Died
at about age 64
in Amesbury, Essex, Massachusetts, United States
Problems/Questions
Profile last modified
| Created 13 Sep 2018
This page has been accessed 129 times.
Biography
Ruth Webster was born April 8, 1725, in Salisbury, Essex county, Massachusetts, a daughter of Israel Webster and Susannah (Morrill) Webster. [1] Ruth married Ensign Thomas Bagley (1722-1771), son of Orlando Bagley. Children of Ruth and Thomas are:
Israel Bagley, born October 25, 1747, in Amesbury, married Mary Snow, on April 21, 1768, an lived in Royalsborough (present day Durham) Maine
Thomas Bagley, born May 9, 1752, in Amesbury, married Molly Wier, May 31, 1773; and she died in Salisbury, his consort, Jan. 23, 1814
Philip Bagley, born May 22, 1752, in Amesbury
Sarah Bagley, born June 15, 1755, in Amesbury; probay married Elliot Frost of Royalsborough July 28, 1774
Enoch Bagley, born February 4, 1758, in Amesbury, lived in Royalstown, Maine, occupations "Joiner" in 1789
Ruth Bagley, born June 30, 1760, in Salisbury; was living in 1772
Susanna Bagley, born circa 1762, was deceased, unmarried, in 1778
Dorothy Bagley, born circa 1764; living in 1772
Thomas Bagley, Sr. died in 1771. Before 1779, Ruth married secondly, to David Osgood. [2] Ruth is buried in the Salisbury Plains burying ground in Amesbury, Essex County, Massachusetts [3]
Sources
↑ "Massachusetts Births and Christenings, 1639-1915," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:FZ84-7K9 : 10 February 2018), Israel Webster in entry for Ruth Webster, 08 Apr 1725; citing SALISBURY,ESSEX,MASSACHUSETTS, ; FHL microfilm 845,110
Information regarding the children is from Bagley Family, reprinted from Essex Antiquarian, Salem, Mass., 1901, Vol. 5, p. [65]-70
Is Ruth your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Ruth by comparing test results with other carriers of her mitochondrial DNA.
However, there are no known mtDNA test-takers in her direct maternal line.
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with Ruth: