Matthias Corwin was an early Puritan settler who participated in the settlement of first, Ipswich, Mass and then Southold, Long Island, New York (then part of the New Haven, Conn colony). Among the earliest settlers of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, we find a Matthias Corwin, (pronounced Currin.) The Commoner's Record, at Ipswich, yet preserved, says, "Given and granted to Matthias Currin, two acres of land, lying unto his house, on the east end thereof, to him, his heirs, and assigns," etc. This was in 1634, and seems to be a second grant of  land. The name in the same records is also spelled Curwin, and they note, concerning him,  that he finally removed to Southold, Long Island.(*) The first grant was probably the fifty or two hundred acres given to all the first settlers.(+) It is said that he came from Warwick, England.??
    Perty three years before his death, (1655,) no less than nineteen plots of land are described as belonging to him, situated in Southold, on the northern shore, on Tom's Creek, toward the  north-west and the north-east, at Oyster Pond, toward the south-west, at Pechaconnicke River, and at Corchack, (Cutchogue.) His will mentions John,(*) Martha, and Theophilus as  his children, all of whom seem to have been of age at the writing of his will in 1658. Hence  they were probably born at Ipswich, before 1637, or possibly some or all of them in  England still earlier. The families of the two sons were large, embracing seven or eight  children each, all of whom continued to reside at Southold or immediate vicinity. The names  of John's children are positively known by his will, which has also been found.(+) The other names therefore of the third generation, which are recorded in the census list of 1698, must  belong to the family of Theophilus. Most of these removed eight or ten miles west of Southold, to Mattituck.
    In the fourth generation removals from the Island began to be made, though to a very limited  extent, until the breaking out of the Revolution. Before that event, however, Amaziah, 1, had  removed to Maryland, about 1750; Jesse, 2, to Connecticut, about 1760; Theophilus, 4, to  Orange Co., N. Y., about 1760; Gilbert, 1, to Rockland Co., N. Y., about 1768; while  David, 2, in his old age, accompanied his children to Orange Co., N. Y., about the opening  of the war. But with the Revolution removals became frequent. That really broke up the  family on Long Island.
     In April, 1775, a meeting was held at Southold, to secure the signatures of those who would  support Congress. The list is preserved and printed in the Calendar of Revolutionary Papers.  In May, the paper was carried around to get the signatures of those not present at the  meeting. About 223, in the little town of Southold, L. I., agreed to support Congress, while  only 40 declined. Among those who signed were most of the Corwins.
     After the battle of Long Island, 1776, great consternation seized the people of Suffolk  County. The American army being obliged to abandon the island, the more prominent Whigs  of Suffolk County fled across the sound to Connecticut, carrying with them what they could,  leaving their houses and farms to the enemy. The convention aided the removals. Many of  these joined the American army. Some crossed over to the Hudson River and settled in   Orange County, N. Y., while others afterward returned to the Island. (Prime's Long Island,  p. 65. Onderdonk's Revolutionary Incidents in Kings and Suffolk Counties, L. I.)
    Among those who never returned were James, 1, who settled near Middletown, Orange  Co., N. Y.; William, 1, his brother, and a Benjamin, who settled near Chester, Morris Co.,  N. J.; Joshua and Eli, with their father  (*) Several of the inhabitants of Southold consented to be made free of this colony, unless any thing appear to interrupt the same. Among these was John Corwin, 1662. (Col. Rec. of Ct.)
    David, who settled near Scotchtown, Orange Co., N. Y., while their brother Phineas  removed to Central New-York; Stephen went to Essex Co., N. J., near Springfield, and  subsequently to Ohio; while Jesse, already in Connecticut, had, about 1767, removed to the   vicinity of Flanders, Morris Co., N. J., and about the opening of the war proceeded to   Fayette Co., Pa., and in 1789 to Bourbon Co., Ky.
    Since this first general scattering, the migrations have continued in every direction for a  century, but the reader is referred to the particular names for further information. New-York  State has always been the chief home of the family, especially the counties of Suffolk,  Orange, Sullivan, Ulster, Cayuga, and other counties in Central New-York. New-Jersey has  had the next share, perhaps, especially Morris County. Ohio stands next, until now fully  three fourths of the States have members of this family for citizens. They are found in each of  the New-England States, excepting Maine, and in all the others, except, perhaps, Utah,  Nevada, Delaware, and West-Virginia.

Much of the above information comes from "Settling the Massachusetts Bay and New Haven Colonies from the Corwin Genealogy, 1872."
Another online source for Corwin Genealogy and links as well as additional Long Island families can be found at Our Heritage a web page by Norris M. Taylor, Jr.

---

Supposition of interest Posted by BarBara Fricke (amaranthb@earthlink.net) on February 12, 1999 at 11:51:50: @ Corwin Family Genealogy Forum (http://genforum.familytreemaker.com/corwin/messages/109.html)

Among Curwen descendants, much dispute has arisen over whether Matthew/Matthias Curwen/Corwin who sailed to America (with his wife and her siblings) from Ipswich, England, in 1633 and settled in Salem, Massachusetts, was the son of or brother of John Curwen of Sibbertoft, Northants, England, who died there in
1631.

I believe he was John’s brother and feel the chronology supports this view.

NOTE: The names, Mathew, Matthew and Matthias as given in various records appear to be interchangeable.

That Matthew Curwen, the immigrant, married Margaret Shatswell before 1627 is apparently no longer in doubt, as it once was. The marriage was confirmed by a chancery suit Matthew brought in 1627 on behalf of his wife and her younger siblings against the man who handled the estate of her mother, Judith, who had died eleven years previously in Sibbertoft, Northants. Also, in his will (1647), John Shatswell (Margaret’s older brother) left his second-best “stufe sute” to “my brother Curwin,” i.e., Matthew. (I understand in-laws were often termed brother and sister in those days.)

Weis, Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists, Sixth Edition (line unchanged in the Seventh Edition), gives this descent for the Curwens, which ultimately derives from the Curwens of Workington in Cumberland, England:

Line 37:

37. Thomas Curwen of Sybertoft, Northamptonshire, will made 19 May 1557, pro. Jul. 1557, mentions son Henry Curwen. Also had daus, Margaret, Elizabeth, Ann, Sabyn and Eliza. (Curwen pedigree viii: Essex Institute Proc. 40: 299-304).

(NOTE: I have a copy of this will. No daughter Eliza is mentioned. Thomas requested his body be buried “in the churchyard of St Elyn.” A witness to the will was “Sr. John Lewyn,” vicar -- which may be a clue as to which church this family attended. See also NOTE under #39.)

38. HENRY CURWEN of Sybertoft, d. 1592, had sons John Curwen, d. 1931; and Matthew, fl. 1627, who m. Margaret Shatchwell). (Curwen ped. viii; Essex Institute Proc. 40: 299-304).

39. JOHN CURWEN of Sibbertoft, Northamptonshire, d. 1 Jun, 1631; will made 14 May 1631, pro. 15 Jun, 1631. (Children: Thomas, b. 1608; George, b. 1610; Mathew: Elizabeth; Sarah; John, b. 1616. Curwen pedigree viii; Essex Institute Proc. 40: 299-304).

(NOTE: I have a photocopy of this will. Sarah and John are not mentioned. Jane is given as a younger sister of Elizabeth. Mathew is mentioned obliquely after bequests to Thomas, George, Elizabeth and Jane: “I do give to my sonn Mathew his oldest daughter called Mary a calf of a year old to be truely and honestly delivered unto her at such time as she shall be twelve years of age.” Mathew himself was left out of the will. Perhaps he was deceased or out of favor with his father. In any case, John’s estate was not large. His inventory amounted to L57.16. Thomas and his mother, Margery, were named co-executors. Christopher Bagshawe, minister, witnessed John’s will, so whatever church he was minister of might have a graveyard with a stone. The parish registers of Sibbertoft did not exist before 1680.)

40. CAPTAIN GEORGE CURWEN, b. Sibbertoft, Northamptonshire, 3 Nov. 1610, d. Salem, 1685; m. (1) 1636, Elizabeth Herbert, d. Salem, 15 Sep. 1668, dau. of the Hon. John Herbert, mayor of Northampton, Eng.; m. (2) 1669, Elizabeth Winslow, d. 1694, dau. of Edward Winslow. Arms: Argent, fretty, gules, a chief azure, with a crescent for cadency. (Curwen pedigrees v, viii, ix, x; J.G. Curwen: Castles and Fortified Towers of Cumberland; Essex Institute Proc. 17: 331-347, cf. 341, chart by Rev. George Curwen , 1698, made during his father's lifetime; Shipton: Sibley's Harvard Graduates V 37; Essex Institute Proc. 40: 299-304; Putnam's Historical Magazine, vol. VI 97-101. Generations 25-34: Jackson: Curwens of Workington Hall, pp. 1-21; Hutchinson: Hist. of Cumberland II 143; Generations 31-34: VCH Cumb, II 218-219).

NOTE: I don’t have access to some of these sources, especially all the ones for George.

In question in this descent is Henry’s death date and his paternity of John and Matthias, particularly the latter. Also in dispute is the birth order of John’s children and the identity of Mathew.

If John Curwen married Margery and they had Thomas, who was b. 1608, then John could possibly have married as late as 1607. If he was 20-25 at the time of his marriage, then he was b. 1582-87 (though, of course, he could have been older). If his father, Henry really died in 1592, then Matthew would have had to be b. by 1592-3, which fits in well with his being a second son. Weis says Matthew "fl. 1627," so in 1627, Matthew would be at least 35 or older and about age 41 or 42 when he and the Shatswells went to America in 1633 -- old enough to have amassed the needed money for the trip to America and the purchase of land when he got there. (He bought 50 acres in Salem, Massachusetts.)

Much has been made of a hand-drawn genealogy chart found on the flyleaf of a book belonging to Rev. George Curwen. He was the great-grandson of George Curwen (b, 1610, Sibbertoft, d. 1685 in Salem, Mass.). The line chart had John Curwen at the top and underneath, in order, Thomas, Matthias, George -- and under George a several-generation array of his descendants. The conclusion has been posited that this chart PROVES that Matthias was George’s older brother. But all it really does is indicate that George had a brother named Matthias (or Mathew), which he did. But I think this “Matthias” was Mathew, the father of Mary.

A Further Look at Immigrant Matthew/Matthias Curwen/Corwin of Sibbertoft, Northants, England, and Southold, Long Island, New York -- Part 2

Weis says Thomas was b. 1608 and George was b. 1610. At the time of John’s death in 1631, Elizabeth was unmarried, thus probably 16 or younger and b. 1615 or later. Jane was also unmarried in 1631, thus probably 14 or younger and b. 1617 or later. (Or they could both be somewhat older and unmarried for some other reason.) Then there’s Mathew’s daughter, Mary.

Mary was under 12 in 1631, so she was age 1 to 11 and thus b. 1620-1630. Mathew (married or not) could have fathered her probably not younger than age 16, and thus would have been 17 when she was born and probably 18 when she was 1 year old. If Mary was 1 (b. 1630), then Mathew would have been 18 (b. 1613) AT THE YOUNGEST. If she's 11 (b. 1620), then Mathew would have been 28 (b. 1603).

BUT

Thomas was b. in 1608 and George was b. 1610, so the earliest Mathew could have been born is ca 1612, so the oldest he can be in 1631 is 21, which makes Mary between 1 and 4 (b. 1626-30). But Matthew/Matthias the immigrant had already married Margaret Shatswell by 1627.

There's an outside chance that Mathew was the first born of John's children and deceased in 1631, but it doesn’t seem likely. It's more probable he was born third, fourth, or fifth -- i.e., ca 1612 or later.

Those who are pushing the Matthew son-of-John theory fail to take into account the following:

(1) John’s son, Mathew, had a daughter, Mary, under age 12 in 1631. There’s no record of such a daughter for Matthias the immigrant, whose children were named John, Martha and Theophilus. I have no firm birth dates for any of them.

(2) Mathew (if indeed alive in 1631) was left out of his father’s will. If he was the immigrant, where did he get the money for the trip and purchase of land -- and what happened to Mary?

(3) Margaret Shatswell was b. ca 1597/8 (proof of her age is indicated in the chancery suit). If Mathew was the third son of John (and thus born after George (b. 1610)), he’d be way too young to be her husband. If he was the second son, he’d have to be 10-15 years older than George, and so Thomas would be older still. But Thomas was reportedly born in 1608, so the supposition for an earlier birth for Mathew is untenable, because, if Mathew was feisty enough to bring suit on behalf of his wife, he would certainly have raised a fuss were he first born and left out of the will!

Thomas is the co-executor of John’s will, so he’s either the eldest or Mathew was the eldest and was deceased at the time of his father’s death. Also, a third son who was that young and was not left anything in his father's will and furthermore had a small daughter could not be considered likely to have enough money to pay his way to America, and buy land on his arrival.

A reasonable scenario is that Matthias/ Matthew went to America with the Shatswells in 1633 and wrote back to his nephew, George (also a second son), telling him of the opportunity to be had in this new land and persuading him to emigrate -- which he did in 1638. Later, George returned the favor by buying Matthias’s land when the latter removed to Southold, Long Island, New York, in 1640.

Matthias d. in Southold in 1658, which would make him at least 66 or more when he died, which seems reasonable for those times.

All this is supposition and conjecture -- but it seems more plausible that Matthew/Matthias the son of Henry, rather than that Mathew the son of John and father of Mary, was the immigrant. The facts seem to bear out the supposition for two Matthews -- the younger the father of Mary who remained in England and may have died by 1631 and the elder who married Margaret Shatswell and came to America in 1633 and was the uncle of Thomas and George.

If anyone has any information on the following please email BarBara:

To prove the latter descent, knowing the answers to the following would be helpful:

(1) Did Henry Curwen of Sibbertoft really die in 1592?
(2) Was Henry the only Curwen in the area who could be the father of John and Matthew?
(3) Did Henry indeed have sons named John and Matthew? (No one has been able to determine whether he left a will.)
(4) Was Thomas really born in 1608 as Weis says?
(5) Was there a Matthew in the Sibbertoft area AFTER 1633 (which would at least prove the existence of two Matthews)?
(6) Is there any death record for a Mathew Curwen before 1631 (which might explain why he was left out of his father’s will)?
(7) Can birth dates of Matthew/Matthias the immigrant’s children be determined? (If any of them were born before 1631 and not mentioned in their supposed
grandfather’s will, then that might possibly clinch the argument that John (d. 1631) wasn’t their grandfather.)
(8) Do any Northants families have records of daughters marrying Curwens in this time period?

Generated  Mar 9, 2006 
 GEDCOM to HTML by GedHTree V2.26 © 1999-2005