Find Family

[ Home Page | First Page | Previous Page | Next Page | Last Page ]

Descendants of Thomas Brownell 1535-1602 Updated 2-17-2002

Generation No. 3


3. THOMAS -33 BROWNELL (ROBERT -22, THOMAS -11)4 was born Abt. 05 Jun 1608 in Rawmarsh, Yorkshire, England4, and died 24 Sep 1664 in Portsmouth, Newport, RI4. He married ANN * BOURNE, BROWNELL4 20 Mar 1636/37 in London, England4, daughter of RICHARD BOURNE and JUDITH COWPER. She was born Abt. 15 Feb 1606/07 in London, England4, and died Aft. 06 Nov 1666 in Portsmouth, Newport, RI4.

Notes for THOMAS -3 BROWNELL:
"Thomas and Anne Brownell of London, England, arrived in Boston in 1638 on the ship "Whale". Thomas, aged 30, and Anne, 32, were the first and probably the only members of the Brownell family in England to emigrate to America.
"They had been married the previous year, on 20 March 1637 at St. Benet's, Paul's Wharf, in London and lived in the London parish of St. Mary Cole before embarking on their voyage to America.
"Thomas was the second son of Robert and Mary (Wilson) Brownell. He was born in Yorkshire, England, and was baptized at Rawmarsh Parish on 5 June 1608. He had an older brother, George, and a younger sister, Ann.
"The family is said to have lived in Sandal Magna Parish, Agbrigg Waberntake, Yorkshire, where they were most likely members ot the yeomanry, as teh class of small, independent farmers was known.
"Anne was the daughter of Richard and Judith (Cowper) Bourne. She was born in London and was baptized at St. Michael Cornhill on 15 February 1606. Richard Bourne was a grocer in London and died on 11 March 1632.
"Both Thomas and his older brother George had left Yorkshire at some point and moved to London, where they worked as drapers (dealers in cloth or clothing and dry goods) probably for their uncle, Thomas Wilson. Thomas, the brother of Mary (Wilson) Brownell, was a prosperous cloth worker or fabric merchant in London who later retired to Ryecroft, in the Parish of Rawmarsh, County of York, where he died in 1657. [The will of Thos. Wilson of Ryecroft, England, was dated Feb 14, 1658. In the will is a bequest of several Brownells among them to his cousin "Thos. Brownell of Portsmouth, RI in New England and to his children twenty pounds to be paid either to himself, if he shall come over to receive the same, or else to such person or persons in his behalf as he shall lawfully assign to receive the same".]

"Thomas and Anne settled first in Braintree, Massachusetts, where he was a "planter," or farmer. The first record of him there is on page 149 in the notebook or legal memoranda of Thomas Lechford. He sold "a house, a garden and six acres of arable land in Braintree" to Deodatus Curtis. The deed is undated, but occurs between entries of 26 May and 11 June 1640.
"The only other record of Thomas Brownell in Braintree is in the Notarial Record of William Aspinwall on 22 February 1646. The record states that "I Thomas Brownell do acknowledge myselfe indebted to Robert Kearne in the just summe of 1 pound 12 shillings and 4 pence which I promise to pay to the said Robert or his assigns in his now dwelling house in Boston at or before 1 July (?)."
"This could imply that the Brownells lived in Braintree until 1646. It is more likely, however, that this was an old debt and that the Brownells left Braintree in 1640 when the house and land were sold.
"Mary, the eldest of Thomas and Anne Brownell's nine children, was probably born during the time they lived in Braintree. Her date of birth is given as April 1639. There is, however, no record of this birth as the recording of births in Braintree did not begin until 1643 and were very sketchy for the early years, few births being actually recorded."

From "The Brownell Chronicle" Vol 1, Num 1, April 1994.

"Two years after arriving in America and making their home in Braintree, Massachusetts, Thomas and Anne Brownell sold their house and land there and, with their one-year-old daughter, Mary, moved again. This time they chose the recently settled town of Portsmouth, Rhode Island.
"Portsmouth had been established in 1638 by supporters of Anne Hutchinson who had been banished from Boston after being found guilty of heresy and excommunicated from the Boston Church. [The "famous compact" of 1638 was signed by Wm. Coddington, John Clark and seventeen others. John Walker was one of the nineteen signers of the compact, and Mar 10, 1647, Thos. Brownell signed "with his mark", the will of John Walker of Portsmouth.] With the help of Roger Williams the Island of Aquidneck was purchased from the Indians and a settlement was established at an area called Pocasset. [April 1657, Casanaquant, chief sachem of Narragansetts, in consideration of gifts of value received and 100 pounds, deeded the island Quononquot opposite Newport, now known as Conneaut, to Wm. Coddington and Benedict Arnold Sr., both of Newport "for themselves and such others of the free inhabitants of RI and others of their friends as are in covenant with them by writings bearing date Mar 10, 1657/8. The grantor agreed at his own charge to remove all Indians and clear them off from the island. This agreement was signed by Governor Coddington, Robert Hazard, John Greene Jr. of Warwick and sixty more others. One provision was that Thos. Brownell (and many others named) shall each of them pay one 67th part of the whole charge and shall each receive one 67th part of the promised premises.]
"It was among these "heretics" that Thomas and Anne chose to make their permanent home in America. While there are no records which state that the Brownells moved to Portsmouth in 1640, the record of the sale of their house in Braintree in 1640 would make that a logical conclusion. Furthermore, the remaining eight of their nine children are said to have been born in Portsmouth although, as in Braintree, there are no records to substantiate this.
"The first written record of Thomas Brownell in Portsmouth is in 1647 when he was a witness to the will of his neighbor, John Walker, on 18 March 1647 O.S. Through this will and from depositions taken in 1721 for a court case involving Walker's land, the location of the Brownell farm has been determined. It was on the western side of the northwestern end of Rhode Island. The farm, comprised of forty acres, extended down to the water and looked out on Narragansett Bay.
"Thomas Brownell held a number of public offices for the town of Portsmouth. This was not unusual - because of the large number of offices to be filled and gthe limited number of Freemen to fill those offices, many were elected to one office or another almost every year.
"Finding someone who would accept an office was often difficult. Portsmouth, as well as other towns in Rhode Island, imposed fines not only on those Freeemen who didn't attend town meetings, but also on those who refused to accept the office they were elected to.
"On 10 July 1648, Thomas as chosen at the town meeting for the post of "water bailey," a position which gave him jurisdiction over fisheries and other maritime matters. He was often chosen to serve on various juries, as were most of the Freemen of Portsmouth.
"Thomas is said to have been made a Freeman of Portsmouth in 1655, but it is more likely that his name appeared on a list of Freemen for that year. He had probably been a Freeman since shortly after moving to Portsmouth and at the latest by 1648. It is unlikely that he would have been elected to an office such as water bailey had he not been a Freeman, i.e. able to vote and to participate in the local government. Church membership was not a prerequisite for being a Freeman as it had been in Braintree.
"Thomas was chosen on 5 May 1655 to be one of six Commissioners to represent Portsmouth at the General Court in Providence. The General Court served as a kind of legislative body for the colony, which at that time consisted of the towns of Portsmouth, Newport, Providence and Warwick. The location of the Court's meedings alternated among the four towns.
"Later in the same year, on 4 June 1655, Thomas was elected one of three constables for the town of Portsmouth. On 29 September 1662, he was again chosed as a Commissioner to the General Court which was to be held in Warwick and was also chosen to be on the Grand Jury for the Court of Trials in Warwick. Thomas was chosen once again on 27 April 1664 as a Commissioner to the General Court to be held at Newport.
"At the General Court of Trials held at Warwick, Rhode Island, on 11 March 1655 O.S. a jury heard a case between the state and Caleb Carr about a sheep that Thomas Brownell "Challengeth." The verdict of the jury was that Caleb Carr was not guilty. At the same session of the General Court, Thomas accused John Coggeshall "uppon suspition of Felonie of an Ewe sheepe." He was ordered to post a bond of 100 to prosecute Coggeshall, who was ordered to post the same bond to answer the charge at the General Court of Trials at Providence.
"A jury heard the case on 24 June 1656 and found the charges against Coggeshall to be not true. The case was ended by the consents of both parties in open court and Thomas was released from his 100 bond.
"Thomas was involved in a more significant controversy in 1661. A dispute had arisen between Thomas and John Porter over a small parcel of land. At the town meeting on 11 May 1661 a committee of five men was established to settle the dispute which concerned the boundary between the two men's properties. Since these kinds of disputes were constantly arising, the town meeting further ordered that this same committee would hear all similar disputes and report their results to the town meeting.
"This case was cited as a precedence in a similar dispute in 1673 between Sarah Smiton (probably the Sarah Smiton who married Thomas Brownell's son William in 1672) and Thomas Jennings. Three of the five original committee members were still alive and, with two more added, their power to make decisions in boundary disputes was confirmed by the town meeting.
"The resolution of the dispute between Thomas Brownell and John Porter was reported to the town meeting in 1 October 1661. The result establishes the boundary line between the two properties. Without an understanding of the area at that time, however, it is impossible to determine which party was the winner in this dispute."

From "The Brownell Chronicle" Vol 1 Num 2, 1994.

Thomas Brownell Killed in Accident

"On the afternoon of 24 September 1664, Thomas Brownell was killed in an accident while on his way from his home at the northwest end of Rhode Island to Portsmouth. Brownell, aged 56, left behind a wife, Anne, and nine children, ranging in age from nine to twenty-five years.
"According to the testimony of Daniel Lawton, Brownell had stopped at the home of Lawton's father and upon leaving, invited Daniel, aged 21, to ride with him the rest of the way to Portsmouth. The ride soon became a race when Thomas put his horse ot a gallop as they came down the hill near William Wodel's property, located about halfway between the Brownell farm and the town of Portsmouth. The younger man soon caught up with and passed Thomas.
"As he continued the race to Portsmouth, Lawton looked back to see where Brownell was. Seeing Brownell's riderless horse running towards a swamp he immediately turned his horse around and caught Brownell's horse.
"He then retraced his way until he came upon Brownell lying on the ground near a tree. He called out to Brownell, but received no response and so dismounted to check on the man. Taking him by the arms and seeing the great amount of blood on the ground, Lawton realized that Brownell was dead.
"The following day a coroner's jury, with Samuel Wilbur as foreman, made an inquest into the accident. Testimony was taken from Danial Lawton and details about the scene of the accident were given.
"The jury's conclusion was that Brownell, riding furiously down the hill, was either thrown against or hit the tree. The broken reins of his bridle had been found next to the body and there was blood and hair sticking to the tree. Brownell's skull was broken and his "brains came out," thus causing his death."

From "The Brownell Chronicle" Vol 1, Num 3, Aug 1994.

"When Thoma Brownell died on 24 September 1664, he did not leave a will or any directions as to how his estate should be handled. Today when someone dies without a will, the courts determine, according to state laws, how the estate is to be divided. The same procedure was used in the case of Thomas Brownell except that the power to do so was vested in the Town Council of Portsmouth rather than the courts.
"Therefore on 16 September 1665 the Town Council determined how the estate should be divided. Anne Brownell was appointed executrix of the estate and was directed to carry out the terms of the settlement. Prior to his death, Thomas had agreed to an exchange of lands with William Brenton. The Council directed that Anne honor that agreement and the transaction was completed in November of 1665.
"As customary at that time, the bulk of the estate was to go to the eldest son, George. Because George was then only about nineteen years old, Anne was to retain the "use, benefit and profit" of all the housings and lands that belonged to Thomas. At the time of his marriage or when he reached the age of twenty-one, George was to receive one-half of the land. Which half was left to Anne to determine. After Anne's death, George was to inherit the remaining half of his father's property. A provision was made that should George die before Anne, the property would go to George's heirs, if any. If not, the property would go to the second eldest son, Robert.
"Legacies were also given to the other eight children, with the stipulation that if Anne should die before those legacies were carried out, George, or whoever inherited the land and housings of Thomas, was to carry out those legacies. The three younger sons--Robert, William and Thomas--were each to receive 20 when they reached the age of twenty-one. The two eldest daughters--Mary and Sarah--both of whom were married at the time of their father's death, were each to receive ten shillings. The other three daughters--Martha, Anne and Susanna--were to be paid 20 each at the time of their marriage.
"Finally, if any of the eight younger children of Thomas were to die before they had received their bequests, the amount due them was to be divided among those still living.
"This settlement reflects the custom of "primogeniture"-- the right of the eldest son to inherit the entire estate of his parents--which was still followed in New England as it had been for many centuries in England. Many parents made gifts of money or land before their death to their younger children as a means of providing for their future and for a more equal distribution of the family's assets. Because Thomas died unexpectedly with no will and with six of his nine children under the age of twenty-one, no such provisions had been made.
"The legacies which the three younger sons and the three unmarried daughters received were not small amounts. Twenty pounds was a good dowry, and probably similar to that received by Mary and Sarah when they were married. Without such a dowry, the girls would have had a difficult time finding a husband. For Robert, William and Thomas, 20 would allow them to buy property of their own when they came of age. That Mary and Sarah received only ten shillings indicates that they had already received their dowry at the time of their marriages.
"As executrix of her husband's estate, Anne was required to post a bond of 200 to assure that she would carry out the provisions of the settlement. Should she fail to do so, the bond would be forfeited.
"This settlement of the estate of Thomas Brownell raises several interesting questions. First, why did it take almost one year after his death for the Town Council to settle the estate? And second, why was an inventory of the estate not done? Usually an inventory was conducted immediately following a death, detailing all the possessions from property and livestock to household furnishings and clothing that belonged to the deceased. If such an inventory was done, it has been lost.
"Could it be that the Council was forced to make this will because of disputes over the estate? And why was Anne required to post a bond to ensure that the bequests were carried out? It seems that the Town Council did not trust Anne and thus forced her to divide the estate according to law and customary practices of that time.
"This decree is also an important genealogical document, as it clarifies several mistakes that have been made regarding the children of Thomas and Anne Brownell. Many sources have noted only eight children, while the will clearly states that there were nine. The youngest, Susanna, is not mentioned in Austin's "Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island", in George Grant Brownell's "Genealogical Record of the Descendants of Thomas Brownell" or in "Little Compton Families." In the few sources that do mention her, she is said to have died in 1655, the same year she is said to have been born. Susanna was, however, still living when the estate was settled in 1665, but no further record of her has been found.
"Another discrepancy appears in the order of birth of Thomas and Anne's children. In all other sources, the order is given as follows: Mary, Sarah, Martha, George, William, Thomas Robert, Anne and Susanna (if she is listed at all). The decree made by the Town Council of Portsmouth lists the sons' order of birth as George, Robert, William and Thomas. In the absence of actual birth records (and I know of none that exist) this decree is the definitive primary source for information about the nine children of Thomas and Anne Brownell, especially since the original document, as opposed to transcripts, still exists.
"Because a will established inheritance and ownership of property, it was the one most important legal document a person at that time could have. The order of birth of the sons was of great importance because the eldest living son would inherit the parents' estates. Thus those who made the will and those who approved it would not have made mistakes in that regard.
"Several transcripts of this document are incomplete because of the condition of the original. The document had been folded in half twice and the words at each fold are rather difficult to make out. By enlarging a photocopy of the document, the wording becomes more clear and thus we are able to get a complete and accurate transcript of the document. The original is on file at the Portsmouth town hall."

From "The Brownell Chronicle" Vol 1, Num 4, Oct 1994.



More About THOMAS -3 BROWNELL:
Burial: Brownell Cemetery, Portsmouth, RI
Immigration: 1638, Boston on the Whale

Notes for ANN * BOURNE, BROWNELL:
What Happened to Anne?

"Anne (Bourne) Brownell was fifty-eight years old when her husband Thomas died. She was the mother of nine children, seven of whom were still at home. When Thomas' estate was settled by the Town Council of Portsmouth the following year, Anne was named executrix and posted a bond of 200 to carry out the provisions of the will.
"The only other reference to Anne that has been found is in the Records of the Court of Trials, meeting in Newport. At the 24 October 1666 session, an indictment was presented by the General Solicitor against William Long and Anne Brownell "for owning one another man and wife," despite being prohibited from doing so by the magistrates. Both pleaded guilty. The court fined each forty shillings and ordered them to pay the court fees. The Court went on to prohibit Anne and William from living together as they were not lawfully married.
"There is no further information about either Anne or William. Anne is said to have been buried next to Thomas, but the date of her death is unknown. It is possible that after being taken to court for living together as man and wife, the two left Portsmouth, moving to a location where they could live together, or, perhaps, even marry.
"We don't know when the relationship between Anne and William Long began. That relationship may have been what prompted the Town Council to settle the estate by making a will for Thomas, thus preventing Long from profiting by his relationship with Anne at the expense of the children's inheritance.
"This could also explain why there is no mention of Susanna other than in Thomas' will. In 1666 Susanna would have been about twelve years old. Anne may have taken Susanna with her, rather than leave her with one of the older children.
"All this, of course, is only speculation and we will most likely never know any more of Anne than we do now."

From "The Brownell Chronicle" Vol 1, Num 4, Oct 1994.
     
Children of THOMAS BROWNELL and ANN BOURNE are:
4. i.   MARY4 BROWNELL, HAZARD, b. Apr 1639, Massachusetts; d. 28 Jan 1738/39, South Kingston, Washington, RI.
5. ii.   SARAH BROWNELL, FREEBORN, b. Bet. 1641 - 1642, Massachusetts; d. 06 Sep 1676, Portsmouth, Newport, RI.
  iii.   MARTHA BROWNELL, WAIT-DYER4, b. 01 May 1643, Little Compton, Newport, RI5; d. 15 Feb 1742/43, Portsmouth, Newport, RI5; m. (1) JEREMIAH WAIT6, Aft. 16 Sep 1665, Portsmouth, Newport, RI7; b. 04 Dec 1639, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. 26 Dec 1675, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; m. (2) CHARLES DYER8, 08 Mar 1690/91; b. Abt. 1650, Newport, Newport, RI; d. 15 May 1709, Newport, Newport, RI.
  Notes for MARTHA BROWNELL, WAIT-DYER:
She was the third daughter according to the Town Council's will, and she was 99 year 9 months old at her death in 1743/4.

  Notes for JEREMIAH WAIT:
Son of Thomas and Ellen (___) Wait.

  Notes for CHARLES DYER:
Son of William and Mary (Barret) Dyer.

6. iv.   GEORGE BROWNELL, b. 1646, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. 20 Apr 1718, Little Compton, Newport, RI.
7. v.   ROBERT BROWNELL, b. Bet. 1651 - 1652, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. 12 Jul 1728, Little Compton, Newport, RI.
8. vi.   WILLIAM BROWNELL, b. Abt. 1653, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. Bet. 02 Nov 1714 - 21 Mar 1714/15, Dartmouth, Bristol, MA.
9. vii.   ANN * BROWNELL, WILBOR, b. Abt. 1654, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. 02 Apr 1747, Little Compton, Newport, RI.
10. viii.   SUSANNAH BROWNELL, CARR, b. 02 Jun 1655, Little Compton, Newport, RI.
11. ix.   THOMAS -4 BROWNELL, b. Abt. 1656, Portsmouth, Newport, RI; d. 18 May 1732, Little Compton, Newport, RI.

[ Home Page | First Page | Previous Page | Next Page | Last Page ]
Home | Help | About Us | Biography.com | HistoryChannel.com | Site Index | Terms of Service | PRIVACY
© 2009 Ancestry.com