Absent any very well-kept family secrets, I don’t have a lot of possibilities for this week’s 52 Ancestors Challenge theme, “Wrong Side of the Law”. For the most part, I have more ancestors who have been on the correct side of the law.
The only ancestor who readily came to mind who had any significant legal problems was my Great x5 Grandmother, Hannah Newland of Norton, Massachusetts. Today her problem – if it would even have been a problem had she been able to do as she wanted – would have been more of a social than legal issue and, frankly, one that would be no one else’s business.

Hannah’s problem arose from her relationship with a John Watterman (often described as Watters due to the legibility of the records). It seems that John may have been a Hessian mercenary who fought for the British during the American revolution, but later who joined with the rebels. In February 1777, Hannah and John declared their intention to marry. However, the Selectmen of Norton, Massachusetts denied them permission to do so.
While not well documented, one account was because of John’s “questionable” German background. If so, that is somewhat ironic, given that Hannah ultimately ended up marrying another Hessian mercenary, my Great x5 Grandfather, “Chris John Burgess”. Despite this rather English-sounding name, Chris John was born Johann Christian Borges (or Burges) in Prussia. Like John Watterman, Chris John also came to America to fight for the British, only to change sides later in the war. The legend is that he changed his name after doing so, in order to better fit in with the colonials.
However, what is more likely is that Hannah and John had conceived a child out of wedlock. The child, Benjamin Newland, was born in August 1777, six months after Hannah and John declared their intention to marry. A copy of an extract of a court record that I have shows that Hannah was fined five shillings for “fornication and having had a bastard child born of her body”, as well as paying the cost of the prosecution. John was in attendance at the court proceeding and essentially acknowledged paternity. The court ordered John to pay for the maintenance of the child. It appears clear from the court record that the order was less for social welfare purposes and more to prevent the town from bearing the cost of supporting an unwed mother.


Of course, after completing this post I remembered an ancestor who was infamously on the wrong side of the law. My Gx10 grandmother was Rebecca Nurse, who was one of the women of Salem Village executed on the false accusation of being a witch. While on the wrong side of the law – albeit through a mockery of the law, even by the standards of the day – Rebecca certainly was on the wrong side of what constitutes justice.
Suffice to say, one need not necessarily be a scoundrel, ne’er-do-well, or criminal to be on the wrong side of the law. Just make sure you don’t live in the wrong era, depending on what you do.

























