\J V J Jk -/*^r> /Aa >0 ^ ' - 4J ^ 
 
 
 w / 1 
 
 
 
 
^ 
 
 .1 
 
 -^^ 
 
 
 ^o 
 
 t<. 
 
 ^' 
 
 •IK 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^. 
 
 
 
 ► <^- 
 
 '^. 
 
 ,v 
 
 %^'^'^ 
 
 ^? 
 
 
 -> ^Kj- 
 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 1 A ^ 
 
 r\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 :,^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 vi. 
 
 >, 
 
 O N 
 
 
 1^ - ■< * 
 
 '""''» "^O 
 
 r,/?'"' 
 
 -:.^ G^ 
 
 ^^" 
 
 C^ . 
 
 1- X 
 
 ■^a 
 
 ^> '" 
 
 ^ 
 
 '^V'9^" 
 
 ^:: 
 
\ 
 
 \ 
 
COAT-OF-ARMS 
 
 OF 
 
 Colonel William Ball, 
 
 OF 
 
 VIRGINIA. 
 
 ARMS: 
 
 CREST 
 
 Argent a lion passant sable ^ on a 
 chief of the second three mullets of 
 the first. 
 
 Out of the clouds proper a demi- 
 lion rampantt sable powdered with 
 estoiles argent, holding a globe. 
 
 MOTTO: "Coelum tueri.^^ To regard the 
 heavens. 
 
One Line of the 
 
 Ball Tribe. 
 
 BY 
 
 One of the Tribe. 
 
 \£. 
 
 
 Printed for Private Distribution. 
 
 1902 
 
PRESS OF 
 
 GIBB BROS. & MORAN, 
 
 NEW YORK. 
 
 
 0^ 
 
 
PREFi^CE. 
 
 IT has been said, somewhere, that the pref- 
 ace of a book is the most difficult part to 
 compose. If such be the case, this preface 
 will be as brief as the exigencies of the work 
 
 will permit. 
 
 The writer makes no claim to superior lit- 
 erary merit, and if in the course of this work 
 any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions occur, 
 they are to be attributed rather to the con- 
 fused state of the information and data at 
 his command than to any neghgence, or in- 
 attention, he hopes, on his part. 
 
 He desires to express his sincere thanks to 
 Miss Clara E. Ball (Associate Historian, In- 
 ternational Ball Union), Miss Lulu K. Eubank 
 (author of ^^Old Glory"), and Miss Emma S. 
 Yerby (author of Manuscript History of 
 ''Colonel WiUiam Ball and his Descendants 
 in Virginia "), for their uniform kindness and 
 courtesy in offering suggestions and impart- 
 ing information to him, during the prepara- 
 tion of this little work. jj -p. j 
 
 New York City, 
 
 February 1, 1902. 
 
PART FIRST. 
 
PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 
 
 TN one of his most famous orations, Daniel 
 ^ Webster asserted the proposition, that 
 ^^ Ancestral pride nourishes a weakness in 
 posterity." Yet by right of descent (his father 
 having been a Captain in the war of the 
 American Revolution), he was entitled to 
 membership in the '^ Order of the Cincinnati," 
 based upon family pedigree, and one of the 
 most exclusive orders then, as now, in the 
 United States. Webster was a politician, as 
 well as a standing candidate for the Presi- 
 dency. 
 
 John Fiske, the eminent historical and 
 philosophical writer, as quoted by Rev. Geo. 
 H. Ball, D.D., says : ''After the fashion that 
 prevailed a hundred years ago, the most illus- 
 trious of Americans felt little interest in his 
 ancestry ; but with the keener historic and 
 
 9 
 
broader scientific outlook of the present day, 
 the importance of such matters is better ap- 
 preciated. The pedigree of horses, dogs, and 
 fancy pigeons, have a value that is quotable 
 in terms of hard cash. Far more important 
 for the student of human affairs, are the 
 pedigrees of men. By no possible ingenuity 
 of constitution making, or of legislation, can 
 a society made up of ruffians and boors, be 
 raised to the intellectual and moral level of a 
 society made up of well bred merchants and 
 yeomen, parsons, and lawyers. One might as 
 well expect to see a dray horse in the Derby. 
 It is, moreover, only when we habitually bear 
 in mind the threads of individual relationship 
 that connect one country with another that 
 we get a really firm and concrete grasp of 
 history. Without genealogy the study of 
 history is comparatively lifeless." 
 
 Thus we have the opposing views of two 
 of the most eminent personages in their 
 respective spheres, that this country has 
 ever produced. One would think that the 
 orator was a candidate for political ofiice 
 and appealing to the ignorant prejudices of 
 the mob, so common to the demagogue ; 
 
 10 
 
whilst the philosopher was fervently assert- 
 ing the pre-eminent superiority of ancestral 
 lineage. 
 
 There can be no doubt that of late years, 
 there has been quite a revival, amounting to 
 almost a ''craze," in genealogical research 
 into family history, by everybody and any- 
 body who have pretentions to family distinc- 
 tion. One can scarcely pick up a newspaper 
 that his attention is not immediately attracted 
 to the headlines of the description of a anion 
 or banquet of some family or other, never 
 forgetting to describe with accuracy and pre- 
 cision the ''illustrious ancestry;" that is, if 
 there were any of sufficient importance to 
 merit description. One can scarcely look the 
 obituary columns over, but that his eyes are 
 not attracted to the exploitation of the 
 "distinguished progenitors" of the deceased. 
 
 It may be news to many of the common 
 people that we now have a College of Heraldry, 
 in full working order, right here in New York 
 city, as witness the following excerpt from 
 one of our great dailies: "The experts in 
 heraldry in England who have been tryirg to 
 
 interest Americans in their ancestry and their 
 
 11 
 
right to use a coat- of- arms have wearied of 
 this long distance propaganda, and at least 
 one of them has removed to this city to be on 
 the spot and reap the harvest of the first 
 enthusiasm he is hoping to arouse. 
 
 ^^So a new college of heraldry has come 
 into existence here, and its special purpose is 
 to trace the connection between American 
 families and their ancestors in England, or on 
 the Continent. The assurance is given that 
 nearly every family in this country has the 
 right to a coat- of -arms, and thus inferentially 
 may establish its due connection with some 
 family of England, or one of the Continental 
 countries. 
 
 ^'This much is practically guaranteed by 
 the latest of the heraldic establishments to 
 attempt to awaken American enthusiasm in 
 the subject. Its promises are deficient only 
 in their failure to make it certain to the 
 Americans interested in discovering their 
 relationship to English families, that their 
 new relatives will be just as glad to hear 
 of it as they are. Maybe they will be, but 
 there are as yet no colleges of heraldry in 
 England that make a specialty of discover- 
 
 12 
 
Benjamin Ball, 2nd 
 
 1786-1858 
 
ing American relatives on behalf of the 
 British families." 
 
 Apropos of the above, some individual of 
 what may be called in connection with this 
 case, one of the proletarian class, wrote an 
 indignant letter to the press denouncing our 
 new College of Heraldry, as a '^fungus factory 
 of shoddy lineage." He further suggested 
 that ^^^our first families' desist from a too 
 close scrutiny of their family history, lest 
 they discover (perish the thought) th^ bar 
 sinister boldly emblazoned on some of their 
 ancestral escutcheons." 
 
 Poor man ! Little did he reflect that one 
 of the most deeply rooted and powerful 
 factors in human nature, is self-conscious 
 superiority. Might as well try to reverse 
 the natural course of a Niagara ; might as 
 well try to appease the raging billows of 
 the ocean with a wave of the wand, as to 
 try to convince the individual who claims 
 representation in Burke^s Peerage, or the 
 Almanache-de-Gotha, that he who is de- 
 scended from a scavenger, or a hodcarrier, 
 is as *^good" as himself. If he were a 
 candidate for political office, he might admit 
 
 15 
 
it in the presence of an audience, but not 
 otherwise. Such is human nature. It has 
 always been so, and will ever be so, as long 
 as man lasts on this earth. 
 
 It is a debatable questi<m that merits 
 the serious consideration of the thoughtful, 
 whether this craze, or fad, or whatever other 
 name the reader may be pleased to term it, 
 that has lately seized the mind of almost 
 everybody who lays claim to family distinc- 
 tion, is strictly in consonance with the 
 institutions of the most intensely democratic 
 government that the world ever saw, or not. 
 
 We may be justified in asking ourselves 
 the question, whether the diligent pursuit of 
 genealogical study; the eager tracing of 
 family lines to an illustrious ancestry ; the 
 assumption of coats- of -arms in order to 
 establish family esprit de corps, are strictly 
 in harmony with the spirit and the insti- 
 tutions of a government, the very corner- 
 stone of which is based upon the theory of 
 abstract equality. 
 
 Who knows but that the '^ peerless leader," 
 the great ^'commoner," the '^self-sacrificing 
 patroit," appellations so near and dear to 
 
 16 
 
the heart of the genuine demagogue, may 
 not some time in the near future develop 
 a national issue based upon this ancestral 
 question, thereby endangering the ^^ stability 
 of our institutions." 
 
 It is no difficult matter to find ardent 
 ^^ champions of the people," ready to denounce 
 any ^' effete institution of the old world " that 
 threatens the social, as well as the political 
 equality of the American sovereign born 
 citizen. The "champion of the people" is 
 every ready to throw off his coat, open his 
 collar, and battle heroically for the rights of 
 the ''plain people," particularly if his own 
 political fortunes are at stake. He is ever 
 ready to act the part of David (with his 
 mouth), when the imaginary Gcliath appears. 
 To use a homely, but forcible expression, 
 ''he's right there every time." 
 
 Before closing the first part of this work, 
 the writer respectfully submits that the 
 views and sentiments contained therein, are 
 of sufficient weight and importance to merit 
 the serious consideration of the present as 
 well as the future social and political phi- 
 losophers of our country. 
 
 17 
 
PART SECOND. 
 
ANCESTRY 1)F THE BALL TRIBE 
 
 OF AMERICA. 
 
 TT would, indeed, be a herculean undertaking 
 to attempt to trace the many branches of 
 the Ball family in England, so many and so 
 varied are they. There are the Barkham 
 Balls, the Oxfordshire Balls, the Wiltshire 
 Balls, the Cheshire Balls, the Balls of Kent, 
 the Balls of London, and aclinfinitum, 
 
 Ireland furnishes her quota of the tribe in 
 the following branches, to wit : The Balls 
 of Youghal, the Balls of Fermanagh, the 
 Balls of Armagh, the Balls of Ardee, the Balls 
 of Shannon, and the Balls of St. Mary's 
 Parish, Dublin. 
 
 These Irish Balls are of English ancestry 
 and undoubtedly migrated to Ireland during 
 the first few centuries [ot the English ascend- 
 ancy. They have always been conspicuous 
 in the army and in the learned professions, 
 
 31 
 
and are strict adherents to the Crown and 
 the Estabhshed Church. 
 
 Reverting to the different branches of the 
 tribe in England, the first to claim attention 
 is that branch known as the *'Barkham 
 Balls," from the fact of their pretention to a 
 great antiquity. They claim a direct and 
 unbroken descent back to 1480. Some writers 
 go a little further and assert with confidence 
 that the tribe entered England during the 
 Roman Conquest under Julius Caesar (56 
 B. C). They fail to inform us whether the 
 original Ball was a Roman, a Greek, a 
 Spaniard, a Gaul, or what not, who may 
 have been a camp follower of Caesars army. 
 Possibly, he may have been a Barbarian 
 belonging to one of the uncivihzed nations 
 that Ca3sar conquered, previous to his in- 
 vasion of Britain. It is a notable fact that 
 Caesar makes no mention of a Ball in his 
 famous "Commentaries." 
 
 It is suggested that these learned and 
 painstaking genealogical writers ought to 
 have been satisfied to go back as far as 
 William the Conqueror ; but no, they must 
 "go William, at least a thousand better." 
 
 32 
 
These ^^Barkham Balls" have been the 
 cause of a great deal of confusion in the tribe 
 in this country, particularly that branch of 
 the tribe that located in Virginia. From all 
 accounts, it would seem that one of the 
 earliest Balls of Virginia visited England, 
 a ad while there proceeded to look up and 
 verify his family coat-of-arms and, to quote 
 an authority, ^^by accident examined the 
 book of visitations of Essex County, instead 
 of that of Northampton County, and conse- 
 quently copied data of the Barkham Balls, 
 whose genealogy begins in 1480, etc., and 
 discovering that the last name recorded of 
 that family was one William Ball, who lived 
 at Lincolns Inn, 1643, came to the conclu- 
 sion that this William and the William 
 who came to America about 1650 were 
 one and the same person. The searcher 
 neglected to find out whether or not the 
 Arms of the William of Lincoln's Inn were 
 the same as those used by his family. Had 
 he remembered to make this important 
 inquiry, many heated discussions might 
 have been averted amongst the members 
 of the present generations of Balls, as to 
 
 23 
 
their right to claim data as early as 
 1480." 
 
 The Rev. Horace E. Hay den, an eminent 
 authority, while collecting material some 
 years ago for his Virginia Genealogies, 
 ** discovered two entirely different coats- of - 
 arms, with the same genealogical account 
 appended to each. After much research, he 
 discovered that the different coats-of-arms 
 represented respectively the Barkham Balls 
 of Berkshire and the Balls of Northampton, 
 England." Thus we are indebted to the skill 
 and research of the Reverend gentleman 
 in straightening out the doings of this 
 ^^ earliest" blundering Ball. 
 
 As to the other branches of the tribe in 
 England, little is dictinctly known of them, 
 except as their names appear in Heraldry, 
 or on the Rolls of the Universities of Ox- 
 ford and Cambridge. 
 
 The majority of those who entered the 
 learned professions seem to have preferred 
 theology, for we read of ^^Rev. John Ball of 
 Oxfordshire, England, a Puritan of note, 
 born in 1585." A great many of the New 
 England tribe claim descent from this par- 
 
 24 
 
son. We also read that a ^* Crest, out of 
 the clouds, ppr., a demi-lion rampant, sable, 
 powdered with etoiles argent, holding a 
 globe, or," was added to the Arms of Eichard 
 Ball, Doctor of Divinity, son to Lawrence 
 Ball of Northampton, in 1613. Fuller, the 
 great English divine, ex tolls the Rev. John 
 Ball of Kent for his learning and piety. 
 There are several other names of the tribe 
 mentioned in connection with the Univer- 
 sity of Oxford. 
 
 The English Revolution of 1642, like all 
 internecine wars, evidently caused a division, 
 religious as well as political, in the various 
 branches of the Ball family in England. 
 Like the great war of Secession in our own 
 country, not only were communities divided, 
 but father against son and brother against 
 brother faced each other in deadly combat 
 in the opposing armies of King Charles 
 and Cromwell. It is to this religio-political 
 war that we may trace the causes that led 
 to the emigration of the ancestors of the 
 Balls of New England, as well as those of 
 Virginia. 
 
 In order to explain to the reader more 
 
 25 
 
thoroughly, who may be unacquainted with 
 EngUsh History, the causes that led to the 
 English Revolution, the writer deems it 
 necessary to digress a little from the sub- 
 ject matter. 
 
 From the time of the reformation and 
 the overthrow of the Papacy by Henry the 
 VIII, there had grown up a number of 
 religious sects, the results more or less of 
 individual interpretation of the Scriptures, 
 chief among whom were the Puritans. 
 
 Hume, the great English historian, divides 
 the Puritans into three classes, which were 
 as follows : the Pohtical Puritans, the Puri- 
 tans in Church Discipline, and the Doctrinal 
 Puritans. 
 
 The first may be classed as religio-political 
 
 demagogues, ever ready to take an advantage 
 
 that would advance their political fortunes. 
 
 The second were learned theologians, known 
 
 to fame as the authors of the Westminster 
 
 Confession, the fundamental creed of modern 
 
 Presbyterianism. The third were speculative, 
 
 rather than literal in their interpretation of 
 
 the Scriptures. They were all followers of 
 
 Calvin, rather than of Luther. They asserted 
 
 36 
 
Louis Ball 
 1«15-18U5 
 
the doctrine of predestination, free will, 
 grace, etc., etc., as expounded by Calvin in 
 his '* Institutes of Christianity," with a 
 narrow-minded fanaticism that has seldom, 
 if ever, been equalled. 
 
 They were violently opposed to Episcopacy, 
 the prerogatives of which were asserted with 
 equal pertinacity by William Laud, the 
 famous Archbishop of Canterbury and Pri- 
 mate of all England. 
 
 On the other hand, it should be remembered 
 that the Church of Eome had ceased to exist 
 as a visible institution in England, having 
 been supplanted by the ^'Established Church," 
 yet many of the rites, ceremonies, and, for 
 all practical purposes, the church government 
 with the exception of Papal supremacy) of 
 the ^ormer were retained by the latter. To 
 the casual observer, there were but little 
 difference in the two institutions, with the 
 exceptions, that the mass, the confessional, 
 and the sacrament of the eucharist (tran- 
 substantiation), were eliminated from the 
 Established Church. 
 
 Now, if there was any one thing on this 
 earth that the Puritans detested more than 
 
 29 
 
another, it was prelacy. They never could 
 endure spiritual supremacy in the form of 
 a prelacy. 
 
 However contradictory it may seem, yet 
 it is a fact that, while claiming to be Chris- 
 tians, with all their fanatical zeal, they were 
 followers of the Prophets, rather than of 
 the Apostles. The whole superstructure of 
 their theology was based rather upon the 
 old than the new dispensation. In the 
 aggressive propagation of their faith ; in 
 their peculiar oral expressions ; in the cant 
 Scriptural phrases they fairly reveled in, 
 they assumed an aspect that drew down 
 upon them not only the contempt, but the 
 hatred of the churchmen. The churchmen 
 looked upon the Puritans as traitors to both 
 God and man ; the Puritans looked upon 
 the churchmen as followers of Antichrist. 
 
 The acts more than anything else that 
 led to the Revolution were what is known 
 in English history as the acts and proceed- 
 ings of the Star Chamber Council, presided 
 over and dominated by Laud. By the acts 
 of this council the Puritans, as well as other 
 dissentients, were compelled to conform to 
 
 30 
 
the Established Church, or suffer '* certain 
 pains and penalties." We can imagine what 
 these pains and penalties were in an age of 
 intense religious hatred and persecution. It 
 should be added, that the last straw that 
 broke the camel's back was Charles' des- 
 potic attempt to rule without a Parliament. 
 
 It was from 1620 to 1642, that the majority 
 of the Puritans, the ancestors of the Balls 
 of New England, among others, emigrated 
 to New England to escape persecution 'for 
 conscience sake," as they were pleased to 
 term it. 
 
 It would seem that when once they estab- 
 lished their theocracy in New England, this 
 cant phrase ^^ conscience- sake," had quite a 
 different meaning to what it had in England. 
 While they were willing to enjoy all that it 
 implied, they were not quite willing to ex- 
 tend its beneficence to those who were not 
 of the ^^ elect." Woe betide the Catholic, 
 the Quaker, or any one else of the '^ungodly" 
 who might be detected in the henious crime 
 of asserting his liberty of conscience ! He 
 would be made to feel very quickly the 
 gentle influence of the pillory or the whip- 
 
 31 
 
ping post. Witness the cruel persecution 
 and banishment of Roger Williams and his 
 harmless but devoted band of Quakers. Of 
 all species of tyranny, a religious tyranny 
 is the most odious. 
 
 To use plain language, the liberty of con- 
 science of the New England Puritan was a 
 misnomer, a fraud, a deceit, and a hypo- 
 criti al pretense. 
 
 W^e may remark, that the sumptuary leg- 
 islation of many of our States to this dav 
 can be traced to the influence of the New 
 England theocracy of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury. 
 
 It was from 1649, the date of the fall of 
 the monarchy, to 1660, the date of its restor- 
 ation, that the principal emigration of the 
 Cavaliers (adherents of the Crown and the 
 EstabHshed Church) took place. It was dur- 
 ing this period that Colonel William Ball 
 of Millenbeck, the progenitor of the Balls 
 of Virginia, came to America. 
 
 The reader will observe, that the earliest 
 Balls to emigrate to America settled in 
 New England, as the result of their perse- 
 cution in England. He will also observe 
 
 32 
 
that, after the overthrow of the monarchy 
 and the establishment of the commonwealth, 
 many Cavaliers emigrated to Virginia, the 
 result of the persecution by Cromwell. This 
 leads us to the conclusion that, while the 
 Ball tribe in America are of one ancestral 
 origin in England, yet they championed 
 conflicting religious and political views, 
 thereby dividing into hostile camps in the 
 internecine wars of the seventeenth century. 
 This view is strengthened by the fact that 
 the earlier Balls of New England were Puri- 
 tans, whilst those of Virginia were Cavaliers. 
 As a further proof of this view, it- may be 
 observed that the only difference of the coat- 
 of-arms of the Balls of New England and 
 that of the Balls of Virginia is, that the 
 former is surmounted with a ^^stag trippant 
 ppr," whilst that of the latter is surmounted 
 with a "demi-lion rampant." 
 
 There is no doubt that the various branches 
 jf the Ball family in England were ^'people 
 of parts," to use a familiar phrase in vogue 
 in those days. They belonged to the great 
 middle class, that has been — as it is to-day — 
 the brains, the life and the glory of England 
 
 33 
 
for the last five hundred years. It is from 
 this class that she has drawn her poets, 
 her philosophers, her statesmen and her 
 heroes. It is to this class more than to any- 
 other, that she owes her pre-eminence among 
 the nations of the earth. 
 
 i 
 
 34 
 
PART THIRD. 
 
COLONEL AVILLIAM BALL, AND HIS 
 DESCENDANTS, IN VIRGINIA. 
 
 A S stated in part second of this work, the 
 "^^ cause of Colonel Ball's emigration to 
 Virginia was the downfall of the English 
 monarchy and the execution of King 
 Charles, though the alluring prospects of a 
 new country might have influenced him to 
 a certain extent. We are justified in the 
 assumption that the English Revolution had 
 more to do than any thing else with his 
 departure from England, from the fact 
 that he was undoubtedly a Eoyalist and a 
 Churchman. That he was a churchman and 
 a zealous supporter of the Church of Eng- 
 land in Virginia (to quote an authority) — • 
 * * is shown by the fact that he was a mem- 
 ber of the committee appointed to arrange 
 for ;the support and government of the 
 
 37 
 
Church in Virginia, and we find that but a 
 short time elapsed after coming to Virginia,, 
 before he was made Warden of Christ 
 Church in Lancaster County, in company 
 with his friend and neighbor, John Wash- 
 ington." 
 
 There is very Kttle of a definite character 
 known of Colonel Ball's English ancestry, 
 or even of the exact place of his birth. 
 One excellent authority suggests the ^'prob- 
 ability" that he was born in America, andi 
 went to England for his wife ; but it is i 
 only a probabihty, and has no foundation 
 in fact. Another authority states that he 
 was a younger brother of the noted John 
 Ball, of Kent. Still another asserts that 
 he reluctantly served in the Eoyal Army, 
 and was in the battles of Marston Moore, 
 and Naseby, and that his estate, which 
 was considerable, was much injured when 
 General Fairfax quelled an insurrection in 
 Kent. 
 
 It is the general opinion of the majority 
 of the authorities that he was born in 
 Northampton, England. This opinion has 
 a very strong foundation based upon the 
 
 38 
 
fact that his coat- of -arms are the same as 
 those of the Balls of Northampton. 
 
 It is to be regretted that so little is known 
 of Colonel Ball and his immediate descend- 
 ants in Virginia, as his granddaughter — 
 *Hhe lowland beauty" — Mary Ball Washing- 
 ton, was the mother of the ^'Father of his 
 Country." 
 
 Had the earlier biographers of Washington 
 devoted a fraction of the skill and industry 
 to the research of his maternal as they did 
 to his paternal ancestors, we would have a 
 more intimate acquaintance with the true 
 source of the elements which gave him 
 fame. The very majesty of the name Wash- 
 ington, coupled with the unwritten law of 
 primogeniture, giving precedence to the male 
 over the female line, seems to have so 
 dazzled them, that they lost sight of his 
 true qualities in an effort to rear a demi- 
 god. 
 
 One English admirer goes so far as to 
 assert that the Washington s were directly 
 descended from a King (one of the Edwards) 
 of England, as if that would enhance his 
 greatness. 
 
 39 
 
The whole truth of the matter is. the 
 EngHsh ancestry of the Washingtons is as 
 little, if not less, known than that of the 
 Balls ; nor did they play any conspicuous 
 part in the colonial history of Virginia, 
 except that one or two of them were dele- 
 gates to the House of Burgesses. They 
 were simply "gentlemen planters" — that 
 was all. 
 
 The erroneous ideas that formerly pre- 
 vailed relative to Washington are to be 
 attributed to Jared Sparks, more than to 
 any one else of the earlier writers. Like 
 his contemporary, John S. C. Abbott, he 
 was a clergyman, and seems to have thought 
 that the true mission of the historian was 
 to develop "moral ideals," however at 
 variance with the facts they may be. 
 
 He not only rewrote the writings of 
 Washington, and "dressed them up," as it 
 were [it is a well-known fact that Wash- 
 ington possessed but a limited education], 
 but almost succeeded in making him scale 
 the dizzy heights of sanctity. 
 
 The stories of the hatchet and the cherry 
 tree ; the silent prayers and pious vigils — 
 
 40 
 
all of which are very nice reading for very 
 nice little boys and girls — originated with 
 Sparks, in his pamphlets, in reply to Lord 
 Mahon. While these pious fictions are ex- 
 tremely edifying, the fact that they are not 
 true history should not be lost sight of. 
 
 The truth of the matter is, Washington 
 was a product of his environment, and, like 
 all great men, possessed a whole lot of virile 
 human nature, as witness his explosion 
 when Lee blundered so lamentably at the 
 Battle of Monmouth. If we are to believe 
 eye witnesses to that famous scene, the 
 very atmosphere was blue from vigorous, 
 old fashioned profanity uttered by him on 
 that occasion. 
 
 If we can believe Adams, Jefferson, Madi- 
 son (very good witnesses), and others, he 
 could, when ''out of sorts," use language 
 not usually heard in well-regulated Sunday 
 Schools. 
 
 That he was a churchman, is quite true ; 
 that he was a saint, is not true. That he 
 was a very great man, no one of intelligence 
 for a moment will deny. That he possessed 
 his defects probably fewer than any other 
 
 41 
 
hero of modern times, there is ample proof, 
 the hero worshippers to the contrary not- 
 withstanding. 
 
 The most distinguishing features of his 
 character, were his well-balanced mind, his 
 admirable judgment, his persistency under 
 adverse conditions, his patience, his fortitude, 
 and above all, his incorruptible patriotism. 
 
 To return to the subject of Colonel Ball, 
 and his descendants it may be stated that 
 he, Richard Lee, John Carter, Isaac AUer- 
 ton, and John and Lawrence Washington, 
 founders of some of the first families ('' F. F. 
 V's ") of Virginia, came to Virginia in 1650. 
 
 Colonel Ball settled in Lancaster County, 
 on the Corotoman River, a branch of the 
 Rappahannock, and called his home ''Mil- 
 lenbeck. " 
 
 ''That Colonel WilHam Ball was a man 
 of consequence is shown by the prominent 
 position he soon occupied in his adopted 
 country, and the fact that he brought with 
 him a handsome copy, on parchment, of 
 the coat- of -arms granted his ancestors, the 
 Balls of Northamptonshire, Cheshire and 
 Kent, in 1613," says an authority. That he 
 
 42 
 
Julia A. (Ball) Jacoby 
 
was a conspicuous person of note is further 
 attested by the fact that he was Presiding 
 Magistrate and Colonel Commandant of 
 the county ; John Carter being Lieutenant- 
 Colonel. 
 
 Before coming to Virginia, Colonel William 
 Ball married Hannah Atherall, of Burgh, 
 Suffolk, England, by whom he had four 
 children : Richard, William, Joseph and 
 Hannah. Richard, the eldest son, died in 
 infancy. 
 
 Captain William (2) Ball, second son of 
 Colonel William Ball, married Margaret 
 Downman, daughter of Raleigh Downman, 
 of '^ Morattico," in Lancaster County, and 
 in his time became Master of '^Millenbeck.'' 
 Margaret Downman was his second wife. 
 He first married Miss Harris, of "Bay 
 View," in Northumberland County. There 
 were no children by the first marriage ; 
 there were nine by the second wife. 
 
 First — William (3) Ball, who married in 
 1744 Hannah Beale, by whom he had six 
 children : William, George, Sarah, Judith, 
 Ellen and Hannah. 
 
 45 
 
Second — Captain Richard Ball married 
 Miss Young of Northumberland County and 
 settled in Lancaster County. There were 
 four children by this marriage : Sarah, Mar- 
 garet, Hannah and Esther. 
 
 Third — Major James Ball, of ''Bewdly," 
 married (1) Eliza Howson, (2) Mary (Conway) 
 Dangerfield, (3) Mary Anne (Bertrand) Bal- 
 lendine. By his first wife James had three 
 children : Anne, Elizabeth and Eliza. There 
 were no children by the third marriage, 
 but his second wife had ten : Mary, Frances, 
 Eve, Jesse, James, Edwin, Jeduthum, Mary, 
 Sinah and Sarah. 
 
 i^oi^r^^— Captain Joseph Ball married Miss 
 Spencer and settled in Northumberland 
 County. He had five children : Spencer, 
 Eichard, Sarah, Joseph and William. 
 
 Fifth — Captain George Ball married (1) 
 Miss Haynie, (2) Grace Waddy. He also 
 settled in Northumberland County. He had 
 no children by his first wife, but his second 
 wife had eight : John, David, Captain 
 George, Jr., Joseph, Richard, Sarah, Harris 
 
 46 
 
Downman and Grace. Captain George 
 and Captain Joseph Ball were the heads 
 of the Northumberland branch of the Ball 
 family. 
 
 Sixth — Samuel, of whom we will discuss 
 more extendedly in Part Four, as he is 
 the head of that branch of the Ball 
 family that it is intended this work shall 
 exploit. 
 
 Seventh — David, twin brother of Stretch- 
 ley, born September 14, 1686, died Decem- 
 ber 24, 1732, unmarried. 
 
 Eighth — Stretchley, twin brother of David, 
 died in infancy. 
 
 Ninth — Margaret, only daughter and last 
 
 child of Captain William Ball, ^^Gent," 
 
 married Raleigh Downman, son of Raleigh 
 
 and Travers Downman, of Lancaster 
 
 County. There were five children from this 
 
 marriage, two of whom married cousins 
 
 Ball — William married Ellen Ball, and Raleigh 
 
 married Frances Ball ; Christopher, Charles 
 
 and Elisha. 
 
 . 47 
 

 Colonel Joseph Ball, of ''Epping Forest," 
 third child of Colonel William Ball, and 
 grandfather of George Washington, married 
 first a Miss Romney, an English woman, 
 by whom he had one son, Joseph (2) Ball, 
 of Epping Forest, and four daughters, 
 Esther, Hannah, Anne, and Elizabeth. 
 
 Esther married Raleigh Chinn, Hannah 
 married Raleigh Travers, Anne married Ed 
 win Conway, and Elizabeth married Joseph 
 Carnegie. Anne (Ball) Conway is the an- 
 cestress of President Madison. Joseph (2 
 Ball married, in England, Frances Ravens- 
 croft, by whom he had several children, all 
 of whom died in infancy except one daugh- 
 ter, Frances, who married Raleigh Down- 
 man, of ^^Morattico," of Lancaster County. 
 Hence the male line of Joseph (1) Ball, of 
 Epping Forest became extinct with his son 
 Joseph (2) Ball. 
 
 Joseph (1) Ball married, the second time, 
 Mrs. Johnston, nee Montague, by whom he 
 had one child, Mary, who married Augustine 
 Washington, of ^'Wakefield," in Westmore- 
 land County, Virginia. From this marriage 
 there were six children, as follows : 
 
 48 
 
First — George; the illustrious ^^ pater pa- 
 tricBy'" who married Martha (Dandridge 
 Parke) Custis. 
 
 Second — Betty; who married Colonel Field- 
 ing Lewis. 
 
 Third — Samuel ; married (1) Jane Champ, 
 (2) Mildred Thornton, (3) Lucy Chapman. 
 
 Fourth — Augustine ; married Hannah Bush- 
 rod. 
 
 Fifth — Charles ; married Mildred Thornton. 
 Sixth — Mildred ; died young. 
 
 The fourth and last child of Colonel 
 William Ball of Millenbeck, Hannah, mar- 
 ried David Fox. There were several chil- 
 dren by this marriage. Her eldest daughter, 
 Elizabeth, married Judutham Ball, son of 
 Major James Ball, of Bewdly, from which 
 marriage the Burgess Ball line has sprung. 
 
 It may not be inappropriate to state that 
 the Balls of Colonial Virginia were people 
 of consequence, as reckoned in those days, 
 and may be classed as belonging to the 
 
 49 
 
'^ first families of Virginia." They were 
 closely connected, by marriage and other- 
 wise, with the Washingtons, Lees, Carters, 
 Downmans, Spencers, Burgesses, and other 
 famous families of Virginia. Robert E. Lee, 
 the great Confederate Commander, was ma- 
 ternally descended from the Balls of Epping 
 Forest. 
 
 By way of explanation, it should be stated 
 that the Balls followed the Enghsh custom 
 of the '^ upper classes" of conferring names 
 on their places of family residence. Thus 
 we have Millenbeck, Bewdly, Epping For- 
 est, Ditchly, Coan, and Crestfield, founded 
 by younger sons, from whence the different 
 lines of the Balls derive their respective 
 names. 
 
 These names generally represented some 
 great plantation ^^ stocked" with a goodly 
 number of ^^ niggers" and all the appur- 
 tenances that in those days were deemed 
 necessary to make a real gentleman com- 
 fortable and happy. 
 
 . From close scrutiny, it would seem that 
 the Balls were addicted to the reprehensible 
 habit of intermarriage with cousins — caused, 
 
 50 
 
it is presumed, by a dearth in outside mar- 
 riageable material not up to the proper 
 standard . 
 
 Another noticeable feature of theirs was 
 the conferring of names of deceased children 
 on younger children of the same family. 
 
 51 
 
PART FOURTH. 
 
SAMUEL BALL, OF CULPEPER, AND 
 HIS DESCENDANTS. 
 
 TN the commencement of the fourth and 
 last part of this work, the writer deems it 
 necessary to place Samuel Ball, of Culpeper, 
 Virginia, as the progenitor of that numerous 
 tribe, both male and female, who are in- 
 habitants of the Western and Southwestern 
 states. 
 
 It would seem that Samuel, like many of 
 his descendants '* struck out for himself" 
 early in life, and located at Culpeper, Vir- 
 ginia. He is the first of the earlier Balls 
 to migrate any considerable distance from 
 the ancestral home, "Millenbeck." A refer- 
 ence to the map of Virginia, will show 
 that Culpeper County is quite a distance 
 from Lancaster County. 
 
 Of the personality and character of Sam- 
 
 55 
 
uel Ball, very little is known except what 
 has been gleaned from tombstones, church 
 records, and other musty sources of infor- 
 mation. 
 
 In the records and correspondence of the 
 earlier Balls, very little is mentioned of him, 
 on account, it is assumed, of his isolation 
 from the rest of the family; Culpeper be- 
 ing, as stated before, quite a distance from 
 Millenbeck. 
 
 According to the record, Samuel Ball, like 
 his ancestors, was a strict adherent to the 
 Crown and the Established Church. We 
 read that he was *'one of the first vestry 
 of ht. Marks Parish, Culpeper County, Jan- 
 uary 1, 1731. In 1751, James Pendleton 
 was elected vestryman in place of Samuel 
 Ball, deceased." We further read that 
 William Ball (son of Samuel) and Henry 
 Field, Jr., '^having in the court of Culpeper 
 County, taken the oath to his Majesty and 
 subscribed the test, and in the vestry sub- 
 scribed to be conformable to the doctrine 
 a,nd discipline of the Church of England, 
 as by law established, took their places as 
 vestrymen accordingly." 
 
 56 
 
These two were made church wardens 
 the ensuing year, and William Ball for 
 the year of 1Y76. He was also vestryman 
 in 1785. 
 
 The authorities state that Samuel Ball 
 was the sixth child of Captain William 
 Ball, of Millenbeck, and was born there in 
 1686, and married Anne Tayloe in 1717, 
 and moved to Culpeper after his marriage 
 and died there in 1751. 
 
 By his marriage to Anne Tayloe, there 
 were issue as follows : 
 
 First — William. There is no further rec- 
 ord of William. 
 
 Second — Thomas ; married Mildred Down- 
 man, and by her had Anne, who married 
 Thomas Danneran, and by him had Mary- 
 Washington, who married Major William 
 Carmack. 
 
 Third — Benjamin (1); married Ann Macin- 
 tosh, a lady of Scottish extraction and by 
 her had nine children. 
 
 Fourth— Fdiiij. No further record of Patty. 
 
 57 
 
The nine children of Benjamin (1) Ball 
 were as follows : 
 
 i^Vs^— Millie ; married a Mr. Cooley. No 
 further record of Millie. 
 
 Second— Hannah ; married John Morning. 
 No further record of Hannah. 
 
 Third — Margaret ; married Robert Good. 
 No further record of Margaret. 
 
 Fourth — William ; married a Miss Singleton. 
 No further record of William. 
 
 Fifth— horns ; married Lucy Singleton. No 
 further record of Louis. 
 
 Sixth — Rubin; married Mary Harden. No 
 further record of Rubin. 
 
 Seventh — James ; married, but wife un- 
 known to the writer. No further record of 
 James. 
 
 All the above children were born in 
 Virginia. 
 
 58 
 
Henry F. Jacoby 
 
Eighth — Benjamin (2); married (1) Margaret 
 Mourning, (2) Clairisa Dimmick. Benjamin 
 and his descendants will receive special 
 attention further on. 
 
 Ninth — Allen ; married three times. Who 
 the names of the fortunate ladies were, the 
 deponent saieth not. 
 
 Benjamin (2) and Allen were born in 
 Kentucky. 
 
 Benjamin Ball (1) and family, in company 
 with Daniel Boone — famous in American 
 history and romance — emigrated to the 
 ''dark and bloody ground," and located 
 near Boonsborough, Ky, in 1780. To re- 
 cite the hardships, trials, and tribulations of 
 the "founders of the State of Kentucky," 
 would fill a separate volume. They encoun- 
 tered all the dangers and perils incident to 
 the invasion and occupation of a wild 
 country dominated by the merciless savage 
 Indian. To use the picturesque language of 
 Felix Grundy, ''death was in almost every 
 bush, and every thicket concealed an am- 
 buscade." 
 
 There is a family tradition that Benjamin 
 
 61 
 
Ball (1) was a man of note in his day, and 
 that he established the first mill in the 
 Territory of Kentucky. The tradition insists 
 that it was a saw, grist, and paper mill ; a 
 sort of combination establishment. 
 
 Benjamin Ball (2) was born May 17, 1786, 
 near Boonsborough, Ky., and died in 1858, in 
 Missouri. He married (1) Margaret Mourn- 
 ing, of Boonsborough, Ky. The issue of this 
 union were as follows : 
 
 First — Nelson ; born 1807 ; married Mary 
 Huff am, of Henry County, Ind., in 1827. 
 There were born to this union eight chil- 
 dren ; all deceased but two, Mrs. Adeline 
 Stivers and Mrs. Sarah Hoffer. 
 
 Second — Isaac ; born 1809 ; married Jane 
 Gould, of Edwardsville, 111. Six children 
 were born to this union, five of whom are 
 living. One, Mrs. Linda Henckell, is known 
 to the writer only. 
 
 Third — James ; born 1811 ; married Nancy 
 Wise, of Carrington, Ky., in 1846. There 
 were born to this union two children; both 
 deceased. 
 
 62 
 
Fourth— Flemon ; born 1813 ; married Nancy 
 Carroll, of Mississippi, in 1838. There were 
 born to this union four children ; all deceased 
 but one, Mrs. Allen. 
 
 Fifth — Louis ; born 1815 ; married Jane 
 Griggsby, of Blandensville, Ills., in 1853. 
 There were born to this union four children, 
 two deceased and two living, Mrs. Jennie 
 Livingston and Mrs. Hester Buose. 
 
 All the above children of Benjamin Ball 
 (2) were 'born in Kentucky. His wife 
 Margaret, having died, he removed to Henry 
 County, Ind., in 1823, and there married 
 Clairisa Dimmick, a native of Connecticut, 
 in 1828. The issue of this union were as 
 follows : 
 
 First— Julia, A. Ball ; born October 13, 1828, 
 in Henry County, Ind.; married Samuel R. 
 Jacoby, of Pennsylvania-Dutch and Virginia 
 extraction, at Bloomington, Ills., November 
 26, 1846. There were born to this union 
 seven children, as follows : 
 
 (1.) Adolphus D. Jacoby; born 1847; 
 died 1848. 
 
 63 
 
(2.) Henry F. Jacoby ; born April 9, 
 1850, at Bloomington, Ills.; married Caro- 
 line U. Brice, November 5, 1881, at New 
 York City. There was born to this union, 
 one child, Henrietta F., born November 
 19, 1882. 
 
 (3.) Peter C. Jacoby; born at Blooming- 
 ton, Ills., October 1^, 1851 ; married Bertha 
 Sernam, at Alva, 0. T., in 1895. The issue 
 of this union is as follows: Richard M., and 
 Samuel R. 
 
 (1.) Orren B. Jacoby ; born January 4, 
 1857, at Bloomington, Ills.; married Mariah 
 Lentz (deceased), March 2, 1889, in Colorado. 
 There was born to this union, one child, 
 Samuel R.; died July 23, 1901, at Cripple 
 Creek, Col., age 11 years. 
 
 (5. ) Abraham L. Jacoby ; born February 
 5, 1861, at Mount Ayr, Iowa ; married 
 Mary L. Denhart, at Lincoln, Neb., March 
 18, 1888. There are issue of this union six 
 children, as follows : Elmer, born in 1892, 
 at Lincoln, Neb.; Nettie, born January 12, 
 1895, at Mount Ayr, Iowa; Edith M., born 
 September 26, 1897, at Mount Ayr, Iowa ; 
 Dail D., born July 20, 1899, at Mount Ayr, 
 
 64 
 
Iowa; Samuel R, born November 29, 1900, 
 at Knowlton, Iowa, died in infancy. 
 
 (6.) Iretus W. Jacoby; born September 9, 
 1868, at Mount Ayr, Iowa ; married Jennie 
 Dimmick, May 1, 1890, at Lincoln, Neb. 
 There are issue of this union four children, 
 as follows : Harley N., born January 9, 1891, 
 in Colorado; Henry F., born October 14, 
 1896, at Lincoln, Neb.; Julia L., born Feb- 
 ruary 4, 1899, at Lincoln, Neb.; Nelhe M., 
 born June 18, 1900, at Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 (7.) Edith M. Jacoby; born July 10, 1870, 
 at Lincoln, Neb.; died October 13, 1870. 
 
 Second — Angeline Ball ; born October 23, 
 1829, in Henry County, Ind. ; married James 
 Albury, July 10, 1850, at Bloomington, Ills. 
 Both deceased. 
 
 Third — Lyvia Ball, born January 13, 1831, 
 in Henry County, Ind. ; married Henry 
 Broadwater, August 15, 1850, at Blooming- 
 ton, Ills. There were born to this union 
 nine children, six of whom are dead. The 
 three living are as follows : 
 
 (1.) Isaac ; born 1856, at Mount Ayr, 
 Iowa. 
 
 65 
 
(2.) Albert P.; born 1859, at Mount Ayr, 
 Iowa. 
 
 (3.) Milton 0.; born at Bloomington, Ills.; 
 
 date of birth unknown to the writer. 
 
 Fourth— l^lYiTSi Ball; born June 23, 1832, 
 in Henry County, Ind. ; died in 1866, at 
 Le Roy, Ills. 
 
 Fifth— Benjaimm F. Ball ; born March 23, 
 1834, in Henry County, Ind.; married Louisa 
 Thurber, at Mount Ayr, Iowa, in 185Y ; died 
 at Mount Ayr, Iowa, in 1857. 
 
 Sixth — Orren Ball ; born September 10, 
 1837, in Henry County, Ind.; died 1856, at 
 Bloomington, Ills. 
 
 Thus ends one line of the great Ball tribe, 
 and the writer feels that, considering the 
 adverse circumstances under which he has 
 worked, he has rendered the subject the 
 best treatment at his disposal. 
 
 The Balls, both in the male, as well as in 
 the female line, are very numerous all over 
 the United States, and it is suggested, that 
 if fecundity adds distinction to a name, 
 then the name Ball is certainly in the race 
 
 66 
 
 4> 
 
 «D 
 
 «5 
 
with Brown, Jones, Smith, Robinson, et al. 
 and deserves a niche in the Temple of Fame. 
 In order to simplify matters, the writer 
 deems it necessary to recapitulate the line 
 of descent of those for whom this was 
 written. It is as follows: 
 
 Colonel William Ball, of Millenbeck. 
 Captain William Ball, of Millenbeck. 
 Samuel Ball, of Culpeper. 
 Benjamin Ball (1), of Boonsborough. 
 Benjamin Ball (2), of Boonsborough. 
 
 References : 
 
 Chambers' Encyclopedia. 
 
 Life of Washington, by Norman Hapgood. 
 
 History of England, by Lord Macauley. 
 
 Life of Oliver Cromwell, by Theodore 
 Roosevelt. 
 
 Virginia Genealogies, by Rev. Horace E. 
 Hayden. 
 
 Colonel William Ball, and his Decendants, 
 by Miss Emma S. Yerby. 
 
 *^ Our Journal," published by International 
 Ball Union. 
 
 67 
 
^oo^ 
 
 
 ^° ^"^^ '^^ 
 
 
 
 
 "^'e'^^^.* ^ 
 
 o » t. 
 
 •^oo^ 
 
 ' V 4-. 
 
 
 
 ^00^ 
 
 
 .<^' 
 
 *^* v"©- </ ^ 
 
 
 o'^ . 
 
 o 
 
 > 
 
 - ^-^^^/ ^^^ ^-. ^^ 
 
 o • i 
 
 '^ 0* 
 
 •/ 
 ,*''.' 
 
 
 

 
 
 V ' o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 -7^ 
 
 .<^ 
 
 %. ''.~^oV^«^ 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 y • o. 
 
 ^.. 
 
 ' A^ 
 
 .V 
 
 -^Jj^ 
 
 ^, 
 
 * 
 
 
 A 
 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 \' 
 
 > 
 
 S 
 
 0' 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 rO 
 
 ° " ° ^ <^^ 
 
 -l^xA- 
 
 
 
 J.OO^ 
 
 o , , 
 
 
 .0' 
 
 <^. 
 
 
 O N O 
 
 ^^ 
 
 V 
 
 0"' 
 
 d^. 
 
 o V/' 
 
 
 
 
 L ' S 
 
 .0 
 
 ,^ 
 
 " o ^ o* 
 
 ,v 
 
 OOBBS BROS. 
 
 LIBRARV BINDING 
 
 APR 81 
 
 ST. AUGUSTINE 
 FLA. 
 
 32084 ; 
 
 » «:■ 
 
 ■■'7^ 
 
 ^ O' 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 <- 
 
 
IBRARY OF CONOR 
 
 ESS 
 
 021 549 314 3 
 

 |- -^ ti m m u %i m ir w k M' W