Sunday, March 31, 2013

DAVENPORT (Part II: The Pamunkey Neck Davenports)

DAVENPORTS of PAMUNKEY NECK, VA
According to The Library of Virginia:
"Several Virginia counties, most of them in the eastern part of the state, have suffered tremendous loss of their early records during the intense military activity that occurred during the Civil War, and others lost records in fires."

Despite the scarcity of records, our Davenport lineage appears to flow from the James River Colony through LANCELOT into New Kent, King & Queen, King William, Louisa, and Hanover counties by his children and their families. Earliest evidence suggests that some Davenports had settled in Pamunkey Neck by 1650.

Although little evidence is found to connect Lancelot to the next generation, Martin Davenport (father of Davis) is believed to be his son, born around 1624 in King William Co.  [Others have connected Martin to the John Davenport line -an interesting, influential Boston/Stamford family that does not appear to be related.] 

The first evidence of Davis Davenport is through a survey made in 1696 for Major John Waller, laying off almost 1,000 acres on the Mattaponi River in Pamunkey Neck (then part of King & Queen County) that Waller had bought from Elias Downes. “Davenport's plantation” was shown on the survey as bounding Waller's purchase on the upriver side with "below Davis Davenport's landing on Mattaponi" cited as the beginning point of the survey.  Davis Davenport and his son Martin both appear in the 1704 Quit Rent roll of land owners of King William County; Davis with 200 acres and Martin with 100 acres. A 1703 patent in the area refers to “the path from Yarbrough’s Ferry to Davenport’s.”  A 1705 patent mentions “Davenport’s Path” in the same area. 

In the third generation, Davis' son Martin of Pamunkey Neck married Dorothy Glover (widow of Paul Harralson, daughter of William Glover).  The next generations are then marked by Glover as first or middle names. Research among the few records remaining of King William County identify a William Glover as a freeholder located relatively near Martin Davenport's land listed for Quit Rents in 1704.   [There may be some interconnections with our Glover/Kennedy lines but I believe this family to be of different ancestry.  We have seven William Glovers, fifteen Thomas Glovers, and ten John Glovers of whom our 'Glover-side' ancestor immigrated to America in 1754 -generations after Dorothy's family.]

Our Pamunkey Davenport line continues through Martin and Dorothy's daughter, Crotia Cassity Davenport, born circa 1710 in King William Co.  Crotia married Charles Kennedy and their son Davenport Kennedy began the westward migration down the Anna River from Hanover Co. to Louisa, VA.  
[Although I am attempting to maintain a focus on our 'direct line' ancestors, I share this 'kissing-cousins' finding too:
James Glover Davenport, Jr., (Crotia's nephew) married Dorothy Kennedy, daughter of Crotia's son, Davenport Kennedy.] 

Our Pamunkey Davenport Ancestors include:
LANCELOT DAVENPORT  immigrant @1620 (1599 – 1660)

The paper-trail begins with my 9th GGF:
Martin Davenport (1625 - 1700)
son of Lancelot Davenport @1620

Davis Davenport (1660 - 1732)
son of Martin Davenport

Martin Davenport (1682 - 1735)
son of (William) Davis Davenport

Crotia Cassity Davenport (1709 - 1780)
daughter of Martin Davenport

Davenport Kennedy (1735 - 1784)
son of Crotia Cassity Davenport

Mary Kennedy (1770 - )
daughter of Davenport Kennedy

James Madison Mayfield (1800 - 1876)
son of Mary Kennedy

Temperance Mayfield (1835 - 1910)
daughter of James Madison Mayfield

Joan (or Joanna) Seese (1873 - 1963)
daughter of Temperance Mayfield

Horse Landing, formerly Davenport Landing, King William Co., VA


Wednesday, March 27, 2013

DAVENPORT (Part I: The DNA Projects)

(Davenport/Kennedy/Mayfield/Seese/Glover)
The ravages of colonial/nationalist wars included the inestimable loss of many records that would have 'filled-in the blanks' making our earliest American family history more complete and accurate.  One modern -and increasingly popular- method used for providing 'proof' of ancestry is DNA testing of potential descendants.  There are at least three main DNA branches of the Davenport family in America for which some records  exist:
1652 Virginia
THE JAMES RIVER DAVENPORTS   Lancelot Davenport is listed on the ship rolls of The Duty which was dispatched by the Virginia Company to America, landing in Jamestown in early 1620. He was in the service of Mr. Edward Blaney, a colonial agent for the Virginia Company of London with a plantation on the south side of the James River, Virginia Colony. In 1639, Lancelot became a landowner, with 50 acres of land in James City County "due for his personal adventure."  This unusually small parcel was his 'headright' provided by the King.  It is believed that within two generations, part of his family moved from King William County into the area called Pamunkey Neck.  The early James River Davenports were noted as literate people, skilled as clerks, bookkeepers, and public servants. The fact that Lancelot worked in the colony for almost 20 years before earning his acreage has some researchers wondering if he engaged in a long apprenticeship and married later in life. Another plausible theory is that Lancelot was sent to the colonies as a convict serving a 20-year sentence.  Since he was probably 'indentured' to Mr. Blaney, it seems more likely that he, as most did, earned his 'freeman' status within four years after arrival.  If true, it would help us to imagine Lancelot's American family beginning with a child of Martin Davenport's age.  If not true, then Martin was probably descended from one of the Boston Davenports (see below).

THE PAMUNKEY DAVENPORTS
Our family line stretches back to early descendants of Davis Davenport[My research shows Davis as son of Martin Davenport who was born and died in King William Co., VA.  Although the link between Lancelot and Martin is generally agreed-upon as father/son, records are sparse and speculative.]  According to a 1696 land survey, Davis owned a plantation and landing in Pamunkey Neck.  The early Pamunkey Davenports were small-farm tobacco planters, but -unlike Lancelot- typically illiterate.  Another group settled in the "Northern Neck" area; these were the Tidewater Davenports who were slave-owning, gentlemen planters with possible aristocratic background. 


Yankee Rebel Tavern
Mackinac Island
THE MACKINAC DAVENPORTS
The Mackinac Davenports have connections to Michigan's Mackinac Island through "The Yankee Rebel" Ambrose R. Davenport.  Born in Virginia in 1771, Ambrose served in the army under General "Mad Anthony" Wayne and was assigned to Mackinac in 1796.  Upon leaving the military, he remained on the island to work in the fur trade.  When the British took control of the fort at Mackinac in 1812, Ambrose was temporarily deported to Detroit as a prisoner of war along with the entire garrison and some other islanders.  Refusing to swear allegiance to the British crown, he is quoted as having said
"I was born in America, and am determined, at all hazards to live and die an American citizen." 
He was able to return to his wife and children at the close of the war and lived out the remainder of his long life on Mackinac Island.  Descendants from his six children remained in the Great Lakes region, settling in Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin.  \[The Yankee Rebel Tavern, located on a side street of downtown Mackinac Island, honors the memory of Ambrose.]
Ambrose Davenport historic cabin in Hubbard's Annex, Mackinac Island, MI


Additional info on the Davenport DNA project can be googled, including the following from:  http://www.isogg.org/successstories.html
From the Davenport DNA Project
"The "original" Davenport can be traced back to Ormus De Davenport, (one of many spelling variations), alive at the time of the Norman Conquest around 1066 AD in the Cheshire area of England. Almost 800 years later, in 1851, Amzi Benedict Davenport published the first major Davenport genealogy. Although Amzi concentrated on his own line, the Rev. John Davenport, (founder of New Haven, Connecticut), he and others were able to document the line back to Ormus. Twenty five years later he published a newer updated edition. Today, except for a few minor instances, that research has stood the test of time. Because of Amzi's research, it is Ormus that most Davenports hope to trace back to.
In the 1600's, five Davenports resided in the Boston area. They were the Rev. John (1597-1670), Thomas "of Dorchester" (abt 1604-1685), Humphrey (bef 1622-abt 1680), Capt. Richard (abt 1606-1665), and Lancelot (abt 1594-?). All supposedly originated in England and shared the same family crest, but no genealogical link has been found to prove any connections.
One of the original goals of the Davenport Surname DNA Project was to determine if these five Davenport lines were related and, if any were descended from Ormus. In the project's first year, we discovered Rev. John and Thomas shared a common ancestor, while Humphrey did not. Surprisingly, we also discovered that they match the descendents of Richard Davenport, born in England in 1642, and settling in Virginia and then Albemarle, North Carolina. We have not found descendents of Capt. Richard or Lancelot yet.
The next step was to confirm an English connection. In 2005 we began an extensive search for Davenports of known Cheshire ancestry. We found a few and some matched the Rev. John/Thomas/Richard lines. This was encouraging, we were on the right track. Finally, we were able to locate a Bromley-Davenport who was willing to donate his DNA.. The Bromley-Davenport's are one of the few remaining lines with documentation back to Ormus.
The Bromley Davenports matched the others. This means the Rev. John, Thomas of Dorchester, Albemarle's, and several other individuals of "unknown English ancestry" all have a common Davenport ancestor with the Bromley Davenports. It's official now, DNA corroborated our common descent from Ormus De Davenport; but the who, where, and when - we don't yet know. As more markers and participants become available, that day may come."
- - Posted on 5 Jun 2006

Sunday, March 17, 2013

St. PATRICK'S DAY ~Ulster Scots in America

It was my intention to feature prominent Irish ancestors today. What I found, instead, were links to our Ulster Scot kinsmen and women, the "Scotch Irish"... who all, for the most part, made the 20-mile crossing to Northern Ireland in the mid-1600's to early 1700's and, later, on to America. 

Historians believe that the real St. Patrick (given name Maewyn) was born in the late 4th century, in Wales or maybe even Scotland.  At 16, Maewyn was captured during a raid and sold as a slave to an Irish landowner of Dalriada. During his time in Ireland as a shepherd, Maewyn began to have religious visions and dreams -- including one in which he learned how to escape captivity. Once free back in Britain, Maewyn moved on to France, where he studied and entered the priesthood under the guidance of the missionary, St. Germain. Eventually, he returned to Ireland to "care and labour for the salvation of others", according to The Confession of St. Patrick, and changed his name to Patrick, which means "father of the people." In the year 431, he was consecrated second bishop to Ireland by Pope Celestine I.  In his 30 year mission, Bishop Patrick converted thousands of Irish to Christianity and is famed for teaching the doctrine of the Holy Trinity with the three-leafed shamrock. St. Patrick died around 461 and was probably buried in Ulster, County Down, Ireland.
Some interesting St. Patrick trivia:
~though included on the official List of Saints of the Catholic Church, Patrick was not formally canonized as a saint. 
~St. Patrick is also honored by the Episcopal Church with the celebration of St. Patrick's Day on March 17th; recognized by the Anglican, Eastern and Coptic Orthodox, as well as Roman Catholic churches.
~The Irish have observed St. Patrick's Day as a religious holiday for over a millenium.  
~And, surprisingly, the FIRST St. Patrick's Day parade took place in BOSTON, not Ireland, on March 18, 1737. 
~Between 1717 to 1770, over a quarter of a million Protestants from the north of Ireland -the Ulster-Scots- emigrated to America. 

~Seventeen of the 44 Presidents of the United States have Ulster-Scots roots.
~Members of the Irish Society of Boston, a group of immigrants (mostly Scots-Irish merchants and tradesmen) were instrumental in organizing the first public celebrations for St. Patrick's Day.
~and, my favorite:  General George Washington allowed his Continental Army troops to take a day off from the American War of Independence on March 17, 1780 to celebrate St. Patrick's Day. 

 Please link to: Song & Tribute  to our family's Ulster-Scot heritage: 
Hi Uncle Sam
When freedom was denied you,
And Imperial might defied you,
Who was it stood beside you
At Quebec and Brandywine?
And dared retreats and dangers,
Red-coats and Hessian strangers,
In the lean, long-rifled Rangers,
And the Pennsylvania Line!


Hi! Uncle Sam!
Wherever there was fighting,
Or wrong that needed righting,
An Ulsterman was sighting
His Kentucky gun with care:
All the road to Yorktown,
From Valley Forge to Yorktown,
That Ulsterman was there!


Hi! Uncle Sam!
Virginia
sent her brave men,
The North paraded grave men,
That they might not be slavemen,
But ponder with this calm:
The first to face the Tory
And the first to lift Old Glory
Made your war an Ulster story:
Think it over, Uncle Sam!
Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Friday, March 8, 2013

THE FLUSHING REMONSTRANCE




(from wikipedia) “The Flushing Remonstrance was a 1657 petition to Director-General of New Netherland Peter Stuyvesant, in which several citizens requested an exemption to his ban on Quaker worship. It is considered a precursor to the United States Constitution's provision on freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights.

"According to Kenneth T. Jackson, the Flushing Remonstrance was remarkable for four reasons: (1)it articulated a fundamental right that is as basic to American freedom as any other, (2)the authors backed up their words with actions by sending it to an official not known for tolerance, (3)they stood up for others and were articulating a principle that was of little discernible benefit to themselves, and (4)the language of the remonstrance is as beautiful as the sentiments they express."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remonstrance of the Inhabitants of the Town of
Flushing to Governor Stuyvesant,
December 27, 1657
Right Honorable
You have been pleased to send unto us a certain prohibition or command that we should not receive or entertain any of those people called Quakers because they are supposed to be, by some, seducers of the people. For our part we cannot condemn them in this case, neither can we stretch out our hands against them, for out of Christ God is a consuming fire, and it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Wee desire therefore in this case not to judge least we be judged, neither to condemn least we be condemned, but rather let every man stand or fall to his own Master. Wee are bounde by the law to do good unto all men, especially to those of the household of faith. And though for the present we seem to be unsensible for the law and the Law giver, yet when death and the Law assault us, if wee have our advocate to seeke, who shall plead for us in this case of conscience betwixt God and our own souls; the powers of this world can neither attach us, neither excuse us, for if God justifye who can condemn and if God condemn there is none can justifye.
And for those jealousies and suspicions which some have of them, that they are destructive unto Magistracy and Ministerye, that cannot bee, for the Magistrate hath his sword in his hand and the Minister hath the sword in his hand, as witnesse those two great examples, which all Magistrates and Ministers are to follow, Moses and Christ, whom God raised up maintained and defended against all enemies both of flesh and spirit; and therefore that of God will stand, and that which is of man will come to nothing. And as the Lord hath taught Moses or the civil power to give an outward liberty in the state, by the law written in his heart designed for the good of all, and can truly judge who is good, who is evil, who is true and who is false, and can pass definitive sentence of life or death against that man which arises up against the fundamental law of the States General; soe he hath made his ministers a savor of life unto life and a savor of death unto death.
The law of love, peace and liberty in the states extending to Jews, Turks and Egyptians, as they are considered sons of Adam, which is the glory of the outward state of Holland, soe love, peace and liberty, extending to all in Christ Jesus, condemns hatred, war and bondage. And because our Saviour sayeth it is impossible but that offences will come, but woe unto him by whom they cometh, our desire is not to offend one of his little ones, in whatsoever form, name or title hee appears in, whether Presbyterian, Independent, Baptist or Quaker, but shall be glad to see anything of God in any of them, desiring to doe unto all men as we desire all men should doe unto us, which is the true law both of Church and State; for our Saviour sayeth this is the law and the prophets.
Therefore if any of these said persons come in love unto us, we cannot in conscience lay violent hands upon them, but give them free egresse and regresse unto our Town, and houses, as God shall persuade our consciences, for we are bounde by the law of God and man to doe good unto all men and evil to noe man. And this is according to the patent and charter of our Towne, given unto us in the name of the States General, which we are not willing to infringe, and violate, but shall houlde to our patent and shall remaine, your humble subjects, the inhabitants of Vlishing.
Written this 27th of December in the year 1657, by mee.  Edward Hart, Clericus
[NOTE: signers below include my 10th & 9th great grandfathers JOHN TOWNSEND* and his brother HENRY.* (see blog post "By Twig & Turf" 4/9/13) This is particularly interesting because I am related to them through the SMITH line, whereas I am related through the GLOVER line to John Bowne, a fellow townsman who would later suffer imprisonment and temporary banishment to Holland for his defiance of Dutch religious law. Some signers, including Tobias Feake, were jailed for not recanting their part in this document.] 
Additional Signers
Tobias Feake (Hannah Feake Bowne's cousin)
Nathaniell Tue
The marke of William Noble
Nicholas Blackford
William Thorne, Seignior
The marke of Micah Tue
The marke of William Thorne, Jr.
The marke of Philip Ud
Edward Tarne
Robert Field, senior
John Store
Robert Field, junior
Nathaniel Hefferd
Nich Colas Parsell
Benjamin Hubbard
Michael Milner
The marke of William Pidgion
Henry Townsend*
The marke of George Clere
 George Wright
Elias Doughtie
John Foard Edward Farrington
Antonie Feild
Henry Semtell
Richard Stocton
Edward Hart
Edward Griffine
John Mastine
John Townesend*



LEGACY OF THE WINTHROP WOMAN - Part III The Bowne House

 Elizabeth and Robert's daughter, HANNAH FEAKE married JOHN BOWNE 7 May 1656.
sketch of Bowne House circa 1850
(In a letter dated April 12, 1656, Captain John Underhill wrote John Winthrop, Jr.
"Sir, I wase latli at Vlissingen (Flushing). Hanna Feke is to be married to verri jintiele young man,
of gud abilliti, of a louli fetture, and gud behafior.")
[Underhill married Hannah's sister, Elizabeth and John "Jack" Winthrop, Jr. was their mother's second cousin and brother to her first husband, Henry Winthrop.]  

Their home, completed in 1661, is listed on the National Registry of Historic Places as the oldest house in Flushing, NY -and one of the oldest in the state of New York.
But, more importantly, it is a structure of historical importance for the early fight for religious freedom in America.
  Hannah became a member of the Society of Friends, who held their meetings in the woods to avoid persecution for not worshipping in the approved church of New Netherland - the Reformed Dutch Church.** 

John soon invited the group to hold their meetings in the Bowne home
-an illegal act that would soon spur government action against Bowne.
In the book The Quaker Cross, A Story of the Old Bowne House by Cornelia Mitchell Parsons, 1911, we get a closer look at the Bowne household:   “The new dwelling was certainly most attractive- with its large, sunny kitchen and great fireplace (holding a log of wood of such enormous proportions that it had to be drawn into place by oxen), and its oven and swinging cranes were there…
“Almost opposite the hearth were raised seats, where the ministers and elders sat during meeting.  John had consecrated this room to the worship of God, as he had promised that day in the wood.  Here every First Day (or Sunday) all Friends gathered from far and near that the might wait upon God, listening to the Divine Voice as it spoke to their souls..." 
In August, 1662, a complaint was made by the new magistrate because John Bowne was allowing Quakers to hold their meetings in his house.   Since this action was against the law, citizens were forbidden to bring the ‘strolling people called Quakers’ into the Province without government consent.  Director General Peter Stuyvesant and other authorities had the complaint posted in the village.  It read:
’Letter of Sententions of the Lord’s Director-General and Council of the New Nethelands upon Thursday, fourteenth of September, 1662.  Because John Bowne, at present prisoner, dwelling at Vlissingen, Long Island, has made no scruple in Vilependention of the orders and mandates of the Director-General and Council of the New Netherlands, made and published against the Quakers, not only to lodge and entertain some of that Heretick and abominable sect called Quakers, but moreover had condescended unto them at several times to hold their Conventicles and meetings in his house, where he (not alone but his whole family) had been present, by which also the said abominable sect (   ) and ministers of the word of God do blame (   ) do undermine both the policy and worship of God, not only by strengthening their wrongful opinions, but also others be led out of the right way, which altogether are acts of all consequence whereout is like to redound much evil: Heresies and differencies, directly and quite contrary to the orders and mandates of the Lords Director and Counsellor of the New Netherlands; and therefore he out to be corrected as an example to others and mandates of the Lords Director and Counsellor of the New Netherlands…”

The suggested “correction” included imprisonment, a fine of 5820 pounds Flemish, and warning to abstain from all future meetings or be ‘condemned in a double boete’ and banished from New Netherland.  Though not yet imprisoned, Bowne understood that he faced serious consequences by continuing to host the Quaker meetings.
This news spread quickly and Bowne’s friends cautioned him to back down.  It was John’s fearless belief, however, that “God’s worship should not be neglected” (p.126) and again held meeting in his home on Sunday.  At sunset armed men arrived with a warrant from the Governor with orders to arrest John Bowne.  Bowne recorded the following in his journal:
"in the year 1662 nustil on the first day of 7th month Resolued [Resolved Waldron, the schout or sheriff of New Netherland] the scout Came to my house att vlishing* with a company of meen with sords and gonns (where I was tending my wife being sike in bed and my yongest child sike in my armes which was both soe Ill that wee watched too or three with them) hee tould mee I must goe with him to the generall [Stuyvesant] I tould him my famiely was not in a condishon for mee to leu them hee sead hee could not helpe that hee must folow his order but would not show it mee soe it beeing to late to goe that day hee left his men there and went to drinking in the towne and Came agenn in the night and with him the scout of the toune before whome I demanded his order which hee denyed before many people but at last I say it by which order hee was to take such as hee should find in vnlowfull meetings but found mee in non   [*Since Bowne's writing was phonetic, it is easy to see how the town name evolved through the years into "Flushing".]
(Bowne's transcriber attached the following note:  
**In the Provisional Regulations for the Colonists in 1624, the Directors of the West India Company definitely stated, "no other form of divine worship than that of the reformed religion would be tolerated". This was repeated in the Freedoms and Exemptions of 1640, "no other religion should be publicly admitted in New Netherland except the Reformed.



Today the original building houses the Bowne House Historical Society museum open to the public.
Next related blog:  THE FLUSHING REMONSTRANCE




Wednesday, March 6, 2013

LEGACY OF THE WINTHROP WOMAN - Part II "Elizabeth's Neck"


LEGACY OF THE WINTHROP WOMAN - Part II "Elizabeth's Neck"
Elizabeth's Neck, Greenwich Connecticut (circled)
*NOTE: We are related to Elizabeth "Winthrop Woman" Fones and Robert Feake through BOTH sides of the Glover-Smith families.  (Glover/Myers through the Quaker Horner family) (Smith/Emerine through Watson to Townsend.)
On 18 July 1640, all the land between the Asamuck and Potommuck brooks was purchased from area Native Americans for “twentie-five coates.” Now known as Old Greenwich, this property was bought in the name of New Haven Colony by Daniel Patrick, Robert Feake and his wife Elizabeth Fones Winthrop Feake.  
This transaction was recorded in a deed that stated, in part: 
"We Amogerone and Owenoke, Sachems of Asamuck; and Ramatthone, Nawthorne, Sachems of Totomack have sould unto Robert Feakes and Daniell Patricke all their rights and interests in all ye several lands between Asamuck river and Totomack ...except ye neck by ye indians called Monakewaygo, by us Elizabeth Neck, which neck is yet peticaler perchace of Elizabeth Feaks, ye said Robert Feake his wife to be hers and her heaires or assigns forever..." (from The Winthrop Woman, page 409-410)]


According to a professional timeline done for another Greenwich pioneer, Robert Husted, the following supporting facts were recorded:
"July 18, 1640. Robert Husted, and Andrew Messenger witness the main land deed purchase of Greenwich by Daniel Patrick and Robert Feake. Jefery Ferris also received land on this docusment, with Angell Heusted and Richard Williams as witnesses. Elizabeth, the wife of Robert Feake, was given an area of land called Monekewego by the Indians, already named Elizabeth Neck on the document." 
What is now 'Greenwich Point' was originally called ‘Monakewago’ and known for much of the area's early history as 'Elizabeth's Neck' in recognition of its first colonial owner, Elizabeth Feake. 
Since assurance of protection under the New Haven Colony was uncertain and the fact that the Dutch still claimed this region, the early settlers agreed in 1642 to become part of the West India Company’s colony of New Netherland. Greenwich was therefore considered a “manor,” under the local leadership of its “patroons,” Captain Patrick and Robert Feake. Greenwich officially remained a part of the Dutch colony until 1650 with the Treaty of Hartford which placed Greenwich back under the control of New Haven Colony.
It wasn’t long before the lifestyle of Greenwich residents drew criticism from the strict Puritan colonial officials due to complaints that they “live in a disorderly and riotous manner, sell intoxicating liquors to the Indians, receive and harbor servants who have fled their masters, and join persons unlawfully in marriage.”
[This last point likely referred to the scandal of Elizabeth Feake 'marrying' William Hallett without legal divorce from Feake, who had to return to England and left Hallett in charge of his estate. Elizabeth's cousin/brother-in-law Jack Winthrop helped to formalize this situation, despite a child being born prior to official documentation of Elizabeth's 3rd legal marriage, to Hallett.] 
As a consequence, Greenwich was required to become a part of “role model” Stamford. It took years before the General Assembly in Hartford allowed Greenwich to become a separate township known for supplying locally grown produce to packet boats.
[Toby/Tobias Feake, nephew of Robert, was the son of Robert's brother James.  Toby followed Robert to America and piloted his boat "Dolphin" along the coastline between the English and Dutch colonies.  After the death of Daniel Patrick, Toby married his widow, Anneken.]
·
·       

  Photo: Marker located midway down "Elizabeth's Neck"
(Inscription reads: "On July 18, 1640, Daniel Patrick and Robert Feaks landed on these shores in the name of the New Haven Colony to start anew settlement, later called Greenwich. This neck of land is called Elizabeth’s Neck after Mrs. Feaks") 
Related Reading:
http://www.ctgenweb.org/county/cofairfield/pages/greenwich/greenwich_hstry.htm
https://greenwichfreepress.com/around-town/spared-from-the-wrecking-ball-elizabeth-feake-house-was-a-hidden-treasure-under-our-noses-65886/ 
The Winthrop Woman, Anya Seton (1958 historical fiction)