Samuel Bradford and William Bradford - Lower Delmarva Bradfords

Samuel Bradford and William Bradford (d.c.1810)
of Worcester County, Maryland
Page 1 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Contents
1. (S1) Samuel Bradford 3
2. (T1) William Bradford (d.c.1810) – Son of Samuel Bradford? 33
3. Citations 45
Page 2 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

S1. Samuel Bradford
The starting point for research on Samuel Bradford of Worcester County, Md., is Bradford Descendants, compiled, written
and published by Vance and Margaret Bradford, but really the combined effort of many of Samuel’s descendants who
contributed knowledge, documents, pictures, and lore to the effort. Over twenty years after its publication, Samuel’s origins
remain a mystery, although much more is known about him now than was known then. In my attempts to find out where
Samuel came from, I ended up discovering more about his life than I had thought possible. Samuel appeared in numerous
records in Worcester County, and when these documents are analyzed together, they allow a much more detailed picture of
his life to emerge. The following is my attempt at a detailed summary and analysis of all the evidence I have gathered on
Samuel. It is probably as clear a picture as we are likely to get of his life based on the documentary evidence available in the
Lower Delmarva area and I hope it will provide a new starting point for further research into his origins. If there is any
evidence as to his origins, it probably lies in other regions and with other types of evidence, particularly genetic evidence.
DNA testing has revolutionized the search for Samuel’s ancestry, because it has allowed several possibilities to be ruled out
and has opened up new avenues for research that otherwise would have scarcely been imagined. Since the search for
Samuel’s origins is ongoing, I will not be writing about it in this piece, which I envision as a summary of his life rather than
an investigation of the mysteries surrounding his birth. Instead, I will update www.delmarvabradfords.com from time to time
with new theories and new evidence.
* * * * *
Birth and Youth
Samuel Bradford was born no later than 1744, although the place of his birth is unknown. This date is deduced from the fact
that Samuel’s son William was listed on the militia muster of 1780. 1 If we assume William must have been at least 18 at that
time and that Samuel was at least 18 when he fathered William, it places 1744 as an upper limit for Samuel’s birth.
Whether or not he was born in Worcester County, it is clear that Samuel was living there by the time he was 15 years old.
This information is contained in a deposition Samuel gave in 1799 in relation to a lawsuit over land and water rights in
dispute between George Spence and Patrick Waters. The deposition is worth quoting in full: 2
And the Deposition of Samuel Bradford of lawful age being sworn on the Holy Evangel of almighty god shows that
this Deponent when about the age of fifteen heard Old Capt Spence tell Mr. Robertson that there was vacant Land
between his / Robertsons Land, And the Mile [mill] Pond and that Robertson Replied he would Clear the Same as
there was but a small vacancy without securing it, that Robertson did actually Clear it and tended it in his Life Time
and that after that Capt Spence or his Family went on and Secured it and that Adam Spence in his Life Time
possessed it and that he had it under fence quite down to the mile Pond which fence he believed was made by
Robertson in his Life Time and that he has frequently seen it in Indian Corn that Robertson’s Posession was about
thirty six years ago and that Robertson and the Spences have always from that Time to this been in the quiet
Posession of the Land and never heard of its being Claimed or possessed by any Person else before the present Wm
Waters has laid Claim to it. That Robertson Cleared it and tended it about seven years before Spence had it in
Possession & further this Deponent saith not –
Samuel {his mark} Bradford
Sworn the 22 of March 1799 Before Phillip Quinton
Several other depositions were given in this case by other individuals and together these allow a reconstruction of the basis
for the lawsuit. Further analysis of the depositions reveals interesting facts that have a bearing on Samuel’s early years and
provide evidence as to where he may have lived. Some of the basic factual details contained in the depositions are
summarized below:
Spence-Waters Land Case
Adam Stevenson’s deposition 3
- acquainted with George Spence and Patrick Waters for 40 years (since 1756)
- acquainted with mill and mill dam (now in occupation of George Spence) upwards of 60 years (since 1736)
- has frequently been on the mill dam at different times from his earliest infancy
- doesn’t recollect change in height of mill dam; it was mended higher at different places where it had been broken
Page 3 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

- never heard a complaint in the neighborhood concerning the drowning of any land in the dispute
George Dennis deposition 4
- acquainted with the mill dam of Capt. Spence for 25 years (since 1771)
- was born within a half mile of the dam and there lived his infancy until he was 28 years old
- remembers dam was broken at the ends and mended higher but not to make more water
William Dryden deposition 6
- as far back as the spring of 177_ he knew the disputed lands;
- in the spring of 177_ Capt. Adam Spence had none of the land enclosed that lies between Robertson’s land and the
mill pond; but the land was cut and brush lay scattered and it was cut by permission of Capt. A. Spence
- in 1770, hired a yoke of oxen to the tenants of the land held under Robertson, who claimed the land under Robertson
- that Mr. Spence had the land enclosed
- that Lazarus Townsend informed him that he rented the land of Hugh Stevenson or Levi Robins who was guardian
to Robertson in whose behalf the land was held
John Johnson deposiiton 7
- about 1771 he went to assist Adam Spence to fell trees in the mil field
- the ground was to the south of an old orchard called Robinson
- he never heard that the lines of Rochester or any claiming the said land ever claimed right to lands on western side
of the branch or pond before the present dispute
John Tarr deposition (over 40 in 1798) 5
- was at John Spence’s.
- mentioned mill and pond; talk of moving a dam
- mentioned a gum tree that Capt. Spence wanted set up as a boundary for the tract Rochester
Sarah Tarr deposition 8
- on the last of the winter of the year John Spence died or first of the spring she heard her husband tell John Spence
the owner of the mill that Pat Waters complained of John Spence damaging his land by ponding the water, and that
Spence was willing to make satisfaction
- she knows that the mill field was not enclosed next to the pond where she got her son George christened
- about 1778 or 1779 her husband and Pat Waters were talking about the water damage, which she thinks was about 8
years or so before the death of John Spence
- she never heard Pat Waters lay claim to lands on this side of the mill pond or branch while she lived on the land
called Bulls [Bills?] Land
- while her husband lived at the mill which was two 2 or 3 years before the death of John Spence her husband tilled
the field called The Mill field
Euphemia (Tarr) Harrison deposition 9
- daughter of John Tarr, says John Spence told her father to tell Waters that he would give him damages; this
conversation was in the last of winter or first of spring that John Spence died
Mary Spence deposition 10
- was acquainted with the field now in George Spence’s possession adjoining the mill pond since 1763
- the field was titled by Adam Spence, brother of George, and has continued in Adam’s possession and those who
claim under him
- has been acquainted with Spence’s mill pond for 40 years and never heard of the lines of Rochester interfering with
the old field and the field on the south side of the mill pond and never heard any complaints in Adam Spence’s time
- in Adam Spence’s time he had run a fence into the mill pond
George Truitt deposition 11
- aged abt. 77 (b.c.1722), acquainted with Spence’s Mill between 60 or 70 years (since 1729-1739)
- believes mill pond to be the same as it was then
- acquainted with the field (now in George Spence’s possession) for 40 years (about 1759) and that it was then
occupied by William Robertson
- before Capt. Adam Spence’s death, he claimed and possessed it and it has remained with the Spences
- Truitt owned that part of Rochester now owned by Waters and recalled having the lines of the tract run and at that
time the lines turn near a poplar tree which stands in Aphradoze Johnson’s field and the lines ran near the millpond
on the north side and crossed a branch that runs between Purnell Johnson and the said Waters and continues up the
east side of that branch called Coleman Branch
Benjamin Purnell deposition 12
- acquainted with Rochester for 25 years (1773)
Page 4 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

- he and Darby Riggin about 20 years ago (1777) (reference deed from Purnell to Waters) tried to find the original
location of the tract and ran out the old deed of Mr. Waters and made a deed to Mr. Waters
- the gum mentioned in the original grant and standing in Colemans Branch and which was the bounder of Mr. Waters
old deed stood on the original line of Rochester (he is convineced)
- he went to one of the Guthries and Guthery told him that the gum was on the original line of the said land
Samuel Bradford deposition 13
- when 15 years old heard Old Capt. Spence tell Mr. Robertson that there was vacant land between Robertson’s land
and the mill pond, and Robertson said he would clear it since there was a small vacancy without securing it
- Robertson did clear the land in his lifetime, and some time after Capt. Spence or his family secured it and that Adam
Spence possessed it in his lifetime and had it under fence down to the mill pond
- The fence he believes was made by Robertson and he has frequently seen it in corn
- Robertson’s possession was about 36 years ago (1763), and the Robertsons and Spences have always possessed it
- Robertson cleared it and tended it about 7 years before Spence had it in possession
Samuel’s deposition indicates that he was living in Worcester County at the age of 15, and it is also clear from his deposition
that he was intimately familiar with a very specific area of the county at that time. Thanks to George Truitt’s deposition, the
location of the land in question may be identified. Truitt mentions that he owned part of the tract Rochester now owned by
Patrick Waters, one of the disputants. This accords with a deed from 1761 in which John Bratten sold “George Trewitt (son
of George)” 200 acres of Rochester; 14 in the deed, the land was described as adjoining Coleman’s branch, which formed the
western border of the tract. On the west, Rochester bordered several tracts belonging to the Spences, indicating that this is
the general area where the land in the dispute was located. It was a couple miles east of the town of Snow Hill, south of the
Pocomoke River, as illustrated in the following map, portions of which were provided by John C. Lyon. 15
William Robertson
I attempted to identify both William Robertson and the Spences, the men mentioned in Samuel’s deposition, in the hopes that
such information might prove useful for understanding something more about Samuel. In a deed dated 1 April 1742, a
William Robertson sold part of the tract Salem to Adam Spence; 16 Salem was in the area involved in the Spence-Waters
Page 5 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

dispute (depicted in the map above), near Coleman’s branch on the west side of Rochester. It seems clear that this William
Robertson was the man to whom Samuel was referring in his deposition. In Robertson’s deed it is mentioned that he
inherited the land from his father, also named William Robertson. A search of Somerset County and Worcester County
probate abstracts for William Robertsons turned up nothing. However, an inventory exists dated December 1733 for a
William Robison Senior; 17 the entry for his nearest kin is listed as “William Robenson (no other kin to be found).” Might this
Robison/Robenson family be the same as the Robertsons referred to by Samuel? The surnames are all relatively close to each
other in pronunciation, and the fact that the name was spelled two different ways in a single record (Robison, Robenson)
indicates that it was one of those names prone to multiple spellings in an age when spelling was not standardized. While
most of the deponents (Samuel Bradford, George Truitt, William Dryden) refer to a “Robertson”, John Johnson refers to “the
old orchard Called Robinson.” A search of Worcester wills for a William Robertson turns up nothing, but a will does exist
under the name William Robinson; 18 it was dated 3 November 1756 and proved 30 November 1759 and was witnessed by
Betty Spence and Adam Spence, as well as Joshua Hall. This Joshua Hall is also mentioned in the deed of sale to George
Truitt noted above, the land Truitt purchased being adjacent to the plantation where Joshua Hall lived. Joshua’s father John
(whose 1751 will was witnessed by Adam, Mary, and Betty Spence) 19 possessed the tract Halls Discovery, on the south side
of Rochester, and not far from the land in the Spence-Waters mill dam dispute. A search of the Somerset tax lists from the
1730s tends to clinch the matter – there Adam Spence is consistently listed next to a man variously named William
Robertson, Robinson or Robison. 20 The William Robertson whom Samuel referred to was very likely the William Robinson
of the 1756 will and son of the William Robison whose estate inventory was recorded in 1733.
The Spence Family
The Spences in the depositions are easy to identify. The “Old Captain Spence” whom Samuel mentions may be identified as
Captain Adam Spence, who left a will in Worcester County dated 7 May 1761 and proved 7 May 1762. 21 Samuel notes that
“Capt. Spence or his family went on and Secured [the vacancy] and that Adam Spence in his Life Time possessed it”. Here
Samuel was likely using the moniker “Old Capt.” to distinguish the elder Adam Spence from Adam’s son of the same name,
whom Samuel refers to simply as “Adam Spence”. This is borne out by the deposition of Mary Spence, who noted that
Adam Spence (brother of George) titled the field. Adam and George were the sons of Captain Adam Spence and Mary
Spence’s remark that Adam Spence the younger titled the field is probably the same thing Samuel Bradford is referring to
when he writes that “Adam Spence in his Life Time possessed it.” This is borne out by other evidence. Captain Adam
Spence left his son Adam the following tracts: Middlesex, Middlemore Inlarged, a lot in Snow Hill, and the water mill known
as “Snow Hill Mill”. These are all Spence properties adjacent to Rochester and Coleman’s Branch, and Snow Hill Mill is
probably the mill referred to as Spence’s mill in the 1799 depositions.
Having identified the men mentioned by Samuel in his deposition, I attempted to narrow down the time period of which
Samuel was speaking, since that might allow us to infer familiarity with a particular place at a particular period of time.
Samuel mentions that Robertson cleared the mill field vacancy 7 years before Adam Spence the younger had it in his
possession. Adam Spence must have titled it after his father’s death, and we’ve seen that “Old Capt. Spence” died in 1761-
1762. Furthermore, William Robertson died between 1756 and 1759 (probably closer to 1759) and the land must have been
cleared before his death. Assuming Robertson cleared the land just before his death in 1759, the latest date at which Adam
Spence could have possessed the field would be 1766 (i.e., 7 years after Robertson cleared it, according to Samuel).
Assuming Adam Spence titled the land in 1762 (the earliest date possible, being the year his father died), then the earliest
Robertson cleared the land was 1755 (i.e., 7 years before). It is therefore clear that Samuel was familiar with the land at
some point in the decade from 1755 to 1766. Unfortunately, Samuel gives no indication of how much time passed between
the conversation he heard and Robertson’s clearing of the land. Otherwise, we might be able to arrive at a more specific
range of years during which he must have been born. Suffice it to say that for some time during the 1750s and 1760s, Samuel
Bradford was intimately familiar with the area around the Spence and Robertson lands.
Can anything more be gleaned about Samuel’s youth from the depositions in the Spence-Waters suit? To answer this
question, it’s first worth asking what the deposition was for and why Samuel was called upon to give it. The charges of the
case are never spelled out in the land records, but they may be deduced. There was an issue of water from Spence’s mill
pond damaging Pat Waters’ land, and there was also some question over the proper boundary between the Spence land and
the tract Rochester. The deponents were all called upon to testify about various details relating to these primary issues. They
would have probably been chosen by one of the men in the suit because that man knew they would be familiar with the
details of the matter in question and probably because they knew the deponent would testify favorably to their cause. It
seems likely that Samuel was called upon as a witness by George Spence, since Samuel describes how the field by the mill
pond came into the Spences’ possession and also relates how its possession had been uncontested for the last 40 years.
Page 6 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Clearly George Spence knew that Samuel Bradford would be able to help his case because he was familiar with Samuel
during the time period in question (the 1750s/1760s) and knew he would remember the period in some detail.
Samuel remembered a specific conversation between Capt. Adam Spence and William Robertson that happened when he was
fifteen years old and was generally able to recollect a series of specific details relating to this area of Rochester near
Coleman’s branch during that time. We must imagine the circumstances under which Samuel would have been in a position
to have overheard such a conversation at that age and to have gained that level of familiarity with the property in question.
The most likely answer is that he was living nearby. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that most of the other
deponents can be shown to have lived in the area. George Truitt lived there as the owner of part of Rochester. The three Tarr
deponents lived there also, since Sarah Tarr refers to the time, “her Husband John Tarr lived at the Mill.” George Dennis
clearly states that he was born within a half mile of the dam and lived there in his infancy. Of the other deponents, Mary
Spence is clearly a relative of the Spences in the suit, and may probably be identified as the daughter of Adam Spence Sr.
The deponent Benjamin Purnell owned part of Rochester on Coleman’s branch. From John Johnson’s deposition, we can
infer that William Dryden is the son of John Dryden, who held the tract Parkers Adventure on the eastern border of
Rochester. John Johnson himself is harder to identify, since his name is so common; he might be a relative of the Affradozi
Johnson mentioned in George Truitt’s deposition who lived on the tract Rochester. In any case, it seems likely that Samuel,
like the rest of these deponents, probably lived nearby. The fact that he overheard a conversation between Spence and
Robertson when he was 15 indicates that he may have even been living with one of them, as it was not uncommon for boys
of that age to be bound out. Or it may be that his father was a tenant of Adam Spence, William Robertson, or some one else
who lived nearby, although there is no guarantee that his father was even alive at that time, much less whether he was in
Worcester County. It is at least clear that some of the other deponents were tenants in the area. John Tarr mentions that he
lived “at the Mill,” but Worcester deed records indicate that he never possessed part of any tracts in the area, so he was
presumably a tenant. The deponent William Dryden specifically mentions that he hired a yoke of oxen to the tenants of the
land held under Robertson. Whether Samuel was a tenant or a servant, knowledge of this early connection with the Spences
and Robertsons may prove useful in determining something more about Samuel’s family, because at some point between his
birth and the age of 15, he ended up living in the area.
* * * * *
Samuel’s Fitzgerald wife
The only evidence of the identity of Samuel Bradford’s first wife is a letter written in 1888 by Samuel Hancock, a grandson
of Samuel by his daughter Sarah; he was writing to Horace Standish Bradford of New York, who was attempting to gather
information from possible descendants of Governor William Bradford of Plymouth. 22 [Note: Samuel is not a descendant of
Gov. William, but Horace Bradford was reaching out to all Bradfords for possible connections.] When discussing the
Bradford family, Samuel Hancock notes “my grandmother was a Fitzgarel. I don’t know her first name.”
[Note: Many of the family trees one finds posted on the internet list name her as Sarah, since Bradford Descendants has her
named thus in the register of Samuel’s wives and children. However, I have been unable to locate any other evidence that
gives her first name and I think this was likely an error.] A search for Fitzgeralds (and other variations of the surname) in
Somerset and Worcester Counties reveals just one family, that of a Peter Fitzgerald. It is possible, though beyond proof at
present, that Samuel’s wife was from this family, which seems to have been the only Fitzgerald family present in the county
during Samuel’s early years.
Peter Fitzgerald appears in the first surviving tax list for Somerset County in 1723 in Manokin Hundred (on the west side of
the peninsula, opposite from that part that would later become Worcester County in 1742), as head of household with a
dependent John Beane or Banes. 23 He appears on his own in the 1724 tax list, and with dependent Thomas Patterson in 1725.
In 1727 he appears on the list with two slaves as dependents, and in 1728 and 1729 with a slave named Tom and dependent
Cornelius Cottman. From 1730 to 1738 he appears with a single dependent, his slave Tom. He is not present in the tax list of
1739, because he died in that year, sometime between May 11 and May 24, as is plain from his will: 24
Page 7 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

May ye 11 1739 In the Name of God Amen I Peter ffetch Garrill of Somerset County being low & weak
in body but of perfect memory Do make & ordain this my last Will & Testament in Writing First I Commit my
Spirit to God who gave it & my Body to be decently buried by my Executor as shall be hereafter mentioned
Item I give & Bequeath unto my Daughter Molley one Negro man named Tom & one large Pot to her & her Aeares
for ever
Item I give & Bequeath unto my Daughter Ann My & another Pot to her & her Aeares for ever
Item I give & Bequeath unto my Child Peggy one other Pot to her & her Aeares for ever
Item I give unto my Daughter molly my Mill & Warming pan & two Dishes & two Plates one new Feather bed & I
Do Leave my Daughter Molly a Aged next September
Item I Give unto my Daughter Peggy two Dishes & two Plates & her Aeares for ever
Item I Give unto my Daughter Ann two Dishes & two Plates
Item I Leave the rest of my Estate to be equally divided among my Children after debts paid & Do appoint John
Wolford
of the aforesaid County to be my whole & sole Executor of this my Last Will & Testament Debarring all other
Sign’d Seal’d & Acknowldge before us
Testes Ringrose Penellepey
Wm. Burgan
Patrick X Burgan On the back of the aforegoing Will was thus written Vizt.
May ye 24 th 1739 / Came Pennellepy Ringrose & William Burgen two of the Subscribing Evidences to the within
Will & made oath on the holy Evangelist of Almighty God that they Saw the Testator Peter Fitch Jarrill Sign & Seal
& heard him Publish Pronounce & declare the within Instrument of Writing to be his last Will & Testament & That
at the time of his so doing he was to the best of their Apprehension of sound & disposing mind memory and
understanding & that they the said William Burgen & Peneliipy Ringrose Subscrib’d the within Will in the Presence
& at the request Of the Testator Peter ffitchgarrill & that they the said Subscribing Evidences Saw the other
Evidence Subscribe at the Same time all in the Presence & at the request of the Testator aforesaid
Sworn before Nehemiah King Deputy: Comry of Som.st. Cty.
In the account of Peter Fitchjarrill’s estate his three daughters are mentioned again: Mary, Anne, and Margett Fitchjarrell. 25
The daughters were likely minors in 1739, since all were unmarried. All probably belonged roughly to Samuel’s generation,
and one of them may have been his wife, either Mary/Molly, Anne, or Margaret/Peggy. It may be significant that Samuel’s
second eldest son was named Peter, as it was common to name the second son after the boy’s maternal grandfather.
Unfortunately, tracking down the daughters of Peter Fitchgarrill has proved impossible. Other names from Peter’s will yield
no clues or connections. John Woolford, Peter’s executor, was prominent in the county and may have been chosen as
executor due to his standing or because he was a patron. I have been unable to find anything further about Penelope Ringrose
and Patrick and William Burgan, the witnesses to the will. On top of this, there are the usual difficulties involved with
tracing females, whose maiden surnames were abandoned upon marriage.
It is unclear when Samuel married ____ Fitzgerald. Since his eldest son William was on the militia muster roll in 1780, he
was probably at least 18, which would give a year of birth of 1762 at the latest. We might presume that Samuel was married
to Ms. Fitzgerald in or before this year. However, although it is often assumed that Samuel only had two wives, it is possible
that he had a wife before his Fitzgerald wife. In his letter to Horace Standish Bradford, Samuel Hancock notes that
“grandfather never had a William to my knowledge,” although he was able to list the other children of Samuel by his two
known wives. In a separate letter to Horace Bradford, Josiah Bradford (a great-grandson of Samuel Bradford through his son
Adam) claims to know of the existence of Samuel’s son William. 26 He says “my brother tells me that my Grand Father
[Samuel Bradford’s son Adam] had some half Brothers and perhaps sisters one half brother named William he settled in
Tenn he was the origin of the Tennessee Bradfords.” Note that he refers to William as a “half brother”, which would indicate
he was a son from a different wife. Then again, Josiah also refers to Sally (Bradford) Hancock as a half sister to Adam,
whereas her son Samuel Hancock vouched that they were full siblings. Given this discrepancy, it’s worth noting that Josiah
himself refers to Samuel Hancock as the best man to talk to about the family history, and Hancock was a generation closer to
Samuel Bradford. On the other hand, Samuel Hancock had no recollection or memory of Samuel Bradford’s son William. It
may be that Josiah was confusing Adam’s brother William with Adam’s own son William by his first wife, who would have
been a half-brother to Josiah’s father; however, this William didn’t go to Tennessee, but to Texas. Overall, the evidence from
Josiah Bradford is not very convincing, and one gets the impression that his knowledge of the family history was not very
good. However, it’s worth keeping in mind this possibility that William may have been a half-brother of Adam. It is at least
a salutary reminder that we have no certain knowledge that Samuel’s Fitzgerald wife was his first.
Page 8 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

* * * * *
James Smyly Estate Inventory
So far, all the discussions of Samuel’s youth have been based on evidence gleaned from later records – a deposition from
1799 and letters written by his descendants in the late 19 th century. The first record in which Samuel actually appears is the
inventory, dated 1 November 1765, of the estate of James Smyly, a merchant of Worcester County. 27 Samuel Bradford
appears in the large list of “desperate debtors” to Smyly’s estate. Samuel must have been a young man at this time, probably
in his twenties, and he may have gone into debt purchasing the materials and equipment necessary to establishing himself as
a farmer.
* * * * *
Samuel Bradford During the Revolution
Bradford Descendants states that “Samuel was a soldier in the Revolutionary War, serving as a private in Squad 6 of Captain
William Purnell’s company in the Sinepuxin Battalion of Worcester County, Maryland.” This characterization is not entirely
accurate. Samuel was not properly a soldier in the revolution; rather, he served in the Worcester County militia. This is an
important distinction, because otherwise one might be led to believe that he served under General Washington and engaged
in some of the noteworthy battles that took place during the war. In fact, there is no reason to believe he ever left Worcester
County. That doesn’t mean that Samuel’s life simply went on as before, interrupted only by the occasional company drill.
The peculiar situation of Worcester County during the war makes Samuel’s story much more interesting than it would be had
he been a militiaman in most other places. But before delving into the story of Worcester County during the war, it’s first
worth going over the documentary evidence from those years that relates specifically to Samuel.
All adult white males were required to take an Oath of Fidelity and Support to Maryland’s revolutionary government,
according to a law passed by the General Assembly in 1777. The text of the oath is reproduced below: 28
I do sware I do not hold myself bound to yield any Allegience or obedience to the King of Great Britain his heirs or
successors and that I will be true and faithful to the State of Maryland and that I will to the utmost of my power,
support maintain and defend the Freedom and Independence thereof and the Government as now established against
all open enemies and secret and traterous conspiraces and will use my utmost endeavours to disclose and make
known to the Governor or some one of the Judges or Justices thereof all Treasons or Treaterous consperaces,
attempts or combinations against this State or the Government thereof which may come to my knowledge so help
me God.
Samuel Bradford swore this oath in 1778 before Thomas Purnell in Bogerternorton Hundred, Worcester County. 29 On the
register of those who took the oath, his name is spelled “Samuel Braford”. The choice of this particular alternate spelling of
Samuel’s surname is interesting in itself, and its implications are explored further in my discussion on theories about
Samuel’s origins contained at www.delmarvabradfords.com.
Samuel also appears (as “Sam Bradford”) in the muster roll, dated 25 May 1780, of the Sinepuxon battalion of the Worcester
County militia. 30 This is the evidence from which his military service is deduced in Bradford Descendants. He was in the 6 th
class of William Purnell’s company and his son William was in the 2 nd class of the same company, listed as “William
Bradford (of Sam).” A copy of the original muster roll is presented on the following page. The copy is taken from Bradford
Descendants, in which the names of the 6 other Bradfords serving in the battalion are circled, on the plausible assumption
that they might have been relatives of Samuel. In fact, five of the six Bradfords (Annanias, Isaac, Levin, Solomon, and
Avery) are known descendants of John 2 Bradford (Nath 1 ), from whom most of the Worcester County Bradfords are
descended and to whom Samuel is not related. [See my work on John’s sons Nathaniel 3 and William 3 for evidence relating to
these five Bradfords and see my discussion on Samuel’s origins for an account of the evidence disproving any connection
between Samuel and John 2 (Nath 1 ).] The precise parentage of the sixth Bradford, Elisha, is unknown, but circumstantial
evidence indicates that he is a grandson of John 2 (Nath 1 ). At any rate, it appears likely that Samuel and his son were not
related to any of the other Bradfords in their battalion.
Page 9 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 10 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

The Worcester militia seems to have remained in the county for the duration of the revolution and it is doubtful that Samuel
was ever involved in any battles. However, the militia was called up on occasion and was certainly held in a greater state of
readiness than the militia of other areas. Many inhabitants of the lower Eastern Shore were loyalists, or tories, and in the early
years of the war there was great concern over the possibility of the British colluding with them to gain control of the region,
which was vital for supplying provisions, if not manpower, to the continental army. The remoteness of the area and its easy
accessibility by water made it susceptible to British landing parties throughout the war and attacks by British and Loyalist
privateers on the eastern shore began early. In April 1776, the Maryland Council of Safety recommended that shipments of
supplies be sent in small craft that could easily evade capture, since the Chesapeake was “so full of Men of War and
Tenders.” 31 The following month, the Council received reports of British vessels pillaging around Nanticoke Sound in
Somerset County; even worse, when the Somerset militia were called out, they were found to be “very lukewarm in the
opposition, difficult to be got together, and when collected in such bad discipline they are not . . . to be relied on.” 32 In July
1776, due to the “unhappy and disturbed state of your County and Somerset,” the Council requested that the Worcester
Committee of Observation (the county arm of the revolutionary government) provide an armed guard for some gunpowder
and supplies that had to pass through the area on the way from Accomack County, VA, to Kent County, MD. 33 The
combination of easy access for British raiding parties with a large loyalist population was a cause of concern throughout the
war.
Loyalist trouble in the lower shore seems to have peaked in late 1776/early 1777. In January 1777, the Council wrote the
eastern shore militia commanders that they had heard “from several hands some flying reports of extraordinary proceedings
in the lower part of your Brigade, particularly that some disaffected persons in Somerset and Worcester Counties had talked
freely of erecting the King's Standard, and had been collecting themselves into Bodies for the purpose of forming an
opposition to the American cause.” 34 This was doubtless a reference to the activities of Levin Townsend and others to gather
together a force from Worcester County that would fight for Lord Dunmore, the royal governor of Virginia. In November
1776, the Maryland Council of Safety received numerous depositions relating to these activities. 35 Townsend had apparently
gathered together dozens of men (estimates ranged as high as 70) under the pretense of their protecting him from the
Worcester Committee of Observation. Josiah Robins had apparently sworn an oath to the committee about Townsend’s
disaffection with the cause of independence, and Townsend claimed to fear he would be taken captive. Another resident,
Benjamin Shockley, was said to have threatened any who signed the association (an oath of loyalty to the Revolutionary
government). One deponent related how Shockley “asked him if he was one of the damn’d associaters.” Shockley picked up
an ax and threatened for the man to keep silent “or he would split his brains open or any that dar’d sign the Association.”
Another deposition related that Edmund Scarborough of Accomack County (on Virginia’s eastern shore) said if governor
Dunmore sent him a ship with 30 soldiers and a couple officers, he would take them to the house of every leading man in the
county and carry them to Lord Dunmore. Townsend similarly threatened to sail up the Pocomoke River and “seize the
Committee of Worcester in the night whilst they were asleep and convey them down to Dunmore as speedily as possible.”
Townsend apparently had received ammunition from Lord Dunmore and was dispersing it amongst loyalists and seems to
have also had a plan to fit out a vessel that would cruise Chesapeake Bay and capture ships. He induced numerous men to
accompany him to the mouth of Pocomoke river on the pretense of giving them salt, and then took them to Norfolk, Virginia,
where they were offered “a suit of regimentals, a guinea and a crown entrance” if they would consent to serve under
Governor Dunmore. Several men claimed Townsend would not allow them to return to their homes until they had sworn an
oath of loyalty to the King.
Through early 1777, the loyalist and British cause seemed to be gaining strength on the lower eastern shore. In February, the
Council of Safety received a letter from Zachariah Campbell (stationed at Vienna, just west of Somerset County) stating that
the “Tories in Sussex [in Delaware], Somerset and Worcester Counties, have been assembling for some days. They have 250
men collected at Parker's Mill, about nine miles from Salisbury, and 'tis reported they have three field peices, which they
received from the Roebuck [a British warship], with some men, with intention to seise the Magazine and destroy the property
of the Whiggs.” Campbell also reported that there were “three men of war in the bay, one at the Tangiers, one at Smith's
point, and one in the middle, and that it is reported some men, with two field peices are landed from the Roe Buck.” 36 The
following month, General William Smallwood, who had been sent into the area to restore order, sent a letter to the Council of
Safety detailing several incidents of loyalist behavior, including “those who have cut down Liberty poles, and in direct
opposition thereto, have erected the King's standard, & in an avowed manner drank his health and success & destruction to
Congress and Conventions . . . those who have advised and actually signed General Howe's Proclamation [Howe was the
British commander] . . . militia officers who have embodied with & headed the insurgents . . . such who have supplied the
King's ships with provision, and kept up a constant intercourse with them. . . those who knowingly aided and conveyed public
prisoners . . . those enrolling in the King's service, . . . those advising the sold`iers of this state and the Continent to desert, &
not only harboring them, but supplying them with arms to defend themselves against being taken . . .” 37
Page 11 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

The loyalist activity on the eastern shore even warranted the attention of the Continental Congress, which had received a
petition from the inhabitants of Somerset and Worcester for assistance against the Tories. The Congress responded by
requesting that Maryland dispatch a force of continental soldiers to the area; they also forwarded a list of ringleaders who
should be apprehended. 38 The Maryland Council sent this force along with a proclamation offering amnesty to anyone who
came in with their arms and took the oath of fidelity within forty days. In addition to the use of the local militia in this task,
Maryland diverted to the lower eastern shore some forces that were intended to join General Washington’s army. General
Smallwood commanded the expedition, which acted speedily. They arrived at Salisbury in Somerset County on 19 February,
but “found People generally quiet, and Peaceable, tho’ much alarmed particularly such who were under Guard upon
Accusations who seemed disposed to accept the Terms offered in the Proclamation.” Most of the ringleaders mentioned by
Congress surrendered or were captured. 39 However, the British threat to the area remained very much alive and George
Washington himself wrote to the Maryland Council in March 1777 and expressed the “general opinion” that the 70 boats the
British were building in New York were destined for an expedition to the Chesapeake, possibly “with a view of making a
descent on the Eastern Shore.”
In April 1777, the Continental Congress further appointed a committee of four to “devise ways and means of suppressing the
disaffected persons spirit of toryism in the counties of Somerset, Worcester, and Sussex [in Delaware], and preventing them
from taking measures prejudicial to the cause of the United States.” 40 The committee reported that “the Counties above
mentioned consist at least betwixt four and five thousand Men, two thirds of whom are highly disaffected by the Measures
pursued by the United States for the Establishment of their Freedom and Independence.” The committee also noted that “the
dangerous Spirit of Toryism has acquired Strength, and at several Times has broke out into open Acts of Treason against the
Liberties of the United States,” and that the position of the counties by the sea afforded easy access to British ships. 41 There
was fear that, should the British land forces in the area, they might be “joined by a considerable Body of Insurgents who only
wait an Opportunity to fall upon the defenceless Sons of Freedom in that Quarter, and to perpetrate those Acts of Cruelty and
Devastation which have hitherto been consequent to such Insurrections.” They were particularly worried should the
insurrection break out when the main British army might be marching on Philadelphia. Congress accordingly ordered the
governor of Maryland to “detain the weakest continental battalion raised in the state of Maryland” and to order 300 militia to
cooperate with it. 42
On 3 July 1777, Congress had occasion to discuss the loyalists in Sussex County, Delaware, just north of Worcester County.
The passage is worth quoting in full: “a considerable part of the inhabitants of Sussex . . . have ever since the commencement
of the present controversy with great Britain acted as enemies to the American cause, and are now unfriendly and disaffected
to the constitution and government of that State, and to the independence of the United States; that an open and avowed
intercourse has been kept up by the disaffected in the county aforesaid with the British ships of war, by means of which
intelligence has from time to time been given, and frequent supplies of provisions have been afforded to the enemies of the
United States; that the disaffected in the said county keep up a constant correspondence with those of the same character in
the counties of Worcester and Somerset in the State of Maryland; that some of them have promised to conduct British sailors
to the houses of the well affected that they might be taken; that it is probable that enterprizes of this kind will be attempted to
be put in execution; that one person has already been taken in this way and put in irons; that considerable numbers of men
have been recruited for the enemy in Sussex county, and have been sent to New York; that the militia officers in that county
have generally resigned, and the laws of the State of Delaware for punishing treason and disaffection are rendered altogether
ineffectual by the insolence and the numbers of the disaffected; that a very large sum of counterfeit continental money has
been brought from the enemy's ships into the said county, part of which has been circulated among the inhabitants; that there
is the greatest reason to apprehend, that if the enemy were to gain the smallest advantage over the army of the United States,
and the English fleet should appear upon the coast, there would be a general insurrection in that county in favour of the
British king.” Congress ordered the force under Colonel William Richardson into Sussex “to overawe and disarm the
disaffected in that county.” 43 (Colonel Richardson had joined his militia and regulars to General Smallwood’s force in
February and had officially taken over command of the troops stationed in the lower eastern shore in April). 44
At some point in 1777, militia from Worcester County were ordered to join the main American army under George
Washington. However, since loyalist unrest had not completely subsided in the lower shore, in September 1777 the Maryland
Council of Safety wrote to countermand their previous order, writing that “Genl. Washington we hope & expect, will not
want the Assistance of your County Militia, we are sorry there is so much Occasion for them at Home.” It is possible that
Samuel Bradford or his son William were part of this force destined for the Continental army, but there is no way to be sure.
It is at least clear that the military situation in Worcester County was precarious enough that there was a greater need for the
militia to remain at home. The Council further noted that “for Security of themselves and Families and for the Preservation
Page 12 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

of the public Peace, it is desired that they frequently meet and exercise and get prepared in the best manner they can to crush
any new Insurrection in its Birth.” 45
Although the presence of Col. Richardson’s force on the lower shore prevented any general uprisings, the government had
other problems. Apparently some of the lower shore residents had been unwilling to sell their cattle to supply the American
war effort, so in January 1778 the Council ordered the authorities in Worcester to requisition it by force if necessary: “if the
People, whose Situations expose their Stocks to be plundered by the Enemy, refuse to furnish their spare Cattle, for the high
Prices proposed, as such Refusal can proceed only from a Preference they give the Enemy, it is necessary such Cattle should
be taken to prevent their inimical Designs.” 46 Even worse, the militia of Worcester and Somerset were proving reluctant to
serve, some of them being of the opinion that they were not compelled to serve until expressly ordered by the Governor and
Council. 47 In April 1778, Governor Johnson wrote to the Assembly to request that 100 to 150 more militia be sent to
Somerset County; letters he had received from Worcester and Somerset made him apprehensive that “unless decisive
Measures are speedily taken the Balance in Somerset County, will be in Favor of our Enemies & Toryism.” 48 He also
recommended that martial law be proclaimed in Somerset and that a court martial be set up to try “Spies, Piracies and such of
our own People as may be taken in Arms.” That same month, Samuel Chase, who was serving in the Continental Congress,
wrote to the Governor of Maryland that about 90 recruits had enlisted with the British fleet from Worcester and Somerset
Counties and that there were insurrections in nearby Queen Anne County, MD, and in Sussex County, Delaware. 49
In the five years from 1776 to 1781, not much had improved in the military situation of the lower eastern shore. Although
there were no major uprisings, British and Loyalist privateers continued to conduct raids and the attitude of the residents
continued to be a cause for concern. In August 1780, Lt. Joseph Dashiell wrote to the State Council that it was needless to
ship supplies from Snow Hill “until their is sum Guard Boats sent down or the [British] Cruisers Take Leave of us as but
Very Few of our Vesels Escape the Enemy.” 50 In September 1780, he wrote the governor to say that “Our Militia is very
Tardy and many of them Refuse to Turn out.” 51 Another letter from George Dashiell in September 1781 to Thomas Lee
described some of the loyalist and British raiding that was happening: 52
The counties of Somerset & Worcester are at this time invaded on every quarter by the Enemy's Cargos and tenders,
and the inhabitants plundered in the most shamefull manner of every species of Property worth taking nor can the
Militia prevent their depredations in many parts contiguous to the water & accessible to their Vessels. On Sunday
night last two or three barges on board of which were 30 or 40 Saylors Tories & negroes, came up Nanticoke river
as far as Vienna, Burnt Several valuable vessels, and plundered the inhabitants on the river of their Slaves and
Valuable Effects; and on Annemessix the people have shared the same fate; I am informed of A number of arm'd
boats being in Pocomoke river, and several privateers are constantly cruising in Tangier Sound (which frequently
come to the mouth of Wicomico & Nanticoke rivers To prevent further ravages I have ordered A detachment of
Militia on duty, at Places most exposed to their incursions.
Dashiell described the Vienna raid in some detail. He also expressed his frustration at the failure of the residents to exert
themselves against the invasion, implying that their inaction was the result of sympathy with the British and describing how
difficult it was to get the militia to march against the raiding parties: 53
I will now Indivour to give you a Detail: of the Conduct of Our people at Vianna upon the appearance of the
Enemys Boats which I am informed they saw sum time before they Landed Instead of flying to armes: the
Inhabitants more in number then the Enemy: suffer them to Land without offring them the Least opposition; and
permitted Twelve white men & Twenty one negro men to Stay at Vianna from abought half an hour by Sun in the
morning until Neare 12 a Clock, in which time they Burn'd a new briggentine of Mess" Rob t Dashiell & my one. a
Vesel Belonging to M r James Shaw one Vesel Belonging to One Traver: and hove down a New Vessel of Prichet
Willeis that was Building and Distroy'd all the Tools the poore man had & did him much more Damage, they Left
One new Vesel on the Stock & a sloop Belonging to one M r Hopkins & I Cant heare that they Ignord any one else at
that place Except taking away some negroes, after this they went down the river 3 or 4 miles to Col o John Henry's
whare they gave a Specimen of their savage Disposition, they Broke all the Glass in his house all the Dores his
Clock Broke up all his Flores and puled up all his Windscut. Broke his Still Started all his Sider & Brandy & did
him a grate Deal more Damage. Caried of Two of his Negro men, and Neare Night, thus Left him and then
proceeded down to Damquarter in Somerset County whare they ware Rec d with open Arnes bv our people and
Carest for the noble acts they had done, I would observe to you that Capt. Joseph Venables of Somerset had notice
of thief Being at Vianna Early in the morning: by a man that Inform d him they ware Indevoring to Burn the Brigg 6
but I Cant heare of One single man he attempted to race to appoint them, altho it was within five miles of his House,
Page 13 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

and his Company all in that Neighborhood if he had have done his duty the whole Damage might have bin
prevented, the next morning I was Informed that several more Boats had threathnd to Cum up Pocomock & Wicom.
to Take sum Vesels that is Landed with Corn and Pork and to plunder sum of the most Welthy Inhabitants on the
Water side. In consequence of which Immediatly ordered out the first Class of the Militia and it is with grate
Dificulty we Can keep a guard of thirty men together and many have Refus'd Expressly to march against the Enemy
From 1776 until the very end of the war, Somerset and Worcester Counties were dealing with British raiding. Even as late as
September 1782, over a year after Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown, enemy barges were found plundering in Worcester
County and the militia were called out, thereafter remaining on guard and supplied with ammunition. 54 Although Samuel
was not enlisted in the Continental army, and though it is unclear what specific activities he or his son William engaged in as
militiamen, it is clear that their membership in the militia entailed something more than simply being able-bodied and male,
and I hope the above account provides some interesting context for what their wartime experience may have been like.
Though no battles took place there, the threat to Worcester County and its environs was real enough that the authorities
feared it might become a battleground; and throughout the war the militia was kept at the ready and called out on several
occasions to prevent insurrections or defend against raids.
* * * * *
Samuel’s wife Tabitha Tarr
Sometime around 1783-1784, Samuel Bradford’s Fitzgerald wife passed away, after which Samuel remarried. In a letter to
Horace Standish Bradford (a copy of which appears in Bradford Descendants), Samuel Hancock listed the names of Samuel’s
children by two wives, and this allows us to pinpoint when he remarried.
On the 1850 census, Nancy Bradford gave her age as 67. 55 She was therefore presumably born around 1783. Samuel’s
Fitzgerald wife must have died not long afterwards, because by November 1784 Samuel was married to Tabitha Tarr, the
daughter of John and Sarah (Holland) Tarr of Worcester County. It has always been clear that the given name of Samuel’s
last wife was Tabitha, since he mentions her in his will. But until recent years her surname was a mystery. [Note: Bradford
Descendants has caused some confusion relating to this, since it contains an error relating to Samuel’s second wife, noting
that she was “said to have been a Fitzgerald.” In fact, the primary evidence for Samuel’s wife being a Fitzgerald is given just
four pages later, and it clearly relates to his first wife, not Tabitha.] Since there is no specific document that proves that
Tabitha Tarr was Samuel’s wife, it is necessary to go over all the evidence, which adds up to a convincing case. First, a
search of Worcester County will abstracts reveals two mentions of a Tabitha Bradford in the will records of Worcester
County. The first is the will of Sarah Burbage, an abstract of which is provided here: 56
Sarah Burbage will – 9 March 1820 – 24 March 1820. All my part of my mother’s estate and what was devised by
my father Elias Burbage to Tabitha Bradford and my sister Leah Burbage. Executor: brother Samson Burbage. Wit:
William Bassitt, Thomas Duncan, John Jarman.
The Tabitha Bradford mentioned in Sarah Burbage’s will may be positively identified as the wife of Zedekiah Bradford, not
Samuel. [See section on Zedekiah Bradford in my work on Nathaniel 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ).] That leaves Tabitha Tarr, the
daughter of John Tarr Sr.: 57
Will of John Tarr, Senr. – 10 November 1784 – 28 January 1785
In the name of God Amen I John Tarr Sen r . Being in Perfect health at Present Blessed be to Almighty God calling to
mind the uncertainty of this Life, first of all I do Recomend my Body to be desently buried in the Earth from whence
it came and my Soul to God who gave it nothing: Next I have a mind & thank it my Duty to Settle my worldly
Business that in manner and form as follows. Viz t . First I give and bequeath to my Loving wife Sarah Tarr
Page 14 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Peaseable & Quiet Possession of all and singular on the Plan tation houses and all Improvements thereto belonging
whereon I now live together with horses, cattle, sheep and hogs to her Dureing her natural life or widowhood after
her deceas d . or Entermarriage: I give and bequeath to my Eldest Son Israel Tarr the Plantation with all
Improvements thereto belonging whereon I now live Bounded as follows Beginning at a markd Red oak being
division Bounder Between Levin Waters track and my track of Land thence with a Straight Line Northerly to a
Gully Running through the Old Plantation Called Bald Cypress Point and with the s d . Gulley till the mid Line
Entersects my Old Line Northward I Likewise Give and bequeath to my Second Son Nehemiah Tarr all the
Remainder Part of my Land Lying and being Joining the aforesaid by and with the aforesaidLine fore Division Line
all the Rest of my Land being the southward & Eastward of the s d . Line together with all Improvements thereto
belonging: to them and each of them or their heris or assigns forever. Item I give and bequeath to my Eldest
Daughter Tabitha Bradford exclusive what she now has Six hard Dollars, to her and her heirs or assigns: I
Likewise give to my Second Daughter Sarah Harpur two hard Dollars, to her exclusive what I have already Given
her to her and her heirs or assigns; I Likewise Give as a Legacy to my Son Israel Tarr one Cow & Calf to him and
his heirs or Assigns forever I likewise Give & Bequeath to my Second Son Nehemiah Tarr and my third Daughter
Elenor Tarr not yet mentioned in the [______________________] before by mentioned or named to be Equally
divided between the sd. Nehemiah Tarr and the sd. Elenor Tarr to them and their heirs or assigns forever, I leave
give and Desire that my Daughter Elenor Tarr should have a home and quiet abideance on the Plantation and in the
house whereon I now live Dureing her Single Life this is to be done and divided after the deceased & intermarriage
of my loving Wife Sarah Tarr. I likewise will & desire that my Loving wife Sarah Tarr & my Eldest Son Israel Tarr
should be my whole & Sole Executors or Executrix of this my Last will and Testament Denying all other will or
wills Deed or Deeds Gift or Gifts on[?] before by me made or Done in In Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my
hand and acknowledged my Seal this 10 th day of November Anno Dom. one thousand Seven hundred and Eighty
four.
Sign d . Seal d . Acknowledged } Stephen Sturgis
and Pronounced in pre”: } Richard Sturgis John [Jamo Tarr] Tarr Sr.
sents of us } Outten Sturgis
Worcester County fs. the 28 th day of January Anno Dom 1785 then came Sarah Tarr and Israel Tarr Executors of the
last will and Testament of John Tarr late of worcester County deceased and made oath on the Holy Evangels of
Almighty God that the foregoing Instrument of writing is the true and whole Will and Testament of John Tarr late of
Worcester County deceased that have came to their hands or possession and that they do not know f any other.
Before John Wise Reg. Wills.
Abundant circumstantial evidence supports the conclusion that Tabitha Tarr was Samuel Bradford’s wife. First there is the
evidence of proximity: the land Samuel owned near the end of his life, Bradford’s Luck/Littleworth, was located not far from
the lands of John Tarr around Calkers Creek [see below, page 21]. Then there is the evidence of association in probate
records. On 25 November 1803, Samuel was bond for Hezekiah Johnson’s administration of the estate of Michael Tarr (of
Samuel); 58 administration was given to Johnson by Leah Tarr and Sarah Tarr. [I haven’t firmly established Michael’s exact
relationship to Tabitha. He was probably the son of Samuel 3 Tarr (Mike 2 Jno 1 ) and therefore probably a first cousin of
Tabitha. See below.]
Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) (Administration Bonds) 1802-1807 JBR 6 CR 50,315
November 26 th day 1803 This is to certify that I Leah Tarr and Sarah Tarr do agreejointly that Hezekiah Johnson
shall vandue and fill at his own discresion the property of Michael Tarr dec d . as far as makes himself satisfyd and he
securities interested therein As witness our hands and seals the day and date above written
In pst of us
Elisha Johnson } Leah [X] Tarr
Henery Clogg } Sarah [X] Tarr
Maryland fs. Know all men by these presents that we Hezekiah Johnson Samuel Bradford and Isaac Cottingham
are held and firmly bound unto the state of Maryland in the full and just sum of one thousand dollars current money
of Maryland to be paid unto the said State of Maryland To which payment well and truly to be made we bind
ourselves our heirs executors and administrators in and for the whole jointly and severally firmly by these presents
sealed with our seals and dated this thirteenth day of December Anno Domini 1803
The Condition of the above obligation is such that if the above bounden Hezekiah Johnson shall well and truly
perform the office of administrator of Michael Tarr {of Samuel) late of Worcester County deceased according to law
Page 15 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

and shall in all respects perform the duties requred of him by law as administrator aforeaid without any injury or any
damage to any person interested , etc., etc.
The connection between Samuel Bradford’s family and the Tarr family is further bolstered by the fact that Samuel Bradford’s
son James Bradford (by his first wife) married Sarah H. Tarr. 59 She was the daughter of John Tarr Sr.’s son Israel and
therefore a niece of Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford: 60
Will of Israel Tarr - 30 March 1799 – 10 Jan 1800 - To my loving wife Molley Tarr, the plantation whereon I now
live, then to son John Tarr. If John should die without lawful heir, then to my son Levi Tarr. To my son James Tarr.
To my daughter Sarah H. Tarr one bed and furniture one chest and cone cow and calf at the age of 16 years. Witt:
Sarah [X] Harper, Wm [X] Smulling, Ephraim Matthews. Then came Samuel A. Harper [sic] and Ephraim
Matthews.
Evidence from Samuel Bradford’s own will further strengthens the connection. Two of the witnesses to his will were
Nehemiah Holland and Eliakim Jones. These two men were first cousins of Tabitha Tarr, all three being the grandchildren of
Nehemiah Holland who died 1758-1760 in Worcester County. In his will, Nehemiah named daughters Sarah Tarr and
Bridget Johnson (who were married to John Tarr and Eliakim Johnson, respectively). 61 [Note: Though the name in Samuel
Bradford’s will is spelled Eliakim Jones, that is the sole mention of an Eliakim Jones that I could find in the records of
Worcester County; however, there are several records relating to Eliakim Johnson, the name of the husband and the son of
Bridget Holland, one of whom likely signed Samuel’s will.]
Nehemiah Holland. 2 Feb 1758 – 4 Jan 1760 - "I acknowledge a deed made to my children by me
to be good which was put upon the records of our county April the 26 1746.” To eldest daughter
Sarah Tarr - pewter plate. To second daughter Tabitha Price - one pewter plate. To eldest son
Nehemiah Holland - my silver cup. To second son Thomas Holland - pewter plate. To third
daughter Bridget Johnson – one mare. To fourth daughter Betty More - one plate. To third son
William Holland - my shooting gun. To fourth son Benjamin Holland - my gun and wearing
apparel. To wife Ann Holland and her son Benjamin Holland - remainder of estate. Executor:
wife Ann and son Benjamin and "desire my friends William Aydelotte, John Selby, and Ephraim
Waggamon to see that this my last will and desires put in full force according to the true intent
and meaning thereof". Witness: William Aydelotte, Hugh Mills
Descendants of Nehemiah Holland
Sarah
Holland
Tabitha
Tarr
John
Tarr
Samuel
Bradford
Nehemiah
Holland
- 1758
Nehemiah
Holland
Nehemiah
Holland
Bridget
Holland
Eliakim
Johnson
Eliakim
Johnson
Further support for the Bradford-Tarr connection is provided by the fact that Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford’s parents, John and
Sarah Tarr, both gave depositions along with Samuel in 1799 [see above]. They were tenants in the area where Samuel
Bradford probably lived in his youth and it is possible that Samuel Bradford and Tabitha Tarr were familiar with each other
growing up.
Page 16 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

* * * * *
Ancestry of Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford
The Tarrs of Maryland all descend from a certain John 1 Tarr, who moved to Somerset County from Accomack County,
Virginia, in the 1680s. He first appeared in Accomack records in 1667 as an indentured servant of Colonel Edmund
Scarburgh, who had transported him into the colony. 62 In fact, John 1 Tarr’s first appearance in the records occurred under
very interesting circumstances; he and several other of Scarburgh’s servants plotted to escape their indentures and run away
to “New England and the Manhatens”. 63
“. . . on the night of 15 June, John Tarr [and others] took several shirts, clothes, stockings, ‘a good long gun,’ and
other things. They broke into the brewhouse and the brewer’s chest and left for Craddock Creek, where Capt.
Bowman ‘had negligently or on purpose left a boat ready afloat, let his oars be taken from his door, and his house
opened for some provisions.’ Along with the other things they had taken, they went away in the boat, but were
pursued in different ways and John Tarr [and others] were captured and returned by Lt. Col. Kendall.”
The re-captured servants, including John Tarr, were ordered to serve extra time. John would have been about 19 at the time,
since he stated that his age was about 38 years in a deposition in 1686. 64 In that deposition he also mentions a trip from
“Boquety Norton” (i.e., Bogerternorton Hundred in Somerset County, MD) to Accomack. He may have moved to Maryland
that year, since 1685 is the last year he appears on the Accomack tithable lists. 65 He was thus one of the earliest residents of
what would become Worcester County. By 1680, John 1 Tarr was married to Tabitha Watts, the daughter of John Watts, who
bequeathed to her and her heirs 300 acres in Somerset County, Maryland. 66 Before his death in 1695, John 1 Tarr had
remarried to a woman named Mary; in his will of that year, he named his four children: Michael 2 , Samuel 2 , John 2 , and Mary 2 ,
and left each of his sons 200 acres on Calkers Creek. 67 John Tarr Sr., the father of Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford, is likely the son
of one of the three sons of John 1 Tarr. Although proving his descent is complicated, a thorough analysis of various records
relating to the Tarr family yields the answer.
John 2 was the first of the sons of John 1 Tarr to pass away. He left no will, but the inventory of his estate was recorded on 20
May 1731, with his brothers Samuel 2 and Michael 2 Tarr listed as next of kin; John 2 ’s widow Mary was also named. 68 Samuel 2
Tarr passed away next, in 1740-1741. In his will he named the children of his brother John 2 : they were John 3 (Jno 2 ) (under
20 at the time), Tabitha, Esther, and Mary. 69 Since Samuel 2 Tarr named no children of his own, he presumably died without
issue. Samuel 2 Tarr also willed his nephew John 3 (Jno 2 ) into the care of Hutton Hill. Michael 2 , the remaining Tarr brother,
died in 1751, in his will naming wife Sarah, and sons Michael, Eli, and Samuel. 70 At first glance, it would appear that John
Tarr Sr., father of Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford, must be the son of John 2 , since Samuel 2 Tarr died childless and since Michael 2
Tarr named no son John in his will. In fact, that is the relationship most often presented in family trees posted on the internet.
However, upon closer examination of the records and a thorough analysis, it becomes clear that John Tarr Sr. was actually
the son of Michael 2 .
It is clear from Worcester County land records that there were two John Tarrs present in Worcester County starting around
1763. One of these men is John Tarr Sr., the father of Tabitha Bradford; the other is usually referred to in the land records as
John Tarr Jr to distinguish him. John Tarr Sr. can first be identified in the records in 1750, when Michael 2 Tarr sold him a
part of the tract Shasbury; 71 it’s clear that this is Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford’s father, because John Tarr Sr. ended up
bequeathing part of Shasbury to Tabitha’s brother, Israel Tarr. The other John Tarr, John Tarr Jr., first appears in 1763,
when Samuel 3 Tarr (Michael 2 ) sold him part of the tract Tender Dale. 72 One of these Johns is probably the son of John 2
(Jno 1 ), who died in 1731; and the other must be the son of Michael 2 , since Samuel 2 Tarr (John 1 ) died childless. Michael 2
named no son John in his will, but this may be explained by the fact that he had already provided for him by deeding him part
of Shasbury. Michael 2 sold another part of Shasbury to Elisha Tarr, who is also not listed in his will. However, both a John
Tarr and an Elisha Tarr received payments as heirs from Michael 2 Tarr’s estate in 1755, 73 which confirms that Michael did
have children named John and Elisha, who were clearly the ones to whom he deeded the tract Shasbury. It follows that
Tabitha’s father, John Tarr Sr., was the son of Michael 2 Tarr, since John Tarr Sr. possessed Shasbury and bequeathed it to his
son Israel Tarr. An examination of other evidence backs this up.
We may assume that John Tarr Sr. is older than John Tarr Jr., since they are distinguished as Sr. and Jr. in the records. That
means that if it can be determined who is older – John 2 ’s son or Michael 2 ’s son – then the older John must be John Tarr Sr.
The Somerset County tax lists provide the necessary evidence. In 1739, a John Tarr appeared as a dependent in the
household of Michael 2 Tarr. It seems clear that this John Tarr is the elder John, since he is the first to appear on the tax lists.
The question remains, was he a son of Michael 2 , or was he the son of Michael’s deceased brother John 2 ? The fact that he is
Page 17 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

listed in the household of Michael 2 seems to be good evidence he was Michael’s son, but it may have simply been that John 3
(John 2 ) was living in the household of Michael 2 after the death of his father. However, in Samuel 2 Tarr’s 1740 will he
provides for his nephew John’s education, which means Samuel 2 was probably John’s guardian. If John 3 (Jno 2 ) was the one
who appeared on the 1739 tax list, we would therefore expect to find him living with Samuel. It is also significant that John 2
Tarr does not appear on the tax list for 1723. This probably means that he only turned 16 in 1724; if this is true, then he must
have fathered all his children in the late 1720s. This would provide further proof that the John who appears with Michael in
1739 must be Michael’s son, since John 3 (Jno 2 ) would in that case have been too young to show up on the tax lists in 1739.
John
Tarr
Levi
Tarr
Israel
Tarr
- 1800
James
Tarr
Descendants of John Tarr
Molly
Sturgis
Michael
Tarr
- 1751
John
Tarr
- 1784
Sarah H.
Tarr
John
Tarr
1643 - 1695
Sarah Samuel
Tarr
Sarah
Holland
Nehemiah
Tarr
* * * * *
Elisha
Tarr
Tabitha
Tarr
John
Tarr
Michael
Tarr
Samuel
Bradford
James
Bradford
Mary
Tarr
Eli
Tarr
Sarah
Tarr
Samuel
Tarr
Eleanor
Tarr
Samuel on the 1783 Assessment: Truitts Harbour, Mulberry Grove, Morris’ Security
The 1783 tax assessment for Worcester County provides several interesting details about Samuel’s life. This source, which
was an assessment of the value of land and personal property for the purposes of taxation, provides vital information about
those listed on it. In addition to the name of the property owner, the names of the tracts he owned and their size were listed; a
man’s animals were also counted and valued, and a value was placed on his other personal property. The assessment also
acts as a kind of census for property owners, since the number of white males and white females living in his household were
enumerated. Samuel Bradford is listed in Boquetenorton Hundred in Worcester County as the owner of portions of three
tracts: 145 acres of Mulberry Grove, 146 acres of Morris’ Security, and 100 acres of Truitts Harbour. 74
The land was assessed at about 15 shillings per acre, for a total value of £292. Samuel also owned 3 horses and 13 head of
black cattle, valued at £32, 10s, and personal property worth £36. The entirety of his land and personal property was thus
valued at £351, 15s, resulting in a tax assessment of £4, 7s, 10d. In his household there were 5 white males and 6 white
Page 18 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

females. The number of males in his household is easy to account for: they probably consisted of Samuel himself, and his
four sons William, Peter, Adam, and James. The females probably consisted of his wife (either ____ Fitzgerald or Tabitha
Tarr), plus his daughters Eleanor, Sarah, Nancy, Comfort, and Mary.
Copy of page from 1783 Worcester County tax assessment containing entry for Samuel Bradford
Although Samuel Bradford was listed as owner of Truitts Harbour, Mulberry Grove and Morris Security, I found no deeds
prior to 1783 to indicate transfer of ownership to him. However, there are two deeds in which all three tracts were conveyed.
The first is a deed dated 8 November 1770, in which John Morris conveyed to his son William Morris portions of Mulberry
Grove and Truitts Harbour that he had purchased from John Truitt, and also the tract Conveniency. 75 (Conveniency was one
of a few tracts later resurveyed to form the tract Morris’ Security.) Later, in a deed dated 7 December 1774, John and
William Morris conveyed portions of the three tracts Mulberry Grove, Truitts Harbor, and Morris’ Security to a certain
Zadock Wright. 76 This appears to precisely fit the lands Samuel was settled on in 1783. A deed from 22 May 1817 confirms
that title to the properties never passed from the family of Zadock Wright: 77
AG: 489, 490 22 May 1817 Deed Barzilla Parker, et al to John Bishop 26 Apr 1817 And Grantor Sally Parker,
wife of Barzilla $1000 for 125 A. MULBERRY GROVE, TRUITTS HARBOR and MORRIS SECURITY
Sally Parker acquired property from the death of her father Zadock Wright and her brother John Wright, dec.
Grantee John Bishop, son of Benjamin
Since ownership of the properties passed directly to Zadock Wright’s daughter Sarah after the deaths of her father and
brother, it may be deduced that Samuel Bradford probably paid taxes on the land in 1783 as a leaseholder, not as an owner.
This seems to be the only possible solution, despite the fact that the head of the name column in the assessment clearly reads
“Owners Names”. Leases are almost never recorded in the Worcester County deed books, so if there was an actual
Page 19 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

instrument by which Samuel obtained the lease of the lands, it would not be discovered through the course of land record
research.
The lands Samuel Bradford was leasing in 1783 were contiguous. As illustrated on the following map, they were located to
the northeast of the Spence and Robertson lands where Samuel was likely living in his youth. It is not clear how long Samuel
had been living on the lands. If he was leasing them from Zadock Wright, then we might surmise that he was not living on
them prior to 7 December 1774, when Wright purchased them.
* * * * *
On 2 April 1790, Samuel Bradford became a freeholder of Worcester County. From Joseph Bousee he purchased “all his
right title in and unto all that Tract of Land called Claywels Advice and all that Tract of Land called Newark and
part of a tract of land called Claywels Security” for £55 Maryland currency; John Selby and James Selby were witnesses to
the instrument. 78 The land was down the Pocomoke River from Snow Hill, in Mattapany Hundred, close to the lands held by
the Tarrs, his wife’s kin. On the same day that he purchased his land, Samuel also purchased the “negro girl named Taymor”
from Peter Townsend. 79 Samuel appeared on the census in this year; other than himself, in his household were two males
under 16 and 6 females. 80
The females may be identified as Samuel’s wife, Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford, and five of his daughters (Eleanor, Sarah, Nancy,
Comfort, Mary, or Delilah). The two males were probably his youngest sons, James and John. William was already an adult
by this time and was likely living on his own somewhere. Peter and Adam, who were still young (Peter was about 23 and
Adam about 15), may have already left the county by this date and headed west.
Page 20 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

On 2 April 1790, the same date of his purchase of land and
a slave, Samuel Bradford appeared as a witness to John
Bradford’s bond to ensure his proper discharge of the office
of tobacco inspector. 81 [A copy of Samuel’s signature on
the bond is given to the left.] When someone signs as a
witness for an individual with the same surname, it is
frequently a hint that they were related. However, in this
case the hint may be misleading. Since the date of the
tobacco inspector bond was the same as Samuel’s purchase of land and slaves, it may simply be that Samuel acted as a
witness because he happened to be in court that day and not because he was related to John Bradford. John Bradford is
covered in my work on the other unconnected Bradfords of 18 th century Worcester County. There is no other indication or
hint of a relationship in the records pertaining to either John or Samuel. Since this John Bradford seems to have been a
member of the same church as the family of John 2 Bradford (Nath 1 ), it seems more likely that he was related to that family
than to Samuel’s.
* * * * *
Another record in which Samuel Bradford appears in the early 1790s is the will of James Lindsey, which Samuel witnessed
on 13 October 1794. 82
James Lindsey. 13 Oct 1794 – 22 April 1796 – To son Matthew Lindsey. To son Major Lindsey. To daughter Betty
Lindsey. Executor: son Matthew. Witt: Robert Schoolfield, John Milbourne, Samuel Bradford.
It is not clear that there is much significance to Samuel’s witnessing John Lindsey’s will. The two of them were neighbors;
Lindsey’s dwelling plantation (a tract called The Lock) was just east of Samuel’s land, as depicted in the following map,
which also shows the Tarr lands around Calkers Creek. 83
Page 21 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

On 14 September 1790, a few months after purchasing Claywells Advice, Samuel obtained a warrant to resurvey the tract.
The resulting patent for the new tract Bradford’s Luck was issued on 11 September 1794. 84 Bradfords Luck was an 83 acre
tract, consisting of the original 50 acres of Claywells Advice with a vacancy of 33 acres added to it. A copy of the certificate
of survey for Bradfords Luck is located on this and the following page.
As illustrated in the map to the left, it
appears that Samuel did not make use of the
rights he had purchased to the tracts Newark
and Claywells Security, which were directly
adjacent to, but not incorporated into,
Bradford’s Luck. Only Claywell’s Advice
was incorporated into his survey.
Page 22 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 23 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Samuel Bradford appeared on the 1800 federal census for Worcester County. 85 In his household were himself, 1 male aged
16 to 25 (likely James), and 1 male under 10 (probably John). Tabitha also appeared, as did 3 females aged 11 to 16, perhaps
Delilah, Comfort and Mary.
* * * * *
On 22 April 1800, Samuel Bradford obtained a warrant to resurvey Bradfords Luck in order to add 90 acres of vacant land to
the tract. On 20 May 1802, a patent was issued to him for the resulting track, now 173 acres. 86 It was renamed Littleworth,
perhaps a wry comment on the quality of the land. (A copy of the patent is listed on the following three pages.) Littleworth
was located southwest of Snow Hill, between the Worcester Highway and Pocomoke River, in what is now the Pocomoke
State Forest: 87
Page 24 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 25 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 26 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 27 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

* * * * *
From 1800 to 1811, Samuel appeared in a variety of records in Worcester County orphans court relating to the orphan
William Price, who was the youngest son of his daughter Sarah’s deceased husband, Arthur Price. On 14 October 1810,
Samuel was surety for Sarah’s guardianship of William. 88 The orphan John Price was placed into the care of Eliakim Johnson
(first cousin of Samuel Bradford’s wife Tabitha) and Michael Tarr (another cousin of Tabitha) was made guardian of the
orphan Arthur Price. On 10 February 1801, Samuel himself took over the guardianship of William Price; 89 this may have
been due to his daughter Sarah’s marriage to Coulburn Long, which took place some time in late 1800/early 1801. 90 Sarah
was married to Arthur Price for only a matter of months before his death, since their marriage bond was issued in 1800; 91
according to Bradford Descendants, Arthur’s son William Price was born on 28 June 1792, 92 so Sarah was not his natural
mother. On several occasions in subsequent years (17 February 1801, 10 December 1805, 11 February 1806), 93 men were
appointed to view William Price’s estate in Samuel’s care. Samuel was discharged from his guardianship of William Price
on 12 February 1811. 94 Samuel appeared in two other records from Worcester County orphans court before his death; on 13
August 1811 he presented his 10 th account of his guardianship of William Price and on 24 August 1811, Samuel paid $81.87
to the court, which was the property of William Price per a receipt dated 25 July 1811. 95 This record from 24 August 1811 is
the last in which Samuel appears before his will was proved on 11 February 1812.
* * * * *
Prior to his death, Samuel Bradford appeared on the federal census of 1810 in Worcester County, with 2 males aged 16 to 25
(James and John), his wife Tabitha, and 2 females aged 16 to 25. 96
* * * * *
Samuel wrote his will on 15 December 1810; it was proved in Worcester County court on 11 February 1812. 97 A copy of the
will as it appears in the Worcester County will books is presented below, along with a transcription. As noted earlier, two of
the subscribing witnesses (Nehemiah Holland and Eliakim Jones/Johnson) were first cousins of Samuel’s wife Tabitha (Tarr)
Bradford. I have not been able to identify the witness Lancy Tunnell.
Page 28 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Page 29 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Will of Samuel Bradford
MSA CR 50,316, Folio 316
In the name of God Amen. I Samuel Bradford of Worcester County in the State of Maryland considering the
uncertainty of this mortal life and being of sound mind and memory blessed be almighty God for the same do make
and publish this my last will and testament in manner and form following first I give and bequeath unto my beloved
wife Tabitha Bradford all my lands that I have any right to or title in during her widowhood. and after her marriage
or death I give and bequeath all my aforesaid lands that I have any right to or title in unto my son John Bradford and
his heirs or assigns forever – also I give unto my said wife one yoke of oxen my cart one plow one harrow + my
horse. I give and bequath [sic] unto my two daughters Elenor Bevans and Delilah Bradford a feather bed and
furniture a piece also I give unto my said wife two feather beds & furnitures and two of my best cows [torn] also
give each of my said two daughters Elenor and Delilah one cow a piece. I give and bequeath unto my son James
Bradford two cows. I give and bequeath unto my daughter Sarah Handcock one cow. I give unto my daughter Nancy
Bradford one cow. I give unto my son John Bradford my still. I give unto the heirs of my deceased son William
Bradford two shillings. I also I give to my son John Bradford my gun I give unto my sons Peter Bradford and Adam
Bradford one dollar a piece. I give unto my two daughters Comfort Bradford and Mary Bradford one dollar each. my
will and desire is for all the residue or remaining part of my personal property not yet given way including my
money and all the rest to be equally divided between my said sons + daughters namely John Elenor Delilah James
and Nancy Bradford and lastly my will and desire is that there shall be no administration on my estate but three
impartial men shall settle and adjust all disputes that may happen in dividing my s d estate. the said three men is to be
choosen by the heirs of my estate if they shall disagree in the men then for the Judges of the orphans Court to choos
them. I al[torn] hereby revoke all my former wills by me made – in witness whereof I have hereto set my hand and
seal the 15 th day of December in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and and ten. Signed sealed
published and delivered by the above named Samuel Bradford to be his last will and testament in the presents of us
who have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses in the presents of the testator. N.B. the two cows in
possession of my two daughters Sarah Handcock & Elenor Bevans is the same that I have mentioned in this will
Nehemiah Holland his
Eliakam Jones Samuel [X] Bradford (seal)
her mark
Lancy [X] Tunnell
mark
Worcester County Be[?] the 11 th day of February anno Domini 1812 there came Nehemiah Holland Eliakam Jones
and Lancy Tunnell the three subscribing Witnesses to the aforegoing last will and testament of Samuel Bradford late
of Worcester County deceased and personally made oath on the holy Evangely of almighty God that they did see the
said Samuel Bradford the testator sign and seal this will and that they heard him publish pronounce and declare the
same to be his last will and testament that at the time of his so doing he was to the best of their apprehensions of
sound and disposing mind memory and understanding and that they respectively subscribed their names as witnesses
to this will in the presence and at the request of the testator and in the presence of each other
Before Matthew Hopkins Reg Wills for Wor. Coty.
Page 30 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Samuel Bradford was born before 1744, probably in the 1730s, and was in Worcester County, Maryland at the age of 15. He
died in Worcester County between 24 August 1811 and 11 February 1812.
He married _____ Fitzgerald before 1764; they had the following children: 98
+ S2. i. WILLIAM BRADFORD. b.c.1760-1764 in Worcester Co., Md., d.bef.15 Dec 1810. [See section below on
William Bradford (1810) for further information about Samuel’s son and for information about the
possible identity of his wife and children.]
S3. ii. PETER BRADFORD. b.c.1767 in Worcester County, d.c. 1844 in Somerset County, Pa.; no issue
+ S4. iii. ADAM BRADFORD. b.16 April 1775 in Worcester County, d. 5 June 1849 in Mo.
+ S5. iv. ELEANOR BRADFORD. b.1770-1780 or 1787 in Worcester County, d.aft.1839
+ S6. v. SARAH BRADFORD. b.c.1780 in Worcester County, d.1 July 1859 in Kentucky
+ S7. vi. JAMES BRADFORD. b.19 Feb. 1780 in Worcester Co., Md., d.24 Sept. 1852
+ S8. vii. NANCY BRADFORD. b.c.1783 in Worcester Co., Md., d.aft.1843
The mother of two of Samuel’s children cannot be determined. Though they are named in Samuel Bradford’s will, they are
not noted by Samuel Hancock in his 1888 letter on Samuel Bradford’s children. They may therefore be the issue of either
wife:
S9. viii. COMFORT BRADFORD.
S10. ix. MARY BRADFORD.
Samuel Bradford married second Tabitha Tarr, the daughter of John and Sarah (Holland) Tarr of Worcester County. They
wed probably in 1783 or 1784, and had the following children:
+ S11. x. JOHN BRADFORD. b.c.1790 in Worcester Co., Md., d. 17 July 1826 in Ky.
S12. xi. DELILAH BRADFORD.
S13. xii. ?LIDA BRADFORD. Existence unconfirmed. The name is mentioned among Samuel Bradford’s second
set of children in a letter from Samuel 3 Hancock (Sarah 2 Samuel 1 Bradford) dated 1888.
Page 31 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Documentary Timeline of Samuel Bradford’s Life
[NOTE: since the year of Samuel’s birth is unknown I have listed his age as greater than or equal to the age he would have
been had he been born in 1744, which I consider the absolute latest he could have been born. The age is not meant to be
exact. It is simply the youngest he could have been in any particular year.]
YEAR AGE EVENT
1744 >=0 born in or before this year [son Wm at least 18 in 1780; Samuel at least 18 when he fathered him]
1759 >=15 age mentioned in Samuel’s deposition from 1799
1760-1764 son William born
1763 >=19 year mentioned in Samuel’s deposition from 1799
1765 Nov 1 >=21 debtor of James Smyly’s estate
1767 >=23 son Peter born
1775 Apr 16 >=31 son Adam born
1780 >=36 daughter Sarah and son James born
Jul 25 militia muster: 6 th Class, Capt. Wm Purnell’s co., Sinepuxent Battalion; son Wm in same company
1783 >=39 Tax List: 146 acres Morris Security, 145 acres Mulberry Grove; 100 acres Truitt’s Harbour
daughter Nancy born
1784 Nov 10 >=40 married to Tabitha Tarr by this date, which is the date of her father’s will
1790 >=46 on census 12600 [1 male over 16; 2 males under 16; 6 females]
Apr 2 purchases negro girl Taymor from Peter Townsend
Apr 2 buys Claywells Advice, Claywells Security & right to Newark for 55 pds from Joseph Bayly
Apr 2 witness to John Bradford tobacco inspector bond
Sept 14 obtains warrant to resurvey tract Claywells Advice
1792 Oct 13 >=48 witness to James Lindsey’s will
1794 Sept 11 >=50 patent for Bradford’s Luck
1799 Mar 22 >=55 gives deposition concerning tract Rochester
1800 >=51 on federal census [1 male under 10; 1 male 16-25; 1 male 45+; 3 fems 10-15; 1 fem 45+]
Oct 14 surety for orphan William Price, guardian Samuel’s daughter Sarah Price
1801 Feb 10 >=52 guardian of William Price
Feb 17 John Taylor & Thomas Slocomb to view estate of William Price in care of Samuel
1803 Nov 25 >=54 bond for Michael Tarr who died intestate
1805 Dec 10 >=56 John Holland & John Taylor to view estate of William Price in care of Samuel
1806 Feb 11 >=57 John Holland & John Taylor to view estate of William Price in care of Samuel
1810 >=61 on federal census [2 male 16-25; 1 male 45+; 2 fems 16-25; 1 fem 45+]
Dec 15 date of Samuel’s will
1811 Feb 12 >=62 Samuel discharged from guardianship of William Price; Severn Pruitt new guardian
Aug 13 statement from Samuel’s 10 th account on guardianship of William Price
Aug 24 Samuel paid $81.87, property of William Price and receipt dated 25 July 1811
1812 Feb 11 >=63 Samuel’s will recorded for probate
Page 32 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

T1. William Bradford (d.c.1810)
There are several probate records in Worcester County, Maryland, relating to a William Bradford who died intestate around
1810, leaving a wife Sarah and daughters Henny and Elizabeth. This relationship of this William Bradford to the other
Bradfords of Worcester County is not apparent from the probate records and further analysis of the records does not yield any
conclusive evidence as to his parentage. A thorough analysis of all the known William Bradfords of Worcester County seems
to indicate that he may have been the son of Samuel Bradford of Worcester County. But before addressing his probable
parentage, it’s necessary to go over those records that may be definitively attributed to him and to glean whatever is possible
from them. Hereafter I will refer to him as “William Bradford 1810,” to distinguish him from other William Bradfords of the
area.
* * * * *
Facts Relating to William Bradford 1810
William Bradford died before 11 December 1810, when his widow Sarah Bradford was ordered to sell his estate. 99 This
order came three days before administration on the estate was granted to Sarah, who gave Peter Waters and Lemuel P.
Spence as securities. 100
Administration Bond of William Bradford, 14 December 1810
Maryland Know all men by these presents that we Sarah Bradford, Peter Waters and Lemuel P Spence are held and
firmly bound unto the State of Maryland in the full and just sum of Five thousand dollars current money of maryland
to be paid unto the said State of maryland To which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves our heirs
Executors and administrators in and to the whole jointly and severally firmly by these presents. Sealed with our seals
and dated this fourteenth day of December anno Domini The Condition of the above obligation is such that if the
above bounden Sarah Bradford shall well and truly perform the office of Administratrix of William Bradford late of
Worcester County deceased according to law and shall in all respects perform the duties required of her by law as
administratrix aforesaid, without any injury or damage to any person interested in the faithful performance of said
office then the above obligation to be void; it is otherwise to be in full force and virtue in law
Signed Sealed and delivered Sarah x Bradford
in the presence of Peter Waters
Matthew Hopkins Lemuel P Spence
Letters of Administration granted to the aforesaid Sarah Bradford in the following form (having) first administered
to her the oath prescribed by law To wit Maryland The state of Maryland to all persons to whom these presents
shall come Greeting. Know ye that whereas William Bradford late of Worcester County deceased, died in testate as
it is said leaving at her death personal estate within the State of Maryland wherefore administration of all the goods
chattels and credits of the said deceased is hereby granted and committed unto Sarah Bradford. Witness Littleton
Robins Esquire chief Justice of the Orphan’s Court for Worcester County this fourteenth day of December Anno
Domini 1810
Test Matthew Hopkins Reg Will Wor Coty
* * * * *
Sarah Bradford submitted the inventory of her husband’s estate to court on 15 December 1810. It totaled $1456.96 and
included four slaves: Sarah (25 years old), Rose (7 years old), Isaac (5 years old), and Mary (2 years old). It also included
numerous livestock, including a dozen pigs, over a dozen head of cattle, 2 oxen, 15 sheep, 14 geese, and 2 mares. Judging
from the nature of the items in the inventory, it appears likely that William Bradford was a farmer. In March 1811, Sarah
Bradford returned the account of the estate sale to court. Transcriptions of both records follow.
* * * * *
Inventory of the Estate of William Bradford, 15 December 1810 101
Worcester County The State of Maryland to Joseph Gillis and Jacob Teague Greeting: This is to authorise you Jointly to
appraise the Goods Chattels and personal Estate of William Bradford late of Worcester County deceased so far as they shall
come to your sight and knowledge Each of you having fist taken the oath or affirmation hereto annexed, a certificate whereof
Page 33 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

you are to return annexed to an Inventory of the said Goods Chattels and personal Estate by you appraised in Dollars and
Cents; and in the same Inventory you are to set down in a Column or Columns opposite to each article the value thereof.
Witness Littleton Robins Esq. Chief Justice of the orphans Court in Worcester County this 14 th day of December Anno
Domini 1810 Test. Matthew Hopkins Reg. Wills
You Joseph Gillis Jacob Teague do swear that you will well and truly without partiality or prejudice value and appraise the
Goods Chattels and personal Estate of William Bradford deceased so far as the same shall come to your sight and knowledge
and will in all respects perform your actions as appraisers to the best of your skill and judgment So Help you God
Sworn Before John [??] Bishop
this 14 th day of December 1810
The Inventory of the Goods Chattels and personal Estate of William Bradford late of Worcester County deceased appraised
by us the subscribers in Dollars and Cents on the 15 th of December 1810
2 sows 6 00 1 yoke of steers 32 00
1 shoate 6 1 red cow 8
1 Turnip patch 1 1 old Brindle cow 6
1 yoke old steers 24 1 Black cow 8
1 Pide cow 8
2 small steers ? years old 8 00 1 Drawing knife 15
1 Brindle Steer ? years old 5 2 Writing Cose 30
1 Brindle Heifer, 3 years Old 6 2 Dito Dito 10
1 Red Heifer 3 years old 6 1 Adz 50
15 sheep one dollar twenty } 18 75 1 spaid & shovel 75
Five Cents } 3 Ditto Clauses[?] 40
Half of Cursus[?] 2 3 Grubbing Hoes 75
14 Geese[?] 25 cents each 3 50 3 Sashels[?] 15
2 ox yokes 75 cents each 1 50 Oyslet Tongs Cockle pak [?] 40
2 yearling 2 Dollars Each 4 1 plow 20
3 Cows first choice 16 2 old Buckets 10
3 Hogs second Choice 16 1 small Cooler 5
3 third Choice 12 6 Bee hives 6
3 fourth Choice 10 1 Grind stone 75
2 Deus[?] 2 1 Cider trough 1
1 Wood[?] Cart 20 1 large kettle iron 1 25
1 Brown Mare 7 years old 30 1 small Dito 20
1 Bug [?] Dito 5 years old 25 1 large Pot Iron 10
1 Black Coalt 2 years old 20 1 small Dito 25
1 Sand[?] Dito 6 months old 6 1 --- Dito 50
1 plow 1 50 1 Iron Oven 1
1 plau 15 1 small Iron spider 15
1 Harrow 75 1 pair Pot Hooks 25
1 Dito 75 2 Sets Dito 20
1 Drig[?] Harrow 25 1 pot Rack 50
1 Hd[?] trough 10 1 Hommey[?] Mortar 6
2 Cullutin[?] and trace 30 1 Grid Iron flesh forks 10
1 Small trough 5 1 wooken Iron[?] Cadee[?] 5
2[3?] Barrels [?] 75 4 Bushels potato seed 1 50
Flax in the straw 2 2/3 Dito Insh[?] 70
3 Bridles 30 1 Mill straner[?] 5
1 Cracome[?] 10 1 pair Wafel Irons 75
2 Axes[?] 1 Dollar Each 2 1 tea kettle 50
1 Hd[?] Ax 15 1 pair Sad[?] bins[?] 25
1 pair Iron Wedges 75 1 Hackle 75
Page 34 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

3 screw Augurs 50 1 pair Fletyards[?] 25
1 frou[?] 25 1 Dito Dito Dito 1 50
1 Chyels[?] 1 file 10 1 pair Winding Blades 3
1 Hammer 10 1 Hand saw 50
2 Ox Chains 75 cents each 1 50
1 pair Iron[?] apples 33
1 Set of old iron[?] Chains 25
1 gun 1[?] 2 Earthen pots 45
1 old Chairs 75 3 stone pots 62
1 pine safe 1 50 1 sone[?] pitcher 25
2 Close Brushes 25 4 Black Jugs 25
3 Gimblets[?] 10 2 small Pots 10
3 Candle stands 25 2 Mous traps 20
1Cream pot & pepper Box 10 2 pair sheep shears 50
4 Bottles 30 1 tea kettle 10
8 large Green Edged plates 33 1 Brass kettle 1
6 small Dito Dito 30 6 Baker pans tin 37
6 Cups & saucers 15 1 Lot of Tin 75
1 shuger Dish 25 1 Earthen pan 1 tin Dito 10
6 Blue Edged plates[?] 25 2 Bread Trays 50
8 old plates 8 3 Fat[?] tub[?] 25 cents each 75
3 Tumbler Glasses 20 1 Meat Tab[?] 1 50
1 Vinegar Cruet & large Glass 10 3 Barrels 50
1 Black Cup 5 2/2 Bushels salt 2 25
2 Baking pans 6 1 Brandy Barrel 50
1 Tea Pot 25 2 wine scores[?] 1 75
2 Bread Baskets & cover[?] 6 2 split sires[?] 75
2 Green Edged Dishes 25 2 sifters 25
1 White Dito 10 1 cow Bell 25
2 small Earthen Bowls 8 1 reap[?] Hook 10
2 small Cups 12 1 Thrashing Shrales[?] 10
1 Tin Coffee Pot 15 2 Gallons Brandy 1 50
5 puter plates 50 3 Bags & wallet 75
1 puter Dish 30 30 lb poark 2
4[?] puter spoons 10 Some preserve fruit 20
1 Puter Bason 50 some dried fruit 10
1 Tutor ladle 12 3 lt soap 20
6 Knives & forks 1 10 lb sugar 75
2 dish[?] pans 10 7 u Coffee 1 40
1 pair Candle moals[?] 5 3 w Hogs lard 30
1 lb Tallow 12 1 small pot & Butter 15
1 Blue Chest 1 50 3 large casks without h[__] 30
1 Womans saddle 2 3 open Barrels 30
1 old oven & jug 5 3 Bushels rye 1 25
1 pair Wool yards & Basket 50 1 ½ Bushels peas 75
Some tea[?] 6 ¾ Bushels Beans 50
1 pair Cotton Cards 15 1 Cagg 2 old Guns 10
2 stone Jugs 50 5 Drum lines [?] 15
2 Chamber Pots 30 10 Gallons Vinigar 1
1 Connou[?] sail 1 50
50 lb tobacco 1 50
1 ¼ Bushels flax seed 1 25
Some leather 1
Page 35 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

2 sithes[?] wheat 1 50
1 old Chest 25 4 yds Lining 1 25
2 lbs[?] Brick flane[?] 2 8 1 pine Chest 1 50
1 sheap skin 5 1 Walnut Table 4
1 Butter Pit[?] 10 1 Table Cover 75
1 Warping Burz[?] skin[?] 1 25 1 Dito Dito 75
Weaving loom 4 1 small Walnut Table 2 50
1 Bed Bolster N o 1. 45 w[?] 14 40 1 Table Cover 33
1 pair sheets N o 1 2 50 1 Walnut stand & Cover 1 50
2 Blue and White Coundeys[?] 2 1 Dressing Box 50
1 white Counterpin 8 1 Carge[?] Water 30
2 pillow Cases 50 1 Coffee Mill 20
1 Bed Bolster [______] } ?? ?? 1 Lit of Books[?] 2
@ 30 cents } 1 saving Box & Hazers[?] 50
3 sheets N o 2 3 1 Decanter & Picher 30
2 Blankets Do 3 2 Sugar[?] Desks 10
1 Bed N o 3. 30 lbs @ 25 Cents 8 75 1 Looking Glass 25
1 pair sheets 1 50 1 Mans Saddle 75
4 Bed Quilts 4 1 Comb Basket & phaz[?] 5
1 Bed N o 4. 54 lbs @ 30 cents 16 20 6 Flag Bottom Chairs 50
1 Frame[?] [????] 4 1 Lot of old Crockery Wair 25
3 Blankets 2 1 Well Bucket 50
1 Bed quilt 1 50 Wearing Apparel 11 20?
1 Blue and white Counte[?] pin 2 Shovel and jones[?] 75
1 Bed N o 5 34 lbs @ 30 cents 11 70 1 pair Hand Irons 1
1 pair sheets N o 5 2 1 Frying pan 30
1 Blanket 1 12[?] Casting Hooks 25
1 Bed quilt 1 1 small Chair & hook 4
1 White Counter pen 8 1 lot Cotton thread [____] 5
Red[?] & Blue Counterpin 8 5 Turkeys 1? 25
3 Bed quilts 3 37 Dunghill Fowls 2
1 Bedstead N o 1 mat Cord[?] 1 50 10 lbs Bacon 70
1 Bedstead mat Coro[?] N o 2 1 11 Stacks Foddar[?] 16 50
1 Bedstead Dito Dito N o 3 75 3 Oat Stacks 10
1 Dito Dito N o 4 1 25 150 Bushels Corn @ 50 cents 75
1 Dito Dito N o 5 1 50 Short corn 2
1 Maple Desk 6 Roten Corn 1 50
3 pair Pillow Cases 1 50 1 Flax Brak[?] 20
2[?] Table Cloths 1 50 Negro Sarah 25 years old 200
3 Dito Dito 1 75 Negro Rose 7 years old 100
2 Truite[?] 75 Negro Isaac 5 years old 90
3 Dito 75 Negro Mary 2 years old 50
1 roap[?] 10
Wheat on the Ground 5
1 Small Trunk 75 1 lb Lead ??
Some Shot 15 Cask on haud[?] 334 ??
½ Gure[?] of Paper 12 Total Amount $1456 96
1 Moxoeco[?] Pocket Book 20
We the subscribers do Certify that the within and foregoing is a true and perfect Inventory of all and singular the Goods
Chattels and personal Estate of William Bradford deceased as far as they hath come to our sight and knowledge Witness our
hands and seals this 15 th day of December Anno Domini 1810
Joseph J Gilliss
Jacob Teague
Page 36 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Worcester County Sc the 15 th day of December Anno Domini 1810 then Came Sarah Bradford administratrix of William
Bradford late of Worcester County deceased and made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God that the within and
foregoing is a true and perfect Inventory of all and singular the Goods Chattels and personal Estate of the said Deceased that
have come to her hands or possession at the time of the making thereof and that what hath since or shall hereafter come to her
hands or possession she will return in an additional Inventory that she Knows of no Concealment of any part or parcel of the
deceaseds Estate by any person whatsoever and that if she shall hereafter discover any Concealment or suspect any to be she
will acquaint the Register of Wills therewith that it may be Enquired into according to law Before Matthew
Hopkins Reg Wills for Wor Coty
* * * * *
Account of Estate Sale of William Bradford 102
Worcester County fs. The State of Maryland To Sarah Bradford Greeting The Orphans Court of Worcester County reposing
special confidence in you have appointed you some time past administrator of William Bradford deceased and do hereby
authorize and impower you to sell and dispose of the whole of the personal estate each of the personal property of the
deceased as you shall think most Conducive to the Benefit of the representatives at public auction after you shall have first
given ten days public notice by advertisement previous to the day of sale at which sale you are to allow a credit of six months
to each person who shall become a purchaser to an amount greater than three Dollars on each purchaseer giving obligations
with good security on Interest form the day of sale and in what manner you shall have Executed this trust you are to make
known to the said Court by your return fairly and distinctly made and ruled with double collumns so as to show the appraised
value of each article and the amount for which the same shall be sold on or Before the second Tuesday [?] of March next
annexed to this Commission, to be accompanied with an affidavit of the person who shall act as Clerk of the sale to the truth
thereof Witness Litttleton Robins Esq Chief Justice of the said Court the 14 th day of December Anno Domini 1810. Issued
this 15 th day of December anno Domini 1810 Test Matthew Hopkins Reg Wills of Wor Coty
A List of Articles sold Belonging to the Estate of William Bradford deceased agreeably to an order of the Orphans Court of
Worcester County by Sarah Bradford Administrator on the 27 th day of December Anno Domini 1810 with the Sale and
appraisement annexed as follows.
app sale
1 sow 3 -- 3 10 2 screw augers -- 50 -- 51
1 yoke of old steers 24 28 50 1 hoe 25 17
1 old Brindle Cow 6 6 55 2 Chisels 10 5
1 Pide Cow 8 7 75 1 pair Iron Tropples 33 12 ½
1 Prindle Heifer 3 years old 6 5 40 1 Lott of old Iron 23 8
1 red Heifer 3 years old 6 5 55 1 Draw Knife 15 12
11 sheep 13 75 16 20 2 Weeding Hoes 30 33
Half of Canoe 2 1 20 1 adz 50 50
1 ox yoke 75 70 1 spade 37 17
1 Small yearling 2 2 1 Bolt Clivis[?] 14 10
3 hogs first Choice 16 25 37 2 Grubbing Hoes 75 40
2 second Choice 9 32 14 80 awther Tongs & Cocklerakes 40 60 ½
1 Bay mare 5 years old 25 43 25 1 Wash Tub 12 10
1 Pomel Colt 6 months old 6 13 25 2 old Buckets 10 6
2 plows 2 25 36 4 Bee hives 4 1 90
1 Drag Harrow 25 17 1 Grind stone 75 1 65
1 Cider Trough 1 70 1 small Iron Kettle 20 27
2 Barrels 75 1 1 Spider Do 15 28
1 Bridle 15 10 1 Milk Strainer 5 4
1 Axe 1 1 1 Hand saw 50 30
1 Gun 1 1 36
old shears 33 30
2 Gimblets ?? 8
Page 37 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

1 Cream Puff [?] 5 6 5 Flag Bottom Chairs 2 8 1 56
2 Brindle Horses 2 years old 8 8 60 14 Dunghill Fowls 77 1
1 Hand saw 50 30 2 Oat stacks 6 66 6 36
6 Cups and saucers 15 30 50 Bushels of corn @ 2/5 25 10
1 Shugar Dish 25 ?? 1 Rope 10 14
1 Bread Basket 60 12 1 pair of sheets 2 2 17
4 Puter plates 40 51 2 Gallons of Brandy 1 50 2 70
1 Puter Dish 36 56 2 Earthen Pots 45 47
5 Baking Pans Tin 30 10 Mouse Trap 10 2
1 Lot of Tin 75 29 1 ½ Bushels of Peas 75 40
1 wire seive 87 50 1 ox yoke 75 70
2 spit Do 75 45 1 Swingle Tree 10 17
5 Oxumhim[?] hooks 15 15 2 old Casks 20 30
1 Cannoe Sale 1 50 1 6 Articles sold that was not appraised
6 old Tobacco 1 50 2 41 1 cuff 1 57
1 Read N E 35 th 8 75 13 60 iron 41
1 P Sheets 1 50 83 piece of Tristen 36
4 Bead quilts 4 5 10 2 steel Traps 1 1
3 Bead quilts 3 3 69 2 Case Bottles 28
1 Beadstead Matt third ?? 75 61 11 apple Trees 60
1 Mans saddle 75 60 Lote of py 255 3 Bushels 1 65
1 Shugar Dish 5 5 $ 275 88 273 88
Worcester County fs. The 1 st day of March Anno Domini 1811 William Parker personally appeared Before the subscriber a
Justice of the peace for the County afsd. and made Oath on the Holy Evangely of almighty God that he acted as Clerk at the
Sale of the personal Estate of William Bradford decd. and that the within list Contains a true account of all the Property said
deceased which was sold by Sarah Bradford adminsitrator on the day therein mentioned and that the same was sold for the
prices respectively annexed to the several articles in the sales coluns Witness my hand
Matthew Davis
February Term 19 th March 1811 Ordered by the justices of the Orphans Court of Worcester County that the foregoing return
Containing an account of the Sale of part f the personal Estate of William Bradford deceased be received and recorded and
that the said sale be Confirmed Teste Matthew Hopkins Reg Wills for Wor. Coty
* * * * *
The list of debts due William Bradford’s estate was recorded on 16 May 1811. 103 Just one debt was listed, a note from Nancy
Spence. She was the wife of George Spence and mother of Lemuel P. Spence.
William Bradford – Debts – 16 May 1811
A list of sperate Debts due the Estate of William Bradford
late of Worcester County deceased received by Sarah Bradford adminis
tratrix to wit
Recieved of Nancy Spence one Note dated 31 st day
of December 1808 for 50 L 10P 9 Equal to
Interest 26 years and 28 days is
Selby Parker in Account
[Total] 132.10
Worcester County fs. The 16 th day of May Anno Domini 1811 Then
Came Sarah Bradford administratrix of William Bradford deceased
and made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God that the
above is a just and true list of the debts sperate due to the said
deceased that have come to her hands or possession
Before Matthew Hopkins Reg. Wills for Wor Coty
* * * * *
Page 38 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

The final account of William Bradford’s estate was recorded in Worcester County court on 9 August 1811. 104 Among
William Bradford’s debts were $3.27 owed James Holland, $1.94 owed R. L. Bunee, 66 cents owed Belitha Hook, and $18
owed to Thomas R. P. Spence (brother of Lemuel Spence and son of Nancy Spence, both mentioned above).
Account of William Bradford, 15 December 1810
Register of Wills Office Worcester County Do. Sarah Bradford administratrix of William Bradford late of Worcester
County deceased To Inventory of the deceaseds estate exhibited by you into this office on the 15 th day of December
anno Domini
1810 amounting to $1456.96
To this sum claimed on the sale of a part of said
estate p list sales filed 19 th march 1811 $55.97
To debts collected and returned sperate p test
thereof exhibited the 16 th day of May 1811 $150.0
$1665.03
Cr By the following payments & disbursements vis
By cash paid Belitha Hook for plank to make the
deceaseds coffin P account & receipt .75
By ditto paid John Williiams for making coffin 3.0
By ditto paid Jacob Teague for acting as an apprais
er of the deceaseds estate and as a commisioner for 4.0
dividing such part thereof as was not sold p receipt
By ditto paid Joseph I. Gillis for acting as apprai
ser and commissioner as also p receipt 4.0
By ditto paid William Parker for acting as clerk at
the sale of the estate p receipt 3.0
By ditto paid John Holston for crying prop
erty p receipt 2.0
By ditto paid James Holland for a debt due from
the deceased p his account proved [??] the
Orphans Court and receipt thereon 3.27
By ditto paid R. L. Bunee for do & do 1.94
By ditto paid Belitha Hook p do .66
By ditto paid Doet Thomas R. P. Spence p do 18.00
By ditto paid same p or all ending negro Girl Rose
belonging to this estate – since the death of the
intestate p account receipt allowed pr order court 2.50
By Registers fees on this administration including
this account & striking distribution 18.06
By this sum allowed the administratrix for [??]
ses of saving crop, articles consumed in the family
after appraisment and for a deficiency in the
quantity of corn and cash included in the invento
ry p a particular account thereof rendered on
oath and a special order for allowance at april
Term 1811 39.36
Commission of Eight pcent allowed the adminis
tratrix on $1640.33 being the whole amount of
estate deducting the deficinencies above mentioned
which came to her hands 131.22
Balance remaining in the hands of the administratrix 233.76
1433.27
1665.04
Worcester County fs.l The 9 th day of august anno Domini 1811 then Came Sarah Bradford administratrix of William
Bradford deceased, and made oath on the holy Evangely of almighty God that the within account is just and true as
Page 39 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

it stands stated to the best of her knowledge and that she hath bonafide paid or secured to be paid the several and
particular sums for which she claims an allowance Before Matthew Hopkins Reg. Wills for Wor. Cty
* * * * *
The identities of William and Sarah Bradford’s children are revealed in the orphan’s court records relating to the distribution
of William’s estate. On 12 February 1811, the orphan Henrietta Bradford was bound to Sarah Bradford, with James Hook
and Lemuel P. Spence (the same man who was bond for Sarah’s administration) as her sureties. 105 In orphan’s court on 9
April 1811, Jacob Teague and Joseph J. Gillis distributed William’s estate. 106 The widow, Sarah Bradford, received the
“negro Sarah.” Peter Truitt and his wife received the slaves Rose (age 7) and Isaac (age 5). Henny Bradford, a minor,
received the slave Mary (age 2). Henny Bradford is clearly the aforementioned orphan Henrietta Bradford and it may be
surmised that Peter Truitt probably married another daughter of William and Sarah.
Further details about William and Sarah’s daughters are provided in Sarah Bradford’s will (3 November 1814 – 16 November
1814). 107 She named a daughter Elizabeth, to whom she gave “one small negro Girl by the name of melia” and a $150 “note
on Peter Truitt if said Peter Truitt should bring any accompt against my estate to take it out of the moneys left in my will to
his wife.” There is a marriage record in Worcester County dated 27 February 1811 for a Peter Truitt and an Elizabeth
Bradford, and this Elizabeth may be identified as the daughter of William and Sarah Bradford. 108 Sarah Bradford also named
“daughter Henny Truitt” to whom she gave the “negro by the name of Nathan also one Heiffer.” All the rest of Sarah’s
personal estate was to be “equally divided between Elizabeth Truitt and Henny Truitt.” Since Henny was called by her
maiden name in the orphans court record from 9 April 1811, she presumably married a Truitt between then and the dating of
Sarah’s will on 3 November 1814. This is confirmed by the marriage bond of Henny Bradford and John Truitt dated 27
October 1813. 109 In her will, Sarah Bradford also stipulated that “my black woman” Sarah was to be set free and given “one
good and pretty coat of my clothes also one large pot.” This Sarah is evidently the same woman who was part of William
Bradford’s estate and who went to Sarah Bradford as her dower. Sarah’s bequest of the slaves Nathan and Melia to her
daughters is notable because the two of them were not named in the inventory of William’s estate. She may have purchased
them after William’s death, or it may be that they were property she had brought to the marriage. If they were her property
before her marriage to William, then locating their names in an estate record or will might provide a clue to Sarah’s own
origins. Since Sarah Bradford describes Melia as a small girl, it is likely that she was acquired later. Nathan, however, may
have been a grown man.
Sarah Bradford’s will was witnessed by Selby Parker and James Truitt (the latter probably a brother of Sarah’s son-in-law
John Truitt who married Henny Bradford – see below).
Will of Sarah Bradford, 3 November 1814 – 16 November 1814
In the name of God amen the third day of november one thousand eight hundred and fourteen I Sarah Bradford of
worcester county being in perfect sound scree[?] & memory let thanks be to almighty God therefore calling unto
mind the mortality of my body & knowing that it is appointed for all men once to die. principally that is to say and
first of all I leave my soul to God that Gave it and for my body to the earth to be decently buried in a cristian like
manner at the discression of my Executors and for all the worldy goods it hath pleased almighty God to bless me
with I give and dispose of the same in the following manner and form Item I give unto my Daughter Eliz one small
negro Girl by the name of melia. also one Hundred and fifty Dollars a note on Peter Truitt if said Peter Truitt should
bring any accompt against my estate to take it out of the moneys left in my will to his wife Item I give and Bequeath
to my daughter Henny Truitt one negro by the name of Nathan also one Heiffer and all the rest of my personal estate
Except some few legacies given to negro Sarah my clothes to be equally divided between Elizabeth Truitt and
Henny Truitt. My will and desire is that at my death Sarah my black woman shall be free also I give Sarah
one good and pretty coat of my clothes also one large pot
My will and desire is that their shall be no expence about setting my estate after my Just Debts are paid
John Truitt has all except what is mentioned above some few legacie left in my will. I Do hereby Revoke Declare
null all and every other will or wills heretofore made or named and doth Strengthen and confirm this to be my last
will and Testament in witness hereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal
In the presents of us Sarah x Bradford
Selby Parker, James Truitt
Worcester County 16 November 1814
Page 40 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

* * * * *
Elizabeth Bradford – Peter Truitt
It is difficult to identify Peter Truitt, the husband of Elizabeth Bradford. He was undoubtedly a descendant of George 1 Truitt
of Accomack (d.1670), who seems to have been the progenitor of all the Truitts of Worcester County, but his line of descent
from George 1 is unclear. There are two promising leads. An Eli Truitt in his will (1793) bequeathed a slave to Peter Truitt,
son of William; 110 I could discover nothing more with certainty about this Peter Truitt nor could I reliably identify which
William Truitt may have been his father. The other promising mention of a Peter Truitt comes in the will of Isaac Richards
(1810). 111 Isaac gave the remainder of his estate (what was left after his bequests to his own children) to Peter Truitt, whom
he describes as “son of my daughter Rachel.” This is probably the same Peter Truitt who is a witness to the will of Kendal
Jones (1832), who was a nephew of Isaac Richards and the son of Isaac’s sister Mary. [Incidentally, Mary was the widow of
William 4 Bradford (Wm 3 Jno 2 Nath 1 ).] 112 In an effort to further identify the Peter named by Isaac Richards, I searched for
male Truitts with wives named Rachel. The only one I could identify was Pattey Truitt. In Pattey Truitt’s will (dated 1780)
he mentions no son Peter. 113 However, he does note that “if my wife should be with child,” then the child should be given
“negro boy Isaac.” It is possible that Peter Truitt was the child being carried by Rachel Truitt at the time Pattey Truitt wrote
his will. If Peter was Pattey Truitt’s unborn child, it makes sense that he might receive a substantial legacy from his
grandfather, Isaac Richards, since he would not have been well provided for out of his own father’s estate. He would also
have been about 30 in 1811, which is when Elizabeth Bradford married Peter Truitt; so his age fits with what is known of
Elizabeth Bradford’s husband. Despite these tantalizing leads, the evidence as to Peter Truitt’s identity remains scant and
inconclusive.
* * * * *
Henny Bradford – John Truitt
John Truitt, husband of Henny Bradford, may be identified as John Truitt (of Benjamin), who left a will in Worcester County
naming a wife Henny. 114 He also named a brother James Truitt, who might have been the same James Truitt who was witness
to the will of Sarah Bradford. John Truitt mentions three children in his will, but does not name them. Littleton Purnell and
Lemuel Spence were selected to direct the sale of his estate, and Lemuel Spence was also chosen as executor. Note that this
is the same Lemuel Spence who was also surety for Sarah Bradford’s guardianship of John Truitt’s wife Henrietta and surety
for Sarah’s administration of William Bradford’s estate.
John Truitt (of Benjamin). 9 July 1823 - 27 Aug 1823 - Littleton R. Purnell, Lemuel P. Spence and James Truitt, my
brother, to determine whether land should be sold to pay debts. To my wife, Henny Truitt. Lemuel P. Spence to
settle the estate. Witt: Thomas R. P. Spence, Benjamin Richardson and Polly Richards.
It is clear that John Truitt was the son of a Benjamin Truitt. Benjamin may probably be identified as the son of William
Truitt, who left a will in 1795 naming sons Benjamin Truitt, Samuel Truitt, John Killen/Kellam Truitt, and William Truitt. 115
William Truitt. 7 April 1795 - 1 May 1795. To wife Peggy Truitt 85 acres of Mulberry Grove, negros Ned, Nan and
Nance, and riding horse, old mare, livestock, furniture. To son Benjamin Truitt - 85 acres of Mulberry Grove plus
other 85 acres after wife's decease. To son Samuel Truitt - all rights to Truitt's Harbor. To son John Killen Truitt -
negro boy Ames, mare called Jenny, sailing boat; he is also requested to “tend his mother's ground and make what
he can for her.” To son William Truitt - negros Melby, Ethel, Bob. Execs: wife Peggy and son Benjamin Truitt.
Witt: John [X] Johnson, Joshua Atkinson, Charles Parker
William Truitt’s wife Peggy left a will in 1814 naming sons Samuel Truitt and William Truitt, and grandsons John and James
Truitt. 116
Peggy Truitt. 6 January 1814 - 23 July 1816 - Sons Samuel Truitt and William Truitt. Grandsons John Truitt and
James Truitt. Witt; Benjamin Purnell, John Gootee and William [X] Jones.
Peggy Truitt does not identify which of her sons was father of her grandsons John and James Truitt. However, they were
probably the sons of either Benjamin Truitt or John Kellam Truitt, both of whom had passed away before their mother wrote
her will. John K. Truitt passed away the previous year: 117
Page 41 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

John K. Truitt. 29 July 1813 - 8 Oct 1813 – To wife, plantation. Son John Kellam Truitt. Daughters Sarah Truitt,
Mary Truitt, Henrietta Truitt and Elizabeth Schoolfield. Land bought off Henry Crapper to four daughters. Negroes
Leah, Levin, Major Bob and Charles given their freedom. Witt; Littleton R. Purnell, Joseph Stevenson, Elias
Poynter.
As for evidence of Benjamin Truitt’s death, the general index to Worcester County probate records reveals the existence of
an administration bond for Benjamin Truitt (of Wm) dated 18 January 1799. 118 The fact that there is no Benjamin Truitt listed
on the 1800 Worcester County census tends to confirm that he had passed away before then. 119 Since John Kellam Truitt
named no son James, Peggy Truitt’s grandsons John and James were probably the sons of Benjamin. Since Henny’s husband
John Truitt mentioned a brother James and since John was the son of a Benjamin, this seems the most likely explanation of
the evidence.
* * * * *
Having reviewed all the evidence relating to William Bradford 1810, it remains to discuss how he might be related to the
other Bradfords of Worcester County. There are four men named William Bradford who lived in Worcester County during
the 18 th century and who may be shown to be related to other Bradfords of Worcester County. The earliest is William 3
Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ), son of John 2 Bradford (Nath 1 ) who moved to Somerset County from Accomack County, VA, around
1710. This William’s last known appearance in the records came in 1769, in a deed to William Bradford Jr., whom the
evidence indicates was probably his son. No probate records may be definitely attributed to this William Bradford and thus
his fate is unclear. Two of the other William Bradfords are this man’s descendants. The first is his son William 4 Bradford
(Wm 3 Jno 2 Nath 1 ), referred to in the 1750s and 1760s as William Bradford Jr.; he left a will dated 1779. The third William
was William 5 Bradford (Wm 4 Wm 3 Jno 2 Nath 1 ), on whose estate administration was granted in 1796. 120 All three of these
William Bradfords are discussed in some detail in my work on William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ).
The fourth William Bradford was the son of Samuel Bradford of Worcester County, Maryland. Only two records may be
definitively attributed to Samuel’s son William. First, he was on the muster of the Sinepuxent Battalion of the Worcester
County militia in 1780 as “William Bradford (of Sam)”: 121
He was also mentioned in the will of his father, who gave “unto the heirs of my deceased son William Bradford two
shillings.” 122
There may have been other William Bradfords in Worcester County from 1710 to 1810, but only the above four are known.
If we assume that William Bradford 1810 was one of the four known William Bradfords of Worcester, then there are only
two possibilities. Since probate records exist for both William 4 Bradford (Wm 3 Jno 2 Nath 1 ) and his son William 5 Bradford
(Wm 4 Wm 3 Jno 2 Nath 1 ), it means that William Bradford 1810 may likely be identified as either William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 )
or William 2 Bradford (Sam 1 ). Is one of these Williams more plausible than the other as a candidate for being William
Bradford 1810?
It is possible to arrive at a specific range of birth years for William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ) thanks to the Somerset County tax
lists. Male dependents were taxed at the age of 16. Since William 3 Bradford doesn’t appear on the tax lists of 1723-1725,
but does appear in 1727, we may assume that he turned 16 that year or the year before. (The tax list for Bogeternorton
Hundred does not survive for 1726, so it is impossible to tell if he showed up on that year’s list.) Therefore, William 3
Bradford’s birth year could have been as early as 1709, but not later than 1711. It follows that if William 3 Bradford is the
Page 42 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

William who died intestate in 1810, he would have been roughly 100 years old at the time of his death. This is improbable,
but not impossible. However, other evidence tends to cast doubt on the possibility that William Bradford 1810 may be
identified as William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ). 123
William Bradford 1810 had two daughters, Elizabeth and Henrietta, who married in 1811 and 1813, respectively;
furthermore, Henrietta Bradford was still underage on 12 February 1811, when her mother was made her guardian. We
might therefore expect them to have both been born sometime in the 1790s, Elizabeth possibly in the 1780s. If William
Bradford 1810 was William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ), it means he would have fathered Elizabeth and Henny in his 70s or 80s.
This is not impossible, but it is very unlikely, especially considering that no older children were mentioned in his estate
account. In short, the issue of William 3 Bradford’s age makes it seem very doubtful that he may be identified as William
Bradford 1810.
On the other hand, all the evidence relating to William Bradford 1810 fits quite well with what is known about William 2
Bradford (Samuel 1 ). It is known that Samuel’s son William died before Samuel wrote his will on 15 December 1810; this
accords strikingly with the fact that William Bradford 1810 died before 14 December 1810, when administration was granted
on his estate. Furthermore, there is the unusual coincidence that Samuel Bradford’s will is dated a day after William’s
administration bond. It is tempting to think that Samuel may have felt compelled to rewrite his will to take his son’s death
into account and to bequeath a legacy to William’s children rather than to William himself. No reliable birth year is
available for William 2 Bradford (Sam 1 ), but as he was serving in the militia in 1780, he is presumed to have been at least 18
at the time, and probably older. That would place his birth in 1764 at the latest. We might also surmise that William (Sam 1 )
was not yet 21 in 1778, since he not swear the oath of fidelity; that would mean he was born probably sometime between
1757 and 1764. In any case, he was about the right age to have had two children who were born in the 1780s or 1790s.
The possibility remains that William Bradford 1810 was some William other than the four who are known in Worcester, but
if that were the case one might expect to find him in more records. It should be noted that no William Bradford is listed on
the census from 1790 to 1810 and that William Bradford 1810 appears not to have owned any land. This is unusual, because
the inventory of William Bradford 1810 reveals a rather large estate. He was likely simply a well off leaseholder who either
escaped the notice of the census taker or was listed in someone else’s household.
* * * * *
Other circumstantial evidence relating to William Bradford 1810 points to a connection with Samuel Bradford.
Spence-Waters Connection
The two men who served as bond for Sarah Bradford’s administration of William Bradford’s estate were Peter Waters and
Lemuel Purnell Spence. Lemuel P. Spence was also surety for Sarah’s guardianship of William Bradford’s orphan Henrietta.
The fact that Lemuel Purnell Spence was a bond for Sarah Bradford, both for her administration of William Bradford’s estate
and for her guardianship of Henrietta, hints at a close connection, possibly even a kin connection. The connection continued
after Sarah’s death. Lemuel P. Spence was named as executor in the 1823 will of John Truitt, son-in-law of William and
Sarah Bradford. The account of debts due to William Bradford’s estate also mentions a note due from Nancy Spence, who
was the mother of Lemuel P. Spence. Lemuel’s brother Thomas Robins Purnell Spence was another witness to John Truitt’s
will and was also listed in the account of William Bradford’s estate.
Peter Waters and Lemuel Purnell Spence were sons of the two individuals who were involved in a dispute over land in 1799
for which several men gave depositions. One of the deponents was Samuel Bradford, and his deposition indicates that he was
intimately familiar with the land in his youth; this tends to further connect Samuel Bradford with the family of William
Bradford 1810. The dispute was between George Spence and Patrick Waters, and probate records for these two men indicate
that Lemuel Purnell Spence and Peter Waters were their sons: 124
George Spence. undated - 23 Oct 1800p. To wife Nancy Spence, use of plantation I now live with timbered land
purchased of William Purnell, also use of plantation where William Hook late lived until son John is 21; also
negroes Cuff, Jack, Leah & Cloe. To son Adam Spence, part of tract Snow Hill Confirmation, after his son’s
decease to be the right of son Thomas Robins Purnell Spence. To son Thomas Robins Purnell Spence, lot #22 in
Snow Hill. To son Lemuel Purnell Spence, all lands in and about Calkers Creek, also negro Ben. To son John
Spence when 21, all right to tract Smiths First Choice where William Hook lately lived; should he die without issue
before 21, said lands to son William and his heirs. To son John, negros. To son James Robins Spence, tract Snow
Page 43 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Hill Confirmation. To son Ara Spence, plantation now held by James Handy and his wife where Ralph Holston
lives. To son George Spence, the plantation and woodland where I live. To daughter Betsy Washington Spence, half
of lot 5 in Snow Hill where Robert Smith now lives. To daughter Andasia Spence, lands that bound James Selby,
Dover, Mount Ephriam, Levi Richardson, and James Brattan. The lands on Assateague Beach called Middlemore to
my sons equally. George Purnell and James B. Robins to advise my family. John S. Purnell, EX. Wit; James B.
Robins, John Purnell, Elisha Purnell.
23 January 1801 – Esther and Peter Waters administrators of Patrick Waters. Bond Esther Waters, Peter Waters,
John Ayres, and Frederick Conner.
Note that George Spence granted Lemuel Purnell Spence his lands at Calkers Creek, which was the area where the kin of
Tabitha (Tarr) Bradford lived, not far from Samuel Bradford.
* * * * *
Truitts Harbor/Mulberry Grove
On the 1783 tax assessment for Worcester County, Samuel Bradford was listed as taxpayer for the tracts Truitts Harbor,
Mulberry Grove, and Conveniency. Other records reveal that Zadock Wright was the owner of the lands, so Samuel Bradford
was probably a tenant. But it is interesting to note that portions of the same two tracts - Mulberry Grove and Truitts Harbor –
were in the possession of William Truitt, who was grandfather of that John Truitt who married Henny Bradford, daughter of
William Bradford 1810. Other connections in the family of William Bradford 1810 point to the Spences, Purnells, and to
Zadock Wright. Littleton Purnell, one of the witnesses of John Truitt’s will, was a bond for the administration of George
Spence’s estate. Littleton Robins Purnell was a witness to the will of John K. Truitt, who was the uncle of John Truitt.
Littleton Robins Purnell seems to have been the son of William Purnell who, in his 1794 will, mentioned a gift to Zadock
Wright’s heirs and to Elizabeth Spence, daughter of Adam Spence. 125
These connections indicate that the family of William Bradford 1810 is connected with the same sets of families who
inhabited the areas where Samuel Bradford is known to have lived. This adds weight to the other circumstantial evidence
suggesting William Bradford 1810 might be identified as William 2 Bradford (Sam 1 ). Nevertheless, though circumstantial
evidence points towards Samuel Bradford as father of William Bradford 1810, that evidence is not yet strong enough to make
it conclusive.
* * * * *
William Bradford died in Worcester County before 14 December 1810. He and his wife, Sarah _____, had the following
children:
T2. i. ELIZABETH BRADFORD. She married Peter Truitt in Worcester County on 27 February 1811.
+ T3. ii. HENRIETTA “HENNY” BRADFORD. She married John Truitt (son of Benjamin) in Worcester
County on 27 October 1813. They had three children, unnamed in John Truitt’s will:
T4. i. UNKNOWN
T5. ii. UNKNOWN
T6. iii. UNKNOWN
Page 44 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

Citations for Samuel Bradford and William Bradford (d.c.1810) of Worcester County, Maryland
1.Vance Arthur Bradford, Bradford Descendants, (Oklahoma City, OK: Self-Published, 1985), 3. The book contains a
photocopy of the original militia muster at the Maryland Historical Society.
2.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1798-1800, Liber T, folios 223-224. MD State Archives microfilm CR77,910-1.
3.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1796-1797, Liber R, folios 410-411. MD State Archives microfilm CR77,909.
4.ibid, 412.
5.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1797-1798, Liber S, folio 418. MD State Archives microfilm CR 77,910-1.
6.ibid, folio 420.
7.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1798-1800, Liber T, folios 227-228. MD State Archives microfilm CR77,910-1.
8.ibid, folio 228.
9.ibid, folios 228-229.
10.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1797-1798, Liber S, folio 502. MD State Archives microfilm CR 77,910-1.
11.ibid, folio 504.
12.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1798-1800, Liber T, folio 223. MD State Archives microfilm CR 77,910-1.
13.See note 2.
14.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1760-1763, Liber E, folio 173. MD State Archives microfilm CR 37,384.
15.In the course of my research into Samuel Bradford, I requested from John C. Lyon, an expert on Lower Delmarva
land records, information as to the placement of the tracts Rochester, Mulberry Grove, Truitts Harbor, Morris Security,
Bradford’s Luck, and Littleworth. These allowed me to determine the precise locations of the various tracts of land where
Samuel Bradford lived or with which he was associated. Later, using the copies of original patents available at the website of
the Maryland State Archives, I was able to add tracts to these maps that revealed the location of the Spence lands near
Rochester and the Tarr lands on Calkers Creek not far from Samuel Bradford’s Bradfords Luck/Littleworth land.
16.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1742-1747, Liber A, folio 59. MD State Archives microfilm CR 37,383.
17.Inventory for William Robison Senior as found in Neil and Leslie Keddie, Worcester Register of Wills: Liber JW 15,
abstracts of inventories taken from Somerset County records 1688-1742 & abstracts of administration accounts from
Somerset County records 1667-1719 (Family Tree Bookshop, 2004).
18.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1742-1758, Liber JW3, folio 1-2. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-2.
19.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1742-1758, Liber JW2, folio 90. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-1.
20.Transcriptions of the Somerset County tax lists may be found at the website of the Maryland State Archives. Search
Guide to Government Records, County Records on Microfilm.
21.Worcester County, Md. Register of Wills, Wills 1759-1769, Liber JW3, folios 64-66, MD State Archives microfilm
CR 43,744-2.
22.Bradford Descendants, 10.
23.See note 20.
24.Maryland Prerogative Court (Wills) 1738-1742, Liber 22, folio 68. MD State Archives microfilm SR 4416.
25.Maryland Prerogative Court (Accounts) 1740-1742, Liber 18, folio 141. MD State Archives microfilm 51-2.
26.Bradford Descendants, 376.
27.Worcester County, Md. Register of Wills, Inventories 1762-1783, Liber JW 9, folios 309-322, MD State Archives
microfilm WK 664-665-3.
28.The text of the oath is taken from that sworn in Montgomery County, MD, and published in National Genealogical
Society Quarterly (Washington, DC: National Genealogical Society, 1917), Vol. VI, page 1; original digitized by Google
Books on March 17, 2008 from the University of Wisconsin-Madison library.
29.Henry C. Peden, Revolutionary Patriots of Worcester & Somerset Counties, Maryland, 1775-1783 (Westminster,
Maryland: Willow Bend Books, 1999), p.32. The book is organized alphabetically by surname and the following passage is
found under “Samuel Bradford”: “Took the Oath of Allegiance in Worcester County in 1778 in Bogerternorton Hundred
before the Hon. Thomas Purnell [Ref: J-1814 (Box 4) listed the name as “Samuel Braford.”] The source J-1814 is indicated
as Revolutionary War Military Collection, Manuscript MS.1819 (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, Manuscript
Division).
30.See note 1.
Page 45 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

31.William Hand Browne, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the Maryland Council of
Safety, August 29, 1775 to July 6, 1776, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1892). Published at Archives of Maryland
Online, Volume 11, 330.
32.ibid, 542-543.
33.ibid, 557.
34.William Hand Browne, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the Maryland Council of
Safety, January 1 to March 20, 1777, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1897). Published at Archives of Maryland
Online, Volume 16, 41.
35.Browne, Maryland Council of Safety, July 7 to December 31, 1776, Volume 12, 370-382.
36.Browne, Maryland Council of Safety, January 1 to March 20, 1777, Volume 16, 122-123.
37.ibid, 175.
38.Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 (Library of Congress, 1904-1937), 7:82. Online database available
at the Library of Congress website: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwjclink.html.
39.Browne, Maryland Council of Safety, January 1 to March 20, 1777, Volume 16, 157-159.
40.Journals of the Continental Congress, 7:275.
41.ibid, 7:284.
42.ibid, 7:286.
43.ibid, 8:530.
44.William Hand Browne, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the State Council, March 20,
1777 to March 28, 1778, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1897). Published at Archives of Maryland Online,
Volume 16, 228.
45.ibid, 382-383.
46.ibid, 460.
47.ibid, 464.
48.William Hand Browne, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the State Council April 1, 1778
through October 26, 1779, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1901). Published at Archives of Maryland Online,
Volume 21, page 11.
49.ibid, 44.
50.Bernard Christian Steiner, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the Council of Maryland,
November 13, 1780 to November 13, 1781, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1927). Published at Archives of
Maryland Online, Volume 45, 67.
51.ibid, 125.
52.ibid, 129.
53.ibid, 127.
54.J. Hall Pleasants, editor, Archives of Maryland: Journal and Correspondence of the State Council, November 19,
1781 to November 11, 1784, (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1931). Published at Archives of Maryland Online,
Volume 48, 252.
55.Nancy Isaac, 1850 US Census, Marion County, Mo., Roll M432_212; page 408; image 169; Ancestry.com. 1850
United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2005. Original data:
United States of America, Bureau of the Census. Seventh Census of the United States, 1850. Washington, D.C.: National
Archives and Records Administration, 1850. M432, 1,009 rolls.
56.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1813-1822, Liber MH10, folio 428. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,317.
57.Worcester County, Md. Wills 1783-1790, Liber JW 13, folios 60-61. MD State Archives microfilm CR 50,312.
58.Worcester County, Md. Administration Bonds 1802-1807, Liber JBR 6, folios 115-116. MD State Archives
microfilm CR 50,315.
59.James Bradford Marriage to Sarah H. Tarr. Dodd, Jordan, Liahona Research, comp.. Maryland Marriages, 1655-
1850 [database on-line at Ancestry.com]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2004. Original data: Most of the
records in this index may be found at the Maryland Historical Society or the Family History Library.
60.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills and Administration Bonds) 1799-1802, Liber JBR1, folio 47. MD State
Archives microfilm CR 50,314.
61.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1742-1758, Liber JW2, folios 15-16. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-1.
62.JoAnn Riley McKey, Accomack County, Virginia Court Order Abstracts, Electronic Edition (Bowie, Maryland:
Heritage Books, Inc., 2001); 2: 146.
63.ibid, 2:48-50.
Page 46 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

64.ibid, 7:154.
65.Stratton Nottingham, Accomack County, Virginia certificates and rights, 1663-1709 and tithables, 1663-1695
(Bowie, Maryland: Heritage Books, Inc., 1993).
66.Stratton Nottingham, Wills and Administrations of Accomack County, Virginia 1663-1800 (Baltimore: Genealogical
Publishing Company, 1999), 12.
67.Abstract of Will of John Tarr. Ancestry.com. Maryland Calendar of Wills [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: The
Generations Network, Inc., 1998. Original data: Cotton, Jane Baldwin. Maryland Calendar of Wills. Vol. I-VIII. Baltimore,
MD, USA: 1904;. Volume 2.
68.Inventory for John Tarr found in Neil and Leslie Keddie, Worcester Register of Wills: Liber JW 15, abstracts of
inventories taken from Somerset County records 1688-1742 & abstracts of administration accounts from Somerset County
records 1667-1719 (Family Tree Bookshop, 2004).
69.Abstract of Will of Samuel Tarr. Ancestry.com. Maryland Calendar of Wills [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA:
The Generations Network, Inc., 1998. Original data: Cotton, Jane Baldwin. Maryland Calendar of Wills. Vol. I-VIII.
Baltimore, MD, USA: 1904;. Volume 8.
70.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1742-1758, Liber JW2, folio 80. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-1.
71.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1747-1753, Liber B, folio 252. MD State Archives microfilm CR 37,383.
72.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1760-1763, Liber E, folio 482. MD State Archives microfilm CR 37,384.
73.Maryland Prerogative Court (Accounts) 1755-1756, Liber 38, folio 106. MD State Archives microfilm 54-6.
74.Maryland 1783 Assessment Record, Worcester County, Boquenorton Hundred, MD State Archives film M872-48.
75.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1769-1770, Liber H, folio 436. MD State Archives microfilm CR 37,385.
76.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1771-1776, Liber I, folio 506. MD State Archives microfilm WK 707-708.
77.Worcester County Land Records: Abstracts of Libers AG, AF, & AH, by the Lower Delmarva Genealogical Society
and The Nabb Center for Delmarva History & Culture (Salisbury, MD: Research Center for Delmarva History and Culture at
Salisbury State University, 1997), 133.
78.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1789-1791, Liber N, folios 202-203. MD State Archives film CR77,907-1.
79.ibid, folios 201-202.
80.Samuel Bradford, 1790 US Census, Worcester County, Md., Roll M637_3, image 0450; Ancestry.com. 1790 United
States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2000. Original data imaged
from: National Archives and Records Administration, First Census of the United States, 1790. M637, RG29, 12 rolls.
National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, D.C.
81.Worcester County, Md. Land Records 1789-1791, Liber N, folio 121. MD State Archives microfilm CR 77,907-1.
82.Worcester County Md. Wills 1790-1799, Liber JW 18, folio 250. MD State Archives microfilm CR 50,313.
83.See note 15.
84.Patent for Bradford’s Luck. Worcester County Circuit Court Land Survey, Subdivision, and Condominium Plats
MSA S1210 (Certificates, Patented, WO). Patented Certificate 345; images taken from plats.net. Maryland State Archives
accession number MSA S1210-381. Storage location (for original): 01/26/02/50.
85.Samuel Bradford, 1800 US Census, Mattapony Hundred, Worcester County, Md., Roll 12, page 738, image 193;
Ancestry.com. 1800 United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc.,
2004. Original data: United States of America, Bureau of the Census. Second Census of the United States, 1800. Washington,
D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, 1800. M32, 52 rolls.
86.Patent for Littleworth. Worcester County Circuit Court Land Survey, Subdivision, and Condominium Plats MSA
S1210 (Certificates, Patented, WO). Patented Certificate 1547; images taken from plats.net. Maryland State Archives
accession number MSA S1210-1659. Storage location (for original): 01/26/02/66.
87.Location provided by John C. Lyon. See note 15.
88.David V. Heise, Worcester County, Maryland, Orphans Court Proceedings (Westminster, Md: Willow Bend Books,
2000), 4.
89.ibid, 7.
90.Marriage of Sarah Price to Coulbourn Long. Dodd, Jordan, Liahona Research, comp.. Maryland Marriages, 1655-
1850 [database on-line at ancestry.com]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2004. Original data: Most of the
records in this index may be found at the Maryland Historical Society or the Family History Library.
91.Marriage of Sarah Bradford to Arthur Price. Dodd, Jordan, Liahona Research, comp.. Maryland Marriages, 1655-
1850 [database on-line at ancestry.com]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2004. Original data: Most of the
records in this index may be found at the Maryland Historical Society or the Family History Library.
92.Bradford Descendants, 8.
93.Heise, 11, 115, 124.
Page 47 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford

94.ibid, 224.
95.ibid, 240.
96.Samuel Bradford, 1810 US Census, Worcester County, MD; Roll 16, page 625, image 285.00. Ancestry.com. 1810
United States Federal Census [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2004. Original data:
United States of America, Bureau of the Census. Third Census of the United States, 1810. Washington, D.C.: National
Archives and Records Administration, 1810. M252, 71 rolls.
97.Worcester County Md. Wills 1806-1813, Liber MH 4, folios 316-318. MD State Archives microfilm CR 50,316.
98.Information on children is supplied largely by Bradford Descendants; for William’s possible children see this
document
99.Heise, 222.
100.Worcester County, Maryland, Administration Bonds 1807-1814, Liber MH 5, folios 167-169. MD State Archives
microfilm WK 756-1.
101.Worcester County Register of Wills, Accounts of Sale 1810-1812, Liber MH 9, folios 125-129. MD State Archives
microfilm WK 747-1.
102.ibid, folios 224-226.
103.ibid, 324.
104.Worcester County, Maryland, Administration Accounts 1805-1812, Liber MH 1, folios 393-395. MD State Archives
microfilm WK 737-738-2.
105.Heise, 223.
106.ibid, 230.
107.Worcester County, Maryland, Wills 1813-1822, Liber MH 10, folios 73-74. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,317.
108.Jody Powell, Worcester County Maryland Marriage Records, 1795-1865 (Roanoke, TX: J. Powell, 1990), 157.
109.ibid.
110.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1790-1799, Liber JW18, folio 150. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,313.
111.Will Abstract of Isaac Richards Sr. Mddelgenealogy.com. From Neil and Leslie Keddie, Worcester County Wills
1806-1813 MH 4, page 13.
112.Will Abstract of Kendal Jones. Mddelgenealogy.com. From Neil and Leslie Keddie, Worcester County Wills 1828-
1833 MH#27, page 18.
113.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1769-1783, Liber JW4, folios 450-451. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-3.
114.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1823-1833, Liber MH27, folio 29. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,318.
115.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1769-1783, Liber JW4, folio 202. MD State Archives microfilm
CR43,744-3.
116.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1813-1822, Liber MH10, folio 216. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,317.
117.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1813-1822, Liber MH10, folio 19. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,317.
118.Worcester County General Index to Estates 1742-1909, page 30. MD State Archives microfilm CR 94,449.
119.Based on search of 1800 census on ancestry.com.
120.See section of this work on William 3 Bradford (Jno 2 Nath 1 ) and his descendants.
121.Vance Arthur Bradford, Bradford Descendants, (Oklahoma City, OK: Self-Published, 1985), 3. The book contains a
photocopy of the original militia muster at the Maryland Historical Society.
122.Worcester County, Maryland, Wills 1806-1813, Liber MH 4, folios 316-318. MD State Archives microfilm CR
50,316.
123.See note 22.
124.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills and Administration Bonds) 1799-1802, Liber JBR1, folios 159 and 185.
MD State Archives microfilm CR 50,314.
125.Worcester County Register of Wills (Wills) 1769-1783, Liber JW4, folio 278. MD State Archives microfilm CR
43,744-3.
Page 48 of 48 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford