Home | Search for Names | Surnames | Photos | Places |  What's New

Capt. John Putnam

Male about 1627 - 1710  (~ 83 years)


Personal Information    |    Sources    |    All    |    PDF

  • Name John Putnam 
    Prefix Capt. 
    Born about 1627  Aston Abbotts, Buckinghamshire Find all individuals with events at this location 
    Gender Male 
    Baptism 27 May 1627  Aston Abbotts, Buckinghamshire Find all individuals with events at this location  [1
    Occupation Planter 
    Died 7 April 1710  Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  [1
    Notes 
    • From A History of the Putnam Family, pages 30–36:
      John Putnam was made freeman in 1665. He was constantly to the fore in all matters relating to town or church government. In 1668 and 1670, he with both his brothers signed a petition to be allowed a minister at the “Farms.” His name occurs among the following Putnams on a petition of the Village to be set apart from Salem, dated 14 March, 1681–2.
      Thomas Putnam,senior
      Jonathan Putnam
      John Putam
      Thomas Putnam jr.
      Nathaniel Putnam
      Edward Putnam
      John Putnam jr.
      1689, Nov. 10, the following members of the church at Salem were set off to form the church at Salem Village, now the North Parish in Danvers. They had had preaching for some years.
      Bray Wilkins and wife
      Nathauiel Putnam
      Peter Cloyce
      John Putnam and wife
      John Putnam jr. and wife
      Joshua Ray and wife
      Benjamin Putnam and wife
      Nathauiel Ingersoll
      Deliverance Wolcott
      Thomas Putnam
      Henry Wilkins
      Ezekiei Cheever
      Jonathan Putnam and wife
      Edward Putnam
      Benjamin Wilkins and wife
      Peter Prescott
      Sarah Putnam wife of James.
      Summing up the connection of John Putnam with church affairs we have the following: He was not connected with the church in any official capacity except as occasion might arise when his influence was needed to collect rates, etc., for the minister; he himself was generous iu providing for the wants of the minister and church. He was a man of decided opinions, naturally supported Bayley, who was the brother of his son-in-law, opposed Burroughs bitterly, accepted Parris. His house was occasionally the meeting place for the church meetings. He did not hesitate to invoke the law where the affairs of tile church were concerned.
      In his business career we find many interesting facts. Under date of 1678, John Putnam testifies to having heard a conversation in 1643 between Governor Endecott and one of his men, the deponent being then on the Endecott farm, and in 1705 he testifies that he had fifty years before been a retainer on Governor Endecott's farm and was intimately acquainted with the Governor. It is evident that his father had sent him to the Governor's farm to learn the science of agriculture, as this farm was known throughout the colony as a model place, where the latest and most approved theories were in practice. From this school of agriculture he seems to have gone forth well prepared to clear a farm for himself, for in 1658 he deeds some twenty acres of meadow land on north side of Ipswich river to Robert Prince, styling himself “Planter.” As he was married in 1652 he probably remained with Endecott some time tatween his fifteenth and twenty-first years. From this time to his death he was constantly acquiring property, following the calling of a farmer of the highest and most intelligent class. He also entered more or less into the speculative enterprises of his time.
      In 1674 at Rowley Village (now Boxford) Simon Bradstreet, Daniel Dennison and John Putnam established iron works. These were constructed and carried on upon a large scale, on contract, by Samuel and Nathan Leonard.
      In this connection the following extract is interesting: “John Gould his book of accounts 1697 an account of the weaight of the iron plates that cozen Putnam had. Thomases waighed 260. Samuell weighed 330. Samuell Smiths waighed 170.”
      That John Putnam was successful in the management of his affairs is shown by his tax rate. He paid £8 in 1683 and until a few years before his death was among the heaviest tax payers in the Village. Some years previous to his death he gave his property to his children, always with reservations as to his maintenance, and the last year of his life his property was rated only for a few shillings.
      It was in the military affairs and witchcraft delusion that his character is best shown. In 1672 he is styled corporal; on the 7 Oct., 1678, he was commissioned lieutenant of the troop of horse at the Village; after 1687 he is styled “Captain.” As late as 1706 “Capt. John Putnam in company with Capt. Jonathan (his son) was empowered to settle town bounds.” He served in the Narragansett fight and retained his military manners throughout his life. In 1679 and later he was frequently chosen to present Salem at the General Court to settle the various disputed town bounds. He was selectman in 1681.
      He was deputy to the General Court in May, 1679, to succeed Mr. Bartholomew Gedney and again for the regular terms of 1680-1686-1691-1692, previous to the new charter. Ou the 12 May, 1686, he received the following order from the town of Salem: “In case Mr. Dudley &c. said to be nominated & authorized by his Majesty to Edict another Government here, do publish a Loyal Nullification of our charter and a commission from the King for their acceptance of the Government. Here then our instruction to you is — That you give no countenance to any resistance, but peasably withdraw yourself as representing us no longer.” This was just previous to the Andros administration. It is seen above that he was returned to the General Court again in 1691, after the Revolution, but of the part that John Putnam played during the intervening time we know nothing.
      That he was alive to the needs of education among the growing generation while absorbed in military and political affairs and his own business, the following entry shows: Jan. 24, 1677, “ordered and empowered to take care of the law relating to the catechis&ing of children and youth be duly attended to all the Village.” He is desired to have “a diligent care that all the families do carefully and constantly attend the due education of children and youth according to law.”
      We come now to the part he took in the witchcraft delusio ; the same causes alluded to under Nathaniel were active in his case. Family pride, the strong feeling of kinship, his stern education, quick temper and obstinate nature, nil tended to influence his action which was excusable according to the ignorant and narrow superstitions of the times. One side of his character is known by the following extract from Upham:
      In 1683, the Court order Rev. George Burroughs to settle with the parish at Salem Village. Tiiis settling was interrupted in a most arbitrary manner, as the following deposition shows:
      (“County Court, June, 1683 — Lieutenant John Putnam versus Mr George Burroughs. Action of debt for two gallons of Canary wine, aud cloth, &c. bought of Mr Gedney on John Putnam’s account, for the funeral of Mrs Burroughs.”)
      “DEPOSITION.”
      “We whose names are underwritten, testify and say, that at a public meeting of the people of Salem Farmes, April 24, 1683, we heard a letter read, which letter was sent from the Court. After the said letter was read, Mr Burroughs came in. After the said Burroughs had been a while in, he asked ‘whether they took up with the advice of the Court, given in the letter or whether they rejected it.’ The moderator made answer, ‘Yes we take up with it’; and not a man contradicted it to any of our hearing. After this was passed, was a discourse of settling accounts between the said Burroughs aud the inhabitants, and issueing things in peace, and parting in love, as they came together in love. Further we say that the second, third and fourth days of the following week were agreed upon by Mr Burroughs and the people to be the days for every man to come in and to reckon with the said Burroughs ; and so they adjourned the meeting ... We further testify aud say, that, May the second, 1683 Mr Burroughs and the inhabitants met at the meeting house to make up the accounts in public, according to their agreement the meeting before: and just as the said Burroughs began to give in his accounts, the marbhall came in, and after a while went up to John Putnam, Sr, and whispered to him, and said Putnam said to him ‘You know what you have to do; do your office' Then the marshall came to Mr Burroughs and said ‘Sir, I have a writing to read to you.’ Then he read the attachment and demanded goods. Mr Burroughs answered 'that he had no goods to show. and that he was now reckoning with the inhabitants, for we know not yet who is in debt but there was his body.’ As we were ready to go out of the meeting house, Mr Burroughs said, ‘Well, what will you do with me?’ then the marshall went to John Putnam Sr. and said to him ‘What shall I do?’ The said Putnam replied, 'You know your business.' And then the said Putnam went to his brother Thomas Putnam, and pulled him by the coat; and they went out of the house together, and presently came in again. Then said John Putnam ‘Marshall take your prisoner, and have him up to the ordinary (that is a public house) and secure him till the morning’ ”
      (Signed) “Nathaniel Ingersoll, aged about fifty
      Samuel Sibley, aged about twenty four.”
      “To the first of these, I, John Putnam, Jr. testify, being at the meeting.”
      Again — Thos. Haynes testified, “after the marshall had read John Putnams attachment to Mr Burroughs, then Mr Burroughs asked Putnam what money it was he attached him for. John Putnam answered ‘For five pounds and odd money at Shippen's at Boston, and for thirteen shillings at his father Gedney’s and for twenty four shillings at Mrs Darby’s’; then that Nathaniel Ingersoll stood up and said, ‘Lieutenant, I wonder that you attach Mr Burroughs for the money at Darby’s and your father Gedney's when to my knowledge, you and Mr Burroughs have reckoned and balanced accouuts two or three times since, as you say, it was due, and you never made any mention of it when you reckoned with Mr Burroughs.’ ”
      John Putnam answered “It is true and I own it.” John Putnam as chairman of the Committee the previous year represented the inhabitants. “As there was really no case against Burroughs and as there was even while these proceedings were taking place, a balance due Burroughs, the case was withdrawn.”
      From the above we learn the obstinate character of John Putnam and those who sided with him.
      Upham says, writing of the scene at the above described meeting, “We can see the grim bearing of the cavalry lieutenant, John Putnam, and of his elder brother and predecessor in commission ... But the chief figure in the group is the just man who rose and rebuked the harsh and reprehensible procedure of the powerful landholder, neighbor and friend though he was. The manner in which the arbitrary trooper bowed to the rebuke, if it does not mitigate the resentment of his conduct, illustrates the extraordinary influence of Nathaniel Ingersoll's character and demonstrates the deference in which all men held him.” Burroughs lived with John Putnam nine months in 1680 after his first coming into the settlement.
      Another trouble in which John Putnam took a leading part was the matter of the bounds between Salem and Topsfield. There was a strip of territory claimed by both towns. This land had been granted to settlers by Salem who had taken up their farms in good faith. Topsfield claimed these lands, unimproved and improved, as part of its commons and refused to acknowledge the titles given by Salem. There were many fights in the disputed territory between the people of the two towns and much bad feeling existed.
      John Putnam with two of his sons had land there and had two houses, orchards and meadows in the disputed territory. He maintained his ground throughout the dispute, resisting force with force. The records are full of this dispute; it was finally settled by a separate township being formed, called Middleton. The action taken. by John Putnam in these matters shows him to have been a man without fear and tenacious of his rights.
      His opponents in both of these cases were, however, among the accused during the witchcraft delusion, but I do not think that Johu Putnam used his influence agaiust them. He does not seem to have appeared as a witness of any moment during the proceedings, although he was more or less prominent as shown above, in the quarrels immediately preceding the trials. That he did not believe in all of the statements of the afflicted children is evident, as his name, with that of his wife, occurs on the document testifying to the good character of Rebecca Nurse, and on testimony favorable to others of those accused, but he seems never to have spoken out in open opposition, as did his nephew, Joseph Putnam.
      The will of John Putnam is not on record; he seems to have disposed of his property by deed to his children. As early as 1690 he deeds one hundred acres to Jonathan and to James, and in 1695, ninety acres to John.
      His residence was on the farm originally occupied by his father, now [1891] better known as Oak Knoll, the home of the poet Whittier.
      Rev. Joseph Green makes the following note in his diary: “April 7 (1710). Captain Putnam buried by ye soldiers.”
      The graves of both Captain John and of his father are unmarked. The present Wadsworth Cemetery was originally the Putnam burial place and in some of the many unmarked graves probably their remains lie. Here are buried the families of his sons James and Jonathan and many others of his descendants in later generations. The oldest stone is dated 1682, and is that of Elizabeth the first wife of Jonathan Putnam. All of the graves seem to have had at some time head stones and foot stones but most are now broken off level with the ground. Many of those still standing are broken. Although the cemetery was presented to the parish by Rev. Mr. Wadsworth, no care is taken to preserve the ancient memorials of the dead. A shameful state of affairs, indeed! [1, 2]
    Person ID I62346  Schirado
    Last Modified 15 September 2013 

    Father John Putnam,   b. 17 January 1580, Wingrave, Buckinghamshire Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 30 December 1662, Salem, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age 82 years) 
    Mother Priscilla Gould,   b. 3 June 1582, Bovington, Hertfordshire Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 1668, Salem, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age 85 years) 
    Married about 1611 
    Family ID F42594  Family Group Sheet  |  Family Chart

    Family/Spouse Rebecca Prince,   d. 6 November 1704, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location 
    Married 3 7 mo. [Sep] 1652  Salem, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  [1
    Children 
     1. Rebecca Putnam,   b. 23 May 1653, Salem, MA Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 21 September 1689, Salem, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age 36 years)
    +2. Sarah Putnam,   b. 4 September 1654, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location
    +3. Capt. Jonathan Putnam,   b. 17 March 1659, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 2 March 1739, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age 79 years)
    +4. Dea. Eleazer Putnam,   b. 8 September 1665, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 25 January 1732/3, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age 67 years)
    +5. John Putnam,   b. 14 July 1667, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. before 21 March 1737  (Age < 69 years)
    +6. Ruth Putnam,   b. August 1673, Salem Village, MA Find all individuals with events at this location,   d. 11 September 1722, Beverly, MA Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age ~ 49 years)
    Family ID F42636  Family Group Sheet  |  Family Chart

  • Sources 
    1. [S716] Eben Putnam, (Salem MA: Salem Press, 1891).

    2. [S717] Charles Upham, (New York: Frederick Ungar Publ., 1867.).


Send eMail to WMGS

This site powered by The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding ©, v. 12.0.3, written by Darrin Lythgoe 2001-2019.

WMGS Online Trees - created and maintained by Western Michigan Genealogical Society Copyright © 2005-2019 All rights reserved. | Data Protection Policy.

© This Site Copyright WMGS 2002–2019

WMGS Main Home Page

WMGS Searchable Databases

Become a WMGS Member