1. Nathaniel Bradford of Accomack County, Virginia - Lower ...
1. Nathaniel Bradford of Accomack County, Virginia - Lower ... 1. Nathaniel Bradford of Accomack County, Virginia - Lower ...
In this case Nathaniel seems to have committed the wrong accidentally. The suit was referred to a jury, which ordered Nathaniel to reimburse Burton. There must have been some bad blood between the two in court that day as a result of the trial, and some harsh words must have been exchanged, since on the same day the suit was tried Nathaniel and Burton sued each other for defamation. After both defamation suits were dismissed each of the two men petitioned that the other be taken into custody until each put up security for good behavior. 256 * * * * * Christopher Sadbury Defamation Suit In a small society like that of 17 th century Accomack, where almost everyone knew everyone else, reputation counted for a great deal. If a damaging rumor was allowed to spread it could affect all of one’s relationships. If the rumor in some way touched upon one’s trustworthiness in financial dealings it could potentially even be damaging to one’s livelihood, since so many financial transactions were conducted on credit and relied upon the honesty of the parties involved. Aside from the mutual defamation suits he and Burton filed against each other, Nathaniel was involved in only two such suits in the course of his life, both of them as plaintiff. In one of them, which was tried before the court on 18 January 1677/8, he sued Christopher Sadbury: 257 “Petition of Nath. Bradford: About 13 August, at Watchepregue in the hearing of several people, Xophr. Sadbury sad that Bradford stole malt from him along with 50 pounds sterling worth of goods. Sadbury also said that Bradford and his wife kept the key of the room where the goods lay, and when they were done with the key, they threw it on the dunghill. Bradford was suing for 40 lbs sterling in damages.” “Sadbury "submitted himself to the said Bradford" who accepted and discharged him. Ordered that the suit be dismissed with Sadbury paying court costs. "I own I said that I had lost several goods, but do not remember that I said as is charged in Mr. Nathaniel Bradford's petition. If I did, I am sorry for it." Signed 18 January 1677/78, Christopher Sadbury” In this particular case, Sadbury publicly retracted his statements. Nathaniel must have found this sufficient for the purposes of his suit, as he discharged him without demanding the damages requested in his initial petition. * * * * * Land in Delaware In early 1679, Nathaniel purchased land from John Hagoster in Angola Neck on Rehobeth Bay in what is now Sussex County, Delaware, at that time part of the colony of Pennsylvania. 258 In 1682, he resurveyed his Sussex planation to include 1200 acres. 259 It’s doubtful that Nathaniel ever resided for very long on the land himself, but there is evidence from Accomack that reveals time he probably did spend in Sussex. For 9 months in the period before 1682, his sons Nathaniel and William stayed with Florence Matts, who later presented an account for their room and board in Accomack Court on 17 May 1682; 260 Nathaniel was clearly away during this time, perhaps arranging his affairs in Sussex. After Hagoster’s acknowledgement of the deed in 1679, Nathaniel’s only personal appearance in Sussex County court came in 1681, when he was on a jury to judge a dispute over a wager on a horse race. 261 After purchasing the Sussex land, Nathaniel hired men to build a house and plant corn, both necessary if he hoped to retain title. Shortly thereafter, Nathaniel’s servant John Daniell was his agent in a dispute with a neighbor over land. In March 1682, Daniell made “forceable entrey” into the house of Nathaniel’s Rehobeth neighbor Baptis Newcomb “and by force of Arms hath and still doth keepe [Newcomb] out of his house and from making a Crop on the said Land”. 262 Evidently Newcomb had surveyed some portion of the same land. Daniell pled by his attorney “that his master Nathanil Bradford have A right to the said Land” and proved “that Nathanil Bradford did Clear part of the said Land and did plant sume Corn on the said Clear Land, And did hire sume men to build A house on the said Land, which men did deceive him; Mathias Everson sware that he did worke foure days on the said Land by order of Nathanil Bradfor Towards the geting A frame for A house.” But Newcomb proved that he “built the first house on the said Land, And Robert Bracey, Junor, sware that there never was any Corn Tended on the said Land by the said Nathanil Bradford or his order.” One fact that seems clear from the above proceeding is that Nathaniel Page 46 of 74 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford
himself was probably not in Sussex to oversee the building of the house and planting of a crop, since the men he hired to build a house “did deceive him.” Most likely he ordered one of his servants, possibly Daniell, there to oversee the work. By January 1683, Nathaniel had sent his son William, then about 20 or 21 years old, to live on his Sussex plantation. William was appointed a surveyor of Sussex county in that year. 263 A year later, Nathaniel called William back to Virginia temporarily, putting John Johnson “the Negroe” in charge of his estate and designating Henry Bowman his attorney for all his affairs in Sussex. 264 William’s return occurred around the same time that Nathaniel had to postpone a case of debt in Accomack court since "his son was dangerously sick.” 265 It’s possible that Nathaniel, Jr. had been retained in Accomack to help with management of the Bradford’s Neck plantation, while William had been sent to look after his father’s Sussex land. If Nathaniel, Jr. was “dangerously sick” in 1684, that would have been a good reason to call William back, either to be there when his brother passed or to help his father with his affairs during his brother’s illness. Then again, it may have been either William or John who was sick. William returned to Sussex in 1685 and began to appear in court as a proxy for his father. 266 William appears consistently in the records of Sussex from then until May of 1688, 267 after which date there is no further record of either him or his father in Sussex until William’s acknowledgement of the sale of the entirety of Nathaniel’s estate there to various parties in 1692, about two years after Nathaniel’s death. 268 Significantly, it is shortly before William’s last appearance in Sussex court records that his brother Nathaniel disappears from Accomack court records, a fact pointing to the probable demise of Nathaniel Jr. around this time. The likeliest explanation for this turn of events is that, after the death of his eldest son in 1687-88, Nathaniel Sr. called William back to Accomack to take his place. Nathaniel Sr. may have been arranging matters with a view to his legacy, reserving the Bradford’s Neck plantation for his eldest son and the Sussex plantation for his younger son. This is supported by the fact that Nathaniel Sr. had already granted Nathaniel Jr. 800 acres in Bradford’s Neck in 1664. 269 Map of Rehobeth Area, site of Nathaniel’s Delaware Plantation Page 47 of 74 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford
- Page 1 and 2: 1. Nathaniel 1 Bradford of Accomack
- Page 3 and 4: Sketch of Nathaniel Bradford Nathan
- Page 5 and 6: in London that “no question . . .
- Page 7 and 8: Nathaniel’s Early Years to Settle
- Page 9 and 10: to tender our Cause; that (if ye sd
- Page 11 and 12: Nathaniel as Constable & Birth of N
- Page 13 and 14: Alice sold the Occahannock plantati
- Page 15 and 16: The occupation of currier no longer
- Page 17 and 18: approve the appointment of the King
- Page 19 and 20: The fundamental division within the
- Page 21 and 22: ecompense for their services. The m
- Page 23 and 24: Nathaniel in the Late 1660’s: 166
- Page 25 and 26: practice that another of Nathaniel
- Page 27 and 28: man were the father of Nathaniel Jr
- Page 29 and 30: Nathaniel as Grand Juror and Repres
- Page 31 and 32: court’s reputation. Since the acc
- Page 33 and 34: Nathaniel Bradford During the 1670s
- Page 35 and 36: 2800 acres. In that same year Natha
- Page 37 and 38: household. A Thomas Williams was a
- Page 39 and 40: In 17 th century Virginia slavery w
- Page 41 and 42: Mathews’ lack of payment for cert
- Page 43 and 44: Governor Berkeley used the eastern
- Page 45: Though tobacco was the staple of Vi
- Page 49 and 50: Now that all of Nathaniel’s land
- Page 51 and 52: * * * * * Nathaniel as Attorney On
- Page 53 and 54: Nathaniel’s tithables remained co
- Page 55 and 56: towels, a small chest, a small brok
- Page 57 and 58: Citations Introduction 1.Nathaniel
- Page 59 and 60: early 1640s, Richard Smith Jr. is a
- Page 61 and 62: 122.McKey, 7: 232. For knowingly co
- Page 63 and 64: 219.Wesley Frank Craven, The Coloni
- Page 65 and 66: 298.McKey, 7: 73. 299.McKey, 8: 49.
- Page 67 and 68: Appendix A: Timeline of Events in N
- Page 69 and 70: Apr 20 verbal bargain with Mathew S
- Page 71 and 72: 1692 Feb 19 Robert Watson’s estat
- Page 73 and 74: 3) Henry Bradford of the Muster Per
himself was probably not in Sussex to oversee the building <strong>of</strong> the house and planting <strong>of</strong> a crop, since the<br />
men he hired to build a house “did deceive him.” Most likely he ordered one <strong>of</strong> his servants, possibly<br />
Daniell, there to oversee the work.<br />
By January 1683, <strong>Nathaniel</strong> had sent his son William, then about 20 or 21 years old, to live on his Sussex<br />
plantation. William was appointed a surveyor <strong>of</strong> Sussex county in that year. 263 A year later, <strong>Nathaniel</strong><br />
called William back to <strong>Virginia</strong> temporarily, putting John Johnson “the Negroe” in charge <strong>of</strong> his estate and<br />
designating Henry Bowman his attorney for all his affairs in Sussex. 264 William’s return occurred around<br />
the same time that <strong>Nathaniel</strong> had to postpone a case <strong>of</strong> debt in <strong>Accomack</strong> court since "his son was<br />
dangerously sick.” 265 It’s possible that <strong>Nathaniel</strong>, Jr. had been retained in <strong>Accomack</strong> to help with<br />
management <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Bradford</strong>’s Neck plantation, while William had been sent to look after his father’s<br />
Sussex land. If <strong>Nathaniel</strong>, Jr. was “dangerously sick” in 1684, that would have been a good reason to call<br />
William back, either to be there when his brother passed or to help his father with his affairs during his<br />
brother’s illness. Then again, it may have been either William or John who was sick.<br />
William returned to Sussex in 1685 and began to appear in court as a proxy for his father. 266 William<br />
appears consistently in the records <strong>of</strong> Sussex from then until May <strong>of</strong> 1688, 267 after which date there is no<br />
further record <strong>of</strong> either him or his father in Sussex until William’s acknowledgement <strong>of</strong> the sale <strong>of</strong> the<br />
entirety <strong>of</strong> <strong>Nathaniel</strong>’s estate there to various parties in 1692, about two years after <strong>Nathaniel</strong>’s death. 268<br />
Significantly, it is shortly before William’s last appearance in Sussex court records that his brother<br />
<strong>Nathaniel</strong> disappears from <strong>Accomack</strong> court records, a fact pointing to the probable demise <strong>of</strong> <strong>Nathaniel</strong> Jr.<br />
around this time. The likeliest explanation for this turn <strong>of</strong> events is that, after the death <strong>of</strong> his eldest son in<br />
1687-88, <strong>Nathaniel</strong> Sr. called William back to <strong>Accomack</strong> to take his place. <strong>Nathaniel</strong> Sr. may have been<br />
arranging matters with a view to his legacy, reserving the <strong>Bradford</strong>’s Neck plantation for his eldest son and<br />
the Sussex plantation for his younger son. This is supported by the fact that <strong>Nathaniel</strong> Sr. had already<br />
granted <strong>Nathaniel</strong> Jr. 800 acres in <strong>Bradford</strong>’s Neck in 1664. 269<br />
Map <strong>of</strong> Rehobeth Area, site <strong>of</strong> <strong>Nathaniel</strong>’s Delaware Plantation<br />
Page 47 <strong>of</strong> 74 Copyright 2008 Adam M. <strong>Bradford</strong>
Change language