The Paternity of Alexander Bushnell has been called into question by some. The following is an interesting discourse on the subject.

Bushnell, Nancy Foster. "The Paternity of Captain Alexander Bushnell of Hartland, Connecticut and Hartford, Ohio." NEGH Register. July 1991, 234-238.

The Paternity of Captain Alexander Bushnell of Hartland, Connecticut and Hartford, Ohio

Alexander⁶ Bushnell, a soldier in the American Revolution, was born 2 December 1739 at Lyme, Connecticut, according to family records, and died at Hartford, Trumbull County, Ohio, 18 March 1818 (History of Trumbull and Mahoning Counties [Ohio] [Cleveland, 1882], 2:276). He married at Lyme, 12 February 1761, Chloe Waite, who was born there 20 June 1738 and died in Ohio 28 October 1832, daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth (Lewis) Waite. Several of their ten children (five recorded at Lyme and five at East Hartland), were early settlers in Ohio, to which Alexander and Chloe also migrated about 1804.

With their grandchildren numbered over one hundred, and there are many records of their descendants, there has been no documentary evidence available to identify Alexander's parents, although several possible couples have been suggested. The author's search for evidence eventually revealed not only the facts, but attempts by earlier researchers, including the eminent genealogist, J. Gardner Bartlett, to deal with Victorian sensitivity surrounding the issue of illegitimacy.

The first clue to Alexander's identity was found in a typed manuscript presented to Burrus E. Bushnell (the writer's grandfather) by his friend and employer Steward H. Hartshorn in 1924 (hereinafter Hartshorn Ms.). A letter dated 21 July 1924 to B.E. Bushnell from S.H. Hartshorn reads in part:

By a strange co-incidence Mr. J. Gardner Bartlett of Cambridge, Mass. has visited me here [Center Harbor, New Hampshire] for two days. For some time he has been compiling the Ms. for a genealogy of the descendants of Thomas Hartshorn of Reading, Mass. (1614-1683) and has done some work for my own family lines.

One of my wife's grandparents [sic. - ancestors] was Francis Bushnell of Saybrook and Guilford, Connecticut, from whom all of the American Bushnells descend.

Mr. J.G. Bartlett was retained by Mrs. Wm. K. McLean of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, daughter of Wm. G.Warden of Standard Oil Fame and granddaughter of Daniel Bushnell of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania born around 1812...

He has compiled and corrected by authentic evidence the first five generations in America of the descendants of Francis¹ Bushnell of Guilford, Connecticut, from whom you unquestionably descend. This work is still in the Ms.

The Hartshorn Ms. gives the following information on the ancestry of Alexander Bushnell:

William⁵ Bushnell (William ⁴, John^3-4, Francis¹) born in Boston, Mass., 2 Dec. 1716, was taken by his parents in their removals to Norwich, Conn. in 1717 and Hartford, Conn. in 1725. He became a mariner and was captain of a small vessel plying down the Connecticut River from Hartford past Lyme and Saybrook and on the Long Island coast. In this occupation he had business dealings with Capt. Joseph⁴ Higgins, who had a wharf and warehouse at Lyme and thus became acquainted with the latter�s niece, Thankful⁵ Higgins, born at Truro, Mass., 17 Aug. 1717, daughter of Beriah⁴ and Desire (Cooke) Higgens. William⁵ Bushnell was lost at sea in 1739 and Thankful next married in 1741, Daniel Rathbone of Lyme, born there 30 Oct. 1706; in their old age they removed to Hartland, Conn., to live with her eldest son, Capt. Alexander⁶ Bushnell; here Daniel Rathbone died 7 Oct. 1789 and his widow Thankful died 16 March 1792.

Child of William⁵ and Thankful (Higgens) Bushnell:

I - � Alexander⁶ � b. Lyme Conn. 2 Dec. 1739

Here the matter rested until 1931 when George Eleazar Bushnell of Nashville, Tennessee, began to gather material for a genealogy of the descendants of Francis Bushnell of Guilford, Connecticut. At that time both Burrus E. Bushnell and his sister Lunette Sechrist sent George E. Bushnell a copy of the Hartshorn Ms. From these records George attempted to verify the facts of the case.

In June 1941 he wrote to another of Alexander�s descendants, Eloise Sloane Buchan of Mansfield, Ohio, complaining that Bartlett�s widow, while asserting that her husband had full and legal proof of Alexander�s parentage, had refused to show him the references or the proof "and my strenuous efforts to obtain any data of William from Hartford records failed to elicit anything constructive."

George Eleazer Bushnell died before he completed his research into the Bushnell family, and in 1948 George Elmore Bushnell of Santa Monica, California, edited and arranged the manuscript and had it printed as Bushnell Family Genealogy - - Ancestry and Posterity of Francis Bushnell (1580 � 1646)(hereinafter Bushnell Gen.). This work echoes the Hartshorn Ms. and assumes the marriage without proof. It further states that in 1875, Mrs. Phoebe Bushnell Borden, [Alexander�s] youngest daughter, [claimed] "Her Grandfather was a seaman and lost his life at sea before her father was born, and later his mother married a man named Rathbone." In a letter written in 1874 Phoebe Gilder, daughter of Chloe Bushnell Gilder, who was a sister to and 16 years older than Phoebe Bushnell Borden, stated she had no knowledge of her grandfather�s parentage or ancestry.

The marriage of Daniel Rathbone of Lyme to Thankful Higgens of Haddam on 19 March 1741 is found in Vital Records of Lyme, Connecticut 1665 � 1850 (Moodus, Conn., 1976), page 2, along with records of four children born to them there. Alexander Bushnell and Chloe Waite, both of Lyme, were married there 12 February 1761, and the births of their first two sons were recorded there also (ibid., 65).

It is clear that Alexander�s birth date � 2 December 1739 � occurred before the marriage of Thankful and Daniel. But if this were Thankful�s second marriage, why was she married under her maiden name? And what was the "legal proof" referred to by the widow of J.G. Bartlett?

The answers to these questions were finally located in 1985 by this writer in a box of manuscript material labeled �Bushnell� (hereinafter Bartlett Letters) in the records of J. Gardner Bartlett at the Society. Mr. Bartlett�s references have been checked at the Connecticut State Library in Hartford, and although it appears that the order of material and the wording as he copied it are not identical with those found in the Archives, the story told is the same.

Papers filed in case no. 32, New London County Court Records, June 1742, include the following:

To the Sheriffs of the County of Hartford or New London or to either of their deputies or to any of the constables in any of the towns in Either of sd counties; this greeting - - - whereas Thankful Higgens of Saybrook in the county of New London, singlewoman, complains to me the subscriber that she is with child by fornication and that William Bushnell of Hartford in the county of Hartford is the father of the child with which she is now pregnant and thereupon prays that the sd Bushnell nay be arrested and dealt withal according as is provided by one statute of this government entitled an act against fornication and bastardy in page 7 of the law book - - they are therefor in his Majesty�s name to require you forthwith to arrest the sd William Bushnell and bring him before me the subscriber or some other of the civil authority in the county of New London to be examined in the premises and dealt withal as the law directs hereof fail not bond for presentation being given as the law directs - - Dated in Saybrook August 9, 1739 - - Samuel Lynde, Assistant

At a Court held that day at Saybrook, Thankful Higgins of Saybrook was examined under oath, William Bushnell being present:

Q. Do you conclude that you are now with child?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is the father of the child you are now big with?
A. William Bushnell of Hartford who is now present.
Q. When was it he begat you with child?
A. The 17 or 18 of last March.
Q. Where was it he got you with child?
A. At Mr. Harris in this town.
Q. Had no other man carnall knowledge of you about that time so that he might possibly be the father of the child you are now big with?
A. No.

It was recorded that:

Thankful Higgins of Saybrook in the County of New London, coming before this court acknowledged herself to be with child by fornication and upon oath accused William Bushnell of Hartford in the county of Hartford with being the father of the child with which she is now pregnant whereupon tis considered that the sd Thankful Higgins become bound to the Presence of the County of New London with one Sufficient Surety in the recognizance of [ L 10] that she will appear at the County court to be held in Norwich in and for the County of New London on the 4th Tuesday of November next as well as to prosecute her complaint against the sd William Bushnell...

And that the sd William Bushnell being brought before this court by a writ dated August 9 1739 upon the complaint of the sd thankful Higgins for that he is the father of the child with which she is now pregnant and being examined pleaded not guilty whereupon the sd Thankful was under oath examined and she continuing constant in her accusation and the matter being beyond the jurisdiction of this court to determine is thereupon considered that the sd William Bushnell become bound to the presence of the county of New London in the recognizance of [ L 50] with one sufficient Surety [and]�appear at the County Court to be holden in Norwich in and for the County of New London on the 4th Tuesday of November next to answer the complaint above mentioned...

James Harris of Saybrook posted bond of L10 for Thankful�s appearance at the County court to be held in Norwich on the 4th Tuesday of November next. The case was continued on 27 November 1739. On 10 June 1740 Thankful appeared in court and pled continuance, case continued. Again on 25 November 1740, 9 June 1741, and 24 November 1741, the case was continued.

A memorandum found in the Bartlett Letters states that at a court held on 8 June 1742, neither Thankful Higgins nor James Harris appeared and the bond was forfeited, with Harris ordered to appear at court in Norwich the following November

"to shew cause, if any he hath, why execution shall not go against him..."

This is the last court record found, and it appears that the case was simply dropped.

Further investigation into the affairs of William Bushnell by J. Gardner Bartlett brought to light the fact that at the Hartford County court on April 1737 Abigail Thornton of Hartford, a single woman, complained that William Bushnell, Jr., of Hartford was the father of her bastard child born 15 March 1736/7. In this case also William pled not guilty, but the court was of the opinion that he was guilty as charged and ordered him to pay Abigail Thornton 4s per week from the time of the birth of the child to the time of the judgement and then 4s per week to be paid quarterly until the expiration of four years (Bartlett Letters; this record is now in Hartford County Court Records, vol. 10, although at the time it was located by Mr. Bartlett, it was bound in vol. 8).

These records unearthed by Bartlett seemed to have remained undisturbed in his files. One reason they never came to light is evident from a letter written to him by Charles E. Bushnell, for whom he was doing the research (Bartlett Letters):

Perhaps you could spend a Sunday here. Perhaps we can decide on phraseology that would prove the parentage of Capt. Alex B. ignoring the illegitimacy business as far as my record is concerned (I mean the record we are preparing for family distribution).

Another letter written to Mr. Bartlett from Joseph B. Amos of Morristown, New Jersey, on 21 February 1918 (ibid.) also touched on this topic:

I was much amused by the dash of color the free and easy William has introduced into our family history! Personally I don�t believe he died at sea at all. I�ll bet when the fruits of his misdoing became too troublesome he simply changed his name and started business somewhere else. Of course that part of the affair had been confided to me in confidence and I shall be very cautious about keeping it to myself.

Sometime in the 1870�s the Rev. Frederick W. Chapman, preparing to write a genealogy of the Bushnell Family, corresponded with a number of Alexander�s descendants. He died in 1876 before completing his work, and his papers were acquired by Charles Elmer Bushnell and then given to Bartlett in 1919. Although these papers are with the manuscript material in the Bartlett collection at the Society, they are partly illegible, having evidently suffered water-damage at some time. Mr. Bartlett, however, stated that Phebe (Bushnell) Bordon [mentioned above], who died in 1875 had given, shortly before her death, "authentic information concerning her father Capt. Alexander⁶ Bushnell and her grandfather William⁵ Bushnell to her grandnephew Thomas A.⁸ Bushnell of Hartford, Ohio, who communicated it to Rev. F.W. Chapman." The present author has not yet located this letter.

Whether indeed William⁵ Bushnell did die at sea or simply took off for parts unknown may never be determined. He was evidently remembered in the family, however, for Thankful gave the name William to her son by Daniel Rathbone, and Alexander and Chloe (Waite) Bushnell, after naming their first son after her father, Thomas, and her second Daniel, after Alexander�s stepfather, named their own third son William.

---

TOP

Alexander Bushnell

HOME