--part1_63db4cae.24e6eeec_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have the book Currents of Malice by Persis W. McMillen. The following is on pp 186-187: "Sarah Good was strong in her own defene, asserting her own innocence. But she was quick enough to pin the blame on the woman who was brought before the bar next. This was Sarah Osborne. "Sarah Osborne was, too, in a sense, a deviant citizen of Salem Village. Her first husband, Thomas Prince, had died in 1674, leaving his land to his wife in trust for their two small sons, and naming as his executors, Thomas and John Putnam, his in-laws and neighbors. Soon after Prince's death, his widow brought into the village a hired hand. His name was Alexander Osborne, and his indenture was purchased for fifteen pounds. The possible fornication between the two before their marriage undoubtedly made her more vulnerable to village opprobrium. After the marriage however, they began to maneuver to gain full control of her late husband's lands, at the expense of her two sons, and in direct defiance of Thomas Prince's will. " Such doings did not suit the Villagers' sense of propriety at all. Established patterns of land tenure and inheritance were threatened. Added to this was the fact brought out in her first examination that she had not been at a church meeting for a year and two months." If this documentation is correct, Sarah, who m. 1st Thomas Prince and 2nd Alexander Osborne, was a Putnam. This references Thomas and John Putnam as executors and in-laws of Thomas Prince, Sarah's first husband. In the book, Genealogies of the Families and Descendants of the Early Settlers of Watertown, Massachusetts by Henry Bond, M.D., p. 620, the only Mary Warren who is close in age to "Mary Warren, age 20, maid of John Proctor" in Salem is Mary Warren, b. 25 May 1675 to John Warren and Michael (Jennison) Bloys, wd of Richard Bloys. This would make her age 17, not 20 in 1692. Mary m. 30 Dec 1698, Joseph Peirce. The LDS Ancestral File of ROBERT Prince and Sarah Warran (AFN:JWQL-R4) shows Sarah b. abt 1642, of Watertown, MA. The only Sarah Warren shown in the above Watertown reference is Sarah, b. 4 Jul 1658 to Daniel Warren and Mary Barron. It does not include a marriage for Sarah. The next Sarah Warren shown is Sarah, b. 25 jan 1670-1, sister of above Mary and dau. of John Warren and Michael Jennison. This Sarah is not mentioned in her father's will and no marriage is shown. Rita Knecht In a message dated 8/13/1999 10:26:55 Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Fom: LOIS CONN <[email protected]> > Hi all > I like this list. I am interresting in Mary Warren to. According to > someone who has done some research I have 2 relatives who was killed for > witchcraft. What I have found does go along with what she said. She was > tracing the Warren line. Could anyone help with this. > Thankyou > Debby > Fom: "Cindy Abel" <[email protected]> > I still have a few pages from Currents of Malice on Mary Warren, but > not all that refer to her in the book. > > Mary had a father and sister living in 1692. According to testimony, > an accused witch, killed her mother and struck her sister > dumb(whatever that means)when Mary's father, for whatever reason, > didn't plow the accused field for her. > > Mary's family does not appear on Boyer and Nissenbaum's Salem Village > census in Salem Village Witchcraft: a Documentary Record so they must > have lived in one of the outlying areas--Topsfield, Andover, Wenham, > Watertown, or perhaps near the Proctor's where Mary was a servant. > I think Sarah Warren Prince Osbourne was originally from Watertown > and was the right age to be Mary's aunt so if Sarah and Mary's father > were brother and sister, that would be the place to search, perhaps. > > I tried tracing Sarah on the FamilySearch Webbase at Salt Lake, but > only got the family pedigree for her first husband Robert Prince. > Perhaps looking up any 17th c Warrens in Watertown MA might be a > start. > > So now I have confirmation that two of the afflicted girls, Mercy > Lewis and Mary Warren weren't orphans and had some family, at least. > --part1_63db4cae.24e6eeec_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from aol.com (rly-yd04.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.4]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v60.25) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:26:55 -0400 Received: from bl-14.rootsweb.com (bl-14.rootsweb.com [204.212.38.30]) by rly-yd04.mx.aol.com (v60.25) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:26:41 -0400 Received: (from [email protected]) by bl-14.rootsweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA21900; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:24:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:24:31 -0700 (PDT) From: [email protected] Message-Id: <[email protected]> Subject: SALEM-WITCH-D Digest V99 #102 X-Loop: [email protected] X-Mailing-List: <[email protected]> archive/volume99/102 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: [email protected] Reply-To: [email protected] - ---------------------------- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain SALEM-WITCH-D Digest Volume 99 : Issue 102 Today's Topics: #1 [SALEM-WITCH-L] Mary Warren [LOIS CONN <[email protected]>] #2 [SALEM-WITCH-L] George Burrough [[email protected]] #3 [SALEM-WITCH-L] Mail List [Jo Branch <[email protected]>] #4 Re: [SALEM-WITCH-L] Mary Warren ["Cindy Abel" <[email protected]] Administrivia: To unsubscribe from SALEM-WITCH-D, send a message to [email protected] that contains in the body of the message the command unsubscribe and no other text. No subject line is necessary, but if your software requires one, just use unsubscribe in the subject, too. ______________________________ --------------------