On 25 Dec 1670 Mary married
John Borden (5663) , son of
Richard Borden (2276) (ca 1595-25 May 1671) &
Joan Fowle (15 Feb 1604-15 Jul 1688), in Portsmouth, RI.
39 Born in Sep 1640 in Portsmouth, RI.1 John died in Portsmouth, RI on 4 Jun 1716.105
Seabury’s narrative from Weld’s Record of the Borden family:201
John Borden was born in Portsmouth, September, 1640, and married Mary Earl, the daughter of William, of the same place, December 25, 1670, less than a year prior to the death of his father. John Borden was frequently associated with his brother, Matthew, in the performance of various duties assigned by the town and religious community, of which they constituted two of the main pillars. Some of which have already been noticed in the account concerning Matthew, and I feel happy in saying that they uniformly conducted themselves and their business affairs in such a manner as to secure the entire confidence and respect of their neighbors and Friends at home, and gained for themselves among the Friends throughout every state in the union a good reputation. In fact, the name of John Borden of Quaker Hill, on Rhode Island, has been so universally spread over the country as to completely cast into the shade those of his father and brothers; so that for many years even their names had passed out of the recollection of the Borden descendants on Rhode Island; and John was supposed to have been the original emigrant from England, and the father of all that now bear this name in the country. So generally received and firmly established was this conviction that twenty-five years ago, when the Rev. Orrin Fowler published his lectures on the history of Fall River, he appended a genealogical chart of the Borden and Durfee families, in which he places John Borden at the head of the Borden family, as the original emigrant; and in a note he says: “John Borden, the first of the name in this region, and, as is believed, the father of all of the name in the United States, lived and died in Portsmouth.” Nor was this impression peculiar to Mr. Fowler or the people of this vicinity. Go wherever you might, whenever you met a person of the name of Borden or inquired about the origin of his ancestors, he was sure to refer to John Borden of Rhode Island as the original emigrant. And they will invariably say “our family has been long separated from the parent stock, but we are sure we are not mistaken, for we have never heard of any other person named as our ancestor but this John Borden.”
This impression has originated from the fact that for the last century his descendants have greatly outnumbered those of all his brothers. Theirs have been diminishing, while his have been increasing, until they may be found in almost every state of the union. This fact must excite the surprise of all concerned. But to account for this anomaly is beyond the power of man. Neither Thomas Borden, who settled in Providence, nor Matthew, who settled in Portsmouth, near his brother John, have now any living person bearing the Borden name to represent them here. But descendants they both have through their granddaughters, who are highly respectable and do honor to the memories of their ancestors.
The descendants of John, finding themselves thus alone in the race of life, had very naturally concluded that they had never had any competitors or companions of the Borden name, and that they had all derived their existence from John Borden. And this was in effect true, but their conclusion was too broad as this investigation has shown. John settled two of his sons near the Fall River stream; Richard and Joseph. This was the nucleus around which their descendants have rallied until Fall River has become the great Borden center in this section of the country, and no other place is known in the United States which contains so large a number. And yet, previous to the establishment of cotton factories here it was very fashionable for the young people to remove westward to seek their fortunes among the fertile lands of New York, and subsequently of the far, far west. But time has wrought great changes in society and in the pursuits and employments of men. The introduction of manufactures in the present century has given a new impulse and a new direction to human energy. The people have concentrated, forming factory villages, towns and cities, and the country towns have been depleted of their redundant population. Even Portsmouth, the center of the early Bordens, cannot show more than four or five families of the name, but in Fall River they are very numerous, as the directory will testify, and are on the increase.
John Borden was left by his father with a good substantial estate, which gave him a fair start in the world. In addition to this he possessed, by nature, a shrewd business tact and an excellent judgment, which, with his activity of mind and untiring energy of character, insured success in whatever scheme he engaged. Accordingly, in a few years he became the owner of large tracts of land in the colonies of Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware, near Cape Henlopen, Lewees, and it was said by the old people that he was so eager to acquire landed property that he publicly proclaimed: “If any man has land to sell at a fair price I am ready to buy, and have the money ready at my house to pay for it.” He also bought Hog Island and lands at Bristol Ferry, Swansea, Tiverton and Freetown. He was associated with John Tripp, and after his death, with his son, Bikill Tripp, in leasing and managing Bristol Ferry. He first commenced this connection with the ferry in 1660, when he was but twenty years of age. At that time the ferry was in the hands of Portsmouth, which established it in 1640, and the Pocasset Ferry, was established the same year, and placed in care of Thomas Gorton. Just previous to the Indian war, the general court of Plymouth, knowing that there was an intimate acquaintance existing between King Philip and John Borden, for they had several times requested John Borden to use his influence with Philip to restrain and quiet him; so now that an Indian war was imminent and the fears of the people were highly excited on account of it, they sent to him again to ask his intercession. To this request he gave heed at once, for he saw clearly that a dark cloud hung over the white settlement, still in their infancy, and poorly prepared to withstand the horrors of an Indian war. He also felt that the danger and distress which such a war would entail upon the Indians themselves would be disastrous in the extreme, and wishing to save the lives of both races, he hastened to Philip and faithfully portrayed to him the horrors and vicissitudes of such a bloody and exterminating war, the final termination of which could not be estimated or foreseen; and contrasting these with the blessings which would certainly flow from continued peace. This coming from one in whom he had implicit confidence, must have made a deep impression on the mind of Philip; he had said that John Borden was the only honest white man he had ever seen; he could not, even now, doubt the honesty of his intentions, nor the truth which he had spoken. But the memory of his wrongs stung him to the soul, and steeled his heart and nerved his arm for the dreadful strife; and thus he answered one whom he knew and recognized as the best friend he had on earth: “The English who first came to this country were but a handful of people, forlorn, poor and distressed. My father was then Sachem. He received them and relieved their distress in the most kind and hospitable manner. He gave them land to build and plant upon. He did all in his power to serve them. Others of their companions came and joined them. Their numbers rapidly increased. My father's counsellors became uneasy and alarmed lest, as they were provided with firearms, which was not the case with the Indians, they should finally undertake to give law to the Indian and take from them their country. They therefore advised him to destroy them before they became too strong and it would be too late. My father was also the father of the English. He represented to his counsellors and warriors that the English knew many things which the Indians did not; that they improved and cultivated the land and raised cattle and fruits, and that there was sufficient room in the country for the English and the Indians. His advice prevailed. It was concluded to give victuals to the English. They flourished and increased. Experience has taught that the advice of my father's counsellors was right. By various means they got possession of a great part of his territory. But he still remained their friend until he died. My older brother became Sachem. They pretended to suspect him of evil designs against them. He was seized and confined and thrown into sickness and died. Soon after I became Sachem, they disarmed my people. They tried my people by their own laws, assessed damages against them which they could not pay. Their land was taken. At length a line of division was agreed upon between the English and my people, and I myself was to be responsible. Sometimes the cattle of the English would come into the cornfields of my people, for they did not make fences like the English. I must then be seized and confined till I sold another tract of my country for satisfaction of all damages and costs. Thus tract after tract has gone. But a small part of the domain of my ancestors remains. I am determined I will not live till I have no country.” (Arnold's History of Rhode Island, p. 394, vol. 1).
Such was the answer of Philip to the urgent appeal of his friend, John Borden, for the preservation of peace. It is a plain statement of historic facts as they had occurred from the first landing of the English at Plymouth. His sentiments were expressed with much coolness and deliberation; the deep anguish of his soul on account of the wrongs inflicted upon him and his people by those whom they had received as friends, sheltered and nourished when in a desperate and forlorn condition, nay, almost starving--shines forth in every sentence which he uttered, and he concludes by announcing to his friend the fixed determination of his mind that he would sooner perish than survive the loss of his country. How could he longer listen to proposals of peace from those whose sole object was to rob him of his country and drive him and his people far back into the wilderness to procure a precarious living among wild beasts and under their more savage Indian enemies? This he would not do, but he would die in the defence of his country. Philip was an untutored Indian, but he seems to rise to the full stature of a true patriot when he exclaimed: “I am determined not to live till I have no country.” He possessed indeed strong powers of mind and a high moral sense which raised him far above the level of his treacherous neighbors and persecutors, whose miserable pettyfogging schemes to filch from him under the shadow of law, every foot of his territory, deserves universal execration.
There can be no doubt that John Borden did all in his power to dissuade Philip from engaging in a war with the English at this time. At an earlier period the chances of success would have been entirely on the side of the Indians, but now, the English had become too strong for them, and the inevitable result would be great destruction of life and property to the English, and the utter ruin of Philip and his people. And such it proved to be, and detailed accounts of this horrid tragedy had very little influence over the provincial government. Here self-manner as to exculpate the guilty party and charge the blame to those who were comparatively innocent. There was some genuine piety among the first settlers at Plymouth without doubt, but it seems to have have very little influence over the provincial government. Here self-interests and the baser passions seems to have predominated. Philip being disposed of, his Indians scattered to the four winds of heaven, the Plymouth government next attacked John Borden. It would have been supposed that this man who had hitherto been regarded by them as “the peacemaker” between them and Philip, and had served them faithfully in this capacity on several important occasions, would have been at least secure from any disturbance from them. But it seems that gratitude for any service he could render could not be reasonably expected from such men. But a few years after the conclusion of the Indian war, Mr. Borden was arrested in Bristol, in the matter of Hog Island, which the Plymouth government claimed as a part of their territory, although it had been always considered as a part of Portsmouth, and paid taxes as such. The island belonged to John Borden, who refused to pay any tax to Bristol or Plymouth. After his treacherous arrest at Bristol, Mr. Borden entered a complaint to the Legislature of Rhode Island, in 1684. In this complaint he states, as the cause of his arrest “his maintaining the true right of His Majesty's colony of Rhode Island against the intrusions of the Plymouth government.”
This difficulty arose from an attempt to extend the jurisdiction of the Plymouth government over all the islands of Narragansett Bay. It does not appear whether they made their claim as a part of King Philip's territory or not; but no doubt that insatiable thirst for more land which they had manifested from an early day, had much to do with it. They arrested Mr. Borden's tenant first for the same purpose; but to arrest him they had to resort to strategy to get him within their jurisdiction. He was invited to come over to Bristol to receive compensation for the many services he had rendered the Plymouth government, and the ruse succeeded. The equity of their courts in such cases may be duly estimated by that of King Philip some years before. The Englishmen's cattle destroyed the Indian's cornfields, and complaint being entered, Philip was forced to sell more land to pay the damages and costs of court to the Plymouth government.
But Mr. Borden did not appear before the Plymouth court--his case took a different direction. His complaint was received by the general assembly of the colony, and his cause was adopted as their own. They immediately addressed the following communication to the Plymouth government, which states the case more circumstantially:
“General Assembly of Colony of Rhode Island:
To the Governor and Council of Colony of New Plymouth:
COMPLAINT OF RHODE ISLAND.
1. For a warrant granted by James Brown, Esq., against Morris Freelove, for possession of Hog Island.
2. We also have information that Nathaniel Byfield, in an unmanlike and deceitful manner, invited John Borden over to Bristol, pretending to requite him for former kindnesses received, and immediately caused the constable to arrest him to your court, to the intent that he might answer by virtue of a warrant granted by Daniel Smith of Rehoboth for detaining lands at Hog Island which he presumes to assert is in your colony, as by the warrant, a copy of which we have seen, is more largely demonstrated.
“Honored Gentlemen:
“We did expect that there would have been a cessation of these interruptions; forasmuch as the Honored Gov. Hinckly, Esq., and his accociates did declare at the meeting in Bristol, that, although they were not come to a final decision, yet they would live as loving neighbors until another meeting, and did hope that we should meet nearer them next time. But forasmuch as, notwithstanding we have used all fair means for a peaceable and neighborly compliance, you still persist to violate said agreement, we will, by all lawfull ways, uphold our patent right to the extent thereof. We have ordered John Borden not to give answer in your court to the matter he arrested in concerning Hog Island, forasmuch as said island has been possessed by the town of Portmouth, in our jurisdiction, more than forty years, and none is mentioned in yours. wherein you serve His Majesty; and remain your loving neighbors.
“Signed by order of His Majesty's General Assembly, held for the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations June 24, 1684.
“JOHN SANFORD, Recorder”
About this time the little state of Rhode Island was assailed on the west by Connecticut, and on the east by Plymouth--each endeavoring to appropriate to themselves all they could wrest from her. Connecticut claimed the jurisdiction over the western part of the state of Rhode Island, the waters of Narragansett Bay, and, of course, to all the islands those waters contained; but Plymouth claimed on the east side to tide water, and had they got possession of Hog Island, would have claimed all the remainder. There is no stopping in such a race until the object is won or lost. But the attempts on both sides failed, and the evils intended for Rhode Island recoiled upon her enemies. Capt. Christopher Almy was sent to England to lay the situation of affairs here before their Majesties, and, in 1688, four years after the arrest of John Borden, the boundaries of Rhode Island were permanently established as claimed by her citizens, though Massachusetts held on to several towns until 1746, before they relinquished their hold upon them. Capt. Almy, the agent of Rhode Island, was permitted to enter the royal palace and deliver the petition of his fellow-citizens to the Queen herself, which was regarded at the time as an act of especial favor, highly honorable to the petitioners and their little state. But their troubles did not cease. Although by an act of William and Mary the line of Rhode Island on the east was extended so as to include the five towns of Little Comptom, Tiverton, Bristol, Warren, and Barrington within the jurisdiction of Rhode Island; Massachusetts claimed them as a part of the province of New Plymouth, which was quietly annexed to that state. This created a new difficulty and fresh bickerings betweer the new government and the people of those towns, which lasted more than half a century, very much to the annoyance of the people, and no benefit to any one interest. But in 1746, Massachusetts relinquished her claim upon the five towns, and they passed under the jurisdiction of Rhode Island. This was one of the most impudent claims that was ever set up to rob a people of their rights, for the same authority, a statute of William and Mary in 1688, that gave the province of New Plymouth to Massachusetts, had also ordered the five towns enumerated above to be annexed to Rhode Island.
So far as the documents presented for our inspection testify concerning John Borden, he was in no way concerned in raising this difficulty unless it was a sin in him to own Hog Island, which Nat Byfield wished to wrest from him for his own purposes and benefit. He was basely decoyed and betrayed within the Plymouth lines, ostensibly for state purposes, if we can credit tradition, by the meanest man that could have been found in Bristol, where he lived. In so far as he was the agent of the Plymouth government in this affair, it shows that they had sunk so low that they were no longer capable of performing the duties of civil magistrates, and fully justifies the decision of William and Mary to place a guardian over them. No descendant of John Borden will find in this or any other act of his life anything to lessen the respect and esteem in which his memory has always been held. For his character was always above reproach; his standing in society fully equal to that of the most elevated of his associates, and his influence over those who knew him best, was paramount to that of all others. Mr. Borden was much before the public, though not strictly speaking a public man; that is, he did not depend on the public for business nor for salary, which are now the necessary attendants upon public life. Early in life he appears as a ferryman at Bristol Ferry. From 1680 to 1708 he frequently represented the town in the general assembly. In 1706 he was associated with seven other persons in the erection of two meeting houses for the Friends, one each for the towns of Newport and Portsmouth, and often times he was engaged in minor affairs assigned him by the town or religious society to which he belonged.
Mr. Borden became very extensively known throughout the country as a Friend. To account for this we must suppose that there was something peculiarly attractive in his manner or conversation which arrested the attention of those that came in contact with him, and fixed him and his sayings in their memories. For we hear more of the sayings and doings of John Borden than of all the family of his father beside.
Further comments from Weld’s Record of the Borden family:201
1716. February 24, will probated. Exx. wife Mary. Overseers, son Richard and Friend William Anthony. To eldest son, Richard, land in Tiverton. To son John, farm at Touisset Neck, Swanzey, half at my decease and half at death or marriage of wife, he paying my daughters Hope and Mary Borden £50 each, and to children of daughter Amey Chase deceased (late wife to Benjamin Chase of Tiverton) £15. To grandson Stephen Borden, eldest son of Joseph, my son, deceased, land in Freetown, where son Joseph built a sawmill; said Stephen paying his three brothers, William, George and Joseph, £100 each as they come of age. To grandson Joseph Borden, a half share at head of Freetown in Tiverton. To son Thomas Borden all housings and land in Portsmouth, he keeping for his mother a horse and two cows, giving her two fat swine yearly, allowing her sufficient houseroom while widow, and the keep of half a doz. fowls. To son Thomas also, rights at Hog Island. To son William, one-half of 1000 acres of land in Pennsylvania. To son Benjamin, the other half. To daughters Hope and Mary Borden all lands in Shrewsbury, N. J., and certain lands in Pennsylvania. To wife, Mary, all movables and wearing apparel, spectacles, feather bed, 2 Bibles and several other books, silver, pewter, five spinning wheels, three and a quarter years service of Indian girl, £130, cider £1, four cows, 2 two-years, 2 yearlings, calf, 40 sheep, 20 lambs, 3 swine, some pigs, etc.
1721. August, his widow Mary, declared herself to be aged sixty-six having been married at sixteen years of age.