Who was John Balch

 

            Several years ago I wrote an article addressing the possibility that our John Balch who came to settle in Lord Baltimore’s Maryland Colony in 1658 could have been Freeborn Balch, the son of John Balch who settled in Massachusetts in 1623.  The article was written solely as a speculation, a “what if” at the time.  However, after re-reading much of the introduction of Galusha B. Balch’s “Balch Families in America”, I have chosen to revisit the idea.   Further, while we have speculated that all the Balches in America were probably linked at some point in time, more recent DNA testing of members from the four main lines have confirmed that fact.  While we cannot pinpoint any time frame for these connections we definitely know that the Massachusetts line is related to our Maryland, Kentucky, and Tennessee Balch families.

 

I might add at this point my disaffection with the validity, or should I say ‘unsubstantiated’ claims published by Thomas Willing Balch in his “Balch Genealogica” 1907, Allen, Lane, and Scott, Philadelphia, PA.  It appears that much of what he recorded in his book borders on pure conjecture, probably downright fabrication.

 

 Following is a discussion of the various factors influencing my speculation.

 

            Galusha’s book, “Genealogy of the Balch Families in America”, published in 1897 by Eben Putnam, Salem, Massachusetts is an excellent genealogical record of the Massachusetts Balch families.  It also contains data on other early Balch families that could not at that time be connected to the Massachusetts line.  Much of that data served as the basis for the later genealogical publication by Thomas Willing Balch, “Balch Genealogica”, published in 1907.  After many pages of literary blather, obviously just to fill space, his publication claims to be a family history of the descendants of John Balch, Maryland Colony settler in 1658. 

 

            Let us begin with the introductory pages of Galusha B. Balch’s book, where he records his efforts, and that of other researchers, attempting to establish a connection of John of Massachusetts to any of the Balch families in England.  In fact, he goes to some lengths to disprove and dispel what certain other researchers had claimed to be such a connection.  His final conclusion was that John, his subject, was most likely the descendant of one of the Balch lines in Sommersetshire, near Bridgwater in England.  However, even with the English church records, tax and land records, and the several historical records available, it could not be conclusively proven. Following is a quote from Galusha’s book, as pertains to the most popular claim that John of Massachusetts was the son of one George Balch of England.

 

Quote - SOME PRE-AMERICAN BALCHES.

 

It was during the lifetime of this George, and in the year in which he subscribed to the Balch genealogy and arms, apparently as the recognized head of the family, that John Balch, five years his senior, went to America.  John may have been a grandson of the first George Balch of Horton, and a son of either Thomas, Robert or William, but no evidence of such a descent is found, except a family tradition that John Balch was of Horton.

            Much interesting data remains, relating to the English Balches of a later date, but not sufficiently connected to form a narrative. It is to be hoped that some one of them of the present day, with the facilities which the examination and publication of ancient documents now afford more abundantly than ever before, may undertake the task of compiling a family history which shall show exactly the relationship of all the Balches of Southern England.  For a number of years a branch of the family owned the manor of St. Audries, previously alluded to, and the " Gentlemen's Magazine" of March, 1814, contains this notice.  " Died, at St. Audries, George Balch, Esq., last male descendant of an ancient family.” - Unquote 

 

            John Balch came to Massachusetts with the Georgs company in 1623 to establish a permanent settlement in the Beverly – Salem areas.  He was married to Margary, maiden name unknown, sometime around 1627 and they had three sons, Benjamin, John, and Freeborn.  Margary is said to have died some time after 1631 and John was remarried to Agnes or Annis Patch.  John died in 1648, leaving a will, which is recorded in Galusha’s book.

 

Benjamin, born in 1628-29, died after Jan 31, 1714-15

John, born abt 1630, died June 16, 1662

Freeborn, born abt 1631, (possibly died abt 1657)

 

            It is with the last son, Freeborn, that I wish to state my speculation.

Here’s what Galusha records – quoted from his book.

 

Quote - FREEBORN BALCH,—BEVERLY, MASS.

 

Freeborn, son of John and Margary Balch, was born in Salem, Mass., about 1631. He was probably named to commemorate the event of his father being made a freeman that year. Family tradition says that he went to England and died there about 1657. His estate in Salem was purchased in 1658 by his brother Benjamin, from "Walter Price, a shopkeeper of that place, who was his executor and administrator. [Essex Reg. Deeds, Vol. 1, p. 82, Jan. 20, 1659.]  It is probable that at the time of his death Freeborn was in debt to, or in Price's employ, and it may be assumed that he was a mariner and was lost at sea. His brother Benjamin purchased his inheritance from Price, and paid for it X20 and 2 acres in the " Old Planters Marsh." The deed shows that Freeborn's death was uncertain, for it recites, " alwaise Provided if the above sd. Freeborne Balch appears to be alive, then this bargain to be voyd." On May 26, 1660, Price gave his receipt for the money and the land was deeded, and it is to be presumed that then, either because Freeborn had not appeared for two years, or on account of information of his death, that his estate was settled up. " The Old Planters Marsh " referred to was located on the peninsula where they first landed, in the present city of Salem. – Unquote

 

            My conjecture is that Freeborn did not return to England in the winter of 1657.  Nor did he perish while trying to swim the cold waters of the Danvers River, as one source has suggested.  There are other theories regarding his demise.  However, I believe there is the possibility that Freeborn, unhappy with his inheritance and life in the Massachusetts colony, may have borrowed money from Price, his employer, and made his way to the harbor where he boarded one of the trading schooners heading for the southern colonies.

 

            Let us now explore what Thomas Willing Balch records in his “Balch Genealogica”, published in 1907, about the John Balch who came to settle in Lord Baltimore’s Maryland colony in 1658.

 

            T.W. Balch states that ‘John’ Balch came from England, but we have never been able to connect him to one of the English Balch families.  Neither have we found any record of his passage to America, no ship, no passenger list, nothing.  He further states that ‘John” came to reside at the Deer Creek settlement, but we can find no evidence of this.  However, we do find absolute proof that ‘John’ Balch was living and working in Charles and St. Mary’s counties in southern Maryland in 1660-1661.  We note here that St. Mary's was the earliest English settlement in Maryland, and could be considered the bed of early government in the colony.  In any event, court records show that John Balch was called upon to give court testimony in these counties.  There is also another record of a court case where the settlement required the defendant to purchase clothing for John Balch.

            Also, there is this record at the Maryland Archives where John Balch transfers his ‘Right of Land’ to one John Floyd, as follows.  (Note that this event took place some five years after John Balch was awarded the land by the colony.  This seems to be common practice of the day; that of being able to sell the property after holding it for five years.)

 

"John Baltch enters his own right transported in the year 1658 the which he assignes to John Floyde in the words,  I John Baltch do assign over unto John Floyde all my Title and Interest of one Right due unto me for my transportation in this province as Witness my hand this 30th day of December, 1663"

Witness Danl. Jennifer

Signed "The mark of X,  John Baltche.”

 

            We see evidence in land records that Daniel Jennifer owned land (and likely resided) in the Charles or St. Mary’s county areas. 

           And so, with evidence of these court records, it appears that our John Balch who came to the Maryland colony in 1658 came to reside in southern Maryland, rather than in the north at the Deer Creek settlement.  It was much later that the two great grandsons of John Balch (John b. 1716 and James b.1714) are shown in the Deer Creek area.

 

            At the present we have absolutely no records or other evidence to indicate that Freeborn Balch did remove himself from the northern colony of Massachusetts in the winter of the year 1657 to end up in the Maryland colony in 1658.  We also note that if this is the case, he obviously changed his name from Freeborn to John, that of his father.  But in my opinion there is certainly enough in the absence of facts and circumstance, shall we say ‘strange incidence’, to lend credence to my thoughts and speculation. 

 

I only wish there was some way to investigate this further.

 

Gene Balch