NORWALK
 

3/1
 

H O ME -LOT  X X X L.
MATTHEW   MARVIN, Jr.

As the proprietor of this home-lot has, necessarily as well as naturally, name-con¬
nection with his father, Matthew Marvin'"'-, of home-lot x, reference is made to this latter
home-lot description on page 150. From Matthew ^Marvin, Jr., of the home-lot under
treatment directly descend the 1896 " Marvin Brothers" of East Norwalk. Samuel Mar¬
vin"*'-, (Representative to General Court) son of ]\Iatthew Marvin^''- or Jr., had a son !Mat-
thew, born 1702. This son married Elizabeth Clark (see pages 151-2-3), and had Ozias,
born Jan. 29, 1737, who married Nov. 26, 1761, Sarah, daughter of Joseph Lockwood.
To Capt. Ozias and Sarah Marvin was born, Dec. 11, 1772, a son (named for his grand¬
father), Joseph Lockwood Marvin, who was the grandfather of the present brothers J. R.
and W. E. Marvin, whose line runs thus :

Gen.       I.—Hon. Matthew ]Marvin"'-

II.—Matthew^''- and Mary Marvin.
III.—Samuel and Hannah (Platt) Marvin.
IV—Matthew and Elizabeth (Clark) :\Iarvin.
V —Ozias and Sarah (Lockwood) ^Slarvin.
"VI.—Joseph L. and Clarissa (Meeker) Marvin.
"     VII.—William and Amanda (Raymond) Marvin.
..   VIII.—Josiah R. and William E. Marvin.

(See jiages 151 and 1,^2).

HO ME-LO T   XXXII.

DANIEL   KELLOGG.

This settler has Norwalk registry in 1655. He came, it is probable, either at or
about the time of the arrival of the other settlers, and seems to have been a splendid
specimen of physical development (see note page 273). He had been in Norwalk a few
years when  he married, about  1661, Bridget, sister of John  Bouton'^'- of Norwalk.     His
 

Ham, w-as son of  Enos, who was son of Nathan'st-,      origin.    Richard, the father, appeared first  in   that
who was son of Henrv, who was son of  Richard and   i   portion of the New Vork province near to which the
 

Elizabeth (De Bois) Lounsbury, the settlers. Mon¬
mouth Lounsbury2d. (son of Monmouth'st.), and his
sister Elizabeth (Mrs. Phineas Waterbury) were  gr.-
 

Norwalk Beldens, in after years, planted themselves
He removed to Rye as early as 1672, where he owned
a no mean slice of the territory (Rye was at one time
 

nephew   and   niece  of   Henrv.   from   whom   Nathan   I   a part of Fairfield County, Conn.,) which was a be-

Lounsbury^d.   more    immediately    sprang.       Henry   '   longing of the Sachem  Ponus, of the Ponus \Veku-

Lounsbury, who   married   Mercy,  born   October ,30,      wuhm, Canaan Parish, and which was probably named

1690, daughter of John and Hannah (Mead) Scofield,   I   for that chieftan, " Peningoe Neck".    He then went

was also the more immediate Lounsbury foreparent      to Stamford, where his descendants have registration,

of the Broadway,  N. V., Fitch Brothers, mentioned   '           "Louns" or Lounds is reputed to signify seclu-

in the text.         '                                                                      !   sion, shelter, serenity, and its suffix "bury ", a table-

The Lounsbury familv is claimed to be of Scotch      elevation or height-level.