The following document and the subsequent note, are copied from "The Marriage, Baptismal and Burial Registers of Westminster Abbey," collected and published in London, 1876, by Col. Joseph L. Chester, LL.D., the late distinguished American genealogist. The Royal Warrant for the Disinterment of Certain Commonwealth Personages. It is his Maiesties express pleasure and command that you cause the bodies of the severall persons undernamed, wch have bin unwarrantably interred in Henry the 7th and other chappels and places wthin the Collegiate Church of Westminster since the year 1641, to be forthwith taken up, and buried in some place of the churchyard adioning to ye said church, whereof you may not faile, and for so doing this shall be yr warrant. Dated at ye Court at Whitehall Sept. 9, 1661. "Henry 7th Chappel." Dr. Isaac Dorislaus, Coll. Richard DEAN(E), Mrs. Elizabeth CROMWELL, Coll. Humphrey Mackworth, Sr. William CONSTABLE, Thomas May, and fifteen others. Before getting into CROMWELL, I cannot fail to mention the DEANE and CONSTABLE connections to the PAYNE families of America in the 17th century. DEANE marriages include: HIGGINS, ATWOOD, THACKER, and SNOW. All families closely associated with PAYNE'S in New England through their intermarriage's within these families. See Mayflower Families, The Great Migration, Thomas LECHFORD'S Note-Book, etc. for more data. The wife of Col. Richard LEE was Ann CONSTABLE, who m2. Edmund LISTER. Richard and Ann LEE were the parents of John LEE, who was most likely identical to the man which brought William PAYNE, Sr. to Dorchester County, Maryland from Virginia in 1673 as a headright. Son Richard, Jr., married Lettice CORBIN, daughter of the merchant Henry CORBIN and his wife Alice ELTONHEAD. The PAYNE connection to the THACKER, ELTONHEAD, and CONWAY families are fairly well documented. Another son, HANCOCK LEE, married first Mary KENDALL and second Sarah, daughter of Isaac ALLERTON, Jr. and his wife Elizabeth WILLOUGHBY. Again, we find PAYNE's intermarrying with these families as well (see my Family File). Daughter Anne LEE married Thomas YOUELL, a surname that appears in the shipping records with PAYNE, HAWES, PRESTON, BULLOCKE, and others during the early 17th century. The Note attached to the document of 1661 states, "The mother of Oliver CROMWELL, "The Protector," daugther of William STEWARD, of the City of Ely, Esq., by his second wife, Catherine, daughter of Thomas PAINE, of Castle Acre, Norfolk, Esq. She appears to have been a second child of this name, and baptized at Holy Trinity, Ely, 28th October, 1565. She married there 10th Feb. 1588/9, William LYNNE, gent., who was buried there 17th March 1589/90. She married secondly, about a year after her first husband's death, Robert CROMWELL, of Huntingdon, Esq., by whom she was mother of the Protector, and who was buried at All Saints', Huntingdon, 24th June 1617. If the above dates are correct, she had just entered her ninetieth year. She died 18th November, 1654. and was buried in great state, contrary to her express desire. Before the disinterment of her remains, the body of her son, Oliver CROMWELL, buried 26th September, 1658, had been exhumed and hung at Tyburn. Page 521. There are a number of correlations to be found here. First is the mention of the town of Ely in Cambs. which lies in close proximity to the lands held by: · Sir Thomas PAYNE of Market Bosworth, Leicester, who, along with most of his family, removed to the area of Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk · Robert PAYNE of St. Neot's, Hunts. and his grandson, Sir Robert PAYNE, a subscriber of the London Company in 1609 and again 1612 and MP for Huntingdonshire · The PAYNE family of Great Ellingham and Attleborough, Norfolk which lies just east of Ely, north of Bury St. Edmunds and southeast of Castle Acre, Norfolk- the home of Thomas and Margaret PAYNE, and their daughter, Catherine PAYNE CROMWELL (AKA WILLIAMS). The family of Sir Thomas, upon their removal to Suffolk, resided nearby, just to the SE, at Worlington, Hengrave, and in and around Bury St. Edmunds- where they became the Bailiff's of Hengrave for the Duke of BUCKINGHAM (STAFFORD) and Sir Thomas KYTSON; and the Attorneys for the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER)- a title also held, in succession, by the GRANVILLE and the PULTENEY families. The CARTERET family intermarried with the GRANVILLE'S (and MONTAGU'S) and thus held the title of Earl GRANVILLE 1714-1766 (although they preferred the families traditional spelling of GRENVILLE- another family of interest, who held the title of BUCKINGHAM 1784-1889). Sir Thomas PAYNE of Leic/Suffolk, married Margaret PULTENEY, an ancestor of the later Earl of BATH. Albert W. PAINE, in "PAINE Genealogy- Ipswich Branch" published in 1881 (entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1881, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress), relates that, "William PAYNE (son of Edmond), was a man of much note and importance in his day, being in the service of Edward STAFFORD, Duke of BUCKINGHAM, as bailiff of his Manor of Hengrave. In 1521, the Duke having been convicted of conspiring against King Henry VIII. to establish himself in power, as his successor, was, by order of the King, put to death. The office thus becoming vacant by the death of the Duke, PAYNE lost his place as Deputy, and was obliged to retire to private life. The Duke's successor, however, appointed PAYNE'S son (Henry) to the office held by the father." Regarding Henry PAYNE, Albert states, "he came to reside in Bury St. Edmunds, in the County of Suffolk. He was a lawyer by profession, a member of Lincoln's Inn, Esquire. During his life it was that Henry VIII. dissolved so large a part of the Catholic monasteries of England, and seized upon their effects, converting them to his own use and purposes. In the 37th year of that King's reign, A.D. 1546, PAINE purchased of the Crown and received a grant in fee of the Manor of Nowton, the advowson of the church and the hereditaments in Nowton belonging to the dissolved monastery of St. Edmund, one of the most celebrated monasteries in the Kingdom. He also purchased the Grange in Thorpe Riggnoll, in the County of York, parcel of the lands of the Priori of Worksop. For the grants he paid to the Crown, as consideration, the sum of 647.18.2. The sale of the Manor was made subject to a lease then existing in favor of Wm. STERNE for twenty years for the yearly rent of 25.13.9. By this purchase, PAINE became Lord of the Manor of Nowton, a right or dignity which followed the law of inheritance. After the fall and consequent death of BUCKINGHAM (STAFFORD), as has already been related, and the consequent dismissal of PAINE'S father as bailiff, the DUKE'S successor, Sir Thomas KYTSON (?), appointed his son Henry to the same office of bailiff of the Manor (at Hengrave). PAINE was also counsel for the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER), and the Earl on his death bequethed to him for a rememberance, a gold ring of the value of 40s., and the Countess styling him "her loving friend." directed by her will, that he should be associated with her executors, and gave him a legacy of 20.0.0." The association of this PAINE family to STAFFORD, VILLIERS, BOURCHIER, thus becomes clear. I am unsure about "Sir Thomas KYTSON." There is no mention of him in my "Directory of British Peerages," particularly in regard to the title of BUCKINGHAM, which appears to have transferred to the VILLIERS family. This would make much more sense and is in line with the associations with these families by a number of PAYNE families- in Hunts., Cambs., Suffolk, Norfolk, and Jersey in the Channel Islands. Add in MONTAGU, CARTERET, and PEPYS, and their associations with the same PAYNE families, and it becomes possible to solidify the connections between the various branches. However, there is a connection to be found here to the KYTSON family. The following comes from Historian General Larry D. McClanahan: "Much of the prosperity of the early Washington's was through marriages in the male line to wealthy widows. These marriages brought increased landholdings and greater status. Through John Washington's marriage to Margaret Kytson was brought a connection to the Spencer line which produced the future Sir Winston Churchill. A later marriage of John's great-grandson Lawrence in the late 1500s to Margaret Butler brought a connection to the Plantagenet line. Lawrence's second son, William, married Anne Villiers, half sister of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham and confidant of Charles 1. Their son, Colonel Sir William Washington, was a commander under Charles at the Battle of Edgehill in 1642 in the English Civil War. The fifth son of Lawrence and Margaret Butler Washington was the Reverend Lawrence born in 1602 at Sulgrave. His education was from Brasenose College, Oxford, obtaining B.A., M.A. and B.D. degrees while serving as proctor and lector." Thus, we find here even more evidence of the later 17th century connections in Virginia to the PAYNE family. The town of Castle Acre, Norfolk, in which the said Thomas PAINE, Esq. lived is very near to the families old home of Stephen PAYNE and others at Great Ellingham and Attleborough. Bury St. Edmonds, Boxted, Worlington, Soham, Histon, and St. Neots are also in the area and these were all areas where Sir Robert PAYNE, William PAYNE, Guilles and Peter PAYN, Henry PAYNE, PEPYS, CROMWELL, and others of interest lived and conducted business. Robert PAYNE (great-grandfather of Sir Robert), who is thought to have been the elder son of Sir Thomas of Market Bosworth, resided at St. Neot's, Huntingdonshire, near to CROMWELLS home in Huntigdon and St. Ives. The MONTAGU and PEPYS families employed PAYNE'S within their households as cook maids and "watermen" (providing "victuals" to the fleet most likely). Samuel PEPYS stated in his famous diary that when the PAYNE'S left his service it was to join the Lord CHAMBERLAIN'S (a position held by the MONTAGUS under King Charles I). Derek Wilson, a well-known English Biographer states in "The King and the Gentleman," (St. Martin's Press), p. 183, "Between 1623 and 1625 the knights of the shire (Huntingdonshire) in Parliament were Edward MONTAGU and Sir Oliver CROMWELL. In the election of 1625 CROMWELL was replaced by Sir Robert PAYNE, a friend and protege' of the Kimbolton family. The new order was harshly emphasized two years later by the sale of Hinchingbrooke to the MONTAGUS." This reference, and the records themselves, establishes that Sir Robert PAYNE was, in fact, a close associate of CROMWELL, whose grandmother was Catherine PAYNE, daughter of "Thomas PAYNE, Esq., of Castle Acre, Norfolk." However one choses to approach this connection, it is unavoidable to NOT associate Sir Robert with either the NORFOLK or the SUFFOLK branch of the PAYNE family. I chose both for the evidence is compelling that we are talking one family. Either the Thomas PAYNE, Esq. "of Castle Acre, Norfolk" and Sir Thomas PAYNE "of Market Bosworth, Leic." were the same man- or they were closely related. They were both born about the same time (1500) and they both married a Margaret (Thomas of Leic. m. Margaret PULTENEY. Thomas of Norfolk m. Margaret ?). This association must have been one of great division between the family as it is apparant that within this family there were ROYALISTS on the one side and PARLIAMENTARIANS on another. Between the PAYNE relationship's with the MONTAGU, CROMWELL, STAFFORD, VILLIERS, PEPYS, and CARTERET families, there must have been major political and religious differences between members of the family- similar to what historians record happened within the MONTAGU family. Not far to the west, in Hereford, are the remains of Goodrich Castle which was a Royalist stronghold during the Civil War, defended by 104 Royalists. There is a CROMWELL exhibit there and although I do not know CROMWELL'S connection to Goodrich, it is interesting that it lies next door to Tobias PAYNE's haunts and is the neighboring village to where the SCUDAMORE family lived. A SCUDAMORE is named in the 1649 will of Tobias PAYNE of Kings Caple. Furthermore, the Arms of at least three different PAYNE branches are found in the same area- Sir Robert PAYNE held land and license to sell tobacco, Guilles and Peter PAYN of the Jersey family owned land here, and finally, the family of Sir Thomas of Leicester are found here- all living near to one another. Additonally, Oliver CROMWELL married Elizabeth, daughter of James BOURCHIER, another name prominent in Jersey and associated with the PAYN and CARTERET family there. All facts which are hard to dismiss. (see "An Armorial of Jersey," J. Bertrand PAYNE) Oliver CROMWELL was to receive a letter from Colonel Robert LILBURNE dated 22 September 1653; " There Happened a most violent storm, which continued for 16 or 18 hours together, in which we lost a small man of war called the SWAN, the MARTHA and MARGARET of Ipswich, wherein was all our remaining store of ammunition and provision... but that which was most sad was the loss of the SPEEDWELL of Lynn, where all the men that were in her, being 23 seamen and soldiers (except one) were drowned... and all this in sight of our man at land, who saw their friends drowning, and heard them crying for help, but could not save them." The connection of these ship's to the network are unquestionable. The most significant of these being the SPEEDWELL of Lynn. This ship was owned by John WINSLOW, merchant of Boston, whose son-in-law was Tobias PAYNE, Mariner. His grandson, William PAYNE, was a merchant of Boston and two of WINSLOW'S sons lived for a time in Charles County, Maryland where Thomas PAINE of St. Mary's had first patented land as early as 1644. Thomas GATES was aboard the SWAN in 1609 and his wife Elizabeth WEEDON came to Virginia aboard the WARWICK in 1620. The WARWICK was under the command of Col. Henry FLEETE, whose widow, Sarah, married, as his second wife, Col. John WALKER. Their daughter, Sarah WALKER, married before 1685, Edwin CONWAY, who married first, Elizabeth THOMPSON. John WALKER married first, Sarah ? and had three daughters. Jane WALKER married, as his second wife, John DEANE bef. 1679. John DEANE married first, Elizabeth THATCHER, daughter of Silvester THATCHER and Margaret (probably POWELL). Margaret's second husband was Warwick CAMMOCK, whom Robert PAYNE, alias DAVIES, Clerk of the Rappahannock County Vestry from 1662-1666, named in his will as an overseer (to ensure certain stipulations in his will were carried out). Robert PAYNE'S wife was Elizabeth LAWSON. Another Robert PAYNE married Catherine THOMPSON, daughter of John THOMPSON. Warwick CAMMOCK was the grandson of Thomas CAMMOCK, who had married Francis RICH, the daughter of Robert RICH, 2nd Baron RICH and a relative of Robert RICH, the Earl of WARWICK. Thomas CAMMOCK'S daughter, Martha, married Sir Richard SALTONSTALL, Provisional Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. After the death of John WALKER, Sarah married after 1668, as her fourth husband, John STONE. Another daughter of John WALKER and Sarah ?, Anne, married first, John PAYNE, the son of John PAYNE and Margaret (probably ROBINSON, although most sources say JENNINGS) of Rappahannock County. Anne WALKER married second in 1703, John DANGERFIELD and had issue. John DAINGERFIELD, Jr., married as her second husband, Mary CONWAY, who had married first, James, son of William BALL. James BALL and Mary CONWAY had daughter Sinah, who married Daniel MCCARTY, who had married first, Anne Mary LEE, whose second husband was William FITZHUGH. Frances DANGERFIELD, sister of John, married Edwin, son of Henry THATCHER and Eltonhead CONWAY. Edwin's brother, Henry THATCHER, married Elizabeth PAYNE, the daughter of John PAYNE, Jr., and Anne WALKER above. I have written extensively on these intermarriages within the "merchant network." Although listing them in this way is tedious to follow, I know of know other way of demonstrating the degree to which the families of New England, Virginia, and Maryland intermarried. Particularly the PAYNE'S of those colonies- who unquestionably shared a relationship that trancended coincidence or mere association by marriage. To understand this, apart from the numerous marriages that tied them together, all we need do is look to the shipping and business records which also associates them. Again, read my notes on those subjects. More details on these families can be found throughout my web site. I have no firm proof that Sir Thomas PAYNE of Market Bosworth had a daughter named Catherine. We know she was the daughter of "Thomas PAINE, Esq. "of Castle Acre, Norfolk." But, if my research is studied, it becomes apparant that these two Thomas PAINE'S were very closely connected to Sir Robert PAYNE of St. Neot's, Hunts. Further research needs to be done, but I hope I have established yet another lead to follow which will ultimately help in solving our PAYNE mystery. I believe I have demonstrated very well, over a period spanning well over 500 years or more at this point, that these families shared similarities that almost certainly suggest a relationship between them, in England as well as throughout the colonies. If we take all the primary and secondary research together, literally, than we are presented with the unavoidable conclusion that through their relationships with CROMWELL, MONTAGU, BOURCHIER, PEPYS, STAFFORD, VILLIERS, FAIRFAX, KYTSON, and CARTERET, the PAYNE'S, represented by Sir Thomas PAINE of Market Bosworth, Leic. and of Suffolk; Thomas PAINE, Esq. of Norfolk; Robert PAYNE of Hunts.; Tobias PAYNE of Hereford, and finally, the PAYN family of Jersey- were at a minimum, well aquainted with one another. However, we cannot fail to also recognize that from these beginnings in the late 1400s, the connections between the branches continued on for an additional 300 years or more, ending in America where each of these families emigrated in the years between 1635 and 1637. The PAYNE mariners, although they were involved in the settlement of America, appear to not have settled, however, until the 1640s- or the completion of the "Great Migration" period; and the PAYN'S of Jersey that made their way to St. Kitts, due to their involvement on the side of the King during the Civil War, did not emigrate until the close of those hostilities. Nevertheless, their connections, from at least the 15th century on through the 17th (and well beyond in some cases) are simply undeniable.

Robert PAINE, Jr., son of Robert PAINE b. Suffolk County, England in 1601 and his wife Ann WHITING of Hadleigh, Suffolk, who emigrated to America in 1638. Robert, Jr. was born at Ipswich, Massachusetts; graduated Harvard University in 1656, and studied for the ministry. Whether or not he actually practiced his profession does not certainly appear, but Felt speaks of him as "a preacher." On July 10, 1666, he married Elizabeth REINER. By her he had four children, viz: Elizabeth, born June 15, 1677, married Daniel SMITH, and died 1717; John, born Oct. 24, 1684; Robert, who died Dec. 24, 1693, and Dorcas, who married Matthew WHIPPLE, son of Lt. Col. John WHIPPLE. Mr. Robert PAINE was distinguished as the foreman of the Grand Jury that found all the indictments for witchcraft at Salem, though we have reason to believe that he was not an active prosecutor of the accused, or if at any time he was so, he changed his mind before his death and took measures to allay the delusion. With the recent posts regarding the witch trials, I have a query of my own regarding a document, bearing the initials "R. P." which had a powerful influence in dispelling the witchcraft delusion at Salem in 1692; I am extracting the following from "PAINE Genealogy- Ipswich Branch," A.W. PAINE, Bangor, ME. 1881, which on p. 139, allusion is made to Rev. John HALE'S effort effecting the same result. I would appreciate any comments or thoughts on the subject of this letter. This argument for its authorship is quite dated (1881), and to my knowledge, it is still an open question of importance. At least to my family anyway. For anyone interested in the trials, it may prove to be of interest to you as well. "UPHAM, in his "History of Witchcraft," relates that in 1692, chief among the causes or influences which finally led to the breaking up of the witchcraft excitement, was a favorable letter written to Jonathan CORWIN, a man and judge who had much to do with the administration of justice at that time. The letter had great weight in opening the eyes of those who read it, to the enormous wrongs suffered by the community from this cause. The argument is certainly most able and ingenious, showing a mind of great strength and culture worthy of an age and time centuries later. The original document is still preserved by the "Essex Institute," at Salem, and a copy of it is published by Mr. UPHAM in his history now referred to. It bears the initials of "R. P." as its author, and underneath this signature is written the name of "Robert PAINE." Just when this name was written is not known, but it has long been there, probably ever since the letter has had a public observation. The authorship of Mr. PAINE, however, is denied by the friends of Robert PIKE who lived in the neighboring town of Salisbury, where it bears date. Mr. UPHAM enters at great length into a discussion of the matter, and sides with Mr. PIKE, though admitting that it bears internal evidence "of a theological education, and a familiarity with matters that belong to the studies of a minister," which Mr. PAINE was and Mr. PIKE was not. "Whoever was its author," says Mr. UPHAM," he did his duty nobly, and stands alone above all the scholars and educated men of his time in bearing testimony openly, bravely, in the very ears of the Court, against the digraceful and shocking course they were pursuing." He adds, "if composed by him it is truly a marvelous production, an intellectual phenomenon not easly to be paralleled." The fact of Mr. PAINE'S having been foreman of the jury as above related, is taken as evidence conclusive of Mr. UPHAM of his not being the author. But to this view, there is certainly another side leading to an opposite conclusion. Such a mind as his, educated for the gospel ministry, and so constantly brought in closest intimacy with the accused and accusers, could not, it would seem, fail to be convinced of the truth, and at the same time of his duty to work out a correction. Mr. PIKE was a military man, wearing the title of "Major," a fact which very properly comes into consideration in such a case, especially when the contestant for the prize is an educated man, as there is no evidence that Mr. PIKE was, and admitted to be of a theological turn, such as the composition indicates. The internal evidence, afforded by the writing, is very strongly in favor of him, whose name is annexed to it, and the conclusion is supported by all the facts, that the interpretation given to "R. P." was by one who knew, and knowing made his knowledge practical in the way he did. It certainly detracts much from the weight of Mr. UPHAM'S conclusion, that his reasoning is wholly against Robert PAINE, Sen., the father and not the son, he not being aware, as was the fact, that the father had been dead several years before the letter was written. This change of person, introducing the son instead of the father as a competitor with Mr. PIKE, thus a younger man, educated for the ministry, as the document evidences its author to be, the conclusion can hardly be resisted that Robert PAINE and not Robert PIKE was the writter of the article in question, as the paper itself witnesses." p. 170 continues "The following additional facts and reasons, bearing on the same subject, are regarded as important and altogether appropriate to be related here, in connection with the family history now traced. The character and effect of the letter have been already described, leaving for decision simply the question of its authorship. At the time the letter was written, there seems to have been no abatement of the spirit with which the illusion was prosecuted by the public. Subsequent events, however, show most convincingly that such was not the case with individual minds in the community. There evidently existed to some extent a feeling of distrust on the subject, especially among the more intelligent and thoughtful men of the day, but the practice of "crying out" against some member of the family of any one who ventured to doubt the guilt of the accused, had the effect to smother every expression of opposition. How far this practice may explain the reason for accusing Mrs. HALE, cannot now be determined. An inference, however, may be very properly drawn from the fact, that at about the same time with the writing of the letter in question, Judge CORWIN'S mother-in-law was accused in the same manner. Mr. PAINE, a foreman of the Grand Jury, more than any one else had the opportunity to become acquainted with the "true inwardness" of the accusations, and being of an intelligent and educated mind, would very naturally be led to abhor the whole business. Of the same class of mind and education, Rev. Mr. HALE, who, as pastor of the church where the delusion existed, was brought constantly into contact with it, would naturally be similarly affected. by men such as these, we should expect to find the first steps taken for reform, and the succession of events goes to prove or confirm that such was the case. The letter was written August 9, 1692, and was, as Mr. UPHAM writes, "the first undisguised and unequivocal opposition to the proceedings." On the 9th and 17th days of the next month, fifteen persons were tried, and all found guilty and condemned, and eight actually executed on the 22nd of the same month for the crime of being "possessed." Immediately following these events, in October, Mrs. Sarah NOYES, the wife of Rev. John HALE, was suddenly accused of the same crime. "Her genuine and distinguishing virtues," says Mr. UPHAM, "had won for her a reputation, and secured in the hearts of the people a confidence which superstition itself could not sully nor shake." "this broke the spell by which they had held the minds of the whole colony in bondage." Thus in about two months after the letter was made public, the fallacy was exposed and the whole order of things reversed. "A sudden collapse took place," as the history records, "after the executions on September 22 and the court met no more. The executive authority intervened, and their functions ceased. The curtain fell unexpectedly and the tragedy ended." "The special court being no longer suffered to meet," another court was established for the trial of the witches, and held a term in Salem shortly after, when twenty persons were tried, all but three of whom were acquitted. Public opinion, at that time, had become so strong in condemnation of the whole affair, that Sir Wm. PHIPPS, by proclamation, discharged all those in prison, about 150 in number, and thus ended the whole delusion. Why the "special court" was thus treated does not appear, but an explanation may be fairly drawn, it would seem, from the fact that its Judge was the person to whom was written the letter in question, which he took such care to preserve. Though undoubtedly many causes combined to produce the grand result now described, yet the two just now treated of, are the only specific ones especially dwelt upon upon by the author of the history quoted in the foregoing remarks. The character and tendency of this letter have been already explained, and what effect the open opposition of Mr. HALE produced, every one knows who has the least knowledge of the subject in question. It is not however to be supposed, that it was solely the accusation made against his wife that led him to denounce the whole infamy, much less that it was the original cause of his disaffection. Much more likely was it, as already suggested, that the accusation was the result of his previous coldness or known doubts on the subject. Though he knew of his wife's innocence, it be no means followed that he disbelieved in the existence of the crime. Her innocence did not disprove the guilt of others, any more than the charge of theft against an innocent party, disproves the crime of larceny. Be that however as it may, that accusation was the culminating point, the last feather which broke the back of the infamy and placed the patron openly on the side of the opposition. But he must have had doubts before, however "active he may have been in all previous proceedings." The writer of the letter and the parson must have had the sympathy of each other, and would very naturally be fellow workers, perhaps secretly, to undo the great evil then overshadowing the community. And just here comes in the important fact, that Robert PAINE and John HALE were both ministers, of the same faith, residing in the same neighborhood, both graduates of Harvard University, in college together for three years, the former graduating in 1656, and the latter in 1657, both probably having pursued their theological studies together, and been, of course, ever after on most intimate terms of friendship. It can hardly be otherwise than that they sympathized in their efforts to put down the great evil which existed, and took mutual counsel to accomplish their object. the writing of the letter and the open opposition of Mr. HALE were only about two months apart. The removal of Judge CORWIN immediately followed and a new Court instituted, and Sir William PHIPPS' proclamation soon closed the scene. The almost exact contemporaneousness of all these events show how much they had to do with each other in effecting the result, while the acknowledged character of the letter itself, in the language of Mr. UPHAM, as already quoted, "indicates a theological education adn familiarity with matters that belong to the studies of a minister." It would seem that a more certain demonstration of the authorship of the letter could hardly be asked and that the other fact related by the same author, "that Jonathan CORWIN preserved the document and placed it in the permanent filesof his family papers," is certainly very suggestive of the conclusion that he, himself, added the name of the writer, whose initials alone were written by its author."- R.P. The following is a letter in response to a gentleman who had invited me to present my "argument" for Robert PAINE being the author of the letter in question. I feel that A.W. PAINE'S presentation of 1881, given above, speaks for itself. But I hope I have been able to contribute some to the argument with the long winded letter attached below (Mr. Hanson's questions to me are denoted with "$"): At 07:04 AM 03/04/2000 -0500, Mr. Hanson wrote: $Robert Pike was not a military man he was a Judge and a lawyer and given the title of major from the General court to organize a militia for the defense against the attacks by the Indians. Perhaps the fact that he organized a militia for which he was given the title of Major would qualify him as being a military man? I can at least understand how the distinction was made by A.W. Paine. $He (PIKE) was a Justice of the Peace for several years and an associate judge of the Norfolk Co. Court which at that time was Salisbury and the towns north in what is now NH. In 1682 he became an assistant to The General Court, $along with such names as Saltonstall, Dudley & Sewell even though he never had a gentlemans title such as Mr. or Esq. I was unaware that he had any involvement in the trials other than his defense of Mary BRADBURY? Was Mr. PIKE an assistant of the General Court at the time of the trials? Moreover, was he an assistant of court for Salisbury or for Salem, where the trials occurred? There has to be a strong argument that the man who wrote this letter was in some way involved in the trial's- other than as a witness. In this regard, what was Mr. PIKE'S association to the man to whom the letter was addressed, Jonathan CORWIN? PAINE was the foreman of the Grand Jury, and therefore, his connection to the proceedings was explicit, rather than implicit. In other words, by what precedence would Mr. PIKE have written to CORWIN and not some other judge? Or, for that matter, why not address his letter to the court itself during the course of the BRADBURY defense? The CORWIN family was related to the WINSLOW'S and other's whom the PAINE family had also intermarried with. Capt. George CORWIN "of Salem" m1. Elizabeth HERBERT (yet another PAINE associated surname), and m2. Elizabeth WINSLOW, daughter of Gov. Edward WINSLOW and the niece of John WINSLOW, whose 1st cousin, Sarah, m2. Tobias PAYNE "of Boston." In fact, PAINE had connections through marriage and/or personal contact to ALL of the judges. They, like himself, were graduates of theology from Harvard; CORWIN and SEWALL were closely connected; STOUGHTON earned his degree from Oxford (after attending Harvard) in the same year that Robert PAINE graduated- 1652. He returned to Dorchester, Ma. about 1660- and the PAYNE family were among the members of the Dorchester Company. STOUGHTON acted as agent for the Massachusetts Colony for the court of Charles II, whose family the PAYN'S had staunchly defended throughout the families reign. The family provided shelter to Charles I at their home in Jersey during his exile and had assisted in the escape of Charles II after the battle of Worcester (Col. John PAYNE). Their devotion to the defense of the Stuart Crown prompted their emigration from England to the colonies. It just seems that history has primarily concluded the author of the letter was PIKE *almost* solely on the fact that the letter was dated in Salisbury and also due to a "style of closing" which could have been as easily attributed to any Anglican- Denying the compelling evidence, and the name of Robert PAINE that is written beneath the initials "R.P." on the original letter itself! All sources that I have knowledge of imply that they reached their conclusion founded on the issue of Salisbury- at a time when the relations between Robert PAINE and families of Salisbury (and throughout New England) was unknown! Had they had that knowledge, perhaps they would have drawn an entirely different conclusion. [Diarmaid McCulloch's, "Thomas CRANMER" is a good source for much of this information]. As I mentioned in my previous mail, I confess that I have not researched the PIKE family to any large degree and have depended on the research of others- none of whom mention the information above, by the way. For this, I am grateful to you for providing it to me. Robert PAINE was related through marriage to the SALTONSTALL, DUDLEY, and SEWALL families. From as early as 1535, Hugh PAYNE "of Hadleigh, Suffolk, was a close follower of Lord L'Isle (DUDLEY) (as well as the HOWARD family who had provided for him a "benefice"- Hugh was imprisoned at the urging of CRANMER, I might add) ; about 1645, Rosamond SALTONSTALL, daughter of Sir Richard SALTONSTALL married Col. Richard PAYNE "of Gunley Hall, Montgomeryshire." (near the home of Tobias PAYNE "of Kings Caple, Herefordshire) Sir Richard's 3rd wife, Martha CAMMOCK, was the aunt of Warwick CAMMOCK, who is named in the 1675 will of Robert PAYNE (alias DAVIES), clerk of the Rappahannock County Vestry from 1662-1666 (who married Elizabeth LAWSON). ["Complete Peerage"; Records in the Tappahannock Court House; Library of Virginia] Warwick CAMMOCK'S wife, Margaret (believed to have been POWELL), m1. Silvester THATCHER, whom appears to have been kin to Henry THATCHER that married before 1690, Elizabeth, daughter of John PAYNE and Anne, daughter of Col. John WALKER, mariner, who had conducted trade with the New England Colonies (as did Capt. John MARTIN and several COOPERS- other closely associated names to the family). John PAYNE was the son of Mr. John PAYNE, mariner/planter, of Rappahannock County, one of the "Protestant Associators" who was murdered during the Protestant Uprising in Maryland, by "Papist" rebels, including ex-Deputy of Maryland SEWALL, in 1689/90 in the performance of his duties as the King's Customs Collector for Plantations in Maryland. Another involved in this murder, was John WOODCOCK- who is first found in New England. He or his son then later removed to Maryland. John WOODCOCK was hung for his part in John PAYNE'S murder. The SALTONSTALL'S also intermarried with the DEANE, COTTON, COOPER, ROSEWELL, WINTHROP, WARD, WAINWRIGHT, COOKE, GURDON, RAMSDEN, and GARDINER families- all names closely associated with the PAYNE/PAINE'S. While the SEWALL'S are associated through the LEE [see Master Richard LEE- "Planters of the Commonwealth" and other sources], LOWE, KEY, BRENT, CHANDLER, DAINGERFIELD, LECOMPTE, and CALVERT families. Again, all names closely associated with the family. $In 1665 he was invited to serve Amesbury as its minister. I think this act speaks for itself as his knowledge of theology. This is even more critical knowledge. However, the same can be said for a number of "ministers" who had received no formal education. A great example of this, is also relevant to my last e-mail regarding the MAVERICK family, that I failed to mention. In 1642, James PARKER was invited to become the minister at Weymouth, who had "for many years been a deputy for the public court." Mr. PARKER did not attend university, nor did he receive formal training to be a minister. Additionally, Anderson in "Great Migration" states that James was the brother of John and Joseph PARKER. Joseph PARKER m. Anne JOLLIFFE, daughter of Elizabeth MAINWARRING, whose brother Randell MAINWARRING was the brother-in-law of Capt. George PAYNE and also the cousin of Matthew CRADDOCK- partner to George PAYNE. Richard PARKER's daughter, Sarah, m. John PAYNE, son of William PAYNE, who were the proprietors of the Saugus Iron Works, initiated by WINTHROP, Jr. Richard PARKER'S brother, William PARKER had married Alice Elizabeth ? "of Taunton," who, upon PARKER'S death, married Stephen PAYNE "of Rehoboth." [see "Great Migration" for the PARKER/MAVERICK connection.] The connections (and evidence) simply abound. $And there is no way you can compare land transactions and family associations with the real friendship that Thomas Bradbury had with Robert Pike; they were father in-laws and it is supposed that Robert Pike helped Thomas Bradbury with the content of the letter of July 28 in support of his wife since he knew how to write legal documents. I do not question the "real friendship that Thomas BRADBURY had with Robert PIKE." My position is with judge CORWIN, and the other judges, and their connection to Robert PAINE. Also, I was attempting to point out how PAINE'S family was closely connected to the men in the land transactions. I do not doubt that Mr. PIKE voiced his opposition to the trial of Mary BRADBURY. But I believe there is a much stronger argument for Robert PAINE in regard to the letter written to judge CORWIN against the proceedings in general. PAINE had the family connections to the men presiding over the trials; had the education in theology to SUPPORT and DEFEND his argument in a hostile environment (as anyone voicing such an opinion was at great risk to see the end of a rope); as Foreman of the grand jury, he was well placed to initiate such an argument to begin with; and, perhaps most compelling- is that his name is written on the original letter- which must have been placed there for SOME reason. As for the closing of the letter itself, I don't find this to be in any way indicative of the conclusion that it was Robert PIKE who wrote it. Unfortunately, the historians that did drew this conclusion were apparently not Anglicans :-} It seems that it is more of a standard closing that any clergyman of the day typically made. Oliver CROMWELL closed his letters in a similar fashion (and he wasn't all that religious, particularly in his early years- and his grandmother was Catherine, daughter of Thomas PAYNE, Esq. "of Castle Acre, Norfolk" by the way) From your last e-mail: $Also in a Loyal Dissenter he states that " The letter ends with words that reflect Pike's style of closing, as we have seen before " Now, that the only wise God may so direct you in all, that he may have glory... " " The nature of the letter was theologic and therefore demanded such a closing- regardless of who was making the argument. Unless, of course, your saying that Mr. PIKE left letters behind with an IDENTICAL closing? That would be a strong case. But for history to conclude the letter was his solely because he ended the letter with a theological bent is, at best, weak. The "Style of closing" mentioned above in no way suggests to me that it was Identical to other known letters by Mr. Pike, only that the "Style" was similar. That "Style" could as easily be attributed to countless others of the day. To illustrate my point: "O' God, from whom all holy desires, all good counsels and all just works do proceed, give unto us the same peace which the world cannot give, that our hearts being obedient to thy commandments (and the fear of our enemies taken away) our time may be peaceable through thy protection. By Christ our Lord"- Robert REDMAN, 1535 and then: "O' God, from whom all holy desires, all good counsels and all just works do proceed: give unto thy servants that peace which the world cannot give, that both our hearts may be set to obey thy commandments, and also that by thee, we being defended from the fear of our enemies, may pass our time in rest and quietness, through the merits of Jesus Christ our saviour."- Thomas CRANMER, also written over 150 years before the letter. These two "closings" are English translations (by REDMAN) of one of the "Collects" which would become most familiar to Anglicans: what is now the prayer for peace at evensong. The latter is an adaption of it by Thomas CRANMER, the Arch-Bishop in Henry VIII's day. The letter's closing seems to be simply a twist on this well known Anglican passage- no doubt adjusted slightly for the author's purpose. This prayer would have been well-known to theologians. In 1692, a prayer for peace would have been an appropriate thing and the letter in question seems to close with an adaption of REDMAN'S passage. $Do you have letters written by Robert Paine? If I had letters written by Robert PAINE (or PIKE) in my possession now, I wouldn't be needing assistance in obtaining them :-} I do not currently have letters from either man and my purpose for my current effort is to obtain examples of them- preferably with signatures (in fact, that's all I need- a signature) Again, I feel it is the only true way of knowing, with certainty, who the author of the letter was. There is obviously strong argument for both men authoring the letter and by necessity, historians have made their conclusion based on the best evidence they had available at the time. But this information regarding Robert PAINE'S relations and kinship's is NEW and the result of my research which has brought me to this question at hand. His relationship's to the families involved in the proceedings suggests that his argument would be taken seriously and that he would not immediately be seized by them as a result. Though Mr. PIKE may have been called on to be a minister, he had no formal education in the occupation. To make a stand against the proceedings, as the author of this letter did, suggests that it's author had a strong conviction that his letter would be well received and considered, without fear of reprisal. Reason alone compels me to believe that its author must have had a firm position in which to defend himself should the need arise, and that possibility HAD to be in the front of the author's mind. I should also point out, as I failed to do so earlier, that PAINE'S family was also closely associated with another clergyman who had made a similar argument against witchcraft years before in England. I regret that I haven't been able to locate the name of the author of this "treatise against the plausibility of witchcraft". But I recall that the foundation of the letter dated Salisbury contained many of the same arguments. $I think you should get in touch with the three major Pike Historians: Roland Leslie Warren - Brandeis University b. 1915 alive in 1992 Allen R. Pike- Author of The Pike Family Marshall Pike of Red Bluff, CA - Pike Family Assoc. Thank you very much. I'm going to attempt to stick with the signature comparison's I mentioned. Even with all the evidence I can mount, It would be impossible to persuade anyone to change their belief that PIKE was the author. If I can show without question that the writing was in the hand of PAINE, and support it with this evidence, then I might stand a chance :-) $You have caught my interest and I could easily get to the Peabody -Essex institute in Salem. It is just that I don't have a great deal of time. I need to finish my book on the Moody family. I appreciate your time and allowing me to present this to you. I am also writing a book to show the inter-colony relationships between the PAYNE'S who had arrived prior to 1650. It's a daunting task as the opposition to any suggestion of these relationships is great! Even among the New England PAYNE'S, folks have been very vocal in denying any kinship between them. Good luck with your work! I'm including some comments I have received from others in pursuit of resolving the question of the letter: $Finally, I see that Robert Paine was the son of Ann Whiting Paine, which makes me ask if he was in any way related to the Quaker John Whiting, whose Truth and Innocency Defended Against Falsehood and Envy (1702) includes a stinging attack on the 1692 witchcraft trials. $Although many historians shrink from genealogical research (or, have to use a more sanitized name like "family reconstitution,") let's face it, in seventeenth-century New England, family ties were of overwhelming importance. Tracking down these connections often can help us with mysteries (such as the identity of R.P) as well as shed important clues to broader interpretations of the past. $Emerson W. Baker Assistant Professor of History Salem State College $Sir Henry Williams-Cromwell (1537-1604), the son of Sir Richard Williams-Cromwell & Frances Murfyn, studied common law at Queens' College, Cambridge, and Lincoln's Inn. He showed his devotion by endowing an annual sermon against witchcraft to be preached in Huntingdon by one of the fellows of Queens' College. I briefly mentioned the PAYNE-CROMWELL connection above. I believe this ties into the earlier work to expose the implausibility of witchcraft I also mentioned. Huntingdon was the home of CROMWELL, PEPYS, MONTAGU, and Sir Robert PAYNE "friend and protege of the CROMWELL and MONTAGU'S", who replaced Oliver CROMWELL as MP for Hunts. in 1625. $John Alden Jr. -- Accused of Witchcraft John ALDEN III married Susanna, daughter of Edward WINSLOW and Elizabeth HUTCHINSON. Edward was the brother of Sarah, who m2. Tobias PAYNE. Another sister, Susanna WINSLOW, married Robert LATHAM. On 31 Jan. 1654/5, they both were tried for the death of "a servant boy" by the name of John WALKER. Regards, Patrick Payne

The following document and the subsequent note, are copied from "The Marriage, Baptismal and Burial Registers of Westminster Abbey," collected and published in London, 1876, by Col. Joseph L. Chester, LL.D., the late distinguished American genealogist. The Royal Warrant for the Disinterment of Certain Commonwealth Personages. It is his Maiesties express pleasure and command that you cause the bodies of the severall persons undernamed, wch have bin unwarrantably interred in Henry the 7th and other chappels and places wthin the Collegiate Church of Westminster since the year 1641, to be forthwith taken up, and buried in some place of the churchyard adioning to ye said church, whereof you may not faile, and for so doing this shall be yr warrant. Dated at ye Court at Whitehall Sept. 9, 1661. "Henry 7th Chappel." Dr. Isaac Dorislaus, Coll. Richard DEAN(E), Mrs. Elizabeth CROMWELL, Coll. Humphrey Mackworth, Sr. William CONSTABLE, Thomas May, and fifteen others. Before getting into CROMWELL, I cannot fail to mention the DEANE and CONSTABLE connections to the PAYNE families of America in the 17th century. DEANE marriages include: HIGGINS, ATWOOD, THACKER, and SNOW. All families closely associated with PAYNE'S in New England through their intermarriage's within these families. See Mayflower Families, The Great Migration, Thomas LECHFORD'S Note-Book, etc. for more data. The wife of Col. Richard LEE was Ann CONSTABLE, who m2. Edmund LISTER. Richard and Ann LEE were the parents of John LEE, who was most likely identical to the man which brought William PAYNE, Sr. to Dorchester County, Maryland from Virginia in 1673 as a headright. Son Richard, Jr., married Lettice CORBIN, daughter of the merchant Henry CORBIN and his wife Alice ELTONHEAD. The PAYNE connection to the THACKER, ELTONHEAD, and CONWAY families are fairly well documented. Another son, HANCOCK LEE, married first Mary KENDALL and second Sarah, daughter of Isaac ALLERTON, Jr. and his wife Elizabeth WILLOUGHBY. Again, we find PAYNE's intermarrying with these families as well (see my Family File). Daughter Anne LEE married Thomas YOUELL, a surname that appears in the shipping records with PAYNE, HAWES, PRESTON, BULLOCKE, and others during the early 17th century. The Note attached to the document of 1661 states, "The mother of Oliver CROMWELL, "The Protector," daugther of William STEWARD, of the City of Ely, Esq., by his second wife, Catherine, daughter of Thomas PAINE, of Castle Acre, Norfolk, Esq. She appears to have been a second child of this name, and baptized at Holy Trinity, Ely, 28th October, 1565. She married there 10th Feb. 1588/9, William LYNNE, gent., who was buried there 17th March 1589/90. She married secondly, about a year after her first husband's death, Robert CROMWELL, of Huntingdon, Esq., by whom she was mother of the Protector, and who was buried at All Saints', Huntingdon, 24th June 1617. If the above dates are correct, she had just entered her ninetieth year. She died 18th November, 1654. and was buried in great state, contrary to her express desire. Before the disinterment of her remains, the body of her son, Oliver CROMWELL, buried 26th September, 1658, had been exhumed and hung at Tyburn. Page 521. There are a number of correlations to be found here. First is the mention of the town of Ely in Cambs. which lies in close proximity to the lands held by: · Sir Thomas PAYNE of Market Bosworth, Leicester, who, along with most of his family, removed to the area of Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk · Robert PAYNE of St. Neot's, Hunts. and his grandson, Sir Robert PAYNE, a subscriber of the London Company in 1609 and again 1612 and MP for Huntingdonshire · The PAYNE family of Great Ellingham and Attleborough, Norfolk which lies just east of Ely, north of Bury St. Edmunds and southeast of Castle Acre, Norfolk- the home of Thomas and Margaret PAYNE, and their daughter, Catherine PAYNE CROMWELL (AKA WILLIAMS). The family of Sir Thomas, upon their removal to Suffolk, resided nearby, just to the SE, at Worlington, Hengrave, and in and around Bury St. Edmunds- where they became the Bailiff's of Hengrave for the Duke of BUCKINGHAM (STAFFORD) and Sir Thomas KYTSON; and the Attorneys for the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER)- a title also held, in succession, by the GRANVILLE and the PULTENEY families. The CARTERET family intermarried with the GRANVILLE'S (and MONTAGU'S) and thus held the title of Earl GRANVILLE 1714-1766 (although they preferred the families traditional spelling of GRENVILLE- another family of interest, who held the title of BUCKINGHAM 1784-1889). Sir Thomas PAYNE of Leic/Suffolk, married Margaret PULTENEY, an ancestor of the later Earl of BATH. Albert W. PAINE, in "PAINE Genealogy- Ipswich Branch" published in 1881 (entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1881, in the Office of the Librarian of Congress), relates that, "William PAYNE (son of Edmond), was a man of much note and importance in his day, being in the service of Edward STAFFORD, Duke of BUCKINGHAM, as bailiff of his Manor of Hengrave. In 1521, the Duke having been convicted of conspiring against King Henry VIII. to establish himself in power, as his successor, was, by order of the King, put to death. The office thus becoming vacant by the death of the Duke, PAYNE lost his place as Deputy, and was obliged to retire to private life. The Duke's successor, however, appointed PAYNE'S son (Henry) to the office held by the father." Regarding Henry PAYNE, Albert states, "he came to reside in Bury St. Edmunds, in the County of Suffolk. He was a lawyer by profession, a member of Lincoln's Inn, Esquire. During his life it was that Henry VIII. dissolved so large a part of the Catholic monasteries of England, and seized upon their effects, converting them to his own use and purposes. In the 37th year of that King's reign, A.D. 1546, PAINE purchased of the Crown and received a grant in fee of the Manor of Nowton, the advowson of the church and the hereditaments in Nowton belonging to the dissolved monastery of St. Edmund, one of the most celebrated monasteries in the Kingdom. He also purchased the Grange in Thorpe Riggnoll, in the County of York, parcel of the lands of the Priori of Worksop. For the grants he paid to the Crown, as consideration, the sum of 647.18.2. The sale of the Manor was made subject to a lease then existing in favor of Wm. STERNE for twenty years for the yearly rent of 25.13.9. By this purchase, PAINE became Lord of the Manor of Nowton, a right or dignity which followed the law of inheritance. After the fall and consequent death of BUCKINGHAM (STAFFORD), as has already been related, and the consequent dismissal of PAINE'S father as bailiff, the DUKE'S successor, Sir Thomas KYTSON (?), appointed his son Henry to the same office of bailiff of the Manor (at Hengrave). PAINE was also counsel for the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER), and the Earl on his death bequethed to him for a rememberance, a gold ring of the value of 40s., and the Countess styling him "her loving friend." directed by her will, that he should be associated with her executors, and gave him a legacy of 20.0.0." The association of this PAINE family to STAFFORD, VILLIERS, BOURCHIER, thus becomes clear. I am unsure about "Sir Thomas KYTSON." There is no mention of him in my "Directory of British Peerages," particularly in regard to the title of BUCKINGHAM, which appears to have transferred to the VILLIERS family. This would make much more sense and is in line with the associations with these families by a number of PAYNE families- in Hunts., Cambs., Suffolk, Norfolk, and Jersey in the Channel Islands. Add in MONTAGU, CARTERET, and PEPYS, and their associations with the same PAYNE families, and it becomes possible to solidify the connections between the various branches. However, there is a connection to be found here to the KYTSON family. The following comes from Historian General Larry D. McClanahan: "Much of the prosperity of the early Washington's was through marriages in the male line to wealthy widows. These marriages brought increased landholdings and greater status. Through John Washington's marriage to Margaret Kytson was brought a connection to the Spencer line which produced the future Sir Winston Churchill. A later marriage of John's great-grandson Lawrence in the late 1500s to Margaret Butler brought a connection to the Plantagenet line. Lawrence's second son, William, married Anne Villiers, half sister of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham and confidant of Charles 1. Their son, Colonel Sir William Washington, was a commander under Charles at the Battle of Edgehill in 1642 in the English Civil War. The fifth son of Lawrence and Margaret Butler Washington was the Reverend Lawrence born in 1602 at Sulgrave. His education was from Brasenose College, Oxford, obtaining B.A., M.A. and B.D. degrees while serving as proctor and lector." Thus, we find here even more evidence of the later 17th century connections in Virginia to the PAYNE family. The town of Castle Acre, Norfolk, in which the said Thomas PAINE, Esq. lived is very near to the families old home of Stephen PAYNE and others at Great Ellingham and Attleborough. Bury St. Edmonds, Boxted, Worlington, Soham, Histon, and St. Neots are also in the area and these were all areas where Sir Robert PAYNE, William PAYNE, Guilles and Peter PAYN, Henry PAYNE, PEPYS, CROMWELL, and others of interest lived and conducted business. Robert PAYNE (great-grandfather of Sir Robert), who is thought to have been the elder son of Sir Thomas of Market Bosworth, resided at St. Neot's, Huntingdonshire, near to CROMWELLS home in Huntigdon and St. Ives. The MONTAGU and PEPYS families employed PAYNE'S within their households as cook maids and "watermen" (providing "victuals" to the fleet most likely). Samuel PEPYS stated in his famous diary that when the PAYNE'S left his service it was to join the Lord CHAMBERLAIN'S (a position held by the MONTAGUS under King Charles I). Derek Wilson, a well-known English Biographer states in "The King and the Gentleman," (St. Martin's Press), p. 183, "Between 1623 and 1625 the knights of the shire (Huntingdonshire) in Parliament were Edward MONTAGU and Sir Oliver CROMWELL. In the election of 1625 CROMWELL was replaced by Sir Robert PAYNE, a friend and protege' of the Kimbolton family. The new order was harshly emphasized two years later by the sale of Hinchingbrooke to the MONTAGUS." This reference, and the records themselves, establishes that Sir Robert PAYNE was, in fact, a close associate of CROMWELL, whose grandmother was Catherine PAYNE, daughter of "Thomas PAYNE, Esq., of Castle Acre, Norfolk." However one choses to approach this connection, it is unavoidable to NOT associate Sir Robert with either the NORFOLK or the SUFFOLK branch of the PAYNE family. I chose both for the evidence is compelling that we are talking one family. Either the Thomas PAYNE, Esq. "of Castle Acre, Norfolk" and Sir Thomas PAYNE "of Market Bosworth, Leic." were the same man- or they were closely related. They were both born about the same time (1500) and they both married a Margaret (Thomas of Leic. m. Margaret PULTENEY. Thomas of Norfolk m. Margaret ?). This association must have been one of great division between the family as it is apparant that within this family there were ROYALISTS on the one side and PARLIAMENTARIANS on another. Between the PAYNE relationship's with the MONTAGU, CROMWELL, STAFFORD, VILLIERS, PEPYS, and CARTERET families, there must have been major political and religious differences between members of the family- similar to what historians record happened within the MONTAGU family. Not far to the west, in Hereford, are the remains of Goodrich Castle which was a Royalist stronghold during the Civil War, defended by 104 Royalists. There is a CROMWELL exhibit there and although I do not know CROMWELL'S connection to Goodrich, it is interesting that it lies next door to Tobias PAYNE's haunts and is the neighboring village to where the SCUDAMORE family lived. A SCUDAMORE is named in the 1649 will of Tobias PAYNE of Kings Caple. Furthermore, the Arms of at least three different PAYNE branches are found in the same area- Sir Robert PAYNE held land and license to sell tobacco, Guilles and Peter PAYN of the Jersey family owned land here, and finally, the family of Sir Thomas of Leicester are found here- all living near to one another. Additonally, Oliver CROMWELL married Elizabeth, daughter of James BOURCHIER, another name prominent in Jersey and associated with the PAYN and CARTERET family there. All facts which are hard to dismiss. (see "An Armorial of Jersey," J. Bertrand PAYNE) Oliver CROMWELL was to receive a letter from Colonel Robert LILBURNE dated 22 September 1653; " There Happened a most violent storm, which continued for 16 or 18 hours together, in which we lost a small man of war called the SWAN, the MARTHA and MARGARET of Ipswich, wherein was all our remaining store of ammunition and provision... but that which was most sad was the loss of the SPEEDWELL of Lynn, where all the men that were in her, being 23 seamen and soldiers (except one) were drowned... and all this in sight of our man at land, who saw their friends drowning, and heard them crying for help, but could not save them." The connection of these ship's to the network are unquestionable. The most significant of these being the SPEEDWELL of Lynn. This ship was owned by John WINSLOW, merchant of Boston, whose son-in-law was Tobias PAYNE, Mariner. His grandson, William PAYNE, was a merchant of Boston and two of WINSLOW'S sons lived for a time in Charles County, Maryland where Thomas PAINE of St. Mary's had first patented land as early as 1644. Thomas GATES was aboard the SWAN in 1609 and his wife Elizabeth WEEDON came to Virginia aboard the WARWICK in 1620. The WARWICK was under the command of Col. Henry FLEETE, whose widow, Sarah, married, as his second wife, Col. John WALKER. Their daughter, Sarah WALKER, married before 1685, Edwin CONWAY, who married first, Elizabeth THOMPSON. John WALKER married first, Sarah ? and had three daughters. Jane WALKER married, as his second wife, John DEANE bef. 1679. John DEANE married first, Elizabeth THATCHER, daughter of Silvester THATCHER and Margaret (probably POWELL). Margaret's second husband was Warwick CAMMOCK, whom Robert PAYNE, alias DAVIES, Clerk of the Rappahannock County Vestry from 1662-1666, named in his will as an overseer (to ensure certain stipulations in his will were carried out). Robert PAYNE'S wife was Elizabeth LAWSON. Another Robert PAYNE married Catherine THOMPSON, daughter of John THOMPSON. Warwick CAMMOCK was the grandson of Thomas CAMMOCK, who had married Francis RICH, the daughter of Robert RICH, 2nd Baron RICH and a relative of Robert RICH, the Earl of WARWICK. Thomas CAMMOCK'S daughter, Martha, married Sir Richard SALTONSTALL, Provisional Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. After the death of John WALKER, Sarah married after 1668, as her fourth husband, John STONE. Another daughter of John WALKER and Sarah ?, Anne, married first, John PAYNE, the son of John PAYNE and Margaret (probably ROBINSON, although most sources say JENNINGS) of Rappahannock County. Anne WALKER married second in 1703, John DANGERFIELD and had issue. John DAINGERFIELD, Jr., married as her second husband, Mary CONWAY, who had married first, James, son of William BALL. James BALL and Mary CONWAY had daughter Sinah, who married Daniel MCCARTY, who had married first, Anne Mary LEE, whose second husband was William FITZHUGH. Frances DANGERFIELD, sister of John, married Edwin, son of Henry THATCHER and Eltonhead CONWAY. Edwin's brother, Henry THATCHER, married Elizabeth PAYNE, the daughter of John PAYNE, Jr., and Anne WALKER above. I have written extensively on these intermarriages within the "merchant network." Although listing them in this way is tedious to follow, I know of know other way of demonstrating the degree to which the families of New England, Virginia, and Maryland intermarried. Particularly the PAYNE'S of those colonies- who unquestionably shared a relationship that trancended coincidence or mere association by marriage. To understand this, apart from the numerous marriages that tied them together, all we need do is look to the shipping and business records which also associates them. Again, read my notes on those subjects. More details on these families can be found throughout my web site. I have no firm proof that Sir Thomas PAYNE of Market Bosworth had a daughter named Catherine. We know she was the daughter of "Thomas PAINE, Esq. "of Castle Acre, Norfolk." But, if my research is studied, it becomes apparant that these two Thomas PAINE'S were very closely connected to Sir Robert PAYNE of St. Neot's, Hunts. Further research needs to be done, but I hope I have established yet another lead to follow which will ultimately help in solving our PAYNE mystery. I believe I have demonstrated very well, over a period spanning well over 500 years or more at this point, that these families shared similarities that almost certainly suggest a relationship between them, in England as well as throughout the colonies. If we take all the primary and secondary research together, literally, than we are presented with the unavoidable conclusion that through their relationships with CROMWELL, MONTAGU, BOURCHIER, PEPYS, STAFFORD, VILLIERS, FAIRFAX, KYTSON, and CARTERET, the PAYNE'S, represented by Sir Thomas PAINE of Market Bosworth, Leic. and of Suffolk; Thomas PAINE, Esq. of Norfolk; Robert PAYNE of Hunts.; Tobias PAYNE of Hereford, and finally, the PAYN family of Jersey- were at a minimum, well aquainted with one another. However, we cannot fail to also recognize that from these beginnings in the late 1400s, the connections between the branches continued on for an additional 300 years or more, ending in America where each of these families emigrated in the years between 1635 and 1637. The PAYNE mariners, although they were involved in the settlement of America, appear to not have settled, however, until the 1640s- or the completion of the "Great Migration" period; and the PAYN'S of Jersey that made their way to St. Kitts, due to their involvement on the side of the King during the Civil War, did not emigrate until the close of those hostilities. Nevertheless, their connections, from at least the 15th century on through the 17th (and well beyond in some cases) are simply undeniable.

From "The Complete Poetry and Prose of Geoffrey CHAUCER," edited by John H. Fisher & John C. Hodges of the University of Tennessee, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977, we learn the following from the list of expenses and gifts from 1356 to 1359 of the household of Elizabeth, Countess of Ulster and wife of Lionel, second son of Edward III. "The two attendants of Elizabeth most frequently mentioned are Philippa "PAN" and Galfrido CHAUCER. CHAUCER'S function is not indicated; presumably he was a page. Philippa's identity has been much debated. The most attractive theory is that "PAN" is a contraction of "PANNETO," one form of the name of Sir PAON (or PAYNE) de ROET, father of Philippa CHAUCER and Katherine SWYNFORD, who was mistress and eventually (1396) wife of John of GAUNT, Duke of LANCASTER, third son of Edward III. If this surmise is correct, CHAUCER married the damoiselle with whom he had served as a young boy." "The date of CHAUCER'S birth is not known. In the Scrope-Grosvenor trial of 1386, he gave his age as "xl ans et plus armeez par xxvii ans"- forty years and more, having borne arms for twenty-seven years. Efforts have failed to make these terms precise, but the first part sets CHAUCER'S birth before 1346. The customary age for going to war was 16 or 17, which would move the date to 1342 or earlier. The twenty-seven years is quite accurate, because in 1359-1360 he (CHAUCER) served in the French War. In 1360 he was captured and ransomed for £16- 13s 4d less than for Sir Robert De CLINTON'S horse, as had been often remarked. Such military experience for CHAUCER, as for his father before him, was clearly expected of one who hoped to be accepted by an aristocracy whose business was still war, even though his own ambitions might run in a totally different direction. CHAUCER had no doubt been given a good elementary education before he joined the household of the Countess. Serving in a noble household and joining Prince Lionel on a military expedition must have been regarded as a continuation of his education. But the period between the 1360 record of his military service and 1366, when he reappears traveling in Spain, is the longest gap in CHAUCER'S like-records after their commencement in 1357. Indeed, there are records every year from 1366 until the last one in 1400. The best supposition is that during these six years he was continuing his education in the Inns of Chancery and Inns of Court, which prepared him for an administrative career. In the Inns of Chancery, aspiring clerks were taught, first, the Chancery hand in which all official documents had to be written and, second, the forms and language (in CHAUCER'S time still Latin and French) in which they were enrolled. Without such training, CHAUCER could not have been appointed controller of customs in 1374 with the provision that "rotulos suos dicta officia tangentes manu sua propria scribat"- that he write the rolls touching said office in his own hand. After two or three years in an Inn of Chancery, he could proceed to an Inn of Court, where he would hear lectures on law and government. The only evidence for such education comes much to late. Speght, in the 1598 life already referred to, said that "manye yeres since, master BUCKLEY did see a recorde [if the Inner Temple], where Geffrye CHAUCER was fined two shillinges for beatinge a Franciscane fryer in fletestreate [Fleet Street]." No records from the Inns of Court in Chaucer's day have survived, but Edith Rickert discovered that Master BUCKLEY was keeper of the records of the Inner Temple in Speght's time, and so in a position to see such a record, and the offense and penalty are similar to others listed in the earliest records that do survive. By 1366 this period was over and CHAUCER reappears traveling in Spain, probably in connection with the Black Prince's campaign in support of Don PEDRO of Castile, to whose fate CHAUCER later alluded in the Monk's Tale (CT vii.2375ff), but possibly simply on a pilgrimage to the shrine of St. James of Compostella (CT I.466). In the same year the King granted Philippa (PAYNE De ROET) CHAUCER a life annuity of 10 marks as a damoiselle in attendance upon Queen Philippa, and in 1367 the King granted Geoffrey his first annuity of 20 marks. Scholars have debated the timing and the wording of these grants. The facts that Philippa was referred to in her own person rather than as the wife of Geoffrey CHAUCER and that she received her grant first make it appear that CHAUCER had married above himself and that Philippa's connections in Court would do his career no harm. Her father, Sir PAON (PAYNE) de ROET, had come from Hainault in northern France in Queen Philippa's personal entourage, and he was Guienne King of Arms- that is, he was charged with recording the genealogies of the noble families in England's valuable territories in souther France." "CHAUCER'S extended absence in 1372-1373 involves a domestic situation that has troubled some scholars, notably Russell Krauss in "Three CHAUCER Studies," 1932. One of the problems of CHAUCER biography is his relation to Thomas CHAUCER, one of the wealthiest men in England in the fifteenth century, whose daughter became Duchess of SUFFOLK, whose grandson married the sister of Edward IV, and whose great-grandson was declared heir apparent to Richard III, only to be killed in battle. Thomas CHAUCER is referred to as the son of Geoffrey CHAUCER in contemporary records, but his birth and early years are shrouded in mystery. After using the CHAUCER coat of Arms for a few years, he shifted to the de ROET arms of his mother [Philippa PAYNE de ROET]. It has been suggested that the reason for his rapid advancement was that he was the illegitimate son of John of GAUNT by Philippa. From GAUNT'S illegitimate children by Philippa's sister Katherine (legitimized by GAUNT'S marriage to Katherine in 1396) were descended all of the English Kings after Henry VI. If there is any truth in the conjecture that Philippa was also GAUNT'S mistress- which is not unimportant in view of CHAUCER'S treatment of women in his writings and in view of the progress of his own career- it depends on the timing of events in 1373-1374. When CHAUCER departed for Italy in December, 1372, Philippa was one of the damoiselles in waiting upon GAUNT'S second wife, Constance of Castile, and Katherine (who that year bore GAUNT John BEAUFORT) was governess to his children by Blanche of Lancaster. CHAUCER returned on May 23, 1373. On July 13 GAUNT went to lead a campaign in France. He returned to England in April, 1374, and within two months CHAUCER was made financially independent: on April 23 the King granted him a pitcher of wine daily (perhaps $6000 a year at present values); on May 10 he was given the house over Aldgate rent-free; on June 8 he was appointed controller of customs (another £10-5000 a year); and on June 13 he and Philippa together were granted another life annuity of £10 by John of GAUNT. All of this, together with previous grants and subsequent gifts and wardships, made CHAUCER a prosperous man. Philippa continued to receive gifts and payments from GAUNT, always in her name, and the year before her death in 1387 she was admitted, again without her husband, to the fraternity of Lincoln Cathedral in a ceremony honoring the admission of GAUNT'S oldest son, the future Henry IV. Although her annuity was usually drawn at the hand of her husband, warrants transferring payments in 1378-1379 to receivers in Lincolnshire indicate that Philippa did not live with CHAUCER over Aldgate the entire period after 1374, a circumstance that may throw light on the wry self-portrait in the "House of Fame" (ll.641.660). And while we are setting down these personal details, there is the curious business of the legal release granted in May, 1380, by Cecily CHAMPAIN to Geoffrey CHAUCER for her "raptus." Despite arguments to the contrary, legal opinion holds that the word means what it says- that CHAUCER had been sued for rape and had to seek legal quittance. Since the quittance came after the fact, this episode must have occurred around the time that Philippa was living in Lincolnshire. Skeat conjectured that "Litell Lowys," to whom the "Treatise on the Astrolabe" is addressed, might have been in consequence of this episode (Astrolabe, 1.27 note). CHAUCER'S earliest poetry is related to the household of John of GAUNT. Whether or not the "Prier a Nostre Dame" (short poem 1) was written for Blanche of Lancaster, the "Book of the Duchess" was certainly composed as an elegy on her death in 1368. John SHIRLEY asserted that the "Complaint of Mars" (short poem 3) was likewise composed at the command of John of GAUNT. So both in documented fact and in undocumented tradition and surmise, CHAUCER'S literary and personal lives were entangled with the house of LANCASTER." In "Geoffrey Chaucer" by Robert O. Payne, we additionally learn that "although several documents from the land 1360s and early 1370s show CHAUCER in increasingly important occupations in the service of King Edward III, he was forming perhaps an even more important connection during those years with Edward's third son, John of GAUNT, Duke of Lancaster. Like so many things about Geoffrey CHAUCER, the exact nature of his relationship with the duke eludes our modern attempts to fill in between the raw facts of a scanty and scattered but always suggestive public record. The connection seems to have been established by 1368, when LANCASTER'S first wife, the rich and beautiful Blanche, died. She was a daughter of the same Henry of LANCASTER whom CHAUCER'S father had served in a lost and nearly disastrous cause, and it was John of GAUNT'S marriage to her that brought him the land and title of LANCASTER. CHAUCER commemorated her death in what seems to be his first major poem, the "Book of the Duchess," probably written not long after she died, although we have no certain means of dating it precisely. No one knows whether CHAUCER wrote it at the duke's request, or whether he wrote it on his own to increase his favor with LANCASTER, whom he may already have served in some capacity on a 1369 military expedition into Northern France. Some modern Chaucerians continue to refer to John of GAUNT as CHAUCER'S "Patron," but the term may be misleading. Ordinarily, a patron provides an artist with a livelihood in order to support his artistic production, and nothing now known indicates that the duke ever did any such thing for CHAUCER. In 1374, he granted a £10 annuity for life, in consideration of "la bone et agreable service que nostre bien ame Geffray CHAUCER nous ad fait et auxint pur la bone service que nostre bien ame Phillipe sa femme ad fait a nostre treshonure dame et miere la royne que Dieu pardoigne et a nostre tres ame compaigne la royne de Castille... (the good and agreeable service that our good friend Geoffrey CHAUCER has done us and also for the good service that our good friend Philippa his wife has done for our honored mother the queen, whom may God pardon, and to our beloved companion the queen of Castille...). The second queen mentioned was LANCASTER'S second wife, Constance of CASTILLE, in whose household Philippa had served. The phrasing seems to refer unmistakingly to personal, political, or military services- not to the support of the career of a rising young writer. Still, there must have been more to it than that. Katherine ROET [daughter of PAYNE de ROET] SWYNFORD, LANCASTER'S mistress for many years and eventually his third wife, was a sister of Philippa CHAUCER. the duke must have had a hand in some of CHAUCER'S political appointments during his career, although again we have to note that not infrequently CHAUCER aligned himself with factions opposed to the LANCASTRIANS in London city affairs and in Parliament. Perhaps fourteenth-century politics were not quite so cutthroat as they sometimes appear to be. In any case, LANCASTER'S oldest son, Henry, Earl of DERBY, made two modest grants to CHAUCER in 1395 and 1396, and then after usurping the throne from Richard II and becoming King Henry IV, renewed and increased CHAUCER'S annuities, although by that time the aging poet and public servant was to have only about a year of life left in which to enjoy them. Another association that has intrigued modern scholars is that during the thirty or so years of CHAUCER'S acquaintance with John of GAUNT, the duke was also the friend and protector of that fierce and austere religious reformer John WYCLIFFE. We have nothing to confirm a direct relationship between CHAUCER and WYCLIFFE, and CHAUCER certainly had little in common with the stiff-necked, opinionated, often dogmatic attacker of clerical corruption and church bureaucracy. Yet perhaps through the Duke of LANCASTER, CHAUCER surely knew about WYCLIFFE and the storm he was blowing up in fourteenth-century religious and intellectual life. We have, in fact, a few other scattered indications that CHAUCER was acquainted with some of WYCLIFFE'S contemporaries at Oxford. (Indeed, there was a tradition in the sixteenth century, almost certainly wrong, that CHAUCER had studied at Oxford.) One of these men, the logician Ralph STRODE, who sometimes argued against WYCLIFFE, even appears in the dedication at the end of CHAUCER'S Troilus and Criseyde. What is important here is the indication that CHAUCER had fairly direct contact with one of the major centeres of contemporary intellectual life, in addition to his experience of its political and artistic activities." Finally, from "The Life and Times of Chaucer" by John Gardner, he states, "Two highborn ladies who were to be of importance in the life of Geoffrey CHAUCER were the daughters of Sir Paon (Payne) of ROET, a chevalier (knight) of Hainault. Roet was attached to the service of Queen Philippa when she came to England, and later attended her at the seige of CALAIS, when he was one of the two knights appointed to lead away the citizens she'd saved from Edward's wrath. He also served as an official of the household of Marguerite, empress of Germany and countess of Hainault, sister of Queen Philippa." With this introduction to the life of Geoffrey CHAUCER and his relations to sisters Katherine and Philippa, we can now move on to the 16th century and a curious set of events which I firmly believe leads to a family connection between several branches of the PAYNE family- including the Leicester/Suffolk PAINE'S, friar Hugh PAYNE "of Hadleigh, Suffolk," and Sir PAYNE de ROET. The page at http://www.payn.org/pfhs-intro.shtml gives an introduction to the Leicester/Suffolk PAINE family. Included is a brief biography of Henry PAINE, Esq., the bailiff of Manor Hengrave to Sir Thomas KYTSON (like his father for the Duke of BUCKINGHAM, Edward STAFFORD). In "PAINE Genealogy- Ipswich Branch" by A.W. PAINE, 1881, he includes the will of Henry PAINE, Esq., which contains some rather interesting correlations. The introduction also provides information on Hugh PAYNE, the ex-Observant preacher "of Hadleigh, Suffolk," the home of Ann, daughter of John WHITING, the wife of Henry's grand-nephew, Robert PAINE. John WHITING is believed to have been the same as the "Gentleman Usher of the King's Chamber" of the same name, at a time when a Master Richard PAYNE is recorded as the "Queen's Almoner and Palfreyman". Hugh PAYNE, like Henry, like his ancestor's "of Market Bosworth, Leicester," were men of status in society. All were close to Court, and several peers and removed to Suffolk about the time of the Battle of Bosworth in the late 15th century. Hugh PAYNE was a protege of Lord LISLE'S (Arthur PLANTAGENET who married Honor GRENVILLE) party supporting Catherine of ARAGON at CALAIS. Sir PAYNE de ROET also had connections to CALAIS and to Court there where he was appointed King of Arms. Diarmaid McCulloch states that Hugh also had been preaching in CRANMERS peculier parishes in London where it is likely he enjoyed the patronage of the surviving members of the WARHAM set, clinging on to various of the benefices which the old Archibishop had given them." During his persecution by CRANMER, Hugh had "escaped to a benefice at nearby Stoke-by-Nayland, a living in the gift of the Duke of NORFOLK (Thomas HOWARD). McCulloch gives the Duke of NORFOLK as Thomas HOWARD, 8th Duke of NORFOLK, but I believe he is incorrect in this identification. In Hugh's time, the Duke of NORFOLK would have been Thomas HOWARD, the 3rd Duke of NORFOLK, b. 1473, d. 25 Aug. 1554 ["Complete Peerage," vol. xiipl, p. 513]. The duke's wife was Lady Anne PLANTAGENET, daughter of King Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth WOODVILLE (WYDEVILLE). ["Complete Peerage," vol. xllpll, pp. 909-910]. Edward IV was the son of Richard, 3rd Duke of YORK and Lady Cecily NEVILLE. Richard was the son of King Edward III and Philippa "of HAINAULT", while his wife Cecily NEVILLE was the daughter of Ralph NEVILLE, Earl WESTMORELAND by his 2nd wife, Joan, daughter of John of GAUNT and Katherine ROET (daughter of Sir PAYNE de ROET). Henry PAINE died 25 July 1568, and was buried the next day in the Parish Church of Nowton (which he had purchased of the Crown, A.D. 1546 (the 37th year of Henry VIII's reign) with the dissolution of the Catholic monasteries. Henry VIII had seized upon the lands for his own purposes. Henry purchased of the Crown and received a grant in fee of the Manor of Nowton, the "advowson" of the church and the hereditaments in Nowton belonging to the dissolved monastery of St. Edmund, "one of the most celebrated monasteries in the Kingdom." "Advowson," is a term which would have given Henry the right to appoint the local clergyman if I understand the term correctly- and it would be interesting to know whom he chose for this office to present to the Archbishop. Henry also purchased the Grange in Thorpe Riggnoll, in the County of YORK (the home of Richard NEVILLE. parcel of the lands of the Priori Workshop. For the grants he paid to the Crown, as consideration, the sum of 647 pounds, 18 shillings, 2 pence. The sale of the Manor was made subject to a lease then existing in favor of William STERNE for twenty years for the yearly rent of 25 pounds, 13 shillings, 9 pence. By this purchase, Henry became Lord of the Manor of Nowton, a right or dignity which followed the law of inheritance. After the fall and consequent death (execution) of BUCKINGHAM, and the consequent dismissal of Henry's father, William, as bailiff of Manor Hengrave, Sir Thomas KYTSON, appointed Henry to the same office of bailiff of the Manor. Henry was also counsel for the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER), and the Earl on his death bequeathed to him for a rememberance, a gold ring of the value of 40 shillings, and the Countess styling him "her loving friend," directed by her will, that he should be associated with her executors, and gave him a legacy of 20 pounds. Henry left a will (which I have not yet obtained a copy), made a few days before his death, giving his estate, most of it, to charitable purposes. "To three-score poor house-holders, in each of the Parishes of St. Mary and St. James, In St. Edmunds Bury", he gave "three-score bushels of rye, that they and their families might pray for him, and to the poor prisoners in the gaol two bushels of rye to be baked for them, together with as much meat as ten shillings would purchase, and 6 shillings, 8 pence, in money and an annual allowance of wood for 20 years; 64 shillings to maintain the monument (?), etc., of St. Mary's Church, 20 shillings to repair it, small sums to the poor men's boxes of Nowton and other churches", to one friend (?), "the Countess of BATH'S (Lady BOURCHIER'S) cup", to another, "My CHAUCER written in vellum and illumyned with golde," to another,"a standing cup with cover all gilt that was part of the Countess of BATH'S plate," and also "a cloth of fine work that hung over the cupboard in his room with the story of NOE (?) and the Creation of the World," also various gifts to his brothers and sisters and their children. To Walter, son of his late brother, John PAINE, he have his homestead on College Street, St. Edmunds Bury, with the College Hall adjoining and 300 marks (?) and furniture, etc. To William JAMES, the 2d husband of his brother John's widow, 40 shillings, and to his brother Edward, his household effects, tiles and bricks made at his Manor of CLEES in ESSEX. Other lands he gave to his brother Anthony for life, with remainder over to Anthony's sons, John, Thomas, and William successively in "tail male." (?) Besides other devises he gave to his brother Nicholas and William his son, the Manor of NETHERHALL in SOHAM, Cambridgeshire on payt of 100 pounds to his executors. The Manor of Nowton he settled on his brother Anthony. His will was proved 2 Feb. 1569. He was never married (or at least left no widow, or children). The records compiled by the author of the "Visitation" show "Mr. Henry PAINE, Esq., Lord and Patron of Nowton, buried 26 July 1568." [A.W. PAINE, "PAINE Genealogy- Ipswich Branch" (Ipswich, Mass.), 1881] At the bottom of this page, I have attached correspondence I have received from members of the "Canterbury Tales Project," regarding Henry PAYNE'S ownership of the manuscript, which is now called, "The Ellesmere Manuscript," and is on public display in the Huntington Library, San Marino, California- "the most famous Chaucer manuscript to survive." I have also received a generous amount of information from the Huntington Library's curator in charge of the manuscript. You can view that information by clicking here. The mention of "My CHAUCER, written in vellum and illuminated in gold," is telling. We are talking about a hand-written manuscript here, not a simple printing of a book we'd recognize today, or one that could be purchased in virtually any bookshop. This was obiously a treasured item to Henry, one worthy of specific mention in his will. No other books or manuscripts were mentioned, although Henry, as an attorney and consel to the Earl and Countess of BATH (BOURCHIER), would have most likely owned many. Henry, in fact, willed his CHAUCER to Sir Giles ALINGTON, grandson of Ursula DRURY and her Giles ALINGTON. Ursula was his second wife, having m1. Alice MIDDLETON; m3. Margaret FALKARNE. Ursula was from the prominent DRURY family and Henry PAINE had purchased lands from them. It should be pointed out that Elizabeth DRURY was the second wife of William CECIL, 2nd Earl of EXETER, who had m1. Elizabeth MANNERS, Baroness De ROOS. Elizabeth, the daughter of William CECIL and Elizabeth DRURY married THomas HOWARD, 1st Earl of BERKSHIRE, the son of Thomas HOWARD and his 2nd wife, Catherine KNYVETT, who had married 1st, Richard RICH, son of Robert RICH, 2nd Baron RICH whose daughter, Frances RICH married, as his 2nd wife, Thomas CAMMOCK. His grandon, Warwick CAMMOCK was named in the 1675 will of Robert PAYNE (alias DAVIES), Clerk of the Rappahannock County Vestry, 1662-1666. Following these family connections, it is possible to establish the relationships between many PAYNE branches, accounting for all of the PAYNE'S who came to America prior to 1650, and it also leads to how Henry PAINE most likely came into possession of his CHAUCER- due to his connections to the family of Sir PAYNE de ROET. Edward STAFFORD (BUCKINGHAM), whom William PAINE had served as bailiff, was the great-great-grandson, through his wife Eleanor, of Ralph NEVIL, Earl of Westmoreland, by his wife Joan De BEAUFORT, the daughter of John of GAUNT and Katherine De ROET, whose father was PAYNE De ROET. Through his father's line, STAFFORD was the great-great-grandson of Thomas "Fairborn" BEAUFORT, Duke of Exeter, K.G., son of John of GAUNT and Katherine De ROET. Katherine's sister was Philippa De ROET, another daughter of PAYNE De ROET, and Philippa married Geoffrey CHAUCER. Philippa is also thought to have been the mistress of John of GAUNT. I've read some speculation that the son of Geoffrey and Philippa CHAUCER, Thomas, was the illegitimate son of John of GAUNT. It seems compelling that Henry PAINE, Esq. came in possession of his CHAUCER manuscript through some family relationship to Sir PAYNE De ROET, rather than through his connections. Henry mentions several items that he had received for his service to the KYTSON and BOURCHIER families, yet he does not mention that he had come by his CHAUCER through these sources, as he specifically did for these others. That seems to be another clue here. While it is possible he obtained it through his connections, it seems much more plausible that he was able to obtain it through some kinship to PAYNE De ROET. Also, there is no record that any of the families Henry was associated with owned the manuscript prior to him. Additionally, Edward STAFFORD'S son, Henry, Lord STAFFORD, had married, Ursula, daughter of Richard POLE, Duke of SUFFOLK (where Henry's family had settled) , and his wife, Margaret, Lady SALISBURY, daughter of George PLANTAGENET, Duke of CLARENCE (a relation of Arthur PLANTAGENET whom Hugh PAYNE served) and Lady Isabel NEVILLE. Lady Isabel's parents were Richard NEVILLE, Earl of WARWICK and Lady Anne (Isabel) BEAUCHAMP (one of the 1st recorded BEAUCHAMP'S was PAYNE de BEAUCHAMP). Richard was the son of "The King Maker," Richard NEVILLE, Earl of SALISBURY and Alice MONTACUTE (or MONTAGU). From the introduction, the reader will recall the MONTAGU/CROMWELL connection to Sir Robert PAYNE of St. Neot's and the part that Sir Thomas CROMWELL played in the imprisonment of Hugh PAYNE in the early 1500s. Oliver "The Lord Protector of the Commonwealth" CROMWELL'S grandmother was Catherine, daughter of Thomas PAYNE "of Catle Acre, Norfolk." However, of more significance at the moment, is that Richard "The King Maker" NEVILLE'S parents were Ralph NEVILLE, Earl of WESTMORELAND, and his second wife, Joan, daughter of John of GAUNT, Duke of LANCASTER, and his third wife, none other than Katherine ROET, whose sister, Philppa, married Geoffrey CHAUCER- both daughters of Sir PAYNE de ROET. The implication can hardly be denied that it was through these connections that Henry PAINE was able to come into possession of his CHAUCER. Several questions remain though. People the world over have dedicated their lives to the study of CHAUCER- and I could dedicate my life to just studying the numerous correlations to be found among the various PAYNE branches in this research. I have given the reader only a brief overview of these correlations. There are many more to be found in the PAYNE connections through the STAFFORD, BOURCHIER, MONTAGU, BEAUCHAMP, HOWARD, RICH, CARTERET, and other peers- which now encompass at least 6 branches of the PAYNE family, previously said to "have no connection whatever." We now have a long list (and still growing) of connections that make "whatever" seem a useless word. I have attached below letters I have received regarding the CHAUCER manuscript in Henry PAINE'S possession which is on display at the Huntington Library. Patrick A. Payne 7 March 2000 Dear Mr Payne, I've just had a quick look at the catalogues, and have found two references to owners with the surname Payne. The first in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 600. On f. 268r is the name Edward Payne in a sixteenth century hand (erased, and now only visible under ultra-violet light). The Henry Payne manuscript, however, is much more interesting. It seems that your ancestor was in possession of the most famous Chaucer manuscript to survive, the Ellesmere manuscript. This is kept in the Huntingdon Library, San Marino, California, with the shelfmark El. 26. C. 9. http://www.huntington.org/LibraryDiv/LibraryHome.html It has been the subject of many extensive studies, and a beautiful facsimile has been made of it, with a thorough discussion of the manuscript's history. I've just checked Amazon.com, and it's out of stock at the publishers, (and was also very expensive), but most big libraries should have a copy. The details are as follows: Ellesmere Manuscript of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales : A Working Facsimile by Ralph Hanna III, Hardcover (October 1990) Boydell & Brewer; ISBN: 085991187X . The manuscript's history os reasonably well recorded, and it may also have been owned by the well-known Paston family, who lived in Norfolk in the fifteenth century. I'm passing your query on to a colleague of mine, Estelle Stubbs, who is a mine of information of the history of the Canterbury Tales manuscripts. In the meantime, you could start by looking at a Catalogue of Chaucer Manuscripts: The Canterbury Tales by M. C. Seymour , Hardcover Vol 2 (October 1997) Scolar Pr/Gower; ISBN: 1859280579, which should also be available in most libraries. I hope this is a useful start - if you have any further questions, please get in touch. Best wishes Claire Jones Dear Mr. Payne, Your e-mail to Claire Jones at De Montfort has been sent on to me. I have worked at the University of Sheffield on the Canterbury Tales Project for the last six years. My particular interest in the Canterbury Tales manuscripts has been from the point of view of provenance. The manuscript you describe is the Ellesmere Canterbury Tales now in the Huntington Library, California. Ellesmere is one of the earliest manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales still extant. It probably dates from a few years after Chaucer's death but it is not known for whom it was originally made. Its quality suggests a member of the nobility, royalty or perhaps even the Chaucer family. Geoffrey Chaucer's son, Thomas played a significant role in the Parliaments of the first thirty years of the fifteenth century and presumably would have had some sort of copy of his father's work. However, there is no coat of arms or early signs of ownership which establish its provenance exactly. One theory is that it was made for the Earls of Oxford, whose family seat at Castle Hedingham in Suffolk is close to the area of later ownership. There is a poem written in praise of the De Vere Earls of Oxford written on spare folios of the manuscript. The poem was written at some time during the fifteenth century and seems to indicate that it was in their possession at this time. Ellesmere was owned by the Drury family of Hawstead in Suffolk early in the sixteenth century. Henry Payne of Nowton near Hawstead, a wealthy lawyer and member of Lincoln's Inn, had purchased lands from the Druries and knew them well. It could be as a result of this connection that he first came to own the Chaucer. As you know he willed the manuscript to Sir Giles Alington, grandson of Ursula Drury and her husband. The friar connection intrigues me and I would like to know more. My reason for this is that my own research seems to indicate that there may be some connection between friar copying and Canterbury Tales manuscripts. This is my own theory and there is much still to discover, but the Earls of Oxford, and indeed the family of Lionel of Ulster, Chaucer's first employer, were closely connected with the Augustinian Priory of Friars at Clare in Suffolk. When you say Hugh Payne was an 'ex-Observant' friar, do you know to which order of friars he was attached? If you do I would be keen to know. The history of ownership of Canterbury Tales manuscripts is not now easy to research since so much information regarding ownership has been erased from the manuscripts over the years, original binding boards have been replaced and the manuscripts have changed hands many times. Your research sounds fascinating and I hope I have been able to offer a little more information. Best, Estelle Stubbs The Canterbury Tales Project. Humanities Research Institute, Room 1.19, PO Box 595, Arts Tower, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TN

Nice to have another UK contributor to the list! Can't help specifically, but have you looked at some of the Paine/Payne web sites that are out there? Try starting at www.paine.org We have a message board where you are welcome to post a request, and we are also part of a Payne Web Ring which will take you to other Payne sites. Hope this helps John Paine john.paine@paine.org -----Original Message----- From: Sue Powell <sue@thesquirrelhouse.freeserve.co.uk> To: PAYNE-L@rootsweb.com <PAYNE-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 14 March 2000 20:11 Subject: Margaret PAYNE - St Peter, Dorchester, Dorset, UK >Hi All, >I'm new to the list having just discovered the name PAYNE in my family >tree. >I would love to hear from anybody researching the same and would appreciate >any additional information you can add. > >Margaret PAYNE married George RIGGS (b.1734) on the 3rd July 1751 at St >Peter, Dorchester, Dorset, UK >They had a son George RIGGS in about 1760 in Puddletown, Dorset. > >When and where was MARGARET born ? > >Many thanks for any help. > >Sue >Glamorgan, UK >

Hi All, I'm new to the list having just discovered the name PAYNE in my family tree. I would love to hear from anybody researching the same and would appreciate any additional information you can add. Margaret PAYNE married George RIGGS (b.1734) on the 3rd July 1751 at St Peter, Dorchester, Dorset, UK They had a son George RIGGS in about 1760 in Puddletown, Dorset. When and where was MARGARET born ? Many thanks for any help. Sue Glamorgan, UK

unsubscribe -----Original Message----- From: PAYNE-D-request@rootsweb.com <PAYNE-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: PAYNE-D@rootsweb.com <PAYNE-D@rootsweb.com> Date: Friday, March 10, 2000 2:29 PM Subject: PAYNE-D Digest V00 #37

Hi there, I'm not new but I seldom post..This is my cousins line and I watch it for her ....until now..I have a Payne in my Gillocks here is the only info I have on her if you want info on him I have it all...will exchange all I have if you want it... Nelda James Robert Jones - Son of Reese James (I) Jones & Mary Elizabeth Gillock . Born 1829 in Sangamon Co., ILL. Died 1899. He married Nancy Jane Payne, Born 1834. Died 1917. I have nothing more on her or children would love.....info I am doing a complete line with siblings and siblings siblings line. Who went where and married whom. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

unsubscribe -----Original Message----- From: PAYNE-D-request@rootsweb.com <PAYNE-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: PAYNE-D@rootsweb.com <PAYNE-D@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, March 09, 2000 10:06 PM Subject: PAYNE-D Digest V00 #36

Does anyone know who John Payne Living in Whitevill Township, Baxter Co Ar living in 1880 with John W Messick, maybe what his status is?

Does anyone know who John Payne 20 TN TN TN in the baxter co 1880 census as boarder in the John W Messick household in Whiteville Township. Could he be some relation to John or his wife.

> > >> >> >>I received this on another list, thought I would pass it on >> >>Hereditary Organizations >>******* >>Daughters of the American Revolution >>http://www.chesapeake.net/DAR >>Daughters of the Republic of Texas >>http://www.drtl.org/~drtl/index.html >>Descendents of Mexican WarVeterans >>http://member.aol.com/dmwv/home.htm >>Descendents of Washington's Army at Valley Forge >>http://www.execpc.com/~drg/widwavf.html >>Founders of the New Haven Colony >>http://members.tripod.com/~Historic_Trust/NEWHAVEN.HTM >>General Society of Mayflower Descendents >>http://user.aol.com/calebj/mayflower.html >>General Society of the War of 1812 >>http://LanClio.org/1812.htm >>General Society Sons of the Revolution >>http://www.execpc.com/~drg/gssro.html >>Grand Army of the Republic (G.A.R.) >>http://pages.prodigy.com/CGBD86A/garhp.htm >>for male descendents and >>Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic >>http://suvcw.org/lgar.htm >>and the Women's Relief Corps >>http://suvcw.org/wrc.htm >>for female descendents of Union soldiers of the Civil War. >>Huguenot Society >>http://www.startext.net/homes/huguenot/ >>International Society Daughters of Utah Pioneers >>http://www.media.utah.edu/medsol/UCME/d/DAUGHTERSUTPIO.html >>Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States >>http://suvcw.org/mollus.htmMilitary >>Order of the Stars and Bars >>http://scv.org/mosbhome.htmMilitary >>Order of the World Wars >>http://www.cais.com/dc/moww/ >>Order of Daedalians >>http://www.daedalians.org/ >>Order of Indian Wars of the United States >>http://members.tripod.com/~Historic_Trust/INDIAN.HTM >>Point Lookout Prisoner of War Organization >>http://barbados.cc.odu.edu/~bkb300z/plpow/plpow.html >>for descendents of POWs at the Point Lookout, Maryland prison during the >>American Civil War. >>Society of the Cincinnati >>http://members.tripod.com/~Historic_Trust/CINCINNA.HTM >>Sons of the American Legion >>http://www.legion.org/salinfo.htm >>Sons of the American Revolution >>http://www.sar.org/ >>Sons of Confederate Veterans >>http://scv.org/ >>Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War. >>http://SUVCW.org/ >>Link to the Daughters of Union Veterans of the Civil War. >>http://suvcw.org/duv.htm >>*********************************************** >>Patriotic and Military Organizations >> >>Air Force Association (AFA) >>http://www.afa.org/ >>The American Legion >>http://www.legion.org/ >>Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts >>http://www.tiac.net/users/ltcdon/ >>Ancient and Honorable Order of the Jersey Blues >>http://www.innerlight.com/genepool/njblues.htm >>Association of the United States Army (AUSA) >>http://www.ausa.org/ >>Disabled American Veterans (DAV) >>http://www.dav.org/contents/ >>Legion of Valor of the United States >>http://members.aol.com/LValor1890/index.html >>Marine Corps League >>http://www.mcleague.org/Military >>Order of the Purple Heart >>http://www.purpleheart.org/index.ssi >>National Society Sons of Utah Pioneers >>http://www.uvol.com/sup/homepage.html >>The Navy League >>http://www.navyleague.org/ >>Retired Officers Association (TROA) >>http://www.troa.org/ >>United Daughters of the Confederacy >>http://www.hsv.tis.net/~maxs/UDC/ >>Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) >>http://www.vfw.org/ >> >> >> >> >> >

Hello everyone! I was going through some old papers and came upon this copy I had made on one of my early trips to the library. I have found no connections to my Payne line. I hope that my posting them will help someone. Pittsylvania Co., VA. Marriages collected by Dorothy Murray, Hunting for Bears Inc., Page 44 Sep 18, 1782 Payne, Abigail Arn, Moses Nov 30, 1784 Payne, Anne Harrison, Robert May 28, 1804 Payne, Anne Shelton, John Dec 10, 1793 Payne, Anne Willis, John Jun 16, 1800 Payne, Charles Fearn, Leannah Jul 07, 1787 Payne, Dedbrah Hill, Charles Dec 15, 1794 Payne, Fanney Shelton, Tunstall Oct 20, 1784 Payne, James Dix, Fanny Dec 22, 1804 Payne, Janey Adams, Joel Mar 10, 1800 Payne, John Elliott, Sally Dec 06, 1793 Payne, John Fearn, Lucy Feb 20 1792 Payne, John Richards, Milley Jan 08, 1786 Payne, Ketturah Dixon, Wynne Oct 28, 1787 Payne, Lucresia Pigg, John Jun 13, 1784 Payne, Mary Hutcherson, Walter May 24, 1787 Payne, Phillimon Wilson, Rachel Jun 17, 1793 Payne, Robert Fearn, Elizabeth Lee Feb 15, 1802 Payne, Sally Curry, Israel Apr 03, 1779 Payne, Sally Spiller, Hickman Nov 03, 1785 Payne, Sarah Willis, Sterling Nov 03, 1785 Payne, Susanna Johnson, Philip Nov 03, 1785 Payne, Susannah Johnson, Philip Oct 16, 1795 Payne, Thomas Shelton, Sally Jun 17, 1783 Payne, William Dix, Martha Mar 1, 1802 Payne, William Griggory, Maryanna

I am searching for descendants of Clarence and Martha Payne who lived in Russellville, Arkansas. 1. Clarence H. Payne, b: 5/22/1844 Lynchburg, VA d: 8/4/1900 Russellville, AR m: Martha J. ? b: Dec. 1852 Misssissippi d: 9/18/1922 Russellville, AR 2.. Auska Lee Payne, b: 1876 Mississippi 2.. Clarence H. Payne, b: 5/19/1878 Mississippi d: 6/30/1907 Russellville, AR 2.. Esme M. Payne, b: 3/24/1884 Mississippi d: 7/28/1900 Russellville, AR 2.. Jennie Payne, b: June 1886 Mississippi m: Henry Hargis 2.. Volia Payne, b:Oct. 1889 Mississippi 2.. Thurman Leslie Payne, b: 6/17/1894 Russellville, AR d: 1/13/1919 Would like to share genealogical information. -Mark Beamer

Is anyone researching John Paine d. 1753 in Craven County married to Anne and son Thomas. I have a Thomas Paine, sr. d. 1798 had a wife Mary and children John, Sarah, mary, thomas, christian, richard, Sanderson, Bethany, and grandsons: David, thomas, Benjamin, and Daniel. I know some of these lived in Hyde Co.NC ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie Carter <tara37@comsys.net> To: <PAYNE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, 03 March, 2000 11:53 AM Subject: John Payne > > looking for info on a John Payne/Pain who married a Mary prior to 1793 and > had a daughter named Nancy born 1793 in NC who married Anthony Summars. > > Debra Carter > tara37@comsys.net > > >

looking for info on a John Payne/Pain who married a Mary prior to 1793 and had a daughter named Nancy born 1793 in NC who married Anthony Summars. Debra Carter tara37@comsys.net

I have a Robert Payne (my grandad) bn 26 Dec 1877 in Baxter County Arkansas. Ihaven't found his father John Payne, but did find his Mother Louisa Melton Payne bn 1859 in Hardin county Tn, to a Ellis and Mary (Byrd) Melton. Mary later married a Alexander Payne in 1865 and they then came to Baxter County Ar in 1872. Surely there is someone out there researching this paticular Payne family. I have all the Family from Robert on down, but nothing past Robert but his mother. Any help would be great. thanks rjpayne@terraworld.net

Looking for information about Nancy J. Payne. According to census records she was born abt. 1828 in AL. She married Jesse Franklin Fuller in Union Pr. LA, November 26, 1845. Her parents may have been Daniel Payne & Elizabeth Dupree. Any information is appreciated. Shari, Tulsa OK, SS1919@worldnet.att.net.

Affidavit of John Albertson, I am 65 or 70 years old I live near Utica IT and am a chickasaw Indian by blood and do not understand the english lanquage very well [Joseph E. Nelson translated] I lwas born and lived in the old naiton in Mississippi till I was about 15 years old. I came west and have lived here ever since. While I was a boy in Mississippi I know a family of Choctaws there by the name of Pyane. I do not know whether they were full bloods or only mixed bloods. SInce I came to the Territory I have known only one indian by the name of Payne and he died about 20 years agoat the age of about 50 or 60 years. He died up west of caddo about 12 or 13 miles. His wife died a long time ago and they had 2 boys I think one of them went up abover where Lehigh is now and do not know werhe the other one went to. Believed this is the Bromide Springs Payne's any one knows.

Unsubscribe