Saturday, September 2, 2023

John Hawkins of Elk River, Maryland/Family group #5

Bob Hawkins who is a participant who connects to family group #5 prepared a paper that he has graciously consented to allow me publish on this blog site.   In this paper Bob identifies and clarifies the connection of John Hawkins of New England, Mariner to John Hawkins of Elk River, Maryland and explains that he can find no connection between John  Hawkins of New England, Mariner with John Hawkins who was a Quaker of West River who lived in Ann Arundel County.  These two men with name John Hawkins who lived in Maryland appear to be separate men.  If you have questions, reach out to Bob Hawkins at hawkinsphd@yahoo.com     Here is Bob's paper:

Who was John Hawkins of New England, Mariner?


Shortly after the publication of his seminal book BALTIMORE COUNTY FAMILIES, 1659-1759,

Robert Barnes acknowledged a number of additions and corrections. He published some of those

corrections in the December 1989 edition of the Maryland Historical Society’s Notebook1.

Among these changes were revisions to the paragraph on page 310: Namely, “Hawkins, John (1),

formerly of N.Y..” In his update, Barnes indicated that this John Hawkins was a mariner from

Boston who married Sarah Damarill on 15 September 1654. He further states that this is the John

Hawkins formerly of New England who came to Maryland in 1651 and assigned his headrights

to Giles Blake. Barnes finally asserted that “In New York on 30 March 1671 Sarah Hawkins was

appointed admnx. of the est. of her late husband John Hawkins, late a res. of Elk River,

Maryland.” In short, Barnes’ revision says that the person who identified himself as John

Hawkins, of New England, Mariner and transported himself into Maryland in 1651 was the same

as the John Hawkins of Elk River Maryland who died by 1671 leaving a wife Sarah.

Many members of Group 5 identify a Quaker John Hawkins of West River in Ann Arundel

County as their earliest ancestor in Maryland, Moreover, it has become axiomatic to many of

these Group 5 members that the immigrant John Hawkins of West River was the same person as

John Hawkins of New England, Mariner; who came to Maryland in 1651 and assigned his

headrights to Giles Blake. If Barnes’ conclusion that John Hawkins, who self-identified as John

Hawkins of New England, Mariner and the John Hawkins of Elk River were the same person is

correct, it means an abrupt change in the search for their earliest Maryland ancestor for many of

those members of Group 5.

In light of Barnes’ assertions, a reappraisal of evidence linking the John Hawkins of New

England, mariner with both John Hawkins of Elk River and John Hawkins of West River was

made to see if there is any evidence to refute his revision. Presented below are results of an online

search of the colonial archives available in the excellent Archives of Maryland On Line

sites.

Firstly, looking at Maryland land records, the name “John Hawkins of New England, Mariner”,

was found only once. In St. Mary’s County on December 8th, 1663 Daniel Jennifer signed over

land rights to “John Hawkins of New England, Mariner”. A note at the bottom of the document

indicated that the said John Hawkins had 3 warrants for 1300 acres. Unfortunately, the document

does not describe the land or tell us where it was located. Nor does it tell where this John

Hawkins resided. Furthermore, no evidence was found that John Hawkins did indeed exercise

these rights.2

However, two years later, a John Hawkins, Mariner was identified when he acquired property for

which the location of the property and the identification of the owner can be ascertained. On 8

August 1665, John Hawkins, Mariner evidently became established on the Elk River on the

eastern shore of the upper Chesapeake Bay with the assignment to him of a tract of land by John

Collett. The document describes the land as being located in Baltimore County which he, John

Collett, along with his brother Richard, had patented. The assignee was identified as “John

Hawkins of the said county, Mariner”.3 The identification and location of this property can be

inferred from the description of the property during its later sale by Robert Hawkins, the heir and

brother of this John Hawkins.4 That sale described the property as being a six-hundred-acre tract

of land called Two Necks, lying on the East side of the Chesapeake Bay on the Elk River in

Baltimore County that had been granted to John and Richard Collett by Lord Baltimore and later

signed over by John Collett to the late John Hawkins.5.

Then on September 30, 1667, Lord Baltimore granted a one-hundred-and-fifty-acre tract of land

called the Tryangle to John Hawkins of Baltimore County6. Again, the tract was described in a

later sale by John’s brother Robert, as lying on the eastern side of the Chesapeake Bay near the

head of the Bay bounded by land owned by Richard Collett, John Collett and the Elk River7.

On February 16th, 1670-1671, four servants used an axe to murder John Hawkins of Elk River.

Johns’ brother Robert Hawkins was named administrator of his estate and on October 13th, 1672,

his wife Sarah “widow and relic of John Hawkins late of the city of New York deceased”,

appointed Augustine Herman as her power of attorney8. On May, 30, 1673, Robert Hawkins,

brother and heir to John Hawkins of Elk River in Baltimore County, and the administrator of his

estate, disposed of his brother’s real property. Tracts Tryumph, Tryangle, Colletton, and Two

Necks, totaling 1950 acres, were sold to William Dunkerton and Thomas Overton9. Clearly, the

John Hawkins named in these deeds was the same John Hawkins of Elk River listed in Barnes

revision.

In summary, in the land records, the only time that John Hawkins of Elk River was referred to as

a Mariner was in the documentation of the 1665 assignment of Two Necks from John Collett.

However, the multiple business dealings with John and Richard Collett indicate that John

Hawkins of Baltimore County, Mariner and the John Hawkins who held nearly two thousand

acres of land in and around the eastern shore of the upper Chesapeake Bay near the Elk River

were one and the same. Perhaps, with the acquisition of Baltimore County property this John

Hawkins no longer considered himself of “New England” nor a Mariner.

Turning to judicial documents, one of the few times that John Hawkins of New England, Mariner

is identified as such, is in early court records when an indentured servant, one Elizabeth Frame,

petitioned the April 1658 Provincial Court for her freedom. An affidavit was produced in the

proceedings signed by John Hawkins in which he identified himself as John Hawkins of New

England, Mariner10.

While not named as such, there is a John Hawkins, who was an obvious mariner, that appears

often in the Provincial Court Proceedings. In the Provincial Court of Nov 1663 John Hawkins

sued James Jolley for payment of 45436 pounds of tobacco. A warrant to the Sheriff of St

Mary’s County was issued for the arrest of Jolly11. In the same court a Raymond Staplefort

petitioned for payment from James Jolley. In February of the next year, having not received

payment from Jolly for his tobacco, John Hawkins partitioned the court for a lien on Jolly’s

property until payment was made12 and later petitioned the court to take possession of Jolly’s

property for nonpayment of the tobacco13. James Jolly submitted a response to John Hawkins’

petition which was witnessed by Daniel Jennifer14. Probably the same Daniel Jennifer who, in

December 1663 signed over land rights to John Hawkins of New England, Mariner. On the 6th of

April 1664, John Hawkins foreclosed on the estate of James Jolly. The estate included: “1 small

boat, 1 Sloope & Contents rigging and grappling etc”. along with 8 slaves/servants. The

receiving of a small boat along with a Sloope (Sic) and rigging as payment indicates this John

Hawkins was probably a mariner15.

The afore mentioned Raymond Staplefort and John Bayley were business partners owned a ship

named Providence of Petuxent which they leased to John Hawkins and Thomas Wells. The lease

was for six to twelve months and the ship would be carrying freight (probably tobacco) to

Foulstone Creek (Oyster Bay Long Island)16. For whatever reason Staplefort and Bayley had a

disagreement which made the ship unavailable for use and Hawkins and Wells seized the ship

for payment of lost revenue. The court proceedings that followed provides substantial

information about that John Hawkins.

In the March 1664 Court, Raymond Staplefort sued John Bayley for breach of contract. The

court directed the Sheriff of St Mary’s County to prepare John Hawkins as a witness for the

plaintiff. Apparently, at this time John Hawkins was still living, or at least residing in St. Mary’s

County17. Because the vessel had not been returned, in the March Court of 1665 Stapleforth

requested the Provincial Court issue a warrant to the Sheriff of Baltimore County to arrest and

return Hawkins and Wells to the next scheduled Court. Obviously, John Hawkins was a mariner

and probably now living or residing in Baltimore County18. From the above discussion of land

records, John Hawkins of Baltimore County, mariner had purchased the tract Two Necks in

Baltimore County from John Collette in August 1665. However, the court, in the same session

directed a warrant be issued for John Hawkins and Thomas Wells in St Mary’s County “or any

other County” for a debt of 250 pounds owed to John Bayley. Perhaps an indication that this was

a transition time for John Hawkins and that the court really didn’t know his whereabouts19. The

April 1665 session of the Provincial Court ordered the Sheriff of St Mary’s County to seize the

vessel and hold it until the next court session until the legal proceedings between Staplefort and

Bayley could be resolved20. In the October 1665 court, John Bayley requested a summons for the

Sheriff of Baltimore County to provide John Hawkins as a witness21, indicating that John

Hawkins was probably residing at Two Necks by that time.

The Provincial Court documents tell us that John Hawkins was apparently a savvy business man

and somewhat of a Rounder, and possibly a tobacco farmer. He certainly was in the business of

buying, selling, and transporting tobacco. The Staplefort/Bayley affair tells us that he was also a

Mariner who spent some time in or had business dealings in St. Mary’s County but, by 1664/65

was located in Baltimore County. What’s more, the same Daniel Jennifer who sold land rights

over to John Hawkins of New England, Mariner was a witness to the lawsuit between that John

Hawkins and James Jolly linking these men named John Hawkins. While not providing direct

evidence that the John Hawkins of Elk River and the John Hawkins of New England, Mariner

were the same person, the Provincial Court documents certainly don’t exclude that possibility.

To be sure, there could have been two people: John Hawkins of Elk River who identified himself

as Mariner, and another John Hawkins of New England, Mariner but the available court

documents don’t support such a conclusion.

Of particular interest to many members of Group 5 is any evidence that points to the immigrant

Quaker John Hawkins of West River in Ann Arundel County being the John Hawkins of New

England, Mariner. Trying to link John Hawkins of West River with John Hawkins of New

England, Mariner through legal records proved to be difficult. I have been unable to find court

proceedings in the relevant time frame, that identifies a John Hawkins as being from West River

or even from Anne Arundel County. Perhaps that should not be surprising. The minutes of the

first Meeting at West River are dated 1692, but previous to that, the Meetings were held for

several years in the homes of various members. West River, on the western shore of the

Chesapeake Bay in Anne Arundel County, became the center of Quaker activity and was wellknown

for social activities and dealings, trading, and other business activities. Many actions

were taken outside the purview of the local government. Perhaps that’s the reason that John

Hawkins of West River is not mentioned in the Provincial Court Proceedings. Clearly then, the

proceedings do not connect John Hawkins of West River with John Hawkins of New England,

Mariner.

Looking at land records, in 1659, one James Bonner patented a tract of land called Great

Bonnerstone. The reverse side of the patent document, showed James Bonner reassigning the

tract to Jno Hawkins and below that was recorded the conveyance of half of the Bonerstone tract

to William Cole. Neither of these documents identified John Hawkins as being of New England

nor as being a Mariner. The property was described as being “on the west side of Chesapeake

Bay on the north side of a river in said Bay called West River and on the north side of a creek in

the said river called Cedar Creek”22. In April 1663 John Hawkins sold the remainder of the Great

Bonnerstone tract to William Cole. On the document, the Quaker John Hawkins identified

himself as John Hawkins and signed it as Jno Hawkins23. The location of the property leaves

little doubt that Great Bonnerstone was assigned to the John Hawkins of West River. On the

deed of sale, this John Hawkins identified himself simply as Jno Hawkins.

In 1668, a John Hawkins patented a tract called Bolealmonack. The documents show that he was

referred to simply as John Hawkins24. Sixteen years later, on August 12th, 1684 John Hawkins of

Anne Arundel County, identified as “son and heir of John Hawkins late of the said county” sold

Bolealmonack to William Constable. The deed indicated that “the said parcel of land was taken

up by the said John Hawkins deceased father of the said John Hawkins…”25.

Only two property transactions were found relating to John Hawkins of West River. Neither the

Bonnerstone nor the Bolealmonack documents identify him as John Hawkins as of New England,

Mariner. In short, no evidence was found in the Provincial Court proceedings nor in the land

transactions that link the Quaker John Hawkins of West River in Ann Arundel County with the

John Hawkins, of New England, Mariner.

The immigrant Quaker John Hawkins of West River died testate and left a will dated February 3

167026. Of note for this discussion is the preamble to his will: “ye same being intended a voyage

for New England and not knowing how ye Lord will be pleased to dispose of this vessel therefore

make this my last will and testament”. Much has been made of this statement in the argument

that it identifies this John Hawkins as being a Mariner. Yet, one must ask why a mariner, who

would have made tens if not over a hundred voyages to New England would feel the need to put

this statement in his will. On the contrary, this sounds more like a person who is facing an

upcoming voyage; something uncommon and frightening, and his fears compelled him to make

his last will and testament.

What’s more, the inventory of the estate of the immigrant Quaker John Hawkins dated June 8

1676 does not list any of the possessions that would be expected of a mariner. There are no sea

chest, compasses, spyglasses, quadrants, charts or atlases that one would expect a mariner to

have on hand. No knives, needles, hooks, marlinespikes, or fids. The immigrant Quaker John

Hawkins’ estate consisted of items that would be expected of a farmer: Hogs, cows, yearlings,

heifers and branding irons. With cups, carafes, pots and miscellaneous furniture rounding out the

inventory27.

Not only did John Hawkins of West River not own any of the possessions one would expect of a

Mariner, one could argue that the inventory, instead showed that he was a prosperous, if not rich

farmer. Moreover, it would seem that, because of his anxiety of traveling by ship, he felt obliged

to make his will at that time and his fear was indicated in the preamble.

Barnes, in his December 1989 revision tells us that John Hawkins from Elk River, was a

Mariner, from Boston, Massachusetts where he married on September 15th 1654, Sarah, the

widow of Humphrey Damarill. He also tells us that in New York on March 30th, 1671, “Sarah

Hawkins” was appointed to administer the estate of her “late husband John Hawkins, late a

resident of Elk River” Maryland28. These facts certainly qualify John Hawkins of Elk River as

being “of New England” and also a Mariner. Furthermore, one can reasonably claim that this,

along with the preponderance of evidence from land and court records proves that John Hawkins

of Elk River Maryland is the same John Hawkins who, in legal documents, self-identified as

John Hawkins, of New England, Mariner. What’s more, none of the property and probate

documents of John Hawkins of West River, link him to John Hawkins, of New England,

Mariner. Clearly, Hawkins members of Group 5 should be cautious when conflating the Quaker

John Hawkins of West River with the John Hawkins, of New England, Mariner.

1 THE NOTEBOOK of the Baltimore County Genealogical Society, Dec , 1989 Vol. V, No. 4, page 3.

2 Maryland state Archives Online. Patent Record, 1663-1664, 6, Transcript of AA Accension: Number SR 7348.

Maryland state Archives Online. mdsa_se23_10.pdf (maryland.gov), page 98.

3 ”. Baltimore County Land Record. https://www.mdlandrec.net/main/dsp_search.cfm?cid=BA. Clerk IS, Book IK,

page 4.

4 Maryland Land Records, Baltimore County, https://www.mdlandrec.net/main/dsp_search.cfm?cid=BA, clerk TR

Book RA, page 153.

5 Archives of Maryland, Maryland Patent Owner Index 1634-1985,

https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/stagser/s1400/s1426/html/index54.html

6 Archives of Maryland, Maryland Patent Owner Index 1634-1985,

https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/stagser/s1400/s1426/html/index54.html

7 Maryland Land Records, Baltimore County, https://www.mdlandrec.net/main/dsp_search.cfm?cid=BA, clerk TR

Book RA, page 143

8 Baltimore County Land Record. https://www.mdlandrec.net/main/dsp_search.cfm?cid=BA. Clerk IS, Book IK,

page 42

9 Baltimore County Land Records, https://www.mdlandrec.net/main/dsp_search.cfm?cid=BA, clerk TR Book RA,

pages 137-153

10 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 67

11 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 97

12 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 138

13 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 175

14 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 194

15 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 205

16 Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666 Volume 49, Page 450

17 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 187

18 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 435

19 . Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 437

20 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 438

21 Archives of Maryland Online. Proceedings of the Provincial Court, 1663-1666. Volume 49, Page 529

22 Ann Arundel County Land Records http://mdlandrec.net/main/index.cfm.Liber WH 4. p. 0045,

23 Ann Arundel Land Records http://mdlandrec.net/main/index.cfm Liber WH 4. p. 0016,

24 Recordation and Retrieval of Plats: A Digital Image System for the Courts - PLATS.NET (maryland.gov)

https://plats.msa.maryland.gov/pages/results.aspx?page=ser&cid=AA&qualifier=S&series=1581&seriesname=Pate

nts,%20Tract%20Index&dates=1639-1972&countyname=Anne%20Arundel%20County&filt=11&id=1377299694

25 Baltimore County Land Records, (http://mdlandrec.net/main/index.cfm) Liber RM HS. p. 103

26 PREROGATIVE COURT (Wills) 1635-1777 S538

https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/stagser/s500/s538/000000/000010/pdf/msa_s538_000010.pdf, Page 7

27 Huntington Collection (TE1-63), Inventories & Accounts, Vol. 2, 1676

http://mdhistory.msa.maryland.gov/msaref10/msa_te_1_063/html/msa_te_1_063-0095.html

28 THE NOTEBOOK of the Baltimore County Genealogical Society, Dec , 1989 Vol. V, No. 4, page 3. 

No comments:

Post a Comment