1. Nathaniel Bradford of Accomack County, Virginia - Lower ...

The inventory of Nathaniel’s estate contains a room-by-room account of his belongings and allows one to
get a fairly good picture of what his house was like. It contained a porch chamber, a hall chamber, a hall,
two cellars, a tanhouse, a shoemakers shop, a kitchen, and a study, as well as 2 garrets and some
outhouses. 277 It would appear that Nathaniel’s house was basically comparable to the homes of the more
prominent Virginia planters. The house of Nathaniel Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion, one of the colony’s
wealthiest men, contained two halls, an inner room and outer room, three upper chambers, a kitchen, a
dairy, and a storeroom. 278 The house of Accomack Justice Southy Littleton was nearly identical to
Nathaniel’s, containing a parlor chamber, porch chamber, hall chamber, hall, two garrets, a little room over
the kitchen, the kitchen itself, and a dairy. 279 The value of Nathaniel’s personal estate was also above the
average. Not including livestock, his estate was valued at roughly £453. The estates of many of the elite
were worth more on the order of several thousands of pounds sterling, but Nathaniel’s possessions
definitely indicate he was one of the more well-off members of the middling class of planters. 280
* * * * *
Contempt of Authority
Though Accomack court records reveal that Nathaniel interacted with the Justices of the county in
numerous ordinary ways in their capacity as private citizens, on only one recorded occasion did he have an
actual run-in with the law. In October 1681, Nathaniel was brought before the court for the rather serious
offense of breach of peace and contempt of authority. 281 His servant Richard Mason had been sued by
James Davis for a debt, but when the sheriff came with John Tankard and Henry Ayres to Nathaniel’s
house to arrest Mason, Nathaniel prevented him from doing so. The sheriff in this case happens to have
been Captain Edmund Scarburgh, son of the old Colonel, and Scarburgh’s deposition is the only surviving
description of the events that transpired.
After the sheriff entered Nathaniel’s house to arrest Mason, Nathaniel came into the room where Scarburgh
and Mason were and asked what the matter was. When Scarburgh told Nathaniel he had come to arrest
Mason, Nathaniel asked, “who arrests him, ye?” Scarburgh told him James Davis was having Mason
arrested “upon wch ye said Bradford fell arailing on the said Davis askeing ye Dep if the sd Davis was not
a sun of a whore.” Scarburgh asked Nathaniel if he would be security for Mason and Nathaniel agreed. But
when he found out the suit was for 20,000 lbs tobacco, Nathaniel asked what would happen if he didn’t
sign and Scarburgh replied “then he (meaning ye sd Mason) must goe along wth me.” At this Nathaniel
“angerly said (wth a loud voice & disdainfull utterance) but he shant though.” Scarburgh then replied “then
ye must sine this bond.” Nathaniel said, “but I wont” and Scarburgh said “nay then he must goo along wth
me.” “Wth much scorne,” Nathaniel said “but I say he shant goo.” Scarburgh said “but I say he shall goo;
& in his Majties name I command you to assist me wth my Pryoner to Prison.” “With a look of contempt,”
Nathaniel replied “but I wont, nor he shant goo.”
Scarburgh claimed that Nathaniel “[cast into] my grinning countenance many reproachfull words against ye
Dep: & amongst others said what is Mun Scarburgh I know Mun Scarburgh well enuft ye Depont. mildly
replyed, well & I know ye Currier well enuff the said Bradford said al good a man Scarburgh al good a man
al over mim Scarburgh was wch he often reiterated wth. other reviling words . . . not being pertinent to ye
Dep business.” After this Scarburgh took Mason by the hand and began to take him from the house, but as
they neared the door Nathaniel laid “both hands on ye . . . prisoner [and] violently pulled him [away from
Scarburgh].” Then with a “very loud” voice and “fierce countenance” Nathaniel said “ye shant go.”
Scarburgh then “by ye sd Bradfords loks & posture [did] verily feere either to be struck in the face or be
thrust backward on ye brick in ye porch if he made the least attempt further, and [he] having been ill some
time before and finding [his] authority at an end wth the sd Bradford & imagining the same of the rest
present did bid Mr. Tanckard Harry & all take notice, and then made haste away.”
The court order mentions a deposition of Henry Eyre (probably the Harry referred to by Scarburgh) and a
confession from Nathaniel, but no record of these exists. The court found Nathaniel guilty of “breach of
peace and contempt of authority by rescuing a prisoner named Richard Mason," and he was ordered taken
into the sheriff's custody till finding security for his good behavior. Though Nathaniel owned up to his
fault, it’s unfortunate that we only have Scarburgh’s account of the event.
Page 50 of 74 Copyright 2008 Adam M. Bradford