II? I do not think so, Timothy II would be 49 years old and his wife would be 46. There is no one listed in those age groups in Abraham or Samuels family either. Looking at the 1820 US Census we do find Timothy Putnam.

120 US Census Charlestown New Hampshire

120 US Census
Charlestown New Hampshire

Here we see  a few more columns, the first column is male under 10 years of age and we have no listing there for the Timothy family. Next we have one at 10 and under 16 possibly Joseph, none listed from 16 to under 18, three from 16 to under 26 which may include Oliver, John, and Moses, none 26 to under 45, one  over 45 which should be Timothy II now 59 years old. On the female side  we have none under 10, one age 10 to under 16 which would be Susannah age 11, two age 16 to under 26 may or may not be older daughters Polly  and Betsey, none age 26 to under 45, and one over 45 who I will assume is the mother Sarah.

Sarah their first born died in 1814. She may have married a Joseph Currier. Need to research further to verify.

Timothy’s mother Susanna (Badger) Putnam dies  7 April 1816.

1830 US Census Charlestown New Hampshire

1830 US Census
Charlestown New Hampshire

Here is the 1830 Census for Charlestown with Timothy Putnam. Apparently people are living long so they have added more columns. Timothy II is now 69 and we can find him in the ninth column which is for free males age 60 -70 which works. Sarah is now 66 years and she is found in the 9th column on the female side along with another female in the same age group 60-70. The first column to hold a mark is the male ages 5-10  and then there are two free males in the 20-30 age group. In the household there is also one female age 20-30 that could be either an unmarried daughter or a daughter-in-law to one of the boys listed in the same age group.

It certainly was more convenient for genealogist when the United States started listing by name all of the members and their relationship to the head of house. First in 1850 they listed all members of a household by name then in 1880 the relationship to head of household was included.

To continue chronicling  the life of Timothy II we learn that on 13 February 1834 Timothy III dies in Ludlow, Vermont leaving my 2x great grandfather, Joseph Putnam an orphan at age 11. At this point our Timothy II is 73 years of age and Sarah is 70 years old. Joseph is sent to live with his grandfather. I imagine that Joseph is just settling in, having moved from Ludlow Vermont to Charlestown New Hampshire ( a move of about 22 miles along VT route 10), losing his mother in 1833, then his father the next year, then grandpa Timothy dies on 18 May 1835. While Timothy II had  lived a long life for that period, young Joseph is uprooted once again and sent off to live with an uncle, possibly Joseph or John. I imagine it was too much to expect Sarah to raise her grandson alone at her age.

Five years later Sarah dies 24 November 1840.





Tag Cloud

ARK Design

Send more cards.

The Armchair Genealogist

Putnam/ Dougherty family genealogy

Tales of a Family

Finding my Way Home

Vita Brevis

A resource for family history from AmericanAncestors.org

Amy Johnson Crow

Modern Genealogy Made Easy

Ancestry Blog

Putnam/ Dougherty family genealogy

The WordPress.com Blog

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: