1564109

JONATHAN HATCH, (Thomas), From all that we learn of him, Jonathan Hatch,
whose descendants we shall follow, was a man of great energy and force of character
with a decided will of his own which brooked no unseemly restraints.

He was a pioneer in the march of civilization in the stirring times of the early history of
New England, a man of daring enterprise and romantic adventure, only a part of which is
known to us now. He was born in England about 1625 and came to Mass. Bay Colony
with his father in 1634. Even as a boy he was a lad of spirit and perhaps somewhat willful
and disinclined to conform to all the austerities and restrictions of the intolerant age in
which he lived. The most of his early struggles with society came from this cause
and not from any natural depravity in the boy or man and from the further circumstance
that as a boy his lot was cast largely among strangers where he was deprived of
the loving counsel of good friends. The theory has been advanced, and with apparent
good reason, that his father's wife, Grace, was a second wife, and not the mother of
Jonathan and his sister, Lydia, and that she and the children did not get along well
together as a reason why the children did not apparently live much at their father's house.
At that time in Plymouth and Mass. Bay Colonies it was the custom of those who assumed
leadership in any community to look askance and with disfavor upon any one who had no
regular occupation or permanent place of abode. Such persons were the subjects of
special attention and closely watched and either ordered out of town or appointed by
the Court or Town Meeting to reside with some family of known probity to watch over
them and keep them employed and out of mischief.

This was due partly to the austerity of the time, and the responsibihty of training
the twig as the tree should stand, but partly also to the fact that in their hand to
hand conflict with the wilderness and the savage the colonists could not afford to have
any impecunious person come into town who might become a public charge on the
community or set a bad example for others. Sobriety, industry and frugality were
prime virtues at that time. The austerity of the time frowned upon all amusements as
a device of the Devil. The Sabbath must be sacredly and religiously observed.
They were perhaps too prone to meddle in private affairs and opinions, to put a straight
jacket upon everyone's conduct, public and private. Even the clothes one might wear
were subject to regulation by Puritan law. (See Laws of Massachusetts, 1634 and later).
But with all their drabness and austerity perhaps we should not judge those stern
old Puritans too harshly. They were human and had their faults but they were a
conscientious, God-fearing race, sternly doing their duty as they saw it; erring
sometimes doubtless, sometimes in their zeal cruel and intolerant, but always we
may well believe, actuated by what they conceived to be the good of their religion
and, their respective communities.

In view of all these circumstances and perhaps also in the belief that the discipline
of the soldier would benefit the boy, Jonathan was at about the age of 12 apprenticed
to Lieut. Davenport of Salem, Mass.There is little doubt that the free spirit of
Jonathan chafed and fretted under the strictures and discipline of the soldier and
perhaps a home-sick longing to be near friends and after serving him for about two years
he could endure it no longer and deserted and made his way to Boston with the probable
intent of seeking passage by boat to Yarmouth where his father then resided. A strange
boy wandering around the streets and wharves of Boston was at that time, a sufficiently
grave matter to be inquired into. It probably did not take long to acertain the
true state of affairs. Sept. 2, 1640 he was arrested as a fugitive from service and
"was censured to be severely whipped and for the present is committed for a slave to Lieut.
Davenport." (*)

[*Slave at that time in New Engand meant a bond servant or person bound to service for
a specified length of time. There were not many of them.]

But Jonathan did not wait for any whipping nor did he return to Lieut. Davenport.
He had a good head and two good legs and the spirit and will to use them and they
brought him safely to his father's home at Yarmouth.

Although his conduct in this case could not be justified by the law of that time,
we cannot but admire his brave manly spirit in his resistance to the strictures
and intolerant spirit of the age and for his courage and daring, boy though he
was, in striking out for liberty, alone and unaided.

Though he gained his liberty in a practically hostile community and arrived safely
in Yarmouth, his troubles did not end there. Dec. 1, 1640 Capt. Nicholas
Simpkins had him arrested and charged with slandering him. When the case came up
for trial in the General Court at Plymouth, Jonathan evidently proved the truth of
his charges for Capt. Simpkins was fined 40 shillings and Jonathan was set free.

Still his troubles did not end. His father moved to Barnstable in June, 1641, but
Jonathan apparently lived on in Yarmouth earning such a living as he could with no
settled occupation or place of residence. That of itself was a sufficient
reason why those stern old Puritans of that time should have him under observation.
Undoubtedly they did. Mar. 1, 1642 he was "taken as a vagrant and for his misdemeanors
was censured to be whipped and sent from constable to constable to Lieut. Davenport, at
Salem." His misdemeanors, aside from his desertion from Lieut. Davenport
were probably nothing more than the natural disinclination of a spirited and exuberant
youth to conform to all the austerities and restrictions of the strict age in which
he lived. The above sentence appears not to have been executed. Jonathan may
have protested he would never stay there if sent. Knowing something of the spirit of
the lad may have been cause for second thought. At the session of the Court held about
a month later, April 5, 1642, this sentence was reconsidered. Jonathan was in Plymouth
Colony while Lieut. Davenport was in Mass. Bay Colony. It was held Jonathan could
not be sent back into the service of a master residing in another colony.
And so Jonathan escaped again. But the Court appointed him to reside with Mr. Stephen
Hopkins of Plymouth, who was enjoined to have a special care of him.

Mr. Hopkins died about two years later. In 1644 we find Jonathan in Barnstable
where he was on the list of those able to bear arms. In 1645 he was one of four men
forming the quota of Barnstable who with men from other towns went forth Aug. 15 in
an expedition against the Narragansett Indians. They returned Sept. 2 and were
disbanded the next day.

April 11,1646 he married at Barnstable, MISS SARAH ROWLEY, daughter of Henry
Rowley by his first wife Ann, who was widow of Thomas Blossom and daughter of William
Palmer, Sr., and his wife Frances. William Palmer came to Plymouth Colony in
1621 and in 1630 was one of the original first settlers of Yarmouth. Both Blossom
and Palmer were of the Pilgrim element. Ann Palmer married Thomas Blossom in
England in 1615 and went with him to Leyden, Holland where they were a part of the
Pilgrim settlement. In 1620 they came to Plymouth, England in the Speedwell
intending to take passage on the Mayflower for America; but for some reason found
it impractical to do so and returned to Leyden, where they formed a part of the Pilgrim
group.

While in Leyden, Blossom held some correspondence with Gov. William Bradford of
Plymouth Colony and in 1629 he and his wife and son came to Plymouth, Mass.
Blossom died soon after and Oct. 17, 1633 his widow married Henry Rowley as his first wife. Their first child was Sarah, who at about the age of 13 married
Jonathan Hatch. After his marriage, Jonathan lived for some years at West Barnstable.
Oct. 7, 1651 he and Samuel Hinkley, father of Governor Hinkley, were brought before
the grand jury on a charge of hiring land from the Indians. Not a very heinous offense
it would seem now, but rather as an evidence of their energy and enterprise. But
at that time it was felt that enterprises of that kind should be discouraged as likely to
lead to misunderstandings and trouble with the Indians.

In Feb. 24, 1652 he was appointed one of a commission that was to "choose and lay
out a common highway between Plymouth and Sandwich, according to your best judgment
where you shall find it most convenient for the country's use," showing that at that
time the Court had confidence in his integrity and good judgment. This road was at
that time one of the most important roads in the colony. But Jonathan found it
difficult to suppress his natural instinct for trading wherever he found it advantageous
and Mar. 2, 1652 he was again before Grand Jury on a charge of "furnishing an
Indian with a gun, powder and shot."

It is probable that heretofore he had worked for others or had farmed land on shares
and that he now felt he wanted and was entitled to land of his own and that he applied
to the town for a grant of land. At a town meeting held Oct. 27, 1653, it was "ordered
that ye land measurers shall lay out Jonathan Hatch land as they shall conceive most
convenient for him and least prejudical to ye other inhabitants who are to have
their lots laid out afterwards." It is probable at that time there was no unallotted
land except in the outskirts of the town, for his land was laid out to him in quite
the southeast part of the town, known at that time as "Sepneset on ye South Sea."
(Now Lewis Bay.) The Indian name was Sepneset.

After his land had been laid out to him he went there and built a log house and on
Oct. 7, 1654 moved there with his family. There were 50 acres of upland and a parcel
of marsh adjoining and 8 acres of meadow and some land on an island. Feb. 14, 1655
he had the grant of his land recorded and at the same time, probably in answer to
questions, expressed his satisfaction of the division of the lands. All that part of the
town was then an unbroken wilderness inhabited only by Indians.The wigwam of
Paup-Mun-Muche, Chief of the Massapees was only a mile away. There were no white
settlers within several miles of him for several years. Rather a dreary and dangerous
situation one would think. But it was characteristic of the man that no difficulties
or dangers daunted him. It is not known that he had any trouble with the Indians during
all the time he resided there. He was friendly with them, traded with them and treated
them well. That he was able to get and retain the good will of these wild denizens
of the wilderness speaks well for his courage, tact, and good sense. If by his conduct
towards them he had excited their hostility they could have done him much harm.

At this time oysters were abundant in the waters near Jonathan's residence at
Sepneset and many barrels of them were annually pickled by him and his family and
sent to market. The shells of the oysters were burned in kilns into quick lime
of a superior quality and for many years all the lime used for building purposes was
manufactured from the shells of oysters at this place. Some time subsequent to
the grant of his land at Sepneset he sold one-half his farm (probably an undivided
half interest) to Mr. Thomas Shaw. Whether Shaw came there to live does not appear
but it would seem not.

At first all the freemen of the Colony met annually at Plymouth in a General Court
for transaction of the general business of the Colony. In 1638 a representation
of the towns by Deputies was adopted. In 1657 Jonathan took the oath of fidelity, which,
as the head of a family and a taxpayer entitled him to vote for Deputies and any other
town business though he was not yet a freeman. He was made freeman later. It was
well known that Jonathan had the good sense to be on friendly terms with the Indians.
Perhaps it was sometimes thought he was too friendly with them. In June, 1658
it was proved in Court that an Indian named Repent had threatened to shoot Gov.
Prence on his return from Plymouth. Jonathan was also in Court at the same time on
suspicion that he had "justified" Repent; but of this there was no proof and he was
by the Court admonished and released.

The vacant lands in his vicinity were not being settled upon and it is evident Jonathan
did not find here in this isolated locality the opportunities to satisfy his enterprising
spirit. In the summer of 1659 he went in search of more promising prospects to
Martha's Vineyard and elsewhere. It was about this time that an old Indian Chief,
Notantico by name, knowing that Jonathan was a good friend of the Indians and
that he was looking for land, freely gave him a tract on that neck of land between
Woods Hole and Buzzards Bay, about two or three miles southwest of the present village
of Falmouth. Jonathan did not go there to live. It was too far away from even the
nearest settlement with no prospect of others coming there for a good while. Years
afterwards Jonathan remembered this gift and claimed it as we shall see.

June 7, 1659

"Liberty to view and purchase a tract at Succonnesset and arrange with the Indians for
the same" was granted to six men from Barnstable and one from Sandwich. These men
apparently did nothing towards making the purchase; but it served to direct attention
to the place and Jonathan may have gone there prospecting. Succonnessett
was the Indian name of the place meaning in their language the place of the black clam
shells, which were found there in abundance. It was on the sea shore southwest of
Barnstable, near Woods Hole.

Mar. 5, 1660

"Liberty to purchase land at Succonnesset and adjacent" was granted by the Colony Court
to another and different company of seven men, John Howe, Anthony Annabel,
Nathaniel Thomas, Samuel Fuller, Abraham Pierce, Peter Blossom and Isaac Robinson.
Isaac Robinson was son of John Robinson, the Leyden preacher and a friend of
Jonathan Hatch. June 4, 1660 were added to the above purchasers of Succonnesset
and places adjacent, Samuel Hinkley, Henry Cobb, John Jenkins, who were of the company
which applied June 7, 1659 and Mathew Fuller, John Cooper and John Dunham, all
of Barnstable and William Nelson and Thomas Burman (now Bowerman) of Plymouth.
The purchase was made of Qua-cha-tis-set and other Sachems of the Succonnesset
and Massapee tribe of Indians.

Here seemed to be the promising prospect that Jonathan was in search of. Here he could
be in the midst of things and a part of it. Just what day and month the purchase by
the Company was consummated does not appear but that same year (1660) Jonathan Hatch
and Isaac Robinson went there and built each of them a log house; whether before
or after the purchase by the Company is not known but probably after and that they had
the permission of the Company.

Land could not be purchased of the Indians except by permission of the Colony Court
and as the Court had already permitted the purchase by a company it seems unlikely
they would grant permission to purchase a part of the same land to an individual.
It is improbable permission would have been granted previous to the purchase by
the company for the Colony laws required that no settlement be made remote from a
place of public worship unless the settlers be strong enough to support a minister of
the Gospel. Barnstable was the nearest place of public worship about 15 miles away.

Jonathan built his house on or near that narrow neck of land between Fresh and Salt
ponds (see map) about a half mile south or southwest of the present village of Falmouth.

Robinson built his a little further south. They probably moved there with their families
soon after they built their houses though no precise date is known. Jonathan placed
his family and goods on a small skiff and sailed away down the coast till they came
to Salt Pond, entering which, they sailed up to the neck where they landed. Jonathan
Hatch and Isaac Robinson were the first white settlers in Succonnesset, now Falmouth.
Jonathan's son Moses was the first white child born there-named Moses it is said because
so many bullrushes grew near his father's house.

May 27, 1661

Jonathan and Mr. Shaw sold their farm at Sepneset to Mr. John Thompson who sold
about 1674 to John Lovet some of whose descendants still hold the old Hatch farm.
Nov. 29, 1661 the proprietors or purchasers of Succonnesset held a meeting which
extended to Dec. 3rd following, and agreed upon an allotment of lands. The meeting
appears to have been held at Jonathan Hatch's house so that they might view the land
and make an equitable allotment. The land by the Herring Brook was to be "in general."
Each of the proprietors was allotted about 80 acres. Commencing at the sea shore as a
base these lots ran straight back into the interior. Nine of them were l6 rods broad,
three were 17 rods broad, two were 8 8 1/2 rods broad and one (that to Isaac Robinson)
was 18 rods broad. These lots were just east of the Herring Pond and the lines of the
lots were to run to "the same point of the compass as Jonathan Hatch's 80 acres upon the
sea," showing that Jonathan had his farm there of 80 acres previous to this first allotment.
He probably selected and laid out his land soon after he moved there and it was not by his
house, but by the sea. For the better accommodation of all some other small allotments
of 4 to 8 acres were made and "Jonathan Hatch and Isaac Robinson because they have
built their houses shall have their lots by their houses, that is to say Jonathan Hatch
to have 10 acres by his house, lying against the neck, leaving a sufficient way
into the neck; and Isaac Robinson shall have 4 acres by his house and 8 acres next
adjoining Jonathan Hatches." Apparently upon second thought "because we questioned
whether we should get water on These lots we laid out 4 acres to a share along by the pond
***a sufficient way to be left along by the pond side above or below the houses." What
pond this was is not stated.

It was "also agreed that the proprietors shall not keep above 20 head of cattle each
upon the great neck for a share." This great neck was probably that land by the Herring
Brook which was to be be "in general" and used in common by all as pasturage.
Again "we have laid out 20 acres to a share next to Jonathan Hatches ground abutting
upon the sea and running 200 rods towards the woods. This work is now concluded
and the agreement signed I)ec. 3, 1661." Jonathan Hatch is one of the signers.
Jonathan Hatch's father died in Barnstable in 1661 and Mar. 3, 1662 Jonathan
and his sister Lydia, who married Henry TayIor Dec. 19, 1650 applied for and were
granted letters of administration upon their father's estate by the Plymouth
Colony Court. Isaac Robinson and Thomas Ewer were appointed to make an inventory and
appraisal of the estate which they did May 27 and it was sworn to by the widow.
The new settlement at Succonnesset not being strong enough at that time to stand alone
it was ordered bv the Court in Mar. 1663 "that Succonnesset shall for the present
belong to Barnstable."

The first purchase of land at Succonnesset by the original company in 1660 was
probably not largely in excess of that allotted to the proprietors in Nov. and
Dec., 1661. Sometime subsequent to the first purchase the company
obtained additional land; a tract extending along the seashore from Woods Hole to
Five Mile River and extending inland four or five miles, apparently completely
surrounding the first purchase except on the sea side. In July 1677 it was agreed to
lay out additional lands of 60 acres to a share, also meadows. John Howland and
Thomas Lathrop acting for the company appointed Bernard Lumbert, William Gifford and
John Smith a committee who laid out 12 strips or lots which were assigned to
Moses Rowley, Sr., Joseph Hull, Thomas Griffin, John Robinson, Samuel Tilley,
Nathaniel Skiff, Thomas Johnson, William Gifford, Thomas Lewis, John Jenkins,
Jonathan Hatch, Sr., William Wicks or Weeks, and Thomas Ewer. There were also
other 10 acre lots laid out to the same individuals. The balance of the tract was
held in common to be sold later to others. Jonathan Hatch and Isaac Robinson
were appointed a committee to sell the lands of those who did not wish to settle there.
It was about this time when settlement was extending and land was becoming
valuable that Jonathan remembered the land the old Indian Chief had given him
some years before. The old Chief was not living then but his son remembered the
gift and confirmed it by the following deed dated Jan. 15, 1679, signed by Job Notantico,
Indian of Succonnesset.

INDIAN DEED TO JONATHAN HATCH

"To all people to whom these presents may come, Job Notantico, son of Thomas Notantico,
Indian of Succonnesset in the Govt. of New Plymouth, sendeth greeting etc.
Know ye that I, the said Job Notantico, understanding that my father, the said
Notantico, Sachem, many years ago, about or since the beginning of the Succonnesset
Plantation, did freely and absolutely grant and give unto Jonathan Hatch, Sr.,
of the said Succonnesset all that tract or neck commonly called Woods Hole Neck,
excepting a part which he, the said Notantico reserved for himself which afterwards he
exchanged with Succonnesset men and accepted in lieu thereof 40 acres at little
Sipperwisset, with liberty to cut sticks and wood in the commons. The fins and tails,
whales cast ashore to be mine, etc."

This deed was witnessed by Shearjashub Bourne and Bathsheba Bourne and acknowledged
by Job Notantico, alias Attuckoo, before Thomas Hinkley, Assistant.

There was preaching at Succonnesset-often at the house of Jonathan Hatch-but there
was no regular church organization till the autumn of 1708. The business meetings of
the proprietors were held more often at his house than elsewhere. When strangers arrived
they were often entertained at Jonathan Hatch's till his house became a place of public
entertainment for travelers and others and was finally licensed as such with the privilege
of selling liquor for their use. When any of Jonathan's good friends among the Indians
were present it was doubtless a little difficult for him to refuse them a little "fire water."
June 7, 1670 he was fined L3 for selling them liquor; but knowing the Indians as he did it
is not likely he gave them enough to make them dangerous.

Shortly after King Phillip's War Jonathan Hatch bought of Capt. Church three Indians,
a man, wife and child, probably prisoners, many of whom were taken near the close of
the war, for the apparent purpose of liberating them. June 3, 1679 Jonathan and
the brothers of the woman appeared in Court where it was agreed that "for L6 the man
and woman should be released and the child should remain with Goodman Hatch till 24
years of age and then be released forever."

In Colonial times the local Inn or Tavern often became the Civic Center of the community
and excepting the meeting house was the most frequented place in town and the tavern
keeper the best informed man in the community. People flocked there to learn not only
the local gossip but the news of the outside world from travelers. When in June 4,1686
Succonnesset was detached from Barnstable and incorporated as a separate township and
given the name of Falmouth, Jonathan Hatch's public house was the logical place
for holding town meetings for the transaction of town business and all public affairs.
From this time on Jonathan became more prominent in the affairs and business of the
town. He was often engaged in running the lines of lots, attending to the sale of
lands and transfers of titles. Age and experience had toned down the fire and impetuosity
of youth and he had become an honored and respected citizen and a religious man.
June 24, 1690 he took the Freeman's oath and was admitted as a Freeman of the Colony
at the County Court at Barnstable; which was something of a distinction at that time as none
but men of known probity and integrity and generally church members could attain
to that honor.

Jonathan Hatch acquired a large land estate and was regarded as among the wealthy
of those times. In his later years he became the venerable patriarch of a large and
esteemed family of children and grand children. He apparently gave away all his land
to his children previous to his death as shown by the following:

LAST WILL OF JONATHAN HATCH

"I, Jonathan Hatch, Br., of Falmouth, in the county of Barnstable in the Province of
Massachussets Bay, in New England, being now, through the mercy of God in complete
health and of disposing mind and memory, yet being aged and calling to mind the
uncertainty of this life, I am desirous, according to my duty to settle things in
order before I go hence, and therefore do make this my Last Will and Testament,
hereby revoking and disannulling all former will and wills by word or writing
heretofore by me made and hereby constitute and declare this to be my Last will
and testament, in manner and form following, viz: My desire is to commit my soul to
God in Jesus Christ, who gave it and my body to decent burial when God shall please
to call me hence. And as touching my worldly estate which God hath beyond my
deserts bestowed on me, my will is to dispose of it as follows:

"Imprimis, I will and bequeath to my six sons, viz: Thomas Hatch, Jonathan Hatch,
Joseph Hatch, Benjamin Hatch, Samuel Hatch and Moses Hatch, to each of them one
over and above of what they have already had to be paid out of my estate.

"It.-I will and bequeath to my two daughters Mary Weeks and Sarah Wing to each, of them
three shillings over and above of what they have already had, to be paid out of my estate.

"It.-I will and bequeath to my daughter, Marcy Rowley, all and singular my movables
and debts and twenty pound of the thirty pound to be paid six years after my
decease by my two sons, Samuel Hatch and Moses Hatch as may appear by obligations
under their hands and seals bearing date, March the twentieth, One thousand seven
hundred (1700) and I do hereby ordain, constitute and appoint my daughter, Marcy
Rowley (wife of Nathan) to be my sole Executrix to this, my Last Will and Testament
to administer upon all my estate. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand
and seal the fifteenth day of September, Anno Domini, One Thousand seven hundred and
five."

Signed, sealed and declared to be his last will and testament, in the presence of us:
John Weeks, William Weeks and Thomas Bowman, Proved 4 Jan., 1710-11, Attest, William
Bassett, Regtr.

His son Nathaniel and daughter Lydia were possibly not then living, as they are not
mentioned in the will but there are reasons for believing that Nathaniel married and
left descendants.There is ample evidence that Jonathan continued to do business till
the time of his death. As one of the agents of the proprietors he was often called
upon to look after their interests and they could not have been confided to more faithful
hands. He died at Falmouth in Dec., 1710, aged 84, honored and respected by the
community among whom he had lived for the last fifty years.

Jonathan Hatch was the progenitor in America of a numerous family of Hatches which are
now to be found in nearly all the Northern, East, Central and Western states. Some
of these Hatches I personally knew and they, and probably the most of them, still retain
the traits of business abilitv, energy and force of character that distinguished their
ancestor, Jonathan Hatch.

I wish to say here that much of the information on which the above sketch is based
was furnished to me by Mrs Ruth A. Hatch Hale, Recorder of the Hatch Genealogy Society
of Salt Lake City, Utah, after many years of painstaking research and investigation among
the records of the past, and to whom due credit should be given. I have prepared the sketch
at her request to assist the work ready for publication.

SPENCER E. SMITH

One of Jonathan Hatch's descendants

ISSUE:

Mary Hatch, b. 16 July, 1647 at Barnstable, Mass., Md. William Weeks, Jr.,
second wife, he having married Mercy Robinson 16 Mar., 1669, so records say, who
probably died early. Mercy Robinson was bapt. 4 July, 1647 according
to Robinson Genealogy

Children of William Weeks:

1. Mercy, b. 16 Jan., 1670.
2. Mehitable, b. 16 Oct., 1671.
3. Sarah, b. 6 May, 1674.
4. Experience, b. 24 June, 1677-8. Married Timothy Robinson, 3 May, 1699
5. Mercy, b. 24 April, 1679.
6. Jonathan, b. 6 May, 1681.
7. Benjamin, b. April, 1685.
9. Lydia, b. 30 June, 1687, d. young