Descendants of Peter Grant

Generation No. 1

1. PETER¹ GRANT was born Abt. 1631 in was born probably somewhere around Inverness, Scotland^1,2, and died Abt. 1712 in Berwick, York Co., ME³. He married JOHANNA GRANT, WIDOW OF JAMES GRANT November 28, 1664 in Kittery, York Co., ME. She was born Abt. 1644 in Salem, Essex Co., MA, and died Abt. 1710 in Maine.

Notes for PETER GRANT:

PETER GRANT (1634 - 1713)

A FAMILY IS JUST LIKE THE BRANCHES OF A TREE. WE MAY GROWN IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, YET OUR ROOTS REMAIN AS ONE. EACH OF OUR LIVES WILL ALWAYS BE A SPECIAL PART OF THE OTHERS!

This Peter Grant Generation Report has been compiled by Sandi Lee Craig nee Grant, 12th generation from Peter Grant, Scot Exile. This report is for the use of all Grant cousins - but please cite the source. I thank all who have contributed and hope that the information contained in this report will help you each fill in gaps in your personal genealogies where they might occur. If you find any information pertaining to your particular branch of the Grant family incorrect or incomplete, please contact me at any of the following:

email -ewfarm@airmail.net. Or at 2005 Westridge Drive, Plano, Texas 75075-8556. PHONE/ FAX 972-424-3954. Voice mail/Cell 214-537-5460. Each person who contributes to this growing family document will be listed in the sources as well as the source of the documentation, unless you state that you would prefer not to have your name and address in this report. Thank you and may our Grant family retain the old strength as we continue to grow. Sandi Lee Craig

"Old Times Have Gone, Old Manners Changed;

A Stranger Fills the Scottish Throne."

The following is from Edward Allen Cooper, 1134 N. 59th Dr. Phoenix, AZ 85043

email cooper@amug.org in email correspondence dated 12/6/1998

Ed Cooper's web site: vineyard.net/vineyard/history/allen/allenhp.htm

_________________________

Immigration: 1650 @ Lynn, Essex Co. MA

During the English Civil War the Parliamentary Army executed King Charles I and his son Charles attempted to regain his father's throne through various invasions originating in Scotland. The Scots, although by religion in sympathy with the Parliamentarians, were loyal to the Stuart dynasty.

During one of thse invasions Oliver Cromwell, Protector of England, marched on the Scots. The Scots surrounded the English army at Dunbar, but General David Leslie, commander of the Scottish army, believed that the English were still in the best position. The Covenanters (Scottish Presbyterian Church leaders) claimed that victor had been revealed to them in a vision and ordered Gen. Leslie to attack the English, which he did on 3 September 1650. 140 members of Clan Grant, including Peter Grant, fought for Prince Charles under the command of the Chief's brother at the Battle of Dunbar. The battle lasted all day and the Scots were defeated.

The English pursued many remnants of the Scottish army as far as 8 miles before capturing them. Five thousand prisoners were taken and marched a hundred miles from Dunbar to Durham and New Castle in England. The Cathedral at Durham was converted into a prison for the Scottish prisoners.

Banks wrote, "Their food consisted of Pottage made with Oatmeal, Beef and Cabbage, a full quart at every Meal for every Prisoner. They had also Coals daily brought them, as many made about 100 Fires both Night and Day and Straw to lie upon." Yet, 1,600 of them died in 58 days from disease and lack of medical attention to their wounds. Of the surviving prisoners 900 were sent to Virginia and 150 to New England. Peter Grant was among those deported to New England.

They sailed on the 'Unity' captained by Augustine Walker. The 'Unity' sailed in the winter instead of waiting for spring, so the trip was rough and the prisoners had scurvy, but all arrived safely in Boston near the end of December. The prisoners were sold as indentured servants for L20-30 each, and were expected to work off the price of their voyage for 6-8 years, then be given their freedom. The typical cost for passage across the sea was L5, so Capt. Walker made quite a profit.

Peter Grant was sold to work at the Lynn Iron Works in Massachusetts and like his fellow prisoners, probably received his first medical attention since the battle from his purchasers. In 1651 another battle for Prince Charles, the Battle of Worcester, resulted in the deportation to New England of Peter's brother, James Grant, and a kinsman of theirs, another James Grant. In 1652 Peter was working for a sawmill in Maine, and probably received his freedom and L10 to start life on his own there. The Maine sawmill was in financial trouble and it is possible that the remaining Scottish prisoners were discharged from their bondage early to relieve the owners of the mill from the responsibility of feeding the laborers.

In 1656 Peter was granted land in Maine and so was free by that date. He went to Boston to look for work and is known to have spent some time in Nantasket, Massachusetts. In 1657 he moved to Dover, New Hampshire and two years later was living across the line in Kittery, Maine. Unity Parish in Berwick, Maine was founded by the Scottish prisoners and the names commemorate both one of the battles with the English and the name of the ship that carried them to America.

On 6 January 1657 Peter and James Grant were among those who formed the Scots' Charitable Society for the relief of Scottish prisoners in the New World. Peter bought land on 21 October 1659 from James Emery in Kittery, Maine. The deed calls him "Peter Grant, Scotsman". In 1661 Peter and James Grant were ordered by a local court in Kittery to return to Scotland to their wives, indicating that both had been married at the time of their capture. They do not appear to have returned to Scotland, perhaps because they could not affort the fare, or perhaps because after 11 years their wifes must have remarried, assuming them dead.

After Peter's brother James disappeared in 1663/64, Peter continued to live with his sister-in-law Joanna Ingersoll. On 10 July 1664 Peter and Joanna were taken to court for living together while unmarried. Joanna was pregnant at this time and it was believed that Peter had a wife living in Scotland. Peter claimed that the child was not his, but promised to care for it, and Joanna claimed that the child was her husband's. The court decided otherwise and penalized Peter L10 or 10 lashes. Peter married his sister-in-law and her child was born and named Elizabeth. She [Elizabeth] was raised by Peter's kinsman, James Grant and his wife Elizabeth Everell. The kinsman James left his foster daughter Elizabeth property in his will. Peter's will states that he has 7 children and he names them, excluding Elizabeth.

Peter's son James Grant, in his will calls Elizabeth his half-sister, as she would have been through their mother. Peter and Joanna had no children for a period of 6 years after their marriage and it is believed that after 6 years word came from Scotland that Peter's wife there was dead or remarried, or that this was the necessary time to ensure that Joanna's first husband was legally dead. Peter Grant is listed on the original tax lists of Kittery, Maine and certainly lived there at least from 1661.

In 1701 he signed a deposition stating that he had lived in Kittery for over 40 years. A 1673/74 description of common lands in a deed includes the description "above Birch Point to Peter Grant's Point". In 1674 Peter was granted 120 acres near York Pond. In 1679 Peter and his kinsman James, signed a petition to the Massachusetts government for direct government in Kittery, Maine (Maine then being part of Massachusetts).

On 12 November 1679, his kinsman James died, leaving Peter some clothes and tools, and Peter's son James his "fyrelock muskett, sword & belt". In 1687 Peter served on a Grand Jury. In 1683 he was trustee of Alex Cooper's will, and in 1693 was Surveyor of Highways and Fences. On 28 December 1704 there was an abatement of taxes given to all who had suffered in recent Indian attacks and were destitude, including an abatement in the amount of 3 schillings for Peter Grant. Toward the end of his life Peter lived at Berwick, Maine. His will was made 19 October 1709 and mentions his wife Joanna, and children William, James, Alexander, Daniel, Grizzel, Mary and Hannah. The inventory of his estate was taken 12 March 1712 and it was valued at L210:10.0. He was buried on his own land somewhere outside Berwick.

___________________

from "The Genealogy of Peter Grant, Berwick, Maine - Leola Grant Bushman, pg. 1 - 2."

Peter was engaged in the battle of Dunbar to preserve the English throne for Charles II, a Stuart, and the Scots were defeated in a complete rout [by Cromwell's forces]. A great many were taken prisoner, shipped in chains, and sold in Massachusetts to anyone who would pay the price, and Peter, along with others, was sold to the Iron Works in Lynn (Saugus) where he worked for two years. The Iron Works went bankrupt, and the men still in bond were presumed to have been sold again. Peter and others who came in the "Unity" from England are found in the service of one of the partners of the old Iron Works who had lumbering interests in Maine. He presumably had served out his time by 1659 as he was released, whereupon he settled in the Province of York.

Material with regard to the Scotch prisoners sold to the Iron Works may be found in the Massachusetts Archives, Suffolk County Court Files #225, Commonwealth of Massachusetts;"

====================

Ibid. pg. 4 - "History of Durham, N. H. - Vol. 1, p. 79 has the following:

"Peter Grant, one of the Scotsmen deported by Cromwell, was taxed at Oyster River 1659. HE HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN EMPLOYED IN THE LYNN IRON Works. He bought land in what is now South Berwick, August 1659. A deposition made 13 Sept. 1701 calls him upwards of 70 years old. He married about 1664, Joan, widow of James Grant of York." Court records show that a Peter and a James were ordered to return to their wives, this probably not this Peter and his brother James, as they were exiles and could not return. "Peter left eight children". This statement also must be questioned, the author must have included the child of his brother James, Elizabeth, in this number. Deposition referred to above states he lived in Upper Kittery over forty years, i.e. prior to 1661. As perhaps we have stated elsewhere, Peter denied, and Joan denied, that Elizabeth was Peter's child. Elizabeth was taken into the home of James and Elizabeth Everell Grant, formerly of Boston to be cared for."

"The first land purchased by Peter Grant in the province of Maine was the land obtained from James Emery at Kittery, Oct. 21, 1659. Other lands granted him Mar. 4 1673/4 (York Deeds III). Peter's will Oct. 19, 1709, probated Oct. 30, 1718, lists wife Johanna and 7 children, speaking of them specifically as "Them Seven"; William, James, Alexander, Daniel, Grizel, Mary and Hannah. The will does not mention Elizabeth, daughter of his brother and Johanna. [see end for copy of will]

With regard to Elizabeth: Peter was brought before the court, accused of living with Joanna, them not being married, and she, big with child. Her husband, Peter's brother, had disappeared and it is not known whether he had been killed by Indians or what had happened to him. Peter agreed to look after Elizabeth, but both denied the child was his.

It might be noted here that in that era danger from Indians, and the need for a provider of food and protection, probably was the necessity of Peter's remaining in the home were James, Peter and Joanna had been living prior to James' disapperance."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Battle of Dunbar 3rd September 1650 - taken from "Scottish Battles" by C. Stewart Black, published by Brown Son & Ferguson, Ltd., 52 - 58 Darnley St., Glascow, Scotland. - as emailed by Carol Grant Sanderson - seasand@prodigy.net, May 14, 1999.

The Presbyterians of Lowland Scotland had the strongest objection to King Charles I as a religious dictator. Their faith was a matter solely for themselves and their own consciences, with which neither pope nor king might to interfere. To the house of Stewart, however, they were entirely loyal. There was no trace in them of the republicanism which formed so large a part of the policy of the English sectaries. Cromwell, the chief protagonist of that quack remedy for political ills, they hated like Lucifer, whose apostle, indeed, they believed him to be.

They esteemed him at what was probably more near to his real worth than have been the conceptions of certain historians, two Scotsmen among them, who have chosen to see in him a great man and a liberator, instead of a fanatical boor and one of the worst oppressors the isles of Britain have ever groaned under. In Scotland the Protector was told to his face that he was a servant of sin, when Zachary Boyd preached to him in the Barony Kirk of Glasgow. by way of the Bishop's Castle, whose cellars were stored with gunpowder, ready for the match to be applied as he and his staff rode past. And it was in Scotland that he had his "crowning mercy" --- from God or the devil as we may look at it.

The news of the murder of the king at Whitehall, murder in the trappings of justice, was received by the people of Scotland with horrified indignation. They had done their best to protect his person, little though they liked his principles, having even, the year before, sent an army under the Duke of Hamilton into England, where it had been cut up by Cromwell, and the Duke made prisoner, shortly to be executed. Now that the king was dead, they hastened to shew their detestation of the action of the sectaries, and to fling defiance at Cromwell and his parliament, by proclaiming the younger Charles, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland.

They were a strange people, though. They made this demonstration of loyalty to the crown; but when the greatest royalist among them came back from exile, they sent an army against him, and James Graham, Marquis of Montrose, was taken and hanged as any felon might have been.

On the 23rd of June, 1650, the young king landed at the mouth of the Spey. He had submerged his scruples, and signed both the National Covenant and the Solemn League; he would probably have signed anything at the time. Now he was in full favour with his loyal people, who installed him in Falkand Palace, and engaged relays of preachers to strengthen his faith in the pure doctrine of Presbyterianism. They were resolved to have a king, but this time they would have a hand in the shaping of him.

Cromwell was furiously angry, and possibly a little alarmed, when he learned of the turn of affairs in the north. He had imagined that the heads of all the Stewarts were on the neck of Charles I; yet here was one of them very much alive in Scotland. Strong and immediate action was urgently called for, so, with 16,000 men, he crossed the Border and marched on Edinburgh.

Meantime, the Scots had not been idle. They had collected an army for the protection of their king, and placed it under the command of David Leslie. In point of numbers, it was considerably stronger than Cromwell's force, but in military qualities it seems to have been sadly lacking, being led, according to a writer of the period "mainly by ministers' sons, clerks and such other sanctified creatures, who hardly ever saw or heard of any sword but that of the Spirit". It was controlled by a parliamentary committee, composed largely of ministers, which did not scruple to dictate to Leslie and to over-ride his experienced judgement whenever it saw fit.

On the 22nd of July, 1650, Cromwell had entered Scotland, after assuring "his brethren in evil of a more easy conquest of that kingdom than all the English kings ever had." (Baillie) Since none of them had ever succeeded in such an object, he was promising less than perhaps he imagined. Leslie was waiting for him, in a strong position between Leith and Edinburgh, with an army of 26,000 men.

The Scottish commander, who had fought Montrose and finally beaten him, was an able leader, but on his parliamentary committee, modelled apparently on the lines of a kirk session, he had such a handicap as few generals can ever have been hampered with. Their first determination was that their armed forces should be strong in the Word, whatever they might be in the field. No back-slider should be in their ranks, no man however good with sword and pike, who was not above suspicion in the matter of the Covenant. A series of courtmartials were therefore established, and before the end of August, with Cromwell and his formidable array close at hand, some four thousand men were expelled from the Scottish army for lack of godliness. As will readily be understood, these were almost the whole of the real soldiers in Leslie's command. The clerks and the ministers' sons were left to him.

On 28th July Cromwell established his camp at Musselburgh. Somewhat to his surprise, he found the people of Scotland as determinedly hostile to England and Englishmen as ever their forebears had been. They were so blindly stubborn that they refused to recognise in him a protector, and saw only an invader as detestable as any Plantagenet or Tudor.

He decided to make an appeal to their commonsense, and besought "God's elect in Scotland" to ally themselves with their fellow-elect across the Border. To the ministers, who, he realised, were his most bitter opponents, he addresses a special appeal. "I beseech you," he wrote "in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken." In particular, he urged them to read the twenty-eight chapter of Isaiah, from the fifth to the fifteenth verse; but if he believed that Scottish ministers may ever be persuaded to admit that "they err in vision, they stumble in judgement," his experience of the race must have been a limited one. All his arguements and his texts fell unheeded on deaf ears, and he realised that if Scotland was to be won it could only be with the sword.

He decided, therefore, without more adon, to make an effort to capture Leith, and so secure a base for his shipping, through which much-needed supplies might reach his army. He quickly found that he was matched against a general who knew more about the strategy of war than he himself did. Leslie occupied a position which completely commanded both Leith and Edinburgh; and, although the Ironsides attacked him gallantly enough, they were driven off with considerable loss and pursued back to Musselburgh by Leslie's horse.

Now followed several weeks of manoeuvering, marching, and counter-marching. Cromwell was in serious straits. The harbour at Musselburgh was quite inadequate for his needs, and, unless he could secure a better base, he was threatened with famine. As it was, during a month he lost 5,000 men, mainly from disease brought on by exposure and insufficient food.

Giving up all hope of taking Leith, he made several attempts on Queensferry, but each time he was outwitted by Leslie, whose superior military genius and more intimate local knowledge enabled him to seize the key posiitons which commanded every approach to the firth of Forth.

Cromwell was forced to move southward, and still he was out-generaled. He fell back on Dunbar, which he reached on the 1st of September, and that same day Leslie's men occupied the Doon Hill, a commanding height to the south of the town. There was no shaking off the determined Scot, who next despatched a force to occupy the Pease Bridge, a narrow pass controlling the road to Berwick.

Cromwell was in a trap, which would not be easily got out of. His enemies blocked his way to the south. If he attempted to force a passage, he would have to fight with all the advantages against him, and could scarely hope for success. To retreat by sea was impossible. the weather was stormy; he had not enough ships to accommodate all his men; and, apart from those difficulties, embarkation, with Leslie's troopers hovering around and ready to pounce at any favourable opportunity, would probably have cost him half his force. He said himself, in a letter, that escape would require "almost a miracle".

The situation could scarsely have been worse. Yet stout-hearted Oliver did not despair. "We have much hope in the Lord," he wrote, "of Whose mercy we have had large experience." He was to be justified in his confidence. The miracle happened.

On the evening of the 2nd of September, the English were astounded to see the Scots coming down from their hill. All night through, columns of them filed down on to the plain, and by morning they had given up the whole of their advantage. To Cromwell it must have seemed that Leslie had gone mad.

The ministers had been at work again, teaching their general his business. In vain he pointed out that he had maneuvered the English force into a position from which their escape was practically impossible, and that in time they would be compelled by famine to surrender. There was no need for the Scots to risk the uncertain outcome of a battle. But the committee of amateur tacticians were impatient. The Lord had been good to them. Victory was within their reach. Let them snatch it without further delay.

Some of the preachers put a sudden end to the argument by marshalling their flocks and leading them down the hillside. Leslie could do nothing else than follow.

When Cromwell saw the new position taken up by the Scots, well might he exclaim, as he is said to have done, "the Lord hath delivered them into my hands." They had the Brock Burn, within its deep banks, on their left; behind them was the steep slope of the hill; if they failed to achieve a speedy success they would find it impossible either to retire or to execute a change of front. They would be completely hemmed in when once he had taken up the position he contemplated.

Before daybreak, on 3rd Septemer, the English began to move south from Dunbar. With a body of horse and two regiments of foot, they made good the passage of the burn, near the spot where it is crossed by the Berwick road. The Scottish pickets were driven back, and the entire English force passed safely over the stream, to take up a line facing the Scots and closing the box in which those unfortunates had put themselves.

The attack began as soon as the two armies were opposite each other. The onset was by the English. Lambert's brigade and Monk's made the first advance. They were received with the greatest resolution, and forced to retire with considerable loss. Then Cromwell himself led forward three regiments of foot and one of horse. They, too, were stoutly met by the men to whom Leslie had entrusted his first line. But Cromwell's troops were fresh. The others had already fought Monk and Lambert. The Ironsides forced their way on, till they had only the clerks and ministers' sons to deal with. Those gentlemen promptly fled, throwing the whole army into confusion. The battle was over. Two regiments "fought it out manfully, and were all killed as they stood." Of the rest, many surrendered immediately; the remainder of the "sanctified creatures" threw away their weapons and ran, with the English dragoons hard on their heels, cutting them down in swathes.

At Dunbar the Scots had three thousand killed, and lost some ten thousand prisoners. The English losses must have been trifling, as it was in their flight that most of the Scots were slain.

Had Leslie been allowed to retain his ungodly veterans, there would probably have been a different ending to the battle, and a different course to the subsequent history of Britain. He himself declared, in a letter to Argyll, "I take God to witness we might have as easily beaten them as we did James Graham at Philiphaugh, if the officers had stayed by their troops and regiments."

As it was, Cromwell was to trample on liberty for several years more. He died on the 3rd of September, 1658. It might have been eight years earlier to the day if David Leslie had had a free hand and his own men at Dunbar.

========================

from "History of York Maine", Vol. 1, by Charles Edward Banks, Sponsored by the Old York Historical Society, York Maine - Peter E. Randall Publisher, 1990, Portsmouth, New Hampshire (copy found at the downtown Dallas Public Library - 1998)

Chapter XVIII THE SCOTCH PRISONERS' SETTLEMENT

To the two victories of Cromwell with his Ironsides at Dunbar and Worcester we are indebted for about a dozen Highlanders sent over as "prisoners" who became the founders of the settlement and parish which has ever since been known by the name of "Scotland". Their story furnishes one of the picturesque chapters in early New England history, and this town, like a number of others in the other provinces, shared in their romantic experiences and later careers.

_____________

Peter died in 1712 and his will was made Oct. 19, 1709 [inventory was 2 March 1712/13]. Probate Office 3, 7: P

"In the Name of God ament the Nineteenth day of October, one thousand Seven hundred and nine in the Eight year of Reign of our Soveraign Lady Ann by the grace of God of Great Brittain France & Ireland, Queen defender of the faith &tc. I Peter Grant of Kittery in the County of Yorke in the Province of the Massachusets Bay in New England being aged & Creasey in body but of good Memory Praise be to God for it and Knowing the Vncertainly of this Life on Earth & being Desireous to Settell things in Order to make this my last weill & Testament in manner & form following that is to Say first & principelly I commit my Soul to almighty God who gave it and my body to be buried According to the Discreation of my Successors in a Christian & Decent manner and as Touching the worldly Goods & Estate the Lorth hath Lent me my Will & meaning is the Same Shall be Imployed and bestowed as hereafter by this my will is Expressed and first I do Revoke frustrate and make Void all wills by me formerly made and Declare & appoint this my Last will & Testament.

Item I will & bequeath to my Loving wife Johannah all my moveables Estate at her Disposing as also the whole use of my home Steed housing barns Lands & Orchards and dwelling place During her Naturall Life.

Item I will and bequeath to my Son William a Grant of Land granted me by the Town of Kittery of fifty acres.

Item I will and bequeath to my Son James ten Acres of Land where his Young Orchard now is at the head of my Home Steed Dwelling place as I laid it out to him.

Item I will & bequeath to my two sons Alexander & Daniel my home Steed & Dwelling place where I now live in Equal halves after my now wifes Decease.

Item I will & bequeath to my Children William, James, Alexander, Daniel, Grizell, Mary & Hannah to them Seven in Equeal Shears all my out Lands & meadow wheresoever it by Lying in marnner or form whatsoever.

Signed, Sealed & Delivered in Presents of us: Phillip Hubord, James Emery, Daniel Emery

I do appoint my Son Daniel Grant to be my Executor of this my will & Testament - Peter Grant"

Notes for JOHANNA GRANT, WIDOW OF JAMES GRANT:

In the summer of 2000 there was a large email 'brewhaha' re Johanna Grant's maiden surname. Previously it had been listed as Ingles and Ingersoll. A Ingersoll genealogist made loud and clear claims that there could not have been a Johanna Ingersoll of the date and place where this 'widow of James Grant' appeared. So several of us have agreed to list her as "Johanna, widow of James Grant".

I personally feel that the James Grant who returns to Berwick with a wife Elizabeth [married in Boston] is the same James Grant who was the husband of said Johanna. This type of behaviour would be constant with the practices of the Scots at the time....and totally against their Puritan neighbors philosophies! [slc]

What is known is the following records taken from "New Wold Immigrants - Volume I, edited by Michael Tepper, Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1979:L

And further records taken from "Province and Court Records of Maine Vol II - Edited by Robert E. Moody, PhD. Portland: Maine Historical Society, 1947

July 2 1661 [2:156} Inquest July 2:1661 "Wee present Peter Grant a Scotchman for not returneing home to his wife. Wee present James Grant a Scotchman for not returneing home to his wife."

July 5, 1664 [2:2-2] Wee present Peter Grant & Joane Grant the wife of James Grant deseased for liveing In one house togeather, hee owneing of her as his wife & they being not married. Witness Richard Abbutt

Whereas Itt appears by Peter Grants acknowledgement of his keepeing Company with Joane Grant In soe familiar manner as If they ahd been lawfully married which they never were nor Could bee, because the Grants wife is yett alive for any thing that is known to the Contrary, & the sd Joane Grant being now bigg with Child, It is ordered by the Court as followeth:

In reference to Peter Grants presentment for his offence herein shall either pay tenn pounds In to the Treasury or to have tenn lashes given him on the bare skine.

Peter Grant appeales from this sentence to the next Court houlden for this County. Peter Grant & Tho. Doughty do Ingage them slaves In a bond of 201i that the sd Grant shall prosecute his appeale to the next County Court & the sd Grant & Doughty do Ingege In a bond of 201i that further Peter Grant shall take meete care to mantayne the Child of the sd Joane Grant soe soone as shee is delivered.

Sep 13 1664

Att a Court of Assotiats September 13:1664: Itt is further ordered by this Court, for preventing any further evill betweene the sd Peter and Joane Grant by there frequent unlawfull Comeing together, that hereby theere shall bee and is an Act of seperation made betweene them, after publication whereof it they shall bee at any tyme found frequently or unseasonably togeather, &* that It do Legally appeare, each person shall either forfitt tenn pounds to the County Treasury or bee lyable to such other Censure as the Law in such Cases doth provide.

[This couple married 28 Nov 1664 according to an attested copy of the Kittery town records, now lost [Suff. Court Files 137175] and Capt. Jaems, their son, was born 23 March 1671/2. The child the bride was 'big with' became Elizabeth. This Elizabeth was made chief heir as "Elizabeth Grant, daughter of Joane wife of Peter Grant" in James Grant's will 1679. Peter Grant's will named his seven children, "them seven' - Elizabeth was NOT LISTED.]

Children of PETER GRANT and JOHANNA GRANT are:

2. i. JAMES² GRANT, b. March 23, 1669/70, Kittery, York Co., ME; d. Bef. April 16, 1742, Berwick, York Co., ME.

3. ii. WILLIAM GRANT, b. Abt. 1671, Kittery, York Co., ME; d. Abt. 1722, Berwick, York Co., ME.

4. iii. GRIZELL GRANT, b. Bet. 1670 - 1680.

5. iv. MARY GRANT, b. Abt. 1676, Berwick, York Co., Maine.

v. HANNAH GRANT, b. Bet. 1670 - 1680.

vi. PETER GRANT, b. Bet. 1670 - 1680; m. MARY THOMAS; b. ⁴.

vii. ALEXANDER GRANT, b. Abt. 1674; d. Aft. 1737⁵.

Generation No. 2

2. JAMES² GRANT (PETER¹)⁶ was born March 23, 1669/70 in Kittery, York Co., ME, and died Bef. April 16, 1742 in Berwick, York Co., ME^7,8. He married (1) MARY NASON⁹ October 06, 1693 in Kittery, York Co., ME¹⁰, daughter of JONATHAN NASON and SARAH JENKINS. He married (2) RACHEL STONE Bef. 1709, daughter of DANIEL STONE and PATIENCE GOODWIN.

Notes for JAMES GRANT:

JAMES GRANT - (1672 - 1735)

The following narrative was emailed by Edward Allen Cooper cooper@amug.org -

on Saturday, Dec 5, 1998.

________________________

James Grant - born on 2 March 1672 in Kittery, York Co., ME. James died in Kittery, York Co. Maine on 3 Nov 1735; he was 63. Occupation: carpenter. Probate: 20 Oct 1741.

James Grant was baptized along with his oldest son in December 1725. Between 1728 and 1735 he lived on the Great Works River.

_________________________

from "The Genealogy of Peter Grant, Berwick, Maine - Leola Grant Bushman.

pg. 6"

"James was a carpenter, juryman, collector of taxes 1714, representative to General court 1725-7 and 1732 [York Co. 1880 p. 303] He was Captain in the Indian Wars 1725. Was wounded in 1692 by Indians when a young man."

_______________

from "Kittery to Kansas"

A carpenter by trade, James was the first of many Grants to serve with distinction in the military foces. Early records of Berwick show that he was paid 200 pounds for building a trading post on the Saco River. In 1725 he was a captain of the troops charged with protecting the settlers from attacks by the Indians. Captain James took his company of men to the Norridgewock area to assist in resisting an Indian raid, considered to be the alst of the great Indian attacks on the New England settlers.

For services performed for his fellow townsmen, Captain James was given a tract of land of 70 acres. Two months after this recognition by his townsmen he died - Nov 3, 1735.

________________

Children of JAMES GRANT and MARY NASON are:

i. JAMES³ GRANT¹¹, b. October 08, 1694¹²; d. February 15, 1699/00^13,14.

Notes for JAMES GRANT:

"From Kittery to Kansas"

Captain James Grant, II fought at Louisburg [French fort in Nova Scotia] as a captain in Jeremiah Moulton's Massachusetts Regiment.

________________

6. ii. PETER GRANT, b. December 14, 1696, Berwick, York Co., ME; d. Aft. April 29, 1756, Berwick, York Co., ME.

iii. MARY GRANT¹⁵, b. February 12, 1699/00, Berwick, York