c.1751:  Chasing Charles
Uncovering the English Origin of Charles HINXMAN (c.1751-1836)

Considerable evidence survives in America regarding the later life of Charles HINXMAN, who founded the Nova Scotian branch of the HINXMAN family.  But his early years in England are more difficult to trace, and have defied many attempts to discover his origins.  Minimal clues, of unknown reliability, first formed the basis of a search among English archives and family trees for Charles's early roots. 

This webpage outlines the final, successful hunt for the English roots of Charles HINXMAN.  It examines the evidence supporting his provisional identification amongst English documentary records, and considers some possible opportunities to discover further details.

British Army
In 1901, the author Reverend HILL cited 'The HINXMAN family Bible' (now apparently lost) when he stated that:

'Charles HINXMAN, a clerk in the British Army, embarked with his regiment in England and came out to oppose George WASHINGTON in the War of Independence.'

Charles's origin in England is further confirmed in A Genealogy and History of the Chute Family in America, published in 1894, where he is identified in notes on the ancestors of his grandson Captain James T. HINXMAN as 'Charles, from Eng.(land)'.

This information seemed to offer a good chance of discovering further details about Charles, from the British Army archives.  The hope was to find Charles's indenture of employment, his official discharge papers, or some other clues to confirm the date and location of his English origins. 

But online searches of various categories in Discovery, the online catalogue of 32 million records at The National Archives (UK), failed to find any mention of Charles HINXMAN.  For instance, he did not appear in searches of the Colonial Office records, nor in the Admiralty records for dockyard employees.

A search of the attestation records (joining and discharge papers for army troops) showed that Charles HINXMAN was not listed there either, which supported the tradition that Charles was not a fighting soldier. 

Subsequent research confirmed that Charles was indeed a non-combatant, civilian employee of the Army's Commissary Department (part of the War Office) in New York.  This was not a regiment (as stated by HILL), but was the administrative section in charge of army supplies and their logistics.

Staff at the National Archives advised that the Army employment records for civilian staff were usually destroyed when the employment was terminated, making it unlikely that any record of Charles's employment there has survived.  Further discussions with staff at The National Archives during a research visit, confirmed that all potentially relevant sections of the online catalogue had been checked - although with no success. 

Only one possible source of information remained at The National Archives: the few surviving records of the Commissary Department. The New York record boxes are indexed as WO 60/11-33, i.e. records 11-33 within category WO 60.

Unfortunately, there is no way quick way to assess their content. The contents of the boxes are not listed in any detail online, and the records have not been indexed below the level of broad groupings, under vague and rather unhelpful titles.

Consequently the only way of discovering the content of each one is to personally visit The National Archives at Kew, in Surrey, England; order the record; and take a look.

Moreover, the total volume of these records is quite considerable, so it is a very long job to check all of them. Expert staff opinion is that these records are highly unlikely to mention any individual workers, but nevertheless a sample was tried.

Illustration 1.  Point Prim at the entrance to Digby Gut, from Victoria Beach.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

Each 'record' is either a single very large and thick ledger (some the size of small table tops!), or a box full of several large but thinner ledgers.  Even checking 1 record is a lengthy and formidable task, so only records 11-16 have been examined so far.  Each one deals only with aggregated data - i.e. total quantities under major headings: such as the total staff bill for the Commissary, or total stores carried per transport ship, through certain periods.  As advised, no mention of individual workers has been found in these records.

The records are almost exclusively about the quantities of stores shipped in and out of New York, right up to 25 Nov 1783: the day before the fall of the city to General Washington.  The stores recorded reflect the varied work of the Commissary: cattle, horses, pigs, animal forage, wood, candles, rum, victuals for troops, etc., all generally listed by transport ship or by destination.  The massive scale of the quantities and their values is breathtaking: hundreds of transport ship arrivals and departures; hundreds of thousands of pounds weight of cargo; and thousands of bushels of individual stores: all listed in an array of ledgers.  The records give a vivid impression of the colossal enterprise that the American Revolutionary War represented for Britain, and for its Army Commissariat Department. 

But there was no mention of Charles HINXMAN.  The remaining records (nos. 17-33) will also be checked, and the outcomes will be reported here.  But it does seem highly unlikely that any mention of Charles will be found.  All of the detailed, individual records appear to have been destroyed long ago, probably to save space in the hurried evacuation of New York.  It seems that only high-level summaries of the Commissary Department in New York have survived, possibly brought home by high-ranking staff to defend their roles in the British defeat. 

So we must look elsewhere for Charles.

From Death to Birth

On 07 Oct 1836 the St John Weekly Chronicle recorded: 

d. Digby, 17th ult., Charles HINXMAN, age 85, resided in that Township for 52 years.

The Latin abbreviation 'ult.' is short for 'ultimo mense', which means 'last month'.  Thus the date of Charles's actual death was 17 Sep 1836.  His stated age of 85 years on this date implies that Charles was thought to be born sometime between 18 Sep 1750 to 17 Sep 1751. 

This data offers an alternative chance of discovering Charles's origins.

A Spell in America
But first a note on spelling. 

The spelling of Charles's surname in records from North America appears uncertain, being spelt in a variety of ways in different documents. 

This potentially raises some doubt about Charles's origins, as for instance the HIN(C)KSMAN family comes from the Welsh Marches (the border between Wales and England), while the HINXMAN family (thought to be unrelated genetically) comes from Hampshire, in southern England. 

Illustration 2.  Digby Gut: Digby at far left, & Bay View on far right.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

However, the fairly consistent use of the spelling HINXMAN by Charles's own descendants provides a reasonable degree of confidence that HINXMAN is the correct spelling.

The other spellings of Charles's surname appear to be deviant versions, arising from mis-spellings and mis-readings by clerks and authors who were not acquainted with our rare surname.  Such variability of spelling is not unusual for the HINXMAN name, even in modern times.  If this analysis is correct, Charles's surname spelling implies that he or his forefathers came from Hampshire in England: the ultimate origin of all branches of the HINXMAN family.

Civil Records
The next stage in this search was to look for any Charles HINXMANs (or surname variants) during the relevant period.  The author had already been conducting a One Name Study of the HINXMAN family worldwide for several decades.  Combining past collected records from this uniquely broad-based study, with a further detailed search of current online resources, gave a considerable degree of confidence that no likely candidates had been missed. 

This approach turned up 2 possible candidates in England at that time, and no others in New York.  This was something of a relief: with a common name like Charles, there was always the possibility that a large number of alternative candidates would be found, making it difficult to identify the correct individual.  But fortunately it turned out to be quite simple to pick out the most likely candidate.

Red Herring?
A possible fit for the data was found early in the search of English documentary records.  This was the baptism of Charles HINCKSMAN, son of Richard and Ann, in the parish of Deuxhill & Glazeley, Shropshire, England, on 29 Dec 1751.  However, 2 aspects made it seem unlikely that this Charles was also the North American Charles.

Firstly, although inconclusive, the consistent HINCKSMAN spelling of his surname (and its compatible Shropshire origin) both contradict the HINXMAN (from Hampshire) spelling generally used by Charles's descendants in North America. 
More convincingly (although the source data for this has not yet been found) a comment on the My Heritage website states that this Charles HINCKSMAN from Shropshire died in 1792, thus ruling him out as a candidate to become the North American Charles, who is known to have lived until 1836.  Both of these are only clues, not proof, although they carry more weight together than individually. 

Nevertheless, they seem to suggest the real solution is elsewhere.  The search for 'our' Charles moved on  .  .  .

Perfect Fit
Detailed documentary searches found only 1 other Charles HINXMAN (including alternative spellings) born in the UK in about 1751, who could also be Charles HINXMAN (c.1751-1836) of Nova Scotia.  This is:

Charles HINXMAN, son of Edward and Martha HINXMAN, baptised on 18 Aug 1751 at the village of West Dean, on the border between Hampshire and Wiltshire, England.

As yet no absolute proof has been found linking this child to Charles of Nova Scotia, and perhaps none ever will.  But every component of the data for this West Dean Charles matches that of the Nova Scotian Charles:

 - His single first name of Charles
 - Both families normally spell the surname as HINXMAN
 - Origin on the border of the county of Hampshire, England (confirming the surname spelling)
 - Baptism (and possibly birth) in 1751
 - No marriage or burial records for him in the UK (as expected for an emigrant)

All of this evidence is only circumstantial.  But the quantity of data, its perfect fit, and the lack of other convincing candidates, strongly suggest this is the Charles who founded the Nova Scotia branch of the HINXMAN family.

This date for Charles's baptism provides a new latest date for his birth.  This now moves 1 month earlier, placing his birth sometime in the 11-month period from 18 Sep 1750 to 17 Aug 1751 .  As more than 7 of these months fell in 1751, it is marginally more likely that his birth occurred in that year (generally abbreviated here to c.1751).

It is unlikely that any more accurate date of his birth will be discovered, as there was no official requirement for the civil recording of births in England during this early period.

Illustration 3.  Distant Digby, across the Annapolis Basin.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

Notes from the Past
Another important piece of circumstantial evidence is a series of informal manuscript notes, about the genealogy of the HINXMAN family, by an unidentified author.  They are written (most unusually) on the back end-papers (pages 65-69) of the Parish Register of West Dean, in Wiltshire.  The author was therefore probably the vicar of West Dean, or an official church scribe with access to the register. 

The notes
list names, dates and family relationships in the West Dean branch of the HINXMAN family, from 1661 to 'about 1810'.
The notes themselves are undated, and are supplemented by sketched attempts (in the same hand) to construct family trees from the notes.  The sequence in which the pages appear to have been written, plus their ranges of family dates and summaries of their contents, are as follows:
  • A.  Page 67:  1728-1786.  Baptism details only (names and dates), apparently extracted from the Parish Register (or from the HINXMAN family Bible?).
  • B.  Page 68:  1688-1745.  Baptisms 1688-1727; Burials 1689-1691; Marriages 1708-1745.  Details as above.
  • C.  Page 69:  1688-1808.  1st(?) attempt at constructing a family tree.
  • D.  Page 70:  Left blank.   This single end page is the reverse side of page 69, with many ink marks coming through, so the author did not use it.
  • E.  Page 66:  1661-1810.  This page bears an interesting heading which explains its content: 
Information given me by Mary HIXMAN (sic), those marked thus * have their names in her Bible.
  • F.   Page 65:  1661-1797.  2nd(?) attempt at constructing a family tree.
The notes can be cross-checked against the official records of baptisms, marriages and deaths elsewhere in the Parish Registers.  Analysis suggests that the notes are generally trustworthy sources, although the family trees drafted from them do contain some mistaken assumptions of relationships.  A revised family tree, based on the notes and checked against other sources, is now available on the Internet - initially on request to family members only, and later to be made publicly available.


The notes on page E/66
are evidently taken from a discussion with Mary HINXMAN (her married surname) of the West Dean branch, sometime during her later years. 

The notes state that Mary was married to a nephew of Charles HINXMAN.  Her maiden name is not provided, and so far it has not proved possible to identify her from other sources.  This is perhaps something to aim for in future research.

It can be deduced from the notes that Mary's husband was a son of Thomas HINXMAN V (1746-1???).  He was a brother of Charles HINXMAN II (c.1751-1???; also Charles of Nova Scotia) and George HINXMAN I (1744-1797). 

The name of Mary's husband is not given in the notes, and nothing more is known of him at this stage.  It is not clear whether he was alive at the time the notes were written. 

Neither is it known whether he and Mary had any children, nor whether any of his siblings have any modern descendants.

Illustration 4.  Old Homestead and Meadow, opposite Bay View.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

4 pages of these notes include brief mentions of Charles HINXMAN.  Page B/68 does not mention Charles because it covers an earlier time period, while page D/70 was left blank. 

All of the details directly concerning Charles are transcribed below, in the order they were apparently written:

Page A/67:  Charles's baptism and his parents' names are listed here, among rough notes of many other key dates:

Charles  Ed & Martha  (17)51

Page C/69:  Charles is then shown on the 1st draft of the family tree, with his siblings and 4 generations of his ancestors, as:  1751 Charles

Page E/66:  Next a short but interesting note about Charles is recorded:  Charles (died abroad)  Uncle to her husband

No asterisk is against Charles's name, so this indicates he was not mentioned in Mary HINXMAN's family Bible: perhaps because the Bible was purchased after Charles's time.

The latest date mentioned in any of the notes is 'about 1810'
(also on page E/66), which implies the notes were written at least several years after that: say 1815 or later.  But there is a further clue in a note at the foot of the family tree on page F/65, where the children of William HINXMAN III (baptised in 1782) are not identified individually, but are labelled 'The present generation'

The Parish Register and other research shows that this William's first child, Charles HINXMAN III (c.1808-1875), was baptised in 1808, while the last of his 7 children, Henry HINXMAN II (1820-1897), was born in 1820. 
Martha HINXMAN IV (1832-1907), the first of William's grandchildren (the next generation),  was born in 1832.  So William's children could have been regarded as 'the present generation' until at least 1832, and probably until 1853 or later.  This suggests that the genealogical notes were written between about 1815 and the 1850s.

However, this does raise a question about the interpretation of the comment that Charles 'died abroad'.  If we assume the West Dean family had knowledge of Charles's actual death in 1836, then page E/66 must have been written later than 1836.  But the comment 'died abroad' might also mean that Charles made little or no contact with West Dean after emigrating, and that his relatives eventually assumed he had been killed in the war (which ended in 1783). 
Either interpretation (loss of contact before or after 1836) seems possible, so the notes can only be vaguely dated to about 1815-1850s.

Page F/65:  Lastly, Charles is included in a clearer and slightly more detailed 2nd draft of the family tree, showing Charles, his siblings and ancestors:

Nat. 1751

In the extract above, 'Nat.' is an abbreviation of the Latin 'Natus', meaning 'Born'.  'Ob:' is a similar abbreviation of the Latin 'Obiit', meaning 'Died'.  The year date was left blank against the latter: presumably Mary could not remember the date of Charles's death, although she apparently felt it had happened. 

Research in America reveals that Charles had a wife (married 1783) and children there, but these are not shown on the tree: implying that Mary did not know about them.  This suggests that Charles's family may have presumed he was dead by 1783, rather than knowing about his actual death in 1836.  However this is not conclusive, so the date of the notes remains vague.

Died Abroad

The remark that Charles 'died abroad' is an important clue.  It lends additional support to the theory that it was this particular Charles, of West Dean, who later became Charles HINXMAN of Nova Scotia.  Once again this is circumstantial evidence, not absolute proof.  But the implications are highly significant. 

Firstly, it independently corroborates all of the matching data previously listed under Perfect Fit above. 

Secondly, it provides additional confirmation from a local relative that Charles HINXMAN from West Dean, born in 1751, died abroad.  This gives much greater confidence to the identification of the child baptised at West Dean in 1751, as being the Charles HINXMAN who  much later settled in Nova Scotia.

The chances of 2 Charles, both with the rare surname of HINXMAN, being born in England in the same year of 1751, and then both dying overseas, must be quite low: this West Dean Charles is almost certainly the same one for whose origins we've been searching.

It is interesting to discover that long after Charles HINXMAN's departure from England, his West Dean relatives may have been aware of his emigration and eventual demise.  If so, this suggests there was some correspondence between the HINXMANs of West Dean and Nova Scotia, up to and beyond Charles's death.  Some of that correspondence might yet survive, and could resurface again.  If so, it might also further clarify the date of the West Dean genealogical notes.

It is possible that some visiting between relatives, or even further migration, may also have occurred between the West Dean and Nova Scotian branches.  This is worth bearing in mind when researching the lives of family members on both sides, particularly during Charles's lifetime and in the subsequent couple of generations.

Illustration 5:  Bay View from Victoria Beach, across Digby Gut.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

Working Proposition
Taken altogether, the various circumstantial evidence makes a convincing case that Charles HINXMAN II of West Dean (c.1751-1???) was also the Charles HINXMAN (c.1751-1836), who founded the Nova Scotian branch of the HINXMAN family.  Further clues, perhaps even proof, may yet be discovered of Charles's origins.  But for now, there is a significant body of evidence pointing to West Dean as his birthplace. 
In the absence of absolute proof for or against, that is therefore the working proposition, and the assumption upon which his biography is based for now.

The provisional identification of Charles as a member of the West Dean branch is an exciting development.  The West Dean and Nova Scotian branches are the largest in the HINXMAN family, so linking them is especially significant.  It is a major step towards joining the family trees of all HINXMAN branches, and to proving that everyone descended from a HINXMAN is related to all others.

For the Nova Scotia branch, it adds another 4 generations of ancestors - and 116 years of history - to their family tree.  This now reaches back to the birth of Edward HINXMAN I (c.1635-1689) of West Dean.  This is close to the presumed founding of the HINXMAN family: only 70 years after 1565, when the Henxmen from whom we inherit our surname were abolished. 

For the West Dean branch, the connection adds a large and dynamic overseas branch to their already extensive family tree.  And for both branches, it roughly doubles the number of their living HINXMAN relatives and descendants.

DNA Testing

But that may not be the end of this detective story. 

Charles HINXMAN's male descendants may now hold the key to establishing the connection between the HINXMANs of West Dean and the rest of modern HINXMANs. 

Through Charles HINXMAN they seem to be direct descendants of the earliest known member of the West Dean branch, and therefore carry his genes in the DNA of their Y (male) chromosomes.  If tests show this DNA matches that from other HINXMAN branches, it would prove that all HINXMANs are related. 

So why not use DNA tests from other West Dean descendants too?  To detect whether HINXMANs are related, we need to test those bearing the surname, which is traditionally inherited through the male line.  The only part of our DNA which always stays with the male line is the Y chromosome, carried only by males.  So testing DNA on the Y chromosome of a male descendant will reveal the genes inherited through the male line - which normally coincides with the inherited surname.

This works so long as the male line of inheritance is unbroken.  But at one point in the HINXMAN of West Dean branch, the correlation between their HINXMAN surname and their inherited DNA was changed. 

All modern descendants of the West Dean branch appear to be descended from Sarah HINXMAN IV (c.1754-1827), who was a 3rd cousin of Charles HINXMAN (c.1751-1836) of Nova Scotia.  Both were direct descendants of Edward HINXMAN I (1635-1689), the earliest known member of the West Dean branch. 

Illustration 6:  Old Meadows at Bay View, above Point Prim.  2017.  For picture details, see footnotes.

But Sarah, being female, did not have a Y chromosome to pass down: so her descendants do not carry the signature DNA from the HINXMAN Y chromosome.  The father of Sarah's eldest son was William LAVER (c.1745-1???).  But their son William III (c.1781-c.1832) was born out of wedlock, and his father apparently took no part in rearing the child.  So Sarah gave him her own surname of HINXMAN, and this is how all of his descendants have become HINXMANs of West Dean too. 

Of course these West Dean HINXMANs are all still valid genetic descendants of Edward HINXMAN I.  But there is one small but significant difference: all modern male descendants of the West Dean branch now carry signature DNA from the LAVER Y chromosome, not from the HINXMAN one.  So testing this DNA can never tell us whether the West Dean HINXMAN branch is related to others.

But now it appears that the HINXMAN branch of Nova Scotia has an unbroken descent from Edward HINXMAN I.  So a DNA test of modern male HINXMANs from Charles's line offers the hope of discovering whether they are related to other HINXMAN branches.  This could signpost the way towards a major long-term goal for HINXMAN family history: a unified, worldwide HINXMAN family tree. 

If you're a male HINXMAN living in North America, or a male descendant of Charles HINXMAN of Nova Scotia, please do get in touch. 

A simple DNA test, of a small saliva sample, could hold the key to re-uniting our whole HINXMAN family.  Samples from several male descendants would be ideal, to improve the accuracy and dependability of the results. 

We need your help, and we're waiting to hear from you!


  • William E. CHUTE.  1894.  A Genealogy and History of the Chute Family in America, with some account of the family in Great Britain and Ireland, with an account of forty Allied Families gathered from the most authentic sourcesSalem, Massachussetts, USA.
  • Comment:  This single volume comprises 2 separately numbered parts: Part I, The Chute Family & Part II, Allied Families.  Both contain important HINXMAN references: Descent of Bethia Matilda WOODMAN (1825-1892), 2nd. wife of Capt. James T. HINXMAN (Part I, Page 31); Poem 'On the Death of Nelson CHUTE', which refers to James T. HINXMAN (Part I, Page 57); Descent of Susan G. PURDAY (1816-1854), 1st wife of Capt. James T. HINNMAN (sic: typographical error, spelt correctly earlier) + Descent of the latter from 'Thomas, (and then) Charles, from Eng(land)' (both in Part II, Page xcviii). 
  • Reverend Allan Massie HILL.  1901.  Some Chapters in the History of Digby County and Its Early Settlers.  McAlpine Publishing.  Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN.  
  • Comment:  Key source on the settlement of Charles & Jane HINXMAN in Digby, Nova Scotia, and their initial descendants.  Sometimes incorrect in the details, due to its secondary nature as a source written long after the original events, but nevertheless of real importance in guiding the direction of research.  The purchase of this book was kindly sponsored by Alex BOWER.
  • Lois JENKINS.  2017.  Descendants of Charles HINXMAN.  Personal communication: unpublished paper.  Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia, Canada.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN.
  • A detailed and fully referenced digest of American documentary sources, relating to Charles & Jane HINXMAN and 4 generations of their descendants.
  • Unattributed.  18 Aug 1751.  Charles, son of Edward and Martha HINXMAN.  Baptized 1751.  Page 34 (of 70).  Parish Register, 1678-1793.  West Dean, Wiltshire, England.  Wiltshire & Swindon Record Office.  Chippenham, Wiltshire, England.
  • Unattributed.  29 Dec 1751.  Baptism of Charles HINCKSMAN.  Deuxhill & Glazeley.  Shropshire, England. 
    Found in:  Ancestry.com. England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2014.
  • Unattributed.  1774-1784.  War Office & predecessors: Commissariat Department: Accounts.  British Army Commissary Department.  Reference WO 60/11-33.  The National Archives (UK).  Kew, Surrey, England.  'Discovery' website URL:  http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk.  Individual record codes and descriptions are shown below.
  • Comment:  An impressive overview of a vast logistics operation.  The following lengthy records have been checked, but no mention was found of Charles HINXMAN.  As all the documents examined proved to be aggregated overviews, with none mentioning individual workers, it now seems highly unlikely that any further records from this series will contain anything about Charles HINXMAN.  Records checked so far:
    • WO 60/11.  1774-1782.  New York, General AccountContent:  Stores landed per station/ship/owner.
    • WO 60/12.  1782-1783.  New York, General AccountContent:  Lists & abstracts (summaries) of stores (animals, forage, ships, candles, staff, wood, rum, etc).  Totals & subtotals only.
    • WO 60/13.  1782-1783.  New York, JournalContent:  Daily record of stores brought per ship, up to the surrender of New York on 25 Nov 1783.
    • WO 60/14.  1781-1783.  New York, LedgerContent:  Stores brought per ship.
    • WO 60/15.  1782-1783.  New York, Cash Books, Memoranda, Sales of Stores, etcContent:  Large aggregated sums as per title, not at individual level.
    • WO 60/16.  1776-1783.  New York, Accounts of Victualling ShipsContent:  Quantities of victuals (food) supplied to transport ships.
  • Comment:  The following records still await detailed checking:
    • WO 60/17.  1782.  New York, Abstract of Rations for Foreign Troops.
    • WO 60/18.  1782.  New York, Abstract of Rations for Foreign Troops.
    • WO 60/19.  1782.  New York, Tabular Account.
    • WO 60/20.  1782.  New York, Tabular Account.
    • WO 60/21.  1782-1783.  New York, Tabular Account.
    • WO 60/22.  1776-1784.  New York, Vouchers relating to Ships Victualled.
    • WO 60/23.  1776-1784.  New York, Vouchers relating to Ships Victualled.
    • WO 60/24.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/25.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/26.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/27.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/28.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/29.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/30.  Dates unknown.  No further details.
    • WO 60/31.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/32.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
    • WO 60/33.  1776-1784.  New York, Miscellaneous Vouchers.
  • Unattributed.  Between c.1815-1860.  Information (Genealogical notes on the West Dean branch of the HINXMAN family)Pages 65-69.  Parish Register, 1678-1793.  West Dean, Wiltshire, England.  Wiltshire & Swindon Record Office.  Chippenham, Wiltshire, England.
  • A most unusual and very helpful find, included within a parish register: a set of 19th century genealogical notes and draft family trees of the West Dean branch of the family.
  • Unattributed.  07 Oct 1836.  Death Announcement of Charles HINXMAN.  Saint John Weekly Chronicle.  Provincial Archives of New Brunswick.  URL: http://archives.gnb.ca/Search/NewspaperVitalStats/Details.aspx?culture=en-CA&guid=4b5545f9-b372-4986-b110-06636e1226d4

Webpage version 2021.1.  First version 2018.
Webpage copyright © Richard HINXMAN, 2018.

Scenery around Bay View & Digby Gut, Nova Scotia: the married home of Charles & Jane HINXMAN.

Point Prim at the entrance to Digby Gut, from Victoria Beach.
This headland is at the end of Lighthouse Road, upon which Charles & Jane HINXMAN's homestead was sited.
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017. 
Point Prim.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.

2.  Digby Gut: Digby at far left, & Bay View on far right.
Showing the distance between the town of Digby, and the HINXMAN homestead at Bay View.
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017.  Digby Gut.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.

3.  The Town of Digby, seen across the Annapolis Basin.
Digby lies just beyond the inner end of Digby Gut, the sea entrance to the large Annapolis Basin.
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017.  Distant Digby.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.

4.  Old Homestead and Meadow, opposite Bay View.
This old homestead at Victoria Beach lies across Digby Gut from the hill at Bay View (seen in the background).
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017.  Old Homestead at Victoria Beach.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.

5.  Bay View from Victoria Beach, across Digby Gut.
The HINXMAN homestead was sited on the hill across Digby Gut, roughly beneath the sun in this photo.
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017.  Bay View from Victoria Beach.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.

6.  Old Meadows at Bay View, above Point Prim.
These old meadows, carved out by settlers, look out from Point Prim across the enormous Bay of Fundy.
Digital colour photograph.  Richard HINXMAN.  31 Jul 2017.  Meadows above Point Prim.  Collection of Richard HINXMAN. Copyright © Richard HINXMAN 2018.  See Terms of Use.