The Augusta Cemetery Family Trees

Francis John WestAge: 55 years16401696

Name
Francis John West
Given names
Francis John
Surname
West
Birth about August 1640
MarriageSusannah SouleView this family
about 1660 (Age 19 years)
Source: WikiTree
Birth of a son
#1
Richard West
1661 (Age 20 years)
Source: WikiTree
Birth of a daughter
#2
Susannah West
October 23, 1666 (Age 26 years)
Source: Find A Grave
Death of a wifeSusannah Soule
about 1684 (Age 43 years)
Source: Find A Grave
Marriage of a childMoses BarberSusannah WestView this family
about March 24, 1691 (Age 50 years)
Source: Find A Grave
Fact
Biography

Text:
Biography of Francis Waste (1636) from "Mayflower Fam....": Francis and Susanna and family "resided in that part of Kings Towne, R.I. which became North Kingstown in 1722/3. We have been unable to find place or date of birth, date of death or parentage for Francis. When Gov. Andros took over the King's Province in 1687, he levied taxes on the inhabitants of Kingstown, renamed Rochester. Included in the list were Francis Wast senior, Francis Wast junior, and Richard Wast. Only Francis senior had a rate, that of 2 shillings 1 pence. The children of this family have been difficult to trace. Francis, Susannah, and Martha remained in the Kingstown, R.I., area; William removed to Newport, R.I., probably after the death of his first wife; Clement moved to Charlestown, R.I., and then disappears from R.I. records, perhaps moving to Dutchess County, N.Y.; Richard returned to Plymouth and Bristol County, living in Middleboro and Taunton. We have not found Peter, John nor Thomas. This family name has a variety of spellings in the public records: WAST, WEST, WASTE, WEAST being common variants. Of the four "West" families in Plymouth Colony only this family has its surname used in forms other than WEST suggesting that the original name, while phonetically similar, was distinct from West. Some of Susanna's children are identified in the Samuel West Memorandum Book published in the 'Mayflower Descendant'. Parents not proved, but I suspect them to be Francis West and Margery Reeves of Duxbury, neighbors of George Soule, whose daughter Susannah Francis married. Though he is not listed in other sources as a child of this couple, court records indicate that Francis and Margery were found guilty of fornication before marriage, for which Francis was required to build stocks at Duxbury. The other children proved for Francis and Margery were born too late to have been the cause of the early pregnancy charge, leaving an unidentified first child whom I suspect to be our Francis, the couple's first born son, named after his father. His name, age at marriage, and father-in-law's being a neighbor of Francis and Margery all make sense if this connection is true. Samuel West's account of his great grandfather, Francis West, says that he "Came from Europe to Amarica Soon after the first Settlement at Plymouth and Soon after his arival he married A young Lady By the name of Sole daughter of Mr George Sole (he came with his family to Plymouth in the first Vessel that Came their from Europe) by whoom he had Seven Sons & 2 daughters". He then lists the children of Francis and Susanna WEST. The account of his coming to America could actually refer to Francis WEST, Sr., husband of Margery Reeves, assuming that Samuel conflated the two persons because they bore the same first names.
Fact
Biography of the man who could possibly be the Father of Francis West

Text:
Francis West of Duxbury, Mass. From A Survey of the Descendants of Francis West of Duxbury by Carlton Prince West (Winston Salem NC, 1987) (A full copy of this manuscript be found at the NEHGS Library in Boston, Mass. Only 26 of the first 38 pages are reproduced here.) 1. FRANCIS1 WEST, b. 1605 or 1606, probably in England (see death record) and died at Duxbury, Mass., in the Plymouth Colony, 1 Jan. 1692, at the age of 86 (see the settlement of his estate in The Genealocal Advertiser, 3:91) He married, presumably at Duxbury, 27 Feb. 1639 MARGERY REEVES (PCR­CO 1:222) In this marriage record he was called Francis Weston; a discussion of the problem of West/Weston will be found on following pages. Until now all attempts to identify Margery Reeves and to determine her parentage have failed. No Reeves family, including the possible variants of Reaves and Rives, has been found in the area of southeastern Massachusetts. Since it is somewhat unthinkable that an unattached female could have been living in the Plymouth Colony, it may be that she had come as a servant to some family whose name is not known. According to a letter of W. H. Way to a member of the Maglathlin (McLauthlen) family of Kingston, Mass., Margery Reeves was born on the Isle of Wight ca. 1608 and died in 1694 at the age of 86. No source for these assertions was supplied, and it has not been identified. Francis left no will, so his son Peter was appointed administrator of the estate on 4 Apr. 1693. The inventory was taken 4 Feb. 1692 [sic. 1692/1693?], revealing a total value of only £16/15/10. At one time he had a house and lands at Duxbury, but it is possible that he may have sold much of the property or given it to his children. However this may have been, the value of the estate was so small that there was no division among the children; it was all given to Peter, in view of the fact he had cared for his father for about three years. (The Genealogical Advertiser, 3:91). Since Margery was not mentioned, the statement of W. H. Way, given above, that she died in 1694 and so survived Francis is open to further question. It is not certain how long Francis had been the Plymouth Colony before his marriage. Again the question of West/Weston is involved. Francis may have been the man named in a tax list of March 1633. (PCR-CO 1:9) Justin Winsor in his History of Duxbury (p. 70) showed that he was uncertain about whether the name in the list was Weston or West, when he wrote "Francis Weston (West?)". Possibly, then, Francis West may have been in the Colony before 1633 and had acquired property by that time. By trade Francis believed to have been a house carpenter, which may have been inferred from the fact that he was required in 1640 to build a pair of stocks for the Town of Duxbury, which was delinquent in providing this facility for punishment (PCR­CO 1:164). As will be described later, the need for stocks was pointed up at this time since Francis himself had been sentenced to sit in them. He appears to have lived at Marshfield for two or three years after his marriage. At least he was appointed to the grand jury for that town 1 Mar. 1641/1642 and constable for the same place 7 June 1642 (PCR­CO 2:34, 41). He later had lands on which he lived in the Millbrook section of Duxbury (Duxbury Records, 55). He bought meadow land from William Ford 27 May 1661 (Duxbury Records, 7). At one time he had a right in meadow land at the Gurnet (Duxbury Records, 61­62). He was granted 30 acres by the Town of Duxbury 10 Oct. 1670 (Duxbury Records, 24). Some of his land was sold to Josiah Kein (Duxbury Records, 69). What his original acreage may have been or the largest number of acres he may have owned at any one time are not known. Francis was admitted a freeman. perhaps a little belatedly, on 8 June 1655 (PCR­CO 3:77). His subsequent public appointments were principally on grand juries: for 1662, 1669, 1674, 1678, 1680, and 1682 (PCR­CO 4:14; 5:18, 145, 196; 6:36, 85). Occasionally there were other appointments: for 1658 he was Surveyor of Highways (PCR­CO 3:136)1 for 1660 he was Constable for Duxbury (PCR­CO 3:136); and in 1671 he was one of two men appointed to inspect ordinaries in Duxbury to see if regulations were being observed (PCE­CO 5:60). Twice Francis found himself in court. On 2 Nov. 1640 he and his wife Margery were sentenced to sit in the stocks for incontinency before marriage. Since Duxbury had no stocks, Francis was required by the Court to build a pair (PCR­CO 1:164). Again, he was indicted 29 Oct. 1668 for stealing a gun and a hog from an Indian (PCR­CO 4:6). He was sentenced 1 June 1669 to pay a sum of thirty shillings to the Indian and return the gun (PCR­CO 5:22). There are several theories about the background of Francis West: (1) that he came from Salisbury in England; (2) that he was the son of Francis, Governor of Virginia and brother of Thomas, Lord de la Warr; (3) that he was not a West but a Weston. In turn each of these proposals will be examined. It may be well, for the sake of clarity, to state in the beginning that no proof from any primary source has been found to support any of them. That Francis came from Salisbury has been quite generally accepted because it is based on the statement of Judge Zebulon West, a great­grandson of Francis (CW 1). While he might have been living there at the time of emigration, no record of his birth has been found there. Margaret Adelia Ells, preparing West Lines, arranged a search of Salisbury parish records, where no Francis was found. Possibly Salisbury was confused with Soulsbury, where there were Wests. However, according to records published in REG, there was no Francis among them. There is also no evidence for the statement of Zebulon West that Francis was "invited to emigrate by a Mr. Thomas of Marshfield. He may have confused Francis with Twyford West, who was indentured to Edward Winslow of Marshfield. The supposition that Francis was the son of Francis of Virginia and the nephew of Lord de la Warr seems to rest on the following considerations. Banks wrote, in his History of Martha's Vineyard that such a tradition was believed by Wests on the island. Thomas2 West named a son Sackfield, suggestive of the Sackvilles, who were associated with the Virginia Wests. The gravestone of Samuel West at Acushnet, Mass. shows a line of descent from Francis of Virginia, but, curiously enough, does not name Francis of Duxbury, blanking his generation. This genealogical inscription reflects the Vineyard tradition. Francis of Virginia did have some first­hand knowledge of Plymouth, since he made a visit in June 1623 to investigate disputes over fisheries. A chart of the West family in the Virginia Historical Society at Richmond shows the marriage of Francis and Margery Reeves. Finally. it has been considered suggestive that little is known about Francis of Virginia and that a Francis of approximately the same age should appear in the Plymouth Colony. No proof from any primary source has been found to establish a connection between the two men. However, it would seem that Banks went too far in writing that there was absolutely no connection; there is also no proof that a connection is impossible. The Vineyard tradition, by itself, may be dismissed simply as a tradition without supporting evidence. The use of the name Sackfield is no more than suggestive, since nothing has been uncovered which otherwise relates to it. The gravestone at Acushnet presents the ideas of Samuel or his relatives about a line of descent, but of course includes no proof. There is also no evidence that the visit of Francis1 of Virginia to New England in 1623 led to any other association. The chart in the Virginia Historical Society, which gives no specific references, represents only the belief of the compiler. It is possible, although not certain, that the two Francises may have been of approximately the same age. No birth record for either has been found. As noted above, Francis of Duxbury was probably born in 1605 or 1606. Since Francis2 of Virginia was called a minor in his father's will of 1629, he could not have been born before ca. 1608. Furthermore, Francis senior requested in the will that his surviving third wife Jane take care of the son Francis. The general tone of this request suggests that Francis was either a young boy or in some way physically or mentally defective. It is unlikely that a healthy male in his late teens would have been in need of any special care. He might therefore have been born several years after 1608. There are at least two considerations which argue against the identification of the supposed two men as the same. The first is that it seems somewhat unreasonable that Francis junior of Virginia should have learned the trade of a carpenter, growing up, as he must have, in a prominent family in a landed society. It would rather be expected that he would have learned no trade at all. The second involves the question of what he received, or should have received, as inheritance from his father's estate. There are few suggestions that Francis Of Duxbury was affluent. His land holdings seem to have been modest, and the size of his estate at the time of his death was notably small. There have been other attempts to show that the two Francises were the same, but they will be dismissed with little attention because they are almost purely conjectural. One suggests that Francis of Virginia brought his young son with him when he came to Plymouth in 1623, at which time the son found the colony attractive, and, in maturity, decided to return. Another proposal is that the father bought property in the colony and that the son, having been in England, came to Duxbury to oversee and manage this property. The contention that Francis of Duxbury was actually a Weston who changed his name first appeared in print in Dorothy Wentworth's Settlement and Growth of Duxbury (p.96). Through the author the point was traced to a manuscript genealogy in the public library at Duxbury, with the title "The Weston Families of Duxbury", by Samuel K. Weston. In this work the compiler stated that Francis Weston changed his name after the court sentence of 1640, perhaps from shame and wishing to disassociate himself from the Westons, This genealogy also suggested that Francis might have been a brother of Edmund Weston. The problem of WEST?Weston is first encountered in connection with the tax list of 25 Mar. 1633 (PCR­CO 1:8), on which a name appears to be Francis Weston. Justin Winsor, in examining the Duxbury records while preparing his History of…Duxbury, also transcribed the name as Weston but with misgivings, so he printed it as "Weston (West?)''. He evidently later decided that references to Francis Weston meant Francis West, because, in his treatment of the Weston family (pp. 334­336) he made no reference to any Francis Weston of the period, even in his note of unidentified Westons. The confusion seems to have arisen with a difficulty in interpreting the records. The name was sometimes written with a slight twist of the pen after the "t" which may have been only a casual stroke or flourish or a sign for the suffix "on", Nathaniel Shurtleff, in editing the Colony records read the name as Weston in the tax list of 1633, in the list of freemen of the same year (although the name was later canceled), and in the record of the marriage to Margery Reeves. The Francis on the list of freemen must actually have been that of a Weston because Francis West was not made a freeman until 1655. Elsewhere in the printed records the name appears as West. There are few references in either the Colony or the Duxbury records to any Francis Weston. In fact, aside from the references mentioned above, there is only one other, the mention of a Francis who in 1679 was described as deceased (PCR­CO 6:22). Whoever he was, he could not have been Francis West, who died in 1692. In general, it has been accepted that Francis was West and not a Weston. Neither Judge Zebulon West Samuel West, both of whom were great­grandsons of Francis, made any mention of the Weston name. Furthermore, it is evident that on occasion the two names were simply confused. A clear case of such a situation may be found in connection with the settlement of the estate of Thomas Howell. Letters of administration were granted to Edmund Weston 7 June 1648 (PCR­CO 2:127), but it was later recorded that a claim against the estate was paid by Edmund West (PCR­CO 2:141). No other reference to any Edmund West has been found. No direct evidence has been uncovered to support the claim that Francis changed his name. Such a claim seems to have been based principally on the fact that Nathsmiel Shurtleff, as he edited the Colony records, read the name as Weston in entries before 1640 and as West thereafter. The implied decision of Justin Winsor has been discussed above. Children, probably born at Duxbury. No record of births has been found. The only child of whom there is any primary record is Peter, mentioned in the settlement of his father's estate, Judge Zebulon West stated that there were five: Samuel, Thomas, Peter, Mary, and Ruth (CW 3). There is a note in CW 3 that two others, Richard and Peletiah, have been ascribed to Francis "although it would seem without good reason". In the case of Peletiah Cornwall was probably right; the Pelatiah at Duxbury was a grandson of Francis (DVR 187). In the case of Richard the situation is somewhat different. He was married to Mary Samson 26 Oct. 1693 (DVR 327) and so might have been born during Margery's child­bearing years. Much depends, of course, on Richard's age at the time of his marriage. That he was called "Waste" is probably of no significance. At times a question has been raised about whether Francis had a son Francis who married Susanna Soule, the dau. of George Soule. Recent and more exhaustive research, which was undertaken during the preparation of Volume 3 of Mayflower Families failed to establish the identity of Susanna's husband. It was concluded that his name was probably something other than West, although the volume assigns the name West to all of his descendants. Marriages of four of the five children mentioned by Judge Zebulon West have been found, although nothing is known of Mary. These four, at least, must have been children of Francis. Except for Twyford West, there was no other Wests in the colony who could their parents. The following information about Twyford was found in Mary Lovering Holman's Ancestry of Charles Stinson Pillsbury... (p. 847). Late in 1650 Twyford moved to Rowley, Mass. and later to Ipswich. He married and had at least five children, some at Rowley and some at Ipswich. He made his will 5 Dec. 1683, and it was probated 1 Jan. 1683 [i.e. 1684?]. He mentioned four children and it should be noted that none of them bore the names of any of those ascribed to Francis West. 2. i. SAMUEL, b. ca. 1643 [see death record]. 3. ii. THOMAS, b. ca. 1646 [see death record]. 4. iii. PETER, b. 1648 (SW 284; source of this date unknown). iv. MARY (CW 3). 5. v. RUTH, possibly b. ca. 1651 [see notes on her death]. vi. RICHARD [possibly]
Fact
Biography

Source: WikiTree
Text:
Parents ? & DNA testing "DNA testing has resolved the question of whether Francis WEST who married Margery REEVES (West Family group 19) is related to the Francis WEST who married Susannah SOULE. The DNA evidence tells us those two men are probably not related, thru the direct paternal line, within a genealogical time period." Francis West and Margery Reeves "There has been conjecture that Francis WEST was the son of Matthew WEST, and brother of Bartholomew WEST. A DNA test of a descendent of Bartholomew has been completed (W154), and that DNA profile does not match the DNA of the descendents of Francis WEST/Susannah SOULE. Until additional information is found, this group is assuming that Francis was not a son of Matthew WEST." Matthew West Geographic Information: 1674, Kingstown Rhode Island was founded. 1722, it was divided into North Kingstown and South Kingstown. North Kingstown had the earliest settlers so retained the status of having been founded 1674 and apparently retained the early records. The Wests lived in Kingstown, now called North Kingstown. Francis West We do not know his parents, birth date or place, death date or place or marriage date and place. All we can do is make speculative guesses. Here's what we do know. "Samuel West's Memmorandum Book" "1802 August 23rd "my great grandfather Francis West Came from Europe to Amarica Soon after the first Settlement at Plymouth and Soon after his arival he married A young Lady By the name of Sole daughter of Mr George Sole (he came with his family to Plymouth in the first Vessel that Came their from Europe) by whoom he had Seven Sons & 2 daughters "his Sons names ware Francis Thomas Peter William Richard Clemment & John his daughters names ware Martha & Susanna martha married a Fones by whoom she had Children Susann Married a Barber By Whoom She had a number of Sons & daughters" -------------------------- 29 Oct 1668 Phillip, Sachem of Pocanokett, petitioned the court "for justice against Francis Wast." Phillip complained that Wast had taken a gun and a hog from some of his men. The matter was refered to the selectmen at Taunton, and a report was made at court on 1 June 1669. Francis was to pay 30 shillings for the hog and to return the gun. The George Soule Mayflower Families in Progress book neglects to mentions that a Francis West was made freeman of Duxburrow 29 May 1670. The elder Francis had long since been made freeman. This date is too early for the sons of Francis. Conclusion, this date belongs to Susanna's husband. The births of Francis' last three children were recorded in North Kingstown, Rhode Island, in 1681 and twins in 1684. For a full list of particulars on the West children see Susanna's profile 6 Sept 1687 Francis was on a list of inhabitants to be taxed in Kingstown, Rhode Island. Francis was taxed 2 shillings 1 pence. Sons, Francis Wast junior, and Richard Wast were also on the list, but not taxed. From here we can speculate. His birth was definitely not in America or Rhode Island, but Europe, sometime between say 1630 and 1640. His marriage was around 1661 (based on the estimated births of children about 1662, in Plymouth or Duxbury, both in Plymouth Colony. His death was after 1687, when he was taxed. It may be 2 Jan 1696 in Kingstown or North Kingstown, Rhode Island.
Death January 2, 1696 (Age 55 years)
Source: Find A Grave
Family with Susannah Soule - View this family
himself
Francis John West
Birth: about August 1640Duxbury, Plymouth Colony, New England
Death: January 2, 1696North Kingstown, Washington County, Rhode Island
wife
Susannah Soule
Birth: April 25, 1644 51 42Duxbury, Plymouth County, Massachusetts
Death: about 1684Kingstown, Washington County, Rhode Island
Marriage: about 1660Duxbury, Plymouth Colony, New England
2 years
son
Richard West
Birth: 1661 20 16Duxbury, Plymouth Colony, New England
Death: November 17, 1727Middleborough, Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, British Colonial America
6 years
daughter
Susannah West
Birth: October 23, 1666 26 22North Kingstown, Washington County, Rhode Island
Death: April 4, 1758South Kingstown, Washington County, Rhode Island

BirthRootsweb, an ancestry.com community
MarriageWikiTree
FactRootsweb, an ancestry.com community
Text:
Biography of Francis Waste (1636) from "Mayflower Fam....": Francis and Susanna and family "resided in that part of Kings Towne, R.I. which became North Kingstown in 1722/3. We have been unable to find place or date of birth, date of death or parentage for Francis. When Gov. Andros took over the King's Province in 1687, he levied taxes on the inhabitants of Kingstown, renamed Rochester. Included in the list were Francis Wast senior, Francis Wast junior, and Richard Wast. Only Francis senior had a rate, that of 2 shillings 1 pence. The children of this family have been difficult to trace. Francis, Susannah, and Martha remained in the Kingstown, R.I., area; William removed to Newport, R.I., probably after the death of his first wife; Clement moved to Charlestown, R.I., and then disappears from R.I. records, perhaps moving to Dutchess County, N.Y.; Richard returned to Plymouth and Bristol County, living in Middleboro and Taunton. We have not found Peter, John nor Thomas. This family name has a variety of spellings in the public records: WAST, WEST, WASTE, WEAST being common variants. Of the four "West" families in Plymouth Colony only this family has its surname used in forms other than WEST suggesting that the original name, while phonetically similar, was distinct from West. Some of Susanna's children are identified in the Samuel West Memorandum Book published in the 'Mayflower Descendant'. Parents not proved, but I suspect them to be Francis West and Margery Reeves of Duxbury, neighbors of George Soule, whose daughter Susannah Francis married. Though he is not listed in other sources as a child of this couple, court records indicate that Francis and Margery were found guilty of fornication before marriage, for which Francis was required to build stocks at Duxbury. The other children proved for Francis and Margery were born too late to have been the cause of the early pregnancy charge, leaving an unidentified first child whom I suspect to be our Francis, the couple's first born son, named after his father. His name, age at marriage, and father-in-law's being a neighbor of Francis and Margery all make sense if this connection is true. Samuel West's account of his great grandfather, Francis West, says that he "Came from Europe to Amarica Soon after the first Settlement at Plymouth and Soon after his arival he married A young Lady By the name of Sole daughter of Mr George Sole (he came with his family to Plymouth in the first Vessel that Came their from Europe) by whoom he had Seven Sons & 2 daughters". He then lists the children of Francis and Susanna WEST. The account of his coming to America could actually refer to Francis WEST, Sr., husband of Margery Reeves, assuming that Samuel conflated the two persons because they bore the same first names.
FactMartha's Vineyard Museum
Text:
Francis West of Duxbury, Mass. From A Survey of the Descendants of Francis West of Duxbury by Carlton Prince West (Winston Salem NC, 1987) (A full copy of this manuscript be found at the NEHGS Library in Boston, Mass. Only 26 of the first 38 pages are reproduced here.) 1. FRANCIS1 WEST, b. 1605 or 1606, probably in England (see death record) and died at Duxbury, Mass., in the Plymouth Colony, 1 Jan. 1692, at the age of 86 (see the settlement of his estate in The Genealocal Advertiser, 3:91) He married, presumably at Duxbury, 27 Feb. 1639 MARGERY REEVES (PCR­CO 1:222) In this marriage record he was called Francis Weston; a discussion of the problem of West/Weston will be found on following pages. Until now all attempts to identify Margery Reeves and to determine her parentage have failed. No Reeves family, including the possible variants of Reaves and Rives, has been found in the area of southeastern Massachusetts. Since it is somewhat unthinkable that an unattached female could have been living in the Plymouth Colony, it may be that she had come as a servant to some family whose name is not known. According to a letter of W. H. Way to a member of the Maglathlin (McLauthlen) family of Kingston, Mass., Margery Reeves was born on the Isle of Wight ca. 1608 and died in 1694 at the age of 86. No source for these assertions was supplied, and it has not been identified. Francis left no will, so his son Peter was appointed administrator of the estate on 4 Apr. 1693. The inventory was taken 4 Feb. 1692 [sic. 1692/1693?], revealing a total value of only £16/15/10. At one time he had a house and lands at Duxbury, but it is possible that he may have sold much of the property or given it to his children. However this may have been, the value of the estate was so small that there was no division among the children; it was all given to Peter, in view of the fact he had cared for his father for about three years. (The Genealogical Advertiser, 3:91). Since Margery was not mentioned, the statement of W. H. Way, given above, that she died in 1694 and so survived Francis is open to further question. It is not certain how long Francis had been the Plymouth Colony before his marriage. Again the question of West/Weston is involved. Francis may have been the man named in a tax list of March 1633. (PCR-CO 1:9) Justin Winsor in his History of Duxbury (p. 70) showed that he was uncertain about whether the name in the list was Weston or West, when he wrote "Francis Weston (West?)". Possibly, then, Francis West may have been in the Colony before 1633 and had acquired property by that time. By trade Francis believed to have been a house carpenter, which may have been inferred from the fact that he was required in 1640 to build a pair of stocks for the Town of Duxbury, which was delinquent in providing this facility for punishment (PCR­CO 1:164). As will be described later, the need for stocks was pointed up at this time since Francis himself had been sentenced to sit in them. He appears to have lived at Marshfield for two or three years after his marriage. At least he was appointed to the grand jury for that town 1 Mar. 1641/1642 and constable for the same place 7 June 1642 (PCR­CO 2:34, 41). He later had lands on which he lived in the Millbrook section of Duxbury (Duxbury Records, 55). He bought meadow land from William Ford 27 May 1661 (Duxbury Records, 7). At one time he had a right in meadow land at the Gurnet (Duxbury Records, 61­62). He was granted 30 acres by the Town of Duxbury 10 Oct. 1670 (Duxbury Records, 24). Some of his land was sold to Josiah Kein (Duxbury Records, 69). What his original acreage may have been or the largest number of acres he may have owned at any one time are not known. Francis was admitted a freeman. perhaps a little belatedly, on 8 June 1655 (PCR­CO 3:77). His subsequent public appointments were principally on grand juries: for 1662, 1669, 1674, 1678, 1680, and 1682 (PCR­CO 4:14; 5:18, 145, 196; 6:36, 85). Occasionally there were other appointments: for 1658 he was Surveyor of Highways (PCR­CO 3:136)1 for 1660 he was Constable for Duxbury (PCR­CO 3:136); and in 1671 he was one of two men appointed to inspect ordinaries in Duxbury to see if regulations were being observed (PCE­CO 5:60). Twice Francis found himself in court. On 2 Nov. 1640 he and his wife Margery were sentenced to sit in the stocks for incontinency before marriage. Since Duxbury had no stocks, Francis was required by the Court to build a pair (PCR­CO 1:164). Again, he was indicted 29 Oct. 1668 for stealing a gun and a hog from an Indian (PCR­CO 4:6). He was sentenced 1 June 1669 to pay a sum of thirty shillings to the Indian and return the gun (PCR­CO 5:22). There are several theories about the background of Francis West: (1) that he came from Salisbury in England; (2) that he was the son of Francis, Governor of Virginia and brother of Thomas, Lord de la Warr; (3) that he was not a West but a Weston. In turn each of these proposals will be examined. It may be well, for the sake of clarity, to state in the beginning that no proof from any primary source has been found to support any of them. That Francis came from Salisbury has been quite generally accepted because it is based on the statement of Judge Zebulon West, a great­grandson of Francis (CW 1). While he might have been living there at the time of emigration, no record of his birth has been found there. Margaret Adelia Ells, preparing West Lines, arranged a search of Salisbury parish records, where no Francis was found. Possibly Salisbury was confused with Soulsbury, where there were Wests. However, according to records published in REG, there was no Francis among them. There is also no evidence for the statement of Zebulon West that Francis was "invited to emigrate by a Mr. Thomas of Marshfield. He may have confused Francis with Twyford West, who was indentured to Edward Winslow of Marshfield. The supposition that Francis was the son of Francis of Virginia and the nephew of Lord de la Warr seems to rest on the following considerations. Banks wrote, in his History of Martha's Vineyard that such a tradition was believed by Wests on the island. Thomas2 West named a son Sackfield, suggestive of the Sackvilles, who were associated with the Virginia Wests. The gravestone of Samuel West at Acushnet, Mass. shows a line of descent from Francis of Virginia, but, curiously enough, does not name Francis of Duxbury, blanking his generation. This genealogical inscription reflects the Vineyard tradition. Francis of Virginia did have some first­hand knowledge of Plymouth, since he made a visit in June 1623 to investigate disputes over fisheries. A chart of the West family in the Virginia Historical Society at Richmond shows the marriage of Francis and Margery Reeves. Finally. it has been considered suggestive that little is known about Francis of Virginia and that a Francis of approximately the same age should appear in the Plymouth Colony. No proof from any primary source has been found to establish a connection between the two men. However, it would seem that Banks went too far in writing that there was absolutely no connection; there is also no proof that a connection is impossible. The Vineyard tradition, by itself, may be dismissed simply as a tradition without supporting evidence. The use of the name Sackfield is no more than suggestive, since nothing has been uncovered which otherwise relates to it. The gravestone at Acushnet presents the ideas of Samuel or his relatives about a line of descent, but of course includes no proof. There is also no evidence that the visit of Francis1 of Virginia to New England in 1623 led to any other association. The chart in the Virginia Historical Society, which gives no specific references, represents only the belief of the compiler. It is possible, although not certain, that the two Francises may have been of approximately the same age. No birth record for either has been found. As noted above, Francis of Duxbury was probably born in 1605 or 1606. Since Francis2 of Virginia was called a minor in his father's will of 1629, he could not have been born before ca. 1608. Furthermore, Francis senior requested in the will that his surviving third wife Jane take care of the son Francis. The general tone of this request suggests that Francis was either a young boy or in some way physically or mentally defective. It is unlikely that a healthy male in his late teens would have been in need of any special care. He might therefore have been born several years after 1608. There are at least two considerations which argue against the identification of the supposed two men as the same. The first is that it seems somewhat unreasonable that Francis junior of Virginia should have learned the trade of a carpenter, growing up, as he must have, in a prominent family in a landed society. It would rather be expected that he would have learned no trade at all. The second involves the question of what he received, or should have received, as inheritance from his father's estate. There are few suggestions that Francis Of Duxbury was affluent. His land holdings seem to have been modest, and the size of his estate at the time of his death was notably small. There have been other attempts to show that the two Francises were the same, but they will be dismissed with little attention because they are almost purely conjectural. One suggests that Francis of Virginia brought his young son with him when he came to Plymouth in 1623, at which time the son found the colony attractive, and, in maturity, decided to return. Another proposal is that the father bought property in the colony and that the son, having been in England, came to Duxbury to oversee and manage this property. The contention that Francis of Duxbury was actually a Weston who changed his name first appeared in print in Dorothy Wentworth's Settlement and Growth of Duxbury (p.96). Through the author the point was traced to a manuscript genealogy in the public library at Duxbury, with the title "The Weston Families of Duxbury", by Samuel K. Weston. In this work the compiler stated that Francis Weston changed his name after the court sentence of 1640, perhaps from shame and wishing to disassociate himself from the Westons, This genealogy also suggested that Francis might have been a brother of Edmund Weston. The problem of WEST?Weston is first encountered in connection with the tax list of 25 Mar. 1633 (PCR­CO 1:8), on which a name appears to be Francis Weston. Justin Winsor, in examining the Duxbury records while preparing his History of…Duxbury, also transcribed the name as Weston but with misgivings, so he printed it as "Weston (West?)''. He evidently later decided that references to Francis Weston meant Francis West, because, in his treatment of the Weston family (pp. 334­336) he made no reference to any Francis Weston of the period, even in his note of unidentified Westons. The confusion seems to have arisen with a difficulty in interpreting the records. The name was sometimes written with a slight twist of the pen after the "t" which may have been only a casual stroke or flourish or a sign for the suffix "on", Nathaniel Shurtleff, in editing the Colony records read the name as Weston in the tax list of 1633, in the list of freemen of the same year (although the name was later canceled), and in the record of the marriage to Margery Reeves. The Francis on the list of freemen must actually have been that of a Weston because Francis West was not made a freeman until 1655. Elsewhere in the printed records the name appears as West. There are few references in either the Colony or the Duxbury records to any Francis Weston. In fact, aside from the references mentioned above, there is only one other, the mention of a Francis who in 1679 was described as deceased (PCR­CO 6:22). Whoever he was, he could not have been Francis West, who died in 1692. In general, it has been accepted that Francis was West and not a Weston. Neither Judge Zebulon West Samuel West, both of whom were great­grandsons of Francis, made any mention of the Weston name. Furthermore, it is evident that on occasion the two names were simply confused. A clear case of such a situation may be found in connection with the settlement of the estate of Thomas Howell. Letters of administration were granted to Edmund Weston 7 June 1648 (PCR­CO 2:127), but it was later recorded that a claim against the estate was paid by Edmund West (PCR­CO 2:141). No other reference to any Edmund West has been found. No direct evidence has been uncovered to support the claim that Francis changed his name. Such a claim seems to have been based principally on the fact that Nathsmiel Shurtleff, as he edited the Colony records, read the name as Weston in entries before 1640 and as West thereafter. The implied decision of Justin Winsor has been discussed above. Children, probably born at Duxbury. No record of births has been found. The only child of whom there is any primary record is Peter, mentioned in the settlement of his father's estate, Judge Zebulon West stated that there were five: Samuel, Thomas, Peter, Mary, and Ruth (CW 3). There is a note in CW 3 that two others, Richard and Peletiah, have been ascribed to Francis "although it would seem without good reason". In the case of Peletiah Cornwall was probably right; the Pelatiah at Duxbury was a grandson of Francis (DVR 187). In the case of Richard the situation is somewhat different. He was married to Mary Samson 26 Oct. 1693 (DVR 327) and so might have been born during Margery's child­bearing years. Much depends, of course, on Richard's age at the time of his marriage. That he was called "Waste" is probably of no significance. At times a question has been raised about whether Francis had a son Francis who married Susanna Soule, the dau. of George Soule. Recent and more exhaustive research, which was undertaken during the preparation of Volume 3 of Mayflower Families failed to establish the identity of Susanna's husband. It was concluded that his name was probably something other than West, although the volume assigns the name West to all of his descendants. Marriages of four of the five children mentioned by Judge Zebulon West have been found, although nothing is known of Mary. These four, at least, must have been children of Francis. Except for Twyford West, there was no other Wests in the colony who could their parents. The following information about Twyford was found in Mary Lovering Holman's Ancestry of Charles Stinson Pillsbury... (p. 847). Late in 1650 Twyford moved to Rowley, Mass. and later to Ipswich. He married and had at least five children, some at Rowley and some at Ipswich. He made his will 5 Dec. 1683, and it was probated 1 Jan. 1683 [i.e. 1684?]. He mentioned four children and it should be noted that none of them bore the names of any of those ascribed to Francis West. 2. i. SAMUEL, b. ca. 1643 [see death record]. 3. ii. THOMAS, b. ca. 1646 [see death record]. 4. iii. PETER, b. 1648 (SW 284; source of this date unknown). iv. MARY (CW 3). 5. v. RUTH, possibly b. ca. 1651 [see notes on her death]. vi. RICHARD [possibly]
FactWikiTree
Text:
Parents ? & DNA testing "DNA testing has resolved the question of whether Francis WEST who married Margery REEVES (West Family group 19) is related to the Francis WEST who married Susannah SOULE. The DNA evidence tells us those two men are probably not related, thru the direct paternal line, within a genealogical time period." Francis West and Margery Reeves "There has been conjecture that Francis WEST was the son of Matthew WEST, and brother of Bartholomew WEST. A DNA test of a descendent of Bartholomew has been completed (W154), and that DNA profile does not match the DNA of the descendents of Francis WEST/Susannah SOULE. Until additional information is found, this group is assuming that Francis was not a son of Matthew WEST." Matthew West Geographic Information: 1674, Kingstown Rhode Island was founded. 1722, it was divided into North Kingstown and South Kingstown. North Kingstown had the earliest settlers so retained the status of having been founded 1674 and apparently retained the early records. The Wests lived in Kingstown, now called North Kingstown. Francis West We do not know his parents, birth date or place, death date or place or marriage date and place. All we can do is make speculative guesses. Here's what we do know. "Samuel West's Memmorandum Book" "1802 August 23rd "my great grandfather Francis West Came from Europe to Amarica Soon after the first Settlement at Plymouth and Soon after his arival he married A young Lady By the name of Sole daughter of Mr George Sole (he came with his family to Plymouth in the first Vessel that Came their from Europe) by whoom he had Seven Sons & 2 daughters "his Sons names ware Francis Thomas Peter William Richard Clemment & John his daughters names ware Martha & Susanna martha married a Fones by whoom she had Children Susann Married a Barber By Whoom She had a number of Sons & daughters" -------------------------- 29 Oct 1668 Phillip, Sachem of Pocanokett, petitioned the court "for justice against Francis Wast." Phillip complained that Wast had taken a gun and a hog from some of his men. The matter was refered to the selectmen at Taunton, and a report was made at court on 1 June 1669. Francis was to pay 30 shillings for the hog and to return the gun. The George Soule Mayflower Families in Progress book neglects to mentions that a Francis West was made freeman of Duxburrow 29 May 1670. The elder Francis had long since been made freeman. This date is too early for the sons of Francis. Conclusion, this date belongs to Susanna's husband. The births of Francis' last three children were recorded in North Kingstown, Rhode Island, in 1681 and twins in 1684. For a full list of particulars on the West children see Susanna's profile 6 Sept 1687 Francis was on a list of inhabitants to be taxed in Kingstown, Rhode Island. Francis was taxed 2 shillings 1 pence. Sons, Francis Wast junior, and Richard Wast were also on the list, but not taxed. From here we can speculate. His birth was definitely not in America or Rhode Island, but Europe, sometime between say 1630 and 1640. His marriage was around 1661 (based on the estimated births of children about 1662, in Plymouth or Duxbury, both in Plymouth Colony. His death was after 1687, when he was taxed. It may be 2 Jan 1696 in Kingstown or North Kingstown, Rhode Island.
DeathRootsweb, an ancestry.com community
DeathFind A Grave