USA > Massachusetts > Hampden County > Springfield > Colonial justice in western Massachusetts, 1639-1702; the Pynchon court record, an original judges' diary of the administration of justice in the Springfield courts in the Massachusetts Bay Colony > Part 5
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45
2 The earliest writings of John we have seen are some notes taken in a form of shorthand of some of Moxon's sermons in February and March 1639/40; these are at,
the Connecticut Valley Historical Muse- um. Cf. 1 Wright, Story Western Mass. 134-135, 189-190.
3 37 N. Eng. Hist. and Gen. Reg. 33; Rec. 24. A study by John Pynchon of the Indian names for various months of the year has survived (10 N. Eng. Hist. and Gen. Reg. 166; 1 Wright, Story Western Mass. 253) , but it is doubtful that Pynch- on attained fluency in any Indian tongue. A receipt, dated November 1, 1645, by John Pynchon for £150 received from Mrs. Mary Wyllys, the executrix of Gov- ernor Wyllys, as the first part of a legacy to his daughter is in 7 Wyllys Mss. (Con- necticut Historical Society, Hartford, Conn.)
33
JOHN PYNCHON
chosen recorder, to record lands, town orders, and "the publike occa- sions of the Towne." 4
John Pynchon was named in each of the commissions issued by the General Court after November 1652 for the administration of justice in Springfield and its environs. Presumably by virtue of cer- tain of these commissions he sat initially on the County Court for Hampshire which heard its first causes in March 1663. In May 1659 and again in May 1662 and the two succeeding years Pynchon was chosen deputy for Springfield.5 On May 3, 1665 he was chosen an as- sistant-an office which he retained until May 1686.6
During these twenty-one years Pynchon held court at Springfield by virtue of his authority as magistrate; he sat on the County Court, with associates (and for part of the period, another assistant, Peter Tilton) , by virtue of such position; and, of course, he sat on the Court of Assistants (although not too frequently) , and participated in the judicial work of the General Court. As a member of the Gen- eral Court Pynchon appears to have played a minor role. In his years as assistant he was named to only a few committees, apart from those relating to protection and settlement of the frontiers of the colony. In February 1659/60 he was again chosen town treasurer, serving for three successive terms, and clerk or recorder of Springfield. He was also elected selectman in which capacity he served the town for most of the next eleven years. Lastly, he was chosen moderator to preside at town meetings; with a few intervals he continued in this office un- til 1694.7
During the period between 1660 and 1685 scarcely a year passed that Pynchon was not appointed to some ad hoc town committee. These committees dealt with such matters as town rates, town bound- aries, accounts of selectmen, settlement of the county government, county rates, laying out of highways, disposition of town lands, es- tablishment of mills, lands at Woronoco, poor relief, Indian matters, a new meeting house, defense measures, lands at Freshwater Brook, and land grants to the minister.8
4 1 Burt, Hist. Springfield 217, 218-219, 223; Rec. 54.
5 See Pynchon Waste Book for Hamp- shire 2; 1 Hamp. Cty. Probate Ct. Rec. 28; 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part I) 364; 4 ibid (Part II) 41, 117.
6 See Rec. Mass. Bay, passim, for the composition of the General Court each year. Records of the choice of magistrates indicate Pynchon reached the peak of his popularity at about 1683-1685. 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (6th ser.) 1-2; 5 ibid. 48, 77, 133, 137; 3 New Hampshire Hist. Soc.
Coll. 99-100; Hutchinson, Collection Orig- inal Papers 541, 543.
7 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 476; 39 Mass. Archives 391. The town offices may be traced in Burt, Hist. Springfield, vols. I, II.
8 1 Burt, Hist. Springfield 282, 284-285, 289, 291, 297, 300, 307, 352-353; 2 ibid. 80, 81, 85-86, 105, 110, 114, 120, 129, 142-143, 149, 169, 186; 5 Rec. Mass. Bay 376. For material before the General Court on the Glover controversy, see 11 Mass. Archives 9-12, 20, 170, 178-182.
34
INTRODUCTION
On the county level Pynchon headed the County Court for Hampshire. The records of this court, and those of the later Court of General Sessions of the Peace, in a number of instances show him charged with the duty of providing for or maintaining the house of correction at Springfield.9
The Record, commencing in March 1660/61, contains entries of annual meetings of the freemen of Springfield at which they chose deputies to the General Court and gave in their votes for nomina- tion of assistants, and, after the establishment of a county, choice of associates on the County Court and of county treasurer. John Pyn- chon was the commissioner appointed to carry such votes sealed to the shire meeting for the first two meetings recorded. He was chosen and allowed County Treasurer at least twelve times between 1664 and 1679, and may have served consecutively during the entire period.10
John Pynchon was extremely active in connection with new plan- tations in the Connecticut Valley, an activity which had economic as well as political aspects. At the May 1653 General Court, upon the petition of Springfield inhabitants craving liberty to erect a new plan- tation at Nonotuck (Northampton) , Pynchon, Holyoke, and Chapin were appointed a committee to divide the land petitioned for into two plantations, the petitioners to have liberty to settle on the one of their choice, under certain conditions.11 In May 1659, settlement having commenced on the east side of the Connecticut, the General Court empowered a committee of five including Pynchon, Holyoke, and Chapin to lay out the bounds of the "town at Norwattocke" (Hadley) on either or both sides of the river, "so as shall be most suitable for the chohabitation and full supply of those people, that this wildernes may be populated and the maine ends of our coming into these parts may be promoted." 12
In May 1667, upon petition of the inhabitants of Quabaug (later Brookfield) , the General Court appointed Pynchon and four others with power to admit inhabitants, grant lands, and order all the pru-
9 Rec. Cty. Ct. Hamp. 73, 129, 148-149; Pynchon Waste Book for Hampshire 52, 154; Hamp. Rec. Ct. Pleas 61. See also Morris, "The Old Main Street Jail and House of Correction," 1 Papers and Proc. Conn. Valley Hist. Soc. 29-30.
10 Rec. 318-335. As to County Treasurer see the entries in Pynchon Waste Book for Hampshire and Rec. Cty. Ct. Hamp.
11 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part I) 136; cf. 3 ibid. 308. For the return of the committee see 4 ibid. 213; 3 ibid. 360. When a dis-
pute arose later as to the boundary be- tween Northampton and Springfield, com- mittees from both towns met on April 28, 1685 and reached agreement. The Spring- field committee included Pynchon, who, as survivor of the original committee, ex- plained the intent in settling the original boundary. 5 ibid. 480-481; 112 Mass. Ar- chives 403, 407-408.
12 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part I) 368; 112 Mass. Archives 116.
35
JOHN PYNCHON
dential affairs of the place until the Court judged it meet to grant the full liberty of a township. In November 1686, Pynchon and five others were appointed a committee for Quabaug to receive the claims of the old inhabitants, to grant lots to others, and to give the neces- sary orders for some orderly settlement of the town. In 1692 Pynchon was a member of a committee reestablished for Brookfield.13
In October 1670, upon petition of Springfield inhabitants, lib- erty was granted to erect a new plantation, later known as Suffield, on the west side of the Connecticut River. For the purposes of man- aging the affairs of the township, receiving inhabitants and granting land, and ordering all prudentials the Court appointed a committee of Pynchon, Holyoke, and four others. The committee delayed laying out the bounds of the plantation in hope of settlement of the bound- ary line between Massachusetts and Connecticut, but when the latter did not accept a Massachusetts concession, the committee proceeded and made its return, per Pynchon and Holyoke, to the General Court in June 1674.14
1214989
In May 1671 a petition, largely by Northampton inhabitants, sought. liberty to settle at "Squawqueque and Wissquawqueque," both deserted by the Indians. A committee headed by Pynchon re- ported favorably on the petition but the magistrates did not approve the return. At the May 1672 Court, when the petition was renewed, the General Court offered to grant land at Squakeag for a village, provided qualified householders gave their engagement to settle twenty families within eighteen months. Such engagement was pre- sented by Pynchon at the October Court and a grant was made for a new plantation; however, Pynchon was not named to the commit- tee.15 In May 1672 Hadley inhabitants were granted additional lands on the northern boundary, later called Swampfield (still later Sun- derland) ; Pynchon and two others were named a committee to order prudential affairs and grant lots.16 In May 1683 the General Court granted a new township at Freshwater Brook below Springfield, to
13 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 342; 21 Acts and Res. Prov. Mass. Bay 667; Qua- baug, 1669-1910 (comp. and ed. C. J. Ad- ams, 1915) 45; 2 Ms. Mass. Council Rec. 85; 112 Mass. Archives 426-427; 113 ibid. 294. For the early history of Quabaug, see 35 N. Eng. Hist. and Gen. Reg. 332.
14 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 469; 5 ibid. 12-13; 112 Mass. Archives 208, 210, 235, 440-441. For an earlier petition to which the deputies did not consent, see Sheldon, Documentary History of Suffield (1879-88) 47-48. For the report of Pynch- on and Holyoke see ibid. 49-50. For the
acts of the committee, largely concerned with land grants, covering the period Jan- uary 12, 1670/1 to January 2, 1681/2 see ibid. 53-78.
15 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 528-529, 542; Temple and Sheldon, A History of the Town of Northfield, Massachusetts (1875) 59-63; 1 Hist. and Proc. Pocum- tuck Valley Mem. Asso. 116-117.
16 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 557-558; 5 ibid. 9; 113 Mass. Archives 760; 1 Hist. and Proc. Pocumtuck Valley Mem. Asso. 174-175.
36
INTRODUCTION
be called Enfield, and for the admittance of inhabitants, granting allotments and ordering all the prudential affairs of the town, ap- pointed Pynchon and four others to be a committee. An earlier ap- pointment, in September 1679, of a committee to settle a town at Freshwater had been made by the County Court with Pynchon one of the members.17
In a number of cases Pynchon assisted settlement of new planta- tions on the Connecticut River on lands purchased from the Indians by advancing the purchase price from his own funds, taking a con- veyance of lands in trust, and obtaining reimbursement from the set- tlers at a later date. Such arrangements were made in connection with Northampton, Hadley, Westfield, Pocumtuck (Deerfield) , En- field, and Suffield.18
Closely related to Pynchon's work in laying out new plantations was his participation in determining the boundaries of the common- wealth. Since by marriage, geographic location, and military neces- sity Pynchon was closely tied to neighboring Connecticut, he was a natural choice to represent Massachusetts in ascertaining the bound- ary line between the two colonies, made controversial by an error in the Woodward-Saffery line. Therefore, on May 31, 1671 the General Court authorized him to run the south line of the patent twenty miles or more westward from the Connecticut River. This move was prompted by a letter from the General Assembly of Connecticut ex- pressing fear that a recent grant of lands toward Windsor by Massa- chusetts could prove prejudicial, if not ruinous, to the people of Windsor.19
Pynchon, unaccompanied by any Connecticut representatives, al- though opportunity was afforded, carried out his mission between
17 5 Rec. Mass. Bay 410-411; 112 Mass. Archives 238, 339; Rec. Cty. Ct. Hamp. 32. For the committee book see 1 Allen, The History of Enfield, Connecticut 60-135.
18 Wright, Indian Deeds 27-28, 33-35, 37-38, 51-53, 61-62, 65, 69-71, 84-85, 89- 92, 94-96, 97-98, 99-100. See also 1 Wright, Story Western Mass. 254-258, 261. See 1 Hist. and Proc. Pocumtuck Valley Mem. Asso. 80, that four conveyances were made at Pocumtuck to Pynchon by the Indians on behalf of the Dedham proprietors, Pynchon advancing £40. For the manner in which Pynchon was reimbursed for his advances in connection with the Enfield plantation see 1 Allen, The History of En- field, Connecticut 76. For Pynchon's reim- bursement for £41/15 expended in con- nection with Stony Brook or Suffield see
Sheldon, Documentary History of Suffield 20, 21, 62-63. For references to Pynchon in the settlement of Pocumtuck see Early Records of the Town of Dedham, Massa- chusetts (1659-1673) 103, 117, 133-134, 136-138, 162, 173, 192-193, 219-220. It was not until 1674 that Pynchon was entirely repaid his advances. Ibid. (1672-1706) 17, 23.
19 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 487, 502- 503. On the boundary question see Bowen, The Boundary Disputes of Connecticut (1882) 53-55; Hooker, Boundaries of Con- necticut (Pub. Ter. Comm. State Conn., 1933) 16-19. Many of Pynchon's dealings were with Lieutenant Colonel John Allyn, secretary of the Connecticut colony, who had married Henry Smith's eldest daugh- ter, Anne.
37
JOHN PYNCHON
October 31 and November 3, 1671 and made his return to the Gen- eral Court in May 1672. The Court allowed and approved the re- turn and ordered that Pynchon have its thanks for "his great paines Therein." The General Court, in order to accommodate the town of Windsor, offered to make some concession on its boundary and to have Pynchon, joined by Connecticut representatives, run the new line before winter. However, Connecticut never saw fit to accept this offer, and this failure to settle the boundary line gave rise to contro- versy for many years.20
In most New England histories John Pynchon makes but a fleet- ing appearance, usually as a military leader in King Philip's War and in later defensive actions against Indian and French marauders. Un- der the First Charter he was successively confirmed as lieutenant (1653) , captain (1657) , and sergeant major (1671) in the military establishment of western Massachusetts. However, prior to the out- break of King Philip's War Pynchon was rarely called upon to act in a military capacity.21 In August 1664 Captains Thomas Clarke and Pynchon were dispatched by the General Court to inform the Eng- lish commissioners engaged "in reducing the Dutch at the Monhatoes into the obedience of his Majestie" of the military assistance to be furnished by the Bay colony. As deputies, both men were signatories to the articles of capitulation consented to later in the month at New Amsterdam.22
John Pynchon took no conspicuous part in King Philip's War as a field commander; his role was largely confined to pressing the Bay and the Connecticut authorities for succor and to coordinating the
20 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 517-519, 529-530; 5 ibid. 12; 3 Mass. Archives 23a. For the correspondence exchanged be- tween Pynchon and John Allyn in Octo- ber 1671, see 2 Mass. Archives 188-190. For the map drawn by James Taylor, dated June 6, 1672, by order of the General Court of May 15, 1672, see 3 Conn. Ar- chives, Colonial Boundaries 3-4. For an example of the controversy see the Novem- ber 12, 1679 letter to Windsor from the committee for Suffield, of which Pynchon was a member. Wolcott Mss. (Conn. Hist. Soc.)
21 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part I) 135, 314; 4 ibid. (Part II) 82, 488. For Pynchon's role in various Indian matters, see 1 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 62-67; Sheldon, "The Po- cumtuck Confederacy," 2 Papers and Proc. Conn. Valley Hist. Soc. 78-79; 1 Conn. Ar- chives, Miscellaneous 88k-m; Thornton, "The Gilbert Family," 4 N. Eng. Hist. and
Gen. Reg. 232, 339; O'Callaghan, Calender of Historical Manuscripts in the Office of the Secretary of State, (Dutch Manu- scripts, 1663-64) 304; 8 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (5th ser.) 89.
22 4 Rec. Mass. Bay (Part II) 123-125; 2 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y. 253; N.Y. Hist. Soc. Coll., 2 Pub. Fund Series (1869) 333- 336; CSP, Col., 1661-68, #788 (p. 228) , #794. See also 6 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (4th ser.) 527-529; letter, dated Aug. 15, 1664, from John Pynchon to John Ende- cott, Boston Public Library, Rare Book Room, Ac. Ms. 586. For Pynchon's connec- tion with Indian matters in 1665-66 see 6 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (4th ser.) 531; CSP, Col., 1661-68, #1379; 67 Mass. Archives 170; 3 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y. 146, 148. See also the references to Pynchon in let- ters of John Winthrop, Jr. to Colonel Nicholls. 8 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. (5th ser.) 105, 111.
38
INTRODUCTION
activities of the local, the Bay, and the Connecticut forces. When, on August 4, 1675, he confirmed Indian intelligence of the attack on Brookfield by the Nipmucks, Pynchon immediately sent to Hartford for aid in securing Springfield, succoring Brookfield, and giving "present chase" to the Indians, stating:
We are very raw and our People of this Towne extreamely scattered so that our owne Place needs all and how soone these Indians may be upon this Towne we know not.23
On the same date he informed John Winthrop, Jr. of the pres- ence of Philip and a small band of followers at Ashquoash, no more than twenty-three miles from Springfield, having escaped from the Pocasset swamp on the night of July 29. He urged swift action to de- stroy Philip, but the Connecticut authorities were skeptical of the intelligence.24
On August 12 Pynchon, who was in command on the River, ap- parently feeling the weight of responsibility too great, sent a messen- ger to inform the Council at Hartford that he "is alone and wants advice what to doe in this Juncture." Major John Talcott with a small force of dragoons was sent to his assistance with a recommenda- tion that an agent be sent to Albany to enlist the aid of the Mo- hawks, if the enemy should go in that direction. Governor Andros, being at Albany when Pynchon's messenger arrived, engaged the Mohawks not to join the war or entertain the hostile Indians.25
Headquarters was established at Hadley, but extensive scouting uncovered no hostile Indians. By August 22 Pynchon was engaged upon a task, often repeated in coming years, of persuading the Con- necticut authorities to garrison remote locations such as Squakeag (Northfield) and Deerfield, since it was feared that the Indians would fall upon these areas. The first combat along the River took place when a party of English was ambushed on August 25 below Deer- field while pursuing some River Indians who formerly occupied a fort on the west bank of the River between Northampton and Had- ley. Although disarmed by the committee of militia, these Indians, pretending great fidelity to the English and promising that they
23 Mather, The History of King Philip's War (ed. S. G. Drake, 1862) , appendix B, pp. 234-235; 1 Conn. Archives, War Co- lonial 162. For the attack on Brookfield see Quabaug, 1669-1910, 46 ff.
24 1 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 87; Mather, Hist. King Philip's War, appendix B, pp. 234-239; 1 Conn. Archives, War Colonial 11a, 11c, 11d, 163.
25 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 87-88; 2 Pub.
Rec. Col. Conn. 345-350; Wyllys Papers, 21 Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., 221; 1 Conn. Ar- chives, War Colonial 164. For a letter, dated August 28, 1675, from the Massa- chusetts Council entreating Connecticut's assistance see 2 Pub. Rec. Col. Conn. 362. For a September 8, 1675 letter from Pynchon to the Albany authorities see 67 Mass. Archives 250.
39
JOHN PYNCHON
would fight against Philip, had been rearmed in the hope they might do the same service as the Mohegans and Naticks. When it became plain that they were not trustworthy, the council at Hadley de- manded their arms on August 24 but met a show of defiance which culminated in their quitting their fort. Advice to Pynchon from the Connecticut Council to forbear from forcibly disarming the Indians, "least it might prove to be provoakeing or discourageing to our In- dian Neighboures," arrived too late. Pynchon, who was "of a differ- ing mind" from those favoring disarming, thus offending some, wrote that "when I Recollect things: I cant but conclude that this was a Contrived busyness of the Indians." 26
All the marching and countermarching provided no effective an- swer to Indian tactics which included an attack upon Deerfield and the ambushing of forces marching to the relief of Northfield, for, as Pynchon despondently noted, "when we go out after the Indians they doe so sculk in swamps we cannot find them and yet do waylay our people to there destruction." Perhaps influenced by Pynchon's pessimistic attitude in matters military, a council of war on Septem- ber 8 decided to give up operations in the field and only garrison the towns. This view proved unacceptable to Connecticut which urged a more aggressive campaign. However, a few days after the initial de- cision bolder counsels had prevailed at Hadley and, a vigorous cam- paign having been agreed upon, Major Treat was sent up the River with a large force of Connecticut troops.27
The concentration of large bodies of troops in the Valley made it necessary to lay in an adequate store of provisions. At this time Major Pynchon and others had a large quantity of unthreshed wheat at Deerfield which had been spared by the Indians in expectation that it would soon be theirs. About September 15 Pynchon sent orders to have some of this wheat threshed and to impress teams and drivers for its transportation. Captain Thomas Lathrop was sent up with his company from Hadley to convoy the supply train to headquarters. On September 18 Lathrop with a train of carts laden with wheat commenced his return march from Deerfield, taking no precautions against hostile activity. In a swampy area on the narrow Pocumtuck Path, later known as Bloody Brook, Lathrop's force was ambushed by a superior force of Indians and virtually annihilated. Pynchon, re- alizing the difficulty of holding Deerfield, sent to Hartford for advice which led to the abandonment of the town and of an expedition
26 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 88-93; 2 Pub. Rec. Col. Conn. 352-354; Wyllys Pa- pers 222-223; Mather, Hist. King Philip's War 71, 73-76; 1 Conn. Archives, War Co- lonial 14, 17, 166-167.
27 1 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 95-100; 2 Pub. Rec. Col. Conn. 365, 367-368; Mather, Hist. King Philip's War, appendix B, 241- 243.
40
INTRODUCTION
planned to regain Northfield as a center for offensive operations by Connecticut troops.28
On September 21 the council of war at Hatfield was notified by the Commissioners for the United Colonies at Boston that they had decided to raise a thousand men. Pynchon was appointed com- mander-in-chief; the council chose Major Treat as second in com- mand. The letter from Thomas Danforth stated that, "considering the great trust and dependance that is upon Major Pinchon, for the constant management of the publicke affaires in those parts we do not expect that he should be personally present in every expedition against the enemy, further then himselfe, and his Councill of offi- cers shall See a necessity off." With Pynchon's commission, received on September 22, came instructions, drawn up before Bloody Brook, to employ all forces in field operations and not in garrisoning towns. Though against his judgment, Pynchon set in motion plans to as- semble at Hadley a force large enough to sweep the valley clear of hostile Indians, but also persevered in attempts to resign his com- mand.29
In the meantime the Indians were continuing their hit-and-run tactics. On September 26 Pynchon's farmhouse, barns, and crops on the west side of the River were burned. A few days later Pynchon sent in his resignation as Commander-in-Chief, stating that "my sad state of affairs will necessitate your discharging me, and truly I am as full of troble and overwhelmed with it that I cannot act." 30
Although Pynchon had tendered his resignation, he remained in command of the Valley forces and on October 4 led all the troops from Springfield to Hadley where a force had been assembled to move out in a large-scale operation to clear the Valley. However, these plans were upset when an Indian informant on the evening of October 4 revealed at Windsor plans of the "friendly" Indians at Long Hill to join with hostile Indians in an attack on Springfield the next morning. Messengers were dispatched in haste to Major Treat at Westfield and to warn Springfield. The Springfield inhabitants, who had received the firmest assurances and pledges of friendship and faithfulness from the Long Hill Indians both by covenant and hostages given as security (but cunningly enticed away from Hart- ford) , took to the shelter of their palisaded houses and sent a mes- senger to Pynchon at Hadley. The next morning, believing the re- port to be false, two defenders started to ride out to the Indian fort
28 1 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield, 100-103, 110-112.
29 Ibid. 112; 67 Mass. Archives 263-264,
270; 1 Conn. Archives, War Colonial 19a.
30 1 Sheldon, Hist. Deerfield 113-114. Contemporary accounts estimated Pynch- on's loss at Suffield at £1100-1200. 1 Wright, Story Western Mass. 268.
41
JOHN PYNCHON
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.